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.

sigh......

I was lighting this squad up with plasma guns, and my enemy takes up to 2 wounds with the regular guys and 3 on the leader.

kinda stupid because the regular guys die from instant death from the plasma, yet he is able to take 2 wounds out on them..... ridiculous


even though I absolutely *devastated* him with plasma, he still has his leader left because he soaked up the fire with wound-wrapping from a weapon that inflicts instant death to his units.

The problem I have with wound-wrapping is that sometimes it doesn't matter how much you wound them. The result would have been the same if I had dealt 3 less wounds to his guys.

this is new, how?

oh, so it's not just me who's fed up with the bullcrap?

If you want to counter-game the system, why didn't you fire fewer regular guns?

It's just the way the rules are. Sometimes you have your boys hold fire and only shoot AP weapons.

Dead bodies can still get hit, can't they?

Play Napoleonics. It never happens.

Uh huh. Op try playing against a tau player or someone else that effectively needs wound allocation to keep their army going. It's nothing new and it's one reason why nob bikers are kinda feared. Instead of what you did, fire with another squad first and soften them up, then shoot like you did. Less dudes there means more wounds on the enemy models and more chances for them to pile up on the guy you want to kill.

I'm a little puzzled as to what there is to be 'fed up' with. It's just a part of how the current system works, and is in line with the current philosophy to encourage people to use more big blocks of troops.

Just means that if you want to guarantee that you take out the character, you need to use more firepower.

but it doesn't make any sense. With the current system sometimes wounding them MORE actually doesn't do anything.

that is what is broken about it.

redguardsman wrote:but it doesn't make any sense. With the current system sometimes wounding them MORE actually doesn't do anything.

that is what is broken about it.

It's a pretty rare case, but yeah, it happens. Compared to the previous versions, it's a marked improvement.

It's also one reason unit champions and their wargear is so expenisve. They really are expected last that long.

insaniak wrote:I'm a little puzzled as to what there is to be 'fed up' with. It's just a part of how the current system works, and is in line with the current philosophy to encourage people to use more big blocks of troops.

Just means that if you want to guarantee that you take out the character, you need to use more firepower.

Here's most peoples problem(or at the very least mine): Say you want to attach a 3 wound character to a squad with 1 wound on each model to soak up shots at the squad. With the current system, you would have to eliminate all of the 1 wound models before the 3 wound model could take another one. It sort of stifles strategy, IMO.

The problem is that more shooting often results in fewer wounds, and is particularly a problem with gun tanks (e.g. Leman Russ fires it's battlecannon and three heavy bolters, should have just fired the battlecannon)

GW wanted to make it so that upgrades weren't always the absolute last models to die, but this then resulted in that system being gamed to reduce total casualties taken and in some cases makes it *harder* to kill off those upgrades.

I'd love to see 6E go back to 4E's wound allocation mechanics. The current system is something many (most) players don't currently actually do correctly (or at all) anyway, and is often either ignored or abused. Too fiddly, takes up too much time, and too abuseable.

I just simply play the game wrong, in order to make it right. Yes, your unit with the powerful wargear will likely be the last man standing, but me and my friends do not like current wound allocation, and, as a result, if you fail 10 saves on 5 2 wound models, you are taking the entire squad off, no "well, I allocated the wounds this way, so these few survive..." We have none of that.

Polonius wrote:

redguardsman wrote:but it doesn't make any sense. With the current system sometimes wounding them MORE actually doesn't do anything.

that is what is broken about it.

It's a pretty rare case, but yeah, it happens. Compared to the previous versions, it's a marked improvement.

Yeah, actually it's worse than that. In close combat, for example, you MUST attack with everyone who can attack. I've had more than one occasion where I've done markedly LESS damage because I put on MORE wounds.

It's the one thing about 5th ed (other than perhaps TLoS) that's just stupid. I can only hope that it gets changed in 6th.

Grr I'm so angry about games.

Your point is valid, but when you changed your thread title to say "wound wrapping is worse than the AIDS virus" I can't take you seriously whatsoever, and you just come off as some immature player who can't deal with the rules. They work both ways and you can benefit from them too.

I actually don't mind it. The situations where you significantly reduce damage incoming by "allocating it away" are rare, and I consider it a marked improvement over 4e 'Sergeant/Lascannon/Cyclone Missile Launcher NEVER DIE EVER'.

Customizing a squad is expensive and the majority of them die to Thunderhammer Terminators as an un-customized squad.

I've had my fair share of frustrations with 3 wounds killing 3 men but only 2 falling over. In general, though, I find it to be a fair tradeoff to always end up fighting the super epic wargear badass in every single assault phase.

sourclams wrote:I actually don't mind it. The situations where you significantly reduce damage incoming by "allocating it away" are rare, and I consider it a marked improvement over 4e 'Sergeant/Lascannon/Cyclone Missile Launcher NEVER DIE EVER'.

In my experiences so far, this actually IS the problem.

A power blob charges 3 crisis suits with 2 shield drones, putting down 6 power weapon wounds and 6 regular wounds. Each suit gets 2 wounds apiece, and each drone gets 3 power weapon wounds.

What's the end result of doing 6 power weapon wounds to a 5-man squad? All three suits are left standing while the drones got horribly sucker punched.

If the purpose of new wound allocation was to prevent the best models from never dying, clearly this is a less than perfect solution...

That's the entire point of a shield drone though, its actually appropriate there.

Well than what's to say that the whole point of the other 7 guys in the tac squad aren't just there to absorb damage against the sarge and special/heavy weapons carriers?

If the point was to even out the casualties amongst a squad, then wound wrapping clearly isn't all that much better than the old system.

I think some of you guys need to grab some good ol'fashion sniper rifles ^-^.

Before I we were doing it correctly it was terrible and overly confusing.

My Roomate and I put a lot more effort into it and now we really dont have any problems with it.

Umm, whats wound wrapping?

Ailaros wrote:

sourclams wrote:I actually don't mind it. The situations where you significantly reduce damage incoming by "allocating it away" are rare, and I consider it a marked improvement over 4e 'Sergeant/Lascannon/Cyclone Missile Launcher NEVER DIE EVER'.

In my experiences so far, this actually IS the problem.

A power blob charges 3 crisis suits with 2 shield drones, putting down 6 power weapon wounds and 6 regular wounds. Each suit gets 2 wounds apiece, and each drone gets 3 power weapon wounds.

What's the end result of doing 6 power weapon wounds to a 5-man squad? All three suits are left standing while the drones got horribly sucker punched.

If the purpose of new wound allocation was to prevent the best models from never dying, clearly this is a less than perfect solution...

How would it be any different at all in 4th ed?

6 power weapon wounds
6 drones die and suits get armor saves

sourclams wrote:

Ailaros wrote:

sourclams wrote:I actually don't mind it. The situations where you significantly reduce damage incoming by "allocating it away" are rare, and I consider it a marked improvement over 4e 'Sergeant/Lascannon/Cyclone Missile Launcher NEVER DIE EVER'.

In my experiences so far, this actually IS the problem.

A power blob charges 3 crisis suits with 2 shield drones, putting down 6 power weapon wounds and 6 regular wounds. Each suit gets 2 wounds apiece, and each drone gets 3 power weapon wounds.

What's the end result of doing 6 power weapon wounds to a 5-man squad? All three suits are left standing while the drones got horribly sucker punched.

If the purpose of new wound allocation was to prevent the best models from never dying, clearly this is a less than perfect solution...

How would it be any different at all in 4th ed?

6 power weapon wounds
6 drones die and suits get armor saves

there were only 2 drones

Ailaros wrote:

sourclams wrote:I actually don't mind it. The situations where you significantly reduce damage incoming by "allocating it away" are rare, and I consider it a marked improvement over 4e 'Sergeant/Lascannon/Cyclone Missile Launcher NEVER DIE EVER'.

In my experiences so far, this actually IS the problem.

A power blob charges 3 crisis suits with 2 shield drones, putting down 6 power weapon wounds and 6 regular wounds. Each suit gets 2 wounds apiece, and each drone gets 3 power weapon wounds.

What's the end result of doing 6 power weapon wounds to a 5-man squad? All three suits are left standing while the drones got horribly sucker punched.

If the purpose of new wound allocation was to prevent the best models from never dying, clearly this is a less than perfect solution...

This was a problem from the other direction in the previous edition.

6 power weapon wounds would have killed 2 drones (let's say they don't save) and 2 suits, leaving all 6 non-power wounds to be saved by the last suit. Why did that last man take every single non-power attack while the other 4 guys in his squad took none? This was just as stupid.

Only random allocation of wounds would solve both problems and that's not practical given the number of wounds thrown around per volley.

xlightscreen wrote:I think some of you guys need to grab some good ol'fashion sniper rifles ^-^.

If those actually functioned as sniper rifles (IE, target the model instead of the unit) that would be awesome. Sadly outside of list building to take out MCs, I haven't actually seen a use for those.

I think the vanilla marines have a special char that functions that way, but that's about it.

It should really be something more like "if there are more wounds than there are models, allocate one wound to every model, roll to save, remove casualties, allocate remaining wounds until there's one on every remaining model, roll to save, remove casualties, and so on until there are either no more wounds or no more models left". It's ridiculous that you can end up inflicting fewer wounds by inflicting more wounds.

I as well do not like the current system.

I liked 4th ed alot better..Every unsaved wound hurt someone. Yes the last model in every unit was either someone with a special weapon or a champ/sarg...But you never got cheated out of wounds.

How much damage you did was how much damage was taken onto the squad.

The current system can leave you feeling cheated which isnt that great.

(MODs, ignore my stupid alert that this thread was in the wrong place, thought I was in news and rumours and saw a dude say "this is new how?")

Yeah I agree it can get quite annoying sometimes. Sadly those are the rules of 40k :(