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.

One of the key factors in games like Epic and BFG is blast markers, yet 40k does not make use of this mechanic.

This is surprising because in small unit actions (exactly the kind of platoon/company level engagements that 40k is supposed to be about) suppressing fire is king. You can make people go to ground, retreat or become vulnerable to assault without ever causing a casualty.

So, here's the idea - If a unit with a Ld stat is shot at, place a blast marker next to the unit. If any casualties are caused, place a second blast marker. Repeat each time the unit is shot at, so for example:

A unit of eldar guardians is shot at by an IG inf squad that kills two eldar. The guardians recieve one marker for being shot at and a second for suffering casualties. A second inf squad also shoots at the squad but fails to kill anything, so just one marker is placed. Finally, a Chimera shoots, killing four more eldar. A marker is placed for being shot at by the chim and another for taking casualties.

In total, the eldar have received 5 blast markers. At the end of the turn, each unit not falling back can remove d6 markers. If any are left on the unit it must immediately take a Ld test, modified by the number of markers left on the unit. If this test is failed, the unit must 'go to ground' for the following turn. If the roll is higher than the unmodified Ld, the unit must fall back.

So, to continue the previous example. The eldar roll and remove 2 blast markers leaving them with 3. They then take a Ld test at -3. With eldar Ld of 8 if the roll is 5 or less they would act normally, on a 6, 7 or 8 they would go to ground; 9 or more and they would fall back.

Assaults: units in an assault count as causing 1 more casualty for the purpose of winning an assault if they have fewer blast markers than their enemy. If you win an assault you are buoyed up by your success and remove all blast markers. If you lose and are not caught by a sweeping advance you gain an extra blast marker.

Rallying: if you successfully rally you immediately remove d6 blast markers.



Please pick apart!

IMO, the GtG mechanic works well enough, placing the decision in the hands of the player being shot at.

The point of the change, though, is so that you can force (or try and force) an enemy to go to ground.

That's how suppressing fire works - any kills are a bonus but you do it to stop the enemy attacking you and keep them pinned down in one place.

Chimera_Calvin wrote:That's how suppressing fire works - any kills are a bonus but you do it to stop the enemy attacking you and keep them pinned down in one place.

So you want a benefit for not being able to actually kill models?

I think the game works fine as it is. All this will do is allow armies that can spam out shooting to be able to pin their opponent in place so they do not have to deal with them.

I like it, but then I really like Epic so there you go...

Only real trouble is it still leaves too many fearless units in 40k who'd ignore them.

Need to incorporate the epic version of ATSKNF as well.

Jack

Crossfire'n 40k Eldar & Tau....
*sigh*
I need to find me some Central New York Epic players

There are rules for epic in 40k scale, they work well.

Could get damn unbalanced in a hurry.

I would say one blast marker for being shot at per turn and one for each wound. Terminators aren't going to cower just because it is 70 lasguns instead of 10.

@ OP: Being a fan of Epic and Stargrunt, I see what you are trying to do, but I think part of the problem is some fundamental aspects of 40k psychology, from a fluff perspective:

Orks: Ignore incoming fire because they're crazy and largely just don't give a f***

Space Marines: Massive egos + blind religious faith + some of the BEST ARMOR IN THE GALAXY = tends to ignore incoming fire.

Tyranids: The Hivemind has reserves. Hormagaunts are about as smart as a dog anyway.

Necrons: They're already dead. And they're robots. Dead robots don't care.

Pretty much the only 3 armies that I can see reacting to having bullets whiz pass their ears are the IG, Tau, and Eldar. Introducing a rule that will only have an effect on a comparatively small portion of units seems unnecessary IMO.

Then there's the issue of player reactions like this:

loomisc wrote:So you want a benefit for not being able to actually kill models?

I think the game works fine as it is. All this will do is allow armies that can spam out shooting to be able to pin their opponent in place so they do not have to deal with them.

People play 40k because they want to experience the ridiculous yet awesome mix of Star Wars and death metal. Brutal violence, swirling melees, monsters from beyond, lasers that go *pew pew* and wizards....IN SPAAACE!

If people wanted to fight two forces hunkering down behind cover and fixing each other's positions with talking guns before assaulting the objective they'd play Stargrunt or its refined cousin Fast and Dirty.

Suppressing Fire = Pinning

The problem with Suppressive Fire = Pinning is that only a handful of weapons have that, and pinning checks are largly a joke, as a result of the morale system in 40k being....a joke.

I'm too tired and cranky to make my usual long-winded post in favor of suppressive fire, so I'll do it another time.

Noble713 wrote:@ OP: Being a fan of Epic and Stargrunt, I see what you are trying to do, but I think part of the problem is some fundamental aspects of 40k psychology, from a fluff perspective:

Orks: Ignore incoming fire because they're crazy and largely just don't give a f***

Space Marines: Massive egos + blind religious faith + some of the BEST ARMOR IN THE GALAXY = tends to ignore incoming fire.

Tyranids: The Hivemind has reserves. Hormagaunts are about as smart as a dog anyway.

Necrons: They're already dead. And they're robots. Dead robots don't care.

Pretty much the only 3 armies that I can see reacting to having bullets whiz pass their ears are the IG, Tau, and Eldar. Introducing a rule that will only have an effect on a comparatively small portion of units seems unnecessary IMO.

That's pretty much the reason for 40k's morale system to be redone completely.

It is either largely useless (everything's fearless or Ld10), or unfluffy (orks and chaos marines running away). The fact that all morale is either being unaffected by 3/4 of squad dying or fleeing the battlefield because a tank came near you doesn't help.

HI all.
If you want a tacticaly rich straightforward rule set that fits the 40k background, dont look at the 40k rule set!
It is a thinly veiled marketing devise based on what GW PLC thinks a 13 year old boy would buy because its kewl.

It is impossible to modify the current 40k rule set to improve game play significantly without having to add lots and lots of extra rules .

Its much easier to start from scratch and use more suitable game mechanics. Or simply pick an existing rule set like Stargrunt II that fits your game play expectation more closley, and modify that to suit.

If you want close combat assaults to be important in a game full of ranged weapons .Take a note from some 'WWII sims' four 'F's .
Find the enemy .(Awarness and stealth.)
Fix the enemy in place (Fire power to supress.)
Flank the enemy .(Awareness and stelth.)
Finish them .(Close combat assault)

Rather than let ranged weapons cause horrendous casualties while the protagonists close for close combat.And mitigate this attrition by making most units immune to psychology.

If we were to use more apropriate game mechanics we could include supression in normal shooting resolution and get results from armour without the massive efficiency jumps the AP system inflict,And cover vehicles in the same basic mechanic!

Eg all 'skill stats' are the number of dice thrown.(Bs 3 roll 3 dice, BS 4 roll 4 dice etc.)
All weapon lethality is described as dice score required to supress/kill unarmored target.

And armour values are added to the weapons lethality scores.

EG las gun 3+/5+. firing at a target AR value 1 .Supresses the target on a roll of 4+/ kills a model on a 6+.

Light infantry AR 0 to 1
Medium infantry AR 2 to 3
Heavy infantry AR 4or more.


Small arms keep the single highest scoreing dice.
Support (special -heavy)weapons can add the result of 2 dice for large targets.OR apply up to 2 kill results on normal targets (and supression)
Fire support (Heavy -ord')can add up the result of 3 dice for large targets.Or apply up to 3 kill results on normal targets.(And supression)


For unit interaction as in 40k. 'Small arms fire' is rolled for every group of up to 4 guns firing.
The following 'out gunning 'modifiers apply to small arms.
Firer out numbers target by up to double .+1 to dice result.(Easier to supress get a kill)
Firer out numbers target by double to treble .+2 to dice result.(Can kill up to 2)
Firer outnumbers target by more than treble .+3 to dice result.(Can kill up to 3)

Target outnubers firer by up to double. +1 to weapon scores required.(Harder to supress and kill)
target outnumbers firer by double up to treble.+2 to weapon scores required.
Target outnumbers forer bydouble up to treble +3 to weapon scores required.

Large targets like vehcles and Monstrous creatures can only be supresseed by small arms .
The armour value of vehicles and monstrous creatures (4 to 8) mean only support and fire support weapons can 'kill them.'

Oh I got carried away again, sorry...

TTFN
Lanrak.