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.

Simply put, after some thought I've gotten to the conclusion that the reason many units like possessed, 1ksons, terminators, etc are having a hard time living up their name, is that they pay for saves they rarely use (invuls)
Even power-armored dude pay for the 3+ like hell, when a 5+ to 4+ is available for free on the board, but they cannot benefit from it unless their armor is broken. meanwhile the quater-priced cultists get said cover saves, netting not far-off durability.

This becomes far more silly with units going to ground (especially when forced by pinning) when it adds no defense.

And that standing behind a building is meaningless if you wear good armor.

Its an issue in the system, and no level of point-management could fix it.



So, in that note I thought to myself, "What if you could take multiple saves?"

The primary effect, increased durability across the board, especially VS shooting, will reduce the death count, and reduce the meaning of alpha strikes (the "I lost 30% of my army before shooting a bullet" syndrom), giving more room to actually play, and making terrain more relevant to people.
Power armor dude will see a rise in defensive value above that of GeQ, as they rarely get an armor save to begin with, and TeQ and tzentch marines will see the most value, as they will become a true indestructible force.
Such a reduction in deathtoll will cause an expected increase in play time. probably an increase in turn count as well will be required to allow time for meaningful kills to take place.
Say, 7-9 turns rather than 5-7.

The second effect is the rise of ignore-cover and template relevance, as it will matter even when facing armor heavier than your AP. making many of the weak-AP cover ignoring guns relevant once more, and the strong-AP cover ignoring guns a true force to be reckoned with.

Third, assault will become more lethal in comparison, as one of the three saves does not exist there. given the ease to get there with multiple saves, the board size will have to be increased, and the starting distance off each other must be increased to give shooters more time to try and eliminate assualters. (matched with increased turn count, it should work out)
72x48 increased to 96x72, or is that too much?
Nice side-benefit, super ranges (60 and higher) will actually matter.


Army specific:
SoB will have an actual benefit of their 6++
CSM will have their warp talons, possessed, 1ksons and tzentch mark in general feature a meaningful defensive boost.
Marine terminators as a whole will become more viable, as their reduced per-point firepower will be offset by a true increase of per-point durability.
Tau riptide could not be allowed to get a 3++ NOVA any more, as the mere possibility will be devestating.
Tau markerlight cover ignore system will have to be reduced to the old method "1 mark=-1 cover", or it will become too dominating.
Vidicare will become far more deadly in comparison.


Anyone think I missed anything important?

Time. I've tried it, four rolls to kill instead of three slows the game down immensely and makes it extremely difficult to actually kill anything without a corresponding increase in weapons power.

Increased time requirement was noted. though I honestly don't think these few extra rolls will cause that much of a slowdown.

As for increased weapon power-whats the point? the entire idea is to reduce lethality!

I thought we've allready got a ton of complaints about how many ap2 stuff is floating around. Cause if you don't have ap2, you'd face a bunch of th/ss termies that are now 3 times harder to kill in mellee. And even more so at range. Or Nurgle DP that are now 3 times harder to kill due to 2+ cover and 3+ armor.

It would make possessed and warp talons even less playable as they have no ap2 or ignore cover low ap shooting and only ap2 and ignore cover low ap shooting would matter.

Thus, i think that the proposed changes would make tough units even tougher, weak units even weaker and regular dudes will become close to irrelevant.

It's not a bad mechanics as is - it'd just require a complete redesign to work. Like cover/invul saves dropping, for example, regular termies get 6++, th/ss termies get 5++, cover dropped to 5+ from fortifications that'd be 3+ instead, ruins, woods going to 6+, gtg, stealth not stacking, removing shrowded, bumping the cost of low ap and ignore cover weapons a lot, etc.

Ignores cover is already one of the most overpowered abilities. A Hellhammer shot is already 3 times as powerful than a Baneblade shot (Assuming 3+ Jink / Cover save). If you allow cover saves aswell as armour/invuln then it becomes 6 times as powerful (if target has a 4+ invuln).

Imagine what a waveserpent on a skyshield would be like (3+ jink + 4++ save)

The only reason I wouldn't want to play that way is that it'd take ages to complete even a medium sized game. That, and as mentioned above SS termies would become near invincible.

TH/SS termies or deathwing knights would just DS in the face of any army they're up against, be near immune to that turn or two of shooting before they get in range, then they'd absolutely wreck everything.

And while I'd love that, as I love my deathwing knights, it wouldn't be a very enjoyable game.

So these propose rules will greatly buff the IoM and chaos but you say that Tau cannot benefit?

Why can THSS Termites get a 2+ 3++ but not the Riptide? Double standards, double standards everywhere!

IMO the real problem is the simple damage resolution in 40k, is too limiting and has not got enough variety.
So that limits options to adding extra rolls to the resolution , which just slows the game down.

It would be much better to use opposed values to determine the save roll required.As this allows all units and weapons to have the same resolution and proportional interaction.

Armour value,(values of 1 to 15)+D6. vs weapon Hit AP.(Values 5 to 20.)

This way the dice is representing all the variable in the interaction apart from the targets level of protection, and the weapons hits ability to penetrate armour..(These 2 are directly represented by the stats.)

As this is far from current rules Ill stop there as further discussion may not be suitable for this thread.

SGTPozy wrote:
So these propose rules will greatly buff the IoM and chaos but you say that Tau cannot benefit?

Why can THSS Termites get a 2+ 3++ but not the Riptide? Double standards, double standards everywhere!

Yes, great double standards, my purist tau self feels the need to screw tau over
/sarcasm


Maybe I just know tau better and see the consequences better than I do the IoM things?

Anyway, one must also note, the riptide and the SStermies are two very different units.



Lanrak-I utterly failed to understand what you are saying there.

BoomWolf we all know that Pozy doesn't really care about the game, he just likes lashing out at people for intentionally perceived slights.

As for Lanrak, I believe he is advocating an entire overhaul, saying the AP of the weapon SHOULD affect penetration/chance to wound based off converting all armor saves into AV and then subtracting the AV by the new AP system... I think.

 BoomWolf wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
So these propose rules will greatly buff the IoM and chaos but you say that Tau cannot benefit?

Why can THSS Termites get a 2+ 3++ but not the Riptide? Double standards, double standards everywhere!

Yes, great double standards, my purist tau self feels the need to screw tau over
/sarcasm


Maybe I just know tau better and see the consequences better than I do the IoM things?

Anyway, one must also note, the riptide and the SStermies are two very different units.



Lanrak-I utterly failed to understand what you are saying there.

No, what I'm saying is that you only said that Tau will have drawbacks. What about Eldar? Will they not get some sort of nerf?

I get that you understand Tau better than other armies but surely you have knowledge of other armies too.

They can have the same save, so they're similar (obviously the toughness is a massive difference) but by your proposed rules termunators would be harder to kill then the Riptide (which IMO is very silly).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Quickjager wrote:
BoomWolf we all know that Pozy doesn't really care about the game, he just likes lashing out at people for intentionally perceived slights.
.

Whilst you love to point out what I believe...

Sometimes my buds and I houserule that you can take up to 2 of your saves in 500-750 point games. It does slow the game down and for large matches I would not suggest it, but for smaller matches it makes it so that you actually THINK tactically rather than run straight up with said termies in the middle of the open.

SGTPozy wrote:

 BoomWolf wrote:

SGTPozy wrote:
So these propose rules will greatly buff the IoM and chaos but you say that Tau cannot benefit?

Why can THSS Termites get a 2+ 3++ but not the Riptide? Double standards, double standards everywhere!

Yes, great double standards, my purist tau self feels the need to screw tau over
/sarcasm


Maybe I just know tau better and see the consequences better than I do the IoM things?

Anyway, one must also note, the riptide and the SStermies are two very different units.



Lanrak-I utterly failed to understand what you are saying there.

No, what I'm saying is that you only said that Tau will have drawbacks. What about Eldar? Will they not get some sort of nerf?

I get that you understand Tau better than other armies but surely you have knowledge of other armies too.

They can have the same save, so they're similar (obviously the toughness is a massive difference) but by your proposed rules termunators would be harder to kill then the Riptide (which IMO is very silly).

...Last I checked Terminators were still 1W/T4...

As to reducing lethality it's supposed to be possible to kill an entire army in a six-turn game. It's not supposed to be easy, straightforward, or happen every game, but it's supposed to be possible. In my test run of Aegis with rewritten saves and stacking Arm/Inv equivalent points of normal infantry couldn't kill half of each other in eight turns.

I think each save would need adjustments.

Just a first thought but:

Cover Saves:
-Base cover saves all drop by 1, except 6+
--5+ Ruins or Jink, 6+ woods/intervening, etc
--Makes current 5+s no better than 6+s, but not much gives a base 6+.
-Shrouding becomes +1, still stacks with Stealth (really should)

Armor Saves:
AP modifiers instead of hard numbers:
AP6/-: 0
AP5: -1
AP4: -2
AP3: -3
AP2: -4
AP1: -5

Invulns:
- All invulns reduced by 1
-- Again, current 5++ would be no better than a 6++, unfortunately

Rerolls:
-If its reroll-1s, improve invuln by 1
-If its reroll fails, improve invuln by 2

(Perhaps thats not the best fix for rerolls)

Doing armor-save-modifiers alone would make things too easy to kill, but take-all-saves makes them too survivable. So what if both were done?

Also, reductions seem right to cover/invuln if its on top of armor and each other.

Thoughts?

I've been playing with various save combinations in my homebrew.

It doesn't really slow the game down any, unless you don't know your own model's rules and have to check the book on whether a guy has a ++ every time he's hit, I suppose... Just roll your saves, pick up the fails and roll them for the other save. Done.

Currently we play it so that Cover saves are in addition to any others, but Armour and Invulnerable are still mutually exclusive.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
I've been playing with various save combinations in my homebrew.

It doesn't really slow the game down any, unless you don't know your own model's rules and have to check the book on whether a guy has a ++ every time he's hit, I suppose... Just roll your saves, pick up the fails and roll them for the other save. Done.

Currently we play it so that Cover saves are in addition to any others, but Armour and Invulnerable are still mutually exclusive.

Ofc it wouldn't take more time. Horde players don't like it cause it would be a buff to high armor units that they have no access to - you know...the units that are absolutely useless like tactical marines and terminators? This is a pretty obvious fix to the game but....it aint gonna happen cause "reasons"