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.

Why is everyone overjoyed with armor modifiers vs straight old AP?


It doesn't seem like an intuitive mechanic.....I realize cover will modify the save, but still, you could have done that with a reverse mechanic. Or even kept the old system.

Thanks for any insights.

( Jeez, why not just make it AP + X, since that makes it more simple to think. My plasma gun is AP +4, that means my terminator needs to roll a 6, but I have cover so +1 on the roll means a 5. When I look at AP-4, my first inclination will be to roll, then to start doing the math...it doesn't seem different but it is. I have to stand there and do math in a high stress situation, and despite multiple degrees and a doctorate, none of them are in a math oriented field, for a reason. I suspect many people will have this problem).

Because all rolls are made on a X+, which means if you had an AP+4 Everything would save on a 6+. With it being -4, only 2+ saves have a chance, they require a 6 to be rolled. A 4+ auto fails its save versus AP-4, even with cover.

General Hobbs wrote:
it doesn't seem different but it is.

It really isn't. If you feel that way, just draw a vertical line through the minus in your books?

In your example you first use + to remove armour, then you also use + to add armour for cover. That is unintuitive. You just need to get used to how it is, because to be quite frank, you're just wrong.

The old system was fine until they allowed you to spam ap2 weapons in 6th and made armour worthless look at how terminators disappeared.

This new system will be a big boost to marines which were previously worthless without fnp or an invulnerable save.

hobojebus wrote:
The old system was fine until they allowed you to spam ap2 weapons in 6th and made armour worthless look at how terminators disappeared.

This new system will be a big boost to marines which were previously worthless without fnp or an invulnerable save.

"spam." Sure, but the biggest problem for anyone that isn't playing marines was that everything is balanced after the marine. So AP4 and up are handed out like candy, while AP3 is a rare treat on anything but tank-busters (and they all get AP2.) When one flamer got AP3 it became a huge deal that everyone cried about for the longest time (I'm talking about the CSM flaming chicken.)

This meant that while tearing off marine armour at all was a feat only special weapons were allowed to do, the rest of us were affected by any randomly picked AP number that could be found on every other weapon.

This new system means that if something has -3 AP, sure, I'm losing my save entirely, but at least marines don't stand there completely unaffected. They get torn down to a 6+ too.
The only people that liked the old system were people with army wide 3+ saves. For everyone else, this new system is HUGE for balancing the game.

Because the old system wasn't a Gradient... Which caused AP to be garbage or broken.

For example... Your weapon is AP4
vs Av2 you would be 83% less effective
vs Av3 you would be 66% less effective
vs Av4 you're 0% less effective?!

New system...

Your Weapon is AP-1
vs Av2 you're 66% less effective
vs Av3 you're 50% less effective
vs Av4 you're 33% less effective
vs Av5 you're 16% less effective
vs Av6 you're 0% less effective

Nice and smooth, no sudden spike in effectiveness/ineffectiveness

 Purifier wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
The old system was fine until they allowed you to spam ap2 weapons in 6th and made armour worthless look at how terminators disappeared.

This new system will be a big boost to marines which were previously worthless without fnp or an invulnerable save.

"spam." Sure, but the biggest problem for anyone that isn't playing marines was that everything is balanced after the marine. So AP4 and up are handed out like candy, while AP3 is a rare treat on anything but tank-busters (and they all get AP2.) When one flamer got AP3 it became a huge deal that everyone cried about for the longest time (I'm talking about the CSM flaming chicken.)

This meant that while tearing off marine armour at all was a feat only special weapons were allowed to do, the rest of us were affected by any randomly picked AP number that could be found on every other weapon.

This new system means that if something has -3 AP, sure, I'm losing my save entirely, but at least marines don't stand there completely unaffected. They get torn down to a 6+ too.
The only people that liked the old system were people with army wide 3+ saves. For everyone else, this new system is HUGE for balancing the game.

I play Marines and I MUCH prefer the new system. because even against a lotta those special weapons my armor still has some benifits. it also means, IMHO we're less likely to see high AP values being insisted on, AP -2 is likely to be seen as "good eneugh" and AP -3 or -4 can be saved for rare, and expensive, heavy weapons.

Man makes me feel old hearing people calling AP the "old" system and Save Modifiers the "new"
I started in 2nd edition and this whole newfangled all or nothing AP thing never sat right with me.
Huzzah for Save Modifiers! the old system turned "new" again.

General Hobbs wrote:


Why is everyone overjoyed with armor modifiers vs straight old AP?


It doesn't seem like an intuitive mechanic.....I realize cover will modify the save, but still, you could have done that with a reverse mechanic. Or even kept the old system.

Thanks for any insights.

( Jeez, why not just make it AP + X, since that makes it more simple to think. My plasma gun is AP +4, that means my terminator needs to roll a 6, but I have cover so +1 on the roll means a 5. When I look at AP-4, my first inclination will be to roll, then to start doing the math...it doesn't seem different but it is. I have to stand there and do math in a high stress situation, and despite multiple degrees and a doctorate, none of them are in a math oriented field, for a reason. I suspect many people will have this problem).

You remember 2++ rerollables? Or 2++ with a 2+ FNP on a t5 model? Yeah, those were a direct result of the old AP system. It was bad and it should feel bad.

I never heard anyone complain about the old AP system at all, and I worked at GW for years. It was never a problem.

It's still an unintuitive system.

.

Not if you started with 2nd edition it isnt

Or if basic addition/subtraction is intuitive...

General Hobbs wrote:


I never heard anyone complain about the old AP system at all, and I worked at GW for years. It was never a problem.

It's still an unintuitive system.

.

I have complained about it often to my friends over the years. But you're not gonna get people complaining about something constantly if you own a store or something. What good would it do the person complaining? If someone dislikes it, he mentions it to his friend. Maybe even several times. But after a few times even he is bored of hearing it and just accepts how it is.

I feel the new system to be way better.

 Z-Ray wrote:
Man makes me feel old hearing people calling AP the "old" system and Save Modifiers the "new"
I started in 2nd edition and this whole newfangled all or nothing AP thing never sat right with me.
Huzzah for Save Modifiers! the old system turned "new" again.

Technically the armor modifiers started in WHFB I think.

Also the AP system was utterly broken because anything that had AP5 or lower was completely worthless (it mattered so little that it might has well not have existed). AP4 was extremely situational; if it did work the enemy would be curbstomped. If it didn't work, you just paid premium price for essentially AP-. Only AP3 and AP2 was really worth anything (what with vehicles being like tissue paper from glancing hits, AP1 was just a glorified premium version of AP2 most of the time), which ended up causing the lensmen arms race of trying to cheese each other with Invisibility, 2+ cover or stupid Rerollable invul saves.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 Z-Ray wrote:
Man makes me feel old hearing people calling AP the "old" system and Save Modifiers the "new"
I started in 2nd edition and this whole newfangled all or nothing AP thing never sat right with me.
Huzzah for Save Modifiers! the old system turned "new" again.

Technically the armor modifiers started in WHFB I think.

Also the AP system was utterly broken because anything that had AP5 or lower was completely worthless (it mattered so little that it might has well not have existed). AP4 was extremely situational; if it did work the enemy would be curbstomped. If it didn't work, you just paid premium price for essentially AP-. Only AP3 and AP2 was really worth anything (what with vehicles being like tissue paper from glancing hits, AP1 was just a glorified premium version of AP2 most of the time), which ended up causing the lensmen arms race of trying to cheese each other with Invisibility, 2+ cover or stupid Rerollable invul saves.

Not to mention made Av5 feel like it literally did nothing, and Av4 feel like it almost always did nothing...

and made Av3 the holy grail that made every other faction envious... while Av3 users were like "its garbage, everyone has AP3" without realizing that everyone FORCED themselves to GET AP3 /because/ of Av3 users...

 Talamare wrote:


Not to mention made Av5 feel like it literally did nothing, and Av4 feel like it almost always did nothing...

and made Av3 the holy grail that made every other faction envious... while Av3 users were like "its garbage, everyone has AP3" without realizing that everyone FORCED themselves to GET AP3 /because/ of Av3 users...

Exactly. Playing Skitarii was so painful. My opponents would have AP4 completely on accident, just because it exists fairly freely, and S6, completely on accident, which oneshots everything in the Skitarii army because let's make a rule that screws anyone with T3 and FNP/multiple wounds!... and the Infiltrators wept.

 Talamare wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 Z-Ray wrote:
Man makes me feel old hearing people calling AP the "old" system and Save Modifiers the "new"
I started in 2nd edition and this whole newfangled all or nothing AP thing never sat right with me.
Huzzah for Save Modifiers! the old system turned "new" again.

Technically the armor modifiers started in WHFB I think.

Also the AP system was utterly broken because anything that had AP5 or lower was completely worthless (it mattered so little that it might has well not have existed). AP4 was extremely situational; if it did work the enemy would be curbstomped. If it didn't work, you just paid premium price for essentially AP-. Only AP3 and AP2 was really worth anything (what with vehicles being like tissue paper from glancing hits, AP1 was just a glorified premium version of AP2 most of the time), which ended up causing the lensmen arms race of trying to cheese each other with Invisibility, 2+ cover or stupid Rerollable invul saves.

Not to mention made Av5 feel like it literally did nothing, and Av4 feel like it almost always did nothing...

and made Av3 the holy grail that made every other faction envious... while Av3 users were like "its garbage, everyone has AP3" without realizing that everyone FORCED themselves to GET AP3 /because/ of Av3 users...

I always found a direct relation between stress and the saves being rolled, with the better saves causing more stress. The lower the save, the lower the stress.

2+ Save - "Oh please don't fail...."
3+ Save - "Come on, work!"
4+ Save - "Eh, 50% is okay."
5+ Save - "Meh" or "Oh, did some save? Neat!"
6+ Save - Either "Let me pick up my models" or "Did that actually save? Waaagh!"



I wonder about the stress-to-save correlation in 40K what with the modifiers. It's not too stressful in Age of Sigmar, but those saves hardly ever get above a 3+ or 4+ in most games.

 BunkhouseBuster wrote:
saves being rolled, with the better saves causing more stress. The lower the save, the lower the stress.

2+ Save - "Oh please don't fail...."
3+ Save - "Come on, work!"
4+ Save - "Eh, 50% is okay."
5+ Save - "Meh" or "Oh, did some save? Neat!"
6+ Save - Either "Let me pick up my models" or "Did that actually save? Waaagh!"



I wonder about the stress-to-save correlation in 40K what with the modifiers. It's not too stressful in Age of Sigmar, but those saves hardly ever get above a 3+ or 4+ in most games.

I dunno, man. My most stressful saves was probably 6+ invulns on Exorcists when I played SoB.

not to mention that the one moment someone made a 6+ ARMOR SAVE felt like the universe itself kicking the shooter in the nads, given that most of the time a 6+ save didn't even exist.

With the return of the Modifier system, I'm willing to bet a lot of people will start gaining respect for 5+ and 6+ saves, if only because their precious power armor will now be more frequently forced to being flak armor.

All hail the new AP system !

Its really already been said, But i would be ignoring 40k if they did not move to this system. I think its one of the best things to come to this edition And super happy to see it.

There is a huge conceptual advantage of the current system.
In the older system, one shooting to a 3+ save with a S7 AP5 weapon, and one shooting to the same 3+ save with a S7 AP4 weapon would cause the same damage all the other variables (save rolls, BS) considered.
Nonetheless, the weapon with AP4 would cost more than the one with AP5.

On the other hand, pay the points for a 5+ compared to a 6+ would often count only in melee, and even there not in all the cases. Those points felt "wasted".

Such increase of granularity helps the point system and the game immensely, along with the fact that most troops have at least a certain degree of protection from most "standard" armament, if you exclude Scions and Necron troops (and maybe something else I forgot).

 BunkhouseBuster wrote:

I always found a direct relation between stress and the saves being rolled, with the better saves causing more stress. The lower the save, the lower the stress.

2+ Save - "Oh please don't fail...."
3+ Save - "Come on, work!"
4+ Save - "Eh, 50% is okay."
5+ Save - "Meh" or "Oh, did some save? Neat!"
6+ Save - Either "Let me pick up my models" or "Did that actually save? Waaagh!"



I wonder about the stress-to-save correlation in 40K what with the modifiers. It's not too stressful in Age of Sigmar, but those saves hardly ever get above a 3+ or 4+ in most games.

This could be a factor, not only did I start isn 2nd ed (and play Fantasy) but I also play Orks
Marine Players: "they're changing the armour save rules! Oh No!"
Ork Players: " The what?"

The old AP system was crap, it was a swingy mess and came up often as a point of contention.

Now, the reason it exists is clear, but it ended up not doing its intended role.

Back in 2nd, there were too many modifiers. Every small arms weapon worth its salt had a -1 mod (and shuriken weapons were a terrifying -2). Basically, nothing ever got its save as written outside of the odd S3 close combat attack, or some goofus taking autoguns instead of lasguns. This wasn't great, it was obvious the game relied over much on save mods. It was compounded by terminator armour being 3+ on 2d6, meaning that a small save range would be largely inconsequential to terminator armour. So the save range was -0 to -6 with barely anything dipping below -1.

So 3rd comes along and GW focuses a bit on making marines not an underpowered joke (imagine paying 30ppm for a bolter marine that effectively had a 4+ save, that was basically 2nd Edition for SM players that didn't use the two possible cheese builds marines could use). The AP system was implemented so that low-ball weapons wouldn't modify better armour saves. But in the end, this ended up being the worst of both worlds because once again, it was rare for a weapon to not have an AP and the distribution of said AP was all over the place.

The first issue is one that has plagued mainline GW games for over 30 years, and that is basically that low armour saves are largely pointless as almost nothing in the game doesn't modify armour. This takes your universal three-step resolution and the nuance involved, and turns it in to a two-step process for a great many armies. But these armies (ostensibly) pay for their armour save, so why do they never get to take it? What's the point of writing a save down if it is never applied? This has been a universally bad piece of design from the get go.

The second issue shares a lot in common with 2nd Edition's own overuse. Distribution of the various AP values created break points in save values that made some saves worth far more or less than they should have been. 6+/5+/4+ saves were largely garbage, especially 4+ since it usually came at a price premium, but outside of small arms, almost any gun in the game just ignored it. 2+ saves were largely pointless because AP3 weapons were oddly rare, whereas AP2 weapons were not just plentiful, but spammable from almost day one (just go look up the 3rd Edition star cannon and die a little inside). This basically left the 3+ save or the '-' save as the only worthwhile saves to have (besides stacked, re-rollable, invulnerable ones). But because the AP system is all or nothing, playing with these numbers just shifts what the good and bad save breakpoints are. Sure, a better implementation may have evened this out a bit, but most likely all it would have done is shifted the overarching meta toward whatever army good spam the best AP value (and that would still likely be AP2).

But I think the worst sin of the 3rd Edition's AP system is that it lacks nuance. Without a whole ton of special rules it was impossible to create a weapon that was, say, effective against marines without just ignoring a 3+ save. This led to all sorts of stop gap rules like rending in an attempt to create things that didn't always simply allow or ignore a save. And so we got this weird arms race where everyone was racing to get as many low AP weapons in as possible because the difference in casualties between three steps and two steps is a massive uptick in models you take out.

This lack of nuance basically relegated a ton of equipment to the scrap heap while things that played in to the AP2 meta were spammed more and more.

While 2nd Edition overused save mods (and mods in general) it is valuable to remember that in a game that uses a d6 randomizer, the only way to tweak probabilities at a finer thant ~16.67% increment is to add steps. The purpose of the 3rd Edition AP system was to remove steps, the purpose of the ASM system was to modify steps (with ignoring being one possible result of modification, but not the only one). So, the save mod system still allows for 3rd Edition's "ignore saves worse than X" result, while also giving you a built-in way to simply modify one of the resolution steps instead of merely ignoring it. And if need be you still have further layering or re-rolls available as well.

8th's re-adoption of the AP system with a smaller value range and more stringent requirement for what does and doesn't have AP-1 is a powerful and robust tool in a designer's toolkit. It can emulate the system that came before to some degree, but it can also create nuance in resolution where only binary results occurred before. Now you can make a weapon that is effective against marines without making carapace armour pointless. You can have small arms that allow even Orks to make their saves. It is a much more robust and even intuitive system that allows for more nuance without having to delve in to special rules.

The old system was inflexible and created an environment that let a race-to-the-bottom AP metagame form because it was the only way to make some impact on a large number of models. Now? Even a S5/AP-1 heavy bolter is something your average marine will think twice about getting in front off without it having to simply ignore their armour outright.

So this gives the best of both worlds. Higher number of weapons that don't modify saves at all give you the "let models make their actual save" thing that AP was originally trying to fix (and failed at). Use of modifiers means that when weapons are better at penetrating armour, they do it on a sliding scale rather than just providing a binary yes/no. Anti-infantry (AP4) weapons used to shred anything in carapace armour or worse, now carapace is getting a 5+ save (4+ if in cover). The premium being paid is finally worth it. Anti-marine weapons are no longer at this weird cross roads where they erase marines but are as effective against terminators as a wet slap. And high end stuff like plasma and melta performs its anti heavy infantry/vehicle role but due to the return of another great rule (variable damage levels) alongside a newer innovation (giving more stuff multiple wounds) it is no longer a one stop shop for killing everything.

So basically, hurray for armour save mods!

I'd have to say the cover saves in 7th edition were more annoying, though. Oh, i've got stealth, cloaked units in ruins. Yay, what amounts to a 2+ invulnerable against almost all shooting.

Also, yes, your marines are in cover, but that doesn't matter, because the cover save is worse than the armor save. So while you could hide behind the rock, it's more effective if you leap into the bullets.

So basically what I am reading is that the problem with the old AP system is simply the number of weapons with low AP, not an actual game play system.

My point is there should be an easier, more intuitive way to gain the same result than to say, this weapon is AP -4! And then the player has to sit and think whether he gets a save or not. What made the old system work is you didn't have to pause in game play to think...you just played the game.

General Hobbs wrote:

So basically what I am reading is that the problem with the old AP system is simply the number of weapons with low AP, not an actual game play system.

Yes. AP was a great system at heart, but later codex releases took one-upsmanship too far with extreme AP, plus Ignores Cover plus re-rollable saves. It worked great in 3rd and 4th edition, before the escalation of abilities.

Nor was it necessary to have low AP to kill Marines. Recall that Battlecannons (AP3) were "out", while Scattlerlasers (AP 0) were "in".

This is going to sound insulting, but if applying an armour save modifier is too difficult...that's an issue with the player. Anyone who played 2nd can still tell you precisely what your armour save is vs. any weapon in that game, 20 years on.

My only bone of contention with the new system is that they now add cover in...which confounds it all. That's a poor design decision and should have been a penalty to hit (much easier, particularly with the static to-hit rolls).

The 3-7th AP system was stupid, because it was an on/off system.

General Hobbs wrote:


So basically what I am reading is that the problem with the old AP system is simply the number of weapons with low AP, not an actual game play system.

Honestly, you don't have to stop the game to make a simple subtraction. If you managed to count how many casualties you took before, you'll manage to subtract two points of armour now.

ERJAK wrote:

You remember 2++ rerollables? Or 2++ with a 2+ FNP on a t5 model? Yeah, those were a direct result of the old AP system. It was bad and it should feel bad.

That wasn't a direct result of the AP system, because they didn't show up for more than a decade after the AP system was introduced. That was a result of the aforementioned escalation, and general lack of discipline with units and combo-abilities. It's important to note that similar things happened in 2nd Edition, with the traditional mod system. 2++ Powerfields on a 2+on 2D6(possibly re-rollable) save model with further bonuses through psychic powers. . . sound familiar? Both systems suffered from combo-escalation.

It would be much more accurate to say your particular examples are a direct result of the escalation of psychic powers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Elbows wrote:

My only bone of contention with the new system is that they now add cover in...which confounds it all. That's a poor design decision and should have been a penalty to hit (much easier, particularly with the static to-hit rolls).

Eh, this way you only have to mod one roll in most cases. Cleaner. It also means cover still helps against Overwatch fire, if I'm not mistaken.