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.

I can agree with that. You only need to play or see battle reports online. Rerrolls are so... they make things so reliable.

And I know failling to hit sucks. When I stop playing my custodes, everything in the army hitting on 2+ normally rerolling 1's, to play my Tau's, it feels like I can't do please don't bypass the language filter like this. Reds8n But thats how the game should be played. If not things are too reliable and too damaging.

Part of D&D, and later 40k, to me is that the dice were the final, infallible truth. That 1 you rolled is a 1. No takebacks. No savescums. You rolled a 1.

It kinda sucked when you saw someone lose their entire Sternguard squad when their LR blew up. That was a lot of 1s. But that's super rare (we can run numbers if we really care). We play so much, we see super rare things happen - rule of large numbers and all that.

But getting into the dice being the arbiters of fortune requires accepting that sometimes they're out to kill us. Sometimes it's a 1. Once you've rolled, there's nothing you can do. It provided meaning. Closure. Fairness.

People love it when dice go their way. But they want a doover when it doesn't. So people got their doovers. Yes, you can reroll that 1. But so can I.

And now the dice are just an ineffective speedbump. They don't mean anything, because I can try again.

I hate rerolls.

Bharring wrote:
Part of D&D, and later 40k, to me is that the dice were the final, infallible truth. That 1 you rolled is a 1. No takebacks. No savescums. You rolled a 1.

It kinda sucked when you saw someone lose their entire Sternguard squad when their LR blew up. That was a lot of 1s. But that's super rare (we can run numbers if we really care). We play so much, we see super rare things happen - rule of large numbers and all that.

But getting into the dice being the arbiters of fortune requires accepting that sometimes they're out to kill us. Sometimes it's a 1. Once you've rolled, there's nothing you can do. It provided meaning. Closure. Fairness.

People love it when dice go their way. But they want a doover when it doesn't. So people got their doovers. Yes, you can reroll that 1. But so can I.

And now the dice are just an ineffective speedbump. They don't mean anything, because I can try again.

I hate rerolls.

Rerolls are definitely too prevailent, but your example is aweful. Sure, loosing a full squad of Marines was unlikely when a vehicle blew up and sucked when it happend, but those of us that played armies that relied on open topped vehicles tended to have infantry without T4, 3+ and would lose 1/2 the squad or more when the vehicle inevitably blew up. There was nothing fun about that, at all.

The old vehicle rules were complete and utter trash and can burn in hell as far as I'm concerned, bringing them back in any capacity would be aweful for the game.

Blackie wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:
3rd Ed. had it right, with the exception of the Wraithlord.

In 3rd edition vehicles were appropriately resilient due to the average volume of fire of the armies which was basically like 25% of the current one. 5-6 (or 10-15 if you hit on 5s like orks) anti tank shots were tipycally enough in a 1500 points TAC list.

But that's it, I also would love shooting to be way less efficient but that has nothing to do with the "armour facings vs wounds" matter.

Personally, it's one of the many reasons I simply went back to 3rd. Ed. Currently I have a few opponents to choose from, so it's still a viable alternative.

I preferred the AV chart, personally. Mashing Monstrous Creatures and Vehicles together always felt a little weird to me.

During 4th/5th, the environment was very different to what it is today. Tau were new, there were no riptides, and the only monstrous creature that wasn't vulnerable to even S4 weapons was the Wraithlord, whereas most vehicles had at least one AV11 side which made them practically immune to small arms fire. Vehicles were much faster than MC's and typically carried more firepower, and skimmers were hellaciously difficult to deal with. Any those super durable MC's? Typically did not have invul saves and had in the range of four wounds, so they tended to be around the same durability as a minimum terminator squad, and because of the FoC (which I also dearly miss), you'd be looking at no more than 8 or 9 with very little else on the board. Did it feel bad when an expensive vehicle was one shot? Sure, it did, especially in the unlikely scenario your monolith took a turbo round and blew up. But it also felt bad having to walk MC's up the table and soak up tons of fire for three turns before they were in effective range to do anything.

The problem with returning to the AV/damage chart/facing rules is that GW has made anti tank ranged weaponry far, far too spammable and mobile. It would take a new edition just to fix the mess.

I'm probably being nostalgic for those days, but the game felt overall more balanced if individual pieces were over or undertuned. If it's any consolation, GW always doted on space marines at that point too.

If we're going to keep wounds, I'd like to see vehicle armor saves move to 2d6. And then I'd like to see GW actually charge for significant amounts of AP, because right now 25 points of lascannon can kill whole lot more than that in most cases.