Switch Theme:

One model, One shot, One wound  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Too many dice rolls in 40K?
Yes
No
Lemon Curry

View results
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
VF-1S Valkyrie Squadron Commander





Mississippi

One of the things that has really turned me away from 40K is the buckets of dice lethality that has mired the game in endless rolls. I despise that marines have been moved to 2 wounds, and overall would like to see the amount of dice rolling greatly reduced.

Personally, I'd like to see the standard infantry models go down to a stat line where they make ONE attack, and can survive ONE wound. The one attack represents enough time to take focus to get off a single shot or 3-shot burst from an automatic weapon.

That doesn't preclude some guns (or skilled characters) getting more shots/attacks - I can certainly see the likes of Assault cannons getting two, maybe three shots or the same with Heavy stubbers/Heavy bolters.

Same with wounds - monsters, vehicles, bikes, heroes and everything else bigger than a trooper could be rated for more wounds. Tweak the toughness stat where possible to change the chance of getting a significant wound that removes the model from the table, rather than just plopping extra wounds on the target. D2 and higher wound weapons could then be fewer in number (perhaps changing D2 weapons to have higher Strength instead?) and more significant as anti-tank weapons. And personally, I'd prefer if blast weapons could only hit a target once (split tank guns into multiple profiles - say, HEAT for anti-personnel & AP for anti-vehicle/monster).




It never ends well 
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

I also think that too many dice are rolled in current edition of 40k, but I dislike the concept of "one model, one shot, one wound". Back in 3rd, 4th and 5th editions dice rolling was significantly lower and yet multiwounds models and multi shots weapons were common.

I'm ok with a tank (razorback for example) firing 12 assault cannons shots, I'm not ok with an infantry model (say an aggressor) rolling 18 dice or a tank firing with countless weapons, like the primaris tanks.

Re-rolls, generated extra shots and firing/fighting twice mechanics should be removed completely.


 
   
Made in ca
Longtime Dakkanaut





To each their own.

The thing about rolling a single die is it's all or nothing- you either succeed absolutely or fail absolutely. Rolling a dice pool generally creates fewer instances of absolute failure or absolute success, and more instances of the nuanced spectrum that falls between.

This is why the core mechanics for World of Darkness were better than the core mechanics of D&D- though I haven't checked recent editions of WoD.
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Definitely too much rolling.

I'd like attacks to be roll-to-hit, roll-to-wound, done.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




UK

I actually like rolling a load of dice at once. Avenger Gatling Cannon anyone?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/17 19:11:43


https://www.flickr.com/photos/dreadblade/
Chaos Knights [1800]
Ultramarines [1200]
Hexfire 
   
Made in us
Krazed Killa Kan






Attack bloat is out of control but I don't agree with infantry only having 1 attack/shot. Shoota Boyz with assault 2 for example is fine as they replace accuracy with volume of fire. Same with certain melee units being better at close combat so they get 2-3 melee attacks vs your more ranged focused units which might have 1-2 melee attacks. Special weapons should have some mix of volume of shots and/or enhanced strength/armor penetration properties.

Also all or nothing situations feel really crappy when your banking everything on 1 attack to get through which over the course of 3-4 rounds of combat could very easily have done 0 killing or it's maximum potential. Volume does allow for the dice to better average out so you don't get completely ruined by 3-4 rolls. I'm sure many people know the feeling of watching their unit of terminators get cut in half because they rolled three out of five 1's for their armor saves.

"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" 
   
Made in nl
Fixture of Dakka





Look I make balloon animal

I think there are better ways to reduce the amount of dice rolls than just making every unit 1 wound and 1 attack. That just takes so much diversity out of the game.

A Space Marine is supposed to be a lot harder to take down than a Guardsman or an Ork Boy. Custodes even more so. And to represent units like that you really need multi-wound profiles. Same goes with attacks. Orks just wouldn't feel like Orks if they would only get one attack. You just need these stats to be able to do justice to the great variety of different factions in 40K.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/17 22:48:01


Error 404: Interesting signature not found

 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





feth it, let's stop playing all together, let's just put our minis on the board and flip a coin he who wins the coin flip wins the game!


in all seriousness I'm not sure how dumbing the game down to the OPs suggestion would improve the game, differant amounts of wounds are an important way to diffrentiate between a space marine, a custodes and a guardsman

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in ca
Enigmatic Chaos Sorcerer





British Columbia

Both flagship games could use a "what scale of conflict is this" overhaul.

What complexity there is being contained to your ccg style pre game combo execution and skirmish level miniature minutia is a big turn off for me.

I'd much rather they adopted an Epic/Armageddon approach.

 Crimson Devil wrote:
That's what 7th edition is about. Yelling "Forge the Narrative Pussy!" while kicking your opponent in the dick.
 BlaxicanX wrote:
A young business man named Tom Kirby, who was a pupil of mine until he turned greedy, helped the capitalists hunt down and destroy the wargamers. He betrayed and murdered Games Workshop.


 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






A Space Marine was already harder to take down than a Guardsman or Ork Boy. The 2W Marine paradigm is bleh.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Powerful Pegasus Knight





40K has a design philosophy that is enamored with resolving the abstract in the physical world. So much of the abstract components of the game are front loaded into codex and army construction, that almost all of the tactics and strategy are contained therein. What happens on the table is that the game ends up focusing so much more time on rolling dice, rerolling, and special rules that your time actually strategizing becomes dwarfed by them. From a design perspective I think the game is in a lot of ways just an excuse to roll dice. It takes up a disproportionate amount of time, and you can look at the lists to determine the winners in most cases. Without the dice rolling, it's barely a game.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Eldarain wrote:
Both flagship games could use a "what scale of conflict is this" overhaul.

What complexity there is being contained to your ccg style pre game combo execution and skirmish level miniature minutia is a big turn off for me.

I'd much rather they adopted an Epic/Armageddon approach.
40k suffers a lot from trying to make a company scaled game work in 28mm.

Epic Armageddon works because 6mm is best mm, AND it's what i consider an "elegant" ruleset. What i mean by that is the rules are simple, but lead to emergent behavior that creates a depth larger than the rules seemingly provide at first glance. LOTR is another "elegant" system.

Epic Armageddon is also a combined arms wargame at heart which helps as well. I can actually use my guardsmen to advance on a position after artillery bombarded it yay!!!!

This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2021/07/17 21:57:50


 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 Insectum7 wrote:
A Space Marine was already harder to take down than a Guardsman or Ork Boy. The 2W Marine paradigm is bleh.


This.


I don't think 1-wound, 1-shot, 1-attack is necessary (e.g. 2 attacks is generally how melee units are/were defined) but we definitely didn't need so many non-character infantry units to go up to 2-3 wounds. Nor, I think, should basic infantry be putting out 4-5 shots or attacks each.

I would also suggest that there's far too much 'rolling dice for the sake of rolling dice' in the game. If a weapon currently has d3 shots just give it 2 shots. And then you've the absolute mess that is Psychic powers. Just look at all the pseudo-Smite powers and their desperate attempts to be different by rolling slightly different combinations of dice to still end up with near-identical results.

And for the love of God, stop having dedicated dice-rolls for stuff that only works on 6s. An ability that triggers when a model rolls a 6 to hit/wound/save is fine. That was a roll you were going to make anyway. But giving models 6+ FNP is just a time-wasting mechanic.

 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in au
Repentia Mistress





The superfluous dice roll stuff really kicked in then rerolls were introduced as well as rolling for amount of attacks per attack.
Looking at arco flagellate. Oh they get d3 attacks per attack and there's a priest nearby, so they've got 3d3 attacks each and there's 9 models. Roll 27 do just to find out how many attacks they have; then roll 80+do to hit. Oh they get reroll to hit, so let's reroll the 50 that missed.
Granted they don't roll for attack number any more; but still, rerolls shouldn't be in the game.
   
Made in us
Da Head Honcho Boss Grot




New Jersey, State of Perfection

Are there too many dice rolls? Yes. Do I agree with your stance that models should have one attack and one wound each? Absolutely not.

The problem with the too many dice rolls isn't that models have too many attacks or too many wounds, its that each attack requires multiple rolls to resolve - roll to hit, potential rerolls, roll to wound, potential rerolls, armor saves, potential rerolls, on top of things like feel no pain, etc. which add additional rolls into the resolution chain. Don't get me started with models and weapons that have variable numbers of attacks and variable stats (strength, AP, and now damage too).

I don't mind rolling a bucket of dice, theres something satisfying about it sometimes. The problem is that after the bucket is rolled it then needs to be rolled again a few more times to find out what happens.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/17 23:59:47


This ain't no pansy GW Armor, son - Digital Sculpting Plog, Now with Heavy Weapon Platforms!
Sympathy for the Devil, or: The Project Log from Hell

Ma55ter_fett wrote:It reads like the ramblings of a Nigerian lobotomized Shakespeare typed into a cellphone with a very aggressive autocomplete function.
 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

I think rerolls are fine in moderation.

The issue is that they've gone from being relatively rare to being a standard ability (with most armies' basic auras letting all nearby units reroll 1s to hit or wound).

Incidentally, I really, really hate auras. I can understand wanting non-psyker HQs to have utility beyond hitting stuff in the face but this really doesn't seem like the way to go about it. For the vast majority of models, it's flavourless, it causes a ton of issues, and it adds almost nothing because these auras are always on and involve no choice or meaningful decisions.

I sincerely hope auras are removed from the game in 10th, and that instead stratagems are reworked to be HQ-centric mechanics, rather than feeling like someone spilled Yugioh on 40k..

 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Powerful Pegasus Knight





 vipoid wrote:
I think rerolls are fine in moderation.

The issue is that they've gone from being relatively rare to being a standard ability (with most armies' basic auras letting all nearby units reroll 1s to hit or wound).

Incidentally, I really, really hate auras. I can understand wanting non-psyker HQs to have utility beyond hitting stuff in the face but this really doesn't seem like the way to go about it. For the vast majority of models, it's flavourless, it causes a ton of issues, and it adds almost nothing because these auras are always on and involve no choice or meaningful decisions.

I sincerely hope auras are removed from the game in 10th, and that instead stratagems are reworked to be HQ-centric mechanics, rather than feeling like someone spilled Yugioh on 40k..
If they changed Stratagems to basically be the might system from LOTR it would make the game a lot more interesting. Different HQs having access to different strategems and helping to distinguish characters that "lead from the front" from those that focus more on tactics. All while grounding the system to the game while its being played on the board. Taking out a commander would be more impactful, and the system would feel more integral to the game as a whole.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/07/18 00:50:40


 
   
Made in us
Exalted Beastlord




 Blackie wrote:
I also think that too many dice are rolled in current edition of 40k, but I dislike the concept of "one model, one shot, one wound". Back in 3rd, 4th and 5th editions dice rolling was significantly lower and yet multiwounds models and multi shots weapons were common.

I'm ok with a tank (razorback for example) firing 12 assault cannons shots, I'm not ok with an infantry model (say an aggressor) rolling 18 dice or a tank firing with countless weapons, like the primaris tanks.

Re-rolls, generated extra shots and firing/fighting twice mechanics should be removed completely.


Same. Lots of things just got out of hand, but it wasn't really the basics (for the most part).

That said, recently a lot of weapons have gotten too many base shots. Re-rolls, bonuses on 6, and the MORE! strats are just bonkers.
I'd honestly like to dump strats and traits in a fire and haul army-wide and unit-specific rules back to 1-2 max, with a lot of stuff with zero special rules at all (ie, have stuff to function as a baseline).

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/18 01:01:02


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





as Others said, I like the idea of HQs giving some benifits to represent their ability to lead. re-rolls themselves? I'm eh on.

back befor 8th edition I was a proponent of taking the Imperial Guard orders system and expending it, to one degree or another, EVERY army in 40k. I mean obviously the orders list would be differant from army to army, but the idea of :HQ makes LDR check, and nearby squad can shoot better, has appeal. expand on that system a bit and you can greatly reduce strats and remove the re-roll auras.

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in nl
Fixture of Dakka





Look I make balloon animal

 Insectum7 wrote:
A Space Marine was already harder to take down than a Guardsman or Ork Boy. The 2W Marine paradigm is bleh.

Disagree. Space Marines were harder to take down than Guardsmen, but not by much. Certainly not enough to do justice to the lore. MEQ should never be cannon fodder, and that is pretty much what basic tactical marines had devolved into.

As someone else pointed out already, it is not the wounds that make the game require so many dice rolls, it is all the rolls and re-rolls you have to make for every single attack.


 Sledgehammer wrote:
If they changed Stratagems to basically be the might system from LOTR it would make the game a lot more interesting. Different HQs having access to different strategems and helping to distinguish characters that "lead from the front" from those that focus more on tactics. All while grounding the system to the game while its being played on the board. Taking out a commander would be more impactful, and the system would feel more integral to the game as a whole.
I very much agree with this.
LotR is a really elegant system and I have been hoping for years that they'll change 40K to be a bit more like it. My friends and I once even made a basic system to convert 40K units to LotR unit profiles so we could play 40K with LotR rules.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/18 02:34:50


Error 404: Interesting signature not found

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







Part of the problem is the D6. With just D6 and the nominally 10-point stat range for 40k, there really isn't any room to fit a regular human, a Space Marine and an Ork to different stats and be able to make something slightly tougher than a regular human but not as tough as a Space Marine. That pretty much leaves introducing rerolls (whether it's rerolling failures or just 1's or 2's).

It would be nice, though, if the rules authors admitted that the process was really: Roll to hit, roll to wound, roll regular save, and roll special save.
   
Made in ca
Deranged Necron Destroyer






It's not the human vs marine vs orks vs eldar that's the issue. It's the fact that the game has both grots and Knights in the same game, or, let's ignore vehicles. Grots vs Deamon Prince, or even grots vs Custodes.

Also there's a whole untapped section of, say, rerolling all successful saves, or similar. It's so weird that making your opponent reroll successes isn't a thing.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/18 03:01:46


Girl Gamers are the best! 
   
Made in us
Powerful Pegasus Knight





 Blndmage wrote:
It's not the human vs marine vs orks vs eldar that's the issue. It's the fact that the game has both grots and Knights in the same game, or, let's ignore vehicles. Grots vs Deamon Prince, or even grots vs Custodes.

Also there's a whole untapped section of, say, rerolling all successful saves, or similar. It's so weird that making your opponent reroll successes isn't a thing.
I mean, 7th felt like it did a pretty good job overall of integrating aircraft, super heavies, and vehicles. Monsterous creatures were the black sheep there. Even Epic Armageddon does some of this stuff as well. You don't need 100 special rules. Most vehicles just have a re-rollable save to account for increased armor. It also shows that shoot, wound, save isn't needed. You can condense the rolls down to hitting and saving.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/18 03:13:40


 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Librarian with Freaky Familiar






 Iron_Captain wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
A Space Marine was already harder to take down than a Guardsman or Ork Boy. The 2W Marine paradigm is bleh.

Disagree. Space Marines were harder to take down than Guardsmen, but not by much. Certainly not enough to do justice to the lore. MEQ should never be cannon fodder, and that is pretty much what basic tactical marines had devolved into.
A boltgun had about 3x effectiveness vs. Guard than a Marine.

Even in pure "marineland" the two wounds is weird. At 1w apice it took 10 boltgun shots (5 Marines RFing) to kill a Marine. At 2w it takes 10 Marines RFing. That's crazy.

As for "cannon fodder" most "cannons" do D2 anyways.

Plus it's pumped Marines up in poor ways against other troops (Necron Warriors/Orks) and to compensate now we have, if I'm not mistaken, T5 Orks which puts us in the even stranger spot where Boltguns etc. are no better at killing Orks than Lasguns.

It's all goofy.

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Loyal Necron Lychguard





Curiosity question for people who agree with the OP here, how do you feel about the change to Disgustingly Resilient moving it away from an army wide FNP?
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

I agree that 40k rolls too many dice these days, but reducing weapons to 1 shot or attack except for rare exceptions is not the way to fix that.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in au
Slaanesh Chosen Marine Riding a Fiend




Australia

Nah, I'm happier with the current system.

Emperor's Children
The Fourth Seal  
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut




Yeah, there's way, way too much rolling in the current. Used to be you move a set amount (unless through cover). Not every army had access to a second move. You'd roll to hit, roll to wound, and maybe your opponent would get an armor save.

Now for the most part it's roll to hit, re-roll to hit, roll to wound, re-roll to wound, calculate how many armor saves have to be taken because of things like exploding 6's, take your armor save because most things get an armor save now and even if you have the AP there's always invul saves which have been handed out like candy, reroll your armor save, calculate how many wounds are taken to what, then roll more FNP's...

I've seen some battle reports where one unit shooting at another can take upwards of 5 minutes.

 Iron_Captain wrote:
 Insectum7 wrote:
A Space Marine was already harder to take down than a Guardsman or Ork Boy. The 2W Marine paradigm is bleh.

Disagree. Space Marines were harder to take down than Guardsmen, but not by much. Certainly not enough to do justice to the lore. MEQ should never be cannon fodder, and that is pretty much what basic tactical marines had devolved into.

As someone else pointed out already, it is not the wounds that make the game require so many dice rolls, it is all the rolls and re-rolls you have to make for every single attack.




Ignoring that S4 weapons are anti tank weapons and that the armies space marines are facing are supposed to be every bit as tough and competent as they are, the extra wounds don't exactly help with re-rolling. At the very least, it takes twice as much dice rolling to kill the same amount of unit. There's also shenanigans with weapons that may or may not do D2 based on, you guessed it, dice rolling. For the most part, doubling a model's wounds doubles everything you'd use those wounds for. FNP, invul saves, etc.
   
Made in gb
Fixture of Dakka







How is your Mom's spaghetti, OP?

2021 Plog - Here we go again... - my fifth attempt at a Dakka PLOG

My [url=https://pileofpotential.com/dysartes]Pile of Potential[/url - updates ongoing...

Gamgee on Tau Players wrote:we all kill cats and sell our own families to the devil and eat live puppies.


 Kanluwen wrote:
This is, emphatically, why I will continue suggesting nuking Guard and starting over again. It's a legacy army that needs to be rebooted with a new focal point.

Confirmation of why no-one should listen to Kanluwen when it comes to the IG - he doesn't want the IG, he want's Kan's New Model Army... 
   
Made in gb
Killer Klaivex




The dark behind the eyes.

 Sledgehammer wrote:
I mean, 7th felt like it did a pretty good job overall of integrating aircraft, super heavies, and vehicles.


I would have to disagree on this point.

Unless you were lucky enough to have Grav or D-weapons, playing against Knights felt like your opponent was making up the rules as you went along.

"Yeah, my army ignores this rule, and that rule, oh and that rule as well, oh, and they're immune to everything short of "explodes", and even that doesn't kill them. Oh no, even though they're the size of a skyscraper, you still can't shoot them lest you hit the guardsmen in melee with them. But they can still shoot while in combat and can also make melee attacks against stuff in the vicinity. Oh and it's as fast as a DE skimmer, because why wouldn't it be?"

And then you had the joys of fliers which, once again, required specialised equipment if you wanted to do anything more than plink away at them ineffectually.

"Cool, so your Helldrake can basically go anywhere it likes, damaging 1-2 of my transports each turn whilst also barbequing any units inside them, and if I want to kill it I would need to somehow spend my 2000pts entirely on Ravagers and have every single one of them fire at it. Truly this is a fun and balanced concept that fits neatly into the game."

Sorry but these are some of the worst-integrated and unfun elements to ever make it into 40k.


 Arachnofiend wrote:
Curiosity question for people who agree with the OP here, how do you feel about the change to Disgustingly Resilient moving it away from an army wide FNP?


I can understand moving away from the FNP save (which can be a real pain with D2 weapons against multi-wound infantry). However, the replacement is a little odd in that it seems to be antithetical to the idea of Plague Marines. My understanding was that they were supposed to be especially resilient against small-arms fire but still able to be taken out with heavier ordnance, yet the new rules are almost the opposite - giving no protection against small arms and instead only helping against heavy weapons.

Tbh, I find myself wondering whether a simpler solution would have been to give Plague Marines an extra wound (and other stuff more wounds as appropriate). So with the current rules, Plague Marines would have 3 wounds, though ideally they'd have two and all other non-Primaris Marines would go back to 1. It would have made them much more resilient against low-damage weapons (especially since they're also T5), whilst still leaving them vulnerable to heavier weapons.

(Note: when I suggest that Plague Marines have 2 wounds and all other Marines 1, this would also be with the assumption that a bunch of weapons, like Heavy Bolters, wouldn't have been upgraded to D2 in order to deal with 2-wound Marines.)

 the_scotsman wrote:
Yeah, when i read the small novel that is the Death Guard unit options and think about resolving the attacks from a melee-oriented min size death guard squad, the thing that springs to mind is "Accessible!"

 Argive wrote:
GW seems to have a crystal ball and just pulls hairbrained ideas out of their backside for the most part.


 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

"Prepare to open fire at that towering Wraithknight!"
"ARE YOU DAFT MAN!?! YOU MIGHT HIT THE MEN WHO COME UP TO ITS ANKLES!!!"


Akiasura wrote:
I hate to sound like a serial killer, but I'll be reaching for my friend occam's razor yet again.


 insaniak wrote:

You're not. If you're worried about your opponent using 'fake' rules, you're having fun the wrong way. This hobby isn't about rules. It's about buying Citadel miniatures.

Please report to your nearest GW store for attitude readjustment. Take your wallet.
 
   
Made in us
Depraved Slaanesh Chaos Lord




Inside Yvraine

Reducing granularity almost never works out well. This would favor horde armies as you've lessened the gap between horde infantry and elite infantry, meanwhile sheer numbers still grants the "buckets of dice" you're complaining about.

Under a 1-1-1 rule how would you balance a 10-man tactical squad against say, a 40-man conscript blob?

 Insectum7 wrote:
A Space Marine was already harder to take down than a Guardsman or Ork Boy.
Point for point, this has historically been false.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/18 14:40:39


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: