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.

Karol wrote:

Of course I could eyeball it, but strangely if people saw your list had a bunch of AOE in it, they suddenly became very concerned about spacing and you'd lose a bunch of time at the beginning of a match while your opponent agonized over spacing, placement, blah, blah, blah.

why not use something like an infinity tape measure, everyone uses them here and they have all the range you may want to need 2", 1" , 6"between models. cover all the ranges you need to know.

But again I have not played when templates were a thing, maybe they were a big problem and righfuly removed. It does still leaves us with the fact that the changes in 8th made horde even better and weapons that suppose to counter them much worse.

Scatter dice caused all sorts of arguments, and the small blast radius template was pointless since you almost never caught more than one model with it anyway.

Flamer Templates weren't that big of a deal mostly.

The scatter dice did suck I would not mind if they brought back templates but just made you get a number of shots equal to what you could get under and then use the models ballistic skill as normal.

Karol wrote:
why not use something like an infinity tape measure, everyone uses them here and they have all the range you may want to need 2", 1" , 6"between models. cover all the ranges you need to know.

But again I have not played when templates were a thing, maybe they were a big problem and righfuly removed. It does still leaves us with the fact that the changes in 8th made horde even better and weapons that suppose to counter them much worse.

Because currently I can play the game with a tape measure and some D6, I really don't get the desire to cart around a bunch of extra crap just to play the game. The idea that templates is the only solution is just lazy and stupid.

Codex, TONs of minis rule books terrain ..and you balk at plastic templates that fit in a cigar box?

This comes up in Proposed Rules fairly often.

The solutions I've liked are double the number of shots, but cap the number of shots at the number of models in the target unit - and do this for all the former templates/blasts.

This way, using a Flamer against a unit of Gaunts grants 2d6 hits - average 7. But against a 5-man Tac squad, you can't get more than 5 hits. And against a tank or an individual, you're only getting one hit.

Avarges are all nice and good, but 2d6 gives very swingy results. That fact that it will smooth out at 7 when you play those 100+games, doesn't help much with flamers being a hard counter to horde armies. Plus from what I understand people saying here, that templates could wreck multiple units with one shot. Killing 2d6 IG or orcs doesn't matter much when there is 6 or more squads of them, and your platforms carrying the flamers cost twice or quadruple that of a horde unit. But maybe it is an unfixable problem, and horde is just ment to be the dominant way to play. That could be possible too.

 ImperialArmy wrote:
Codex, TONs of minis rule books terrain ..and you balk at plastic templates that fit in a cigar box?

Cherry picking is poor form, I've identified numerous reasons for not liking templates, just add this to the list.

Karol wrote:
Avarges are all nice and good, but 2d6 gives very swingy results. That fact that it will smooth out at 7 when you play those 100+games, doesn't help much with flamers being a hard counter to horde armies. Plus from what I understand people saying here, that templates could wreck multiple units with one shot. Killing 2d6 IG or orcs doesn't matter much when there is 6 or more squads of them, and your platforms carrying the flamers cost twice or quadruple that of a horde unit. But maybe it is an unfixable problem, and horde is just ment to be the dominant way to play. That could be possible too.

There's the idea that hordes are running the meta, but it's not as true as it sounds. The typical list with Guardsmen is actually Castellan + Beatstick(s) + Guardsmen. The Eldar lists are primarily non-Horde threats. Gman, Maggy, and Morty (although they've fallen out of favor) aren't Horde lists. There are some horde lists at those levels, too, but it's not running the meta.

If you want a single Flamer hard-countering hordes, they need to cost a gakton more. The proposed change I listed is about increasing the flamer a reasonable amount vs Hordes, and even decreasing its potential power versus elites armies and units - but doing so in a nuanced, balanced way.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 ImperialArmy wrote:
Codex, TONs of minis rule books terrain ..and you balk at plastic templates that fit in a cigar box?

Cherry picking is poor form, I've identified numerous reasons for not liking templates, just add this to the list.

You posted a reply that you could play the game with dice and tape measure and didnt want to cart extra stuff.

None of the proposed solutions really work. A template could blast multiple units, no other solution really addresses that part of the problem.
The templates were a bit awkward but they were a way to show how an explosion or burst of flames would cover an area.

 ImperialArmy wrote:
You posted a reply that you could play the game with dice and tape measure and didnt want to cart extra stuff.

I've posted numerous replies on this thread, you chose to cherry pick that one.

 ImperialArmy wrote:
None of the proposed solutions really work. A template could blast multiple units, no other solution really addresses that part of the problem.
The templates were a bit awkward but they were a way to show how an explosion or burst of flames would cover an area.

You clearly need to read Infernal Gateway psychic power, or the broadsides stratagem from Orks, or others that I'm sure I'm forgetting. There are several ways to address your point that already exist in the game, and again, only require tape measure and dice.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 ImperialArmy wrote:

The templates were a bit awkward but they were a way to show how an explosion or burst of flames would cover an area.

You clearly need to read Infernal Gateway psychic power, or the broadsides stratagem from Orks, or others that I'm sure I'm forgetting. There are several ways to address your point that already exist in the game, and again, only require tape measure and dice.

No, those are bass ackwards ways of doing something that can easily be done with a template. In any other edition Infernal Gateway would have been large blast. In fact, it was exactly that in WHFB.

Tape measure and dice, that never caused an bickering ever.
The problem with templates was the scatter.

Cherry picking requires a group or list. i merely pointed out the one gripe of extra stuff was hilariously silly.

 Grimtuff wrote:
No, those are bass ackwards ways of doing something that can easily be done with a template. In any other edition Infernal Gateway would have been large blast. In fact, it was exactly that in WHFB.

Yes, clearly using measuring tape to *gasp* measure, is bass ackwards, brilliant.

Let's go over what I don't have to do with that system:
1 - I don't have to carry templates.
2 - I don't have to balance or carefully hold them over my models, or set them on top of my possibly wobbly models.
3 - I don't have to count the models under the template.
4 - I don't potentially have to argue about who is or is not under, touching, affected by said template.

Things I do have to do with that system:
1 - Check to see if another unit is within x inches.
2 - Allocate hits.

Huh, yep, super complicated, I can see why you don't like it.

Karol wrote:
Avarges are all nice and good, but 2d6 gives very swingy results. That fact that it will smooth out at 7 when you play those 100+games, doesn't help much with flamers being a hard counter to horde armies. Plus from what I understand people saying here, that templates could wreck multiple units with one shot. Killing 2d6 IG or orcs doesn't matter much when there is 6 or more squads of them, and your platforms carrying the flamers cost twice or quadruple that of a horde unit. But maybe it is an unfixable problem, and horde is just ment to be the dominant way to play. That could be possible too.

2d6 is a lot less swingy than 1d6. A 2d6 roll is going to land on a 6, 7, or 8 almost half the time.

Everything you said you don't have to do, you have to do to use a tape measure over multiple groups of figures and heroes.

I understand you personally dont like templates.
But opinions are are not reasons.

The current rule set doesn't do a good job of representing explosions. A hail of Earth shaker fire on a unit of marines in a cluster of heroes and other squads doesn't make a lick of sense that it doesn't hit the other squads.

So, bascially "Template, but don't use a cardboard cutout".

Bharring wrote:
So, bascially "Template, but don't use a cardboard cutout".

So should we bring back *all* the templates? Destructor, maybe we can even get the giant foot back for the Orks, different templates for flamers and heavy flamers? How far down this rabbit hole should we go? I mean GSC already busted the seal right, maybe we'll just have a print out page for every codex to handle each of their unique templates?

The point is, there are various mechanics already in the game to handle these things, without using templates and they work fine, with a tape measure, and as an extra bonus, become more future proof as a result since they're inherently more adaptable. But I get it, everyone wants to stick with the mechanics they're familiar with exploi, err, using. Doesn't make it better.

Bharring wrote:
So, bascially "Template, but don't use a cardboard cutout".

IOW "bass ackwards". Let's list a load of complex stuff to do to get the same effect as placing a template.

Bass. Ackwards.

If we could keep things nice and polite, that would be great.

 ImperialArmy wrote:
Everything you said you don't have to do, you have to do to use a tape measure over multiple groups of figures and heroes.

Actually, I don't, that's specifically why I laid it out. Perhaps you should do some reading.

 Stux wrote:
I think they're bad on Terminators for 2 main reason (both are range, hah):

1.
You can't shoot from deep strike.

2.
You can't shoot someone charging you from deep strike.

Due to these, I think the Reaper Autocannon is much more useful and versatile.

You can shoot after deepstriking. Or did you mean that the range is the issue here?

beta bolter rules have ended combi flamers as a wise terminator choice

I think the flamer could have more of an anti cover rule, similar to the grenades rule in cities of death.
-allways max hits on targets in cover
-ignores cover bonus.
This would be more appealing to me instead of it becoming some kind of anti horde option

 Togusa wrote:

 Stux wrote:
I think they're bad on Terminators for 2 main reason (both are range, hah):

1.
You can't shoot from deep strike.

2.
You can't shoot someone charging you from deep strike.

Due to these, I think the Reaper Autocannon is much more useful and versatile.

You can shoot after deepstriking. Or did you mean that the range is the issue here?

As I say in the post you quoted, both points are related to range. Generally you are allowed to shoot from Deepstrike, but Flamers cannot due to range.

Gitdakka wrote:
I think the flamer could have more of an anti cover rule, similar to the grenades rule in cities of death.
-allways max hits on targets in cover
-ignores cover bonus.
This would be more appealing to me instead of it becoming some kind of anti horde option

A flamethrower is a weapon of fear, not a weapon of war. And that is part of the problem, there is a reason you don't see flamethrower units in the modern armed services of countries.

With that said, a rework would be good.

How about this:

Flamer: 10" D6 S4 AP- 1DMG, Ignores Cover
Heavy Flamer: 11" D6+1 S5 AP-1 1DMG, Ignores Cover

Immolation: When a unit suffers an unsaved wound from a weapon with this special rule, they apply a -1 modifier to any moral tests taken for the remainder of the turn.

Seeing your comrades screaming in pain as they burn to death would make even space marines wince.

 Togusa wrote:

A flamethrower is a weapon of fear, not a weapon of war. And that is part of the problem, there is a reason you don't see flamethrower units in the modern armed services of countries.

Not sure that's entirely true. I'd say another part of it is the decline of trench warfare. Flamethrowers were pretty effective in trenches.

Scatter was fun though. Nothing was more hilarious and embarrassing than firing at a unit with a large blast, then watching it scatter back on your own men

yeah, it was kinda fun.

Honestly, I never really ran into any issues with templates or scatter other than the odd person not being able to line up the scatter die with the direction the template was supposed to go.

I wish they would bring back templates or get rid of the random numbers of hits for blast weapons. Since flamers autohit, I suppose you would still need a random number of hits, but I wish it was 1d6 or 2d3.

Most of all, I wish they would just give flamers back Wall of Death.