Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

DukeRustfield wrote:
I think monsters by themselves are really getting in line. You have an issue with 7th ed books and early 8th.

Exactly. A little update to those older monsters is all we really need, I think. Including a total re-vamping of Giants.

DukeRustfield wrote:
I think you need a way to threaten heroes...If you get rid of war machine sniping those armies who have regular Snipers suddenly become a lot more powerful. Or spell sniping. And if you don't have that, you're SOL against some chock-full of heroes mega star who can accept challenges up to turn 50.

Fair enough. As much as I don't like the maxed out war machine gunline forcing you to roll LoS 6 times a turn, I like the idea of Deathstars with a General, BSB, and whoever else you want to bring being even tougher than they currently are even less.
I think the ultimate goal of Warhammer ought to be something more like: lump of clay, tin shears, and wet tissue paper. You can play one against another, and that gives you a big advantage, but less than a 95% chance of success, like "hard" counters usually seem to promise.

Warpsolution wrote:
1. monsters are getting better. Maybe adjusting old monster prices/stats is an easier way to solve this issue?

That is the solution that's rolling through the books.

That said, it does produce a problem for armies with no access to cannons.

2. How drastically would the game change if Look Out, Sir! was an auto-success?
Seems to me like losing your general to cannon fire is (1) not very likely, (2) not a tactic that should be viable, and (3) extremely un-Fantastic.

Well, exactly how likely it was that a cannon ball would rip through the front ranks and take out the General can't be answered from history, given in history by the time cannon were in use the general didn't stand at the front of the line with his men.

But I did always like the look out sir system, not because of the idea of the general getting pushed out of the way by his mean (which was kind of silly), but because units were typically five or six wide, and so if the cannon ball hit a random place in the front line, it was a 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 chance of hitting the general. Which works out nicely as 1/6, or the 2+ roll of the look out sir roll

Of course, with 8th units are now regularly much wider than five or six so that doesn't really work anymore. And that adds on top of your other point, on the extremely un-fantastic nature of the general getting plinked by a cannon in the first turn of the game. I mean, I've read a lot of Warhammer fiction, and I've never read a story about an all powerful Vampire Count who looked poised to ravage the whole of the Empire, but then a cannon ball sniped him and his army collapsed without any blood being spilt. And yet I've seen that happen in enough games that I actually look for excuses to shoot at anything else than the Vampire Count, just to avoid having an anti-climactic game.

 sebster wrote:
That said, it does produce a problem for armies with no access to cannons.

I dunno, does it? Which armies don't have access to a decent ranged D6 wounds-type weapon?
Really, I think someone should just overhaul the Giant. Then we can consider the rest.

 sebster wrote:
And yet I've seen that happen in enough games that I actually look for excuses to shoot at anything else than the Vampire Count, just to avoid having an anti-climactic game.

Exactly. And if your army doesn't have another obvious answer to General Choppy McUnitblender and his entourage, I'd wager that your army does have ways to delay and redirect them.

Warpsolution wrote:
I dunno, does it? Which armies don't have access to a decent ranged D6 wounds-type weapon?

Well that depends on your definition of decent, and how far we stretch the other alternatives (so the mass poison available to Lizardmen work fine as an alternative, but can we count magic as a decent alternative?). And even then, I wouldn't want to be relying on any ranged, mulit-wound weapons that Beastmen, Vampire Counts or Wood Elves. Even Dark Elves and High Elves - the bolt thrower doesn't really strike fear in to the heart of a monster.

But then I guess when we talk about better monsters, Beastmen and Vampire Counts do okay because they get better monsters of their own. Wood Elves... well Wood Elves need a new book. And High and Dark Elves are still okay because they've got White Lions and Executioners that match up pretty well against monsters. And that's maybe how the thinking has to work in general, not just that really powerful monsters are fine because cannons and other shooting weapons can wipe them out, but that powerful monsters that can decimate certain kinds of troops are okay, because each army army has at least one unit that excels in taking on monsters, whether it's a shooting unit or a combat unit, or a monster of its own.

Your analysis is sound Sebster, but I think that the Gorghon and Cygor wish they were as good as you say they are
Right now, they are sad sad cute fuzzy balls of monstrous overpriceness

TanKoL wrote:
Your analysis is sound Sebster, but I think that the Gorghon and Cygor wish they were as good as you say they are
Right now, they are sad sad cute fuzzy balls of monstrous overpriceness

Definitely, they're absolutely awful. That's why they're likely to be among the biggest benificiaries of any scheme to improve monsters.

I just want them to get rid of the pre-measuring crap where your opponent just goes "10 inches from the back of your base" and your LoC is getting lifted in a single shot

@Ceann Fine: So instead of pre-measuring and saying "10 inches from the back of your base", your opponent will say "x inches that way", measure, and then it's 10" from the back of your base.

Pre-measuring doesn't stop competent players.

To kill that Lord of Change, your artillery dice have to total up to 10" or more. So avoid a misfire on the first die, then don't roll (2,2), (2,4), (2,6), (2,6), (2, Misfire), (4,2), (4,4), (4, Misfire), (6,2), (6, Misfire), or (8, Misfire). Then don't roll a 1 To Wound. Then the Lord needs to fail his 5+. Then don't roll 1-4 (LoC has 5 wounds, right?).

So that's a...5/6 X 25/36 X 5/6 X 2/3 X 1/3 = .10716 ~ 11% chance of getting cannon-sniped on the first turn, I believe.

And that's assuming that the shot is even an option, what with impassible terrain, buildings, and other units.

@Sebster: exactly what I'm thinking. The idea that you need to take down a monster before it sees combat is an illusion. If I can tag him for 3, 2, or even 1 wound, my troops can often finish the job.

The real issue is when a monster doesn't have the protection it needs. I think every big beastie should have a 5+ Scaly Skin save at the least (Regen or Ward works too). That way, they've got more protection from low-S attacks (especially Poisoned ones). T and W only go so far to represent how hard a monster is to bring down.

Then, I guess a Monster should either be Ld8+ and Stubborn or have some serious offensive potential. Enough to average 4 or 5 wounds against WS3 T3-4 models, I think.

Most monsters probably just need a point-drop. The Beastmen ones are good examples of that.

The Giant...needs some love. I'd say we get rid of his Fall Down rule (nothing else has it), change up Thump With Club to be more reasonable, and maybe chang the rules of Pick Up And..., so it's a less risky attack.
He can still be funny. But that doesn't mean he can't also be a little good.