PDA

View Full Version : 1st go, 2nd go -- A Balancing idea



Tiff
30-12-2006, 13:26
I thought of posting this in rules forum but the rules forum says -- for any 40k rules querys and this is a suggestion not a query --

Although over rated getting first go is an advantage that cannot be gained through any skill of the player, thus it seems unfair.

In order to slighty balance this how about the following rule

''The player who takes first go is seen as making the first move, your own forces can see this and have a slight time to react''

After everything has been deoplyed following the Scenarios set up rules and the players have decided who is going first - the player going second may move any 2 units up to 12'' from where they have been deployed - this rule stacks with any speical rules that charcters may have -- eg Eldrad Ulthran


I feel that this gives the player going second a little advantage and so it lessons the gap between first and second go - it also seems fairly realistic -- you watch you opponent start the battle charging towards you at speicific areas and because you are starting a little after, you re arrange a small part of your army because thats all you have time for


What are your opinions thanks

jubilex
30-12-2006, 13:36
Sounds ok. One thing I would like to see is a rule for vehicles, a player going second may only be glanced on turn one. Either the skimmers are assumed to be moving 6+ or the ordinaries have already fired smoke on their approach to the battle field. Also a mechanism to stop first turn charges.

Tiff
30-12-2006, 13:42
Sounds ok. One thing I would like to see is a rule for vehicles, a player going second may only be glanced on turn one. Either the skimmers are assumed to be moving 6+ or the ordinaries have already fired smoke on their approach to the battle field. Also a mechanism to stop first turn charges.


Like the idea about vehicles --- if a vehicle survives turn 1 its a very rare sight

Morgrad
30-12-2006, 16:43
One of the major problems with a game like 40k is the first turn advantage. I think your suggestion is a good one, as well as jubilex's pair of suggestions.

Anything that both players will agree on that mitigates the absurd advantage a first turn can give one player is, in my opinion, a good thing.

Don't get me wrong, there are times that I'll win the die-roll and choose to go second - but that's pretty rare. Easily 90%+ of the time, the person who wins first turn takes it. An advantage like re-deployment could move that number much closer to 50-50, which would be good.

Kaze256
30-12-2006, 16:49
I tend to take 2nd turn if I can. Unless my opponent puts some juicy target out in the open id rather let them move first. Sure I will take some wounds but I shouldnt really loose too much power. Often I dont need to move my heavy weapons because the guy that went first moved to get los to me. Also on games with no random game lenght that last move without being shot at lets fast units bust out of cover and capture objectives.

Gen.Steiner
30-12-2006, 16:52
The best, easiest, and most realistic answer is the simultaneous turn:

We both move
We both fire (i.e. each unit, regardless of whether or not it's killed, has a chance to fire that turn)
We both assault

To prevent reactive movement, simply write orders: "Unit A to move to copse and fire on targets of opportunity"

hiveminion
30-12-2006, 16:52
I thought of posting this in rules forum but the rules forum says -- for any 40k rules querys and this is a suggestion not a query --



I think you are looking for the Rules Development Forum...

UnRiggable
30-12-2006, 17:15
Sounds ok. One thing I would like to see is a rule for vehicles, a player going second may only be glanced on turn one. Either the skimmers are assumed to be moving 6+ or the ordinaries have already fired smoke on their approach to the battle field. Also a mechanism to stop first turn charges.

That could me misinterpreted into people thinking that glancing hits only occur on turn one. But I catch your idea, I have another one - Tanks getting shot at from more than 24" away cannot get penetrating hits unless the shooter has tank hunters.

TheSanityAssassin
30-12-2006, 18:19
I find that the advantage gained by first turn really depends on the amount of terrain on the board. I do my best to hide all of my vehicles for turn 1, make sure that they are well hidden whether I go first or second. In fact, second turn tends to be chosen fairly often around where I play, as if you get first turn, you hardly ever have much to shoot at, and it just forces you to move into the open where you can get shot on the second go.

The first turn advantage is set up to force players to develop ways to avoid it...like not just sticking valuable targets in the open. Most times I see players set up "for first turn" IE tanks pointing at other tanks and the like, they lose it, and the game turns into "player A has 3 tanks, player b now has none", and the game is over practically. This also leads to seeing far less armour in forces these days, or so it seems to me.

My thought would be this however, rather than making sweeping rules changes, which I really think are kind of unfair, and insert some codex entries, such as "concealed deployment" where vehicles for guard and SM/CSM can dig in or whatnot, and only be glanced "until they move/shoot" or something like that, or for Eldar and Tau and Dark Eldar where their vehicles are assumed to have moved onto the table on turn 1, and therefore count as moving 7" or somesuch....b/c I mean, it makes no sense for something like a Dark Eldar raider to be sitting on the ground on turn 1.

Set it at 10 pts or something like that, and I think it will be almost surely taken by most players, and give a nice balancing effect, without changing game mechanics too much.

Lord Malek The Red Knight
30-12-2006, 22:22
I find that the advantage gained by first turn really depends on the amount of terrain on the board. I do my best to hide all of my vehicles for turn 1, make sure that they are well hidden whether I go first or second. In fact, second turn tends to be chosen fairly often around where I play, as if you get first turn, you hardly ever have much to shoot at, and it just forces you to move into the open where you can get shot on the second go.
agreed. i use lots of Terrain on my homeboard (25-40%, easily), and even with shooty armies (IG vs Eldar) having first turn is a disadvantage that gets forced upon you (by the other player winning the roll off), rather than a benefit you hope for. if i go first i get to kill maybe 2 or 3 models at most, but having the last turn makes it easier to overwhelm survivors/throw caution to the wind at the end of the game, and reap more VPs.

then again, this is at Combat Patrol level (but on a 4x4 board) so it is easier to hide most of your army, as there arent many models (about 30 on average per side).

as to the suggestions (by the OP and Jubilex), i like them all. i will bear them in mind when we start playing larger games here. cheers!

~ Tim

Asq_Dak
30-12-2006, 22:24
use "Dawn" rules, and have turn one as night fight. That would reduce some of the firepower thrown around on turn 1.

Vet.Sister
30-12-2006, 23:39
I had some ideas about this before. You could roll off for who goes first at the start of each turn, OR you could make the IGO-UGO turn system interlaced.
ie.
I move, U move
I shoot, U shoot
I assault, U assault

you could even combine the two....

hiveminion
31-12-2006, 12:46
I had some ideas about this before. You could roll off for who goes first at the start of each turn, OR you could make the IGO-UGO turn system interlaced.
ie.
I move, U move
I shoot, U shoot
I assault, U assault

you could even combine the two....

Though that works brilliantly in LotR, 40k has to many guns, and the movement rates are to high, for this system.

Angelus Mortis
31-12-2006, 13:32
I cant say that I agree with most here. All you did was take the 1st turn advantage and gave it to the guy who goes second. I can think of some pretty nasty units I could move that would completly ruin his game in the first turn if I used this as a rule.

Frodo34x
31-12-2006, 14:23
All you need is alot of terrain, and you can nullify alot of the major advantages to going first.

Angelus Mortis
31-12-2006, 15:41
All you need is alot of terrain, and you can nullify alot of the major advantages to going first.Thank you, a voice of reason.

Morgrad
31-12-2006, 18:12
Yes and no, Frodo34x and Angelis Mortis.

"A lot of terrain" is a disadvantage to shooting armies - but *enough* terrain is required to make 40k a good game. That's why GW suggests 25% terrain for the games.

My mates and I all play with 25% terrain, and it leads to good hidey-spots for infiltrators or troops moving under cover, but also allows for fire-lanes and vehicle paths, which are also important elements for a good game of 40k.

I play tyranids, so for me, the more terrain, the easier time I'll have. If I'm playing against Tau, Guard, or static Marines, more terrain just hoses them and helps me - even though it would techically remove the advantage of going first.

Mojaco
31-12-2006, 18:20
I never get first turn it seems, so I hide everything. And then get first turn handed to me most of the time.

First term advantages are a myth or something you only have when you play with too little terrain. Upgrade people.

And if you really can't be bothered, play that rule that boils down to night fight on the first turn. Works fine.

Penitent
31-12-2006, 18:36
People too often forget that going 2nd also carries some advantages, especially in objective-based missions, where the player going 2nd (ie, gets the last turn of the game) can make uncontested moves onto any objectives. That can be a game-winning move.

toxic_wisdom
31-12-2006, 18:51
I'd have to pass on the idea. Its your responsibility as a player to deploy your forces. In doing so you must take into consideration the possibility your opponent will strike first.

Luckily for me ( and other DE players ) going first or second isn't really an issue. Adding Webway Portals to a Cult or Kabal pretty much offsets the advantages and/or disadvantages. Actually I kinda enjoy going second when playing using my Dark Eldar. Their speed combined with going last on turn six has usually tipped the victory scale in my favor - ie Ravagers using 24" movement to secure objectives.

Angelwing
31-12-2006, 19:08
as has been said, always deploy as if you are going second, ie hide in terrain etc. going second is advantagous for capture quarters/objectives etc, even in random game length (both players get an extra turn).
always use a board size and terrain percentage appropiate to army size. playing 2000pts on a 4x4 board with little terrain is going to leave both armies exposed.
as for first turn charges, never set stuff up right on the edge of your deployment zone. eg leave a 25" gap so those hormies cant reach you, leaving them exposed and positioned for a kicking.

luchog
31-12-2006, 20:33
I had some ideas about this before. You could roll off for who goes first at the start of each turn, OR you could make the IGO-UGO turn system interlaced.
ie.
I move, U move
I shoot, U shoot
I assault, U assault

What is known as a "phase-based" rather than "turn-based" system. I prefer this, as it greatly reduces the first/last-turn advantage without needing a complete restructuring of the rules like a unit-activation play sequence would. Not to mention unit-activation having some serious flaws of it's own.

A phase-based sequence would most likely require adding one or two additional phases, similar to Necromunda.

Gen.Steiner
31-12-2006, 22:15
Though that works brilliantly in LotR, 40k has to many guns, and the movement rates are to high, for this system.

Rubbish. I play like that with WWII - where 24" is nothing - and ultra-moderns, and spaceships... and cavemen. And the American Civil War.

Movement rates and number of guns has no effect on the turn sequence. :)

Aundae
31-12-2006, 23:08
The best, easiest, and most realistic answer is the simultaneous turn:

We both move
We both fire (i.e. each unit, regardless of whether or not it's killed, has a chance to fire that turn)
We both assault

To prevent reactive movement, simply write orders: "Unit A to move to copse and fire on targets of opportunity"

I absolutely love this idea. I would get rid of the writing orders bit in an effort not to slow the game down, but otherwise it is awesome. The argument will come up however if your army outnumbers the other, say IG against Space Marines, where you get much more opportunity to maneuver around his stuff since you now know where it is at. I would try out a Battletech type of thing were if you outnumber him 2-1 you move 2 units every movement phase while he moves 1.

Master Jeridian
01-01-2007, 04:21
Have to agree with the terrain answer.

If your finding first turn decides the win- the knee jerk reaction of adding more rules is rarely the answer.

I have observed a lot of games where the amount of terrain is laughable, and played in a few games where my opponent has been shocked that I dared to put a piece of area terrain anywhere other than on his board edge.

Ideally, the board should have enough terrain on the board so that a moderate force (say SM's at 1500pts) can hide everything, whilst a horde force (IG/ Nids at 1500pts) can hide most of the important stuff and/or/while the rest has a lot of cover to sit it. It should be a rarity to be able to draw LOS from your 6xman las/plas squad to the enemy Falcon after deployment.

This way, the game is determined by how the players maneouver and create fire lanes during the game turns- rather than by who rolls first turn, and who deployed on the side with the hill.

If this fails, try Escalation and Concealment.

TheSanityAssassin
01-01-2007, 07:20
Yup...even with 25% cover on a 6x4 bard, on a 1700 pt game (Standard around here) I can generally hide my valuables (two prisms, a serpent and my artillery), and keep their nasty guns from having line of sight to other things I don't want them to shoot simply due to range (Things like reapers). And if you need to give em something to shoot, either put some chaff, like a little squad of guardians, or something survivable like an avatar down.


The one time I get into trouble is against something like railguns where I forget just how long 72" is.

Rlyehable
01-01-2007, 11:43
I find that part of the problem in my area is that tree bases and building ruins are too small. The average tree base in my area tends to be about 8" diameter. While you can park a Rhino (or other similar sized vehicle) behind it, it is still easy to get an angle on it. This size base also makes it very difficult to hide models 6" deep into it and behind it.

Making larger tree bases would be fine, but it would reduce the amount of cover pieces on the board (as it takes up much more room when using the 25% rule. Also, the one large tree base (12" diameter) seems to be rarely taken by players (except Tau with Kroot or IG with Deathworld Veterans).

Small building ruins take up even less space, but if there are enough of them, can be used to disrupt LOS, but often there is the "shot through the crack".

I am still unsure what is the best answer.

I, for one, was disapointed that 4th edition did not include a rule that (non-walker) vehicles placed in deployment count as having moved 6.1" prior to the first turn.