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.

 koooaei wrote:
It's simple. To wound a chapter master you now need 6 * 6 * 6 = 216 attacks from ws4 s4 or lower models. Up from 72 attacks. You think it's fine? 216 attacks to wound?

Uh, are you looking at the same chart?


As you can see on this updated chart (which is in both the first post AND another post in this thread) Marines hit a Chapter Master on a 4+, which what they currently do. Also why are you chaining 6's together. A model who has a 1/6 chance of hitting and a 1/2 of wounding against a model who saves 5/6 of his wounds would not be 6*6*6. It'd be 1/6*3/6*1/6 which is 1/72 that he'd take a wound. Which is higher odds than rolling the same number on a die 3 times in a row (which is 1/216).

Oh, sorry, not 6+, 4+ there? so stuff ain't changing for ws 4 vs cm. but ws 3 is 2 times worse.

Vs Daemon Prince with 3+: ws4 s3 - 108 attacks and ws4 s4 - 54 attacks also.

That's also 2 times worse than it's now.

I've messed up with the table chart a bit, but fixed now

Anywayz, from my gaming experience as orks vs daemons, it alwayz ends up in mellee vs daemon princes no matter how shooty we both are.

 koooaei wrote:
Oh, sorry, not 6+, 5+ there? so stuff ain't changing for ws 4 vs cm.

Vs Daemon Prince with 3+: ws4 s3 - 108 attacks and ws4 s4 - 54 attacks also.

That's exactly 2 times more attacks needed than it's now.

Which would be a lot more on par with the setting I think than the way things are now. Also compare points of ow much that tooled up FMC DP costs versus that squad of Marines. He'a fair bit more I bet.

Agree with it or not, you cannot deny that the way melee combat works really fits the feel of the universe and the effectiveness at killing some of these models should have on the table.

I just think the existing ws table is allready fine. You're not always hitting with a sword in mellee. You have pistols, rifles, other stuff usable in close quarters. And from ballance point of view i'm just suggesting to drop this changes to ws table. Hitting on 5+ and 3+ is really enough. You'll encounter such situations where models will become ws1 occasionally. And hitting on 2+ and 6+ will mess things up. I like the other changes you propose. Especially consolidating into another combat. Some old rules need a return, i think.

That's just my opinion. I suggest you to playtest your WS rules in extreme situations like i've pointed out. WS 9-10 models vs ws4 models. WS 6 models vs WS 3 ones. Don't playtest it vs shooty armies like tau and eldar. There's gona be no difference. You're still wrecking face if you get in mellee. The difference will be brutal for other mellee guyz. Playtest it vs Tyranids, Orks, CSM, necron wraiths+lords. The ones who actually want to get close and personal from time to time.

I don't mind your changes (we've already altered the table somewhat) but unlike the ballistic table re-rolls your chart isn't a sliding scale. Maybe it should read (2+/6+), (2+/5+), etc?

 amanita wrote:
I don't mind your changes (we've already altered the table somewhat) but unlike the ballistic table re-rolls your chart isn't a sliding scale. Maybe it should read (2+/6+), (2+/5+), etc?

Originally it was a sliding scale but there isn't a lot of room for that much variation anymore.

Might look at dropping the re-rolls for a straight 2+ and perhaps stretching some of the sections out a touch more but overall I think it's pretty close to being fairly dead-on to what would work well in the game without breaking the thing (as keeps being insisted on what will happen if this gets used).

Non-sliding scale? Yuck.

The to-hit rules should be simple and uniform, the scale just a visual representation of them for idiots and lazy people.

Having to actually check the chart in case for whatever reason, this to-hit matchup gets a random modifier... nah bro

 Dakkamite wrote:
Non-sliding scale? Yuck.

Well it went from a 2+/2+ incrementally all the way to a 6+ but there was a lot of protesting that it made WS 5 and 6 too good.

 Dakkamite wrote:
The to-hit rules should be simple and uniform, the scale just a visual representation of them for idiots and lazy people.

So about 80% of the wargamers out there then? Because I've known a lot of people too lazy to learn all the rules.

Let other people be as lazy as they want. I know that the rules, as is, are "3+ to hit if better, and 3+ to get hit if doubly better" and so don't need to refer to a chart. Also haven't seen a player refer to that chart in at least a year, so its not like I'm a unique case here.

Melee is gak enough as it is without making it tedious on top of that. And hard enough to use without having to keep in mind that random WS matchups are different somehow.

Personally, would make it something like
-If equal, 4+/4+
-If one better, 3+/4+
-If two better, 3+/5+
-If three better, 2+/5+
-If four better, 2+/6+
-If even better than that, pat yourself on the back

Or alternatively, the higher WS player is able to choose his modifiers. Start at 4+/4+, and if you are say 2 WS higher, you can choose to improve your hit chance by 2, or make theirs 2 worse, or split the effect.

Or a hybrid system. If one better becomes 3+/4+ or 4+/5+. If two better you get both. If three better you again choose where to get the bonus.

How about we make it possible to get into assault before we monkey around with WS vs WS? Just saying

Lol, one thing at a time I reckon.

Best suggestion IMO is the whole consolidate from melee to melee thing. Everything else is just gravy

WS is a garbage-time stat, I agree. But there are just way worse problems out there. I'll take my chances with high WS Eldar if I could just get to them.

Wait, doesn't Clockwork's revised table say WS:4 hits WS:6 (a Chapter Master) on a 4+? That's 50% of the time. I don't see how you'd need a 6, let alone two 6's in a row.

 SisterSydney wrote:
Wait, doesn't Clockwork's revised table say WS:4 hits WS:6 (a Chapter Master) on a 4+? That's 50% of the time. I don't see how you'd need a 6, let alone two 6's in a row.

They were looking at the old one (or at least referencing it) which had that at a 6+ because of the incremental shifts. That was later changed to a 4+ through revisions.

About Howling Banshees:

Assuming the Howling Banshees haven't charged, there's about 30% chance that 1 Howling Banshee kills 1 Space Marine and 16,67% chance that 1 Space Marine kills 1 Howling Banshee. Other rules and points aside, would you say that these chances are as they should be and that Howling Banshees' only problem is not having an Assault transport?

Chaospling wrote:
About Howling Banshees:

Assuming the Howling Banshees haven't charged, there's about 30% chance that 1 Howling Banshee kills 1 Space Marine and 16,67% chance that 1 Space Marine kills 1 Howling Banshee. Other rules and points aside, would you say that these chances are as they should be and that Howling Banshees' only problem is not having an Assault transport?

And assault grenades.

And being efficient against anything besides MEQs and SEQs (Sister equivalent units) while the Scorpion with it's greater number of harder hitting attacks, stealth, grenades, and MEQ saves means that they are better against literally everything else by miles and aren't actually that much worse than banshees against their preferred targets.

Banshees are just bad.

Not Pyrovore level bad, but bad.

Which is too bad because the fluff is pretty cool.