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 think the concept of the Deathstrike (artillery vehicle with a single-use mega-missile) is not a bad one, but I've never seen the use for it, myself. Too many eggs in one flimsy basket. That single missile would need to be as powerful as a Manticore's four rockets put together; more so, in fact, to make up for the weapon's all-or-nothing nature and the unpredictability of its The Hour Is Nigh rule.

The issues with the Deathstrike (and my proposed solutions) are as follows:

1. It's unpredictable, and until it fires its one shot, it's a sitting duck just waiting to be destroyed. This is the one drawback I would actually keep. I would just make the weapon powerful enough to make the risk worthwhile. Given the appearance of the model (a huge missile mounted on a pair of treads), it pretty much has to be a one-hit wonder.

2. Currently, the chance that it will one-shot a vehicle or unit of any substance is quite small. Its awesome power was translated into mortal wounds, which IMO are inadequate. The Deathstrike will take a big bite out of a vehicle or monster, but is unlikely to actually destroy it. Instead of mortal wounds, I think it should deal regular damage (with wound rolls and damage rolls and everything), but in an amount comparable to the main gun of a Baneblade variant. (For reference, a Banesword is 2d6 shots at range 140, Strength 14, AP -4, damage D6, with damage rolls of 1 and 2 counting as 3.) Once it does fire, it should be able to reliably take out a model 100-150 pts more expensive than itself, such as a Land Raider. After all, it gets only the one shot, and there's a very high chance your opponent will pull out all the stops to destroy it before it can fire.

3. It's hobbled by its degrading profile. And Imperial Guard BS isn't too high to begin with. Instead of its current stratagem to bump the power of the missile, I think the Deathstrike should have a 2 CP stratagem allowing it to fire its payload at BS4+ regardless of the damage it has taken. This way, you get the missile's full power, but your opponent's attempts to destroy the Deathstrike haven't fully gone to waste either, since he's forcing you to spend CP.

4. It needs some flexibility. By the time your Deathstrike gets to shoot, several of the choicest targets may already have been eliminated by the rest of your artillery, or may be locked in close combat. To remedy this, the missile could have two modes: direct hit (few shots but high Strength and Damage, for use against vehicles) and air burst (many shots but moderate Strength and Damage, for use against infantry).

5. One grot in melee can keep it from shooting the huge missile. I think it would make sense for the Deathstrike to have a special rule allowing it to fire its missile even if there are enemy models in combat with it. Because how the hell can the models in melee stop that missile, even if they clamber on top of the vehicle? Have you seen the size of that thing??? Might as well stick a banana in the muzzle of a boltgun.

.

Those kind of vehicle can be useful only in very deep battle grounds (in comparison with the models size), but those kind of battle grounds are incompatible with the Warhammer scale (1/78 circa), because you shouldn't able to reach the centre of the table; you should use the Epic scale (1/285 circa). In fact the similar vehicles that actually existed, were equipped with long range missiles; for example the American M752 carried a missiles able to hit a target 75 miles distant.

On a second thought also the "Epic scale" would be too large: to simulate a battlefield 75 miles deep, you should use a table 6 metres deep (236 inches circa)!

The_Grim_Angel wrote:
Those kind of vehicle can be useful only in very deep battle grounds (in comparison with the models size), but those kind of battle grounds are incompatible with the Warhammer scale (1/78 circa), because you shouldn't able to reach the centre of the table; you should use the Epic scale (1/285 circa). In fact the similar vehicles that actually existed, were equipped with long range missiles; for example the American M752 carried a missiles able to hit a target 75 miles distant.

On a second thought also the "Epic scale" would be too large: to simulate a battlefield 75 miles deep, you should use a table 6 metres deep (236 inches circa)!

Although true, the model exists so it should be useful.
Firstly, I'd like to return the infinite range. Just for the memes of phoning up a shop on the other side of the world and nuking their boards.
Secondly, you could even return a semblance of blast to the weapon. EG, when it fires choose a spot on the table, make an attack against each unit for every model within 5in, VEHICLES and MONSTERS suffer d3 attacks".
It should probably be something like S16, AP5, Dd6+3 or something.

This thing would snipe characters and do serious damage then.

1. Agreed.
2. That's an interesting approach, but I personally prefer unmitigable MW mechanic. I'd suspect deathstrike would have difficulty with invuls if we went your route, which would suck more than 'inadequate' translation IMO.
3. Agreed, but instead, I think it should be a built in rule rather than a stratagem: "Nuclear Launch Detected: When this model makes an attack using the Deathstrike Missile, use the top value on its damage chart when determining the BS for this attack, regardless of how many wounds the model has lost."
4. I disagree. I think with such unit, target priority should be of the owner's responsibility to make the most of its missile. That would mean purposely "saving" the juiciest target for spectacular 1-hit instagib.
5. I think that's design intent. If you choose to take deathstrike(s), it should be your responsibility to support it(them) with ample defense against melee.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

The_Grim_Angel wrote:
Those kind of vehicle can be useful only in very deep battle grounds (in comparison with the models size), but those kind of battle grounds are incompatible with the Warhammer scale (1/78 circa), because you shouldn't able to reach the centre of the table; you should use the Epic scale (1/285 circa). In fact the similar vehicles that actually existed, were equipped with long range missiles; for example the American M752 carried a missiles able to hit a target 75 miles distant.

On a second thought also the "Epic scale" would be too large: to simulate a battlefield 75 miles deep, you should use a table 6 metres deep (236 inches circa)!

Although true, the model exists so it should be useful.
[…]

I agree, but it is very difficult to make it useful, without create odd rules. In my opinion one option could be make the missile very powerful, in order to have a weapon useful both against the vehicles than the infantry. One other way could give to the Imperial Guard some troops specialized in the hand to hand combat, but all of this is doesn't solve the "original sin" of the model: it can shoot only one time and I'm not able to think to a good solution for this issue.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

The_Grim_Angel wrote:
Those kind of vehicle can be useful only in very deep battle grounds (in comparison with the models size), but those kind of battle grounds are incompatible with the Warhammer scale (1/78 circa), because you shouldn't able to reach the centre of the table; you should use the Epic scale (1/285 circa). In fact the similar vehicles that actually existed, were equipped with long range missiles; for example the American M752 carried a missiles able to hit a target 75 miles distant.

On a second thought also the "Epic scale" would be too large: to simulate a battlefield 75 miles deep, you should use a table 6 metres deep (236 inches circa)!

Although true, the model exists so it should be useful.

Probably an unpopular sentiment, but I'm not sure I agree in this case. Depending on how you abstract it, a 40k table is the size of what? A football field? Maybe a couple city blocks? An ICBM on treads that wants to shoot at something that close strikes me as conceptually flawed. It's cool that they exist in the lore, but they really don't make much sense being on the table top; at least not as a unit that wants to shoot things on the same tabletop. If I wanted to have an orbital defense laser on my battlefield, I would expect it to be scenery only or possibly an objective with some sort of relevance to a wider campaign. I wouldn't expect to be allowed to point a battle barge's lance weapon at an enemy standing next to said lance weapon. The deathstrike is kind of in the same boat.

This thing would snipe characters and do serious damage then.

Genuine question from someone who isn't knowledgable about real world weaponry. Is sniping an individual the way one expects an ICBM to be utilized? I guess if you know that the individual is in a general area and you just wipe out all life in that area...

My first thought is to change it to basically being a variation on the orbital bombardment stratagem. The deathstrike missile launch site is a thousand miles away, and you called it in before the battle even began. If you really want to use the model itself, perhaps it could somehow be used to impact things that aren't currently on the table? Like, maybe you can launch it on any of your turns (no countdown rule), and enemy units aren't allowed to arrive from reserves along a table edge of your choice because the missile just eradicated everything offscreen on that side of the battlefield. Or maybe it has a chance of damaging any units in reserves because it exploded in the area they were occupying before arriving on the battlefield.

Maybe I'm being a party pooper, but doesn't letting it target something so close by (and not hit everything on the table) kind of rob it of some of its own coolness?

Many pistols in this game can't shoot the length of a battle tank, such considerations of range are folly, imo.

One abstract thing I could think of that would better fit the fluff of an ICBM would be that the controlling player does not use it to attack stuff on the board but instead there is some kind of secondary generating points for succesfully firing a deathstrike. So in a way if you as a player really choose to pay points for a vehicle that will not contribute to the fight outside of its hull bolter AND manage to keep it alive until it can fire (by way of strategic reserves, heavy terrain etc.) you can take a secondary that generates like... 10 points per Missile fired. So to max it out you need two deathstrikes or one + a Trojan
In this line of though it would also be kind of hilarious if one would give the Deathstrike an incredible powerfull "explodes" result. Like always explodes, 2d6 MW for everything within 12'', reflecting that standing near (as in "on the same footballfield sized battleground) an ICBM that is being shot at is definitly not funny.


Alternativly one could change the optics of the model and reimagine it as a kind of targeter used by the off-board ICBM launcher to home in on its target. So same mechanic as at the moment without the stupidity of firing an ICBM on a target some hundred metres away.

How about just saying it needs 2 turns stationary to prepare to fire? Then it's coming turn 3 or after but the opponent has a chance to stop it.

The reliability aspect of your suggestion paddy is indeed probably the best solution.
Vice versa there are so many things now though, that can insta clear it in a heartbeat, even if you attempt to hide it would make it skew.

Basically if you make it too reliable and to fast firing then the game kinda becomes a question of:
Can you deal with X outside of LOS yes/ no.

If yes you are golden if no well the IG player now skewed you.

Granted i find 2 turns waiting time for t3 shooting bit slow for reliabilities sake but 1 turn waiting time for T2 firing doesn't seem better, especially because of the skew element.

How about if the IG player can launch it in any shooting phase after the 1st. But he gets more victory points the later the turn its launched.

Do you think he is going to fire it early so prioritise it. Or do you think he will wait for the bigger payoff, so it can wait.

Risk vs reward

With the codex we can expect Imperial Guard specific Secondaries - launch a Deathstrike at 'some distant target' (nothing) could be a good idea.
It would be quite unique in it's way. 5/10/15 for launching on turn 2, 3, or 4? Although there's a big shift in how long your opponent has to counter it depending on if you go first or second.
It also takes up a secondary slot which could be quite a problem. Having the Death Strike grant a bonus objective would be very unique but not unworkable.

Wyldhunt wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

The_Grim_Angel wrote:
Those kind of vehicle can be useful only in very deep battle grounds (in comparison with the models size), but those kind of battle grounds are incompatible with the Warhammer scale (1/78 circa), because you shouldn't able to reach the centre of the table; you should use the Epic scale (1/285 circa). In fact the similar vehicles that actually existed, were equipped with long range missiles; for example the American M752 carried a missiles able to hit a target 75 miles distant.

On a second thought also the "Epic scale" would be too large: to simulate a battlefield 75 miles deep, you should use a table 6 metres deep (236 inches circa)!

Although true, the model exists so it should be useful.

Probably an unpopular sentiment, but I'm not sure I agree in this case. Depending on how you abstract it, a 40k table is the size of what? A football field? Maybe a couple city blocks? An ICBM on treads that wants to shoot at something that close strikes me as conceptually flawed. It's cool that they exist in the lore, but they really don't make much sense being on the table top; at least not as a unit that wants to shoot things on the same tabletop. If I wanted to have an orbital defense laser on my battlefield, I would expect it to be scenery only or possibly an objective with some sort of relevance to a wider campaign. I wouldn't expect to be allowed to point a battle barge's lance weapon at an enemy standing next to said lance weapon. The deathstrike is kind of in the same boat.

This thing would snipe characters and do serious damage then.

Genuine question from someone who isn't knowledgable about real world weaponry. Is sniping an individual the way one expects an ICBM to be utilized? I guess if you know that the individual is in a general area and you just wipe out all life in that area...

My first thought is to change it to basically being a variation on the orbital bombardment stratagem. The deathstrike missile launch site is a thousand miles away, and you called it in before the battle even began. If you really want to use the model itself, perhaps it could somehow be used to impact things that aren't currently on the table? Like, maybe you can launch it on any of your turns (no countdown rule), and enemy units aren't allowed to arrive from reserves along a table edge of your choice because the missile just eradicated everything offscreen on that side of the battlefield. Or maybe it has a chance of damaging any units in reserves because it exploded in the area they were occupying before arriving on the battlefield.

Maybe I'm being a party pooper, but doesn't letting it target something so close by (and not hit everything on the table) kind of rob it of some of its own coolness?

I can say I agree with everything.
Anyway if the Warhammer 40.000 scale were exactly 1/78, then a table 44 by 90 inches large would correspond to a battlefield 87 by 178 (286 by 585 feet) metres large; which is more or less two time larger than an American football field.

40k is 1/56 though isn't it? So it's even smaller than that.

I think representing a deathstrike missile strike as an off-board bombardment doesn't fix the matter at hand at all. The idea is to make the Deathstrike Missile launcher a usable unit.

As mentioned before: if one keeps the fluff of it being an ICBM I think the most sensible part would be to turn it into a kind of giant cyclops demolition vehicle. If the enemy has come that close, it makes kind of sense in the guard mindset to drive the thing into the crowd and detonate the warhead and fuel for some enormous kaboom.


If one changes the fluff of it to not be an ICBM per see but "just" a giant short- to mid-range missile it should have firepower roughly in the ballpark of 4-5 Manticore Missiles. Or maybe 1-2 salvos of the new and improved Macharius Vanquisher canons.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
40k is 1/56 though isn't it? So it's even smaller than that.

I think representing a deathstrike missile strike as an off-board bombardment doesn't fix the matter at hand at all. The idea is to make the Deathstrike Missile launcher a usable unit.

I fear you can't: let's say the Deathstrike need only one turn to shoot its only missile. Then you could use it in your first turn to destroy a large part of the enemy troops, but then it would became totally useless. So if the missile is so powerful to make the vehicle effective, the Deathstrike would become the ultimate weapon, able to win a game with only a missile. But if the missile wouldn't be so powerful, then there is the serious risk the vehicle weren't enough effective to be used.
I see only one scenario that would make that vehicle useful, without destroy the game: the "titan-buster" role; but in this way the titans would become useless; if there were armies which use titans in the Warhammer 40.000: I don't know if they exist.

P.S. No, the Deathstrike missile can't be an ICBM (InterContinental Ballistic Missile), because that kind of missile need a totally different platform and they are by large greater. It should be a TaBM (Tactical Ballistic Missile).

I don't disagree that it's a difficult thing to balance, not at all.
I'm just saying that the entire point of this thread is to find a way to make it kinda-work, just throwing up our hands and saying "it should be removed as a model" is entirely the opposite idea.

I agree that making it 100% nuke any single model is not great game design, as it would render any sort of super-heavy unusable for a relatively cheap cost (and things like Knights are fairly common atm).

Which is why I favour the psuedo-blast approach, it allows you to spread out the damage whilst still allowing a devastating effect.
The question then becomes how easily should the missile be launched? And how much damage should it do?

I'm inclined to say that the ability of the missile to launch should be based on the number of turns *your opponent* has had, rather than yourself. This reduces the swinginess of first turn on how much time your opponent has to react.

One thing I could see for it to give it kind of a function: let it act as kind of a "one shooting phase" Shadowsword. So retcon the missile to not have a big explosive warhead but instead a "Titan killing" warhead. Same weapons profile as a shadowsword, maybe even with the BS bonus against titanic units

To not completely invalidate the shadowsword (because you could take 2-3 Deathstrikes instead, so why bother?) there should be some mechanic allowing the enemy to get at least one turn before it shoots, otherwise it would be too hefty for a vehicle of that price.

Honestly?

I don't think there is a "fixing" the Deathstrike without separating the kit from the Manticore. It feels like a piece that could work better as a Fortification that can swap to a vehicle. Having "The Hour is Nigh" as a morale benefitting buff for nearby infantry squads, fighting harder the closer you get to the launch? Having Deathstrikes get treated as a kind of 'supply vehicle' for infantry units around it would make it and its missile feel a lot more valuable to your army without it being ridiculously overpowered.

Or even crazier idea: take a baneblade variant and other scary units along with the deathstrike and see which unit your opponent targets first.

If the deathstrike was able to divert firepoweraway from your other key units, then I'd say it has done its job. I think the first step in 'fixing' 90% of units discussed in these forums are solved by understanding the concept of sacrificial pawn. Value of units aren't solely determined by its offensive output.

Also, if you're worried about deathstrikes blowing up before turn 3, you can always pay CPs to put them into reserves. They can shoot their missiles as soon as they arrive without having to worry about accruing any damage.

The whole point is Deathstrikes are terrible and deal hardly any damage.
Bringing an overcosted Baneblade along too wouldn't change that and just increase the amount of points you've sunken into disappointijg units. (Although the Baneblade isn't as bad).

I'm not too sure whether I would call 150 pt model with 18+ MW potential "terrible and hardly any damage."

At worst, it's a niche choice, with its impact dependent on how well you've synergized your list.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

Which is why I favour the psuedo-blast approach, it allows you to spread out the damage whilst still allowing a devastating effect.
The question then becomes how easily should the missile be launched? And how much damage should it do?

I know that 40k's scale is weird and things are kind of scrunched up, but does shooting a missile that can nuke half the map only a few inches away not kind of contradict the power fantasy suggested by the model and its lore? You could conceivably end up shooting the missile at a location only a few times the missile's length away. Having sniper rifles that can't reach all the way across the table is already kind of weird, but the deathstrike takes things to another level.

I'm not trying to rag on anyone who likes the idea of using a deathstrike on the tabletop, but is this not perceived by deathstrike fans as a hard to reconcile source of fluff/crunch dissonance?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Pyroalchi wrote:
As mentioned before: if one keeps the fluff of it being an ICBM I think the most sensible part would be to turn it into a kind of giant cyclops demolition vehicle. If the enemy has come that close, it makes kind of sense in the guard mindset to drive the thing into the crowd and detonate the warhead and fuel for some enormous kaboom.

That could be an interesting approach. It seems pretty fitting for the imperium (though I imagine many guardsmen would be reluctant to throw their own lives away even if their bosses had no problem doing so.) A deathstrike missile feels more like an objective that the enemy army is showing up to capture/destroy than a unit that would participate in a short-ranged fire fight. So if we accept that a deathstrike that finds itself on an active battlefield has basically failed to serve its intended purpose (high chance the enemy will destroy it before it can launch at a worthwhile target over the horizon), I could see them being built with plan B self-destruct mechanisms.

You didn't requisition the deathstrike to deal with the enemy in front of you. You requisitioned it to deal with the enemy base on the other side of the mountains. That plan has been wrecked by the enemy force showing up next to you, so you may as well get as much out of the missile as you can.

I personally think part of the problem is the weapon being mortal wounds. Mortal Wounds, without the blast mechanic, won't scale correctly with the weapon. On top of that, not all mortal wound targets are created equal. Fire it at 3 Custodes squads vs 3 Termagaunt squads (hell you can use Tyranid Warriors for this example too) and, no matter how many models are in those units, the Custodes are the main ones you'll make your points back with.

I would give it a 6 inch radius 1 time shot. everyting in that range takes d3 str 10 ap -3 auto hits for flat 3 damage. Cost it appropriately.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I personally think part of the problem is the weapon being mortal wounds. Mortal Wounds, without the blast mechanic, won't scale correctly with the weapon. On top of that, not all mortal wound targets are created equal. Fire it at 3 Custodes squads vs 3 Termagaunt squads (hell you can use Tyranid Warriors for this example too) and, no matter how many models are in those units, the Custodes are the main ones you'll make your points back with.

I understand the sentiments, but I actually feel like too much is being expected of from a 150 pt model. There are A LOT MORE less useful units at that price tag. It's what you make of that 150 pt expenditure that determines the value of deathstrike IMO.

It's a high risk, high reward type of unit.

 skchsan wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I personally think part of the problem is the weapon being mortal wounds. Mortal Wounds, without the blast mechanic, won't scale correctly with the weapon. On top of that, not all mortal wound targets are created equal. Fire it at 3 Custodes squads vs 3 Termagaunt squads (hell you can use Tyranid Warriors for this example too) and, no matter how many models are in those units, the Custodes are the main ones you'll make your points back with.

I understand the sentiments, but I actually feel like too much is being expected of from a 150 pt model. There are A LOT MORE less useful units at that price tag. It's what you make of that 150 pt expenditure that determines the value of deathstrike IMO.

It's a high risk, high reward type of unit.

Careful talking like this. You'll get labeled as a deathstrike supporter by the dakka police.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I personally think part of the problem is the weapon being mortal wounds. Mortal Wounds, without the blast mechanic, won't scale correctly with the weapon. On top of that, not all mortal wound targets are created equal. Fire it at 3 Custodes squads vs 3 Termagaunt squads (hell you can use Tyranid Warriors for this example too) and, no matter how many models are in those units, the Custodes are the main ones you'll make your points back with.

I understand the sentiments, but I actually feel like too much is being expected of from a 150 pt model. There are A LOT MORE less useful units at that price tag. It's what you make of that 150 pt expenditure that determines the value of deathstrike IMO.

It's a high risk, high reward type of unit.

Careful talking like this. You'll get labeled as a deathstrike supporter by the dakka police.

But I quite like it!

 Xenomancers wrote:
I would give it a 6 inch radius 1 time shot. everyting in that range takes d3 str 10 ap -3 auto hits for flat 3 damage. Cost it appropriately.

a bit related to it: without adding to much new rules one could just give it the rules for the Cyclops demolition charge, just being able to fire it out of line of sight over the whole board. So 2D6 S9, AP-2, Dd3 autohits in a 6'' radius around the target area. Would be pretty juicy especially to kill characters.
To balance it out a miss on the hit roll does not really mean the missile flew off board but instead a normal miss means, it could not be fired this round, a 1 means it critically malfunctioned and explodes where it stands. So a real high risk-high rewart vehicle.

No idea if this would be overpowered, but it sounds funny.

The Deathstrike should be unreliable, by design it is a one trick pony. The only issue is that it is lacking in firepower.

I would rework the missile abilities:

Blast. This weapon can target units that are not visible to the bearer. This weapon ignores the Look Out, Sir rule. This weapon can be fired even if there is an enemy unit within Engagement Range of the bearer. This weapon can only be fired once per battle. When the this weapon is fired, instead of selecting an enemy unit as a target, select one point one the battlefield that is more than 12" away of the bearer. This weapon must target, and resolve attacks against, every unit that is within 6" of that point (friendly units within 6" of that point are considered enemy units for the purposes of this rule), even if they are within Engagement Range of any units of your army. When resolving an attack made with this weapon that targets a Character with a Wounds characteristic of 9 or less, subtract 1 from the hit roll.