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.

PenitentJake wrote:
...And we should SHRED anything else. The day an arrow pierces Terminator armour without magical/ psychic augmentation is the day I will complain as much as some of our more notorious Dakkanauts.

This may be just the half-baked buzzword-spouting nature of the lore but if you discount the old fantasy armies hanging out in Cities of Sigmar there are no arrows in Sigmar without magical augmentation.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
...And we should SHRED anything else. The day an arrow pierces Terminator armour without magical/ psychic augmentation is the day I will complain as much as some of our more notorious Dakkanauts.

This may be just the half-baked buzzword-spouting nature of the lore but if you discount the old fantasy armies hanging out in Cities of Sigmar there are no arrows in Sigmar without magical augmentation.

Even those archers are using arrows made out of magic infused materials since each of the realms was once a wind of magic given form as its own world.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
Change coherency to base contact and/or return to blast with simple rules and a smart template, e.g. with a simple phone app, and that fixes everything.

Adding a phone app to the game would be the opposite of 'simple'. And I don't think anyone wants to return to the days of anal retentive players that measure out 2" between everything to minimise blasts or scattering every. Single. Template. All. The. Time.

Removing blast markers was good idea.

Blasts weren't a problem in, say, 4th when you a) didn't have very many, b) they weren't individually as powerful, c) the Ordnance rules made it much harder to fire all of them every turn, and d) you rolled to hit normally and only actually scattered on a miss rather than rolling to scatter for every blast shot, which made blasts either land right where you wanted them to or a long way off. Blasts became a problem when they became a) spammable, b) powerful enough that where the blast landed was the sole determining factor on whether models lived or died, c) much easier to move and fire so you'd get every shot every turn, and d) when they moved to blasts always scattering (2d6-BS)", which made them scatter an inch or two every time you fired them, thereby making fine distinctions important.

Removing blasts was one solution. Toning down the high-S cover-ignoring AP2 blasts, going back to rolling to hit with your blasts, and cutting down on the whining about "if I paid points for it I should always be able to attack with it rather than needing to make gameplay decisions to get shots!" would have been another. Turning blasts into high-ROF weapons, however, was a stupid solution because it turned lots of them into very efficient anti-everything guns.

Lol- I know less about Sigmar than just about everything else go does.

I've got a pair of pet rats, and I'd love to play Skaven; I've got my daemons to cross over... But I can't afford another Gw big game.

Specialist games maybe... But not another big one.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Turning blasts into high-ROF weapons, however, was a stupid solution because it turned lots of them into very efficient anti-everything guns.

If nothing else, you'd have thought they'd have added a line like 'No unit can be hit more times by a Blast weapon than there are models in that unit'.

 vipoid wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Turning blasts into high-ROF weapons, however, was a stupid solution because it turned lots of them into very efficient anti-everything guns.

If nothing else, you'd have thought they'd have added a line like 'No unit can be hit more times by a Blast weapon than there are models in that unit'.

Eh, just means that someone got tagged by more shrapnel than the guy next to him.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Turning blasts into high-ROF weapons, however, was a stupid solution because it turned lots of them into very efficient anti-everything guns.

If nothing else, you'd have thought they'd have added a line like 'No unit can be hit more times by a Blast weapon than there are models in that unit'.

Eh, just means that someone got tagged by more shrapnel than the guy next to him.

Now I've got a mental image of a lone dude seeing a tank aim at him, sighing, and trying as hard as he can to catch and then wrap himself around the shell so that all the shrapnel hits him instead of nearby units because "those are the rules".

To be fair, war stories about folks throwing themselves on grenades to try and save the unit are common enough- it's not like there is no narrative to justify the action.

 vipoid wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Turning blasts into high-ROF weapons, however, was a stupid solution because it turned lots of them into very efficient anti-everything guns.

If nothing else, you'd have thought they'd have added a line like 'No unit can be hit more times by a Blast weapon than there are models in that unit'.

The FW conversion beamer was just a better solution. One shot, but if that one shot kills a model do (d3/d6/2d6/whatever) extra hits to the rest of the unit at a lower profile. Give blasts a mechanical role distinct from high ROF weapons.

PenitentJake wrote:
To be fair, war stories about folks throwing themselves on grenades to try and save the unit are common enough- it's not like there is no narrative to justify the action.

I mean if anyone has seen Captain America, the idea shouldn't be that foreign.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
To be fair, war stories about folks throwing themselves on grenades to try and save the unit are common enough- it's not like there is no narrative to justify the action.

I mean if anyone has seen Captain America, the idea shouldn't be that foreign.

Even having seen that throwing yourself on an impact-fused tank shell is pretty foreign.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
To be fair, war stories about folks throwing themselves on grenades to try and save the unit are common enough- it's not like there is no narrative to justify the action.

I mean if anyone has seen Captain America, the idea shouldn't be that foreign.

Even having seen that throwing yourself on an impact-fused tank shell is pretty foreign.

So is punching a cockroach the size of a double decker bus, and yet you can do that in 40k too.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
To be fair, war stories about folks throwing themselves on grenades to try and save the unit are common enough- it's not like there is no narrative to justify the action.

I mean if anyone has seen Captain America, the idea shouldn't be that foreign.

Even having seen that throwing yourself on an impact-fused tank shell is pretty foreign.

So is punching a cockroach the size of a double decker bus, and yet you can do that in 40k too.

In 9th. Try to do that in 7th without specialized weapons and the cockroach will just eat you.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
To be fair, war stories about folks throwing themselves on grenades to try and save the unit are common enough- it's not like there is no narrative to justify the action.

I mean if anyone has seen Captain America, the idea shouldn't be that foreign.

Even having seen that throwing yourself on an impact-fused tank shell is pretty foreign.

So is punching a cockroach the size of a double decker bus, and yet you can do that in 40k too.

In 9th. Try to do that in 7th without specialized weapons and the cockroach will just eat you.

No one said you'd live after you did it.

Yeah I dunno if "Look out sir! Arrggh!" would work on an artillery shell.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Yeah I dunno if "Look out sir! Arrggh!" would work on an artillery shell.

Depends on if you're an Ogryn or not.

Karol wrote:
For some armies it would be very stupid in matched play. Paladins for example have the option to take 4 heavy weapons if they have a squad that is 10 man strong. If they can be upgraded only twice, not being troop, then the unit can never reach the size of 10.

Uh, no. You can upgrade them as much as you want, just only 4 times.

10 boyz to 30 would be "one upgrade"

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Turning blasts into high-ROF weapons, however, was a stupid solution because it turned lots of them into very efficient anti-everything guns.

If nothing else, you'd have thought they'd have added a line like 'No unit can be hit more times by a Blast weapon than there are models in that unit'.

Eh, just means that someone got tagged by more shrapnel than the guy next to him.

"All shots hit" is just an abstract representation of "direct hit". The blast landed in the middle of whatever you were aiming at and blew up the whole unit. It's not like the shell is causing d6 shrapnel shards to fly at the unit you have shot.

I see no reason why a blast should be able to cause more wounds than there are models in the unit. I firmly believe that causing an explosion in the middle of three guardsmen is totally allowed to cause overkill.

And lastly, the templates weren't perfect either. During 6th and 7th I had a friend who owned a stormsword with this gun:

The Stormsword siege cannon fires enormous, rocket-propelled shells that detonate with vast concussive force. Stormsword gunners are trained to lob their shots low, punching through the ground floors of defensive buildings to bring them tumbling down or carving vast craters beneath foes and pitching them to their doom.

So, imagine this doomsday device hitting a unit of 10 gretchin out in the open with a prefect hit. It is almost impossible for that unit get wiped out by a shell that is supposed to flatten fortifications, because you only get one hit per grot and every one to wound means the grot just walks the "vast concussive force" off.

Our group was actually looking into AoS and this new rule is one of the things that put me off it. Now I'm not very familiar with AoS since I consider the lore garbage and the concept of a double turn disgusting, but maybe they had issues with hordes being too strong. Even if that were the case i'm not sure an artificial limiter like this was the correct answer. Some people like playing with hordes/blocks off infantry and this rule would just completely destroy that as a legal way to build your army.

 the_scotsman wrote:

Karol wrote:
For some armies it would be very stupid in matched play. Paladins for example have the option to take 4 heavy weapons if they have a squad that is 10 man strong. If they can be upgraded only twice, not being troop, then the unit can never reach the size of 10.

Uh, no. You can upgrade them as much as you want, just only 4 times.

10 boyz to 30 would be "one upgrade"

As I read the Sigmar rule "one upgrade" is "add the minimum number of models again to the unit", so a Stormcast Liberators unit (minimum 5) with 10 models has been upgraded once, 15 models upgraded twice, etc. The unit of Boyz at 30 models has been upgraded twice. Karol's complaining about the fact that Paladins have a minimum squad size of 3, which means that limiting them to two size upgrades would put you at a unit of 9, which wouldn't be enough to get four heavy weapons because you unlock that at 10 models. If GW did roll this through to 40k I'd hope that they'd try to be squad size/weapon upgrade aware with it, but knowing GW they probably won't notice and will start deleting units or saying "no, the line that said you can have four guns at ten models is wrong, take that out entirely" three years after making the change.

 Arachnofiend wrote:

PenitentJake wrote:
The day an arrow pierces Terminator armour with magical/ psychic augmentation is the day I will complain as much as some of our more notorious Dakkanauts.

The day is already here I am afraid.

Oh thats hilarious! I forgot they're in 40k!!

I dont see this rule coming into baseline 40k. Maybe in the future used as a mechanic in a codex for internal balance but not a baseline ability.