Switch Theme:

More damage not less!  [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
Decrepit Dakkanaut





This reddit thread talks a lot about what I like in 40K right now, which is the granularity. It also talks about some of what stresses people out.

The gist is taking things like the Multimelta down to one shot, but 1D6+2 damage and then double damage at 12". Then we have a weapon that no longer beats out a Heavy Bolter at killing marines, because all that extra damage is simply wasted and you have half the shots. The MM then becomes a more appropriate AT weapon. We still need to tweak the tanks, but then doubling the wounds wound then be a viable path.

Other things like weapons that get +1 to hit vs 11+ models ( stubbers ), +1 to hit vs vehicle ( lascannon ), or even " all is dust " for vehicles.

Anyway it's a good read so give it a peak. The solutions don't add dice to the system and just reinforce the granularity.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/q6qhgk/weapons_defensive_profiles_and_granularity/

   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




In principle more variety in stat lines and greater weapon specialisation should encourage more TAC list building and a potentially more balanced game.

It is however a bit complicated. For example the MM doing 2d6+4 in 12" but having one shot is probably a nerf - because there is now a much higher probability of doing 0 damage. Hitting on 3s, wounding on 3s into a 5++ gives you a 30% chance to do *some* damage as compared with about 50% right now. Average hammer may have it the same, but outcomes in games are discrete.

The problem is also that unless you are careful you often find rock/paper/scissors isnt equal for some reason, often due to soft stats. Autocannons for instance are now extremely specialised with lots of terrible matchups due to minus 1 damage effects.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




If we're going to go down a route that involves rewriting most weapon profiles and adding abilities I'd just reconfigure the T/W/Sv of vehicles and monsters and the damage output of anti-tank weapons. Then you introduce an Epic-style Anti-tank trait that makes AT weapons bad against non-vehicle/monster units.

So you end up with vehicles and monsters with more Wounds and higher Toughness and a bump in AT weapon damage (which may not be equal to the increase in vehicle survivability). That would also potentially stop a lot of edge cases where spamming low-Strength shooting is more effective at killing vehicles than firing Lascannons at them.

I still think the better approach is to first reduce overall lethality to a more sane level, then look at which areas you need to adjust. I have no problem with it taking a couple of turns to kill a tank as long as the damage you inflict in the meantime accomplishes something.
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut




I've rarely seen soooooooooo many vehicles in the game.

Ork Buggies, Nemesis Dreadknights, Marine Dreadnoughts, Drukhari Raider, AdMech Flyers, Ork Flyers, Death Guard Drones/PBCs, Knights resurgent, etc., etc.., etc,,

AT Weapons need more damage AND more shots AND vehicles need to lose a few wounds/toughness to give non-vehicles half a purpose in the game again.



This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/10/13 09:22:54


 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
AT Weapons need more damage AND more shots AND vehicles need to lose a few wounds/toughness to give non-vehicles half a purpose in the game again.
What's this alternate reality you live in like? Does it rain donuts?

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

 
   
Made in de
Longtime Dakkanaut



Bamberg / Erlangen

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I've rarely seen soooooooooo many vehicles in the game.

Ork Buggies, Nemesis Dreadknights, Marine Dreadnoughts, Drukhari Raider, AdMech Flyers, Ork Flyers, Death Guard Drones/PBCs, Knights resurgent, etc., etc.., etc,

The issue here is, that most vehicles are not balanced against each other. Yes, you see (Redemptor and Contemptor) Dreads, while the rest of them stays at home. Gladiators and Predators? Nada. Land Raiders and Repulsors? Zero. Land Speeders and Storm Speeders? Zilch.
Same with other armies. Some vehicles are being played despite the high lethality of AT weapons.

Sunny Side Up wrote:
AT Weapons need more damage AND more shots AND vehicles need to lose a few wounds/toughness to give non-vehicles half a purpose in the game again.
Strongly disagree. AT weaponry needs to be made more specific at killing tanks and less efficient at killing elite infantry.

Imperial Guard Space Marines
 
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

Slipspace wrote:


I still think the better approach is to first reduce overall lethality to a more sane level, then look at which areas you need to adjust. I have no problem with it taking a couple of turns to kill a tank as long as the damage you inflict in the meantime accomplishes something.


Exactly. Reducing the rate of fire and the tools to enhance the shots, including re-rolls, is definitely the best way to improve the game.

Being able to get a guaranteed one shot (or even close to it) towards something that is supposed to be pretty tanky, using TAC lists, is terrible game design.


 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Daedalus81 wrote:
This reddit thread talks a lot about what I like in 40K right now, which is the granularity. It also talks about some of what stresses people out.

The gist is taking things like the Multimelta down to one shot, but 1D6+2 damage and then double damage at 12". Then we have a weapon that no longer beats out a Heavy Bolter at killing marines, because all that extra damage is simply wasted and you have half the shots. The MM then becomes a more appropriate AT weapon. We still need to tweak the tanks, but then doubling the wounds wound then be a viable path.

Other things like weapons that get +1 to hit vs 11+ models ( stubbers ), +1 to hit vs vehicle ( lascannon ), or even " all is dust " for vehicles.

Anyway it's a good read so give it a peak. The solutions don't add dice to the system and just reinforce the granularity.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarhammerCompetitive/comments/q6qhgk/weapons_defensive_profiles_and_granularity/


Honestly I'd be perfectly fine with anti-tank weapons all having extremely high boosted damage if GW had just....done gak all simultaneous.

Like, release new Toughness, Wounds and Save for all vehicles and monsters, and boost up multi-melta/lascannon/dark lance/bright lance/fusion damage output to make them super duper mean and fantastic at killing things with many wounds.

Especially if you also released new damage tables more similar to some of the ones in Age of Sigmar, where you can start seeing the effects at only a few wounds, to allow you to truly 'whittle down' a large target. That'd be fine. I'm not knee-jerk opposed to stuff dealing more damage because damage bad, I just think the current system of "only get updated stats when you get your new codex but all imperial offensive weaponry got updated simultanously" is asinine and led to a gak-ton of problems.

You've got codexes out for all factions: There's ZERO reason to be continuing codex churn. Release books that people have to buy to pay for stats if you want, but make the rules content in those books game-wide updates to whole classes of unit. Take the time to build some real meaningful stat differentiation, explore the space a little bit because you didnt have the chance to trying to update everything for 9th.

maybe the leman russ' old "super duper tough from the front, but once you blow the armor plating away it's more vulnerable" identity could be represented by it starting at T9 1+sv and degrading in both toughness and save at the 1/3hp, 1/2hp and 2/3hp marks. Maybe you could bring back the old 'jink and give up your shooting for an invulnerable save' for eldar stuff and lower down the toughness to make it more useful to shoot autocannons and heavy bolters at them than dedicated AT weaponry.

There's a huge amount of game space GW is just not exploring because theyre locked in to just updating one faction at a time instead of actually holistically shifting the game around after theyve established every army with codex books. You could easily obviate the need for many new codexes with simple common-sense updates to how certain factions work - adding second halves to subfaction traits, making subfaction traits interact with all units in the codex, releasing a few new datasheets for lackluster units...

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/13 11:44:35


"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Sure Space Wolves Land Raider Pilot




Somerdale, NJ, USA

I'd be fine with the OP suggestion on giving Anti-Tank weapons (Lascannon, Multimelta, Battlecannon, etc...) and/or Anti-Personnel Weapons (Heavy Stubber, Heavy Bolter, Gatling Laser, etc...) a keyword or special rule that gives them a +1 to hit their name given targets. +1 to hit Vehicles or +1 to hit mobs of 11+ makes sense to me.

"The only problem with your genepool is that there wasn't a lifeguard on duty to prevent you from swimming."

"You either die a Morty, or you live long enough to see yourself become a Rick."

- 8k /// - 5k /// - 5k /// - 6k /// - 6k /// - 4k /// - 4k 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




I think the_scotsman makes a good point about the degrading damage charts. When they were initially revealed I thought they seemed like a cool mechanic that could help make vehicles viable while still allowing counterplay by gradually degrading them. Instead we got a system where 90% of them have the same stat decreases at 2 distinct break points. GW could do so much more with that. Adding more wounds but more break points and reducing some defensive stats in the lower bands would be a good start.

You could represent weapon systems being damaged by reducing S or number of shots on certain guns. Maybe in the lowest bracket sponson or hull-mounted weapons stopped functioning. Reducing defensive stats could represent increasing damage to the hull.

If you gave vehicles more wounds but a more interesting way to degrade they might see more play.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





Halifax

I'd rather see vehicles treated like infantry squads, in that they're a collection of parts, that the whole might bugger off if hit sufficiently hard (leaving aside that morale is a non-existent part of the game), and so on.

   
Made in ca
Quick-fingered Warlord Moderatus






Make vehicles have a higher toughness and make them have more wounds.

Make antitank (add a keyword system to weapons, PLEASE) have big flat damage but low rate of fire. Siege drills for the Leviathan for example. Doesnt matter that a lascannon one shots a terminator because it deals a flat 6, its still not gonna wipe a squad because its only a single shot.

Admech Lucius
Drukhari
Craftworld Yme-Loc
Thousand sons
Tzeentch Demons
Slaanesh Demons
Night Lords
Imperial knights

 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran






I'm putting on my old hammer hat....

But in older editions weapons clearly slotted into relatively distinctive roles. Sure, some stronger anti-personal weapons did an okay job against light vehicles, etc. But if you took a multi-melta you took it to because you intended to go vehicle hunting. And chances are, given that it was only 1-shot, you would want to bring a few of them (or the equivalent) so that you had an overall strategy for dealing with heavy vehicles, should your opponent bring them.

The incrementalization of stats and lack of clearly defined roles for weapons is something I don't like about 9th. The "best" weapons end up being ones in the middle that can, with the right boosts and strats, deal with everything really waters down gameplay.

Want a better 40K?
Check out ProHammer: Classic - An Awesomely Unified Ruleset for 3rd - 7th Edition 40K... for retro 40k feels!
 
   
Made in pl
Steady Dwarf Warrior



Wroclaw , Poland


i invented a joke,


an army of Primaris marines came , to fight

all with multi melta equipement


and, question was, "who can face this Primaris army ? "


and, answer was


probably nobody


and thats the problem, lack of balance in the game


Automatically Appended Next Post:

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/13 16:40:56


 
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Slipspace wrote:
I think the_scotsman makes a good point about the degrading damage charts. When they were initially revealed I thought they seemed like a cool mechanic that could help make vehicles viable while still allowing counterplay by gradually degrading them. Instead we got a system where 90% of them have the same stat decreases at 2 distinct break points. GW could do so much more with that. Adding more wounds but more break points and reducing some defensive stats in the lower bands would be a good start.

You could represent weapon systems being damaged by reducing S or number of shots on certain guns. Maybe in the lowest bracket sponson or hull-mounted weapons stopped functioning. Reducing defensive stats could represent increasing damage to the hull.

If you gave vehicles more wounds but a more interesting way to degrade they might see more play.


Personally I think degrading T or degrading Sv starting from very very high values and actually degrading much sooner is a good idea, personally. You could use the exact system we have right now to allow vehicles and monsters to function distinctly. Imagine the following:

Predator tank: Always 2d3 S7 Ap-1 D3 shots. Starts out at T9 Sv1+ 12W. After the first 4W, goes down to T8 Sv2+ 8" move, after the second 4W, T7 3+ 6" move, but offense stays the same.

Exocrine: Starts at 8 S7 Ap-2 D2 shots BS3+, starts out T6 3+, 24W. After the first 8W, goes down to 6 shots BS4+, after the second 8W, goes down to 4 shots BS5+.

Make monsters (and ork tech) easy to wound, hard to bring down due to their high mass and momentum. Make vehicles hard to wound because of their heavy armor, but easy to destroy once you crack into them.

"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Terminator with Assault Cannon




San Jose, CA

The incremental degradation should be a little steeper once you get to half wounds.

The output should remain stable but as something has taken significant damage, the likelihood of a successive hit going thru should be higher and thus causing more (possibly catastrophic) damage.
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Racerguy180 wrote:
The incremental degradation should be a little steeper once you get to half wounds.

The output should remain stable but as something has taken significant damage, the likelihood of a successive hit going thru should be higher and thus causing more (possibly catastrophic) damage.


yeah, it's a question of how useless you want something to be if it survives with just a few wounds. Currently I feel like they get just a little bit too nasty with the standard BS4+/5+/6+ - on the odd miracle that a tank survives with 2w left, it's like "WELP, guess i hit on 6s.." In AOS they often reduce a bit less dramatically by reducing the attacks on 1 weapon, maybe the hit rolls on a different weapon, and then maybe a defensive value.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/13 19:29:25


"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Sneaky Striking Scorpion




North Carolina

 the_scotsman wrote:


Personally I think degrading T or degrading Sv starting from very very high values and actually degrading much sooner is a good idea, personally. You could use the exact system we have right now to allow vehicles and monsters to function distinctly. Imagine the following:

Predator tank: Always 2d3 S7 Ap-1 D3 shots. Starts out at T9 Sv1+ 12W. After the first 4W, goes down to T8 Sv2+ 8" move, after the second 4W, T7 3+ 6" move, but offense stays the same.

Exocrine: Starts at 8 S7 Ap-2 D2 shots BS3+, starts out T6 3+, 24W. After the first 8W, goes down to 6 shots BS4+, after the second 8W, goes down to 4 shots BS5+.

Make monsters (and ork tech) easy to wound, hard to bring down due to their high mass and momentum. Make vehicles hard to wound because of their heavy armor, but easy to destroy once you crack into them.


I like this except for the nerfing Tyranids part (the point is made but in this made up example, the Predator is so much better)
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





dubman wrote:

i invented a joke,


an army of Primaris marines came , to fight

all with multi melta equipement


and, question was, "who can face this Primaris army ? "


and, answer was


probably nobody


and thats the problem, lack of balance in the game



Drukhari, Admech, and Slanneshi Daemons beg to differ. Custodes and even CSM have won GTs in 9th. I'm not saying it's balanced, because it clearly is not, but Marines haven't been the top of the pile for some time and "the top of the pile" is at least in contention between several factions. And even then, Primaris are not universally at the top of the heap for Marines.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/13 21:49:28


   
Made in es
[DCM]
Secret Inquisitorial Eldar Xenexecutor






your mind

Reduce ranges. Slow movement. Make charges fixed distances differing for different faction and unit movement stats. Give units better use of cover and other shielding or obscuring mechanics. Make vehicles vehicles again. Then sureā€¦ basically what slipspace wrote:
Slipspace wrote:
If we're going to go down a route that involves rewriting most weapon profiles and adding abilities I'd just reconfigure the T/W/Sv of vehicles and monsters and the damage output of anti-tank weapons. Then you introduce an Epic-style Anti-tank trait that makes AT weapons bad against non-vehicle/monster units.

So you end up with vehicles and monsters with more Wounds and higher Toughness and a bump in AT weapon damage (which may not be equal to the increase in vehicle survivability). That would also potentially stop a lot of edge cases where spamming low-Strength shooting is more effective at killing vehicles than firing Lascannons at them.

I still think the better approach is to first reduce overall lethality to a more sane level, then look at which areas you need to adjust. I have no problem with it taking a couple of turns to kill a tank as long as the damage you inflict in the meantime accomplishes something.

   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Back in the days of Gargantuan Creatures and, what were they called, 'Mass Points', which was a bad attempt to make Structure Points fit with living creatures, I had the idea for sets of Wounds linked to a Toughness value.

So, using the Hierophant as an example, you'd start at T8, and that toughness would have, say, 8 wounds. Once those wounds were gone, your new toughness would be 7, and that would have 6 wounds, and so on, depending on how big the creature is.

That's kind of what Scotsman suggested above, and it's something I'd support for monsters.

Vehicles on the other hand... well... the need to start acting like vehicles. Right now they don't, and this:
 Mezmorki wrote:
The "best" weapons end up being ones in the middle that can, with the right boosts and strats, deal with everything really waters down gameplay.
... remains one of the more frustrating things in 40k.


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

 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 Mezmorki wrote:
The "best" weapons end up being ones in the middle that can, with the right boosts and strats, deal with everything really waters down gameplay.
... remains one of the more frustrating things in 40k.



And yet this isn't actually true right now - volkites are great at most things are absolutely terrible at hitting -1D models or 2+. And MM are terrible at taking medium vehicles with invulns. And Dark Lances have too few shots to take on terminators.

That's why you're seeing more Redemptors with plasma to handle a variety of targets.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut







But the question is "What's a vehicle supposed to feel like (while still being playable)?" Surely it's not anything like the old "Fish for sixes" glancing hit and penetrating hit system, with its possibility that you could shake a vehicle into helplessness.

   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






 Gene St. Ealer wrote:
 the_scotsman wrote:


Personally I think degrading T or degrading Sv starting from very very high values and actually degrading much sooner is a good idea, personally. You could use the exact system we have right now to allow vehicles and monsters to function distinctly. Imagine the following:

Predator tank: Always 2d3 S7 Ap-1 D3 shots. Starts out at T9 Sv1+ 12W. After the first 4W, goes down to T8 Sv2+ 8" move, after the second 4W, T7 3+ 6" move, but offense stays the same.

Exocrine: Starts at 8 S7 Ap-2 D2 shots BS3+, starts out T6 3+, 24W. After the first 8W, goes down to 6 shots BS4+, after the second 8W, goes down to 4 shots BS5+.

Make monsters (and ork tech) easy to wound, hard to bring down due to their high mass and momentum. Make vehicles hard to wound because of their heavy armor, but easy to destroy once you crack into them.



I like this except for the nerfing Tyranids part (the point is made but in this made up example, the Predator is so much better)


yeah, general concept: Vehicles generally have more consistent damage output (possibly losing weapons as they get knocked out rather than their weapons degrading in effectiveness over time) while defensively being much harder to initialy crack, but with fewer Wounds to increase their vulnerability to high-strength high-ap high-damage weapons and also mortal wounding effects (such as Haywire).

Monsters (and orky vehicles) on the other hand start out with higher damage output and deadliness, and being more likely to degrade in offensive effectiveness over time with static, lower defensive T and Sv values with a much larger wound pool, meaning a "FIRE EVERYTHING WEVE GOT" approach is what works best.

Bonus points if there were also some kind of temporary pseudo-morale effect varying with different models that would occur with each at a certain damage level, like monsters going bezerk, walkers having their leg damaged and toppling over, tank crews panicking when the first shot manages to penetrate their armored hull, and light fast vehicles hurtling out of control for a turn moving straight forward and taking heavy damage if that causes them to hit a building.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/14 01:09:04


"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"

"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"

"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"

"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"  
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




NE Ohio, USA

Sunny Side Up wrote:
I've rarely seen soooooooooo many vehicles in the game.

Ork Buggies, Nemesis Dreadknights, Marine Dreadnoughts, Drukhari Raider, AdMech Flyers, Ork Flyers, Death Guard Drones/PBCs, Knights resurgent, etc., etc.., etc,,

AT Weapons need more damage AND more shots AND vehicles need to lose a few wounds/toughness to give non-vehicles half a purpose in the game again.


Tell you what, my Monolith will trade in a few wounds in exchange for either an Invuln Save (of at least 4+) or Quantum Shielding.
Ideally both, but I'd settle for either one....
   
Made in fi
5th God of Chaos (O'rly?)





 Blackie wrote:
Slipspace wrote:


I still think the better approach is to first reduce overall lethality to a more sane level, then look at which areas you need to adjust. I have no problem with it taking a couple of turns to kill a tank as long as the damage you inflict in the meantime accomplishes something.


Exactly. Reducing the rate of fire and the tools to enhance the shots, including re-rolls, is definitely the best way to improve the game.

Being able to get a guaranteed one shot (or even close to it) towards something that is supposed to be pretty tanky, using TAC lists, is terrible game design.


Uuuh it's veritable tide of rerolls game has that quarantees those one shots.

As is 40k has so much rerolls there's practically no uncertainty so things just go bum.

Less rerolls is what's needed.

2021 painted/bought: 857/1043 
   
Made in es
[DCM]
Secret Inquisitorial Eldar Xenexecutor






your mind

 solkan wrote:
But the question is "What's a vehicle supposed to feel like (while still being playable)?" Surely it's not anything like the old "Fish for sixes" glancing hit and penetrating hit system, with its possibility that you could shake a vehicle into helplessness.

Not trying to derail the thread, and noting also that my experience with this edition has been limited and I haven't been able to actually play the game since lockdowns and we moved away from the GW store that had been near our old place, but... many vehicles should not be so maneuverable as monsters, so turns and facings and so on should be a thing imho. The addition of armor values and facings would alone make a big difference, make movement and unit placement more important, add the drama of trying to get behind that fracking tank with this assault cannon, limit lethality of weapons shooting from and against vehicles, generally, and so on.

And, not to defend the old shaken crew phenomenon, some sort of dynamic between damage dealt and incurred beyond a ticking wound counter would make a difference, too. Sure, wounds lost reduce some effectiveness, but why not the old damage charts? Why not let (at least some) heavy weapons teams target parts of especially large vehicles and monsters? Why not ablative armor? Why not blasting away at shields and so on? For myself, making tanks into what are effectively monstrous creatures that can shoot to the right from the left sponson and act as if they have no front or back sides is not immersive, doesn't represent what imagination expects, and makes the in-game experience less appealing.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/10/14 10:19:09


 
   
Made in us
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader





 jeff white wrote:
For myself, making tanks into what are effectively monstrous creatures that can shoot to the right from the left sponson and act as if they have no front or back sides is not immersive, doesn't represent what imagination expects, and makes the in-game experience less appealing.


Why does your imagination only expect this for vehicles? Why stop there? We could have troop facings! For immersion, of course, and appealing in-game experience. Make sure you rotate each of your gretchin appropriately! Don't want a nasty deep strike unit sneaking up on you!
   
Made in us
Shadowy Grot Kommittee Memba






Rihgu wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
For myself, making tanks into what are effectively monstrous creatures that can shoot to the right from the left sponson and act as if they have no front or back sides is not immersive, doesn't represent what imagination expects, and makes the in-game experience less appealing.


Why does your imagination only expect this for vehicles? Why stop there? We could have troop facings! For immersion, of course, and appealing in-game experience. Make sure you rotate each of your gretchin appropriately! Don't want a nasty deep strike unit sneaking up on you!


Good argument bro.

Well, if we need stat differentiation between a lasgun and a volcano cannon, *scoff* why not just have three different stat lines for an autopistol, a laspistol and a grot blasta than? ThEyRe DiFfErEnT GunS after all, "muh immersion", a gun's a gun you loser why do you need special stats for YOUR gun.
   
Made in us
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader





 the_scotsman wrote:
Rihgu wrote:
 jeff white wrote:
For myself, making tanks into what are effectively monstrous creatures that can shoot to the right from the left sponson and act as if they have no front or back sides is not immersive, doesn't represent what imagination expects, and makes the in-game experience less appealing.


Why does your imagination only expect this for vehicles? Why stop there? We could have troop facings! For immersion, of course, and appealing in-game experience. Make sure you rotate each of your gretchin appropriately! Don't want a nasty deep strike unit sneaking up on you!


Good argument bro.

Well, if we need stat differentiation between a lasgun and a volcano cannon, *scoff* why not just have three different stat lines for an autopistol, a laspistol and a grot blasta than? ThEyRe DiFfErEnT GunS after all, "muh immersion", a gun's a gun you loser why do you need special stats for YOUR gun.


I dunno, the fluff says there's a difference between a lasgun and a volcano cannon, so that makes sense. The fluff doesn't say that models on the tabletop 100% represent the facings, movements, etc of units. I don't see why a space marine shooting backwards is fine but a tank shooting backwards? that's completely ridiculous!

In my imagination, all these models are taking all of their different guns and like, moving around the battlefield. Ducking into cover, rotating turrets, etc. Not statically clutching their guns to their chest and slightly squatting.

edit: but yes, maybe autopistols, laspistols and grot blastas could do with just a single statline instead of 3. Light Pistol or something? Not sure we need to have 3 different rules that are all the exact same thing (S3 Ap- D1 12" range)

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/10/14 12:58:35


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: