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.

Perhaps the multi-wound rules from Fantasy need to be ported. That might make things like Las cannons ad Rail guns actually do their thing. Although I'm not sure it should be MC-specific.

Getting hit with an anti-tank weapon should suck no matter what. But there should be penalties to hit infantry.

In some cases - such as an SM sniping some guy with a Lasconnon- shouldn't the penalty be merely wasted potential?

Bharring wrote:
In some cases - such as an SM sniping some guy with a Lasconnon- shouldn't the penalty be merely wasted potential?

Maybe.

Concur on multiple wounds, preferably multiple wounds saved separately, unlike what AOS does. I'd also favor transitioning all vehicles over to a T/W/Sv system and making them subject to multiple wounds, too, but that would take more extensive balancing.

As I said, I don't like "ha ha, you just die" mechanics, so I'd rather have single shots that force a zillion saves than having the course of an entire game boil down to a single save-or-die.

Martel732 wrote:
Getting hit with an anti-tank weapon should suck no matter what. But there should be penalties to hit infantry.

Well you certainly can hide models in the unit.

Honestly they need to also bring back owner chooses who dies first.

It makes taking snipers a little better, makes people remember that characters have precision shots. and makes it so these brave marines dont hide the super special weapons in the back.

So, how does this sound for relative specifics?

Multiple Wounds should replace the initial wound, not add too it. Otherwise, even +d3 kills too many things more often than not. And having a Las cannons kill a Dread 1/6th of the time but a WL 50% seems wrong.

We could either specify which weapons get Multiple Wounds, or we'd need to come up with specific rules.

As a guideline, here are some thoughts:
Plasma: No
AT Missiles (Krak, Starshot, HK, etc): d2 wounds
Lascannon and company (Bright/Dark Lance too): d3 wounds
Melta: d3 wounds
Rail guns: d6 wounds

One concern I have is that this makes most MCs even less viable than they are now.

The other option would be a 'wounding' table. Perhaps anything s8+ AP3- gets to roll. +1 for ap2, +2 for AP1.
Table:
6: Shaken
7+: D3 wounds

"One concern I have is that this makes most MCs even less viable than they are now. "

Which magical MCs are you worried about? BA are pretty terrified of all of them right now. Smash = my army is dead.

Martel732 wrote:
"One concern I have is that this makes most MCs even less viable than they are now. "

Which magical MCs are you worried about? BA are pretty terrified of all of them right now. Smash = my army is dead.

its going to be nids

its always nids when it comes to bad mc.

(also maybe the dark eldar ones )

Well Nids MCs wreck me, but BA can't shoot and can't fight. I haven't watched many Nids vs Eldar games. I'm guessing scatterlasers wreck them with no effort. Big shocker.

The Dark Eldar MCs aren't actually terrible, but I've never heard of anyone calling them OP, either.

As for 'nid MCs versus scatter lasers, they're T6 with a 3+ (Tyrannofex has a 2+) and they usually don't have FNP - consider how well bolters work against MEQs and extrapolate from there.

Bharring, I kinda like your proposed mechanic, but I'd suggest doing it a little differently. Instead of one successful to-wound roll dealing d2/d3/d6 wounds, I'd do one successful to-hit roll triggers 2/3/4 rolls to wound, exactly as if it had been multiple hits. Less extra rolling steps this way, and less swinginess.

Who cares. If you dont like the weakness of a vehicle then dont buy or use vehicles because its not as good as a mc.

Grief wrote:
Who cares. If you dont like the weakness of a vehicle then dont buy or use vehicles because its not as good as a mc.

Those of us who like the vehicle models care.

If you care about your precious vehicles which you bought from GW, then i have some bad news for you.

GW has your money, and they dont care what you have to say about their vehicle rules because for all they know, you like it and it sells well.

Jade,
I think we disagree fundamentally on one-save-vs-many.

If you get hit by a *rail gun*, there is a chance you're incorporeal (demons invuln) or the rail gun hit the wrong place (stealth/shrouded). But that only gets checked once. Once it gets past that, you're paste. Multiple rolls make it clearly one hit.

Multiple hits per to-wound just make it seem like it actually connects multiple times. Like a grenade or a beam.

Also, the d3/d6 wounds make it more obvious that they don't carry over. If you hit a Space Marine in the face with a rail gun, you k8ll that marine. Not him and five of his friends. (If you wanted to do that, Beam or Blast is the better way to go).

Multiple Wounds felt right in WHFB. Multiple wounds (like Gauss) just don't feel the same.

Martel,
TMCs on foot aren't great.
DPs on foot.
Wraithlord.
Avatars of Khaine.
Squiggies of several varieties.

I understand that only about 10% of the game exists in your meta. But these things do exist for many players.

"But these things do exist for many players."

And they're still better than my entire codex.

Grief wrote:
Who cares. If you dont like the weakness of a vehicle then dont buy or use vehicles because its not as good as a mc.

Well perhaps some of us are not blessed with MC's and are forced to rely on overpriced tanks for our damage output.

Bharring,

I see your point there, and that makes sense. The carryover issue is a good point, too, and one I hadn't considered.

The reason I don't care for "one roll, many wounds" is because it creates the save-or-die scenario, which, at least in my meta, is a big part of the reason people think vehicles are bad. (Besides the fact that vehicles basically act like they have very high T but poor/no saves and relatively few wounds, but that's a separate issue.)

From a fluff perspective, passing some, but not all, saves could represent things like "the beam hit, but just winged the target", or "the daemon was incorporeal, but phased back in just before the railgun dart fully passed through", or any of a number of other "got hurt, but not too badly" cases.

However, I see where you're coming from, and I think the mold introduced by having special rules to ensure that those extra "virtual hits" don't spill onto other models, while actual multiple hits still do, is probably not worth it.

Better would be to rework the statlines of vehicles and MCs in connection with a change like this to make "dead in 1" a real rarity, while "dead in 2-3" is the norm.

Now, I understand that a lot of people want big stompy robots to go away and be replaced with infantry-and-tanks only: that's fine, as far as that goes, but I have roughly the same reaction to that, as Martel did to being told "well, if tanks are garbage, don't use them, you scrub", which is to say, "but I like me some big stompy robots!". What I really want is for one person to be able to take infantry and tanks and the other to be able to take big stompy robots, and they have a roughly fair fight, modulo any rock-paper-scissors effects.

bs.

Your Dreads hit harder than Wraithlords.
Your Dreads cost less than Wraithlords.
Your Dreads survive as well or better vs small/medium arms than Wraithlords.
Your Dreads cost less than Wraithlords.

The Dread can, rarely, Explodes! when hit with heavy anti-tank weaponry.

I wouldn't call Wraithlords better than Dreads.

What about Termies vs Squiggies? Sure, Termies suck. But they suck far less per point than a gargantuan Squiggoth.

Bharring wrote:
Jade,
I think we disagree fundamentally on one-save-vs-many.

If you get hit by a *rail gun*, there is a chance you're incorporeal (demons invuln) or the rail gun hit the wrong place (stealth/shrouded). But that only gets checked once. Once it gets past that, you're paste. Multiple rolls make it clearly one hit.

Multiple hits per to-wound just make it seem like it actually connects multiple times. Like a grenade or a beam.

Also, the d3/d6 wounds make it more obvious that they don't carry over. If you hit a Space Marine in the face with a rail gun, you k8ll that marine. Not him and five of his friends. (If you wanted to do that, Beam or Blast is the better way to go).

Multiple Wounds felt right in WHFB. Multiple wounds (like Gauss) just don't feel the same.

Martel,
TMCs on foot aren't great.
DPs on foot.
Wraithlord.
Avatars of Khaine.
Squiggies of several varieties.

I understand that only about 10% of the game exists in your meta. But these things do exist for many players.

Don't try talking any kind of facts to Martel...

It seems that his BA's must be 100pts/model for a statline of all 1's, and they can only ever take a wet fart gun. That's the only way he can seriously try and claim with a strait face that the majority of MC's, let alone the truly bad MC's are unstoppable against anything he can possibly take.

On the other hand, in the real world, my poor DP has been gunned down by 20 Guardsmen through FRFSRF!.
Just let that sink in for a minute...
Barely 130pts of Guardsmen took the remaining 3 wounds from my 300pts MC!

 master of ordinance wrote:

Grief wrote:
Who cares. If you dont like the weakness of a vehicle then dont buy or use vehicles because its not as good as a mc.

Well perhaps some of us are not blessed with MC's and are forced to rely on overpriced tanks for our damage output.

I am going to paraphrase what some rude trolls on dakkadakka told me.

"Its your fault for choosing that army. Not the infallible GW, they dont write broken nonsensical rules."

If you dont like how your army relies heavily on vehicles for damage output and is weak compared to MC resiliency then play a different army like Tau or Eldar.

Oi gevalt, this got hostile in a hurry...

Can we at least broadly agree that we'd all prefer that there not be any armies that are just plain un-fun to play?

Alright I will apologize if that got too hostile. I wont be replying on this topic anymore.

I hope you and your opponent come to an agreement to balance the whole MC vs Vehicle rules.

have a good day.

Experiment 626 wrote:

Bharring wrote:
Jade,
I think we disagree fundamentally on one-save-vs-many.

If you get hit by a *rail gun*, there is a chance you're incorporeal (demons invuln) or the rail gun hit the wrong place (stealth/shrouded). But that only gets checked once. Once it gets past that, you're paste. Multiple rolls make it clearly one hit.

Multiple hits per to-wound just make it seem like it actually connects multiple times. Like a grenade or a beam.

Also, the d3/d6 wounds make it more obvious that they don't carry over. If you hit a Space Marine in the face with a rail gun, you k8ll that marine. Not him and five of his friends. (If you wanted to do that, Beam or Blast is the better way to go).

Multiple Wounds felt right in WHFB. Multiple wounds (like Gauss) just don't feel the same.

Martel,
TMCs on foot aren't great.
DPs on foot.
Wraithlord.
Avatars of Khaine.
Squiggies of several varieties.

I understand that only about 10% of the game exists in your meta. But these things do exist for many players.

Don't try talking any kind of facts to Martel...

It seems that his BA's must be 100pts/model for a statline of all 1's, and they can only ever take a wet fart gun. That's the only way he can seriously try and claim with a strait face that the majority of MC's, let alone the truly bad MC's are unstoppable against anything he can possibly take.

On the other hand, in the real world, my poor DP has been gunned down by 20 Guardsmen through FRFSRF!.
Just let that sink in for a minute...
Barely 130pts of Guardsmen took the remaining 3 wounds from my 300pts MC!

Explain how you would successfully engage MCs with a generalized BA list.

Guardsmen are considerably more efficient vs MCs than marines because lasguns = bolters vs T6 and FRFSRF is a thing. It's one of the reasons that IG > BA.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:
bs.

Your Dreads hit harder than Wraithlords.
Your Dreads cost less than Wraithlords.
Your Dreads survive as well or better vs small/medium arms than Wraithlords.
Your Dreads cost less than Wraithlords.

The Dread can, rarely, Explodes! when hit with heavy anti-tank weaponry.

I wouldn't call Wraithlords better than Dreads.

What about Termies vs Squiggies? Sure, Termies suck. But they suck far less per point than a gargantuan Squiggoth.

You forgot the relevant stat: it takes 3 X more scatterlaser shots to kill a WL than a dread. Dreads do NOT survive better vs medium arms. That's a fantasy. WL are better than dreads because S6/7 spam is far less effective against them.

Grief wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

Grief wrote:
Who cares. If you dont like the weakness of a vehicle then dont buy or use vehicles because its not as good as a mc.

Well perhaps some of us are not blessed with MC's and are forced to rely on overpriced tanks for our damage output.

I am going to paraphrase what some rude trolls on dakkadakka told me.

"Its your fault for choosing that army. Not the infallible GW, they dont write broken nonsensical rules."

If you dont like how your army relies heavily on vehicles for damage output and is weak compared to MC resiliency then play a different army like Tau or Eldar.

I like my tanks. I do not like that a single wraithknight or Riptide or Stormsurge will destroy all of my tanks in a single turn or two. I hate that they are immune to being OHK'ed whereas my tanks explode. It is just not right.

Leman Russ tanks in particular are super junk now because of all the ways to bypass AV.

A Marine survives twice as many SL shots as a Harlequins. For fewer points. Does that mean Marines are OP?

Neither the Dread nor the WL do well vs SL spam. Not much does.

But which is more common? SL or the combined Shuriken, Pulse, Splinter, and Sniper firepower? SLs are common, but they aren't everything.

As for how to successfullyou engage MCS in a BA list? Same old same old.
Devs with Krak missiles or Lascannons will dent WLS, DPS, or Squiggies reasonably.
Sternies can Hellfire some of them.
Sniper Scouts are good for a few wounds.
PGs can help a little.
Don't Termies win head to head with many of these MCs?

Devs with Krak missiles or Lascannons will dent WLS, DPS, or Squiggies reasonably.

Devs are unplayable garbage.

Sternies can Hellfire some of them.

This is a thing, but they get one good shot and then get assaulted to death.

Sniper Scouts are good for a few wounds.

BA snipers are BS 3. Garbage.

PGs can help a little.

Grav guns help more, but still can't clear enough wounds past the cover saves. The grav gun is the weapon of the have-not marines and is completely overshadowed by the cannon.

Don't Termies win head to head with many of these MCs?

Termies are unplayable garbage.

Termies are unplayable garbage.
+ Termies beat said MCS in CC.

How does that make said MCS OP?

Many of them have the same drawbacks Termies have.

Yes, Vanilla Marines have it better. But even BA can handle the MCS we're talking about.

Bharring wrote:
Termies are unplayable garbage.
+ Termies beat said MCS in CC.

How does that make said MCS OP?

Many of them have the same drawbacks Termies have.

Yes, Vanilla Marines have it better. But even BA can handle the MCS we're talking about.

Try it some time. It's much harder than you think when you can neither shoot well nor fight well.