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.
It would be rude to say it to you, but you were fanboying a little bit . Honourable to admit it My friend is a massive, sorry, MASSIVE space marine fanbooy, I can't believe anything he says, I can't tell between the S10 AP1 Large Blasts and the 2+ invulnerable saves.
yes but that's what made tau pulse rifles so good, was their higher than Boltgun damage. There need to be things between a Boltgun and a Lasgun, just like there need to be things above a Boltgun. And if a space marine is Defense 5, I'd like for the very scary weapons to be wounding them on more than a 50% chance.
Trying to tone down the fanboyness I see Just kidding. I've actually made them pretty weak; if you think about it, currently marines die to a pulse rifle shot 2/9 of the time. Now it's 1/2 of the time.
Unless we want to add armour back in.
Also stop nerfing the lasguns O.O there doesn't need to be things between a lasgun and a boltgun, bad guns are P3, decent guns are P4, strong guns are P5.
Firstly, stop editing things instead of posting another reply. Otherwise we might miss something!
well for one, it would have to be costed appropriately between armies, and second, its too situational to expect people to consider seriously, so i dont see a point in even having it.
Ok I would just give some things ceramite plating automatically. Like IG veterans or something.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/08/17 07:21:08
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
Yeah, I love me some power armor (Especially Grey Knights) but there is no army I don't find interesting and exciting in the 40K universe, so i try to keep it in check. And as much as it feels weird to admit, sometimes the original designers make amazing decisions, like having orks depend on large number of attacks and furious charge to be so scary, so taking that away would hurt not only the tactics, but the feel of the army.
Adding armor back in is an option, but i don't want to do that if possible, i like the new direction too much. And yes im nerfing Lasguns, but doing so is going to open up new opportunities in the guardsman codex to make them scary, such as improving orders and unit interactions, you already did something towards this by increasing Lasguns to str 4, but having them drop down to str 3 beyond a certain point. That's what we need to do to make Lasguns be useful, but weak at the same time, so the value is not the gun, but how you use it.
Also stop nerfing the lasguns O.O there doesn't need to be things between a lasgun and a boltgun, bad guns are P3, decent guns are P4, strong guns are P5.
and outstanding guns are Damage 6, while ridiculous guns are Damage 7
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/08/17 07:36:52
There we go, that is an exciting interesting mechanic. Id say put some sort of limit, such as they may never fire past 48", and integrate your idea from earlier that they can pass through a model for, say, a -3 or -4 modifier. Also leave the lance rule in place, its a very nicely done rule, it would be a shame to lose it.
Edit: my only worry is that youre crippling many imperial armies best long range anti tank gun, the las cannon. This could be solved by making it Damage 12, that way they are still a respectable 8 at max range.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/08/17 07:51:45
to be fair, fire prisms should have rockin Damage, they are crazy good, second having fanboys design things is actually good in moderation, they make sure things stay interesting, powerful, and fluffy. So long as we don't devolve into shouting matches. Or turn into Matt Ward.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/08/17 07:56:58
Holy crap dude tone it down, 120"? Im not firing it at the battle on the other side of the room. I know that titan is a big juicy target but my god, he's not even in this game.
Edit: 60 inches might be too much even. Id say 48" is the highest range to be allowed, otherwise its not engaging as there's no risk, or you can't use all of that anyways.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/08/17 08:02:01
No way, if it's say 72" (Looking at you, battle cannon), even if you fire at max range (remember you can't get exactly 72" so if it's in range it's only -5P) it's still P7.
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
Idk im exhausted and have a really busy day ahead of me, so id rather not play around with mechanic ideas without being on top of my game. Talk to you guys in the morning.
To go, i think the move but not shoot, and may not move or shoot would work well here, but I'd rather see a shoot but not move, perhaps an option between the two, or use a command point for an order to do one over the other.
Oh, woah, did not realise it was 4am for you! sorry for keeping you awake buddy.
Very rough, but some ideas:
Suppressed: Fortitude reduced by W, cannot move, may only fire Snap Shots (-4Mk)
Dazed: Fortitude reduced by X, cannot move or shoot
Terrified: Fortitude reduced by Y, cannot shoot, automatically moves their full Mobility to the nearest friendly unit
Routed: Fortitude reduced by Z, cannot shoot, automatically moves their full Mobility directly towards the controlling player's table edge
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
The problem with dropping lasgun range is that since guardsman units will not want to move and are slowish, enemy units could just sit outside their range and shoot them all day long
Lasguns are negligible when fired at 24", but decent at 12". That's why I settle at mediocre at 18", strong at 9".
Hahah yeah, all you need to know about Eldar is that they're T3 except hipster Eldrad.
Not quite. If you utilize a larger spectrum of stats, there is strong fluff foundation for differentiating the physical stats of an Eldar a human military. Eldar are physically stronger, tougher, more refined and also highly resistant to infection and disease. Their psychology is likewise super-human being highly resistant to mind control techniques such as that from Genestealers and also extremely resistant to corrupting influence from chaos which is further reinforced by the path system.
The real question is how large the scale need to be before Eldar begin to pull ahead of Guardsmen.
a Guardian is more or less just a civilian Eldar pressed into military service, and not an active member of the path of war, where as war and bashing people on the head is not only the only thing orks live for, its what their society is based off of
You're right that Guardians are just plumbers sent to battle but they've still got the inhuman reaction's of the Eldar race. Orks, even if they live for it, are just plonkers.
Guardians also have basic combat training far beyond what human conscripts have and will typically have spent time as an aspect warrior or as an outcast. The average Eldar Guardian is essentially a retired veteran.
- Why are Boltguns better than shuriken catapults -.-
Because you get more shots. I wouldn't mind them being Damage 5, but that could be a bit extreme at 2 shots on some not-expensive models.
They aren't very inexpensive since they also lack armour and have a distinct and very real range disadvantage on their guns. There's a reason why there hasn't been a huge outcry of "OP!" when Guardians not only got rending but also +1BS for no point increase what so ever. They're still hard as hell to use and you still tend to lose them by the bucket when someone pays them attention.
At damage 4 you need to implement a special rule for the Shuriken Catapult/Cannon which would emulate rending.
Rending: Treats all targets with a resilience/defense of 5 or higher as being 1 point lower and always damages them on a roll of 6.
Bladestorm: Treats non-vehicles with a resilience/defense of 5 or higher as being 1 point lower and always wounds them on a roll of 6.
IcyFireKnight wrote: I was JUST thinking about that. Ya know Shining Spears? Their lasers are short range...
Laser: A weapon with this special rule loses 1 Power for every 12" away it is from the target and 2 Power if firing through smoke.
While I think this is wholly a bad idea because it makes a long range of long-range artillery fairly useless at long range (with the values you have there you'd need to increase the increment to at least 24" range), I'd like to comment on the Ranger Long Rifle: it'd not a laser rifle, it's a gravitic accelerator rifle, it shoots solid slugs.
They aren't very inexpensive since they also lack armour and have a distinct and very real range disadvantage on their guns. There's a reason why there hasn't been a huge outcry of "OP!" when Guardians not only got rending but also +1BS for no point increase what so ever. They're still hard as hell to use and you still tend to lose them by the bucket when someone pays them attention.
i think everyone and their dog can agree guardians used to be massively overcosted, especially compared to 5th and 6th edition troops. And im fine Shuriken catapults being Damage 5, i just put them at 4 because i felt they should be there.
Not quite. If you utilize a larger spectrum of stats, there is strong fluff foundation for differentiating the physical stats of an Eldar a human military. Eldar are physically stronger, tougher, more refined and also highly resistant to infection and disease. Their psychology is likewise super-human being highly resistant to mind control techniques such as that from Genestealers and also extremely resistant to corrupting influence from chaos which is further reinforced by the path system.
im not sure there's a need to differentiate them from humans, because there are so many troops at higher strength/toughness, ill get into it later. Differentiating their agility or speed is necessary though.
You put some good points about the Eldar basically being better at everything, but we don't want them to be OP now do we (well I don't mind!)
I think that it will be revolutionary if we shove all Eldar into T4, I think T3 is one of the most outstanding drawbacks about the race, so I'd keep it.
........................................M..Mk.S...P..R...D...A...V...F..C...Type
Eldar Guardian.................8...4...5...3...3...5...1...1...4...4...
What do you say to this? High Dexterity, along with Nimble Fighter makes them skilful at combat, but still sadly P3. At shooting, Mk 4 reflects their sub-standard training.
I think Bladestorm/Rending is realistic as it is - the chance to hit a vital spot with a hail of shots. I would change it a bit though:
Bladestorm: Against non-vehicles, any rolls To Hit that would still succeed if the user had suffered -3 Marksmanship, the hit is resolved at +3 Power.
Rending: Any rolls To Hit that would still succeed if the user had suffered -3 Marksmanship, the hit is resolved at +3 Power.
Bolters should be P4. As for a Marine punch being stronger than a Bolter round...don't think there's much to do about that, unless we want to make everyone's Power one less, to emulate bullets being stronger than punches.
Btw thank you for the Ranger long rifle info.
............................................Rg...P...A...Type
Ranger long rifle...................42...5...1...Kinetic, Sniper
Sniper: If a model has a weapon with this special rule, any wounds it causes are doubled. Also, all Sniper weapons have the Heavy, Rending and Suppressing special rules.
Let's discuss it now. Shall we split Weapon Skill into two parts?\
- For example, take a Dreadnought. In combat its Weapon Skill could be 5, but its Dexterity would only be one.
- A Plaguebearer could have a WS of 4 but have a Dexterity of 3.
- A Marine (don't hate!) might have a WS of 5 but a Dexterity of 4 (big armour)
- Whereas a Guardian could have a WS of 4 but a Dexterity of 5.
It's almost the same as BS and Stealth. Just because you're hard to hit doesn't mean you're good at hitting, similarly being good with a weapon doesn't mean your fat armour doesn't affect your agility anymore. But the problem is, that it kinda does -_- If you're skilful it means you're better at parrying blows, dodging, etc..
Any suggestions on what we would name the "attacking" stat? Weapon Skill, Combat Skill, just Skill...
This message was edited 7 times. Last update was at 2013/08/18 04:05:12
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
I think Bladestorm/Rending is realistic as it is - the chance to hit a vital spot with a hail of shots. I would change it a bit though:
I think we need to define what Rending does now that we're more or less trying to take out randomness, and im not a fan of the system you laid out, its just too busy. Maybe a pseudo-reverse of what i brought up for posioned weapons. For any roll of 6 to hit, the weapon is resolved at +2 strength? maybe plus 3, idk lets work on it.
What do you say to this? High Dexterity, along with Nimble Fighter makes them skilful at combat, but still sadly P3. At shooting, Mk 4 reflects their sub-standard training.
Id say this could work, so long as we split WS.
Bolters should be P4. As for a Marine punch being stronger than a Bolter round...don't think there's much to do about that, unless we want to make everyone's Power one less, to emulate bullets being stronger than punches.
I dont see why you couldnt just have the really powerful weapons (Pulse rifles, Gauss) be a 6, since we've already said 6 is a rare troop stat, and have bolters and other "Strong" guns at Damage 5, "weak" guns at Damage 4, and weakened lasguns at Damage 3. This would preserve the current way that the Very high power guns damage space marines much more easily on a 3+, Boltguns injure a space marine on a 4+, and weaker units on a 3+, while the weaker guns damage a space marine on a 5+, and weaker units on a 4+ or 3+. Doing otherwise will cause the problems you said here in
Bolters should be P4. As for a Marine punch being stronger than a Bolter round...don't think there's much to do about that, unless we want to make everyone's Power one less, to emulate bullets being stronger than punches.
Sniper: If a model has a weapon with this special rule, any wounds it causes are doubled. Also, all Sniper weapons have the Heavy, Rending and Suppressing special rules.
I like the idea, but it could be a bit too powerful, especially for the likes of tau pathfinders. i think rending would be enough to make them effective, but lets see how playtesting works out on them.
Splitting WS into two parts - like Marksmanship and Stealth?
Plasma having the chance to blind nearby targets?
Morale?
Splitting WS into say WS and Dexterity could yield interesting results to situations like low skill but agile combatants, but im not sure that there would be enough variety to warrant the differentiation. Also, if we keep splitting things and adding stats, the statline is going to get out of control. Lets run some test cases and statlines, and see how they work out gamewise. Also, i dont really want a units agility in close combat to determine its speed in combat, especially if its already making them more difficult to hit, as that could be very very powerful. I still think having initiative tiers defined by special rules will be the way to go for striking order. Perhaps mixing the two, with special rules granting initiative tiers, but otherwise roll offs are done by comparing the two's new Dexterity (Agility) stat instead of the WS stat.
The only idea i have for plasma blinding is a reduction to BS or reduction in targets range, which would be irritating to keep track of, since youd need a counter for it, and with many armies like tau and dark angels having massive amounts of plasma, i think itd be too much complexity for not enough reward, plus plasma weapons are already very powerful, they don't really need a buff.
Morale is such a wide ranging discussion i need a frame to start at.
Edit:
- For example, take a Dreadnought. In combat its Weapon Skill could be 5, but its Dexterity would only be one.
- A Plaguebearer could have a WS of 4 but have a Dexterity of 3.
- A Marine (don't hate!) might have a WS of 5 but a Dexterity of 4 (big armour)
- Whereas a Guardian could have a WS of 4 but a Dexterity of 5.
I agree with this direction and logic, obviously we need to playtest and tweak, but i like it. I vote for Weapon Skill and Dexterity for the names of the new split values. Their obvious and straightforward names, like Ballistic skill and Stealth.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, before i forget and lose this idea, id like to radically alter what a tyranid prime is. Id much rather have them be a MASSIVELY customizable model, beyond just about anything else in the codex, instead of an upgraded tyranid warrior. Fluff-wise, say they are a class of mutable leaders that the hive-mind and norn-queens are constantly adjusting and evolving, at a vastly accelerated rate even compared to other units, to better fit the current battlefield and enemy, and maintain as a distinct entity similar to a hive tyrant.
This way, the player can choose to improve them in any way imaginable, from making them an upgraded Warrior, to a mini-hive tyrant, to a super-broodlord, to a pseudo-lictor. Players start with a relatively cheap base model, and then can improve stats, grant special rules and special weapons, ranging from rending claws and scything talons, to bonswords, lashwhips, poison and adrenal glands, movement bonuses, extra wounds, higher toughness through armor or metabolic upgrades, wings, guns, psychic powers and mastery levels, and everything else imaginable. Essentially, the player would be able to access a modified version of what we as designers would have available to design units and price them accordingly. Obviously the player would have to pay slightly more for every increase than a formula would call for, otherwise they would be a bit too good.
Also let them be 2 to an HQ choice ,similar to chaos heralds, that way a player can have tons of powerful ones if they are willing to put a large portion of their points into them, or a horde player could have more personalized control over individual units using more, weaker Primes, and anything in between
I know this isn't even remotely on topic, but i wanted to get it documented and put up, so ideas and opinons?
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2013/08/18 04:50:46
I think we need to define what Rending does now that we're more or less trying to take out randomness, and im not a fan of the system you laid out, its just too busy. Maybe a pseudo-reverse of what i brought up for posioned weapons. For any roll of 6 to hit, the weapon is resolved at +2 strength? maybe plus 3, idk lets work on it.
I know it's too busy, but it's as balanced as ever. Ever had it where you're hitting on a 5+, and on a 6+ your shots are rending? Exactly, that's why "on a 6" cant work for everything.
I dont see why you couldnt just have the really powerful weapons (Pulse rifles, Gauss) be a 6, since we've already said 6 is a rare troop stat, and have bolters and other "Strong" guns at Damage 5, "weak" guns at Damage 4, and weakened lasguns at Damage 3. This would preserve the current way that the Very high power guns damage space marines much more easily on a 3+, Boltguns injure a space marine on a 4+, and weaker units on a 3+, while the weaker guns damage a space marine on a 5+, and weaker units on a 4+ or 3+.
I think your bias is showing a little bit, although Marines have very good all-round stats, Boltguns are supposed to be the average gun. If Boltguns wound Marines on a 4+..well then 10cm thick armour isn't doing its job huh :x
im not sure that there would be enough variety to warrant the differentiation
why do you think that?
Space Marine WS5 D5
Guardsman WS3 D4?
Tau WS2 D3?
Eldar WS4 D5
Ork WS4 D4?
Hormagaunt WS4 D4?
Necron WS5 D3?
Plaguebearer WS4 D3?
The statline shouldnt get out of control. I'd say around 12 stats is a good point to finish at - just look at how much information you're conveying with a simple letter and number. Like I said earlier the more you can fit on there, the less info you have to put elsewhere (up to a point).
I still think having initiative tiers defined by special rules will be the way to go for striking order.
Remember we don't want whole squads hitting before the other squad. In an ideal world, I would do a D3 roll-off for every model, but that would take too long.
Their obvious and straightforward names, like Ballistic skill and Stealth.
Would you rather have Marksmanship because it sounds much much cooler or Ballistic Skill because it compliments Weapon Skill?
Spoiler:
Also, before i forget and lose this idea, id like to radically alter what a tyranid prime is. Id much rather have them be a MASSIVELY customizable model, beyond just about anything else in the codex, instead of an upgraded tyranid warrior. Fluff-wise, say they are a class of mutable leaders that the hive-mind and norn-queens are constantly adjusting and evolving, at a vastly accelerated rate even compared to other units, to better fit the current battlefield and enemy, and maintain as a distinct entity similar to a hive tyrant.
This way, the player can choose to improve them in any way imaginable, from making them an upgraded Warrior, to a mini-hive tyrant, to a super-broodlord, to a pseudo-lictor. Players start with a relatively cheap base model, and then can improve stats, grant special rules and special weapons, ranging from rending claws and scything talons, to bonswords, lashwhips, poison and adrenal glands, movement bonuses, extra wounds, higher toughness through armor or metabolic upgrades, wings, guns, psychic powers and mastery levels, and everything else imaginable. Essentially, the player would be able to access a modified version of what we as designers would have available to design units and price them accordingly. Obviously the player would have to pay slightly more for every increase than a formula would call for, otherwise they would be a bit too good.
Umm yeah, that was a bit abrupt lol .. But having extremely customisable models is a pretty cool way to go, my only tip is instead of having a cheap base model with moderate price upgrades, I would have a slightly more expensive model with slightly lower-priced upgrades.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Edit: I wouldn't have Weapon Skill any much more than Skill, because Weapon Skill kinda covers ranged weapons as well....if it's Combat Skill, you know it's in combat, and it might be their skill with their fists, not necessarily their "weapon".
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/08/18 05:53:32
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
Well to get technical on it, shooting someone is combat, so thats not right either. And whether you hit someone with a sword or the butt of a gun, its still a weapon, and with the distinction of having Ballistic Skill there, i dont think there will be any confusion, especially since there isn't any right now. Also Weapon Skill is easier to make into an acronym than most other options would probably be. And yes Ballistic skill to compliment Weapon skill.
I know it's too busy, but it's as balanced as ever. Ever had it where you're hitting on a 5+, and on a 6+ your shots are rending? Exactly, that's why "on a 6" cant work for everything.
never had that situation, but so long as the mechanic does its job and is engaging, i dont think it making perfect sense is necessary. Yeah they'll be rending on 1/2 of all successful hits, but theyre still only rending on 1/6 of all possible outcomes, same as every other rending weapon, so it kinda sorta makes sense.
I think your bias is showing a little bit, although Marines have very good all-round stats, Boltguns are supposed to be the average gun. If Boltguns wound Marines on a 4+..well then 10cm thick armour isn't doing its job huh
if we wanted to go pure fluff and logic route, Bolter rounds would almost never penetrate Power Armor, as in BL novels, they can often take dozens of bolter hits before weakening enough for a space marine to actually be wounded by Bolter rounds. The fact is we need marines to be able to kill each other fairly efficiently, since there are so many of them, and the odds of two marine armies facing each other is so great. And even if you put Bolters at Damage 4, they'd still be wounding a great deal of units on the same values as they would be at Damage 5.
As to comments on lack of variety, i hadn't started rolling through units to see what would get what dexterity value, but your dreadnought example gave me a bunch of hope for it.
Remember we don't want whole squads hitting before the other squad. In an ideal world, I would do a D3 roll-off for every model, but that would take too long.
why not? I've yet to see an outstanding mechanic of doing this that isnt incredibly slow, and since most units will be homogenous with the exception of leaders, thats going to be the situation anyways.
The statline shouldnt get out of control. I'd say around 12 stats is a good point to finish at - just look at how much information you're conveying with a simple letter and number. Like I said earlier the more you can fit on there, the less info you have to put elsewhere (up to a point).
true, but we need to be mindful of this, as it could turn off many players, since 12 stats is well into RPG esque territory. And on that note, i question splitting WS since we could use nearly the same Argument to split Defense into Toughness and Armor, and damage into Strength and Ap.
never had that situation, but so long as the mechanic does its job and is engaging, i dont think it making perfect sense is necessary. Yeah they'll be rending on 1/2 of all successful hits, but theyre still only rending on 1/6 of all possible outcomes, same as every other rending weapon, so it kinda sorta makes sense.
that's flawed logic, sure they're rending on 1/6 of all possible outcomes, but they SHOULDN'T be if it's gonna be 50% of the time they hit. E.g.
2+ to hit: 1/5 rending
3+ to hit: 1/4 rending
4+ to hit: 1/3 rending
5+ to hit: 1/2 rending
6+ to hit: ALL FRIGGIN RENDING
if we wanted to go pure fluff and logic route, Bolter rounds would almost never penetrate Power Armor, as in BL novels, they can often take dozens of bolter hits before weakening enough for a space marine to actually be wounded by Bolter rounds. The fact is we need marines to be able to kill each other fairly efficiently, since there are so many of them, and the odds of two marine armies facing each other is so great. And even if you put Bolters at Damage 4, they'd still be wounding a great deal of units on the same values as they would be at Damage 5.
No we don't want marines to be killing each other quickly, look -
7 Bolters in a normal tac squad - 14 shots if didnt move
14 shots, 3+ to hit, ~10 hit. 4+ to wound? 5 Marines dead, in one volley.
why not? I've yet to see an outstanding mechanic of doing this that isnt incredibly slow, and since most units will be homogenous with the exception of leaders, thats going to be the situation anyways.
Whole squads hitting before the other? OP and unrealistic...
why not? I've yet to see an outstanding mechanic of doing this that isnt incredibly slow, and since most units will be homogenous with the exception of leaders, thats going to be the situation anyways.
Current 40k has 9 stats, 3 stats more is a small change. Also turn off many players how? It's not an INSANE number like 18+ or something.
And on that note, i question splitting WS since we could use nearly the same Argument to split Defense into Toughness and Armor, and damage into Strength and Ap.
no it isn't - WS currently is used for the receiving end AND the attacking end. Say it's the same is like saying Defense is the same as Strength, and BS is the same as Stealth.
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
No we don't want marines to be killing each other quickly, look -
7 Bolters in a normal tac squad - 14 shots if didnt move
14 shots, 3+ to hit, ~10 hit. 4+ to wound? 5 Marines dead, in one volley
Yes but thats only in rapid fire range, and you almost never get two tactical squads into rapid fire range with each other. Most of the time its going to be half that, so 2-3 dead marines, which feels about right, considering they're not taking advantage of cover systems. With soft cover (+1 stealth) they would be hitting on 4's, wounding on 4's thats 7 shots, just under 2 wounds. With hard cover (+1 stealth, +1 defense), they're going to be hitting on 4's, wounding on 5's, thats just over 1 wound. I would say this feels pretty good.
Here's some more ideas for using command and leaders. Leaders can expend one command point for going to ground, running, splitting fire, rallying, letting the squad use the leaders morale, overcoming suppresion/shaken or altering it slightly somehow. Essentially taking the "Orders" and giving them to leaders.
that's flawed logic, sure they're rending on 1/6 of all possible outcomes, but they SHOULDN'T be if it's gonna be 50% of the time they hit. E.g.
I agree, but i don't know of a simple alternative.
Whole squads hitting before the other? OP and unrealistic...
That's whats in place right now, and its not OP. As for it being unrealistic...again, we should not be trying to capture realism, we should be trying to capture fun and engaging, and i havn't seen a system that allows for models to trade blows realistically that doesn't slow everything down to a crawl. Every squad is Homogeneous anyways, with the exception of Leaders, so i don't see how a much faster squad of Genestealers is going to trade blows with a relatively slow imperial guard platoon, when they would just bowl over them.
Ok so whats left that we need to talk about? Morale, Integrating the old damage roll (weapon destroyed, immobilized, wrecked, exploded) into the new system somehow, maybe some Universal Special Rules, more ideas on expanding Command, maybe some terrain rules.
Edit: Also, having started playing with new WS and Dexterity assignments, i would probably say you could raise terminators up to 8 Defense, which means they're approaching vehicle level armor, which starts to help that point from earlier about Terminators and the Trukk.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/08/18 15:15:33
Yes but thats only in rapid fire range, and you almost never get two tactical squads into rapid fire range with each other
As of yet, rapid fire is allowing a second shot if you didn't move.
With soft cover (+1 stealth) they would be hitting on 4's, wounding on 4's thats 7 shots, just under 2 wounds.
Remember you can't get your whole army into something like area terrain, there's always going to be things out in the open.
I agree, but i don't know of a simple alternative.
I know of an alternative, and it's pretty easy to understand if you're bright.
As for it being unrealistic...again, we should not be trying to capture realism, we should be trying to capture fun and engaging, and i havn't seen a system that allows for models to trade blows realistically that doesn't slow everything down to a crawl.
It seems like you're discarding reality altogether. Just because you don't know how to make it realistic doesn't mean you immediately resort to the closest and easiest thing. Having your whole opponent throw their attacks at you before you can even make a single swipe is NEITHER fun NOR engaging, but certainly "frustrating".
Edit: Also, having started playing with new WS and Dexterity assignments, i would probably say you could raise terminators up to 8 Defense, which means they're approaching vehicle level armor, which starts to help that point from earlier about Terminators and the Trukk.
Sure, as long you put them at some low Dexterity like 3, akin to Tau..
No time to post right now but your Command ideas seem interesting.
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
Lets try to keep it civil shall we? And as for it being easy to understand, so would multivariable algebra, but if its not fast and relatively easy for new players to understand, i don't see why its a better solution. Im not saying that rending on a to-hit roll of 6+ is the best option, but your system is too complex, if very solid and thought-out, but we need a third direction.
As of yet, rapid fire is allowing a second shot if you didn't move.
Why? The 6th edition version of a rapid fire weapon is the best its ever been, with up to 1 shot like an assault weapon at max range, and a second if you're within 12". Think about what your mechanic means, you are incentivizing these units to stay still and avoid risks, rather than giving bonuses for getting closer and taking more risks, or bonuses for defending against incoming Melee units, which typically wreck a unit with rapid fire weapons.
Remember you can't get your whole army into something like area terrain, there's always going to be things out in the open.
Yes, but i can always keep units out of harms way other ways. Keeping my army more dispersed so that i can take advantage of more terrain, deploying some units off to a side of the table, using vehicles as mobile terrain pieces to block line of sight, using my own units to provide cover for other units, there are many, many ways to avoid having a large chunk of your army out of cover and within LoS.
It seems like you're discarding reality altogether. Just because you don't know how to make it realistic doesn't mean you immediately resort to the closest and easiest thing. Having your whole opponent throw their attacks at you before you can even make a single swipe is NEITHER fun NOR engaging, but certainly "frustrating".
I've never once been charged by a group of genestealers or hormagaunts and thought "im really mad i dont have a chance to strike back", because that high initiative is something i knew beforehand about those units, i expected it, and did my best to plan around it. And you still havn't addressed how to have largely homogeneous units trade blows unevenly without slowing things down. If you have a system that does this, i'd be very interested, but i dont have the slightest idea of how to accomplish it.
Sure, as long you put them at some low Dexterity like 3, akin to Tau..
I did exactly that, actually. currently a terminator is
WS == 6
DEX == 3
BS == 6
STL == 3
DEF == 8
HIT == 1
STR == 6
ATK == 2
MOR == whatever we put for morale
COM == N/A
MOB == 4"
Wasn't trying to offend you But really it seems like a good solution, because you'll only really be able to get rending shots if you fire at full BS or your BS is incredibly high. Someone like Illic would be able to get Rending shots pretty easily.
but your system is too complex, if very solid and thought-out, but we need a third direction.
I know it's a bit ~unorthodox~ but just think how easy it is to use:
Guardians are BS4.
Firing at Marines S4.
Imagine Guardians were -3BS.
Do any shots still hit?
If yes, they're rending.
Now that I look at it I feel like we should up Stealth by one. Because:
1) There is more room for Tank Stealth
2) Just now I was thinking, it's a bit off that you can get Rending shots on a 5+ if you normally hit on a 3+.
3) Previous stated reasons of needing to nerf shooting a bit so things don't die so easily
4) Marines like 5s
using my own units to provide cover for other units
Any ideas for how we can change this? It's neither "realistic" nor that tactically engaging.
For shooting through your own men, I've kinda thought that on a 4+ one of them steps in your line of sight, so you lose a shot. Is that good?
And you still havn't addressed how to have largely homogeneous units trade blows unevenly without slowing things down. If you have a system that does this, i'd be very interested, but i dont have the slightest idea of how to accomplish it.
Just a rough idea, but something somewhat similar (dreaded alliteration again) to one of the ideas ages ago:
Each player rolls a D6; they may assign Strike First attacks to the highest Dexterity models in their unit equal to the difference.
I quite like it, but maybe instead of the highest Dexterity models it can be the closest models?
COM == N/A
I still think all models should have Command - like a rank. Like this
It would dishearten me a bit if 90% of models didn't have a Command stat. And having it like a ranking system would be quite cool, although your "orders" idea can't be implemented like this, because that means the slightest change in Command would mean a massive boost in..everything. We should aim for the variety first, and then flow around that.
Integrating the old damage roll (weapon destroyed, immobilized, wrecked, exploded
Idk, maybe:
1 - No damage
2 - Cannot shoot next turn
3 - Cannot move next turn
4 - Weapon Destroyed
5 - Immobilised
6 - Explodes
maybe some Universal Special Rules
To kick it off:
Fleet - A model with this special rule adds 1" to its Run and Charge distances.
Sharpshooter - A model with this special rule may reroll failed To Hit rolls in ranged combat.
Seasoned Marksman - A model with this special rule may allocate any wounds it causes in ranged combat however it wishes.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2013/08/19 01:26:48
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
But really it seems like a good solution, because you'll only really be able to get rending shots if you fire at full BS or your BS is incredibly high. Someone like Illic would be able to get Rending shots pretty easily.
I agree that it works well, and suits the mechanics of rending well too, unfortunately this is the problem with it
Imagine Guardians were -3BS.
Do any shots still hit?
I have to go back to the universal resolution chart, find where my unit's value on the chart is, then i have to walk it back 3 steps, then go back to the dice and check them. Experienced players in the system would probably be able to do this instantly, if they know the URC fairly well, but new and moderate level players are going to have to deal with these steps. I like it, but we need something more streamlined.
Now that I look at it I feel like we should up Stealth by one. Because:
1) There is more room for Tank Stealth
2) Just now I was thinking, it's a bit off that you can get Rending shots on a 5+ if you normally hit on a 3+.
3) Previous stated reasons of needing to nerf shooting a bit so things don't die so easily
4) Marines like 5s
I would rather see something like a distance modifier when it comes to tanks, something like for every 12" away from the firing model, the vehicles receives a +1 to its stealth value. This way they are MASSIVE targets close up, but more difficult to hit further away, but not overtly so. For instance, a Land Raider could be stealth 1 base, but at 40" away it'd be stealth 4. This would work fairly well for most land tanks, for skimmers, i think we need something like movement stealth modifiers on top of the range modifier, such as for every 12" a skimmer moves, it receives a +1 stealth bonus. Turbo-boosting and Flat-Out could give similar such effects, with many of the Xenos vehicle specialty upgrades making them better, such as the tau shield thing, the eldar star engines, and holo-fields.
Also, yes marines like 5's, but with all the new split stats, they also like some 4's sprinkled in there for things like Dexterity and Stealth, which logically need to be less than the rest of the marine statline since they don't excel in those areas.
Again, id like to see more intuitive ways to let players increase their units stealth or survivability through in-game decisions and tactics rather than just bump everything up. Movement modifiers, range modifiers, etc etc could be options, including things we havnt even thought or heard of yet.
using my own units to provide cover for other units
Any ideas for how we can change this? It's neither "realistic" nor that tactically engaging.
For shooting through your own men, I've kinda thought that on a 4+ one of them steps in your line of sight, so you lose a shot. Is that good?
Yeah its far from realistic and debatably engaging, but tyranids DEPEND on this for their units, as Gaunts are basically just meat-shields that give cover to more important units, and maybe do damage assuming they survive long enough. Guardsman also have tactics that require cover based on other units. I'm not really a fan of losing shots when firing through your own unit, it doesn't make any sense, i admit, but your'e killing tactics like Castling, which many armies depend on when things are stacked against them, and i kinda feel like its just something that would get in the way, as i'd have to make sure that none of my units are in the way, rather than just playing.
Each player rolls a D6; they may assign Strike First attacks to the highest Dexterity models in their unit equal to the difference.
I quite like it, but maybe instead of the highest Dexterity models it can be the closest models?
Hmmmm, idk, i think we need to keep hammering away at this idea. The idea of first strike attacks is interesting, but so many units just have 1 attack, and since charging doesn't give a bonus attack, itd be a bit wasted. I think itd be great for the multi-attack models, like genestealers, orks, gaunts, etc, but lets keep at it.
It would dishearten me a bit if 90% of models didn't have a Command stat. And having it like a ranking system would be quite cool, although your "orders" idea can't be implemented like this, because that means the slightest change in Command would mean a massive boost in..everything. We should aim for the variety first, and then flow around that.
I agree that it'd be annoying to have that stat be N/A or whatever for most of the units, but it makes sense since they lack the authority to issue those orders. As unfortunate as it is, i just think the idea of orders, combined with command "Bubbles" and Command points is too good to pass up, and if having 90% of the models lack a Command stat, so be it. The idea of Command representing seniority or rank is a really cool idea, but it feels more like fluff than mechanics.
As for the Vehicles damage results, i was thinking of looking for a way to ditch the roll altogether, and have the damage roll determine effects somehow. Maybe have for every point above the necessary value to glance, you move up a slot on the damage chart, so a glance would take off a Hitpoint, but 1 above the glance value is shaken, 2 points is stunned, 3 is weapon destroyed, etc etc. Far from a final idea, but its a direction id like to go.
Fleet - A model with this special rule adds 1" to its Run and Charge distances.
Feels a bit weak, maybe have models with fleet be able to run without using a command point, be able to assault after running by using a command point, and/or a movement buff.
Sharpshooter - A model with this special rule may reroll failed To Hit rolls in ranged combat.
LUDICROUSLY overpowered if this is going to be assigned to common units, plus having leaders use a command point for a re-roll type situation might make this redundant. maybe have it work like lance but on infantry, they never count a models Stealth / Defense as being higher than a certain value.
Seasoned Marksman - A model with this special rule may allocate any wounds it causes in ranged combat however it wishes.
Pretty much the same as current 6th edition systems, so i dont see a problem with it.
I have to go back to the universal resolution chart, find where my unit's value on the chart is, then i have to walk it back 3 steps, then go back to the dice and check them. Experienced players in the system would probably be able to do this instantly, if they know the URC fairly well, but new and moderate level players are going to have to deal with these steps. I like it, but we need something more streamlined.
I know what you mean, but it's not that hard, and once you do that method once, you don't have to do it again.
I would rather see something like a distance modifier when it comes to tanks, something like for every 12" away from the firing model, the vehicles receives a +1 to its stealth value. This way they are MASSIVE targets close up, but more difficult to hit further away, but not overtly so. For instance, a Land Raider could be stealth 1 base, but at 40" away it'd be stealth 4.
You know how if you're within half range target gets -1 Stealth? Well I know. If you're over half range target gets +1 Stealth. Easy.
As for the Vehicles damage results, i was thinking of looking for a way to ditch the roll altogether, and have the damage roll determine effects somehow. Maybe have for every point above the necessary value to glance, you move up a slot on the damage chart, so a glance would take off a Hitpoint, but 1 above the glance value is shaken, 2 points is stunned, 3 is weapon destroyed, etc etc. Far from a final idea, but its a direction id like to go.
Yeah but that means Res 12 Land Raiders are gonna be indestructible...
Feels a bit weak, maybe have models with fleet be able to run without using a command point, be able to assault after running by using a command point, and/or a movement buff.
I am approaching cautiously with this command point idea, you know if for example running didn't take up a command point then suddenly you might be able to move run charge shoot or something like that...For something of that reason, I wouldn't like a Command stat to determine how many actions something can do. That should be universal.
LUDICROUSLY overpowered if this is going to be assigned to common units, plus having leaders use a command point for a re-roll type situation might make this redundant. maybe have it work like lance but on infantry, they never count a models Stealth / Defense as being higher than a certain value.
Hmm that does sound like a good idea....Yes I like it.
Sharpshooter - A model with this special rule counts targets with over Stealth 5 as Steath 5. (maybe 6? or even 4?)
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
To sharpshooter, you could probably treat it similarly to poison, like sharpshooter 4 never treats stealth as being higher than 4, sharpshooter 5 would never treat stealth as higher than 5. Would make it a bit more customizable between units, but idk.
Yeah but that means Res 12 Land Raiders are gonna be indestructible
far from perfect idea, but it was a direction i wanted to bring up.
You know how if you're within half range target gets -1 Stealth? Well I know. If you're over half range target gets +1 Stealth. Easy.
having them gain stealth at half to max range feel odd though, doesnt it? Maybe make some sort of 24" barrier that grants +1 stealth if they are beyond it.
I am approaching cautiously with this command point idea, you know if for example running didn't take up a command point then suddenly you might be able to move run charge shoot or something like that...For something of that reason, I wouldn't like a Command stat to determine how many actions something can do. That should be universal.
Agreed, its still a very rough idea for how Command could be implemented, but i was just throwing ideas out there for fleet, and how it could interact with command in some fashion.
having them gain stealth at half to max range feel odd though, doesnt it? Maybe make some sort of 24" barrier that grants +1 stealth if they are beyond it.
Or sort of the same thing as the laser effect: Every 12" away the target gains 1 stealth. This encourages much much MUCH more within 24" play instead of the problems Mahtamori said about camping heavy weapons doing nothing but pew pew from the edge of the table. But we should nerf charge distances a bit, otherwise things will be too easy to assault.
On that note we should lower the normal move distance to 5, yay for Space Marines (lol) and assault armies wont become extremely overpowered.
........................................M..Mk.S...P..R...D...A...V...F..C...Type
Space Marine...................5...5...5...5...5...5...1...1...5...5...
It's too hard not to resist doing this, and it works.
Targets within 12" suffer -1 Stealth. Targets over 24" gain +1 Stealth. (This encourages fairy close range firefights!)
I'M SO HAPPY RIGHT NOW THOUGH, just look at that SM statline!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2013/08/19 05:52:47
650
<- armour save
<- invulnerable save
<- cover save
<- scatter
<- morale check
<- psychic test
Or sort of the same thing as the laser effect: Every 12" away the target gains 1 stealth. This encourages much much MUCH more within 24" play instead of the problems Mahtamori said about camping heavy weapons doing nothing but pew pew from the edge of the table. But we should nerf charge distances a bit, otherwise things will be too easy to assault.
very good point, but if we do the charge range == half mobility rounding down, for most units at mobility 6 thats only a 3 inch charge, thats a huge nerf. I would argue that something like " staring at 24", and increasing by a value of 1 for every additional 12 inches", otherwise there's going to have be either a major recalculation of stealth values on units to account for the new system, or you have a ton of modifiers going on within the ideal battle range of 24" or less.
Id still rather keep average mobility at 6", this way half rounding down is still a respectable 3 inches. Not to mention that dropping it to 5 would make moving between cover and across the field in general just that much harder, which im not in favor of, pus the current set of slow = 4", normal = 6", and fast = 8" feel pretty good, and has clear effects on charge distances.
My friend is a massive, sorry, 
650
)
But really it seems like a good solution, because you'll only really be able to get rending shots if you fire at full