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.

I thought occurred to me while reading several other threads. Instead of "making Riptides and DKs Walkers" or "making all Dreadnaughts MC's", why not re-classify them both?
I first want to say that I like the split between 'vehicles' and 'non-vehicles' as they should functionally be different, even if the rules could be better for vehicles in general.

So my proposal is to keep the MC rules the same, but only "living" units such as Daemon Princes, Nids, etc would be able to count as MCs
I propose that the "Walker" unit type be a kind of hybrid between MC and Vehicle rules, allowing all "mechanical" units such as all Tau Suits (including Crisis & Broadsides), Dreadnaughts, Tomb Spiders, Killa Kans etc to share the same unit type.

I have not flushed out the rules yet, but essentially, I would take the existing Walker rules and make them use Toughness and Armour save instead, but also make them roll on a damage chart to represent weapons being blown off, blowing off a leg, making them immobile, etc. So the units that fall into this unit type that are currently MC's would not have to change their stat line, but units like Dreadnaughts would become, say T7, 3+, 3/4 Wounds (this is just a rough example, please don't lose your minds).
Anytime a model with the "Walker" type takes a wound, you roll on the "Walker damage chart". This damage chart would work exactly like the Vehicle chart (it could actually be the vehicle chart).

This new Walker type could also have special ways of interacting with Poison & Haywire, since both should theoretically have some effect on either the machine, or the pilot.
For example, Poison would still work as there is a chance to hit the pilot, but since the suit offers protection, the Poison roll needed is at -1.
Haywire should also be allowed to work, since these Walkers don't take Glances or Pens, Haywire simply always wounds on 2+
Fleshbane or Armourbane could work as simply re-rolling to wound Walkers.

The biggest challenge in changing the Walker rules is adapting them for Super Heavy Walkers. Since the goal is to replace the rules for Walkers, Super-Heavies would need addressing too. In addition to the above changes, SHs gets stomp and ignore damage rolls entirely. An Imperial Knight might have a stat line of T9, 3+ armour, 6 Wounds and get FnP, just like a GC.

I am not sure if Walkers should get Smash, or if we leave that for the remaining MCs. Most Walkers in this new type don't have (or should have) Smash in the first place. Tau suits and Dreads for example

--

Just keep the current MCs, but make them cost a LOT more. Since they don't have a single bad rule.

Martel732 wrote:
Just keep the current MCs, but make them cost a LOT more. Since they don't have a single bad rule.

Well this is more to make Walkers good AND tone down some of the current MCs. 2 birds, 1 stone.
Some MC's don't make sense to have Smash, yet some Walkers don't, but should, for example.

And I have more goals in mind than to "balance" certain units. It would also be nice if certain things functioned the same. Why are Dreadnaughts and DreadKnights so functionally different?
This is meant to be a though experiment.

But otherwise, sure just make all Walkers into MCs and call it a day

-

Do you really want to turn sternguard into one of the most OP units in the game?

I mean, I suppose I'm all for it if everyone's cool with it.

But I mean...should that be a thing? I don't think that should be a thing.

What wounding on a 2+? Hardly OP considering they're a MEQ firing at anywhere from 24" to 12" effectively. a full squad of 10 firing hellfire rounds into MCs:

2+: 1.85 unsaved wounds
3+: 3.7 unsaved wounds
4+: 5.55...5

So, unless the MC costs 255pt and has a 4+ armor save (or 3 wounds and a 3+), the sternguard won't come out ahead considering grav would deal 5.55 wounds at salvo 2 from a 5man squad to a 2+, 4.44 to a 3+ and 3.33 to a 4+. Salvo 3 brings those up to 8.33 vs a 2+ , 6.66 vs a 3+, and 5 vs a 4+. Assuming plas instead of grav against a T6 MC, 4.44 wounds all the time. And that's only 195pt, you could add another 2 guys bringing it up to 4 points over a full man squad and deal even more damage.

And again, MEQ statline, well within assault range and shooting range of the enemy. They might drop in and murder something, but unless it costs roughly the same as them, it was probably a waste of points.

Just turn all large things (all vehicles and MCs) into the same mechanic. Pick one, apply it universally, add a USR for mechanical and biological things, tweak all special and heavy weapons to work with the USRs/changes, boom. You've now fixed a lot of problems. You've also spent a gak loaf of effort doing it all, but you get a better result in the end.

Advantages of a single mechanic governing all large things:

1. Easier to teach/learn.
2. Easier to remember and apply in game.
3. Easier to balance.
4. Better fluff consistency.
5. Simplifies the game.

Disadvantages:

1. Requires a feth ton of work to come up with a baseline, apply it, re-balance everything, and fix all the heavy and special weapons that would deal with them under the new rules.
2. Getting people to actually use the rules you've spent so much time on your wife has left you and you are soul-less husk of a person wondering where they went wrong in life.

So...yeah.

Martel732 wrote:
Just keep the current MCs, but make them cost a LOT more. Since they don't have a single bad rule.

Fear. Unless you're going to tell me fear isn't bad.

The idea seems to just bloat the system with yet another unit type and I don't see why Walkers should be magically vulnerable to poison and haywire when other vehicles aren't.

pm713 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Just keep the current MCs, but make them cost a LOT more. Since they don't have a single bad rule.

Fear. Unless you're going to tell me fear isn't bad.

The idea seems to just bloat the system with yet another unit type and I don't see why Walkers should be magically vulnerable to poison and haywire when other vehicles aren't.

Fear isn't bad, it only has upsides. The vehicle damage table is bad, because it's a rule (or piece of rules) that make the unit type worse.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

pm713 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Just keep the current MCs, but make them cost a LOT more. Since they don't have a single bad rule.

Fear. Unless you're going to tell me fear isn't bad.

The idea seems to just bloat the system with yet another unit type and I don't see why Walkers should be magically vulnerable to poison and haywire when other vehicles aren't.

Fear isn't bad, it only has upsides. The vehicle damage table is bad, because it's a rule (or piece of rules) that make the unit type worse.

Fear is terrible because it does virtually nothing in reality.

I forgot they had it. So they have one non-rule. Walkers can immobilize themselves on a bush.

Fear is worthless unless you stack big LD debuffs vs non ATSKNF, fearless, fear, zealot (iirc), or auto pass ability of some kind.

So good vs pretty much nothing. All marines? Auto pass. Anything with fear? Passed. High LD units unless you build your army to stack LD debuffs? Worthless.

Martel732 wrote:
I forgot they had it. So they have one non-rule. Walkers can immobilize themselves on a bush.

I thought Walkers had MTC. If they don't WTF GW?

Yeah basically my goal with this change is to make 3 major kinds of units: Those with T and Armour save that get wounded only, Vehicles that take damage as they lose HPs and "Walkers" that get wounded and take damage.
While I don't see any issues with Walkers just becoming MCs, it makes rules like Poison and Fleshbane kinda silly against them, while Haywire & Armourbane SHOULD work but wouldn't
I also don't see regular vehicles like tanks and transport functioning very well as models with T. The AV vs Str mechanic is too ingrained into 40K, you would have to overhaul the entire system (which causes more problems than it fixes in 90% of table-top game history).

So my solution's goal is to make "big mechanical things" also take damage that reduce their effectiveness. In this way, vehicles don't look so bad, Walkers become much better, Tau aren't so OP, and Nids (by virtue of halving most of the 'true' MC) are much better in comparison.
While I don't think Wraithlords and WraithKnights should be Walkers or SH Walkers as they are now, with this change to the "Walker" type, they would both fit in fine.
Imagine if IKs were T9 with a 3+ armour, vs a WK with only T8. In that scenarios, the IK should cost more than the WK

Another proposed rule for this new "Walker type" is to have their armour save be less in the rear armour, say 4+ for a Dreadnaught, but 5+ in the rear of WarWalkers, Killa Kans or Crisis Suits.

-

 Blacksails wrote:
Just turn all large things (all vehicles and MCs) into the same mechanic. Pick one, apply it universally, add a USR for mechanical and biological things, tweak all special and heavy weapons to work with the USRs/changes, boom. You've now fixed a lot of problems. You've also spent a gak loaf of effort doing it all, but you get a better result in the end.

Advantages of a single mechanic governing all large things:

1. Easier to teach/learn.
2. Easier to remember and apply in game.
3. Easier to balance.
4. Better fluff consistency.
5. Simplifies the game.

Disadvantages:

1. Requires a feth ton of work to come up with a baseline, apply it, re-balance everything, and fix all the heavy and special weapons that would deal with them under the new rules.
2. Getting people to actually use the rules you've spent so much time on your wife has left you and you are soul-less husk of a person wondering where they went wrong in life.

So...yeah.

Pretty much this.

Take the mechanic from AoS and make monsters and mechanical things into one thing with a Wound value, and have a chart that makes it get weaker as it takes damage. Then have things like Ordnance, D weapons, AP1/2 weapons, ext do multiple wounds or something along those lines.