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.
2020/05/11 19:00:47
Subject: Invulnerables should work as a modifier like cover
Martel732 wrote: "Big, tough models with Invulns are problematic"
That's my focus. AT guns in this game aren't AT guns.
I just don't think marine capts should be able to take melta to the face, either. Iron halos are stupid.
At least the cultists can't magically shrug it off. Makes no sense to me.
agreed that really, big tough models shouldn't have invulns. Their thing is lots of wounds and high toughness, and invulns shouldn't be there.
That, or they should lose their invuln as their stats degrade - knights going from 4++ to 5++ to 6++ as they degrade would be a way to reduce the issue.
IIRC Iron Halo's are a force field, so yeah, they should be able to take anything to the face, because the shot was stopped before it hit them - so technically, it never reached the face.
I wonder if Meltas would fit their beastly description and their power of old if they simply did 6 damage in half range. you still have to hit and get through the invuln i know, but you know it'll be worth it in half range.
12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!
Martel732 wrote: "Big, tough models with Invulns are problematic"
That's my focus. AT guns in this game aren't AT guns.
I just don't think marine capts should be able to take melta to the face, either. Iron halos are stupid.
At least the cultists can't magically shrug it off. Makes no sense to me.
agreed that really, big tough models shouldn't have invulns. Their thing is lots of wounds and high toughness, and invulns shouldn't be there.
That, or they should lose their invuln as their stats degrade - knights going from 4++ to 5++ to 6++ as they degrade would be a way to reduce the issue.
IIRC Iron Halo's are a force field, so yeah, they should be able to take anything to the face, because the shot was stopped before it hit them - so technically, it never reached the face.
I wonder if Meltas would fit their beastly description and their power of old if they simply did 6 damage in half range. you still have to hit and get through the invuln i know, but you know it'll be worth it in half range.
To be honest it's not invulnerable saves it's the wounding chart and a number of factors that mean more shots are always better.
Also everyone loves to claim Knights are the problem child like seriously most lists can lift 2 or more 400 point models of the table in one turn and you want to make them more easy to kill, like the game is overly leathal cranking it up to being able to kill roughly 60% of their list turn one is not good for the game, heck being able to kill 40% of their list or more in one turn I would argue isn't grrat either but in 8th loosing 30+% seems to be the expectation.
You hit invulnerable saves because of the design choices made at the start of 8th most marines now start at -2AP and -3AP on basic bolter troops a lascannon is -3AP and a knights thermal cannon AKA gaint titan killing melta weapon is AP-4 A Hellblaster can be magical walking around with AP-5 plasma FFS meaning it's not practical to say lets just ban invulnerable saves as your just saying no saves for vehicals ever.
Now if vehicals had 1+ or 2+armour saves or strength actually mattered (and someone hadn't had a fap attack writing plasma stats) it might be less of an issue but the way it is, invulnerable saves are necessary for vehicals against even basic marines now.
2020/05/12 09:04:15
Subject: Invulnerables should work as a modifier like cover
To be honest it's not invulnerable saves it's the wounding chart and a number of factors that mean more shots are always better.
Also everyone loves to claim Knights are the problem child like seriously most lists can lift 2 or more 400 point models of the table in one turn and you want to make them more easy to kill, like the game is overly leathal cranking it up to being able to kill roughly 60% of their list turn one is not good for the game, heck being able to kill 40% of their list or more in one turn I would argue isn't grrat either but in 8th loosing 30+% seems to be the expectation.
You hit invulnerable saves because of the design choices made at the start of 8th most marines now start at -2AP and -3AP on basic bolter troops a lascannon is -3AP and a knights thermal cannon AKA gaint titan killing melta weapon is AP-4 A Hellblaster can be magical walking around with AP-5 plasma FFS meaning it's not practical to say lets just ban invulnerable saves as your just saying no saves for vehicals ever.
Now if vehicles had 1+ or 2+armour saves or strength actually mattered (and someone hadn't had a fap attack writing plasma stats) it might be less of an issue but the way it is, invulnerable saves are necessary for vehicles against even basic marines now.
I agree that it would make sense for vehicles to have better than 2+ saves, and also for AP of anti-tank to scale appropriately (AP-4 to hunt a titan is somewhat meh!), and for a 1+ save or better to render the unit immune to damage.
That way people can keep the ability to glance light vehicles to death using lasguns, but they won't do squat to a titan - as they shouldn't!
I think the only way to reduce killiness in a game with such a scale range as 40k does now is to bring back redundancy. Make weapons stop hurting things with high enough toughness.
I personally feel that the maths would be easier to scale if we didn't have "double" or "half" involved in the mechanics, instead having t = S+1, 5+ to wound, T=S+2or3, 6+ to wound, T=S+4, cannot wound.
Similarly with armour saves - 1+ saves cannot be hurt. So if you want to hurt a terminator in cover, AP0 won't cut it. Or, make 1+ saves rerollable, or something.
Then vehicles can reduce their wound counts, and some weapons can reduce their damage, and leave weapons which do 3-6 damage as actually causing serious hurt to tanks.
I seriously think that there's an issue with the rules when infantry can stab a tank and actually have a chance of doing damage!
12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!
", because the shot was stopped before it hit them -"
I think personal force fields should have limits. Limits that end at AT guns to the face. Just because it's a "force field" doesn't mean it should treat everything the same.
Martel732 wrote: "Big, tough models with Invulns are problematic"
That's my focus. AT guns in this game aren't AT guns.
I just don't think marine capts should be able to take melta to the face, either. Iron halos are stupid.
At least the cultists can't magically shrug it off. Makes no sense to me.
agreed that really, big tough models shouldn't have invulns. Their thing is lots of wounds and high toughness, and invulns shouldn't be there.
That, or they should lose their invuln as their stats degrade - knights going from 4++ to 5++ to 6++ as they degrade would be a way to reduce the issue.
IIRC Iron Halo's are a force field, so yeah, they should be able to take anything to the face, because the shot was stopped before it hit them - so technically, it never reached the face.
I wonder if Meltas would fit their beastly description and their power of old if they simply did 6 damage in half range. you still have to hit and get through the invuln i know, but you know it'll be worth it in half range.
To be honest it's not invulnerable saves it's the wounding chart and a number of factors that mean more shots are always better.
Also everyone loves to claim Knights are the problem child like seriously most lists can lift 2 or more 400 point models of the table in one turn and you want to make them more easy to kill, like the game is overly leathal cranking it up to being able to kill roughly 60% of their list turn one is not good for the game, heck being able to kill 40% of their list or more in one turn I would argue isn't grrat either but in 8th loosing 30+% seems to be the expectation.
You hit invulnerable saves because of the design choices made at the start of 8th most marines now start at -2AP and -3AP on basic bolter troops a lascannon is -3AP and a knights thermal cannon AKA gaint titan killing melta weapon is AP-4 A Hellblaster can be magical walking around with AP-5 plasma FFS meaning it's not practical to say lets just ban invulnerable saves as your just saying no saves for vehicals ever.
Now if vehicals had 1+ or 2+armour saves or strength actually mattered (and someone hadn't had a fap attack writing plasma stats) it might be less of an issue but the way it is, invulnerable saves are necessary for vehicals against even basic marines now.
Yes. I want IKs to be easier to kill. AT guns should work on them and be valuable against them. They aren't. In fact, they are just about the worst weapons for engaging them. The whole point of an AT gun is a single shot that denies all saves, so its reliable.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2020/05/12 12:16:05
2020/05/12 12:24:58
Subject: Invulnerables should work as a modifier like cover
Martel732 wrote: ", because the shot was stopped before it hit them -"
I think personal force fields should have limits. Limits that end at AT guns to the face. Just because it's a "force field" doesn't mean it should treat everything the same.
Martel732 wrote: "Big, tough models with Invulns are problematic"
That's my focus. AT guns in this game aren't AT guns.
I just don't think marine capts should be able to take melta to the face, either. Iron halos are stupid.
At least the cultists can't magically shrug it off. Makes no sense to me.
agreed that really, big tough models shouldn't have invulns. Their thing is lots of wounds and high toughness, and invulns shouldn't be there.
That, or they should lose their invuln as their stats degrade - knights going from 4++ to 5++ to 6++ as they degrade would be a way to reduce the issue.
IIRC Iron Halo's are a force field, so yeah, they should be able to take anything to the face, because the shot was stopped before it hit them - so technically, it never reached the face.
I wonder if Meltas would fit their beastly description and their power of old if they simply did 6 damage in half range. you still have to hit and get through the invuln i know, but you know it'll be worth it in half range.
To be honest it's not invulnerable saves it's the wounding chart and a number of factors that mean more shots are always better.
Also everyone loves to claim Knights are the problem child like seriously most lists can lift 2 or more 400 point models of the table in one turn and you want to make them more easy to kill, like the game is overly leathal cranking it up to being able to kill roughly 60% of their list turn one is not good for the game, heck being able to kill 40% of their list or more in one turn I would argue isn't grrat either but in 8th loosing 30+% seems to be the expectation.
You hit invulnerable saves because of the design choices made at the start of 8th most marines now start at -2AP and -3AP on basic bolter troops a lascannon is -3AP and a knights thermal cannon AKA gaint titan killing melta weapon is AP-4 A Hellblaster can be magical walking around with AP-5 plasma FFS meaning it's not practical to say lets just ban invulnerable saves as your just saying no saves for vehicals ever.
Now if vehicals had 1+ or 2+armour saves or strength actually mattered (and someone hadn't had a fap attack writing plasma stats) it might be less of an issue but the way it is, invulnerable saves are necessary for vehicals against even basic marines now.
Yes. I want IKs to be easier to kill. AT guns should work on them and be valuable against them. They aren't. In fact, they are just about the worst weapons for engaging them. The whole point of an AT gun is a single shot that denies all saves, so its reliable.
So you want to take the most already rediculously leathal edition and make 400-500 point models which most armies can already kill two of per turn and make them easier to kill so people can what kill 1500 points worth of an opponent list turn 1, your not asking for balance your just wanting tobmake entire armies unplayable.
Also FFS bloodangles shooting at vehicals, seriously WTAF it's the CC army which people win quite easily with thunderhammers and powerfists against vehicals and your complaining thag lascannons and melta suck?
2020/05/12 12:30:48
Subject: Invulnerables should work as a modifier like cover
Yes, things would have to be rebalanced. Don't care. It's stupid beyond all reason that AT guns don't function as AT guns. Give IKs more wounds. Make them cheaper. Just make AT guns effective vs their intended targets.
BA are CC bullies, not a CC army. I'm looking ahead for when the current lists won't work. They only work now because marine players are greedy and build in weakness to tripointing into their lists.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/12 12:31:21
2020/05/12 16:57:54
Subject: Invulnerables should work as a modifier like cover
BaconCatBug wrote: Oh I agree the system doesn't really work all that well, but that's because it has to account from Grots to Knights. If Flyers and LoW were removed from the game it would be a lot easier to balance with such a system.
The limitation of a D6 system is also an issue. My idea for my own system was to use D12s, and replace invulnerable saves with an Ignore AP characteristic.
Why d12s and not 2d6 as with termies in the days of yore? d6s also afford the possibility of making doubles and certain combinations or sums do different stuff... say, one faction may favor 8s for instance, or hate 9s. There are different ways to make 8s or 9s and so with the reroll mechanic (that appears frankly overused) this could be useful game design.
Most armor is d6. Some armor is 2d6. With bad luck or offensive bonuses, a bolter might wound a teminator, but it will still pay to invest in assault cannons and melta guns. Vaporize power armor, and get a good chance of hurting a terminator.
About the original post and suggestion, why not both? Use involnerables for things like refractor fields, and use AP to push armor saves ionto the 2d6 range.
I am late to this thread and have not read every page so maybe this was proposed earlier.
For this matter, I suppose that dreadnoughts may have 3d6, and knights 4d6. This helps to stop guardsmen from wounding knights, unless with massed autocannon or melta fire... and heavy weapons platforms, tanks, and so on.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/05/12 17:00:43
.
2020/05/12 19:25:37
Subject: Invulnerables should work as a modifier like cover
BaconCatBug wrote: Oh I agree the system doesn't really work all that well, but that's because it has to account from Grots to Knights. If Flyers and LoW were removed from the game it would be a lot easier to balance with such a system.
The limitation of a D6 system is also an issue. My idea for my own system was to use D12s, and replace invulnerable saves with an Ignore AP characteristic.
Why d12s and not 2d6 as with termies in the days of yore?
Because a) Bell Curves and b) Good luck making 15 or more saves on 2D6 in a reasonable timeframe.
D12's are the superior dice as they can represent 5 different dice types (6 if you're silly and consider the D1 a dice) and allow for a lot more variation. You can have different BS values between Fire Warriors and Crisis Suits, between Sisters of Battle/Scions and Space Marines. You can properly represent toughness on a more granular scale rather than everything clumping at T4 and T8.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/05/12 19:45:27
