I failed a 5 inches charge last night...

[sturm]

With fleet. Twice.

Seriously, has anyone having trouble with the random charges? I know there a thread futher down about all the numbers and everything, but i'm more interested in reading your stories and opinions on this. I know many people only swear by average numbers, but i really dont get why. Yeah, sure your average is 7", but i dont want the average of all my charges being that, i want every single charge to be reliable.

It is completely ridiculous how many charges I fail in one game, which lead to me getting shot to pieces. What's your take on this? Have your army shifted to more shooty bugs? Or are you using more multi assault to reach enemy lines more reliably? Am I just really unlucky or you notices a significant change?

[jocke01]

Yes they wanted it to me more cinematic so they made it random and less cinematic. (grumpy)

[zephoid]

failed to charge 4 inches into tau broadsides with harlequins in a tourney. Frikn retarded changes to charge distance made elegant warriors into flubbing klutzes. Hell, i dont even know how that could happen. They have anti-grav belts... They float above the ground and cant be slowed by terrain and are some of the most graceful characters in all of 40k. Yet some god damn open ground stopped them.... i smell a Ward here.

[robomummy]

I failed a charge for 3" into an enemy squad but my warboss got a 12" charge into another unit. overall I love the new random charge rules.

[Deleted]

Yeah, it's BS. When you bring it up around people with armies that aren't assaulty they'll go on about how it makes for more "tactical strategy" blahblah, but suggest random gun ranges to match my units random attack range and that is suddenly ridiculous.

[andy089]

you know what I don't get?

Okay so they want it to be "more cinematic/realistic" and "due to the chaotic structure of war" etc its random how far your guys will run.
But they always shoot the same maximum distance (except blast weapons of course). I mean...really?
Especially considering the comparison between a few guys running a few meters with their swords and a gun shooting from a few hundred meters away....How EXACTLY can the former have a deviation of about 70% (2"-12" with average 7" = 5" deviation) while the latter has...well none?

Charging basically is like shooting a non-blast gun using the blast rules. 2D6" deviation but no blast template.

[rpricew]

I failed 5 out of 7 charges in a game last night. They averaged from 5-9 inches and only 2 units not having Fleet. The ones that made it didn't require re-rolls. It probably cost me the game, but I also saw some Bloodletters roll Triple 6's coming out of terrain and it was awesome!

I feel like this edition is just all about shooting. The assault army is hurt in a lot of ways and it's forcing us to change.

[killme304]

I failed my first 4 charges in 6th, most of them with fleet, and none farther than 7"s. I was royally pissed.

[Deleted]

Dakkahammer 40k

[rpricew]

Aug 16, 2012 19:54:56 GMT @60mm said:

Dakkahammer 40k

4th edition = MC Hammer 40k

[Moontyranid]

know the problem last week i had to roll a 8 for my 20 rage hormegaunts and then it happent SNAKE EYE'S!

[sturm]

Aug 16, 2012 18:30:07 GMT zephoid said:

i smell a Ward here.

That made me laugh.

@60mm: problem is most armies are built around shooting or have some decent alternatives that arent overpriced. I feel nids are pretty much alone in their field. Whats even worst is the mix with overwatch. That pretty mich sums up to making shooty armies on par with close combat armies in assault. But them they destroy you on shooting. Hell, even getting to kill a unit of imperial guardsmen is hard now because you dont have anyhing left when you get to assault

andy: most shooty guy will tell you that you now have an advantage because of the higher chance of nightfighting in every game, which means shooting too just get something to lower the max range. Now the thing is most armies that aould be heavily affcted by that have ways to ignore nightfighting... So basically, it just doesnt hurt those that should. And your logic still stands in the end. Meh.

@rprice: good to know im not alone in the "fail most of what youre tryin to do" camp. You're right, the overall gameplay is pushed towards more shooting, which is not a horrible thing, but then we dont get anything to compensate our melee centric army. I mean a few allies or allowing us to ally with ourselves to open up more (shooty) elite slots...

@killme: ive got a similar story to that. What bugs me most is when i compare with what other players do. Most of them have a general tactic for a game setup and can stick to it and not have to rethink everything. Most units will do their job. I find myself never having a real game plan because ive got nothing i can count on to do their job with a good chance or success. Take immortals for example. They're a good unit and will hold their ground most of the time. What do we have at around the same point value that we hope for similar results?

Thanks everyone for your replies. I feel less lonely and got to reach my rant quota for the next week!

[Davor]

Well I am sure, part of the everyone was ALMOST using Stealers in 5th edition and had lots of them. How do we get these Tyranid or CC people to buy new minis? Well lets put in random assault range.

Alot of this is to make people buy new minis. It's also to make the SM players more happy, and then being more happy will buy more minis as well. You know SM players complain and cry the most, so that is why we will never EVER have random range shooting as was suggested. Great idea though.

[rehkal]

Oh I did something really awesome the last game I played. Had around a 9" charge to make. I rolled a 1 and a 1. So I rerolled both and got a 1 and a 2.

Though I guess that made up for that lucky 11" first turn charge I made through cover with my hormies....

[webebuggin]

Yeahhh this would have been so easy to do right. Elect to roll 2d6 for charge OR charge 6" (regular though difficult/dangerous terrain).