CONTROVERSIAL! New Shooting Phase Rules for Bolt Action 3rd Edition!

Outro song - • It's a Long Way to Tip...
Background tracks - Battlefield V The Pacific OST
Squad 44: OST
=========================
Please support this channel!
/ mordianglory
Affiliate Links! Save money on your miniatures and support the channel :D
- elementgames.c...
- Use this Element Referral Code to earn double bonus store credit when buying through element games: TIM3921
- Firestorm Games (UK based Store): www.firestormg...
- Noble Knight Games (US based store): www.nobleknigh...
Thanks to Anvil Industry for sponsoring the Channel! Remember Mordian Glory Members and Patreons get a 5% discount :)
www.anvilindus...
Link to the official MG Merch Store:
store.streamel...
Connect and get more content :)
www.facebook.c...
/ mordianglory
www.tiktok.com...
Email:
[e-mail]
I have a new Mailing address! If you want to send anything to me then please use the below address:
Name: MGTV
Address line 1: Store First
Address line 2 :Roundwood Point
Town: St Helens
Postcode: WA9 5JD
Country: United Kingdom

[@anamelessname4996]

“You’ve already had a second shooting phase.” “Ah yes but what about third shooting phase?”

[@erickmain]

@@anamelessname4996 fantastic!! 😂

[@damienthecadian8164]

I would love to see more Bolt Action content from Mordian.

[@Fearior]

I can already see Red Army floating the board with bodies of Green infantry.

[@theholyemu3716]

The problem with tanks being too prone to be one shot is due to cowardice as people bring light tanks instead of glorious heavy tanks

[@callum563]

All my list feature a Tiger or KV2 or Churchill/Cromwell :)

[@DrakonPhD]

Tell that to my Tiger that got one-shot turn 1 against a british player, like 5 years ago.

[@sirdovermeyer]

The 3rd edition updates and news is what made me decide to collect Bolt Action armies over Warhammer armies. This sounds exciting to me. Can't wait to get my US vs. Japanese games on.

[@TikitheHutt]

....... but can you fire three rounds a minute? I'm a fan of no premeasuring and no cover save, I like the lethality and speed of Bolt Action 2nd Ed. I think rolling saves will slow the game down and put more of the game in the fate of chance/dice instead of good tactics. Also this will lead to even more debates about what counts as what kind of cover, and flamethrower and HE spam.

[@samb2052]

I thought the same initially. Now I’ve seen a couple of explanations, I’m not so sure. It seems that pinning will be a lot easier, but the effects less drastic. So it may promote suppression and manoeuvre, which would be a good thing in my view. It also helps speed play as there are very few modifiers to the hit dice, all relating to the firer. There are similarly few modifiers to the save dice, all relative to the target. Although in principle I dislike the extra step, it could actually end up quicker.

[@Keithslawinski]

I personally like the idea of cover saves because it increases pin probability, and allows BA to be more aggressive about using pins to cause routs and failed orders, over relying on lucky -1's to hit to force rallies. In 2e it was REALLLY common to be at a 6-to-hit against hard cover enemies which made suppression with MMG's useless. The result was really swingy turns where you could order 3 units to focus at an enemy with zero impact, OR completely incapacitate them with 3 pins depending on your luck with 6's. It made me feel luck was guiding the battle for more than my deliberate actions. Now 2 mmgs and a unit firing on an enemy is highly likely to score 3 pins every turn no matter the cover (EVEN if they go down). This means you can actually suppress an entrenched enemy. Alternatively, with only a max -1 to-hit for pins, LEADERSHIP buffs become more important as a pinned unit can still fight through 3-4 pins with the help of a nearby HQ without being completely crippled (which is cool given most players will be running 2-3 of them per game).

[@BoltAction.AdArma]

@@Keithslawinski the most anoing thing about the save is, that it happens After wounding. You kill that damn tank and then he Roll to save…

[@ulrichmehler7943]

"Major Lennox answered with his life!" Greatest putdown in the history of television. If you ever watch only one episode of Sharpe´s Rifles, make it Sharpe´s Eagle. Ist has everything. Damn fine officer...

[@ryskatt]

@@ulrichmehler7943 Thats my style sir!

[@ulrichmehler7943]

@@ryskatt Remember: He who loses the king´s colours loses the king´s friendship!

[@ryskatt]

@@ulrichmehler7943 May I remind you sir that I have a cousin in horse guards... And I have friends at court 😆

[@damnationdan5253]

It’s a whole nother company!

[@DinoBProductions]

As a newer player I welcome these changes cause a lot of times I seem to forget some rules when calculating to hit, like small teams, and also just less counting numbers like "oh im more than half range, youre in heavy cover etc." So Im really excited

[@JohnDiPonio]

This is a very good improvement to the rules system and will be super easy to bring new players quickly into the system. The reduction in modifiers and the addition of cover saves is a good thing.

[@irishtom30]

I think the elimination of the long range penalty is fantastic, as this means you will spend way less time measuring

[@gregggambolputty2884]

I don't agree that adding saves gets rid of the frustration of being at the mercy of bad luck... because in the end it's all about that. Whether I fail a hit and/or wound roll or succeed with both and have that taken away by my opponent succeeding at his save makes no difference. Similarly, when I'm on the receiving end, I don't feel like I have any more influence over the outcome just because I get to make a save roll instead of having the to-hit roll modified. There is no decision making by that point, you just roll dice. I'm just as much locked in as before and at the mercy of chance. The outcome just takes a little longer to get to. If there were some kind of resource I could spend to improve my save for that particular roll, that would be a different matter of course... not that I'd actually want that. I consider it merely an excercise of odds juggling, which in the end, may very well make for a better balanced game... I honestly don't know but remain optimistic and trust that the changes are for the better. The point about making armor more durable is solid but I've always felt that it was just a matter of them technically being 1 HP models. We'll see if the vehicle damage tables change but as long as you can at least meet the armor value, there is a chance to one shot anything. The bigger issue I have is that with saves it becomes much harder to make the decision of whether or not it pays to go down. In 2e it's a very straightforward and transparent matter, even if it becomes ridiculous moving from a 1/3 (5+) chance to a 1/36 (7), simply by going down. Either you start calculating the odds (not fun) or make educated guesses based on experience, which I'd argue might raise the skill floor considerably. I got nothing against saves in principle but again, I'd say the main reason to add them was to adjust the hit chances and additional rolls simply provide more options in that regard.

[@justinmsc5]

It's more emotional than logical. Rationally, it doesn't matter. But people like rolling hot themselves, moreso than they like their opponent rolling cold. I cheer and laugh when I roll hot, but it's not nice to do that when the opponent rolls cold (and you feel more bad for them anyway). I'm a rational person, but I can relate to that.

[@DMKA94]

It's mentioned in the article that there will be weapons that ignore cover, most likely HE and flamethrowers. Combined with engineer platoons being decent at assaulting dug in infantry. I think there's a good chance that cover won't be to op. I never found medics to obnoxious in 2.0, granted exceptional damage/he and points balanced them. I really hope observer get a rework

[@markhall9831]

Making BA feel more like 40k isn't an improvement in my opinion. You're right in saying there needed to be some changes but we've played BA for 16 years because it was such a smooth and well balanced game.

[@Fearior]

But is it still a game of sixes*? It looks more like a game of mostly five and four ups, and from experience, 5+ is much better for player experience than 6+. (even if followed by cover save andother rolls) *The biggest complaint from most people who tried the demo of Bolt Action, which is similar to the Lord of the Rings game, is that it feels more like getting lucky (with 6's) rather than planning. Since this was one of the few common complaints (another is Armour/Tanks survivability and usefulness), they tried to address it. Will it help bring in new audiences? Who knows...

[@tiny_worlds]

I like what I'm seeing of 3rd Ed so far. Simplifying hit modifiers and adding cover saves to get rid of 7+ to hit is a good thing. Also means more hits, so more pins. May finally get to see a unit get pinned out.

[@BoltAction.AdArma]

@@tiny_worlds hm the 7+ is still there. The new Mechanik makes inex troops useless.

[@tiny_worlds]

@@BoltAction.AdArma why would it make inexperienced troops useless? An inexperienced rifleman at 18" hits a model in hard cover on a 5+ (1/3 chance) now instead of a 7+ (1/36 chance) previously.

[@BoltAction.AdArma]

@@tiny_worlds you picked, the best Case for inex in v3. For sure the troop will have Pin, now even more likely, and if you have to move you are on a Seven in v3 again. And dont forget that they could hold objectives very Good in v2. Just going down, now that will not work. Espacially the fact that inex troops are the only that can Hit on a Seven makes them much worse than the other. But we have to seit for the Full rules to see it all. Just now for me, inex troops are a no go

[@tiny_worlds]

@@BoltAction.AdArma You picked the worst possible scenario. Inexperienced troops are just as good as in v2 in that one scenario, otherwise they're a lot more likely to hit.. assuming 7+ is even a thing anymore. Perhaps a 6+ always hits now. We don't know yet. Why will just going down not work? An inex unit down behind hard cover gets a 2+ cover save.

[@Joementum2666]

I’m pretty neutral about the rules changes in and of themselves, but it certainly seems like WG is moving Bolt Action to be more like a clone of 40K. It’s an interesting business decision to mimic the biggest player out there. We’ll see if creating a 1940K spinoff gets more players or just muddies the water.

[@stechnicalmike3058]

One thing I don't understand about this version is if you want to take a Tank you can't take one, you have to take a command tank and then another regular one and that is weird. It is probably more realistic but not optimal for army building, I barely found a single Ha Go in stores and I can't really find another japanese vehicle.

[@merlin4084]

I think you've missed the other big thing this change does for the game. It makes inexperienced troops a bit more viable now. Right now, almost everything they do requires 7s to hit, be that due to cover, moving, long range, etc. Now, the worst you can roll with them is 6+ as with no long range, you'll not want to move them from their cover anyway. So they can now reliably, within reason, put pins out and actually have some sort of game impact and not just be easy target practice for your opponent and a waste of good points. Immobile inexperienced units like artillery also get a big boost from this. Now they are a flat 5+ to hit anything on the table. No longer are you forced to go indirect fire because you're only able to hit on 7s anyway and 6s, ranging in, is just the better thing to do (even for regulars sometimes).

[@notxxbobsaget3240]

Well I just bought 2 starter armies that come in today. Can’t wait to play with brother and friends

[@TheTobaccoman]

I actually don’t mind the shooting phase changes , they feel fine. I just hope it feels good still in practice , as long as it does and I can field my big tanks without feeling like a loser just for doing so I’m all in.

[@matthilton8959]

Being both a star wars legion player and bolt action. I'm far more looking forward to playing V3 than I am the recent changes to Legion.

[@ArchaiKM]

Best part of Wednesday

[@ArchaiKM]

Something else about cover saves, is that it engages both players, instead of watch opponent roll a bunch of dice and then take off your models.

[@thunder_chunder6491]

Games should be trying as much as possible to not be like anything GW makes, GW makes shit games, they oversimplify then add crap that feels like the hand of god or whatever, feels crap.

[@arkenhemnall6224]

I hope that going Down effects snipers (as in, a Down unit gets the +2 cover save, but not a save for being in cover in the first place) The lack of range modifier for long range I think is a mistake, although the issue is that its 'half range' that's the issue rather than Point Blank being +X to hit, combat range is the base 'to hit' up to 12" or 15" or something, and long range being any shots over the combat range. But yeah, we'll see how we go, feeling more positive about it, we'll see next month

[@arkenhemnall6224]

Oh, and no pre-measuring is great, no range-finders in Second World War 😂

[@gregbradfield1686]

A quick comment on the shooting rules is that the down is no longer as powerful. No hit modifier, no hits being halved so only benifit is as a cover save. Cover saves great as chances of hitting better now so I think there will be more casualties.

[@benbaxter1047]

I can say that these changes are similar to what I did so my 11 yo son could play a war game. He hated the fantasy and sci-fi of GW games but loves history. Bolt Action gave him a table top game to try, ablite one aimed at adults and set up for experienced gamers. I personaly thought that machine guns and mortars should have had an effect on armoured vehicles especialy open topped ones. All of the minus modifiers meant that guns often did not hit, so distinctions needed to be made as to how many modifiers were enough and to say that a roll of 6 hit (i.e. critical hit). Multple pins only affected moral and units under the strain of multple pins would eventualy be either forced to ground or retreat.

[@Wargoat6]

The cover saves will add more statistical precision to the game. Maybe snipers would prevent targets from rolling them? We shall see.

[@Keithslawinski]

Agree. Pins BEFORE COVER will help suppression be far more consistent. MMG's benefit as their 6 shots are statistically going to hit cause a pin every time they shoot now which thematically feels good IMO. They may not kill more often, but they will suppress consistently which SHOULD BE their focus.

[@Huter2142]

I think Alessio and Warlord have tried to streamline the attack sequence to eliminate those improbable shots, as they always felt clunky and a very bygone mechanic, changing to a slimmer hitmod table and adding the generous cover saves will make the game play faster, but will keep the lethality on par, and as you say alows the defending player that involvement in the attack sequence, rather than being entirely passive, as you say being such is rather demoralising, and was actually a reason i was put off playing the game after my first couple of intro games, as well as most things hitting on 5s at best most of the time, it just felt slow, and i understand a lot of players enjoy that, newer blood coming into the hobby wont find it as engaging for the most part, and the hobby needs new players if it is to survive and thrive. Justy my tuppence, and whatever version you play and enjoy, have at it!

[@ochaco81]

I'm glad I just started, Bolt Action 3rd Ed. it's looking to be a fun, new game to start playing!

[@Mii378]

I think the new rules will result in more pinning and less casualties, as in the Pz III scenario, the tank will hit more. But the pinning has less impact as one or two or three pins all result in the same -1 to hit. Something to keep in mind as soon as I start playing this edition 🙂

[@BloodBuffalo]

3rd edition will be my first

[@leegovus3461]

Konflikt 47 will be very interesting if the cover saves become armour saves for armoured troops

[@mid-westmusic3472]

Maybe vehicles should have been given cover saves for 3rd

[@grahamphilpot7281]

The game still assumes that soldiers can’t judge distance which is nonsense.

[@masher8421]

So far I like all the changes. Pretty excited about this edition.

[@Erzbischof1968]

Perfectly summarized and perfectly concluded.

[@WoodImp]

An observation from todays preview is; The new anti-tank gun rule reads "get an *ADDITIONAL* +1 modifier to hit vehicles when shooting with a Fire order". Does this mean the Fire order now grants +1 to hit? So not only do you not have to worry about cover on your hit roll, it could be +2 meaning you hit on a 2????????

[@Connordaboss45]

Fireflys are gonna stomp any tank into oblivion lmao

[@dannyhalas9408]

I don't like this, the old system was snappy and fast.

[@hienpham2415]

Oh god, it makes Japanese can finally make use of their vehicles and armour a bit more... and their AT rifle team is worth taking also

[@pauls3585]

I like the new rules. This slight change will keep the game fresh.

[@rodento3220]

It does add another step into firing. But to be honest I always thought (and observed) incoming fire doesn't have to kill or wound anyone to keep a unit in place but shooting back with effect (Think two units in rubble shooting at each other, neither wants to move it's F'n dangerous with Ruskis shooting at us but I can pour on fire at the at rubble pile and hold them while the engineers sneak up and Whoosh!) . It is going to make digging out Ruskis in Stalingrad feel a lot more like the historical accounts Close combat, HE, and flame weapons are going to finally have a purpose and not just whoosh any where and time and place you are gone. Be careful with the flamethrower you need it to clear out the rubble to get into the tractor factory. But who knows we have not seen or play tested all the new mechanics together. But if I am "reading this right" I like what I am "Seeing"..

[@Arnie_DK]

Just started getting into the game, simply because I heard there was a third edition coming, and so far, it seems like it was a good time to start :)

[@Wraithnine]

I'm not sold on saves, just makes the game feel generic.

[@Flippotycoon4583]

Ive always really disliked long range penalty's for shooting in tabeltop games.

[@r3dcoat397]

Positive engagement

[@gregbradfield1686]

If you look at the latest intel you will see that anti-tank guns that are stationary get a +1 to hit so I think the to hit modifier table we saw under the shooting intel section is not the complete to hit table.

[@Ellendil12]

I hope they adressed sth I had an issue with - downed veteran squads in the open, at point blank, being way too tanky. It was stupid how much firepower my opponent had to expend to get rid of them. Perhaps a +1/+2 to wound roll at point blank? Also I'd extend point blank range if you are targeting tanks and such, since it was also weird how difficult they were to hit sometimes

[@RussellWilliams736]

There should be no premeasuring for shooting, in any game.

[@robertstrong6798]

I think someone might start playing black powder 😂 new skirmish version coming out soon. 95th riffles anyone

[@amaelrodrigues4076]

Update AT vs vehicles gets +1 so your pz3 scenario would actually hit on a 4+

[@Keithslawinski]

Yea with the AT-special rule I think vehicles will be just as squishy (if not more so). HOWEVER, given armor platoons can run 2-5 tanks at a time, I have a feeling tanks are going to get a hefty points reduction across the board, so you can run 2-4 in a 1000pt game, and a single tiger isn't eating 1/2 your list. They will blow up more, but you are also fielding more so it's less devastating when one blows up. I think I'll like this more than 2e where you get 1 tank that misses 1/2 its 6 shots BEST CASE, and will get insta-popped by a bazooka-jeep team the first turn it leaves cover.

[@tomyorke3412]

There is always going to be the bad luck with dice so there is always going to be frustration its part of the game. I feel the save thing is just there to roll dice for the sake of it

[@dariostabletopminatures]

9:50 BUT WAIT.....THERE IS MORE!

[@zeno6111753]

Is random initiative still a thing?

[@adamcline8728]

Oh boy, I don't like the sounds of this. Bolt Action should stay far away from Warhammer 40k if it wants to preserve any sense of in-game tactics. Limiting the effects of pinning on infantry is a terrible idea. And 2+ saving throws? A new shooting phase to throw off the back and forth feel of the turn structure? The only thing I've seen that seems like it will make the game more fun is the more forgiving army composition.

[@Swrdfshtrmbns]

I think you have long worn out the “that’s just, like, my opinion maaann” line at this point

[@MordianGlory]

Haha your probably right xD

[@briarsandbantams]

​@MordianGlory Yeah, you should replace it with something like "and remember kids, taxation is theft".

[@jacqueslandry2319]

You do know there is cover in V2 , it's just expressed as a modifier

[@ethantaylor9613]

I think pre-measuring is just a solid choice nowadays. To the point it’s almost an accessibility thing.