Friendly fire in GW´s sci-fi games

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

Should there be friendly fire in GW´s sci-fi games?

[Brother Anderson]

It's a bit niche but there's a guard strategem that lets you fire into combat, with every wound caused on the enemy causing one to your own on a 4+ if I remember correctly. I think given how callous a lot of the forces are in 40k it'd make sense for that to be a rule across the board I think.

[Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf]

Humm it's quite complicated in my opinion. With some armies is something you can expect,because they are treacherous even between them, or they are famous for their contempt for life, whether their own or that of others, or they simply don't care who's in the middle because they just want to shoot.

Dark Eldar,Orks,Chaos...but in other armies like Eldar,Space Marines,Tau,Votaan,...I find it more difficult to justify, except in very specific cases.

 

And allow some factions and not others...

Very complicated.

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

53 minutes ago, Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf said:

Humm it's quite complicated in my opinion. With some armies is something you can expect,because they are treacherous even between them, or they are famous for their contempt for life, whether their own or that of others, or they simply don't care who's in the middle because they just want to shoot.

Dark Eldar,Orks,Chaos...but in other armies like Eldar,Space Marines,Tau,Votaan,...I find it more difficult to justify, except in very specific cases.

 

And allow some factions and not others...

Very complicated.

Friendly fire does not mean you shoot your own troops on purpose. Circumstances like very loud noise, poor visibility, close enemies, bullets flying everywhere and fear lead to confusion which makes precision fire and choosing appropriate targets very difficult. Indirect fire via artillery and airstrikes often also lead to friendly fire as either the ground troops or the artillery crew get the coords wrong or the pilot of an airplane thought friendlies were the hostiles.

Edited 12 hours ago by Deus_Ex_Machina

[Dark Shepherd]

Technically there kinda is with vehicles exploding

 

I like it as an apropriate strat or even character ability for chaos

 

Am not reigniting the templates debate!! :)

[Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf]

1 hour ago, Deus_Ex_Machina said:

Friendly fire does not mean you shoot your own troops on purpose. Circumstances like very loud noise, poor visibility, close enemies, bullets flying everywhere and fear lead to confusion which makes precision fire and choosing appropriate targets very difficult. Indirect fire via artillery and airstrikes often also lead to friendly fire as either the ground troops or the artillery crew get the coords wrong or the pilot of an airplane thought friendlies were the hostiles.

Yes, indeed but this is now in game: blast templates misfired,vehicles exploding near friend troops, and so. I'm talking more about mote intentional friendly fire...you know, the kind one of,for example, a commander who wants to kill certain enemy and doesn't care in there are his own troops in the middle or engaged. Just orders to open fire to that target,with all the weapons. Or, for example, when in Istvaan Iron Warriors opened fire against loyalist,killing Word Bearers in the process ("Have faith,Word Bearer. We bleed all today") 

 

The matter is how can we represent this universally for everyone. Accidental friendly fire is more than represented nowadays.

[Brother Anderson]

4 hours ago, Agramar_The_Luna_Wolf said:

Humm it's quite complicated in my opinion. With some armies is something you can expect,because they are treacherous even between them, or they are famous for their contempt for life, whether their own or that of others, or they simply don't care who's in the middle because they just want to shoot.

Dark Eldar,Orks,Chaos...but in other armies like Eldar,Space Marines,Tau,Votaan,...I find it more difficult to justify, except in very specific cases.

 

And allow some factions and not others...

Very complicated.

 

Definitely agree with Eldar and Votaan, but I can see some of the more brutal SM chapters sacrificing their own to bring down an enemy champion for example. The Tau I can imagine caring about Tau casualties in friendly fire but they may gun down some auxiliaries for the greater good if you'll pardon the expression 

[Brother Tyler]

4 hours ago, Deus_Ex_Machina said:

Friendly fire does not mean you shoot your own troops on purpose. Circumstances like very loud noise, poor visibility, close enemies, bullets flying everywhere and fear lead to confusion which makes precision fire and choosing appropriate targets very difficult. Indirect fire via artillery and airstrikes often also lead to friendly fire as either the ground troops or the artillery crew get the coords wrong or the pilot of an airplane thought friendlies were the hostiles.

 

So you're suggesting friendly fire as a result of some sort of fog of war mechanism, is that correct?

 

There are many wargames that incorporate fog of war in a variety of ways. In general, most represent fog of war effects as unintended consequences. These include things such as failing to activate a unit, units acting on incorrect orders (generally in games where orders have to be issued to units - often Napoleonics and the like), etc. For this to work in Warhammer 40,000, Kill Team, Necromunda, etc., you would have to build in some changes to the overall mechanics to allow for fog of war. Do you have any ideas on how to do this?

 

The Astra Militarum stratagem that @Brother Anderson described sounds more like a "danger close" thing - a deliberate choice to fire at the enemy despite the proximity of and danger to friendlies* - rather than a fog of war thing. That kind of rule is easier to incorporate into Warhammer 40,000 than a fog of war friendly fire effect.

 

 

 

* Admittedly, "danger close" generally refers to indirect fire and the like rather than direct fire with small arms. It's the closest thing I could think of, though.