Switch Theme:

Took a break since 7th, just started with 9th. Where did all this random shots/damage come from?  [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
Veteran Knight Baron in a Crusader





Seriously I want to meet the person that said "You know what 40k REALLY needs? MORE dice rolling to see what happens and MORE random!" If I paid 150 points for a model and 25 points for a weapon upgrade, why can my opponent pay the same amount of points for something potentially 6x more effective? What does this add to the game besides slowing it down for unnecessary dice rolls that lead to feel-bad moments? They said they were going to listen to tournament players and create a more competitive version of 40k. I used to play tournaments religiously and tournament players HATED the amount of randomness that was present in the game. I remember people taking a specific librarian because he had invis and everyone else had to roll for it so they only had 1/6 chance of getting the power they actually wanted. People HATED it. Now they make it even worse by making rare and expensive weapons that potentially have less damage output than the bolter held by your 19 point tac marine. So who was asking for this? Fluff players?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 00:49:31


 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

7E onward is specifically designed for bad players who want bad armies to be "good".

This is especially true in 9E with a host of random things that allow a poor player snatch victory from the jaws of a well-deserved defeat.

GW is deliberately engineering a rule system where a player can expect the smallest possible likelihood of victory. That is, GW has been shifting 40k toward "narrative" games were surprising things happen. This means that the world's best players might win, at most, 70% of their games against absolute novices, simply because the game introduces RNG elements that can potentially turn the game on its head. These "surprises" create stories and "excitement".

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 00:56:57


   
Made in us
Clousseau




They can if one is geared more toward a narrative experience as opposed to a sports league style competitive one.

Granted I am not involved too closely in the game as I am more into simulation wargames that are driven by scenario and not lists, but the guys I know that are tourney players are regularly seal clubbing the narrative players pretty reliably despite it all.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 01:03:21


 
   
Made in us
Trustworthy Shas'vre





Cobleskill

random shots is a result of blast\large blast & templates going away. Everything is randumb now.

Don't like deepstrike mishaps? fixed with a 9" deepstrike restriction

Remember 'Wall of Fire'? Fixed by making all the template weapons into 12" weapons - which is BTW, the max range for a charge.

Everything has a random number of damage because they changed Vehicles to function as Monstrous Creatures did in previous editions.

Just wait until you discover the degrading statlines which took the place of vehicle damage...

'No plan survives contact with the enemy. Who are we?'
'THE ENEMY!!!'
Racerguy180 wrote:
rules come and go, models are forever...like herpes.
 
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







40k is much the same as it's always been: fairly brainless, probably too killy, overloaded with spammable anti-everything guns and straight-up pointless units, balanced by throwing darts at the wall blindfolded, and the release schedule is still often drowned in more Space Marines. The biggest difference now from 7th is that there's an extremely vocal sector of the game that insists that 8th fixed everything so much that they have to make up facts about how bad 7th was to prove it.

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






Toofast wrote:
Seriously I want to meet the person that said "You know what 40k REALLY needs? MORE dice rolling to see what happens and MORE random!" If I paid 150 points for a model and 25 points for a weapon upgrade, why can my opponent pay the same amount of points for something potentially 6x more effective? What does this add to the game besides slowing it down for unnecessary dice rolls that lead to feel-bad moments? They said they were going to listen to tournament players and create a more competitive version of 40k. I used to play tournaments religiously and tournament players HATED the amount of randomness that was present in the game. I remember people taking a specific librarian because he had invis and everyone else had to roll for it so they only had 1/6 chance of getting the power they actually wanted. People HATED it. Now they make it even worse by making rare and expensive weapons that potentially have less damage output than the bolter held by your 19 point tac marine. So who was asking for this? Fluff players?


Do you remember when you used to place a template down on the board and roll scatter dice, and sometimes it would get like 4 hits, and sometimes it would scatter and miss entirely?

.....yep.


"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 au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
That is, GW has been shifting 40k toward "narrative" games were surprising things happen.
That is the literal opposite of what 9th is.

9th is "Tournament Edition 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
Powerful Pegasus Knight





 H.B.M.C. wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
That is, GW has been shifting 40k toward "narrative" games were surprising things happen.
That is the literal opposite of what 9th is.

9th is "Tournament Edition 40k".


Locally there have been no big 40k narrative campaigns since early 8th edition. All of the narrative players jumped ship to battletech, conquest, and other systems.

Meanwhile the tournament scene has never been bigger.
   
Made in ca
Sureshot Kroot Hunter





Toofast wrote:
Seriously I want to meet the person that said "You know what 40k REALLY needs? MORE dice rolling to see what happens and MORE random!" If I paid 150 points for a model and 25 points for a weapon upgrade, why can my opponent pay the same amount of points for something potentially 6x more effective? What does this add to the game besides slowing it down for unnecessary dice rolls that lead to feel-bad moments? They said they were going to listen to tournament players and create a more competitive version of 40k. I used to play tournaments religiously and tournament players HATED the amount of randomness that was present in the game. I remember people taking a specific librarian because he had invis and everyone else had to roll for it so they only had 1/6 chance of getting the power they actually wanted. People HATED it. Now they make it even worse by making rare and expensive weapons that potentially have less damage output than the bolter held by your 19 point tac marine. So who was asking for this? Fluff players?


So the D3 or D6 to hit replaced Blast Templates. This reduced all the measuring and scatter, and spacing out models exactly 2", and arguing over if a model was under the template with a single dice roll. For damage, originally, it replaced the vehicle damage table. Instead of a penetrating hit blowing you up or just rocking the boat, you take light to serious damage. Both of these things had always had a random element to determining what they did.

I'm still a big fan of the former as it speeds the game up a whole bunch, even though I do thematically miss the blast templates. As for the latter, I liked it at first, but with all the multi-wound models and D6+3 + X amount of mortals, it's gotten more than a little out of hand.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2022/01/22 06:25:41


13317 4614 3375 2344 2976 1106 1755
1340 1185 1005 1180 1030  
   
Made in de
Contagious Dreadnought of Nurgle




It would be interesting to hear what the OP has in mind specifically, as overall the game isless random than it ever was.
Remember rolling for a random Warlord trait or psychic power? Remember rolling for random equipment with Daemons? Remember scattering? Remember rolling on vehicle damage tables? Remember rolling for psychic powers like this: roll how many dice you have in the phase, then roll your psychic Test, roll to deny, then roll to hit, to wound, then saves. Now it's psychic Test, deny + amount of mortal wounds, done.
Flamers might be the only thing that have gotten more random than before.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 06:50:15


 
   
Made in ie
Battleship Captain





GW are taking a novel approach of trying to use dice rolls as a balancing mechanic. More random results = more balance.


 
   
Made in de
Powerful Ushbati






 the_scotsman wrote:
Spoiler:
Toofast wrote:
Seriously I want to meet the person that said "You know what 40k REALLY needs? MORE dice rolling to see what happens and MORE random!" If I paid 150 points for a model and 25 points for a weapon upgrade, why can my opponent pay the same amount of points for something potentially 6x more effective? What does this add to the game besides slowing it down for unnecessary dice rolls that lead to feel-bad moments? They said they were going to listen to tournament players and create a more competitive version of 40k. I used to play tournaments religiously and tournament players HATED the amount of randomness that was present in the game. I remember people taking a specific librarian because he had invis and everyone else had to roll for it so they only had 1/6 chance of getting the power they actually wanted. People HATED it. Now they make it even worse by making rare and expensive weapons that potentially have less damage output than the bolter held by your 19 point tac marine. So who was asking for this? Fluff players?


Do you remember when you used to place a template down on the board and roll scatter dice, and sometimes it would get like 4 hits, and sometimes it would scatter and miss entirely?

.....yep.



Random dice rolls may bear the barest resemblance to that in result, but you're leaving out the part where a single shell can explode a lone character six times, while on the other end you can't ever splatter more than six Boyz no matter how large or packed the mob is. Random number of shots is a replacement for templates, but a poor one.

Incidentally around the same time GW introduced this nonsense the designers of Bolt Action decided to dump random hits for explodey weapons in favor of templates for a more immersive and all around better game experience.

Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone? 
   
Made in it
Waaagh! Ork Warboss




Italy

7th was much more random overall even in terms of damage.

We might have random damage now, but also lots of ways to fix the dice rolls and to increase damage, combined with units firing way more shots that before.

A razorback with twin linked lascannon in 7th fired a single re-rollable shot, instant killed T4 but only caused 1W on T5 multiwounds models. Now the same platform fires two shots with high BS, which can be re-rolled somehow, can get better AP for free (stupid doctrines), and also damage can be re-rolled. That razorback is now way more effective in killing stuff even if its weapon has a damage characteristic of D6.

That's a massive improvement to remove randomness, not the opposite. And that's true for any other unit in the game, and any other mechanic that involved the dice rolling.

GW is definitely trying to turn 40k into the game of expected results rather than a proper dice based game. Which IMHO is terrible thing and actually the only thing, other than rules bloat and some massive models, that I dislike about this edition.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 09:47:22


 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 Sledgehammer wrote:
Locally there have been no big 40k narrative campaigns since early 8th edition. All of the narrative players jumped ship to battletech, conquest, and other systems.

Meanwhile the tournament scene has never been bigger.


According to a poll I did, about 30% of the participants play crusade regularly, about 60% play GT missions.

Narrative is definitely strong in 9th, thanks to all the support it is getting from GW.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in no
Huge Bone Giant





Bergen

Haters gonne hate. 9th edition is a much more pleasent gaming experience then I have had before. I have played 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th and 9th edition.

The reason I like it over the others is that the objectives are fun and lends good dynamic to the game. And GW try to balance their game. This makes the game more enjoyable to be at least.

Complaining about randomness in a game based upon dice baffles me a bit. You get an average bell curve of predictability and work from there. But each to their own.

   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut







The biggest things in the templates vs non-templates to me is:

1) on table positioning no longer matters. Spreading out to 2" for horde units in my 4th edition and HH games has serious positioning consequences (pretty much all drawbacks/disadvantages) on the table. It's hardly "automatic." I will ruthlessly exploit the numerous tactical drawbacks of spreading out if someone does so against me thoughtlessly. In 9th? Whatever, everyone in single file or in a massive clump, doesn't matter.

2) the administrative division of the enemy force affects how effective my explosive shells are:
"Sir, 30 men standing shoulder to shoulder in the open on the objective!"
"Ready the mortars!"
"BUT SIR! Intel suggests they are in 6 units of five; the mortars won't be effective!"
"...."
   
Made in us
Trustworthy Shas'vre





Cobleskill

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
"Sir, 30 men standing shoulder to shoulder in the open on the objective!"
"Ready the mortars!"
"BUT SIR! Intel suggests they are in 6 units of five; the mortars won't be effective!"
"...."


Exalted!

As someone who ran Karadread and flyers in 7th, I feel your pain.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 14:07:13


'No plan survives contact with the enemy. Who are we?'
'THE ENEMY!!!'
Racerguy180 wrote:
rules come and go, models are forever...like herpes.
 
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





A nice vague post that avoids the ability to discuss and critique the differences - excellent bait.

   
Made in us
Confessor Of Sins




 carldooley wrote:
random shots is a result of blast\large blast & templates going away. Everything is randumb now.

Don't like deepstrike mishaps? fixed with a 9" deepstrike restriction

Remember 'Wall of Fire'? Fixed by making all the template weapons into 12" weapons - which is BTW, the max range for a charge.

Everything has a random number of damage because they changed Vehicles to function as Monstrous Creatures did in previous editions.

Just wait until you discover the degrading statlines which took the place of vehicle damage...


It's weird how you listed off several VAST improvements (AND RNG removal) as if they were negatives.

Old deepstrike was THE definition of RANDUMB. It was a broken mechanic and it needed to die.

Wall of fire was just a gakky rules patch to fix the fact that OOPS! melee units can charge into flamethrower no problem without it because the range of the flamer was shorter than charge range. Yeah, it took a while to fix that in 8th and 9th but they eventually did.

Needed to happen because MCs made vehicles obsolete.

Degrading statline are 1000% superior to the damage chart. YOU may have enjoyed your rhino detonating like it was made of nitroglycerine every time a S7 weapon looked at it funny, but it was a terrible mechanic.

2500pts
2500
3000


 
   
Made in fr
Regular Dakkanaut




 JohnHwangDD wrote:
7E onward is specifically designed for bad players who want bad armies to be "good".

This is especially true in 9E with a host of random things that allow a poor player snatch victory from the jaws of a well-deserved defeat.

GW is deliberately engineering a rule system where a player can expect the smallest possible likelihood of victory. That is, GW has been shifting 40k toward "narrative" games were surprising things happen. This means that the world's best players might win, at most, 70% of their games against absolute novices, simply because the game introduces RNG elements that can potentially turn the game on its head. These "surprises" create stories and "excitement".


Do you genuilely think that GW are that smart, or even care about "narrative" ?

Seems to me they are heavily involved with the high-level tournament crowd, which basically asked them to create more systems, more customization, and more gameplay variety within the same codex.

Everything else (balance/unbalance) is just random.
   
Made in gb
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain





Cardiff

How is the OP bemoaning a 3-4yr old mechanic in this thread yet telling me a certain WD army list is the only competitive option for a faction in another?

Like, do you understand the current rules or are you new to them? I’m super unclear.

Anyway, to answer the Q the random number of shots is their chosen mechanic to respresent blast/Flamer weapons. It replaces the Tempkate Argument Phase that cropped up every. single. time. you used a template in prior editions. “No he’s not 50%, nonthe arrow is pointing more this way, etc etc”

You don’t have to like it, but that is their logic. In practice I prefer it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/01/22 20:52:02


 Stormonu wrote:
For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
 
   
Made in us
Trustworthy Shas'vre





Cobleskill

ERJAK wrote:
Needed to happen because MCs made vehicles obsolete.

Not to argue the point, but was I the only person that enjoyed the fact that I could line up my vehicles and have a wall of armor that was invulnerable to small arms?
ERJAK wrote:

Degrading statline are 1000% superior to the damage chart. YOU may have enjoyed your rhino detonating like it was made of nitroglycerine every time a S7 weapon looked at it funny, but it was a terrible mechanic.


Hey, I ran mech guard in 7th. I appreciate that most vehicles don't get one shotted anymore... oh wait. with the damage proliferation nowadays, one shotted may not happen much, but two shotted?

'No plan survives contact with the enemy. Who are we?'
'THE ENEMY!!!'
Racerguy180 wrote:
rules come and go, models are forever...like herpes.
 
   
Made in ie
Battleship Captain





ERJAK wrote:
 carldooley wrote:


Degrading statline are 1000% superior to the damage chart. YOU may have enjoyed your rhino detonating like it was made of nitroglycerine every time a S7 weapon looked at it funny, but it was a terrible mechanic.


It's okay. Definitely not "1000%" better. I liked facings and having weapons be destroyed rather than tanks basically just being monsters and then giving everyone a strat that makes the degredation chart pointless anyway so you have to focus down on a tank anyway.


 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




Siegfriedfr wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
7E onward is specifically designed for bad players who want bad armies to be "good".

This is especially true in 9E with a host of random things that allow a poor player snatch victory from the jaws of a well-deserved defeat.

GW is deliberately engineering a rule system where a player can expect the smallest possible likelihood of victory. That is, GW has been shifting 40k toward "narrative" games were surprising things happen. This means that the world's best players might win, at most, 70% of their games against absolute novices, simply because the game introduces RNG elements that can potentially turn the game on its head. These "surprises" create stories and "excitement".


Do you genuilely think that GW are that smart, or even care about "narrative" ?

Seems to me they are heavily involved with the high-level tournament crowd, which basically asked them to create more systems, more customization, and more gameplay variety within the same codex.

Everything else (balance/unbalance) is just random.


So... how does that 'Crusade' stuff that eats up a good page-count of every book (and gets its own books), fit into the 'high level tournament crowd' story?
And when the 'high level tournament crowd' complains about all those systems... how does that fit?

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/01/22 20:58:19


Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in fr
Regular Dakkanaut




Voss wrote:
Siegfriedfr wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
7E onward is specifically designed for bad players who want bad armies to be "good".

This is especially true in 9E with a host of random things that allow a poor player snatch victory from the jaws of a well-deserved defeat.

GW is deliberately engineering a rule system where a player can expect the smallest possible likelihood of victory. That is, GW has been shifting 40k toward "narrative" games were surprising things happen. This means that the world's best players might win, at most, 70% of their games against absolute novices, simply because the game introduces RNG elements that can potentially turn the game on its head. These "surprises" create stories and "excitement".


Do you genuilely think that GW are that smart, or even care about "narrative" ?

Seems to me they are heavily involved with the high-level tournament crowd, which basically asked them to create more systems, more customization, and more gameplay variety within the same codex.

Everything else (balance/unbalance) is just random.


So... how does that 'Crusade' stuff that eats up a good page-count of every book (and gets its own books), fit into the 'high level tournament crowd' story?


Yes Crusades exists. My point was that "gotcha" rules/stratagems/whatever aren't calibrated to create "narrative moments" in tournament play, and that it only happens by accident.
   
Made in ie
Battleship Captain





Voss wrote:
Siegfriedfr wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
7E onward is specifically designed for bad players who want bad armies to be "good".

This is especially true in 9E with a host of random things that allow a poor player snatch victory from the jaws of a well-deserved defeat.

GW is deliberately engineering a rule system where a player can expect the smallest possible likelihood of victory. That is, GW has been shifting 40k toward "narrative" games were surprising things happen. This means that the world's best players might win, at most, 70% of their games against absolute novices, simply because the game introduces RNG elements that can potentially turn the game on its head. These "surprises" create stories and "excitement".


Do you genuilely think that GW are that smart, or even care about "narrative" ?

Seems to me they are heavily involved with the high-level tournament crowd, which basically asked them to create more systems, more customization, and more gameplay variety within the same codex.

Everything else (balance/unbalance) is just random.


So... how does that 'Crusade' stuff that eats up a good page-count of every book (and gets its own books), fit into the 'high level tournament crowd' story?
And when the 'high level tournament crowd' complains about all those systems... how does that fit?


You know GW use tournament groups as playtesters now right? Theres a reason the ITC ruleset went away when 9th came out. Claiming GW isn't chasing the tournament crowd is just foolish.


 
   
Made in us
Terrifying Doombull




 Sim-Life wrote:
Voss wrote:
Siegfriedfr wrote:
 JohnHwangDD wrote:
7E onward is specifically designed for bad players who want bad armies to be "good".

This is especially true in 9E with a host of random things that allow a poor player snatch victory from the jaws of a well-deserved defeat.

GW is deliberately engineering a rule system where a player can expect the smallest possible likelihood of victory. That is, GW has been shifting 40k toward "narrative" games were surprising things happen. This means that the world's best players might win, at most, 70% of their games against absolute novices, simply because the game introduces RNG elements that can potentially turn the game on its head. These "surprises" create stories and "excitement".


Do you genuilely think that GW are that smart, or even care about "narrative" ?

Seems to me they are heavily involved with the high-level tournament crowd, which basically asked them to create more systems, more customization, and more gameplay variety within the same codex.

Everything else (balance/unbalance) is just random.


So... how does that 'Crusade' stuff that eats up a good page-count of every book (and gets its own books), fit into the 'high level tournament crowd' story?
And when the 'high level tournament crowd' complains about all those systems... how does that fit?


You know GW use tournament groups as playtesters now right? Theres a reason the ITC ruleset went away when 9th came out. Claiming GW isn't chasing the tournament crowd is just foolish.


They use a lot of groups as playtesters right now, tournament groups and youtube influencers that don't bother. And surprise, surprise, using tournament groups isn't anything new. They're keen, eager and will do it for free (and a bad job, because they're focused on getting a leg up rather than fixing problems)

ITC went away because ITC cashed in with GW (and in several cases signed up)

Do they want money from tournament players? Sure. But also from other players. This narrative that they're only (or even primarily) chasing just tournament players is rather ridiculous. Even more ridiculous than the usual stuff about how there's a huge divide between competitive and casual.

Efficiency is the highest virtue. 
   
Made in pt
[DCM]
Secret Inquisitorial Eldar Xenexecutor






your mind

GW used to make games that I wanted to learn how to play.
With my limited experience with 9th ed, we used no stratagems, no command points, and played with small armies on larger than minimally recommended tables. It was ok.

   
Made in us
Clousseau




How in the world is there not a huge divide between the competitive game and people wanting to play casual or narratively?
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut






SoCal, USA!

 Tawnis wrote:
So the D3 or D6 to hit replaced Blast Templates. This reduced all the measuring and scatter, and spacing out models exactly 2", and arguing over if a model was under the template with a single dice roll.


Indeed. What should have happened is that Flamer should automatically hit ALL models in the target unit within 12". Blast should hit scatter a point and hit ALL models in EVERY unit with at least ONE model within X" of the point. No arguing, no rolling. Just auto-hit every model regardless of how the unit is spaced out. If it's a giant Conga line, too bad. LOL

   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: