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.

Right. So we need to be able to combine Gauss' point-stripping with a removal of glances.

Converting vehicles to MC's would solve this. Simply re-write Gauss to be especially effective against MC's.

Like a Necron Grav. Based on Toughness.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"If the Toughness is greater than 5, then Gauss automatically wounds on a 6, and forces the MC to re-roll it's saves against that shot"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or, if it has the vehicle special rule...

Idk. Spitballing here.

 Selym wrote:
Right. So we need to be able to combine Gauss' point-stripping with a removal of glances.

Converting vehicles to MC's would solve this. Simply re-write Gauss to be especially effective against MC's.

Like a Necron Grav. Based on Toughness.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
"If the Toughness is greater than 5, then Gauss automatically wounds on a 6, and forces the MC to re-roll it's saves against that shot"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Or, if it has the vehicle special rule...

Idk. Spitballing here.

Pssshh, Necrons get something like Grav. Only IoM can have those toys.

Im sure its been mentioned before but i personally would prefer to give them an armor save.

Makes it so non dedicated anti tank weapons can be foiled. but a melta will still feth it up like it should.

 Desubot wrote:
Im sure its been mentioned before but i personally would prefer to give them an armor save.

Makes it so non dedicated anti tank weapons can be foiled. but a melta will still feth it up like it should.

Handy. It /does/ mean that no rules outside of the vehicle section needs to be affected, but it does still leave a mess of a ruleset that has been built around the idea of a schizophrenic damage resolution system.

Due to IG and Orks anti vehicles weaponry limitation, sv4 is more appropriate for vehicles getting glanced. When a penetration does occur, a 6++ non critical component is taken.

Its just a bandage idea. nothing comprehensive.

Personally if i had to make my own game system
it would be simplified to
Shooting: BS > effected by cover/effects and stacks in some ways
Damage: STR vs Toughness. with AP and armor being removed.
(all weapons need to be adjusted accordingly. so shooting at a terminator would be literally like shooting a tank.)
Then add some random tables for the different types of things like tanks infantry and monsters for spice. like say you get to roll it IF you roll a 6 to wound unless you require a 6 to wound. and special weapons get specific ways of messing with those tables like a anti tank weapon gets to roll on the table if it wounds at all and such.


Invuls become like ward saves i guess but should be harder to use.

My 2c anyway

You could go the way of Epic, where you had AI and AT values for weapons.

AI was for Anti-Infantry, AT was for Anti-Tank. The AI profile could only be used on Infantry, and AT was only for Tanks.

Some guns had both, like the Battlecannon, some guns only had AI (most standard infantry weapons, like bolters and lasguns), and some only had AT (lascannons).

 Selym wrote:
You could go the way of Epic, where you had AI and AT values for weapons.

AI was for Anti-Infantry, AT was for Anti-Tank. The AI profile could only be used on Infantry, and AT was only for Tanks.

Some guns had both, like the Battlecannon, some guns only had AI (most standard infantry weapons, like bolters and lasguns), and some only had AT (lascannons).

Yep like D legions ironclad rating.

Speaking of which i really like that system.

Remove the damage chart except explodes results.

Or, add the damage table to all wounds that would automatically get through monstrous creature's armor and treat explodes results as d3 wounds.

I don't think glances should be removed entirely, just reduced in effectiveness. Maybe double the current amount of HP every vehicle currently has, glances take of 1 HP, pens take off 2 HP.

Ether that or fixing the table to not remove HPs except on things like immobilize and Weapons. possibly stunned.

and remove glance all together.

though i guess that might make stun locking a thing again.

That could work...

I think what GW was getting at though, was the capacity for IRL penetrating hits to kill crew members. Unfortunately, they missed the part where a tank can take a ludicrous amount of damage before falling apart. A tank does not care if 90% of the armour plating has come off, so long as it has a working gun, a working engine, and working tracks.

Crew numbers may vary.

Ive said before but I think giving 4+ armor to vehicles and 3+ armor to either certain vehicles (maybe AV12 and up facings on non skimmers) or let the heavy armor (and equivalent) upgrade give 3+ armor. It would nerf stuff like gauss and scatter laser spam (the immortal's gauss would be more attractive with it being AP4), still let auto cannons type weapons be equally useful against non heavy armor vehicles (skimmers and flyers so it forces jinks), and has no impact on the big hitting weapons like Krak missiles, lascannons, rail guns, melta, plasma. Grav would need to be adjusted to ensure it only works on 6s for vehicles.

What if your to hit roll affected your ability to cause an explodes or immobilized result? You know, for simulating having to hit a vital point. Only to hits of 5 and 6 have access to explodes or immobilized, everything else only has access to the rest of the damage chart?

"Any to-hit roll of less than a 6 receives a -1 on the damage table"

Sounds like a good idea, but that would make half or all Ork hits get the bonus.

I think doubling hull points would absolutely overpower vehicles. A soul grinder with 8 hp's? A rhino with 6? A freaking drop pod with 6? Sounds like a bad idea to me. All we would see is vehicles and melta spam then.

And meltaspam makes the whole extra HP thing redundant.

This is not going to be an easy solution.

I was thinking about orks when i typed that, and thought it would be relatively okay because they dont have many high strength AT in the first place, do they?

Okay, okay, I got one:

Double Hull Points.

Bear with me.

Replace the damage table with HP Reductors.

Aha!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AncientSkarbrand wrote:
I was thinking about orks when i typed that, and thought it would be relatively okay because they dont have many high strength AT in the first place, do they?

Lodsa Str 7 for HP stripping, and Power Klawz and Rokkit Launchaz for Penning. Usually Str 8.

I would think that would be moderately balanced if they get more statistically reliable damage on their to hits then, considering the d/melta/lance/str10 other factions get that have higher bs.

I kinda think using the to hit roll to limit damage might really be a decent solution. Might try it out with my group once and see how it goes.

Its starting to sound way complicated.

If anything another simple slight buff to vehicles would be the to hit rolls against vehicles in combat. should be based on how fast it goes.


Something like 3+ for a stationary 4+ for moving 5+ for crusing 6+ for flat out.

I could dig that. Bonus points for Russes, who'd never have to sacrifice firepower for defence, but have a cap on speed.

That's easy. Introduce Crippled table to MC. Now both vehicles and MC suck and everyone's running hordes bike spam like it should be.

AncientSkarbrand wrote:I think doubling hull points would absolutely overpower vehicles. A soul grinder with 8 hp's? A rhino with 6? A freaking drop pod with 6? Sounds like a bad idea to me. All we would see is vehicles and melta spam then.

Why are you complaining that mine makes them OP when its only doing half as much as what people have been suggesting of completely removing glances? It keeps penetrating hits exactly the same if they strip 2 HP at once, but glances only do half as much as they do currently, rather than nothing at all, which is what others were suggesting.

Desubot wrote:Its starting to sound way complicated.

If anything another simple slight buff to vehicles would be the to hit rolls against vehicles in combat. should be based on how fast it goes.

Something like 3+ for a stationary 4+ for moving 5+ for crusing 6+ for flat out.

Well done you just hit melee armies with another nerf and made them even less viable.

I think Glancing Hits should be kept in, however instead of losing a HP on a glance you roll on a Glancing Hit Table and apply AP modifiers:

1-3: Nothing happens
4-5: Crew Shaken
6: Crew Stunned
7+: Crew Stunned, -1HP

A vehicle firing Snap Shots is a huge reduction in effectiveness, allowing you to survive it's next turn so you can get your Boyz in closer/bring your Lascannons to bear on your next turn. Keep the Pen table as-is, so the only way to really strip HP is to actually penetrate the armour.

Also, all Vehicle weapons should be able to fire independently at different targets, representing that they have multiple crew members inside. That alone would be a huge reason to take Vehicles over Monstrous Creatures. Imagine a Land Raider Redeemer that might actually be able fire both its Flamestorm Cannons!!!

The idea has merits, but you've just made vehicles almost unstoppable...

Vehicles are just fine the way they are, can't see why people scream all over about them. Vehicles are seriously cheaper than equivalent MC's unless you factor in specific broken stuff like WK's. Actually if you think outside the box of GMCs and super heavies (and you should, we are talking 40k here, not apoc, bringing apoc units into 40k is a bad move and we should not make a second bad move to try and undo the first one, that's how waterfall effects happen) then vehicles are doing just good. A tri-las predator costs 140 pts and has a front armor of 13, equivalent to a Toughness 9. This is very very cheap for what it does. It should not be any more sturdy because MC's that cost 140 pts don't do half as much as what a trilas predator does. Arguments stating that "WK is too stronk while a rhino dies easier are very very bad arguments. A 250 pt tank (LR) is actually more durable than any 250 pt MC discounting Nurgle DP's. A 100 pt dreadnought is sturdier than a 120 pt carnifex etc etc etc. Not all vehicles are rhinos and not all MC's are WK's.

topaxygouroun i wrote:
Vehicles are just fine the way they are, can't see why people scream all over about them. Vehicles are seriously cheaper than equivalent MC's unless you factor in specific broken stuff like WK's. Actually if you think outside the box of GMCs and super heavies (and you should, we are talking 40k here, not apoc, bringing apoc units into 40k is a bad move and we should not make a second bad move to try and undo the first one, that's how waterfall effects happen) then vehicles are doing just good. A tri-las predator costs 140 pts and has a front armor of 13, equivalent to a Toughness 9. This is very very cheap for what it does. It should not be any more sturdy because MC's that cost 140 pts don't do half as much as what a trilas predator does. Arguments stating that "WK is too stronk while a rhino dies easier are very very bad arguments. A 250 pt tank (LR) is actually more durable than any 250 pt MC discounting Nurgle DP's. A 100 pt dreadnought is sturdier than a 120 pt carnifex etc etc etc. Not all vehicles are rhinos and not all MC's are WK's.

Sturdier against...bolt guns? If so, you are correct. If not, think of this. Gauss. Gauss will would that Riptide on a 6, but it gets a 2+ armor and a FNP roll. It will also glance that Land Raider or Dreadnaught on a 6, with no saves of any kind allowed. Also, you could have a whole squad of Melta or Lascannons shoot at a Riptide/Dreadknight/Bloodthirster, ext, and they would get an invuln save, plus a FNP occasionally. A vehicle would be dead after 2+ Melta guns, because damage chart.

Even if we consider the different USRs that effect each unit type, vehicles are boned even more. Poison wounds on a set number, but most of the time still allows armor saves (dependent on the actual weapon, but rarely do poison weapons have decent AP). Haywire, on a 2+ that vehicle takes damage, and vehicles don't have armor saves or FNP. Fleshbane: okay, wounds on a 2+, not bad. Armourbane: essentially melta, which will cause for a vehicle to explode a lot more easily from a single hit. And then there's Melta, which has absolutely no effect on MCs, and will eat a vehicle alive.

I'm inclined to just slot "wrecked" back into the damage chart at position 6, and change it so running out of hull points make glances penetrate.

It's not as overpowered as doubling hull points, but it still gives you a good bit of survivability after being stripped of HP. By the same token, the possibility of a wreck keeps vehicles from barreling through penetrating hit after hit, and allows low strength weapons to eventually be able to take down a vehicle.

It's also fairly simple.

 GoonBandito wrote:

Also, all Vehicle weapons should be able to fire independently at different targets, representing that they have multiple crew members inside. That alone would be a huge reason to take Vehicles over Monstrous Creatures. Imagine a Land Raider Redeemer that might actually be able fire both its Flamestorm Cannons!!!

Ah, yes, completely forgot about this. MCs can move 6 inches and fire 2 weapons. Some can even move 12" and fire 2 weapons. Vehicles move 6" and can fire 1 weapon effectively. How is that even fair?