Switch Theme:

Army Weaknesses  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
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.




Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





I feel like this section of the forums has slowed down a bit while we're on the cusp of an edition change. So let's have a conversation about some changes that would probably be widely rejected just for the heck of it!

7th edition books have mostly done a pretty good job of giving each army some sort of unique mechanic that showcases their particular style of warfare. AdMech get canticles, eldar have battle focus, marines get chapter tactics, etc. This is all well and good. However, I feel that there could be a lot of interesting mechanics born out of intentional weaknesses for each army. 'Nids and orks already kind of have this in the form of instinctive behavior and mob rule, but what sort of "weakness mechanics" would you enjoy seeing on other armies? For instance...

Eldar
A Dying Race:
The eldar are a fading people. Each life lost is a tragedy, a warrior that the craftworld will struggle to replace. Eldar lose 1 VP at the end of the game if less than a fourth of their starting number of non-vehicle units are still alive (rounding up).

The Honored Dead:
Those already dead risk even more than their living kin for the destruction of a wraithbone construct could lead to a darker fate than mere death. Each time a wraith lord, wraith seer, wraith guard, wraith blade, or hemlock wraithfighter unit is destroyed, replace the last model to be removed with a wraith token. Wraith tokens are treated as objectives that follow the rules for the relic but do not count towards any other objectives being used in the mission. The eldar player loses 1 VP at the end of the game if their opponent controls more wraith tokens than the eldar player.

Necrons
Phase Out:
Those of you that woke from your tombs early enough might remember the original version of this. The preservation protocols hard-wired into Necron technology enforces the preservation of necron automata, even at the expense of army cohesion mid-battle. AT the beginning of each necron turn in which less than a fourth of the necron player's non-vehicle units remain in play (including units still in reserves), roll a d6 for each necron unit on the table. On a 4+, that unit is removed from play but does not count as being removed as a casualty. Canoptek units and C'Tan (including C'Tan shards, transcendent C'Tan, tomb stalkers, any unit with "canoptek" in its name, and tomb spyders) do not count towards the starting number of non-vehicle units.
That was a bit lengthy. TlDR; if you've lost 3/4ths of your "necron" units (so not vehicles or canoptek units), then you start vanishing from the table.

Spess Muhreens
Precious Genseed:
Marines have trouble replacing their casualties. See that "The Honored Dead" rule the eldar get? Apply that to all non-vehicle space marines and to dreadnaughts.


What do you think? What would you change or add?


ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







Not sure the Honoured Dead rule should be restricted to wraith units; the point of that rule, as far as I can tell, is that the Eldar need to recover the fallen's soulstones, and everyone on the table has a soulstone, not just the wraith units. I'd suggest dropping the Dying Race rule and applying the Honoured Dead rule to everyone.

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in au
Ancient Space Wolves Venerable Dreadnought






AM, Tyrannids, Orks
Limited Ammo

Negatively modifies enemy To-Hit Rolls when targeted during the shooting phase by a unit it outnumbers significantly - this effect stacks.
5-1 in favour of targeted unit -1
10-1 in favour of targeted unit -2
15-1 in favour of targeted unit -3
20-1 in favour of targeted unit -4

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2017/05/04 04:39:20


I don't break the rules but I'll bend them as far as they'll go. 
   
Made in ca
Heroic Senior Officer





Krieg! What a hole...

Oh yeah because those three factions really need to get further nerfed.

Member of 40k Montreal There is only war in Montreal
Primarchs are a mistake
DKoK Blog:http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/419263.page Have a look, I guarantee you will not see greyer armies, EVER! Now with at least 4 shades of grey

Savageconvoy wrote:
Snookie gives birth to Heavy Gun drone squad. Someone says they are overpowered. World ends.

 
   
Made in au
Ancient Space Wolves Venerable Dreadnought






 Bobthehero wrote:
Oh yeah because those three factions really need to get further nerfed.


They're not getting nerfed, they're nerfing elite armies.

If you have a squad of five Hormagaunts and are being nagged by an attack bike with a heavy weapon the limited ammo rule kicks in and the bike needs to roll a 4+ to hit instead of a 3+.

I don't break the rules but I'll bend them as far as they'll go. 
   
Made in ca
Heroic Senior Officer





Krieg! What a hole...

Ah, I misread that, oops.

Member of 40k Montreal There is only war in Montreal
Primarchs are a mistake
DKoK Blog:http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/419263.page Have a look, I guarantee you will not see greyer armies, EVER! Now with at least 4 shades of grey

Savageconvoy wrote:
Snookie gives birth to Heavy Gun drone squad. Someone says they are overpowered. World ends.

 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





 Dakka Wolf wrote:
AM, Tyrannids, Orks
Limited Ammo

Negatively modifies enemy To-Hit Rolls when targeted during the shooting phase by a unit it outnumbers significantly - this effect stacks.
5-1 in favour of targeted unit -1
10-1 in favour of targeted unit -2
15-1 in favour of targeted unit -3
20-1 in favour of targeted unit -4
I don't understand this rule, from a reasoning standpoint. What does this represent?


They/them

 
   
Made in nz
Longtime Dakkanaut





Auckland, NZ

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I don't understand this rule, from a reasoning standpoint. What does this represent?

There's a lot of fluff about tyranids throwing waves of gaunts at a defending army for the sole purpose of using up their ammunition before they send in the real threats.

However I don't think that this proposed rule represents that very well.
At the start of a fight there is a big unit of gaunts and everyone shooting it is like 'holy gak, where did all our ammunition go? We can't shoot anything!.
The fight goes on, the defenders blast away a bunch of gaunts, and suddenly they have more ammo!
Maybe it's like a FPS, and the gaunts are dropping ammo boxes.
   
Made in au
Ancient Space Wolves Venerable Dreadnought






Arson Fire wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I don't understand this rule, from a reasoning standpoint. What does this represent?

There's a lot of fluff about tyranids throwing waves of gaunts at a defending army for the sole purpose of using up their ammunition before they send in the real threats.

However I don't think that this proposed rule represents that very well.
At the start of a fight there is a big unit of gaunts and everyone shooting it is like 'holy gak, where did all our ammunition go? We can't shoot anything!.
The fight goes on, the defenders blast away a bunch of gaunts, and suddenly they have more ammo!
Maybe it's like a FPS, and the gaunts are dropping ammo boxes.


Maybe "Limited Ammo" isn't the best way to put it, maybe Too Many Targets would be a better way.

Hoard armies suck - all of them - all the models a player has to buy and prepare only to have the worst rules in the game, this is a representation of power in numbers. Each outnumbering level is a force multiplier that dwindles as the unit crosses the board under sustained fire, at the start of the game the high levels make it difficult to hit an actual model representing the difficulty in hitting a target of value in a hoard, as the levels drop it becomes easier to hit the actual models, representing a dwindling in excess bodies.

I don't break the rules but I'll bend them as far as they'll go. 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Arson Fire wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I don't understand this rule, from a reasoning standpoint. What does this represent?

There's a lot of fluff about tyranids throwing waves of gaunts at a defending army for the sole purpose of using up their ammunition before they send in the real threats.

However I don't think that this proposed rule represents that very well.
At the start of a fight there is a big unit of gaunts and everyone shooting it is like 'holy gak, where did all our ammunition go? We can't shoot anything!.
The fight goes on, the defenders blast away a bunch of gaunts, and suddenly they have more ammo!
Maybe it's like a FPS, and the gaunts are dropping ammo boxes.


Maybe "Limited Ammo" isn't the best way to put it, maybe Too Many Targets would be a better way.

Hoard armies suck - all of them - all the models a player has to buy and prepare only to have the worst rules in the game, this is a representation of power in numbers. Each outnumbering level is a force multiplier that dwindles as the unit crosses the board under sustained fire, at the start of the game the high levels make it difficult to hit an actual model representing the difficulty in hitting a target of value in a hoard, as the levels drop it becomes easier to hit the actual models, representing a dwindling in excess bodies.
But we have an indication of how many men a unit has - that's called "models".

If you don't want to field so many bodies, then the reaction (if you don't want to buff the hordes and increase their points as a result) would be to simply play at a lower level.
Also, why would having MORE targets mean I struggle to hit them? Why is it that when I actually whittle down the massive unit, I gain ammo and can suddenly hit them easily?
Most of the time, when I'm shooting at a horde, I'm not trying to snipe out special weapons and leaders - I'm trying to eradicate the unit. The unit itself is the target of value, and it's a MASSIVE target. The "excess bodies" are my targets, and the "excess bodies" in front of them are too.

I'd get your rule if it were on LoS! or Precision Shots, but this one makes no sense as to why I'd be worse at shooting a unit the bigger it got.


They/them

 
   
Made in au
Ancient Space Wolves Venerable Dreadnought






 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Arson Fire wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I don't understand this rule, from a reasoning standpoint. What does this represent?

There's a lot of fluff about tyranids throwing waves of gaunts at a defending army for the sole purpose of using up their ammunition before they send in the real threats.

However I don't think that this proposed rule represents that very well.
At the start of a fight there is a big unit of gaunts and everyone shooting it is like 'holy gak, where did all our ammunition go? We can't shoot anything!.
The fight goes on, the defenders blast away a bunch of gaunts, and suddenly they have more ammo!
Maybe it's like a FPS, and the gaunts are dropping ammo boxes.


Maybe "Limited Ammo" isn't the best way to put it, maybe Too Many Targets would be a better way.

Hoard armies suck - all of them - all the models a player has to buy and prepare only to have the worst rules in the game, this is a representation of power in numbers. Each outnumbering level is a force multiplier that dwindles as the unit crosses the board under sustained fire, at the start of the game the high levels make it difficult to hit an actual model representing the difficulty in hitting a target of value in a hoard, as the levels drop it becomes easier to hit the actual models, representing a dwindling in excess bodies.
But we have an indication of how many men a unit has - that's called "models".

If you don't want to field so many bodies, then the reaction (if you don't want to buff the hordes and increase their points as a result) would be to simply play at a lower level.
Also, why would having MORE targets mean I struggle to hit them? Why is it that when I actually whittle down the massive unit, I gain ammo and can suddenly hit them easily?
Most of the time, when I'm shooting at a horde, I'm not trying to snipe out special weapons and leaders - I'm trying to eradicate the unit. The unit itself is the target of value, and it's a MASSIVE target. The "excess bodies" are my targets, and the "excess bodies" in front of them are too.

I'd get your rule if it were on LoS! or Precision Shots, but this one makes no sense as to why I'd be worse at shooting a unit the bigger it got.



The whole table-top is abstract, that includes models, there's no way ten Space Marines in power would fit in a Rhino - we just accept that the ten plus the crew do fit.
Personally I'm hoping for a complete overhaul in points that makes an 8th edition 1850 match look like a 7th edition 1000 point match.
Space Marines are the standard and so is the 1850 point game, it presses hoard armies back on the points to a place where a Guardsman is either packing Astartes stats or costing so little in points per model that they either become a multi-wound model representing a unit like the AM heavy weapons team or costs so much in dollars per point to field that people just give up on them.
This chart isn't about sniping special characters, use your imagination and picture shooting at a hoard that's 16% bigger than it actually is.

I don't break the rules but I'll bend them as far as they'll go. 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





 Dakka Wolf wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Arson Fire wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I don't understand this rule, from a reasoning standpoint. What does this represent?

There's a lot of fluff about tyranids throwing waves of gaunts at a defending army for the sole purpose of using up their ammunition before they send in the real threats.

However I don't think that this proposed rule represents that very well.
At the start of a fight there is a big unit of gaunts and everyone shooting it is like 'holy gak, where did all our ammunition go? We can't shoot anything!.
The fight goes on, the defenders blast away a bunch of gaunts, and suddenly they have more ammo!
Maybe it's like a FPS, and the gaunts are dropping ammo boxes.


Maybe "Limited Ammo" isn't the best way to put it, maybe Too Many Targets would be a better way.

Hoard armies suck - all of them - all the models a player has to buy and prepare only to have the worst rules in the game, this is a representation of power in numbers. Each outnumbering level is a force multiplier that dwindles as the unit crosses the board under sustained fire, at the start of the game the high levels make it difficult to hit an actual model representing the difficulty in hitting a target of value in a hoard, as the levels drop it becomes easier to hit the actual models, representing a dwindling in excess bodies.
But we have an indication of how many men a unit has - that's called "models".

If you don't want to field so many bodies, then the reaction (if you don't want to buff the hordes and increase their points as a result) would be to simply play at a lower level.
Also, why would having MORE targets mean I struggle to hit them? Why is it that when I actually whittle down the massive unit, I gain ammo and can suddenly hit them easily?
Most of the time, when I'm shooting at a horde, I'm not trying to snipe out special weapons and leaders - I'm trying to eradicate the unit. The unit itself is the target of value, and it's a MASSIVE target. The "excess bodies" are my targets, and the "excess bodies" in front of them are too.

I'd get your rule if it were on LoS! or Precision Shots, but this one makes no sense as to why I'd be worse at shooting a unit the bigger it got.



The whole table-top is abstract, that includes models, there's no way ten Space Marines in power would fit in a Rhino - we just accept that the ten plus the crew do fit.
That's an abstraction of scale, not models. If I see see ten models in a Tactical Squad, that tells me that there's ten Tactical Marines. That's why we have the individual models, because their location is actually certain and is in the space where their base takes up.
There's certainly abstractions in the game, but the physical models are not one.

Personally I'm hoping for a complete overhaul in points that makes an 8th edition 1850 match look like a 7th edition 1000 point match.
I'd like that, and it would also make horde armies more valid, requiring less models to have a decent horde. It would solve this issue far better.

Space Marines are the standard and so is the 1850 point game, it presses hoard armies back on the points to a place where a Guardsman is either packing Astartes stats or costing so little in points per model that they either become a multi-wound model representing a unit like the AM heavy weapons team or costs so much in dollars per point to field that people just give up on them.
This chart isn't about sniping special characters, use your imagination and picture shooting at a hoard that's 16% bigger than it actually is.
If I'm shooting a target that's 16% bigger, then surely I should get a BONUS to hit? I'm using my imagination, but it makes no actual sense that me shooting at a big unit is harder than shooting at a small unit.
Take the horde of Uruk-Hai at Helm's Deep. If I was firing my bow into them, I would hardly need to aim, only enough that I can hit somewhere between the first and last ranks. Once they get whittled down, and I'm left with a single Uruk-Hai in the field of his slain brethren, I actually do need to aim, because I need to hit a single point, not a swarming mass.

It makes no sense. I get it from a balance perspective, but there are plenty of better ways, and is a rather extreme abstraction (it makes no logical sense that the bigger a target, the harder to hit).


They/them

 
   
Made in au
Ancient Space Wolves Venerable Dreadnought






 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 Dakka Wolf wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
 Dakka Wolf wrote:
Arson Fire wrote:
 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
I don't understand this rule, from a reasoning standpoint. What does this represent?

There's a lot of fluff about tyranids throwing waves of gaunts at a defending army for the sole purpose of using up their ammunition before they send in the real threats.

However I don't think that this proposed rule represents that very well.
At the start of a fight there is a big unit of gaunts and everyone shooting it is like 'holy gak, where did all our ammunition go? We can't shoot anything!.
The fight goes on, the defenders blast away a bunch of gaunts, and suddenly they have more ammo!
Maybe it's like a FPS, and the gaunts are dropping ammo boxes.


Maybe "Limited Ammo" isn't the best way to put it, maybe Too Many Targets would be a better way.

Hoard armies suck - all of them - all the models a player has to buy and prepare only to have the worst rules in the game, this is a representation of power in numbers. Each outnumbering level is a force multiplier that dwindles as the unit crosses the board under sustained fire, at the start of the game the high levels make it difficult to hit an actual model representing the difficulty in hitting a target of value in a hoard, as the levels drop it becomes easier to hit the actual models, representing a dwindling in excess bodies.
But we have an indication of how many men a unit has - that's called "models".

If you don't want to field so many bodies, then the reaction (if you don't want to buff the hordes and increase their points as a result) would be to simply play at a lower level.
Also, why would having MORE targets mean I struggle to hit them? Why is it that when I actually whittle down the massive unit, I gain ammo and can suddenly hit them easily?
Most of the time, when I'm shooting at a horde, I'm not trying to snipe out special weapons and leaders - I'm trying to eradicate the unit. The unit itself is the target of value, and it's a MASSIVE target. The "excess bodies" are my targets, and the "excess bodies" in front of them are too.

I'd get your rule if it were on LoS! or Precision Shots, but this one makes no sense as to why I'd be worse at shooting a unit the bigger it got.



The whole table-top is abstract, that includes models, there's no way ten Space Marines in power would fit in a Rhino - we just accept that the ten plus the crew do fit.
That's an abstraction of scale, not models. If I see see ten models in a Tactical Squad, that tells me that there's ten Tactical Marines. That's why we have the individual models, because their location is actually certain and is in the space where their base takes up.
There's certainly abstractions in the game, but the physical models are not one.

Personally I'm hoping for a complete overhaul in points that makes an 8th edition 1850 match look like a 7th edition 1000 point match.
I'd like that, and it would also make horde armies more valid, requiring less models to have a decent horde. It would solve this issue far better.

Space Marines are the standard and so is the 1850 point game, it presses hoard armies back on the points to a place where a Guardsman is either packing Astartes stats or costing so little in points per model that they either become a multi-wound model representing a unit like the AM heavy weapons team or costs so much in dollars per point to field that people just give up on them.
This chart isn't about sniping special characters, use your imagination and picture shooting at a hoard that's 16% bigger than it actually is.
If I'm shooting a target that's 16% bigger, then surely I should get a BONUS to hit? I'm using my imagination, but it makes no actual sense that me shooting at a big unit is harder than shooting at a small unit.
Take the horde of Uruk-Hai at Helm's Deep. If I was firing my bow into them, I would hardly need to aim, only enough that I can hit somewhere between the first and last ranks. Once they get whittled down, and I'm left with a single Uruk-Hai in the field of his slain brethren, I actually do need to aim, because I need to hit a single point, not a swarming mass.

It makes no sense. I get it from a balance perspective, but there are plenty of better ways, and is a rather extreme abstraction (it makes no logical sense that the bigger a target, the harder to hit).


I think I got the missing imagery.

There's so many bodies and so much stuff being kicked up by them moving about that you're seeing shadows in the debris as often as actual bodies in the hoard, it creates an optical illusion - as the hoard thins down in solid bodies the illusion weakens.

I don't break the rules but I'll bend them as far as they'll go. 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





No, I think Smudge is making a lot of really strong point, but you're kinda of denying them since it was your original idea. Just think of another way to represent Hordes.

Even something simple like,

While your unit has over 10 men, you gain +1 Toughness.

That creates an idea that there are so many of them that it feels like our small weapons fire isn't hurting them enough.

or

For every 5 men higher than 10 men a unit has, it may completely ignore a non-instant death wound after all saves has been rolled.

This one really creates the feeling that there are so many of them that 1 or 2 of them dying is not affecting them at all.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2017/05/06 10:12:30



6+ = 6/36 | Reroll 1s = 7/36 | Reroll Misses = 11/36 ||||||| 5+ = 12/36 | Reroll 1s 14/36 | Reroll Misses = 20/36 ||||||| 4+ = 18/36 | Reroll 1s 21/36 | Reroll Misses = 27/36
3+ = 24/36 | Reroll 1s 28/36 | Reroll Misses = 32/36 ||||||| 2+ = 30/36 | Reroll 1s 35/36 ||||||| Highest of 2d6 = 4.47
 
   
Made in gb
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar





 Dakka Wolf wrote:
I think I got the missing imagery.

There's so many bodies and so much stuff being kicked up by them moving about that you're seeing shadows in the debris as often as actual bodies in the hoard, it creates an optical illusion - as the hoard thins down in solid bodies the illusion weakens.
Except that I'm most likely going to be firing indiscriminately into the "cloud". That shouldn't detract from how massive this horde must be. If the Uruk-Hai horde, for example, was attacking on a foggy day, I still wouldn't aim, because they're all packed in.

Second, how big is this cloud?! Why would guardsmen standing still and in firing formation be creating a cloud around them, even if not actually moving aside from their trigger fingers and reloading? Surely being covered in a cloud is represented in other existing rules - ie, Stealth?

Thirdly, this cloud gets bigger and smaller depending on who's shooting at it - if my five man squad of Space Marines fires at a horde of 50 guardsmen, then they suffer a minus -2 to hit. However, if my ten man squad fires at the same unit, then they only have a -1 to hit. What gives?

Again, we also end up with situations where a unit might not kick up a cloud at all, and also have a cloud. Say I have a unit of 10 Space Marines, they don't move in their turn. Then I am attacked by both a single Leman Russ, and a platoon of Infantry. The Leman Russ would have a minus -2 to hit, but when firing at the same target, the Guardsmen would have no problems. Same as a Vindicare Assassin - apparently a master marksman Vindicare can't shoot for toffee when facing an unmoving battleline of 50 cultists, but another unit of 50 guardsmen would have no issues shooting them even if the cultists were charging head on.

It just creates these very illogical situations.

I think just sheer morale increases would be the ideal solution - a horde's durability comes not from the actual toughness or hardness to hit of the men in it, but of the sheer volume of wounds and models. Unfortunately, that's impossible to represent due to physical limitations for a TT setting. However, anything else comes across illogically. Perhaps an FNP save at fixed unit sizes, to represent the shots just being absorbed into the fold, and "semi" wounded soldiers being dragged along by adrenaline, frenzy, and the sheer mass of the men behind them.

Alternatively, rescale the game.



They/them

 
   
Made in au
Ancient Space Wolves Venerable Dreadnought






If it works I'm for it.
I did recently have something pointed out to me that makes me think I'm wasting my breath beyond trying to get an idea across.

The term used to describe any half decent horde is "Deathstar".

I don't break the rules but I'll bend them as far as they'll go. 
   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





I like how this thread started as, "What would be some fun-but-disadvantageous mechanics for a given army," and ended up being 90% about mechanics representing large hordes. XD

On the topic of large hordes, I rather like the idea of giving units of gaunts, ork boyz, etc. an invul save that scales based on how many models remain. So you might get a 6+ invul for having at least 10 bodies, a 5+ for having at least 20, and a 4+ for having 30+. The idea being, as has been pointed out previously, one of abstraction. Sure, you killed 5 orks, but there aren't really *just* 30 boyz there. The 30 models are representing a larger, probably less cohesive force.

I feel like the level of abstraction in 40k really varies from unit to unit. Five dire avengers are probably literally 5 dire avengers, flitting from terrain piece to terrain piece.. A single daemon prince is literally a single daemon prince. But a billion gaunts? That's just a carpet of carapace with so many bodies they can't all bring their weapons to bare effectively at once.


ATTENTION
. Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
 
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







I kind of liked the Bodies Over Bullets rule from the 4e Apocalypse Gaunts formation (120 models minimum, back when you needed ridiculous quantities of stuff to start plonking superheavies down). If a single unit rolls five or more '6's to hit a unit in that formation with a shooting attack they've run out of ammo and the attack does nothing.

It doesn't really help since flamerspam and templatespam remain unaffected, but it's amusing, minor enough not to be wildly counterintuitive, and doesn't require too much bookkeeping.

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in gb
Lieutenant Colonel




i sort of prefer the more natural a subtle differences in a games system that do not need lots of 'fiddle factors' to function.
EG the ones that generate a preferred play style simply from the stat line and army composition.(Obviously comparative costing is required for random pick up games for obvious reasons.)
Reasonable comparative costing and tactical depth are the cornerstones of the diversity in most popular modern war games AFAIK.

I believe the reason 40k got so messed up, is GW plc need to make Space Marines able to cover every play style.
Back in the days of R.T each race has a clearly defined play style, with advantages and dis advantages.

Space marines were the best equipped and best protected force.However limited numbers and not excelling at any one area, meant they had to be used well to win battles.Which was true of all factions at that point .

I am not sure if you would like to discuss this further?

   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




How about using it to affect morale.

Didn't even make a dent.

-Any unit that shot at a unit with this rule and did not reduce the unit by half of its models rounding down (counting from the start of it's shooting attacks), has a -1 leadership modifier until the beginning of the attacking players next turn.

Penalizes MSU quite a bit, and can even hurt fearless armies when combo'd with the tyranid version of psychic shriek or the normal psychic shriek primaris.
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block




Just an idea here but why not treat the "mob"(large group of models in the same unit) as a single model. Like how the new rules are for superheavies and such in 8th edition. The more wounds the horde takes the less effective it becomes.
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







BrotherChaplinMalus wrote:
Just an idea here but why not treat the "mob"(large group of models in the same unit) as a single model. Like how the new rules are for superheavies and such in 8th edition. The more wounds the horde takes the less effective it becomes.


...So...play WHFB?

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







I always imagined Necron army weaknesses would be related to having to pick a particular Madness for your Overlord. Depending on said Madness, it would add additional restrictions on how your army plays, with a Flayer King having a less structured army compared to a Grand Adventurer or so. Plus, Warriors would have Slow and Purposeful (no Overwatch), be subject to "pre-programmed patterns" (similar to WHFB stupidity, etc).

Wiped out Marine squads become additional objectives that if they aren't controlled by the Space Marine player at the end of the game, count as bonus objectives held by the enemy.

When Ork bosses are killed, other Orks kill themselves to determine the new boss.

Etc.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: