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.

To be honest I do believe guardsmen and other standard human should be S2/T2 to make design space for "better than standard human*" that aren't quite marine level.

And also because it is weird that a normal human can punch as hard as a lasgun/autogun. I don't care how much you lift bro, you aren't punching with the force of a rifle.

*Which obviusly applies to Sisters. Their armor makes them stronger than standard humans, but they are not Marines because lack of the latter's augmentations and also because they are far smaller. Even their armor is blatantly much thinner than Astartes Power Armor.

 Tyran wrote:
To be honest I do believe guardsmen and other standard human should be S2/T2 to make design space for "better than standard human" that aren't quite marine level.

Nope.

It makes no sense to alter the strength(which really isn't a stat on the model itself, but rather the CCW profile...) or toughness to accommodate a perception of "quality".

Frankly though? Marines(spiky and non), Orks, some Tyranid beasties and Necrons need to be bumped up to start letting some stuff that is stuck in the Time Before Going Over 10s for stats shine. AdMech should be starting at T4 as an example.

And also because it is weird that a normal human can punch as hard as a lasgun/autogun. I don't care how much you lift bro, you aren't punching with the force of a rifle.

Do people really forget that the profile isn't usually "bareknuckles and grit" but rather "close combat weapon"?
It's the bayonet/knife/rifle used as a club that's S3.

*Which obviusly applies to Sisters. Their armor makes them stronger than standard humans,

It makes them more robust than "standard, unaugmented humans".

Effectively though it's the difference between Bill the Gym Groupie and Ray the Sometimes Works Out. Sisters with their armor can handle heavier weapons with a bit more ease than a standard trooper could.

but they are not Marines because lack of the latter's augmentations and also because they are far smaller.

The augmentations, in the grand scheme of things, don't matter though. They would impact initiative or a similar stat of that nature, which we don't really have in the game.

Even their armor is blatantly much thinner than Astartes Power Armor.

Has literally nothing to do with anything.It's still supposed to be built to the same general specifications of other power armor.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Do people really forget that the profile isn't usually "bareknuckles and grit" but rather "close combat weapon"?
It's the bayonet/knife/rifle used as a club that's S3.

Sure, but a knife/bayonet/butt of a rifle also don't hit like a bullet.

 Tyran wrote:
Sure, but a knife/bayonet/butt of a rifle also don't hit like a bullet.

If you say so.

I guess we should move autoguns and lasguns up to S4. Just to be safe.

In the case o w40k statline, aside for some tanks, the main culprit here is the d6 as the source of rolling. There is a gigantic stat squish for values like s/t 3 and 4, but not just those.

Now if we used a d10, which we will never use, or a d20, then the statlines could be more spread and lets say a WE could be stronger then a "regular" space marine.

Stats are not the way to fix sob, because marines with a much better statline need and needed rules on top of rules to be valid. The only way to fix sisters, is to give them proper rules, that work both internaly and externaly in regards of both the core rules and what other armies can run. Melta and ap - bolters, are not something that works or can be made to work on stat and point costs alone, aside for making SoB something crazy cheap like 6-7 pts a model.

 Kanluwen wrote:

I guess we should move autoguns and lasguns up to S4. Just to be safe.

Maybe, the point is that the S/T 3 to 4 compresses and simplifies a lot of strenght differences.

if a lasgun were to be str 4, then the bolter should have the stat it kin has. Bolter a multi shot GL, should be str 5 or 6, just like a regular one shot GL. Although then a plasma should probably be str 8 and melta str 10 (maybe double at half range), and lascanon a flat str 12.

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

I guess we should move autoguns and lasguns up to S4. Just to be safe.

Maybe, the point is that the S/T 3 to 4 compresses and simplifies a lot of strenght differences.

Why do you keep harping on S3?

It's the weapon, not the user. If you want to argue that CCWs should be bumped down--do that. Stop pretending that it's tied to the Toughness level.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Tyran wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

I guess we should move autoguns and lasguns up to S4. Just to be safe.

Maybe, the point is that the S/T 3 to 4 compresses and simplifies a lot of strenght differences.

Why do you keep harping on S3?

It's the weapon, not the user. If you want to argue that CCWs should be bumped down--do that. Stop pretending that it's tied to the Toughness level.

Kan, just because they moved Strength to the weapons instead of the user doesn't mean that a baseline human soldier is suddenly a completely unknowable enigma for the old statline.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Kan, just because they moved Strength to the weapons instead of the user doesn't mean that a baseline human soldier is suddenly a completely unknowable enigma for the old statline.

No, but it does mean that it's daft to keep pretending that we're in The Before Times and that somehow, someway the S/T stats are actually linked together.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Kan, just because they moved Strength to the weapons instead of the user doesn't mean that a baseline human soldier is suddenly a completely unknowable enigma for the old statline.

No, but it does mean that it's daft to keep pretending that we're in The Before Times and that somehow, someway the S/T stats are actually linked together.

They're linked as much as they were before.

Models often had the same Strength and Toughness, but not always.
Now, models often have the same Toughness and Strength (on basic CCW), but not always.

Karol wrote:
In the case o w40k statline, aside for some tanks, the main culprit here is the d6 as the source of rolling. There is a gigantic stat squish for values like s/t 3 and 4, but not just those.

Now if we used a d10, which we will never use, or a d20, then the statlines could be more spread and lets say a WE could be stronger then a "regular" space marine.

Stats are not the way to fix sob, because marines with a much better statline need and needed rules on top of rules to be valid. The only way to fix sisters, is to give them proper rules, that work both internaly and externaly in regards of both the core rules and what other armies can run. Melta and ap - bolters, are not something that works or can be made to work on stat and point costs alone, aside for making SoB something crazy cheap like 6-7 pts a model.

Most of those rules such as bloody rose, exploding 6s, extra AP; essentially just boiled down to off balance sheet stats. In practice you were just giving them 3 attacks and -1AP but that would offend peoples sensibilities. I just think it’s a lot easier to just add them to the profile which is what they did with shock assault and bolter discipline. Again, random Khorne cultists and random genecult gets all these attacks and bonuses but the elite army who’ve been granted power armour don’t?

Because Sisters shouldn’t and are not meant to be a horde army. They’re overcosted as is and it’s only because GW are pretending they have better rules to warrant costing as much as a marine. 6 points per model is not crazy cheap at that profile at all.

If you did not have access to Crusaders and Death cult assassins as an exploit then more people would say they were overcosted. It’s a game that’s pretending there’s a lot more T3 trash in the game than there actually is.

Had to dig out my password so I could create my first post in 10 years...
Tried to read through this all and didn't see it mentioned. I really want leadership bettered for Sisters. The 10th rule book even talks about them being unwavering. We should get marine leadership, not guard leadership.
I feel like that's a "training, but with faith" stat that no one can argue against.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:

Most of those rules such as bloody rose, exploding 6s, extra AP; essentially just boiled down to off balance sheet stats. In practice you were just giving them 3 attacks and -1AP but that would offend peoples sensibilities. I just think it’s a lot easier to just add them to the profile which is what they did with shock assault and bolter discipline. Again, random Khorne cultists and random genecult gets all these attacks and bonuses but the elite army who’ve been granted power armour don’t?

Because Sisters shouldn’t and are not meant to be a horde army. They’re overcosted as is and it’s only because GW are pretending they have better rules to warrant costing as much as a marine. 6 points per model is not crazy cheap at that profile at all.

If you did not have access to Crusaders and Death cult assassins as an exploit then more people would say they were overcosted. It’s a game that’s pretending there’s a lot more T3 trash in the game than there actually is.

But then you are , in order to make the faction work, create a sudo space marine stat line at a close to IG point costs. And that may potentialy work, but doesn't have to. And it really makes all marine players not happy. Spreading unhappiness should not be a design goal, even for a company like GW. Fix their faith points/miracle dice system, fix the weapons because that is the problem of SoB not that they aren't str or/and toughness 4. Make their walkers worth taking (same way sentinals are worth taking), make their paragon suits have a goal to exist in an army etc.

Bolt Action used a D6, when they did the Sci-Fi version, Gates of Antares, they moved to a D10 and the game was much better because of it

D6 works when all factions are basically similar, e.g. infantry of some sort of broadly the same strength. gives enough variation for equipment and training.

the moment you start adding non-human factions you need the wider range

Frankly I'd be happy if GW went with weird, trademarked, D11 or something so long as they get better ranges of results and cut down the number of dice rolled

leopard wrote:
Bolt Action used a D6, when they did the Sci-Fi version, Gates of Antares, they moved to a D10 and the game was much better because of it

D6 works when all factions are basically similar, e.g. infantry of some sort of broadly the same strength. gives enough variation for equipment and training.

the moment you start adding non-human factions you need the wider range

Frankly I'd be happy if GW went with weird, trademarked, D11 or something so long as they get better ranges of results and cut down the number of dice rolled

Your wallet won't be happy when you need to by GW exclusive dice.

ccs wrote:

leopard wrote:
Bolt Action used a D6, when they did the Sci-Fi version, Gates of Antares, they moved to a D10 and the game was much better because of it

D6 works when all factions are basically similar, e.g. infantry of some sort of broadly the same strength. gives enough variation for equipment and training.

the moment you start adding non-human factions you need the wider range

Frankly I'd be happy if GW went with weird, trademarked, D11 or something so long as they get better ranges of results and cut down the number of dice rolled

Your wallet won't be happy when you need to by GW exclusive dice.

this, if GW introduced exclusive dice you know they'd charge 50 bucks for a small pack of 6

To summarise the "dice discussion": part of GWs success with WHF and 40K is their accessibility and ease of use, due to using D6 over alternatives that would benefit the gameplay complexity. This comes up every now and then, nothing has changed. It is extremely unlikely GW will ever move to a D10 system for their flagship games, no matter how compelling an argument anybody here can make in favor of it.

Using comparison rules avoids the problem.

5 variations on success chance is plenty. It only looks bad when it's a static value that ignores the opposition.

Static values are very simple to use though which is why gw has shifted to them more (AOS completely).

You get far better results though when your success chance changes based on the relative match up.

a good example is battletech, where your odds to hit something are based on how you and your opponent moved, gunnery skill, any terrain and or cover etc. movement and position are INSANELY important in that game and it simply uses 2d6 to resolve all actions

 Hellebore wrote:
Using comparison rules avoids the problem.

5 variations on success chance is plenty. It only looks bad when it's a static value that ignores the opposition.

Static values are very simple to use though which is why gw has shifted to them more (AOS completely).

You get far better results though when your success chance changes based on the relative match up.

I recall a post from ages back indicating that you could get the same overall probabilities you have now from hit-wound-save if you just had a WS/BS vs. Defence, then S vs. T and skip the save altogether. Could maybe keep an invulnerable save or FNP mechanic for characters if you really want one, but otherwise you've got the same effect with fewer rolls.

BrianDavion wrote:
a good example is battletech, where your odds to hit something are based on how you and your opponent moved, gunnery skill, any terrain and or cover etc. movement and position are INSANELY important in that game and it simply uses 2d6 to resolve all actions

and typically if you have "multiple" of a weapon firing, e.g. LRM20 you do not roll 2d6 20 times.. you roll it once to hit, then roll on a look up to see how many hits you got

GW could learn from that, squad of marines firing bolters, say 10 shots, one 2d6 roll with a lookup on a table, reference your roll to find a column, with any modifiers applied, and find a row based on "10" shots, oh look, you got "x" hits

and note that decent games doing this stick a probabilistic curve in there fire enough shots at anything, no matter how hard to hit and some will land.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

ccs wrote:

leopard wrote:
Bolt Action used a D6, when they did the Sci-Fi version, Gates of Antares, they moved to a D10 and the game was much better because of it

D6 works when all factions are basically similar, e.g. infantry of some sort of broadly the same strength. gives enough variation for equipment and training.

the moment you start adding non-human factions you need the wider range

Frankly I'd be happy if GW went with weird, trademarked, D11 or something so long as they get better ranges of results and cut down the number of dice rolled

Your wallet won't be happy when you need to by GW exclusive dice.

this, if GW introduced exclusive dice you know they'd charge 50 bucks for a small pack of 6

to be honest if the game got significantly better it could be worth it, especially as alternatives would be available quite quickly


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Darnok wrote:
To summarise the "dice discussion": part of GWs success with WHF and 40K is their accessibility and ease of use, due to using D6 over alternatives that would benefit the gameplay complexity. This comes up every now and then, nothing has changed. It is extremely unlikely GW will ever move to a D10 system for their flagship games, no matter how compelling an argument anybody here can make in favor of it.

do agree, its a pity but GW's "model" is Yahtzee with models, more dice == more fun, apparently, leading to situations where you are rolling enough dice you may as well just use a stats look up table and not bother as the chances of a result outside +/- 1 standard deviation is pretty remote

So we can put the nail in the coffin of the stupid comparison to the sister in pariah:


Fluff is as fluff does and there will always be some outliers, but it generally lines up to some degree.

Dudeface wrote:
So we can put the nail in the coffin of the stupid comparison to the sister in pariah:

Spoiler:

Yes the intercessor marine kills more of the zombies in melee than the sister does, with far less effort and with more strength.

There is a marine ripping off a necrons head with their bare hands. A skorpekh gets shot down by 3 sisters (including a superior) but they don't even draw melee weapons before being cut down.

Fluff is as fluff does and there will always be some outliers, but it generally lines up to some degree.

We can kill this whole discussion.

It was supposed to be about improving the Sisters of Battle rules to make them more viable without simply dropping their points down to Ork horde levels.

Instead it got overtaken by a bunch of FAAC people whining back and forth about whose mom can beat up whose dad, but they're in Canada and go to a different school.

It's been completely irrelevant for 4 pages.

ERJAK wrote:

Dudeface wrote:
So we can put the nail in the coffin of the stupid comparison to the sister in pariah:

Spoiler:

Yes the intercessor marine kills more of the zombies in melee than the sister does, with far less effort and with more strength.

There is a marine ripping off a necrons head with their bare hands. A skorpekh gets shot down by 3 sisters (including a superior) but they don't even draw melee weapons before being cut down.

Fluff is as fluff does and there will always be some outliers, but it generally lines up to some degree.

We can kill this whole discussion.

It was supposed to be about improving the Sisters of Battle rules to make them more viable without simply dropping their points down to Ork horde levels.

Instead it got overtaken by a bunch of FAAC people whining back and forth about whose mom can beat up whose dad, but they're in Canada and go to a different school.

It's been completely irrelevant for 4 pages.

The OP is one of them

The rules are there to sell you on the fantasy of the faction. I mean, the above example just outright isn’t fair even if this was chess. But in the trailers, books etc etc this is meant to be a larger than life faction filled with Joan of Arc style saints in power armour. If a squad of Sisters of Battle ran into some Genestealer cultists they should absolutely massacre them. One of the best equipped fighting forces and where its characters such as in Dawn of Fire are shown keeping pace and fighting with Space Marines.

@dudeface

Because it’s both.

The army isn’t fun to play, is badly designed and isn’t selling you the fantasy of the faction.

Ten strength 3 attacks hitting on 4 is terrible for any unit in the game. It might have been reasonable in third edition and in 9th with off balance sheet stats but it’s ridiculous on its own.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:
@dudeface

Because it’s both.

The army isn’t fun to play, is badly designed and isn’t selling you the fantasy of the faction.

Ten strength 3 attacks hitting on 4 is terrible for any unit in the game. It might have been reasonable in third edition and in 9th with off balance sheet stats but it’s ridiculous on its own.

It's perfectly normal for a lot of units...

Dudeface wrote:

 Totalwar1402 wrote:
@dudeface

Because it’s both.

The army isn’t fun to play, is badly designed and isn’t selling you the fantasy of the faction.

Ten strength 3 attacks hitting on 4 is terrible for any unit in the game. It might have been reasonable in third edition and in 9th with off balance sheet stats but it’s ridiculous on its own.

It's perfectly normal for a lot of units...

I'm pretty sure your basic Sister has always been offensively equivalent to a Guardsman (sub-faction bonuses aside, at least) in close combat. So yeah, that seems perfectly reasonable here. Relatively speaking, nothing has changed.

 Totalwar1402 wrote:
@dudeface

Because it’s both.

The army isn’t fun to play, is badly designed and isn’t selling you the fantasy of the faction.

Ten strength 3 attacks hitting on 4 is terrible for any unit in the game. It might have been reasonable in third edition and in 9th with off balance sheet stats but it’s ridiculous on its own.

Hmm. Maybe melee isn't this units intended primary use.
Just a thought....

A guardsman is half the points of a Sister of Battle. Sisters are costed the same as marines, not Guardsman. 100 points is not a cheap squad. Which is why they should be boosted to justify that cost. They’re 30 to 40 percent cheaper than Intercessors for a vastly better statline. A statline that is BTW not even considered to be that powerful or dangerous.

Well it’s not shooting as their main purpose as they’re mostly equipped with one shot boltguns with no AP and damage 1. All other bolters in the game got better except Sisters of Battle. It’s not being ablative wounds to hold objectives since despite being stated in their rules as “famed for their durability” a T3 1W is incredibly easy to kill. So why am I paying a 100 points for two meltaguns that can’t hurt tanks?

Because if you take the armour off the Sisters of Battle they magically get a load of additional attacks and weapon skill? Why shouldn’t the units profile be in line with the rest of army. Marines have equipment instead of raw stats be the main difference.

Because Sisters should be able to kill things like Chaos Cultists in close combat. Currently the rules tell you they are worse in close combat than cultists. Even if you let them hit on 3 and have 2 attacks, that is still not a stellar profile. Every other army has had stat boosts and it just brings back things like Sacred Rites.

In 9th a Sister of Battle with bloody rose and sacred rites had -

2 attacks hitting on 4 with minus 1 AP and exploding hits on 6. It is a huge nerf to lose Bloody Rose and Sacred Rites on the Sisters of Battle squad. It’s not silly to expect the unit to be better because it was until fairly recently.