40K Unit Activation Rules

[steelforge]

There has been some discussion about the Unit Activation Rules I've been testing out.

Here they are.
First, Constructive Criticism is appreciated.
Example: What about X Rule?
Second: Unrelated thread hijacked is not appreciated.

Here they are:
Units take turns activating
A turn if over when all units have activated
A player may “pass” if they do not want to activate a unit.
A player may not “pass” twice in a row unless they are unable to activate a unit.
Units resolve their actions as a normal phase, Move, Shoot, Assault, sequential but during activation.

Scouts.  After deployment scouts may scout.
Infiltrates deploy as normal.
Units with Independent characters attached count as one unit for purposes of activation.
Dedicated transports activate when their squad does. If a unit is combated squaded choose which combat squad is linked to the vehicle.
Roll for reserves at the start of the turn.
Units arriving from reserve activate at their controller’s choice during that turn.
You may attempt to seize the initiative at the start of each turn.
During a turn you may only react in combat once, regardless of how many times that unit is assaulted.  That unit may still activate during that turn and begin an assault phase with the units it is locked in with.

Why?
First, a lot of 40k comes down to who went first?  My pile of points reduced your pile of points.
Second, this increases the tactics generals will use.  Now you can pincer, outflank, force decisions.
But won’t multiple smaller units be better?  Not necessarily, a large unit can be out maneuvered by many small units, like how actual warfare works, but a larger unit is usually more powerful.

[andalucien]

I like it.

In Warmachine, there's a very good reason to activate all of one side, then all of another side - it's because all dice rolls and movement during a player's turn are made by the active player... so this lets you make time management a part of the game, eliminate all possible discussion of "slow play" and bring a chess clock.

But in 40k, since we have saving throws and other things that we do during the opponent's turn, there's no reason why it has to be "you go then I go".  I would like it better mixed up like this.

I've also wondered about "intermingled deployment"... one person deploys one unit, then the other person goes, until all units are deployed... you could even add spice by saying hvy support must be deployed first, fast attack last, something like that.

[Benjamin]

I've also wondered about "intermingled deployment"... one person deploys one unit, then the other person goes, until all units are deployed... you could even add spice by saying hvy support must be deployed first, fast attack last, something like that.

That's some old-school Warhammin' right there. I've wanted events to try this, but always got a bit of push-back, never found the right thing for it... until now.

[shwnlyns]

Not sure if I understand this. So instead of following normal turn order (move, shoot, assault), its do all three steps for one unit then move onto the next unit? This doesn't change who goes first or the opponent rolling armor saves during your shooting attacks, so am I missing something here?

[Loranus]

Shwn I can see your misunderstanding but after you activate a Unit your opponent gets to activate a unit.

So Player A activates one unit Moves, Shoots, Assault.

Then Player B gets to Activate one Unit Move Shoot Assault.

Until all Units have Been Activated then when that happens a game turn ends.

[corporaptor primus]

Any thought towards "until the end of your turn" affects and the like?

[andalucien]

"until the end of your turn" could just basically mean until the end of THE turn, I think.  This would actually make certain things cleaner, no more questions about "player turn vs game turn" with regards to overwatch etc.  Can anyone think of something that would get broken if "player turn" and "game turn" meant the same thing?

[Benjamin]

Psyker powers might get a bit strange, no? That's a good place to start investigating potential inconsistencies.

[Sir_Prometheus]

I've also wondered about "intermingled deployment"... one person deploys one unit, then the other person goes, until all units are deployed... you could even add spice by saying hvy support must be deployed first, fast attack last, something like that.

That's some old-school Warhammin' right there. I've wanted events to try this, but always got a bit of push-back, never found the right thing for it... until now.

Well, Fantasy does it that way, right? 

[andalucien]

Psyker powers might get a bit strange, no? That's a good place to start investigating potential inconsistencies.

Psykers would only replenish their warp charges once per game turn, so that's definitely a change...
however, I think it's a good change.  I think it is dumb that psykers regenerate their charge at the start of the opponent's turn, but then they can't really use them except if they're in combat, or certain specialized things like the eldar equipment... just one of those strange confusing things that would now go away.

[Benjamin]

Here's my thought.

Player turn could now mean "until all units have been activated."
Game turn could now mean "until the unit using the ability is activated again."

Does that make sense?

[shwnlyns]

Shwn I can see your misunderstanding but after you activate a Unit your opponent gets to activate a unit.

So Player A activates one unit Moves, Shoots, Assault.

Then Player B gets to Activate one Unit Move Shoot Assault.

Until all Units have Been Activated then when that happens a game turn ends.

Ah, I get it. Not a bad idea but it seems like it would be difficult to keep track of which units have and have not been activated yet in each turn. Also, some clarification as to when a unit that might have special rules (example, deep strike and infiltrate) gets to activate. Would a deep striking unit have to activate first because deep strike happens at the start of the turn? or could I decide to wait to deep strike last and then activate them first to get a quick charge in?

[Benjamin]

Shwn I can see your misunderstanding but after you activate a Unit your opponent gets to activate a unit.

So Player A activates one unit Moves, Shoots, Assault.

Then Player B gets to Activate one Unit Move Shoot Assault.

Until all Units have Been Activated then when that happens a game turn ends.

Ah, I get it. Not a bad idea but it seems like it would be difficult to keep track of which units have and have not been activated yet in each turn.

A few markers or dice set next to the activated unit should suffice.

Also, some clarification as to when a unit that might have special rules (example, deep strike and infiltrate) gets to activate. Would a deep striking unit have to activate first because deep strike happens at the start of the turn? or could I decide to wait to deep strike last and then activate them first to get a quick charge in?

Deep Striking would have to be hashed out. I imagine those units must be activated first. In the case of multiple Deep Striking units, I imagine the player can choose the order in which to activate.

[AstartesXXVI]

Novel idea. Seen it tried before. You have some hurdles to jump.

Assault Blocks: The biggest one, by far, is I can now activate a unit, and end up assaulting another unit before it shot at or moved at all. This means that most of the time, unless you are assaulting something that was already activated, it will have little to no opportunity to act in its' own turn. So you essentially are making who goes first EVEN MORE important. The guy who goes first in Game Turn 2 could shut down most of the other guys' shooting phase with assaults, this would make assault armies IMMENSELY powerful when they get first activations on a turn...it would just go "Assault army activates, gets a charge off...opponent activates another unit, shoots something...assault army activates another unit  and gets another charge off" that can quickly snowball.

Time and Turn order: This takes immensely longer than the standard turn structure, so you're going to have to rewrite the way the game goes on for X turns and such.

Balance Issues: There are things in the game that affect a unit under the premise that they have not yet done anything (for example, Blessings/Maledictions). These things are too numerous to even begin to list, honestly. All of them will need to be addressed as many abilities or powers will become useless to use on a unit that already activated (i.e. activating to put a blessing on your own unit becomes stupid unless the enemy isn't going first).

Tracking: You are going to end up with a board full of confusion just because of the number of units and models there can be. There needs to be a dedicated way to say who acted and who didn't (like some kind of marker that is very visually obvious and gets flipped). Dice will get out of control fast.

Synergy Destroyed: There are times in every game I have witnessed where there are strategies employed like trying to hit a unit and provide a beneficial scenario for another unit to finish it off, etc. A lot of those are going to be ruined (think things like "Hey those Long Fangs already shot so now the rest of my army is safe from them" type stuff). This is actually less tactical, there is no reason for me to be careful as a player, you just put off activating certain units until the other guys' main threat to them is tied up).

It can work if these issues are addressed but it will take a lot more work than 5 sentences of notes.

[Benjamin]

I'm hoping a point-by-point response is meant to indicate my thoroughness in reading your post.

Synergy Destroyed: There are times in every game I have witnessed where there are strategies employed like trying to hit a unit and provide a beneficial scenario for another unit to finish it off, etc. A lot of those are going to be ruined (think things like "Hey those Long Fangs already shot so now the rest of my army is safe from them" type stuff). This is actually less tactical, there is no reason for me to be careful as a player, you just put off activating certain units until the other guys' main threat to them is tied up).

To the Long Fang example here, I'd posit the Space Wolves player made a tactical error in activating the Long Fang unit too quickly. The Space Wolves player can hold the Long Fangs back in activation, maintaining their threat throughout the turn.

Like chess, I'd see more success coming from players moving pawns/lesser units first, then increasing the intensity of the match by activating more important units.

To the other points...
Assault Blocks. Though less likely, this can happen in a game of 40k currently. On the bottom of Turn 1. If a player anticipates an assault coming in, wouldn't the player then activate the suspected target and attempt to do something about it? There are so many rules that already hinder assault, I wouldn't mind any version that makes melee a viable option. But that's clearly a statement of personal preference.

Time and Turn Order: This answer would come through practice, practice, practice.

Balance issues: Warhammer 40k as currently constituted has extreme balance issues. This would a very low standard to exceed.

Tracking: Markers. Done. Easy peasy.