Should aggressors be allowed to shoot in melee?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Title speaks for itself.

 

The fact their guns are literally connected to the fists they’re punching with makes it hard to understand why you can treat their guns like pistols in melee.

Even if it’s only as a stratagem.

[Malakithe]

It would make sense. I can easily visualize one punching something, the fist holds where it hit, then BLAP BLAP BLAP

[Skywrath]

They can as Dark Angels xD

[Malakithe]

They can as Dark Angels xD

How?

[Dark Shepherd]

Oooh I like it. Might make them relevant again too

[WrathOfTheLion]

 

They can as Dark Angels xD

How?

 

Greenwing Fire Discipline combat doctrine lets you shoot Rapid Fire and Assault weapons into melee with a BS of 5+, whilst in tactical doctrine.

[Skywrath]

 

 

They can as Dark Angels xD

How?

 

Greenwing Fire Discipline combat doctrine lets you shoot Rapid Fire and Assault weapons into melee with a BS of 5+, whilst in tactical doctrine.

 

 

Technically 4 if you stood still, but yeah that.

[WrathOfTheLion]

Only with Grim Resolve, you can have a Dark Angels chapter/successor that has the doctrine, but no Grim Resolve. The ruleset heavily encourages adhering to it, but does not force it.

[Skywrath]

Only with Grim Resolve, you can have a Dark Angels chapter/successor that has the doctrine, but no Grim Resolve. The ruleset heavily encourages adhering to it, but does not force it.

It was my impression that DA units regardless of CORE or not CORE always had Grim Resolve, could you elaborate on the distinction?

[WrathOfTheLion]

 

Only with Grim Resolve, you can have a Dark Angels chapter/successor that has the doctrine, but no Grim Resolve. The ruleset heavily encourages adhering to it, but does not force it.

It was my impression that DA units regardless of CORE or not CORE always had Grim Resolve, could you elaborate on the distinction?

 

Dark Angels chapter does, but Dark Angels successors can take a different chapter tactic. Grim Resolve is pretty good now, and you'd also lose Jink and Inner Circle, but you aren't prohibited from making that decision. They would still retain the combat doctrines if they did that though.

 

With that combinations of decisions, they would shoot into melee with only BS of 5+.

Edited October 24, 2021 by WrathOfTheLion

[Skywrath]

Alright, awesome, because I only play Dark Angels and not outer circle, cheers - sorry for derailing mods.

[Xenith]

They have Autoboltstorm gauntlets, which don't let you - Allowing them to sidegrade to a regular boltstorm gauntlet (pistol 3) would be cool, but maybe you have to be a captain to get that wargear...

[Argonte]

Imperial fist can shoot in combat with bolters as if they were pistols

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

I think it would be an interesting change. It would make them a bit more of a threat against horde units but they have to survive a round or two of CC to get there which seems reasonable. It's also a simple fix which is appealing cause they aren't Reiver bad.

[WrathOfTheLion]

I think this might make sense as something to sort of replace their old shoot twice rule. I think Aggressors could do with something new to make them a bit more interesting.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I think it would be an interesting change. It would make them a bit more of a threat against horde units but they have to survive a round or two of CC to get there which seems reasonable. It's also a simple fix which is appealing cause they aren't Reiver bad.

mine survived 3 rounds of combat against the big tripod choppy necron bois so against hoardes they’re likely have no problems surviving a round or two.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Didn't mean too imply it would be hard more that your opponent could react to it. So powerful but fair I think it would be good fix.

[MegaVolt87]

Make it a stratagem, I like the points on aggressors now. Adding a unit rule will only increase the points. 

[Captain Idaho]

It's an interesting idea as a Strategum but really would it make Aggressors useful? Getting them into melee and up the table is more of an issue without Impulsors and they can't fire in melee unless charged or waiting through 2 combat phases.

 

Just doesn't seem worth it really. I'd say give them the ability to forgo their melee for shooting attacks in melee that isn't tied to the shooting phase.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

It's an interesting idea as a Strategum but really would it make Aggressors useful? Getting them into melee and up the table is more of an issue without Impulsors and they can't fire in melee unless charged or waiting through 2 combat phases.

 

Just doesn't seem worth it really. I'd say give them the ability to forgo their melee for shooting attacks in melee that isn't tied to the shooting phase.

where is this 2 phases of combat coming from?

[Captain Idaho]

So if you give the ability to fire into combat with those engaged with the unit like pistols, what you need to consider that that occurs in the shooting phase.

 

• You charge into combat, turn one. That's 1 melee phase.

• The opponent gets a turn and needs to choose to not remove themselves from combat then get another melee phase.

• Turn 2 and we get the 1st opportunity to fire into melee with pistols and similar abilities.

 

So it's barely worth the extra rules in place without the amendments I mentioned.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

In all fairness though if you charged you probably shot first (they shouldn't double tap the turn they charge). On their turn 2 they have they ability to fall back, if they do unless they charged you with a different unit you still get to shoot during your turn.

 

On the flip side if they assault you, you can overwatch if your running the flamer variant. then punch them. On the second turn you can shoot then fight. In my experience with aggressors the lack of transports leads to a lot of scenarios where you do get charged because your almost always advancing.  

 

That said I don't view it as an ability that should be activated with a stratagem. I think they should always have it, and while its strong your opponent has answers. I don't think aggressors would need a point increase for it (they still wouldn't be as good as VV, BGV, or Termies).

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

So if you give the ability to fire into combat with those engaged with the unit like pistols, what you need to consider that that occurs in the shooting phase.

 

• You charge into combat, turn one. That's 1 melee phase.

• The opponent gets a turn and needs to choose to not remove themselves from combat then get another melee phase.

• Turn 2 and we get the 1st opportunity to fire into melee with pistols and similar abilities.

 

So it's barely worth the extra rules in place without the amendments I mentioned.

I’ve never had anyone fall back out of melee so far, so I guess that sort of thing never really occurred to me, but I did mean shoot during the fight phase Edited October 25, 2021 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Captain Idaho]

Then we agree ;)

[XeonDragon]

As a stratagem yes, as an in-built ability, no. Aggressors are already pretty darn good in terms of shooting and melee output compared to terminators or relic terminators. I did a bunch of mathhammer comparing them and TL;DR, relic terminators with chainfists with whirlwind of rage, born heroes and fury of the first almost do as much combined shooting and melee damage on a points efficiency basis as aggressors with WOR/BH. Comparing ordinary terminators/relics terminators to aggressors and the gap is not insubstantial. Yes, terminators get a 5++ and teleport, but really, aggressors are already very good in terms of overall damage output compared to terminators.

 

Allowing Aggressors to shoot their Auto boltstorm gauntlets natively in combat in addition to melee attacks, even at a -1 to hit, would make them bonkers again.  If it was instead of making melee attacks, maybe not so much. Allowing them to shoot their Auto boltstorm gauntlets as pistols as an in-built ability would be bonkers, but allowing it as a stratagem would be OK. 

Edited October 26, 2021 by XeonDragon