Did Games Workshop MESS UP with 40K's new Terrain Rules? Engagement Range Weirdness!

Let's talk about the strange changes that the new Engagement Range in ruins seems to cause

---Patreon Page---
---SubscribeStar---

---Buy Warhammer 40K miniatures here---

---Social Media---

--- Subscribe to Auspex Tactics ---

0:00 Intro
0:48 The Rule
2:02 Deep Strike
4:17 Move Blocking
5:24 Gamey Combats
7:29 Possible Fixes?

[Undoing]

I've been playing 40k for twenty years, took a break right after 9th dropped and picked it back up about two weeks ago, and I'm still scratching my head trying to catch up with everything. It's absurd how many things have changed just in this edition already. I can't imagine being a new player trying to figure things out. My kid is starting to show some interest, but I don't even know where to start. It's to the point now where even the basics are broken, so it's very hard to teach. "Here's your core rulebook, your codex, and your GT pack, but just remember that about 50% of this material is wrong, so make sure you go download the errata's for each of these."

[hllwne]

3 simple fixes and it works
1: make it so it only applies when going through a wall;
2: Modify the consolidation rule to say you have to end in engagement range; from any unit you already were in
3: Specify that this does not change the charge difficulty, only the final allowed position of the models.

[josephrigley]

Heres what they should have done in the first place, just use the already established wobbly model syndrome rules and have the walls treated as not being there for infantry and beasts because they're breachable and set up the models in the closest possible position until you can move them closer.
It's a ridiculously easy solution using already established principles.

[TheRunningPigeon]

When an [Infantry] unit charges through [Breachable] terrain, if it rolls high enough to complete the charge but the model is physically prevented by the terrain feature with [Breachable], place it touching the terrain and it has engagement range of 2’ against units it declared charges against this turn.

[Kombereloni]

But Auspex,
It's perfectly logical; No sane vehicle driver or a 3 story high gargantuan mass of flesh (demonic or otherwise) would move close to a dinky half destroyed wall lined with guardsmen shooting lasguns and frags.They might scratch the paint!

[nekomatafuyu]

How about something along the lines of "When in contact with a wall, a model's engagement range extends beyond the wall by the width of the model's base"?
This would fix the original problem (the model can't engage due to lack of space on other side of the wall) no matter the size of the model's base, and would mean that models can only project an extended engagement range by actually manning the wall (rather than cowering 1" away from it).

[thisismychannel]

I just imagine the testers that came up with this 'fix' watching and sweating. Everyone's got a boss they gotta justify their position to and when your only job is to smooth out the rules but instead, you create more problems...and to then have the community offer better solutions...that can't feel good

[stephenrepper]

I've never had a problem with the excluding model positioning thing as a way of making charges harder by clever positioning (and I'm no tournament player), always thought it was fair enough to say it was hard to charge a 'garrisoned' building/ruin, just one of the advantages a unit gains from taking cover on the battlefield. In my head canon the garrisoning unit is laying down fire/lobbing grenades out of the windows forcing enemies to take the long way round

[goldspiral]

I realize that a big talking point coming into 8th edition was the desire (on behalf of the players) for more regular balance passes to 40k as the edition progressed, and yet having spent all of 8th and 9th constantly having to adapt to FAQs and supplements and chapter approved and everything else I can't help but feel like I'd prefer things stay as they are for a few years, you know?

[keldor]

Add the stipulation that the 2" engagement range only applies when charging into ruins, and not out of them. Prevents the 2" denial area problem. And also stipulate that a unit charged as a result of this increased engagement range benefits from the increased engagement range against the charging unit until the end of the turn. If models are unable to consolidate into base contact. Those units remain engaged in subsequent turns until on falls back or dies. But the two units do not benefit from increased engagement range otherwise. In regards to other units outside their current melee. Unless those units also charge to the unit within the terrain.

[narnia]

The easiest way to fix this is to make ruins (or area terrain) Garrisonable like I’m AoS. This means you only have to get in base with the terrain. And everyone fights.

[totallyalpharius]

Do they even play-test their new rules before publishing them?
That's a rhetorical question. Of course they don't.

[thedreadinator]

In theory you can move-block a whole corridor between two terrain pieces if they are "only" 4" apart with two Infiltrator-like units...

[alexneal]

Remove the 2" engagement and replace with forcing the charged models backwards up to the required distance to fit a base.

[chraiflame]

It seems like treating walls as non-solid objects in a game that uses solid miniatures is causing issues.

[Bysentenial]

Me fix: If a unit could make the charge but would be placed within engagement range due to terrain, as long it is in base contact with the terrain and the target unit is within a range of the terrain equal to or less than your unit's base size, it is considered within engagement range.
maybe add hull and shortest part of your base, restrict titanics, etc, idk

[deathlytree]

Engagement range becomes 2" if fighting through walls. 0" if fighting out of them, if charging into a unit in terrain add 1" to the charge length needed to complete the charge. any units that were charged and in range of the charger are able to fight the charging units position before consolidation moves were made.

[RSBurgener]

My guess is that in casual games (most games) people are gonna behave. But in tournaments, where everyone is trying to screw each other so they can win, the organizers are gonna have to lay down some rules against this.

[Chodor]

It would be much simpler to not allow fighting through walls altogether. Chunky models would have more breathing space and there would be no shenanigans of attacks clipping like in from software games.

To compensate models hidden behind terrain could increase deep strike range - you can set up 9" from enemy models that are not behind terrain (other than small barricades which don't count), or 6" from an hidden enemy.


Please not that this should only work if enemy is hidden from deep striking unit, you can't pop 6" behind someones back, shoot them and then have a 50% chance to charge.

[TechbotALPHA]

I feel like 8th Edition core rules were so much more workable?
I miss that double-sided sheet heh