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.

Keep in mind that I didn't say that shooting was better then assault in 5th editon, but rather that both were increased power in 5th edition from 4th edition.

Armor is harder to SHOOT, not to assault. A unit that could take out vehicles in assault before still does an admirable job of it. Meltabombs are as effective as ever, and units like a berzerker with a power fist have the same effect as a lascannon firing 3-4 shots. Plus the fact that MCs retain their effectiveness.

I would argue that KPs are better for assault armies because in assault you tend to lose whole units, whereas in shooting it is much less common to lose 100% of a unit. Many times you will shoot one up only to have it fall back, rally, and remain alive and in cover or out of range.

my frinds mob of over 100 boys and gazkull (green tide apocalypse formation) assaults 2 of my guard squads. the fail to kill all my dudes so i hav to sit their in my shooting phase with this massive mob of orks right in front of my gunline and i cant shoot at it because it fighting 5 guardsmen 18 in away or some gak like that. we hav seen what happens to melee units in real war. the japanese bonzai charges almost always were mowed down by the marines they were charging. i really dont think that CC armies (orks especially) are balanced with shooting.

well, thats a complaint about the entire way WH40K / WHFB handle combat. Now however those 5 guard are MORE likely to break from combat, can get mowed down (I2 vs I3) and suddenly those 100 orks are sitting in front of your guard line, as they cannot consolidate.

Honestly i thinik it is more tilted towards combats, but that is because 4th ed combats could be real tarpits.....however being able to shoot most things no the board makes a huge difference - if i can see you i shoot you, no more Area Terrain nonsense. All in all the game seems that much faster and more brutal....

The Angry Commissar wrote:my frinds mob of over 100 boys and gazkull (green tide apocalypse formation) assaults 2 of my guard squads. the fail to kill all my dudes so i hav to sit their in my shooting phase with this massive mob of orks right in front of my gunline and i cant shoot at it because it fighting 5 guardsmen 18 in away or some gak like that. we hav seen what happens to melee units in real war. the japanese bonzai charges almost always were mowed down by the marines they were charging. i really dont think that CC armies (orks especially) are balanced with shooting.

Well, your guardsmen would of most likely had huge negative modifiers to their Leadership, and should of failed (unless they rolled snake eyes). However, if you had a Commissar in those squads then they might have passed, but then you can't complain since you put the commie in their unit in the first place.

Yes, in WWI and WWII massed infantry charges resulted in huge loss of life, however, those were not Orks or genetic supermen, they were mere humans.

Try running squads of guardsmen across an open board against another IG gunline and see how that works out

Yeah.

G

BoxANT wrote:Yes, in WWI and WWII massed infantry charges resulted in huge loss of life, however, those were not Orks or genetic supermen, they were mere humans.

And they merely had average weapons. I want to see 5 marines charge an autocannon nest. Keep in mind this is a gun that has a better chance of killing a Rhino than it does a marine. Thats just not right.

IMHO armor saves vs AP should be a bit more fluid. For instance, give marines an armor value of 6. An AP- weapon would need a 6 on the dice to beat the armor, but an AP2 weapon would reduce the armor save by 3, to an AP of 4, making it so you would need a 4+ to beat the AP value. Or something like that.

Liquidwulfe wrote:

BoxANT wrote:Yes, in WWI and WWII massed infantry charges resulted in huge loss of life, however, those were not Orks or genetic supermen, they were mere humans.

And they merely had average weapons. I want to see 5 marines charge an autocannon nest. Keep in mind this is a gun that has a better chance of killing a Rhino than it does a marine. Thats just not right.

IMHO armor saves vs AP should be a bit more fluid. For instance, give marines an armor value of 6. An AP- weapon would need a 6 on the dice to beat the armor, but an AP2 weapon would reduce the armor save by 3, to an AP of 4, making it so you would need a 4+ to beat the AP value. Or something like that.

They tried that in 2nd, and ditched it because it was too overcomplicated. Not to mention a System like that would totaly throw off any and all notions of what is a fair cost (Autocannons being able to shred both light Tanks AND Marines?)

Liquidwulfe wrote:

BoxANT wrote:Yes, in WWI and WWII massed infantry charges resulted in huge loss of life, however, those were not Orks or genetic supermen, they were mere humans.

And they merely had average weapons. I want to see 5 marines charge an autocannon nest. Keep in mind this is a gun that has a better chance of killing a Rhino than it does a marine. Thats just not right.

IMHO armor saves vs AP should be a bit more fluid. For instance, give marines an armor value of 6. An AP- weapon would need a 6 on the dice to beat the armor, but an AP2 weapon would reduce the armor save by 3, to an AP of 4, making it so you would need a 4+ to beat the AP value. Or something like that.

Like Gwar! said, they ditched armor modifiers at 3ed, and it resulted is a much more streamlined/faster game which is what you needed when rolling 100+ dice a turn. In addition, MEQ got rocked by HW fire in 2ed.

But some people still love 2ed, so it's more of a personal taste.



But back on topic.

I think GW realizes that shooting armies need to be buffed, as was evident by the IG codex. Units like PBS really help even shooting to assault, since it basically makes shooting just as potentially deadly (even though you still can't Sweep a unit from shooting).

EDIT: Fail for not reading

Heaven forbid that GW ask its players to do addition and subtraction....

The AP system, though, is broke. One point of AP difference results in gross swings in lethality, or absolutely nothing.

The change in lethality from AP4 to AP3 versus a 3+ save target is triple (300%); from AP3 to AP2 versus a 2+ target, the difference is sextuple (600%). This is from one point of AP.

The difference in lethality between an AP 5 and an AP2 weapon on a 5+ target, though, is 0.

Ogiwan wrote:Heaven forbid that GW ask its players to do addition and subtraction....

The AP system, though, is broke. One point of AP difference results in gross swings in lethality, or absolutely nothing.

The change in lethality from AP4 to AP3 versus a 3+ save target is triple (300%); from AP3 to AP2 versus a 2+ target, the difference is sextuple (600%). This is from one point of AP.

The difference in lethality between an AP 5 and an AP2 weapon on a 5+ target, though, is 0.

You do realise that this is counterbalanced by the fact that the majority of AP3 and AP2 weapons are high points cost and high strength?

Gwar! wrote:

Ogiwan wrote:Heaven forbid that GW ask its players to do addition and subtraction....

The AP system, though, is broke. One point of AP difference results in gross swings in lethality, or absolutely nothing.

The change in lethality from AP4 to AP3 versus a 3+ save target is triple (300%); from AP3 to AP2 versus a 2+ target, the difference is sextuple (600%). This is from one point of AP.

The difference in lethality between an AP 5 and an AP2 weapon on a 5+ target, though, is 0.

You do realise that this is counterbalanced by the fact that the majority of AP3 and AP2 weapons are high points cost and high strength?

Don't forget generally low number of shots as well, or range-limited... or offset by cover saves, etc.

Ogiwan wrote:Heaven forbid that GW ask its players to do addition and subtraction....

The AP system, though, is broke. One point of AP difference results in gross swings in lethality, or absolutely nothing.

The change in lethality from AP4 to AP3 versus a 3+ save target is triple (300%); from AP3 to AP2 versus a 2+ target, the difference is sextuple (600%). This is from one point of AP.

The difference in lethality between an AP 5 and an AP2 weapon on a 5+ target, though, is 0.

Go play a few 3000 point games of 2ed and tell us how it goes.

BoxANT wrote:

Ogiwan wrote:Heaven forbid that GW ask its players to do addition and subtraction....

The AP system, though, is broke. One point of AP difference results in gross swings in lethality, or absolutely nothing.

The change in lethality from AP4 to AP3 versus a 3+ save target is triple (300%); from AP3 to AP2 versus a 2+ target, the difference is sextuple (600%). This is from one point of AP.

The difference in lethality between an AP 5 and an AP2 weapon on a 5+ target, though, is 0.

Go play a few 3000 point games of 2ed and tell us how it goes.

I have, I'm still Finishing off Turn 3. I started June 1989 :(

namegoeshere wrote:
Gwar is a troll

40k has been bizarrely hth focused for a while. 5th slightly more so than 4th.

Gwar, although frequently blunt and sometimes rude, is not a troll.

and Warhammer 40k has Always been melee-focused.

Demogerg wrote:

namegoeshere wrote:
Gwar is a troll

40k has been bizarrely hth focused for a while. 5th slightly more so than 4th.

Gwar, although frequently blunt and sometimes rude, is not a troll.

and Warhammer 40k has Always been melee-focused.

Thank you for the kind words

And yeah, 40k has always favoured Melee imo, its just that in 3rd Shooting took a major hit, and they are only just now trying to rectify the balance.