Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/05 06:19:15
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Repentia Mistress
|
Had a search around here and couldn't find it.
I've been thinking on the TO Hit chart for combat recently and have come to the conclusion that it does not at all reflect a superior combatants ability to sweep aside their pathetic foes flailing attacks. I mean, Little johnny conscript guardsman on WS2 hits Uberdeathkilllord Daemon with WS10 on a 5+ but our daemon of mass slaughter can do no better than a measly 3+.
My thoughts then turned to the hit formula for shooting- now this one reflects the deadly crackshot BS7 by giving them a 2+ with a chance to reroll misses on a 5+. So I'm thinking, why can't we have something similar for weapon skill but with a comparison to the targets WS.
I've attached my idea for the combat hit table for perusal. Essentially; if the attackers WS is 3 points higher than the targets WS; the attacker gets to reroll any misses on a 6+, this value improving by one for each point beyond the 3rd to a possible rerolled 3+
EDIT: Added alternate table chart in which certain low ws cannot hit high ws. Basically a low WS cannot strike against a high WS which can reroll against it on a 3+.
EDIT: Added another alternate implementing 2+ hits
Filename |
combat hit table change.doc |
Download
|
Description |
Combat hit table change |
File size |
36 Kbytes
|
Filename |
combat hit table change.doc |
Download
|
Description |
Alternate combat hit table change |
File size |
36 Kbytes
|
Filename |
combat hit table change.doc |
Download
|
Description |
2+ hit table |
File size |
36 Kbytes
|
|
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/01/05 10:43:57
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/05 06:22:46
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Still don't like it a WS1 fighter should never be able to hit a WS10 fighter in close combat. If you don't agree with me try fencing with a real sword master without any training.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/05 06:23:34
Inactive, user. New profile might pop up in a while |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/05 06:53:45
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
oldzoggy wrote:Still don't like it a WS1 fighter should never be able to hit a WS10 fighter in close combat. If you don't agree with me try fencing with a real sword master without any training.
Well there is a % chance you could get lucky or if there are enough of you you could overwhelm a far superior fighter with pure numbers. If I fenced a master sword master he would destroy me, but if there was 10 of me then we might just get lucky and overwhelm him (weight of dice).
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/05 07:30:28
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Repentia Mistress
|
Yeah I know what you mean. I was merely thinking of easy implementation without too much change to whats already familiar. I mean, I don't see why there can't be a 6+ to hit. Or even a dash- signifying a combatant just being completely outclassed. I reckon this is doable what with the auto run away rule for not being able to deal damage to something in combat- can also be applied to not being able to hit it too.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/05 13:48:28
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Missionary On A Mission
Eastern VA
|
Recall that "Our Weapons Are Useless" does not override Fearless. That doesn't come up too often, and probably wouldn't with mismatched weapon skill, either, but is something to consider.
I think maybe being stuck hitting on a 6+ is fine, but being utterly unable to even get lucky, no matter how many dice you throw at the problem is probably not terribly helpful. It mostly serves to make walk-over fights even more so.
That said, let me ask something - which is the bigger problem: wimpy combatants getting lucky and damaging masters of melee, or masters getting unlucky and whiffing against useless squishies?
|
~4500 -- ~4000 -- ~2000 -- ~5000 -- ~5000 -- ~4000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 08:07:09
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
|
oldzoggy wrote:Still don't like it a WS1 fighter should never be able to hit a WS10 fighter in close combat. If you don't agree with me try fencing with a real sword master without any training.
Not that hard if you're fencing 10 vs 1.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 09:20:18
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Crushing Clawed Fiend
|
I agree to this. When I play Lelith in my army at WS10 and I9, I feel that she should be almost auto hitting anything and barely getting hit. The fluff fully supports it. She basically never gets even touched with a blade. Most of the time she manages to sever limbs/hands off before they even begin to swing.
|
It'd be a shame to get blood all over my nice new outfit...
--------------Harlequins---------------
-------Dark Eldar Wych Cult--------
-----Eldar Craftworld Warhost----- |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 09:54:35
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
|
Well, in fluff Draigo can solo the warp.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 10:11:13
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
koooaei wrote: oldzoggy wrote:Still don't like it a WS1 fighter should never be able to hit a WS10 fighter in close combat. If you don't agree with me try fencing with a real sword master without any training.
Not that hard if you're fencing 10 vs 1.
Then bring back static combat res or make it a to hit modifier. But you should not be able to hit lilith 1/3th or even 1/6th of the time if you are a cripple blind man with no combat training at all. These chances should be way closer to 0 or 0 if you want to avoid rolling all your hits etc. Automatically Appended Next Post: My solution
-Use the to wound table
-give some bonussus on your WS for: higher str and outnumbering
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/01/06 10:22:00
Inactive, user. New profile might pop up in a while |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 12:29:30
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Courageous Space Marine Captain
|
I think that having a different chart for challenges and 1v1 battles (non-character single units) there should be a different chart, but for squad vs squad or squad vs 1 its different as like poeple have said, there is a chance that a nobody can get lucky and hit. My suggestion below. Obviously, attacker means the model attack and defender means the target.
If WS attacker = WS Defender = 4+
WS attack is 1 higher = 3+
WS attack is 2 or 3 higher = 2+
WS is 4 higher = 2+ with reroll (need 6+ on reroll)
WS is 5 higher = 2+ with 5+ reroll
WS is 6 higher = 2+ with 4+ reroll
WS is 7 higher = 2+ with 3+ reroll
WS is 8 or 9 higher 2+ with 2+ reroll
If WS is 1 lower = 5+
WS is 2 lower = 6+
WS is 3 lower = 6+. Successful hits must be rerolled, hitting on a 2+
WS is 4 lower = 6+, successful hits rerolled and hitting on a 3+
WS is 5 lower = 6+ with successful hits rerolled for a 4+
WS is 6 lower = 6+ with reroll needing 5+
WS is 7 lower = 6+ with 6+ on forced reroll
WS is 8 or 9 lower = cannot hit
So under this, a WS4 Sergeant vs WS 6 captain needs a 6. Against a WS7 opponent he needs a 6, but even if he gets a 6 he must reroll it (though passes on a 2+ the second time). Against a WS10 opponent he hits on a 6, rerolls if he hits and needs to get a 5+ to hit.
A WS 6 Captain would hit a WS 4 Sergeant on a 2+, Against a single model WS 1 unit he would hit on a 2+ with a 5+ reroll if he misses.
A single surviving WS1 model would need 6+ with a 4+ forced reroll to hit the Captain, a 6+ to hit WS 3 or 4, and against a WS 9 or 10 model the WS1 cannot hit at all.
|
I'm celebrating 8 years on Dakka Dakka!
I started an Instagram! Follow me at Deadshot Miniatures!
DR:90+S++G+++M+B+IPw40k08#-D+++A+++/cwd363R+++T(Ot)DM+
Check out my Deathwatch story, Aftermath in the fiction section!
Credit to Castiel for banner. Thanks Cas!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 15:14:00
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Missionary On A Mission
Eastern VA
|
That looks like a start, if a little bit too punishing.
To me, the real problem is that masters of combat whiff too often, not that random crappy fighters (fire warriors, for the archetypal example) get lucky too much. Remember that even the guys who suck moldy rocks at fighting are still trained soldiers, here - they're not half-crippled kids armed with soggy spaghetti, belike.
I'd go with the existing WS chart, with the following changes:
Target's WS is 1 lower: 3+
Target's WS is 2 lower: 2+
Targets's WS is 3 lower: 2+. Misses are re-rolled, hitting on 6+
Targets's WS is 4 lower: 2+. Misses are re-rolled, hitting on 5+
Targets's WS is 5 lower: 2+. Misses are re-rolled, hitting on 4+
Targets's WS is 6 lower: 2+. Misses are re-rolled, hitting on 3+
Targets's WS is 7 or more lower: 2+. Misses are re-rolled, hitting on 2+. You're never so good that you auto-hit, unless the rules already allow you to auto-hit. Anyone can luckily get out of the way. (Just like even a BS10 shooter can miss)
Then going the other way -
Target's WS is equal through 2 higher: 4+
Target's WS is 3-4 higher: 5+
Target's WS is 5-6 higher: 6+
Target's WS is more than 6 higher: 6+, reroll successes, hitting on 4+.
Remember that the combat mastery of folks like Lelith Hesperax isn't just reflected by their weapon skill. "They never get hit" doesn't literally mean "all to-hit rolls fail against them", it also includes things like that 3++ super dodge she has.
|
~4500 -- ~4000 -- ~2000 -- ~5000 -- ~5000 -- ~4000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 16:44:20
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Proud Triarch Praetorian
|
I think that this is the best combat fix I've seen in quite a while.
The only issue I see with it is how you work things like Hatred & Zealot into this, unless of course you would count the forced reroll successes & the reroll misses as different things?
|
Experience is something you get just after you need it
The Narkos Dynasty - 15k
Iron Hands - 12k
The Shadewatch - 3k
Cadmus Outriders - 4k
Alpha Legion Raiders - 3k |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 17:19:23
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife
|
jade_angel wrote:Recall that "Our Weapons Are Useless" does not override Fearless. That doesn't come up too often, and probably wouldn't with mismatched weapon skill, either, but is something to consider.
Gaunts... ws3 I think? but can easily be fearless.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 17:26:03
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Dakka Veteran
|
To keep it simple I would just allow more range to the to WS hit rolls, so 2s and 6s to hit would come into it more. Very similar to the ranged to hit chart.
But I wouldn't bring in an unable to hit your opponent factor, even though I agree that a gretchin probably shouldn't be able to hit a Demon prince, Avatar etc according to the fluff.
|
I've been playing a while, my first model was a lead marine and my first White Dwarf was bound with staples |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 17:29:12
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife
|
I think having to remember all of those rerolls is going to be a pain. how many times have you thought about the reroll when your >BS6 It doesn't happen often enough so you don't have it memorized essentially.
Why not keep it simple? I think considering all the other variables, like toughness and save, this change already makes elite WS models much better.
ws +2 => 2+ *best you can be*
ws +1 => 3+
ws 0 => 4+
ws -1 => 5+
ws -2 => 6+ *worst you can be*
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/06 19:11:44
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Missionary On A Mission
Eastern VA
|
IHateNids wrote:I think that this is the best combat fix I've seen in quite a while.
The only issue I see with it is how you work things like Hatred & Zealot into this, unless of course you would count the forced reroll successes & the reroll misses as different things?
No different than how BS6+ interacts with Twin-Linked or Preferred Enemy - hit on a 2+, misses hit on a 2+. Now, for the really sucky guys case, you might figure it as "6+, reroll misses, then afterward, reroll hits, hitting only on a 4+". That'd be like firing twin-linked snap shots at an Eldar Titan, for a shooting parallel.
I suppose that does need sussing out - it could easily come up with Guardsmen, Sisters or Inquisitorial Acolytes against a Bloodthirster or Lelith Hesperax or someone like that, if they have a Priest or a Chaplain with them.
|
~4500 -- ~4000 -- ~2000 -- ~5000 -- ~5000 -- ~4000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/07 13:34:34
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
|
Deadshot wrote:
If WS attacker = WS Defender = 4+
WS attack is 1 higher = 3+
WS attack is 2 or 3 higher = 2+
WS is 4 higher = 2+ with reroll (need 6+ on reroll)
WS is 5 higher = 2+ with 5+ reroll
WS is 6 higher = 2+ with 4+ reroll
WS is 7 higher = 2+ with 3+ reroll
WS is 8 or 9 higher 2+ with 2+ reroll
If WS is 1 lower = 5+
WS is 2 lower = 6+
WS is 3 lower = 6+. Successful hits must be rerolled, hitting on a 2+
WS is 4 lower = 6+, successful hits rerolled and hitting on a 3+
WS is 5 lower = 6+ with successful hits rerolled for a 4+
WS is 6 lower = 6+ with reroll needing 5+
WS is 7 lower = 6+ with 6+ on forced reroll
WS is 8 or 9 lower = cannot hit
I'd not go for 2+ and 6+ to-hits - especially with re-rolls unless you HATE melee and want it to stop existing. There'd be very little reason of anything melee-oriented with ws < 9. Like 99% of melee units will NOT be able to deal with a 145 pt Solitaire. It's worse than invisibility. Honestly, crap rule change. One Solitaire will tarpit a 1000 pt Thunderwolf cavalry unit all game.
All it will lead to is that everything will be shooty with just ws9-10 melee stuff that can't be killed in melee with anything worse than ws 8 at very least. You're limiting all orks, tyranids, marines and basically everything other than eldar and dark eldar to full-shooting.
|
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2016/01/07 13:38:46
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/07 14:39:05
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife
|
koooaei wrote:
I'd not go for 2+ and 6+ to-hits - especially with re-rolls unless you HATE melee and want it to stop existing. There'd be very little reason of anything melee-oriented with ws < 9. Like 99% of melee units will NOT be able to deal with a 145 pt Solitaire. It's worse than invisibility. Honestly, crap rule change. One Solitaire will tarpit a 1000 pt Thunderwolf cavalry unit all game.
All it will lead to is that everything will be shooty with just ws9-10 melee stuff that can't be killed in melee with anything worse than ws 8 at very least. You're limiting all orks, tyranids, marines and basically everything other than eldar and dark eldar to full-shooting.
There is definitely some fine lines to walk on with any change here. I don't think its the worst balance in the game as is. I think its fair right now, that:
firewarrior hits marine on 4+
marine hits firewarrior on 3+
I think it is also fair that a 2x+1 rule for moving to 5+ exists, it keeps lower tiered cc below high teir, without making it impossible to take down with high numbers.
There is a general consensus I think, that people just hate seeing their WS10 demon or other MC taken out by say a squad of firewarriors who got lucky. I don't know that a subtle change to not make things too OP in cc would be though.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/07 14:58:56
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Missionary On A Mission
Eastern VA
|
Personally, I get a lot more miffed when Lelith and a squad of Harlequins completely whiffs at a squad of Guardsmen, or when a Wraithlord fails to even dent a Rhino, than I do when 20 Necron Warriors successfully bludgeon a Chapter Master to death because of weight of dice.
Your Marines vs Fire Warriors example is fine by me, but I'd like some WS5-6 guys to be hitting the FWs on 2+, and WS 7-8 guys to be hitting the Marines on 2+, too.
But Koooaei is dead right that making WS differences too punishing will only serve to favor shooting even more than the system already does. It will also magnify the problem of "CC monster gets shot to death before doing anything" - as it stands, that CC god of a character might be allowed to make it into a fight or two, because it'll get slowed down and might even take a little bit of damage. If it's literally untouchable (or close to it), your choices are, quite simply, shoot it to death or it does not die. No getting lucky to save you, no whiffing to slow it down. Even tarpits aren't really a viable tactic with something like that. (As it stands, they get lucky sometimes, and that CC god isn't going to kill as many tarpitting models as it theoretically could, at least most of the time - this is the whole reason why tarpits work.)
Also, I know I championed a more punishing WS chart above. I ran some numbers and changed my mind. I also talked to some of my local group and got the feeling that whiffing is much more troubling than lucky shots.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/07 14:59:46
~4500 -- ~4000 -- ~2000 -- ~5000 -- ~5000 -- ~4000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/07 16:45:46
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife
|
jade_angel wrote:Personally, I get a lot more miffed when Lelith and a squad of Harlequins completely whiffs at a squad of Guardsmen, or when a Wraithlord fails to even dent a Rhino, than I do when 20 Necron Warriors successfully bludgeon a Chapter Master to death because of weight of dice.
Your Marines vs Fire Warriors example is fine by me, but I'd like some WS5-6 guys to be hitting the FWs on 2+, and WS 7-8 guys to be hitting the Marines on 2+, too.
But Koooaei is dead right that making WS differences too punishing will only serve to favor shooting even more than the system already does. It will also magnify the problem of " CC monster gets shot to death before doing anything" - as it stands, that CC god of a character might be allowed to make it into a fight or two, because it'll get slowed down and might even take a little bit of damage. If it's literally untouchable (or close to it), your choices are, quite simply, shoot it to death or it does not die. No getting lucky to save you, no whiffing to slow it down. Even tarpits aren't really a viable tactic with something like that. (As it stands, they get lucky sometimes, and that CC god isn't going to kill as many tarpitting models as it theoretically could, at least most of the time - this is the whole reason why tarpits work.)
Also, I know I championed a more punishing WS chart above. I ran some numbers and changed my mind. I also talked to some of my local group and got the feeling that whiffing is much more troubling than lucky shots.
That said, what if the same applied for the attacker..
If the attacker's WS is 2x+1, where x is the target's WS, then you hit on 2+
simple change.. meaning any models hitting on 5+ would get hit by 2+ in return. seems like a balanced amendment.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/07 16:51:58
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Missionary On A Mission
Eastern VA
|
Yeah, I could go for that. For the most part, any slow melee beasts that have to go at I1/I2 will be durable, and can tank the few lucky hits that get through (think Captains or Chaos Lords with a power fist, for example). Most squishy melee monsters have stupid-good initiative, so they swing before the mostly-useless unit gets to, so between hitting on a 5+, to-wound rolls, saves and FNP, the squishies will tank the lucky shots too.
Given that, the lucky shots are mitigated, while whiffing is reduced.
Also, this means that non-walker vehicles are usually being hit on a 2+ in CC, which makes sense. The big exception is by Riptide/Ghostkeel, who are still hitting on a 3+. Which is fine by me. Riptides dropkicking Rhinos makes a certain amount of sense, but I am absolutely fine with the idea that they're nowhere near as good at it as even an Exocrine would be. This makes fluff sense and it's crunch-balanced to a zeroth approximation.
|
~4500 -- ~4000 -- ~2000 -- ~5000 -- ~5000 -- ~4000 |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/07 17:19:47
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Shas'ui with Bonding Knife
|
jade_angel wrote:Yeah, I could go for that. For the most part, any slow melee beasts that have to go at I1/I2 will be durable, and can tank the few lucky hits that get through (think Captains or Chaos Lords with a power fist, for example). Most squishy melee monsters have stupid-good initiative, so they swing before the mostly-useless unit gets to, so between hitting on a 5+, to-wound rolls, saves and FNP, the squishies will tank the lucky shots too.
Given that, the lucky shots are mitigated, while whiffing is reduced.
Also, this means that non-walker vehicles are usually being hit on a 2+ in CC, which makes sense. The big exception is by Riptide/Ghostkeel, who are still hitting on a 3+. Which is fine by me. Riptides dropkicking Rhinos makes a certain amount of sense, but I am absolutely fine with the idea that they're nowhere near as good at it as even an Exocrine would be. This makes fluff sense and it's crunch-balanced to a zeroth approximation.
yep exactly. There are few things that would be hitting vehicles on 3+ and those that do are obviously designed for shooting and not punching.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/07 18:00:28
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Krazed Killa Kan
|
Personally I prefer the current close combat system compared to this. It lets common infantry still be relevant against characters so you don't have some silly gak like a character soloing 30 Ork boyz because the boyz can't ever land a hit. Also with fear being the way it is right now there is no way in hell that this sort of system won't turn ugly. Also would an invisible unit of space marines fighting some daemon price result in the battle of the 6s?
If anything making it easier to hit a target with having double +1 the WS of the opponent is fine (to hit on 2+) but in no way should to hit rolls go below 5+. Sometimes just just need some grots, guardsmen, fire warriors, or killa kanz to lay the smack down to some elder gits who thinks they are too hip to be hit
|
"Hold my shoota, I'm goin in"
Armies (7th edition points)
7000+ Points Death Skullz
4000 Points
+ + 3000 Points "The Fiery Heart of the Emperor"
3500 Points "Void Kraken" Space Marines
3000 Points "Bard's Booze Cruise" |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/07 22:36:52
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Courageous Space Marine Captain
|
Vankraken wrote:Personally I prefer the current close combat system compared to this. It lets common infantry still be relevant against characters so you don't have some silly gak like a character soloing 30 Ork boyz because the boyz can't ever land a hit. Also with fear being the way it is right now there is no way in hell that this sort of system won't turn ugly. Also would an invisible unit of space marines fighting some daemon price result in the battle of the 6s?
If anything making it easier to hit a target with having double +1 the WS of the opponent is fine (to hit on 2+) but in no way should to hit rolls go below 5+. Sometimes just just need some grots, guardsmen, fire warriors, or killa kanz to lay the smack down to some elder gits who thinks they are too hip to be hit 
I think rules should reflect the background as close to possible without creating absurdity. Most characters, fluffwise, should be able to tank a 30 man squad of Boyz quite easily because of various factors. Some do one better and do the whole "soloing an Ork Waagh!" The fine line between the two is where things go awry. Characters like Marine Captains/Chaos Lords, Eldar Autarchs, Ork Warbosses and other "standard" HQ units should be able to take on he average troops of another army and win, while certain CC beast should be able to take on larger groups of troops or small groups of elites with little effort. By CC Beasts I'm talking Hive Tyrants, Daemon Princes, Kharn the Betrayer as an example of special character. For the most part they do, but then you get the odd time when the mighty Skarbrand stubs his toe as he goes to swing, and then gets massecred by the confused but joyous Boyz as he nurses the injury. Or guys like Kharn who is a wanton whirlwind of feth you and your dog, kills 1 boy and is dragged down when you'd never even consider that feasible.
|
I'm celebrating 8 years on Dakka Dakka!
I started an Instagram! Follow me at Deadshot Miniatures!
DR:90+S++G+++M+B+IPw40k08#-D+++A+++/cwd363R+++T(Ot)DM+
Check out my Deathwatch story, Aftermath in the fiction section!
Credit to Castiel for banner. Thanks Cas!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/07 23:11:16
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Krazed Killa Kan
|
Deadshot wrote: Vankraken wrote:Personally I prefer the current close combat system compared to this. It lets common infantry still be relevant against characters so you don't have some silly gak like a character soloing 30 Ork boyz because the boyz can't ever land a hit. Also with fear being the way it is right now there is no way in hell that this sort of system won't turn ugly. Also would an invisible unit of space marines fighting some daemon price result in the battle of the 6s?
If anything making it easier to hit a target with having double +1 the WS of the opponent is fine (to hit on 2+) but in no way should to hit rolls go below 5+. Sometimes just just need some grots, guardsmen, fire warriors, or killa kanz to lay the smack down to some elder gits who thinks they are too hip to be hit 
I think rules should reflect the background as close to possible without creating absurdity. Most characters, fluffwise, should be able to tank a 30 man squad of Boyz quite easily because of various factors. Some do one better and do the whole "soloing an Ork Waagh!" The fine line between the two is where things go awry. Characters like Marine Captains/Chaos Lords, Eldar Autarchs, Ork Warbosses and other "standard" HQ units should be able to take on he average troops of another army and win, while certain CC beast should be able to take on larger groups of troops or small groups of elites with little effort. By CC Beasts I'm talking Hive Tyrants, Daemon Princes, Kharn the Betrayer as an example of special character. For the most part they do, but then you get the odd time when the mighty Skarbrand stubs his toe as he goes to swing, and then gets massecred by the confused but joyous Boyz as he nurses the injury. Or guys like Kharn who is a wanton whirlwind of feth you and your dog, kills 1 boy and is dragged down when you'd never even consider that feasible.
The problem with the fluff vs tabletop is that in the fluff an Ork WAAAGH is in the millions or potentially billions while a Space Marine Chapter's force is at most 1000. The fluff also exaggerates things for heroic, comical, and/or satirical effect a lot of the time. Making a good game is much better than trying to make a game that matches the insanity of the fluff. Even in the current game we see things like 2+ rerollable with invisibility being stupidly hard to kill (until a super heavy just stomps it) which makes for some incredibly unfun games. I am all for characters being cool but nobody wants to see 500 points of models getting soloed by a single character because needing to roll 6s to hit, 5s to wound, and needing to see a 2+ rerollable fail then have the 5+ FNP fail then having to do that 2 more times to kill them. This is a game of rolling dice and the math/probability starts getting really ugly when you start to need multiple low probability rolls in a row to work. Last thing 40K needs is to make assaults more useless by limiting the field of potential close combat units to those with really good WS. They already die by the bucket load to shooting so why do we need to make the expendable/tarpit guys even worse and buff the melee characters who tend to be lacking due to actually trying to get into close combat instead of the close combat itself.
Small example of the current system in action. A few months ago I had a unit of 5 killa kanz beat the squig gak out of a Daemon Prince over the process of 4-5 rounds of combat. He rolled rather poorly over multiple turns while my Kanz slowly got in a wound every other round of combat. It was actually interesting and exciting to see this slug fest take place as a single good round of rolls for the daemon would of taken out a fair amount of Kanz but each round it got slowly worse for the daemon prince. If my Kanz had to hit on 6s and the daemon prince would of hit on 2s with some rerolls then it would of been such a boring event as the fight would of been all but decided as soon as the prince charged in (or got charged). Sure it sucked for the Chaos player who slowly watched his Daemon Prince get smacked down by Kanz due to poor rolls but its better than one player making pointless rolls while the other player mops the floor with everything.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/01/07 23:13:39
"Hold my shoota, I'm goin in"
Armies (7th edition points)
7000+ Points Death Skullz
4000 Points
+ + 3000 Points "The Fiery Heart of the Emperor"
3500 Points "Void Kraken" Space Marines
3000 Points "Bard's Booze Cruise" |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/10 20:42:23
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
!!Goffik Rocker!!
|
Deadshot wrote:Most characters, fluffwise, should be able to tank a 30 man squad of Boyz quite easily because of various factors. Some do one better and do the whole "soloing an Ork Waagh!" The fine line between the two is where things go awry. Characters like Marine Captains/Chaos Lords, Eldar Autarchs, Ork Warbosses and other "standard" HQ units should be able to take on he average troops of another army and win, while certain CC beast should be able to take on larger groups of troops or small groups of elites with little effort. By CC Beasts I'm talking Hive Tyrants, Daemon Princes, Kharn the Betrayer as an example of special character. For the most part they do, but then you get the odd time when the mighty Skarbrand stubs his toe as he goes to swing, and then gets massecred by the confused but joyous Boyz as he nurses the injury. Or guys like Kharn who is a wanton whirlwind of feth you and your dog, kills 1 boy and is dragged down when you'd never even consider that feasible.
It's all great but than they should cost appropriately. If an average naked Space marine captain with ws6 will be abl to solo 50 guardsmen, than he should cost more than this 50 guardsmen. So, this system will work when captain costs like 200 pt before wargear. And than he gets shot to death.
If you want to change the system so drastically, you should also balance it out. Means that good cc and all shooting should go up in price while crappy cc should go down in price. This will require a massive rebalancing.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/11 10:00:49
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
Just curious, why doesn't weapon skill work exactly like BS? Having to compare skills to compete just to hit seems like it just bogs down the system.
WS1 hits on a 6, 2 on a 5+, 3 4+. High WS models get rerolls on the miss just like shooting.
I never understood why they bothered to make WS different from BS.
|
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/11 10:23:05
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Courageous Space Marine Captain
|
Lance845 wrote:Just curious, why doesn't weapon skill work exactly like BS? Having to compare skills to compete just to hit seems like it just bogs down the system.
WS1 hits on a 6, 2 on a 5+, 3 4+. High WS models get rerolls on the miss just like shooting.
I never understood why they bothered to make WS different from BS.
Shooting is a simple matter of pointing yiur gun and pulling a trigger. High BS represents an ability to account for gravity, wind, distance, speed of the target, speed of the bullet, stuff like that. Hitting a target with a ranged weapon is entirely down to skill with said weapon.
On the other hand, as good as you may be with a sword, if the opponent is parrying every strike with ease, you're going to have a hard time. Its no longer entirely dependent on your own skill, and its no longer a one-way system of point and shoot, its a contest and comparison of your skills.
|
I'm celebrating 8 years on Dakka Dakka!
I started an Instagram! Follow me at Deadshot Miniatures!
DR:90+S++G+++M+B+IPw40k08#-D+++A+++/cwd363R+++T(Ot)DM+
Check out my Deathwatch story, Aftermath in the fiction section!
Credit to Castiel for banner. Thanks Cas!
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/11 10:50:55
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Norn Queen
|
Deadshot wrote:Lance845 wrote:Just curious, why doesn't weapon skill work exactly like BS? Having to compare skills to compete just to hit seems like it just bogs down the system.
WS1 hits on a 6, 2 on a 5+, 3 4+. High WS models get rerolls on the miss just like shooting.
I never understood why they bothered to make WS different from BS.
Shooting is a simple matter of pointing yiur gun and pulling a trigger. High BS represents an ability to account for gravity, wind, distance, speed of the target, speed of the bullet, stuff like that. Hitting a target with a ranged weapon is entirely down to skill with said weapon.
On the other hand, as good as you may be with a sword, if the opponent is parrying every strike with ease, you're going to have a hard time. Its no longer entirely dependent on your own skill, and its no longer a one-way system of point and shoot, its a contest and comparison of your skills.
Yeah, I understand that actual melee combat is much more of a back and forth. But I am talking from a purely gameplay/fun/simplicity perspective. Does the mechanic of comparing WS add a benefit that is worth the extra chart checking and attribute comparison?
|
These are my opinions. This is how I feel. Others may feel differently. This needs to be stated for some reason.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/01/11 12:10:26
Subject: Close combat To Hit chart change
|
 |
Not as Good as a Minion
|
Lance845 wrote:Does the mechanic of comparing WS add a benefit that is worth the extra chart checking and attribute comparison?
It used to but the current rules do not use the advantages of the system
e.g.: give all tanks WS1, (and change the chart from 2+ to 6+) and you won't need special rules for ramming any more (because a tank will hit another tank on 4+ while he hits infantry on 6+)
Also you have the possibility to make units which are well protected in melee while easy to kill by ranged attacks (not with the current chart)
If you want to break it down to a simple to hit role like BS, you need to roll against the skill of the defending model, otherwise you cannot represent well protected melee units without adding a special rule
But for the current 40k: attacking models hit on a 3+, defending models hit on 4+, would be enough because the current chart
|
Harry, bring this ring to Narnia or the Sith will take the Enterprise |
|
 |
 |
|