| 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. |
|
 |
2022/05/07 16:22:07
Subject: New balance datasheet due Easter week (slate out, pg 14)
|
|
Killer Klaivex
The dark behind the eyes.
|
 Tyran wrote: Matt.Kingsley wrote: Tyran wrote:
Armor Values not caring about Armor Penetration is a dumb feature.
You're forgetting that Armour Penetration did effect your result on the Damage Chart however, with AP2 and AP1 giving you more severe results.
Penning a vehicle with an AP1 weapon made it more likely than not that said vehicle was dead in a single hit, especially if that AP1 weapon was also Ordnance.
AP2 only mattered in 6th and 7th, it didn't matter in 5th or 4th. And as noted above, the HP system meant that the damage table didn't really matter in those editions anyway.
In fairness, even in 7th AP2 was of dubious use unless the weapon also had a high rate of fire.
This was something that screwed Dark Eldar over at the time, as almost all their anti-tank weapons were AP2. I believe it took something like 6 Ravagers (750pts) to average a single 'Vehicle Destroyed' result against a 35pt Rhino. 
|
 blood reaper wrote:I will respect human rights and trans people but I will never under any circumstances use the phrase 'folks' or 'ya'll'. I would rather be killed by firing squad.
 the_scotsman wrote:Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"
 Argive wrote:GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.
 Andilus Greatsword wrote:
"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"
Akiasura wrote:I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.
 insaniak wrote:
You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.
Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
|
|
|
 |
|
2022/05/07 16:46:19
Subject: New balance datasheet due Easter week (slate out, pg 14)
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Tyran wrote: Matt.Kingsley wrote: Tyran wrote:
Armor Values not caring about Armor Penetration is a dumb feature.
You're forgetting that Armour Penetration did effect your result on the Damage Chart however, with AP2 and AP1 giving you more severe results.
Penning a vehicle with an AP1 weapon made it more likely than not that said vehicle was dead in a single hit, especially if that AP1 weapon was also Ordnance.
AP2 only mattered in 6th and 7th, it didn't matter in 5th or 4th. And as noted above, the HP system meant that the damage table didn't really matter in those editions anyway.
But really my issue with all of this is that calls for the return of armor facings are usually based on its realism, because true tanks tend to have thicker front armor. But if we are talking about realistic armor, then AP matters arguably more than strength, e.g the mechanism that allow a hellgun to penetrate power armor should also allow it to penetrate tank armor, yet under the AV system it was useless against tanks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Under a more "realistic" system, AP would be the main characteristics to determine armor penetration, and then Strength would be the main characteristic to determine the damage inflicted on the vehicle.
I could definitely see a system like this... we could probably come up with something better than GW has done or will do.
|
|
|
|
|
2022/05/07 19:09:40
Subject: New balance datasheet due Easter week (slate out, pg 14)
|
|
Pious Palatine
|
 Unit1126PLL wrote: Tyran wrote: Matt.Kingsley wrote: Tyran wrote:
Armor Values not caring about Armor Penetration is a dumb feature.
You're forgetting that Armour Penetration did effect your result on the Damage Chart however, with AP2 and AP1 giving you more severe results.
Penning a vehicle with an AP1 weapon made it more likely than not that said vehicle was dead in a single hit, especially if that AP1 weapon was also Ordnance.
AP2 only mattered in 6th and 7th, it didn't matter in 5th or 4th. And as noted above, the HP system meant that the damage table didn't really matter in those editions anyway.
But really my issue with all of this is that calls for the return of armor facings are usually based on its realism, because true tanks tend to have thicker front armor. But if we are talking about realistic armor, then AP matters arguably more than strength, e.g the mechanism that allow a hellgun to penetrate power armor should also allow it to penetrate tank armor, yet under the AV system it was useless against tanks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Under a more "realistic" system, AP would be the main characteristics to determine armor penetration, and then Strength would be the main characteristic to determine the damage inflicted on the vehicle.
I could definitely see a system like this... we could probably come up with something better than GW has done or will do.
Dakka people? Lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
2022/05/07 19:58:41
Subject: New balance datasheet due Easter week (slate out, pg 14)
|
|
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
ERJAK wrote: Unit1126PLL wrote: Tyran wrote: Matt.Kingsley wrote: Tyran wrote:
Armor Values not caring about Armor Penetration is a dumb feature.
You're forgetting that Armour Penetration did effect your result on the Damage Chart however, with AP2 and AP1 giving you more severe results.
Penning a vehicle with an AP1 weapon made it more likely than not that said vehicle was dead in a single hit, especially if that AP1 weapon was also Ordnance.
AP2 only mattered in 6th and 7th, it didn't matter in 5th or 4th. And as noted above, the HP system meant that the damage table didn't really matter in those editions anyway.
But really my issue with all of this is that calls for the return of armor facings are usually based on its realism, because true tanks tend to have thicker front armor. But if we are talking about realistic armor, then AP matters arguably more than strength, e.g the mechanism that allow a hellgun to penetrate power armor should also allow it to penetrate tank armor, yet under the AV system it was useless against tanks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Under a more "realistic" system, AP would be the main characteristics to determine armor penetration, and then Strength would be the main characteristic to determine the damage inflicted on the vehicle.
I could definitely see a system like this... we could probably come up with something better than GW has done or will do.
Dakka people? Lol.
Honestly, filtering out at least half of us, I think we could absolutely be more capable of a rule system. Hell you guys did Maelstrom Edge and I haven't heard balance complaints yet
|
|
|
|
|
2022/05/07 22:07:30
Subject: New balance datasheet due Easter week (slate out, pg 14)
|
|
Paramount Plague Censer Bearer
|
Removed. No, just no.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/08 07:50:03
‘What Lorgar’s fanatics have not seen is that these gods are nothing compared to the power and the majesty of the Machine-God. Already, members of our growing cult are using the grace of the Omnissiah – the true Omnissiah, not Terra’s false prophet – to harness the might of the warp. Geller fields, warp missiles, void shields, all these things you are familiar with. But their underlying principles can be turned to so much more. Through novel exploitations of these technologies we will gain mastery first over the energies of the empyrean, then over the lesser entities, until finally the very gods themselves will bend the knee and recognise the supremacy of the Machine-God"
- Heretek Ardim Protos in Titandeath by Guy Haley |
|
|
|
|
2022/05/08 11:10:35
Subject: New balance datasheet due Easter week (slate out, pg 14)
|
|
Trazyn's Museum Curator
|
EviscerationPlague wrote:
Honestly, filtering out at least half of us, I think we could absolutely be more capable of a rule system. Hell you guys did Maelstrom Edge and I haven't heard balance complaints yet
How many people play Maelstrom Edge?
|
What I have
 ~4100
 ~1660
Westwood lives in death!
Peace through power!
A longbeard when it comes to Necrons and WHFB. Grumble Grumble
|
|
|
|
|
2022/05/08 12:34:36
Subject: New balance datasheet due Easter week (slate out, pg 14)
|
|
Stubborn White Lion
|
 CthuluIsSpy wrote:EviscerationPlague wrote:
Honestly, filtering out at least half of us, I think we could absolutely be more capable of a rule system. Hell you guys did Maelstrom Edge and I haven't heard balance complaints yet
How many people play Maelstrom Edge?
*crickets chirp*
We just have to look at 9th age to see how great the community is at projects /s
You need a small dedicated team on the same page, preferably who are not too swayed by outside noise.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/05/08 12:35:40
|
|
|
|
|
2022/05/08 13:09:12
Subject: New balance datasheet due Easter week (slate out, pg 14)
|
|
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
ERJAK wrote: Unit1126PLL wrote: Tyran wrote: Matt.Kingsley wrote: Tyran wrote:
Armor Values not caring about Armor Penetration is a dumb feature.
You're forgetting that Armour Penetration did effect your result on the Damage Chart however, with AP2 and AP1 giving you more severe results.
Penning a vehicle with an AP1 weapon made it more likely than not that said vehicle was dead in a single hit, especially if that AP1 weapon was also Ordnance.
AP2 only mattered in 6th and 7th, it didn't matter in 5th or 4th. And as noted above, the HP system meant that the damage table didn't really matter in those editions anyway.
But really my issue with all of this is that calls for the return of armor facings are usually based on its realism, because true tanks tend to have thicker front armor. But if we are talking about realistic armor, then AP matters arguably more than strength, e.g the mechanism that allow a hellgun to penetrate power armor should also allow it to penetrate tank armor, yet under the AV system it was useless against tanks.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Under a more "realistic" system, AP would be the main characteristics to determine armor penetration, and then Strength would be the main characteristic to determine the damage inflicted on the vehicle.
I could definitely see a system like this... we could probably come up with something better than GW has done or will do.
Dakka people? Lol.
Tyran and I, collaborating.
|
|
|
|
|
2022/05/08 20:00:31
Subject: New balance datasheet due Easter week (slate out, pg 14)
|
|
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba
The Great State of New Jersey
|
Actually been working on a tank-focused ruleset the past few weeks, but when I say its tank focused I mean that the rues are really built around AFV combat, infantry are present but heavily abstracted and simplified relative to t he vehicles, basically the opposite of 40k where the ruleset is built around infantry and tanks are simplified in order to fit the infantry being the focus of the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
