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 encourage anyone playing a big game to try this. Use movement bases for big units on the assumption that the figures within those units are actually using the best squad-level tactics and positions available to them according to the 40k close range scale distortion principle. Count hits from template weapons the way they were in the old cityfight - 1D6 for ordnance and flamers, 1D3 for small templates to a maximum number of hits equal to the total number of figures in the target squad. If you need a to hit roll, you pass it before rolling for number of hits, but things like battlecannon and barrage weapons would just roll the die for quantity of hits. This would speed up the movement phase, reduce the vulnerability of all-ready squishy foot hordes to splash damage, and actually improve the effectiveness of some weapons i.e. plasma cannon, mortar. Multiple barrages would get a rule that the total number of hits from the barrage may not be greater than the number of figures in the squad.

I think this idea would limit the potential effectiveness of battlecannons or other ordnance weapons.

I love it.

I always thought that because of paralax, templates were hard to use, and I'd love to not have to haul them around.  besides I have noticed that most experienced players know the geometry anyway, for example an ordinance hit on a squad spaced out 2 inches in a line is 1 and 2 partials, and when firing at a recently deepstriking target, all (1 inch base) models are hit if there are <=7, and the rest are partials for >7 etc.  The rest of the situations are almost always variations on this, the only time one really needs a template to check is vehicle dismounts (usually during targeting of vehicle bail out squads) and D3/D6 would be fine for that anyway

Why cap the hit maximum at target squad size? Does that really matter?

I'll do one better, citing the pulse laser that use to be HD3, and now just is H2, why even roll dice? Why not just have current blast weapons do the average hits to squads for example: battle cannon at D6, Avg=3.5, therefore ordinance templates do 4 hits? and a plasma cannon does 2 hits average (1 under and 2 partials, or D3 Avg=2) so little templates do 2 hits, and finally, flamers are harder to tell, so how about they do 4 hits like ordinance and have an 8 inch range with no to hit roll (consistant with the D6 aproach for larger templates)  with no cover saves.

OrdinanceT = 4 hits

Flamer = 4 hits

SmallT = 2 hits 

Then you don't even have to roll dice?

limit the potential ...ordnance weapons.

Yes, good point, but have you played with one recently? theyre already limited!  It is easy to space at 2 inches, and because of  requiring a target centerpoint model vs an impact point they really cant take advantage of poorly placed enemy formations, or target multiple units anyway, except in the most gross of circumstances...

I like this idea. I adopted the Cityfight rules a while back and more or less did away with templates from my gaming group, but now I might take up your interpretation, Augustus.

CK

Well thank you.

Honestly my group plays by pretty strict rules interpretations, we are always practicing for tourneys and trying to understand the correct way to play, but this thread, on making things easier I think actually represents something I'd like to adopt.

I had a similar concept once where we didnt even roll dice, until there were less than 10.  We just did the math, an ork assault of 10 boys, like 40 attacks, we didnt have the dice, so we just said, well half hit: 20, and a third wound about 7, so make 7 saves, and I pulled off 4 marines.  It actually made the game go much faster, and eleiminated the ridiculous outliers, like rolling 6 hits in 40 tries or rolling 30, etc.  I think just doing the math and avoiding some of the sillyness of rolling a lot of dice all the time may be a good thing. (Obviously not in the rules anywhere.)

Furthermore, I take no end of grief for Warhammer from my older wargamer friends (who play mostly napoleonics and like periods) to whom rolling to hit for every man, essentially 3 times (hit/wound/save) is absolute balderdash.  They all say the same thing, why not calculate the odds, to a percentage, and just roll once...  They contend it's because warhammer players, are child like and enjoy rolling gobs of dice... A stereotype I can not entirely confirm or deny.

But then we'd remove another one of Warhammers 'subtle tactics'. One of the big differences between new players and savvy players is how many marines I would be able to plaster with my SoB's Heavy Flamer. Usually, almost always, I would get 6+ models with it. Just as expected, you score more template death on a unit of 20 guants than a unit of 5 banshees. Besides, there should be just punishment for any player who lets his army march in formation. I would expect to see greater concentration of enemy troops, which wouldnt help out the game.

Removing die rolls does somewhat take away from part of WarHammer - a thrill that brings me back to the 5th edition FB box under the Christmas tree ages ago. Still, ty for sharing that house rule, Augustus

@Keldrin: My thought is less towards marines as more towards those gaunts you mention. Little nids and foot orks would play a LOT faster if you could just pick up a tray and move 32 spinegaunts or slugga boys instead of picking up and repositioning each at 2" coherency, etc. - or even moving eight regiment stands. Maybe different sized trays could be used, with benefits for shooting at troops on a smaller tray. If you went with regiment stands, you could say that if the stands are spaced under an inch apart, its 1d6 hits, over 1", 1d6-1, and base-to-base 2d6 or something like that. Personally I just happen to like the look of figures on a multibase as well.

Great idea. So many hits per template weapon would stop a lot of arguments over the exact placement and amount of troops partially covered.  To save time and energy when I use template weapons I just hand the template to my opponent and ask him how many I can get in his unit.

I do the same thing too, especially if it isnt on my half of the table anyway.

@Kelderin

-Thats true, there is an element of getting a lot out of a template for really packed in troops, and I have to admit that my tactics change when I know an enemy doesnt have any blast, which happens all the time vs. Tau and Eldar...

Certainly using a fixed hit number for template weapons has a drawback.  I suppose the other side of it is that players who remember to spread out, and pay attention to detail, on what opposing units have blasts ought to be rewarded.

What if any blast weapons got their hits, and then got an extra one for any models that are touching bases up to a maximum?  Say a battlecannon is 4/10; 4 hits regular, no more than 10 total for touching bases, so if a 10 man squad DS landed next to say, a demolisher that hit it, 10 hits would occur...

Is that too complex?

I like it. I would say to make the ORD temp= 5 hits though. That would be better. I think i just has more surface area than a flamer template. 2 is good for the small.

Actually make the large ord= 2D6 but doubles means its a miss.

Ouch, no way. That'd completely slam ordnance effectiveness. Double ones, maybe.

And 2d6 is way overpowered.

Five hits might be a reasonable alternative to four, now that I'm thinking about it. That could just be the fawning Imperial Guard general inside me crying out for an advantage over Spaseh Murienz!! Hurr!! (kudos to nyarly)

CK

I'd just hate to fire a battle cannon at a closely packed target, directly hit, and roll a 1 to see what I wounded....

As a guard player, I would hate the day when I put a battle cannon shot on a closely packed target, only to find out only 1 gets hit.  I think the templates are alright.  When you spread your unit out to avoid ordinance hits, then it makes it harder to move that large formation through terrain, without getting impeded.  If they want to compact a large unit in order to make it fit between some forests (they might not want to get slowed down by difficult terrain tests), they should have to pay for that by being at higher risk from template weapons. 

Guard already has a hard time against many enemies, don't nerf them by taking away their most powerful weapon.  Also, it's more realistic anyways using the templates, a unit that's more spread out is going to take fewer casualties from a single ordinance shell.

Ordinance is pretty fair as it is right now.  It only lands on target 1/3rd of the time, but it's devestating when it does.  When it doesn't, it goes an average of 3 1/2" off course, if it didn't move.  (2" or more, it's off the original target designated.)

Also, part of this game is the randomness, and not following the odds.  All three dice rolls should be made for that reason.  While some might not want to getting 6 hits out of 40 attacks, they probably are not objecting to the times that they might get 38 hits out of 40 attacks.  That's part of the game.

Odds give likelihood, but not certainty. 

Getting rid of templates is horrible idea.

Right now, there are two competing approaches to model positioning.  If you spread out, you're less vulnerable to templates, but more vulnerable to assault.  If you bunch up, you're more vulnerable to assault, but less vulnerable to templates.

If you remove the actual templates, people have no reason not to bunch up, which removes some of the tactical play during assault.  

Part of the fun in any game is making decisions based on known risk.  Do you want to risk the template, in order to be in position to ward off an assault, or do you want to risk the assault in order to reduce the template risk.   

Skrivus> Guard already has a hard time against many enemies...Ordinance is pretty fair as it is right now.  It only lands on target 1/3rd of the time, but it's devestating when it does...

So which is it, a hard time, or pretty fair? 

Ordinance is not pretty fair right now, it's marginal at best!  

This is because of the targeting requirement to pick out a single model and put the template on it, combined with coherency rules, it only hits 1/3 of the time anyway, at a designated point, and the geometry on a spread out squad is 1 and 2 partials.  A leman russ can't even outshoot a 6 man las plas squad (or any squad with a heavy weapon, DE, IG, LatD, Eldar or TMC) in the open with a battlecannon for more points, actually 3 heavy bolters and a stubber has better odds of killing them than the battle cannon does, and they are armored targets...

Devastating? Not in the least.

I concur about making it D6 hits being a bad idea, but I think it needs some help to be improved and that getting rid of templates as a mechanic would be a great way to go, did you see my comments and V2 proposed rule?

..a fixed hit number for template weapons has a drawback.  I suppose the other side of it is that players who remember to spread out, and pay attention to detail, on what opposing units have blasts ought to be rewarded.

...[what if] blast weapons got their hits, and then got an extra one for any models that are touching bases up to a maximum?  Say a battlecannon is 4/10; 4 hits regular, no more than 10 total for touching bases, so if a 10 man squad DS landed next to say, a demolisher that hit it, 10 hits would occur...

 Redbeard> Getting rid of templates is horrible idea.

Right now, there are two competing approaches to model positioning.  If you spread out, you're less vulnerable to templates, but more vulnerable to assault.  If you bunch up, you're more vulnerable to assault, but less vulnerable to templates.

What?

If you spread out, you're less vulnerable to templates, but more vulnerable to assault. Actually if you spread out you are less vulnerable to assaults because the kill zone will only include a few models, if you bunch up, assaulters can wipe out your whole squad in one go. If you bunch up, you're more vulnerable to assault, but less vulnerable to templates That's absurd! If you bunch up your less vulnerable to templates? That makes no sense at all, is that what you meant to write?

Bunching up makes you more vulnerable to assault and to templates, spread out is almost always the way to go, the only reason to bunch up, is to hide from enemy LOS, if you have to...

? 

  Augustus>  ...[what if] blast weapons got their hits, and then got an extra one for any models that are touching bases up to a maximum?  Say a battlecannon is 4/10; 4 hits regular, no more than 10 total for touching bases, so if a 10 man squad DS landed next to say, a demolisher that hit it, 10 hits would occur...

  I'm a bit confused by this, so what you're basically saying is that you can have 10 guys bunched together, with just a millimeter between them, so their bases are not touching, and that would only get 4 hits, when you could fit many more underneath an ordinance template.  And no matter how many guys were bunched up under an area, only 10 could be hit.  That makes it completely unneccesary to spread out then, you'd only need that little bit of space, to ensure safety for a large formation, like 30 Ork Boyz.  I like that you're planning for that and it's a good idea, just it's easier to use a template. 

The point of spreading out is to prevent a blast or something like that from killing an entire squad, but if a formation is spread out, they'd more more vulnerable to a charge, because only a portion of the group being charged would be able to strike back  (I'm talking in general, not accounting for abilities only some troops have access to.)  Also, if a large formation is spread out, they may all not get their attacks in on the charge, due to some models being outside of the 2" from a model in base contact, which could make the difference in a heated close combat. 

I used the wrong word when I said "Devestating."  But then again, name a non-template weapon that has the power to wipe out an entire squad with a single shot.  The Ordinance is limited to an area, which is what many people complain about, but you're ignoring that within that area, the number of models that are affected is only limited to how many bases can fit in there.  There's no arbitrary number of models that are affected by ordinance.  When the ordinance is AP3 or AP2, then MEQs will definitely have to plan around them. 

I personally don't like having to target a single model with the ordinance, that doesn't mean that templates should be thrown out. 

  You also didn't consider what happens after you're in a prolonged combat  (more than 1 round), and then the other side wins, but only gets a massacre roll of 1", there's no way they can max out their 2" coherency if the unit was tightly packed in close combat, then only moves 1".  There's going to be alot of models underneath a template.  Also, deestrikers can be blasted, while you mentioned there should be a max of 10, if they're in base contact, what about the Necron veil of darkness, with more than 10 warriors with the lord.  I've had games where I've taken out more than 10 warriors with one shot due to the template not limiting the number of guys hit. 

It's another weapon that throws the enemy off balance.  While the tanks can do damage in the right situations, the guard don't rely on the tanks to do the major damage, they use the vast numbers of heavy and special weapons.  When there's ordinance around, an enemy squad surely isn't going to bunch up, fearing the devestation that can be brought by battle cannons, or earthshakers.  They're going to spread out to minimize the damage that can be done, leaving them more exposed to fire from the heavy and special weapons of the infantry.  Also, the tanks are usually feared enough that people will plan their tactics around them, either trying to reduce their available fields of fire or bringing their anti-tank specialists to deal with them. 

While the tanks can be killed, because armor 14 is far from invulnerable, but it's hard to take out, especially with good deployment.  Many enemies become obsessed with trying to kill the tanks, that they forget the real threat, the vast horde of shooty infantry. 

Template weapons are not perfect, but they're good for this game.

If you don't like templates, then don't use them.  I'm fine with the ordinance templates, I like the unpredictability of it and that it's limited to an area, not to a number of models. 

I also play marines, so I know what it's like to be on the receiving end of ordinance weapons.  While they themselves don't kill alot of marines, due to spreading out, you have to be very careful about where models end up, after deep striking, and it makes it risky to bunch people up to get them out of LOS (Indirect Basilisk fire sucks to be on the receiving end of.) 

Wow!

Well written.

Ok I agree. I also admit that when troops spread out from my pair of basilisks I tend to get very observant about where my other ranges actually end, I have managed to kill more valuable specific models from casualty removal range limitations playing my IG than I ever have from torrent of fire... 

Interesting indeed.

I agree with Skrivus that blasts/templates are an important addition to 40k. No other method can as easily represent that troops packed together (to fit into cover, for example) should suffer more hits.

Blasts/templates can have a tremendous impact on the way the game is played (as discussed already).

One thing I really think could be improved in the game is the way that units that have multiple blasts or templates are handled.

I think right now the system is clunky and poorly thought out.


One idea could be that a single blast/template is placed over the target unit (no matter how many the firing unit has) and each blast/template weapon after the first causes the same amount of hits, but -1 per marker/template.

So if a unit had 3 flamers, and the template was placed so that 5 enemy models were touched. The 2nd flamer would automatically cause 4 hits (1 less) while the third flamer would automatically cause 3 hits (2 less).


Another idea would be to get rid of the silly multiple barrage rules, and just use the large marker for any guess range weapon. However, models under the marker wouldn't be automatically hit, instead you'd have a 'to hit' roll for any model touched by the marker (maybe 5+?), and for each barrage weapon in the unit, that 'to hit' roll would improve by 1. So if a unit had 3 Barrage weapons in it, any enemy models under or touched by the large blast would be hit on rolls of '3+'.


Obviously these are pretty much just off the top of my head, but I really feel there are more elegant solutions than what GW went with (resolve each blast/template one at a time), especially since that rule doesn't jive very well with some of their other rules (like Torrent of Fire).