Switch Theme:

Suggested Cannon Rules  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User



San Diego

Ok, so i have something of a hard time understanding how a big friggin cannon that has to be maneuvered by hand can bullseye a flying monster...but they should be pretty effective non the less. My flgs is looking for ways to improve this for our own games and i wanted to run my suggestion by you guys before proposing it. So lemme know what you think.

My proposal is simple:

Ensure all cannons have a maxmum range(This will come into play later)

1. Choose a point on the battlefield to fire the cannon at, mark this point with an appropriate marker. You cannot intentionally target your own unit or a unit locked in close combat.
2. Determine the range to that point and whether it is greater or less than half of the cannons maximum range(determine long range)
3. If long range, roll a scatter dice plus 2D6, if not long range, scatter plus D6 and move impact point to the new location. Cannons can ONLY fire grapeshot if the inital target is within 12 inches. If a hit is rolled, move the point half the distance of the dice(rounding down) based on the tiny arrow on the dice.
4. Draw a line from the end of the cannon barrel to the new point: this is the direction of the shot.

At this point, continue firing the cannon as stated in the rules based on the new point starting with the artillery dice and so on with the following exceptions.

*If after scatter, a unit that is locked in close combat is hit that is not MI, MC, or MO, it takes D3 automatic hits per rank hit(roll for each rank). For MI, MC, or MO, follow the rules for wounding based on the individual unit type(matters as these can actually STOP the cannon). To represent the chaos of a swirling melee and the danger of hitting friend as well as foe, keep track of how many HITS the unit takes. Every unit locked in base to base(Friend or Foe) with the unit under the impact point takes an EQUAL number of automatic hits.

*If a cannon hits a mounted monster, roll a D6 for the number of wounds generated, then roll a dice equal to the number of wounds to determine who is struck.
1-4: Monster
5-6: Character (If multiple characters are mounted, designate before rolling which is 5 and which is 6.

I feel that these changes would allow cannons to maintain a powerful presence when the armies are lined up for battle, but as the battle continues and becomes more chaotic, they would become weaker with great possible consequences to using them too close to close combat. It also reduces their effectiveness against single target sniping but adds the element of randomness which could help prevent people loading up one side of the board with their heavy hitters and going for a more even deployment. Shouldn't be too difficult to implement either as all you are really doing is scattering the initial impact point, then carrying on smartly.

So tell me what you guys think?

6k Assault
8K Deathwing/Ravenwing
: 5k Combined
Lizardmen: 3.5k Points
VC: 5k

...pretty sure i'd be a millionare if it weren't for G-dub 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Nothing in the world stopped someone from firing a cannonball at pointblank range. Grapeshot might be more effective, but having them magically change ammo seems really awkward. Each cannon has a totally different profile. 12" is arbitrary. DoC's magic motorcycle cannon and some rusty empire bucket don't have the same rules for a reason.

It seems you're going really out of your way to make mounted monsters a lot better and cannons way suckier. People will just use stone throwers then. They made monsters and other large models that size for a reason. Basically making weapons warp around them because you want a dude on a dragon isn't the way to do it, IMHO. You can just make cannons and stone throwers D3. Done.

As for cannons not being able to shoot a mounted guy on a dragon, if any of this stuff is to scale, the dragon is HUGE. It's like a house. If anyone can't hit a dragon with a cannon, they fail cannon school.

And frankly, war machines are meant to be a hard counter to monsters. What you're doing is lessening that and everything else about them. If they are D3 they still smear troops, still have same profiles, still tag big things, it's just not an insta-win.

   
Made in au
The Dread Evil Lord Varlak





Gamesrgood wrote:
So tell me what you guys think?


I think there are good ideas in there. Like you, I've always found it silly that cannons have this laser like accuracy at picking out monsters from across the battlefield. In fact, forget about monsters, they're almost as accurate at picking out independant characters...

And I don't think the answer of D3 wounds is ultimately that satisfying, as while it might be reasonably balanced... it means you've got a combat environment where cannon balls almost always hit, but aren't that lethal, which is kind of silly.

Instead, I like the idea you suggested, of having the landing spot of the ball scatter, though I'm not convinced about the 2d6 scatter at long range (it's a lot of scatter, and adds in more rules about short & long range which is just more rules). Perhaps just try D6 scatter around the first landing spot.

Or maybe even better, make the scatter D10 - ballistic skill, with a misfire being a misfire, and once that's resolved you have cannon bounce.

I'm also not sure exactly what you're saying in the second part, about multiple hits on units. Why would you suffer D3 hits per rank, when normally you only suffer one hit. A block of troops is a block of troops and a cannon ball will pass through them the same whether they're in combat or not.

“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”

Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something. 
   
Made in ie
Sniping Hexa




Dublin

I got an easy solution for you guys
Remove pre-measuring and bring back the Estimation when firing war machines
Bam, done! (it's much funnier and the game is faster this way)

 
   
Made in us
Killer Klaivex




Oceanside, CA

The biggest problem I see is hitting a unit in combat. If my stubborn infantry are in combat, and the cannon fires danger close, It's doing D3 hits per rank.
If they are standing in the open, they take 1 hit per rank.

Why do cannons deal ~twice as much damage if a unit is fighting?

Also, because all units involved take an equal number of hits, if I've got a stubborn block that you hit with more than one units, I'm going to be gunning for my own guys so that your two units likewise take hits.

-Matt

 thedarkavenger wrote:

So. I got a game with this list in. First game in at least 3-4 months.
 
   
Made in us
Evasive Eshin Assassin





Pre-measuring never hindered gamers who played frequently. Most people can guess within an inch or less (I faced a guy who could get it to within the 1/4" 3 times per turn, every turn).

These rules are neat, but I think they're overly complicated.
I've thought about ways to make cannons less accurate versus monsters, and more worthwhile against blocks of troops. I've considered making them more accurate and reliable, and then firing every other turn (...because it takes longer to load a cannon or catapult than it does notch and arrow).
But as said above, I think the easiest thing is to do this:

- cannons only deal D3 wounds to Large Targets.
and maybe:
- characters automatically pass Look Out, Sir! rolls caused by war machines

 
   
Made in us
Stubborn Temple Guard






I think just doing something like current rules, but modify the initial spot.

Target like normal.

Roll d6 and scatter initial target spot by result.

Resolve as normal.


Makes it far less accurate, as it should be.

27th Member of D.O.O.M.F.A.R.T.
Resident Battletech Guru. 
   
Made in us
Dwarf Runelord Banging an Anvil





Way on back in the deep caves

I can't say I like this scattering idea for cannons.
Cannonballs fly in a straight line. I have experience firing real cannons. They are pretty darn accurate.
Now if a cannon were to fire over a hill or other obstruction to its line of sight, then a scatter might be called for.

Trust in Iron and Stone  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Cannons go kinda straight. But not even bullets are lasers. Or the most modern artillery. The WHFB cannons vary in type from a bunch of weapon and junk shoved down the barrel to kind of renaissance period. So sucky iron up to steel. I can assure you that iron cannons shooting iron balls of varying dimensions, flew all over the place. I don't know how many degrees, but I could easily see 15 degrees after several hundred feet. Though no clue what that would be in game terms (but I have to imagine 6 sided dice would come in at some point...).

   
Made in ie
Sniping Hexa




Dublin

You can't compare historical artillery use to Fantasy one
Even with early cannons (think HYW here), they were very effective due to the size of the battle lines fired upon
Now if you consider Empire/Dwarf guns that are comparable to 1700-era, they were pretty accurate at that time (and the battle lines were even bigger then)
And anyway you have dudes shooting fireballs and summoning Flame demons, so ...

So yes Cannons are effective, but not more so than Stone Throwers or massed fire (well except against big monsters, but that's their job after all)

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





TanKoL wrote:

Even with early cannons (think HYW here), they were very effective due to the size of the battle lines fired upon

That's the point. They were effective because they weren't trying to shoot one guy across the battlefield but shoot...anywhere within those thousand guys. That's what this thread is about.

   
Made in ie
Sniping Hexa




Dublin

If you make Cannons only effective against Goblins and Skavenslaves due to their numbers, then cannons will have to cost about 50 points each to stay balanced, and will just be spammed some more ... Or cannons could just go back to most of em being S7 d3 wounds ... or back to estimating firing range (but you would have to scrap ALL pre-measuring then, not a bad thing if you ask me)
Don't forget that sometimes, A cannonball to the face is one of the only answers some armies have against super-killy things (No, I'm not going face to face with my Warlord against a Vampire Lord)

I prefer Warhammer Historical way (where of course, nothing flies nor teleport, but can still gallop at a brisk pace), where pivoting a War Machine counts as moving it, so you have to plan your firing lanes in advance and really go for enfilading fire if possible
As said above there's no big monster to kill, but when you're facing 2+ save cavalry (heaviest armour in the game at around 40pts/guy) and when nothing (except artillery) can exceed S5 / -2 to AS ... it's still very useful for "big" targets

 
   
Made in us
Stubborn Temple Guard






 snurl wrote:
I can't say I like this scattering idea for cannons.
Cannonballs fly in a straight line. I have experience firing real cannons. They are pretty darn accurate.
Now if a cannon were to fire over a hill or other obstruction to its line of sight, then a scatter might be called for.


I'm not saying it scatters, just that the straight line and impact point are a bit off from where you might have wanted it. Not that it bounces in a different direction. Just changes the point of the "straight line."

27th Member of D.O.O.M.F.A.R.T.
Resident Battletech Guru. 
   
Made in us
Stubborn Hammerer





Correct me if i'm wrong but cannons used to scatter as well back in 5th edition? I hated it. I don't see anything wrong with the cannon rules as they stand.

They are supposed to be powerful

Check out my trades http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/515178.page

Check out my Auctions

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/521603.page 
   
Made in us
Evasive Eshin Assassin





The problem that a lot of people have with cannons is that (1) they can take down monsters with alarming efficiency, and that they can aim directly for the characters within a unit.

@snurl: in your experience, how long did it take to load/aim a cannon?

@TanKol: even if Empire/Dwarfs have only one answer to the big monster/character on the other side of the board, it shouldn't be an answer that stands a decent chance of killing that monster or character for a quarter of its points.

I really like the idea that pivoting the cannon counts as a move. That makes sense and would solve things.

@Mattlov: I still think that making Large Targets only take D3 wounds would solve most of the problems, and it is by far the simplest rule.


 
   
Made in us
Killer Klaivex




Oceanside, CA

Warpsolution wrote:
The problem that a lot of people have with cannons is that (1) they can take down monsters with alarming efficiency, and that they can aim directly for the characters within a unit.

@snurl: in your experience, how long did it take to load/aim a cannon?

@TanKol: even if Empire/Dwarfs have only one answer to the big monster/character on the other side of the board, it shouldn't be an answer that stands a decent chance of killing that monster or character for a quarter of its points.

I really like the idea that pivoting the cannon counts as a move. That makes sense and would solve things.

@Mattlov: I still think that making Large Targets only take D3 wounds would solve most of the problems, and it is by far the simplest rule.



I kind of like the pivot thing, but that makes the stupid chariot cannons even better than normal cannons. How I would do it is, choose target in front arc. Pivot cannon to face directly at target. Fire as normal. That gives you a fire arc, and lets you slowly bring your cannons around as you fire, or you can skip a whole turn of shooting to move. I'd drop the move and fire ability off of all Chariots packing warmachines.

D3 vs large makes stone horns happy.

 thedarkavenger wrote:

So. I got a game with this list in. First game in at least 3-4 months.
 
   
Made in us
Dwarf Runelord Banging an Anvil





Way on back in the deep caves

Warpsolution:
We can load and fire a Napoleon 12 pounder in about 30 seconds. Although we seldom do it that fast due to interperitive talks describing what we do in detail. And safety reasons.

Mortars can take up to five minutes to load depending on how accurate you want to be. The trajectory of a Rev war mortar doesn't change, the range is determined by the amount of powder used and the type of ball. My friend Charlie Smithgall can drop a solid ball into a tractor tire at 500 yards every time.

Trust in Iron and Stone  
   
Made in nz
Boom! Leman Russ Commander




New Zealand

 pities2004 wrote:
Correct me if i'm wrong but cannons used to scatter as well back in 5th edition? I hated it. I don't see anything wrong with the cannon rules as they stand.

They are supposed to be powerful


From memory it was guess range + artillery dice. Still fired in a dead-straight line though.

5000
 
   
Made in ie
Sniping Hexa




Dublin

It's been like that for a very long time yep, I started with the 3rd edition if I'm not mistaken, was already this way

 
   
Made in gb
Bloodthirsty Chaos Knight



Edinburgh, Scotland

The problem as I see it is the relative cost of cannons VS the monsters they are designed to counter.
I would greatly increase the cost of cannons, but also make the balls do moee collateral damage to ranked troops - possibly D3 wounds per rank. It would mean thqt cannon spam was less possible, so that monsters might be viable again, but it would also make cannon more versatile.

Nite 
   
Made in us
Killer Klaivex




Oceanside, CA

Niteware wrote:
The problem as I see it is the relative cost of cannons VS the monsters they are designed to counter.
I would greatly increase the cost of cannons, but also make the balls do moee collateral damage to ranked troops - possibly D3 wounds per rank. It would mean thqt cannon spam was less possible, so that monsters might be viable again, but it would also make cannon more versatile.


D3 hits per rank would make cannons quite good. Monsters have several counters, cannons are just one of them. Cav is very good at monster hunting. Giving cannons a boost vs infantry, I think would result in more cannon spam, not less.

What if the cannon overhaul had a range effect?
24" or less, cannons do S10 hits, Multiple Wounds D6. Beyond 24", they do S8 Multiple Wounds D3.
It would make a turn 1 snipe far less likely. It's really a pisser to have to pick up a monster before your first turn.


-Matt


 thedarkavenger wrote:

So. I got a game with this list in. First game in at least 3-4 months.
 
   
Made in gb
Bloodthirsty Chaos Knight



Edinburgh, Scotland

HawaiiMatt wrote:
Niteware wrote:
The problem as I see it is the relative cost of cannons VS the monsters they are designed to counter.
I would greatly increase the cost of cannons, but also make the balls do moee collateral damage to ranked troops - possibly D3 wounds per rank. It would mean thqt cannon spam was less possible, so that monsters might be viable again, but it would also make cannon more versatile.


D3 hits per rank would make cannons quite good. Monsters have several counters, cannons are just one of them. Cav is very good at monster hunting. Giving cannons a boost vs infantry, I think would result in more cannon spam, not less.

What if the cannon overhaul had a range effect?
24" or less, cannons do S10 hits, Multiple Wounds D6. Beyond 24", they do S8 Multiple Wounds D3.
It would make a turn 1 snipe far less likely. It's really a pisser to have to pick up a monster before your first turn.


-Matt



I agree that it would boost cannon, but my proposal was in the context of raising costs. If cannon each cost210 points (same as a hellcannon) they could not be spammed, would be effective and vesatile, but monsters might still be viable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Like your idea too, but S6 would be better so it wounds most monsters on 4s

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/06/09 19:25:47


Nite 
   
Made in us
Killer Klaivex




Oceanside, CA

S6 would wound most monsters on 4's, which is alright, but would only be save -3, meaning that mounted knights don't take much from a cannon either. The cannon needs to be better than the bolt thrower at long range. S8 does that.
I could maybe see S7.

Increasing a cannon to 210 just makes 40 to 70 point bolt throwers and 85 to 100 point stone throwers become all the rage. Also, unless the cannon is as durable as the thunderstomping unbreakable hellcannon, people would rightly bitch how underpriced hellcannons are.

-Matt


 thedarkavenger wrote:

So. I got a game with this list in. First game in at least 3-4 months.
 
   
Made in ie
Sniping Hexa




Dublin

If you think Monsters are too weak, I wonder why we're seeing lots of Phoenixes, Chimeras and Daemon Princes ...

OK they are flying and fast, but maybe the issue's there, those monsters are too cheap compared to the running/crawling/slithering ones

 
   
Made in us
Evasive Eshin Assassin





Those monsters are the ones that are either fairly cheap, durable, or both.

But you raise a good point: the Games Workshop designers are surely seeing what 8th edition is doing to the game (and sales), and are adapting to it.
Monsters from 7th were T6 W5-6, and that was enough. 8th-ed Monsters are cheaper, have Regeneration, W8, etc.
The effectiveness of cannons is going down, not by an downgrade to their rules, but by making the Big Scary Things better.

And that's the problem with trying to fix the issue. Like HawaiiMatt pointed out, if cannons did D3 wounds to Large targets, the Stonehorn rule would need to be changed to reflect that. And other such things.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





The late 8th monsters are much MUCH better than the monsters that exist in other editions. So we're slowly getting them buffed. I mean if you compare Beastmen monsters to WoC monsters, they're like 100points cheaper and way better in every aspect.

   
Made in gb
Bloodthirsty Chaos Knight



Edinburgh, Scotland

It isn't all roses for WoC monsters - can't think of a way that slaughterbrutes or vortex beasts could be viable.
Chimeras are decent, Hellcannon are eratic and DP are excellent.

On the pricing point, cannon could have AP or ignore AS even at lower strength, so that it was just to wound values that changed. Cannon would still be more accurate than bolt throwers or stone throwers, so could cost a lot more if their effectiveness against RnF was improvedm

Nite 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Slaughterbrutes attached to a DP is pretty kickass. For 225 pts he's WS9 and LD9 and very solid monster stats otherwise.

   
Made in us
Evasive Eshin Assassin





The problem with cannons seems to be:

1. that they kill monsters too good.

2. their laser-like accuracy, and thus character-threatening potential.

So:

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

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.

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





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

I think you need a way to threaten heroes. Well, a way that multiple armies can multiply threaten heroes. In the rock scissors paper of WHFB, you generally have multiple rocks for every scissor. That allows each army to have choices and you not be in the 40K situation of like must take AV.

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.

   
 
Forum Index » The Old World & Legacy Warhammer Fantasy Discussion
Go to: