Close Combat Issues- An Open Letter to GW

[Indefragable]

Something that's basically a problem across the board is that even with the massive, and really really necessary drop in points for melee weapons, assault still isn't worth doing for most armies, but especially marines that pay a lot of points for being "generalists". Lets take one of the absolute best melee units in the game that happens to wear power armor, berzerkers. A unit of 10 with chainaxes put out 62 Str6 AP-1 attacks on the charge spread out among 2 activations. That's a lot, no question. But for the same points as those 10 berzerkers, you could take 4 tarantula guns with twin assault cannons, or 6 guns if you include the rhino those berzerkers will definitely need to make it into combat. Those will put out 72 Str6 AP-1 shots AT 24", against whatever unit might be in range, though admitedly hitting on 4+s instead of 3+'s. You don't have to trundle across the table, and brave overwatch to start doing damage turn 2 at best. You can instead just shoot the enemy from the get go.

 

And berzerkers are being raved about as really good, or even a tad OP, but it's pathetically easy to generate similar damage output from a distance with much more common shooting units, and that isn't seen as a big deal. The only exceptions are stuff like the hordes mentioned, that get just a ridiculous number of attacks for how cheap they are, so they can just walk across the board, take the casualties on the chin, and still have enough left over to wipe stuff out, with the added benefit of being able to score objectives really easy.

In 7th, a Tactics Marine could get either 2x shots in rapid fire range, or 2x melee attacks if he successfully charged.

 

Now, he is limited to 1x attack no matter what, unless the Sanguinor or other applicable bubble or psychic power is in effect.

[Xenith]

Lets take one of the absolute best melee units in the game that happens to wear power armor, berzerkers. A unit of 10 with chainaxes put out 62 Str6 AP-1 attacks on the charge spread out among 2 activations. That's a lot, no question. But for the same points as those 10 berzerkers, you could take 4 tarantula guns with twin assault cannons, or 6 guns if you include the rhino those berzerkers will definitely need to make it into combat. Those will put out 72 Str6 AP-1 shots AT 24", against whatever unit might be in range, though admitedly hitting on 4+s instead of 3+'s.

72 asscan shots at a rhino at BS4+ is 36 hits, 12 wounds, 6 failed saves for 6 damage. The rhino's contents make it into combat unharmed.

 

And above on tac marine rapid fire Vs assault: rapid fire is 2 shots at 12", but you fire a pistol then assault for 2 attacks also. You used to get 3 (pistol shot, basic attack+1 for charging).

 

Transports seem to be the way to go this edition. Shoulda magnetised that last assault squad I built

[Frater Cornelius]

Speaking from the perspective of a Marine player who prefers midrange armies, I found assault to be vital for a lot of my success. Reivers in the backlines charging heavy weapons, that were unable to shoot regardless of whether they flee or not as a result. Finishing a Transport with a Dread and charging the Marines inside when I had no shooting left to prevent that Melta from firing. There are a few more examples, especially with Ultras where you can charge to prevent shooting, retreat and fire at them again if they do not retreat. Or just charge a Rhino or Reiver into a Land Raider and prevent all that dakka. Charge a Rhino into an approaching horde of Gene Stealers or Berserkers. If they fail to kill it, they effectively can not charge anything else until the Rhino is dead.

 

As Marines, melee has become a game of binding the opponent and prevent shooting or force them to retreat and thus potentially abandonning an objective. It has become a tactical tool as opposed to a straight up killing tool. I can see where BA complaints arise though, being an army that likes to use melee as a killing tool :/

[Morticon]

I can see where BA complaints arise though, being an army that likes to use melee as a killing tool :/

The issue is you can do this with a Rhino, or any other unit. There is now no need to incorporate assault elements/units into your game - more often than not, theyre not worth their points. 

[Frater Cornelius]

 

 

I can see where BA complaints arise though, being an army that likes to use melee as a killing tool :/

The issue is you can do this with a Rhino, or any other unit. There is now no need to incorporate assault elements/units into your game - more often than not, theyre not worth their points.

So basically, your complaint is less directed at assault itself and more at dedicated assault units not being up to par, because many are not capable of killig the enemy units in one and go and/or incapable of surviving outside of combat? If that is the case, it this not more indicative of some specific units sub-bar as opposed to assault itself being badly designed, especially with all the boni you can reap from it as a midfield army?

[Morticon]

 

 

I can see where BA complaints arise though, being an army that likes to use melee as a killing tool :/

The issue is you can do this with a Rhino, or any other unit. There is now no need to incorporate assault elements/units into your game - more often than not, theyre not worth their points.

So basically, your complaint is less directed at assault itself and more at dedicated assault units not being up to par, because many are not capable of killig the enemy units in one and go and/or incapable of surviving outside of combat? If that is the case, it this not more indicative of some specific units sub-bar as opposed to assault itself being badly designed, especially with all the boni you can reap from it as a midfield army?

 

Its an aspect of it - but I believe both aspects go hand in hand. 

 

I think killing a unit of 5/10 marines on a charge is far too excessive (despite the fact that KB can pretty much do this). The issue is that if you are lucky enough to get a unit or two into combat, do a wound or three, the unit then just falls out and the unit you spend the time getting into combat gets shot to death. This seems like a complete waste of time and points.  Its tactically unsound.  

 

This means that bang-per buck, in a cost-efficiency consideration, there's little need to take assault units.  

 

Dedicated Assault units should not have solitary value in being able to prevent a unit from shooting for one turn, with a secondary bonus of taking a wound or two off.

The amount of hurt shooting puts out with the armour mods is insane now.  Assault cannons, heavy bolters....whirlwinds...the works.  If you play FW its even rougher.  Quad bolters means 12x HB shots coming your way for 76 points.  That's 3 dead marines from downtown.   

Why bother, competitively, with assault?

 

My motivation for writing is that BA are set to have their Dex soon.  There is no real reason to play a non-shooty army, yet our entire core is based around assault.  If GW dont deal with the rules intelligently, they are going to see BA relegated and played solely by diehard fans of BA fluff and models, rather than a broader variety of gamers who want to enjoy their models and their chapter in a reasonably competitive environment.

 

We've had one local tournament so far. 

 

The top 5 lists are all shooty.  Only a stealer heavy GSC list did alright. 

Another list that does very well for a combat list (though he didnt play) was a Khorne Zerker rhino spam list. In these two situations, the list would work against most things (flyer spam notwithstanding) - but they did well for reasons mentioned in the OP.   

 

 

I must say that local metas will develop and change differently.  I see some tournament winning lists online and think to myself that there's no way a list like that could beat the top 3-5 player lists without something being seriously off - maybe terrain? Maybe mission type or maybe broader meta.  

 

But, at present, with the way transports work, with the way vehicles work and the way shooting mods work - the close combat mechanism doesnt. 

[Remtek]

Great post and most of it is spot on. I disagree with changing core rules as this would require reworking a lot of existing units to re-balance the game. But they need to take a hard look at all assault units, either rules or point costs.

 

It's hard to balance assault units, even berzerkers are not that amazing in competitive games due to the predictable nature of assault units it's easy to exploit their weakness. Horde assault can get table control for a low cost making them much more tactically flexible. In casual games playing elite assault units is generally more forgiving, if you make the too strong for competitive play that might have a negative impact for casual play. I'm hoping for strategems similar to the 7th ed Ravenguard decurion. They need to make elite assault units more dynamic than simply running towards the enemy. 

[Indefragable]

Tangentially to this subject, I am not a fan of how Cover works in 8th versus 7th. Is it far simpler? You bet. Does it speed things up? Yes, there Is a net speed increase, I would say. However, the main problem as it relates to assault is that it has made high AP shooting weapons exponentially more powerful. There is little if any downside to them. Cost isn't even a factor because points are freed up since you don't have to bother with the cost of assault units anymore.

 

In 7th, having Cover being its own mechanic helped balance things because your almighty lascannon was "wasted" on a unit in cover. A lascannon shot would nuke a SM in the open, but only had a 50% (save wise) chance of doing any damage. There was strategy involved. On a personal level I became acutely aware of this discrepancy playing IG in 8th, because there is no defense for them other than # of bodies. A 10 man Vet squad in 7th could have a reasonable chance of survival by using efficiently using cover. Now, a 10man Vet squad,in 8th, in cover, and heck even with the psyker buffs has hardly any defense against decent shooting weapons. Plasma annhilates them in 8th withiut a prayer otherwise. In 7th, Plasma treated IG vets in cover as essentially SM Scouts.

 

It also, in my view, was more realistic in 7th. "Hey, that gun pit is dug in. We're never going to dislodge them with our guns. Our only hope is to charge that hill and take the fight into the pit. Men, fix bayonets!"

 

It makes me wonder if the designers consider cover an essential part of the game, or if they see it as a cosmetic bonus.

[The Unseen]

Shooting pretty much across the board got more lethal, through a combination of ap modifiers, cover changes (both of which I thought were good, a tree saving you from a lascannon that can gut an armored tank is silly), universal split fire, and a fair number of underperforming guns got buffed significantly, in addition to the twin-linked change, while on average, close combat units got LESS lethal, (no extra attacks on the charge, and no extra attacks from having 2 ccws, so for example, a marine tactical squad with a pistol+PW sergeant went from getting 18 str4 attacks and 3 pw swings, to 9 and 2) but it got easier to get there, but still isn't as easy as shooting. With literally less punch, plus the ability for anyone to just walk out of melee, you have a recipe for shooting to be the only thing that really matters, unless your a horde who uses melee for board control. While "everyone" supposedly got hit the same by the assault changes, in practice, losing the charge attacks really hurt elite units with few high ws and str attacks like tactical marines, who now can't punch their way out of a paper bag, but assault horde units already have enough attacks to at least do some damage.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I think only  good codex can save us now .

[Morticon]

Shooting pretty much across the board got more lethal, through a combination of ap modifiers, cover changes (both of which I thought were good, a tree saving you from a lascannon that can gut an armored tank is silly), universal split fire, and a fair number of underperforming guns got buffed significantly, in addition to the twin-linked change, while on average, close combat units got LESS lethal, (no extra attacks on the charge, and no extra attacks from having 2 ccws, so for example, a marine tactical squad with a pistol+PW sergeant went from getting 18 str4 attacks and 3 pw swings, to 9 and 2) but it got easier to get there, but still isn't as easy as shooting. With literally less punch, plus the ability for anyone to just walk out of melee, you have a recipe for shooting to be the only thing that really matters, unless your a horde who uses melee for board control. While "everyone" supposedly got hit the same by the assault changes, in practice, losing the charge attacks really hurt elite units with few high ws and str attacks like tactical marines, who now can't punch their way out of a paper bag, but assault horde units already have enough attacks to at least do some damage.

Nail on the head, here! 

[tychobi]

Great post.  In general I agree.  The game got more deadly but hand to hand was not included equally in that trend.  Just look at how many d6 damage close combat weapons there are. I can not think of one that an infantry model can carry including the unique stuff.  Power fists are not going to be flipping tanks left and right like they were an edition ago at d3.  The numbers of attacks has been limited as well outside of specialty zerk and xeno units.  The result is some very unsatisfying cuddling when two tactical squads are trying to tear each others faces off.  I think this is a blanket problem and needs a sweeping solution, not just a few broken BA units in a new dex.

 

The fix:

 

I have three ideas to throw in the pot in terms of a solution.

 

1. give everybody "combat knives/chainswords" and upgrade the real things to do +1 Str. A tad clunky.  Lots of rewriting entries required

 

2. New rule: successful saves vs wounds suffered while within 1 inch of an enemy model must be re-rolled.  Simple. Might be a tad too deadly?

 

3. Add 1 to the attack characteristic of all models in the game.  Or add one to the # of dice you roll for attacks in close combat.  Simple.  Orks and Nids would go from scary to terrifying.  Conscripts need a nerf anyway. . . This is probably my choice.

 

Let there be BLOOD!

[Indefragable]

To add to the pile of woe is the fact that with the Explodes! Rule, CQC is directly hampered because those TH/SS termites can get mortally wounded for doing their job. Not so much the Devs sitting back comfortably.

[Charlo]

It's falling back being the main problem for me. It shouldn't be as simple as foregoing shooting, and even then enough units fly to not even lose that.

 

There should be a a risk of some mortal wounds at least, the number gauged by combat resolution/ outnumbering etc to represent those caught and dragged down out of the melee as they attempt to flee.

 

I'm not overly 1st hand experienced with 8th yet, but my Skitarii just didn't even care about an Assault from a contemptor or some terminators and a blob of chaos marines. They just fell back and let the rest of my army rip into them with a crap tonne of shooting.

[Morticon]

Ive been thinking about more solutions.

My interim solution would be this type of stratagem  for the BA: 

 

 

 

"No Escape" 1-3 CP

 

Prevent between one and three units engaged with BA infantry or walkers from Falling Back from combat. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Solves 75% of the problem I feel there is with combat.  Still dont believe it goes far enough, but its better than nothing, doesnt require a rules overhaul and requires use of stratagems and command points. 

 

[Karhedron]

Interesting note, I got pinned in close combat by Blood Angels yesterday.

 

I had a squad of Wraithguard that got charged by a BA Tac squad and he was basically able to encircle me. The rules state that you cannot move through enemy models and since there was not a gap between his bases wide enough to fit a model through, I could not withdraw.

 

Did we play it correctly? This is probably not going to be useful on a regular basis but is useful if you are facing elite MSUs.

[Arkhanist]

You played it right, but as you point out it's a hard tactic to pull off.

[Dont-Be-Haten]

Yeah you have to slingshot your unit, and you really need an 8 or better dice roll on the charge to really pull it off so you can wrap the unit around.

 

If you are able to encompass the unit you can keep prolonged combat. It's one of the tactics they use in AoS. Multi assaults really have to happen also to make it more effective. But then you run into the Fly mechanic where they can just leap out of combat as they can simply jump over units. So JP vs JP units is still pointless/frustrating.

[Spagunk]

Honestly, with 8th in place I don't really see the need for JP units to be more points than their non-jp brethren. You give up shooting for the extra movement which pretty much levels their use. Your assault marines still only have pistols which gives them one shot at 12 inches; equivalent to a bolter at that point. With rapid fire essentially being given up for melee, it seems like an assault marine should just be the same costs as normal tacticals.

[Morticon]

Agreed.  Especially given that they are also unable to benefit from the tactical flexibility of the vast majority of transports. 

[Arkangilos]

Did you send it yet?

[Morticon]

Did you send it yet?

 

Gonna rewrite tonight, and post tomorrow or Fri :)

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

Good luck Mort ! <3

[Landrick]

Well said Mort, thank you. May I offer a suggested solution?

The most straightforward comparison to a unit fleeing combat it is a unit charging. Going to and from as it were. In last edition (idk about this one, not in front of me) The rule book says something like "A group of soldiers isn't going to just stand there holding their guns and take a charge..." etc. In the same vein, is something like a marine going to hack a Tau warrior once with his Chainsword, then watch him run off? (the pistol point works extra well here, as even a reverse opportunity overwatch would be nice, but not help things like TH/SS Termies)

 

Perhaps a system like "for each model your opponent has within 2" of one of your models (once per opponents model) your opponent rolls a D6. For each roll of a 6 your unit suffers (a mortal wound/a wound with the following profile S User AP -4) to represent you showing your cowardly back.

 

thoughts?

[Crimson Ghost IX]

Landrick has an interesting idea there. ^^

 

Pistols likely need to be fired in every round of CQC is another thought.

I would bet they were that way until late in playtesting or at least at some point.

Things make more sense that way anyhow. (points values, loss of attack etc).

 

Logically why would you not be firing your pistol on the way in and at contact?

Especially for the defender.

 

I cannot help but feel some last minute changes were made, when I look at the index.