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.

Would judgement tokens be more exepted if they caused exploding hits instead of auto wounding. My thought is if you hate something you would fire more to kill it. I dont understand how hating something makes your bullets wound more. Thoughts?

Abstractly, hating something leads to dealing more damage to them, via some method.

Mechanically there are plenty of ways to do this. Exploding 6s would be one way, auto-wounding is another. Hard to say which way would be best for the game.

auto wounding is just very very powerful so yes exploding hits instead of auto wounds would be a big nerf and more acceptable.

if your wounding on a 4+, auto wound literally doubles your damage. (because you don't lose half your hits to trying to wound).
If your wounding on 5's your tripling.

And it completely removes a major defensive layer and component in decision making when selecting your weapons, your opponents toughness

Knowing the GW clown show as we do, it would probably be:

1 token - 6s to hit generate 1 extra hit.
2 tokens - 5s and 6s to hit generate 2 extra hits.
3 tokens - 4s, 5s and 6s to hit generate 3 extra hits.

I find the concept of hating something extra-hard so you do more damage to it (in 40K no less) to be silly on the face of it, and the implementation is pretty boring to boot.

Rather just axe the mechanic entirely.

I dont want to remove the mechanic, I just believe exploding 4+, with 3 tokens would be a good replacement. Then thier guns which are good just shoot more.

 catbarf wrote:
I find the concept of hating something extra-hard so you do more damage to it (in 40K no less) to be silly on the face of it, and the implementation is pretty boring to boot.

Rather just axe the mechanic entirely.

It is a bit odd, but then it's arguably one of the less silly versions of the idea currently in the game. Like, chaplains with their LItanies of Hate do basically the same thing, but also a bad litanies roll roll can mean that your marines switch back and forth between intense rage and not-particularly-noteworthy rage from turn to turn. Similarly, it's weird when an aura buff or stratagem is fluffed as the buffed unit just feeling really inspired or angry or whatever. Like, is the implication that my dudes are slacking off and feeling meh about the battle until the buff character is standing nearby?

Balance concerns aside, at least gaining a grudge token (sometimes) corresponds to doing something that's actively ticking the squats off.

"Oh look a Magna rail getting exploding hits"

I'd rather have auto wounds, honestly just make it auto wounds dont count as a 6 and it takes a huge amount of the damage away bc of all the many ways to get bonuses on a 6 to wound. Or at least make your Wound roll equal your Hit roll.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
"Oh look a Magna rail getting exploding hits"

I'd rather have auto wounds, honestly just make it auto wounds dont count as a 6 and it takes a huge amount of the damage away bc of all the many ways to get bonuses on a 6 to wound. Or at least make your Wound roll equal your Hit roll.

I understand your point, I do like your offer of fixing the 6 to hit counts as a 6 to wound. I will counter that army wide auto wounding is a little much when it gets better.

I'm not entirely sure about the whole thing frankly.

I've personally played 2 games against them now (using codex and our "best guess for size" proxies for unavailable models) and witnessed 3 more.

I was using Big nids in first game, got horribly HORRIBLY murdered, then went swarm (2x30 termies and 2x30 hormies) with mortal wound support (1x 3 biovores, 2 x 9 spore mine units.....yes i must be mad, but holy emperor, did those mines do some fantastic work against the bikes....go on then..zoom up the board if you want..spend your next turn clearing my mines or YOU WILL DIE)

What we have discovered is that they are VERY VERY good at deleting big expensive units, or elite infantry but have a HUGE problem with board control (even with 3 units of bikes) IF the opponent has taken a decent number of troops.

Is the "judgement token" rule overpowered? YES..against armies with small expensive units. Against orks, guard, nids and possibly (i do mean possibly... Tau if they've loaded up with Kroot) they will have a tough fight.

What we have in this army is (I am starting to believe) the reason to run big units of cheap troops again, which is something that 9th ed has been very punishing on.

I truly pity Knight players ... you are not gonna have an easy game (or anyone with a primarch).

princeyg wrote:
I'm not entirely sure about the whole thing frankly.

I've personally played 2 games against them now (using codex and our "best guess for size" proxies for unavailable models) and witnessed 3 more.

I was using Big nids in first game, got horribly HORRIBLY murdered, then went swarm (2x30 termies and 2x30 hormies) with mortal wound support (1x 3 biovores, 2 x 9 spore mine units.....yes i must be mad, but holy emperor, did those mines do some fantastic work against the bikes....go on then..zoom up the board if you want..spend your next turn clearing my mines or YOU WILL DIE)

What we have discovered is that they are VERY VERY good at deleting big expensive units, or elite infantry but have a HUGE problem with board control (even with 3 units of bikes) IF the opponent has taken a decent number of troops.

Is the "judgement token" rule overpowered? YES..against armies with small expensive units. Against orks, guard, nids and possibly (i do mean possibly... Tau if they've loaded up with Kroot) they will have a tough fight.

What we have in this army is (I am starting to believe) the reason to run big units of cheap troops again, which is something that 9th ed has been very punishing on.

I truly pity Knight players ... you are not gonna have an easy game (or anyone with a primarch).

Yeah, they need to limit the power of the JTs for sure, this honestly is the biggest problem of the army.

 Ordana wrote:
auto wounding is just very very powerful so yes exploding hits instead of auto wounds would be a big nerf and more acceptable.

if your wounding on a 4+, auto wound literally doubles your damage. (because you don't lose half your hits to trying to wound).
If your wounding on 5's your tripling.

And it completely removes a major defensive layer and component in decision making when selecting your weapons, your opponents toughness

Exploding 6 gives you 2 hits so average 1 wound at 4+ though. If yot wound on 3+ exploding gives more wounds. 5+ autowound. 4+ is cornercase. Average same but do you prefer certain wound over chance to spike more'

Bigger the gun mora you want exploing.

Probably better then auto-wounding, but still many, many times more powerful then other armies mono-faction bonus-rules in this direction such as Crossfire or Markerlights (both of which only apply to shooting, remove tokens regularly, and sit on base BS 4+ armies without rules such as Void Armour, etc.. on top)

I think a significantly toned-down version of Crossfire (given it applies to vastly better Datasheets), as well as a redesign of things like Berzerkers to match Aberrants in costs, output, no-fight-on-Death, no-Void-Armour, etc..), perhaps even making Dwarfs a base BS4+ army and removing the-better-then-everyone‘s access to hit-re-rolls would be a start.

Exploding hits wouldn't be much better than autowounds (and in some cases, worse).

Autowounds don't actually increase the maximum damage you are capably of inflicting - they just make it ridiculously easy to achieve near perfect efficiency (1 shot 1 kill). Exploding hits reduces your overall efficiency, but gives the chance for double damage (1 shot 2 kills), so ends up being about equally overpowered.

As an example, the much feared magna rail cannon can currently pick a target and in the right circumstances (having the special character change a dice to an auto 6) jump straight past rolls to hit/wound/save and inflict 2D3+6 damage. With exploding hits you now have a very high chance for 4D3+12 damage on the same combo - you just have to roll for wounds now (easily re-rollable).

If I had a say in how to fix judgement tokens, it would be to change it form "auto-wounds/auto counts as a 6", to "+1 to wound", still very strong but has little synergy in making big guns delete anything (cannot game rail weapons into always having splash damage or auto wound anything to death with bolters).

 Insularum wrote:
Exploding hits wouldn't be much better than autowounds (and in some cases, worse).

Autowounds don't actually increase the maximum damage you are capably of inflicting - they just make it ridiculously easy to achieve near perfect efficiency (1 shot 1 kill). Exploding hits reduces your overall efficiency, but gives the chance for double damage (1 shot 2 kills), so ends up being about equally overpowered.

Reduces overall efficiency claim assumes majority of damage comes from weapons that have worse S than target T. So you are shooting at T8 targets with S7 or less and T4 targets S3 or less.

Magma cannon has enough S that exploding 6's easily increases overall damage output...

Yes - if the current rules stay unchanged the majority of damage will come from low strength weapons, as reroll hit auto wound bolters are even worse than rail weapons against most targets, and beam weapon spam is also potentially worse than rail weapons.

Exploding hits just changes the dynamic to make the best individual guns more desirable - you are right that the rail cannon is simply good enough on it's own that double hits easily makes it scarier (it just has harder access to splash damage).

 Insularum wrote:
Yes - if the current rules stay unchanged the majority of damage will come from low strength weapons, as reroll hit auto wound bolters are even worse than rail weapons against most targets, and beam weapon spam is also potentially worse than rail weapons.

Exploding hits just changes the dynamic to make the best individual guns more desirable - you are right that the rail cannon is simply good enough on it's own that double hits easily makes it scarier (it just has harder access to splash damage).

"Looks at HLFs with 8 str7, 6 str7, and a str 14, or 3D3 Str 8 guns"
"Looks at Beserks that can all have Thunder hammers"
"Looks at Hearthguard that all can have Super charge Plasma guns and Thunder hammers"
"Looks at Warriors with 1 shot HBs, Magna and Missiles"

Sure.... low strength

 Amishprn86 wrote:

princeyg wrote:
I'm not entirely sure about the whole thing frankly.

I've personally played 2 games against them now (using codex and our "best guess for size" proxies for unavailable models) and witnessed 3 more.

I was using Big nids in first game, got horribly HORRIBLY murdered, then went swarm (2x30 termies and 2x30 hormies) with mortal wound support (1x 3 biovores, 2 x 9 spore mine units.....yes i must be mad, but holy emperor, did those mines do some fantastic work against the bikes....go on then..zoom up the board if you want..spend your next turn clearing my mines or YOU WILL DIE)

What we have discovered is that they are VERY VERY good at deleting big expensive units, or elite infantry but have a HUGE problem with board control (even with 3 units of bikes) IF the opponent has taken a decent number of troops.

Is the "judgement token" rule overpowered? YES..against armies with small expensive units. Against orks, guard, nids and possibly (i do mean possibly... Tau if they've loaded up with Kroot) they will have a tough fight.

What we have in this army is (I am starting to believe) the reason to run big units of cheap troops again, which is something that 9th ed has been very punishing on.

I truly pity Knight players ... you are not gonna have an easy game (or anyone with a primarch).

Yeah, they need to limit the power of the JTs for sure, this honestly is the biggest problem of the army.

A simple "remove all JTs at the end of your turn" would go a long way. So your opponent does stuff, generates tokens on himself then get Votaan player gets to put some down, make use of them and at the end of their turn they reset. Rather then sticking around forever and inevitably stacking up.

Hating something should in no way make the guns you are using more effective, the auto wounding is just an asinine rule that shouldn't be used.

I think the tokens should be toned down alot, they won't get rid of them as it would require a total re-write but there are ways the effect could be changed.

Something like the following is still useful, represents the extra effort they put in because they hate the target and most importantly isn't stupidly busted.

1 JT - Re-roll 1s to hit against the target.
2 JT - Re-roll 1s & 2s to hit against the target.
1 JT - Re-roll 1s &2s &3s to hit against the target.

Added to this I'd remove the no wound rerolls from the void armour rule, its just another layer of defence they shouldn't have for their points cost. Either that or lose the -1 AP part.

 Ordana wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:

princeyg wrote:
I'm not entirely sure about the whole thing frankly.

I've personally played 2 games against them now (using codex and our "best guess for size" proxies for unavailable models) and witnessed 3 more.

I was using Big nids in first game, got horribly HORRIBLY murdered, then went swarm (2x30 termies and 2x30 hormies) with mortal wound support (1x 3 biovores, 2 x 9 spore mine units.....yes i must be mad, but holy emperor, did those mines do some fantastic work against the bikes....go on then..zoom up the board if you want..spend your next turn clearing my mines or YOU WILL DIE)

What we have discovered is that they are VERY VERY good at deleting big expensive units, or elite infantry but have a HUGE problem with board control (even with 3 units of bikes) IF the opponent has taken a decent number of troops.

Is the "judgement token" rule overpowered? YES..against armies with small expensive units. Against orks, guard, nids and possibly (i do mean possibly... Tau if they've loaded up with Kroot) they will have a tough fight.

What we have in this army is (I am starting to believe) the reason to run big units of cheap troops again, which is something that 9th ed has been very punishing on.

I truly pity Knight players ... you are not gonna have an easy game (or anyone with a primarch).

Yeah, they need to limit the power of the JTs for sure, this honestly is the biggest problem of the army.

A simple "remove all JTs at the end of your turn" would go a long way. So your opponent does stuff, generates tokens on himself then get Votaan player gets to put some down, make use of them and at the end of their turn they reset. Rather then sticking around forever and inevitably stacking up.

That would make everyone only play GTL and the problem would still be bad bc right now they can max out 3 units a turn without issue. They need to just tone down the JTs over all rr their power stays the same.

NOTE: You will need to spend some CP to do that, but given they can get 2-3 CP a turn if you wanted too, its not an issue.

judgment tokens really are just too good. if they wanted it implemented as is there needs to be a cost associated to it. i get they hate a unit so shoot more at it, maybe more concentrating on it but less on their surroundings.

my solution

any unit shooting at a unit with a judgment token/s pays a price as below

1 token - loses cover save
2 tokens - no cover and +1 to hit that unit
3 tokens - no cover, +1 to hit and +1 to wound

Edit - wrong topic whoops

 G00fySmiley wrote:
judgment tokens really are just too good. if they wanted it implemented as is there needs to be a cost associated to it. i get they hate a unit so shoot more at it, maybe more concentrating on it but less on their surroundings.

my solution

any unit shooting at a unit with a judgment token/s pays a price as below

1 token - loses cover save
2 tokens - no cover and +1 to hit that unit
3 tokens - no cover, +1 to hit and +1 to wound

if you did this what would you do with scanners, because no one would take the scanners

princeyg wrote:
I'm not entirely sure about the whole thing frankly.

I've personally played 2 games against them now (using codex and our "best guess for size" proxies for unavailable models) and witnessed 3 more.

I was using Big nids in first game, got horribly HORRIBLY murdered, then went swarm (2x30 termies and 2x30 hormies) with mortal wound support (1x 3 biovores, 2 x 9 spore mine units.....yes i must be mad, but holy emperor, did those mines do some fantastic work against the bikes....go on then..zoom up the board if you want..spend your next turn clearing my mines or YOU WILL DIE)

What we have discovered is that they are VERY VERY good at deleting big expensive units, or elite infantry but have a HUGE problem with board control (even with 3 units of bikes) IF the opponent has taken a decent number of troops.

Is the "judgement token" rule overpowered? YES..against armies with small expensive units. Against orks, guard, nids and possibly (i do mean possibly... Tau if they've loaded up with Kroot) they will have a tough fight.

What we have in this army is (I am starting to believe) the reason to run big units of cheap troops again, which is something that 9th ed has been very punishing on.

I truly pity Knight players ... you are not gonna have an easy game (or anyone with a primarch).

This is the main problem of the JT system and Votann in general. Armies that can field large amount of units are going to be slightly bothered by Votann, but elite armies are just going to be gatekept in the gutters thanks to the dwarves.

The even bigger problem for the army right now is that if you just outright removed grudge tokens completely, the army would still be in the upper echelons of power in the game. From its stratagems, to its WLT's, to its relics, to its upgrades, to its subfactions, to its psychic discipline, to its datasheets to its points costs; everything is just too good as-is. Units like the Bikes and the Hearthguard do not need tokens to operate at all, and yet point-for-point they're some of the most ridiculous units in the game already.

 Bosskelot wrote:
The even bigger problem for the army right now is that if you just outright removed grudge tokens completely, the army would still be in the upper echelons of power in the game. From its stratagems, to its WLT's, to its relics, to its upgrades, to its subfactions, to its psychic discipline, to its datasheets to its points costs; everything is just too good as-is. Units like the Bikes and the Hearthguard do not need tokens to operate at all, and yet point-for-point they're some of the most ridiculous units in the game already.

Slow down abit, your hyperbole is ruining your argument.
Most of their good stratagems require JT's to even work.
Most of their WLT's and Relics are pretty meh, even if there are some really good ones.
Their psychic discipline is also rather meh with only 2 powers being what I'd consider decent; The CP regeneration and +T powers will be taken in 99% of the games, hardly makes for a good discipline.
"Everything" certainly isn't "too good as-is", the Thunderkin are pretty meh, and I think you give Hearthguard way to much credit when you call them "some of the most ridiculous units in the game". Things can be "good" without being outright "broken".

LoV probably needs tweaking, but people tend to ignore feedback when it pretty much boils down to "EvErYtHiNg Is BrOkEn!!!1"

 MinscS2 wrote:

 Bosskelot wrote:
The even bigger problem for the army right now is that if you just outright removed grudge tokens completely, the army would still be in the upper echelons of power in the game. From its stratagems, to its WLT's, to its relics, to its upgrades, to its subfactions, to its psychic discipline, to its datasheets to its points costs; everything is just too good as-is. Units like the Bikes and the Hearthguard do not need tokens to operate at all, and yet point-for-point they're some of the most ridiculous units in the game already.

Slow down abit, your hyperbole is ruining your argument.
Most of their good stratagems require JT's to even work.
Most of their WLT's and Relics are pretty meh, even if there are some really good ones.
Their psychic discipline is also rather meh with only 2 powers being what I'd consider decent; The CP regeneration and +T powers will be taken in 99% of the games, hardly makes for a good discipline.
"Everything" certainly isn't "too good as-is", the Thunderkin are pretty meh, and I think you give Hearthguard way to much credit when you call them "some of the most ridiculous units in the game". Things can be "good" without being outright "broken".

LoV probably needs tweaking, but people tend to ignore feedback when it pretty much boils down to "EvErYtHiNg Is BrOkEn!!!1"

Yeah this, they are strong bc of a few units and how strong JTs are. If you go watch some of the 15 or so BatReps out with just 2 Army boxes (aka no vehicles or hearthguard) they are not blowing anyone out the park and all games are very close with Votann losing most of them. Its really just the HLFs, Beserks, and Hearthguard that are really pulling the weight with the JTs. Also I think people are playing Beam completely wrong, you need to measure every shot and slow roll every shot (which is annoying AF!), if you are not doing this then you are gaining an advantage.

I think some people look at the Votann codex and assume everything is in range all the time, and because some of the units can be fast they are all fast all the time and somehow can still shoot and charge.

Also everything is a magna rail weapon and all of your units are perpetually at Judgement3 when they are deployed.

blaktoof wrote:
I think some people look at the Votann codex and assume everything is in range all the time, and because some of the units can be fast they are all fast all the time and somehow can still shoot and charge.

Also everything is a magna rail weapon and all of your units are perpetually at Judgement3 when they are deployed.

I more or less agree with the sentiment, but I did get the feeling that it wasn't difficult to stack on judgement tokens. I think the concept of a slowly building power is cool in theory (judgement tokens gradually being built up on the opposing units), but in practice having a weak early game will result in the late game power units being dead before they can do anything (unless you can negate the damage entirely). I'm looking at you deathstrike missile launcher

I also think the slow and short range thing would be more meaningful on the old 6x4 board size with short edge deployment. Back in the day, I looked at the demolisher cannon's 24" range and said "not worth it, I'll never have range on things"...now it borders on the acceptable for me (I use the spotter detail regiment trait to boost it to 30" and I rarely don't have range on something I want to shoot). Not sure if any of the youtube batreps used short-edge deployment or not, but I'll definitely have to go take a look after work because I'd like to see how differently LoV play from the short edge.

I find it hard to consider how I would even create a strategy against a LoV player (I play Custodes). Even IF I can get my telemon into melee range with their tank, I'm still not gonna kill it out right, and there is an extremely good chance he deletes me if he looks at me funny.

The only thing in my entire faction that can reliably handle a T9 platform is either a gimmicky 1 shot launcher on a Termy captain, or a Telemon. I'm not bringing out the Ares, as that would be silly.

But honestly, did GW consider what unleashing a T9 platform on current 40k would do to factions that are mired in a world where the max is T8?