Play chess with GK

[An00bis]

oh

[PeterPotamus]

I disagree entirely that it was "guaranteed", but I know that the voices on either side of this fence aren't likely to find a middle ground. You were "guaranteed" to assault under the following circumstances:

1. You were within 6". Some are better at others at "guestimating" when they were in that range, but the closer you get to that magic 6" by eyeballing, the closer you get to being just out of range and not knowing it. Fleet was the same, are you in range to run then charge? Who knows, you couldn't know for sure unless you were right up in their grill at 2, 3, or 4 inches away.

2. You had to not be charging into difficult terrain. I'm going to give that a 50/50 as to whether or not circumstance allowed that. The number is arbitrary and without going back in time to record every charge we all made in 5th there's no way to get an accurate read so 50/50 is "fair".

If you met both of those conditions then you were getting into assault. If you did not meet those conditions though, you were pooched and had no way to know it until after you declared your intent. And then you just got shot to pieces, or your target got away in a transport. The core of the matter is that we now have "random charges", while before we had "unreliable charges". Change the word reliable if you like, but the fact is that unless you had an uncanny capability to measure distances 100% accurately 100% of the time just by looking at them, then your 6" charge range was unreliable. I'd also be curios to know how often people actually charged from EXACTLY 6" away, or anything more than 5" for that matter. "A lot" is not the kind of answer I'm looking for here, rather "75% of the time" which I would find hard to believe. I know that most of my charges were made from around the 4" range on average because I wanted to get as close as I could to charge. Exceptions being when I decided I was probably close enough and decided to shoot before charging rather than using fleet.

I thought it was clear enough I meant charging in the open was guaranteed; charging through terrain naturally wasn't, but that made sense; random charges in the open is very strange in my opinion. As for eyeballing 6 inches, it takes ten minutes to become expert at it, so I don't consider that a factor either. But that's all moot because 6th is out anyway, bogged down as it is by pre-measuring added strictly in order to support shaky new mechanics, and everything randomized. So I guess my retort is, >> ( .Y .) <<

[Tumal]

You were clear. My point was that charges in the open were only guaranteed if you were 100% accurate in estimating your charge range since you couldn't just measure to see how far away you were. Thus why I called 5th ed charging unreliable.

The rest of the details were for completeness sake of the discussion as a whole over the last several pages, not strictly related to your response alone.

Edit: Oh, and I'm awful at guessing six inches, just for the record. I mean really bad at it.

[Twinlinked]

bogged down as it is by pre-measuring added strictly in order to support shaky new mechanics, and everything randomized. So I guess my retort is, >> ( .Y .) <<

you dont think pre-measuring speeds up the game?

A.

[Tumal]

you dont think pre-measuring speeds up the game?

A.

Man did it ever for me.

[PeterPotamus]

bogged down as it is by pre-measuring added strictly in order to support shaky new mechanics, and everything randomized. So I guess my retort is, >> ( .Y .) <<

you dont think pre-measuring speeds up the game?
A.

I really don't.But I see it did for you; how?

[Crablezworth]

It could make decisions of what to shoot faster... or far slower if you're indecisive (IE lots of options of what to shoot). I am finding 6th ed game slower, part of that is that I'm still learning, the other part is how involved wounding is now.

[Twinlinked]

I think it makes it faster because you measure and you have full information, before you roll a charge or anything you know it is X inches, or when you are moving into a shooting position you agree that you are in range or not.

It just makes for a friendlier faster game,

A.

[Tumal]

I think it makes it faster because you measure and you have full information, before you roll a charge or anything you know it is X inches, or when you are moving into a shooting position you agree that you are in range or not.

It just makes for a friendlier faster game,

A.

Yes, you measure once realistically before you move for stuff you want to know the distance of (you don't always have to measure, if you're less than an arms length away from the bad guys with a 48" gun...), then go with the numbers you already have. My 6th ed game was faster than a number of the 5th games I had, AND I was learning and teaching a friend new to the game. I find myself doing the "hrmmm..." decision making process (read deep thinking) less often as I have hard numbers to deal with rather than my own poor sense of distance on the table. I realize this isn't as much of a boon for others as it is for me, but it's done wonders for me.

[tatz_101]

I've been reading this topic for the last 20mins or so and I'm honestly a little confused why people are so upset about the random charge distances, more so about how much time and energy has been put into arguing about whether or not it's balanced/fair/whatever. I'm not a huge fan of the random charge distance but I accept it as necessary with the introduction of pre-measuring to 40k.

In some of our cases, we're bored at work and need a break :p

Man, I wish I had that problem