The "depth" of a given decision is a function of the number of factors or layers that play into making that decision. When you also add the deafening noise of battle, rubble flying around and dust/smoke kicking up from explosions the thought of calmly selecting a far away target becomes an utter illusion.
Apparently having static models on the table standing straight doesn´t help to convey these conditions. Infantry keep their heads down when bullets fly and fire back at opposing units which usually tend to be the closest targets.
#Warhammer 40k tabletop simulator discord movie#
People who think target priority rules restrict their joy of playing need to either watch a war movie or read a novel about firefights. The above is a situation where constraints and limits create tactical obstacles to work around and that can make the devious more interesting as a result. You can look at it as limited choice when it comes to fire order (which it does), but it's adding choice and additional depth to when it comes to unit positioning and maneuver, which is typically less often a cut and dry matter of optimization. The only choice is whether or not you decide to spend the time optimizing or not.īy having rules governing target selection based on the relative positioning of units (and specifically going beyond just LoS and range as factors) creates opportunities for actual tactical choices snd trade offs. So being able to CHOOSE to fire at a target that's in range & LoS & doing so is boring procedure & somehow robs me of choice.īut making up/bringing back some rule that limits one to only fire on certain units isn't boring procedure devoid of choice.īy giving players unfettered choice over targeting selection snd priority it's setting the for being able to perfectly optimize your firing order.
No, it's units freely firing on any unit of their choice, narrowing the range of live options down to the optimal firing solution, thereby reducing player choice down to a procedure, and making the game boring as a result. So you're issue isn't one of focus fire, it's one of LoS. If you're guaranteed to be able to shoot at the target of your choice rather than just the closest unit (or closest unit of type X, as was also sometimes the case), there's less of a motivation to move/flank, etc. Which makes for something of a dull game, and requires all sorts of additional rules to prevent characters from being 'sniped.'This is also one of those things that cuts down on the importance of maneuvering too. At one point the Tyranids had a rule by which opponents could bypass these targeting restrictions so that opponents could target synapse creatures and larger, more dangerous bugasaurs. Various early editions of 40k attempted to get around this problem by having additional requirements, such as passing a leadership test to shoot targets other than the closest and so on. The issue is simply that units can shoot at whatever is in range, leading the phenomenon of whole armies focusing their fire on single units and eliminating them in a single turn. Nurglitch wrote: Is there anything in here addressing the issue of focused fire?