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.

The Storm Troopers should be more akin to Delta Force or Seals, that are capable, and equipped to do missions that lesser troops wouldn't have a chance at.  Vets should be more like a Marine Recon squad. 

In this respect, I think that ST's should have a slightly higher base cost as long as they have a better Hellgun (many of the ideas stated sound pretty good), carapace, Deep Strike/Infiltrate included and the ability to customize their weapons choices. They should still be able to take two special weapons, but the sarge should be able to take officer only gear.  Each individual member of the squad should be able to switch out his hellgun for a shotgun, pay extra for a bolter, and one should have access to a demolition charge.  Another nice touch would be a fast, open-topped buggy vehicle that could hold five of them ( Maybe the salamander already does that, I don't know its rules). 

As previously stated, transport versatility is something the guard could really use.  I run Chimeras(rarely) with a heavy bolter, multi-laser, and storm bolters (built 'em pre-stubber) and they run me about 100pts and are really fragile.  This vehicle is about as dangerous as a razorback, but costs much more.  It should be able to have an autocannon turret and be cheaper.

I think the other thing that needs to happen is a nerf on skimmers or better  concealment protection.  The ability to always reduce to glancing hits is unfair in my opinion, especially since the concealment save for standard armor is worthless.  The way it was before with the auto glance if half the vehicle was covered is alright, but I think a 4+ save against all hits would also work.  The profusion of lascannons, lances, railguns, gauss weapons and 2+ save Tyranid monsters means that standard armor needs a boost.

On top of that a points reduction for heavy weapons would be nice, and it would also be cool if mortars got bumped up to St 5 ap 5 small template, and the Griffon was put back in the codex.  This would make the old 3 Griffon and Mortar squad option viable again.

As far as Rhinos for IG go, I believe it's more likely that GW will green-light the Centaur than permit Rhinos, as it's all (to them) a question of theme. While the Rhino may be common as muck, the Chimera chassis and all variants thereof provides a consistent theme for the IG, which the Rhino chassis would break.

I think hellguns should sort of be like the first step between lasguns and multilasers. If we assume a "single-barreled" multilaser would be something like Str6 AP6 Heavy 1, then a hellgun should be something like Str4 AP6 24" Rapid Fire.

Shotguns should be Str3 AP- Assault 2, reroll misses.

Ripper guns should count as heavy close combat weapons.

SamWise I am going to have to give you an Amen Brother on the Skimmer comment. They are currently just to dang powerful. Skimmers should be highly manauverable, and fragile as heck. Instead they are highly manuverable, and the most resilant tanks in the game. The easiest fix is to match the fast move rule with the cove rule. Penning hits are downgraded to glancing on a 4+.

The last thing 40K needs is more D6 rolls Foil. The idiotic 'obscurement' rules are one of the chief reasons I hate 4th Ed.

I much prefer our version of Hull Down/Skimmers Moving Fast/Smoke Launchers/etc.:

All hits count as glancing, but if you roll a 6 when penetrating, it counts as a Penetrating Hit (assuming you could penetrate normally) For example:

Railgun vs Falcon moving over 6" (or 8" in our rules - we made vehicles faster than men on foot).

Current Rules - Glance on a 2+
Our Rules - Glance on a 2-5, Penetrate on a 6.

 -- OR --

Multi-Laser vs Falcon moving over 6":

Current Rules - Glance on a 6
Our Rules - Glance on a 6

It is the healthy medium between 3rd Ed's 'absolute' Hull Down rules, that always made it glancing, and the silly 4+ 'save' vehicles get.

BYE

Or have the cover provide a negative modifer to opponent shooting, but I know, for some reason GW views negative modifiers like the Great Vampcow despite doing them in most other games it makes.

So HBMC as opposed to a simple 4+ to downgrade, we have a:

We normally that would pen, but since you rolled a 5 that glances, but if you rolled a 6 and the vehical was moving more than 6 inches, as opposed to a vehical moving 5 inches but then penned on a 5, but now penned on a 6 but glanced on a 5 unless it is hull down or smoked, and then it would be glanced on a 6 but since its the third tuesday of december, and you are firing at an oblique angle but wait its the second tuesday, and you are only firing a strength 6 gun vs armor 12, but in this case you are getting a side armor shot as you are in the right quadrant but with line of sight to only the front armor... .... ....

KISS keep it simple, keep it clear, keep it easy to understand, and most of all keep the rules as identical to each other as posible. What happens when you shoot at a tank that is obscured, 4+ to downgrade. What happens when you shoot at a skimmer moving fast, 4+ to downgrade.

What if skimmers just had a different damage table? For example:

Skimmer Glancing
1 - Shaken
2 - Stunned
3 - Immobilized + Shaken (Destroyed if moving over 6")
4 - Weapon Destroyed + Shaken
5 - Vehicle Destroyed
6 - Vehicle Destroyed (Roll Skimmer Penetrating)

Skimmer Penetrating
1 - (Roll Skimmer Glancing)
2 - Immobilized + Stunned (Destroyed if moving over 6")
3 - Weapon Destroyed + Stunned
4 - Vehicle Destroyed
5 - Vehicle Explodes
6 - Vehicle Annihilated

It makes them much more vulnerable to glancing hits, which they take a lot more. The Skimmer Penetrating could always be tossed for the regular Penetrating instead, since skimmers that are caught in this position are likely to be fried, since they're lightweights in terms of armor. Just an idea, though.

CK

I actually really like that idea Corpsman. A nastier damage table would help things.

Posted By foil7102 on 12/12/2006 6:01 AM
We normally that would pen, but since you rolled a 5 that glances, but if you rolled a 6 and the vehical was moving more than 6 inches, as opposed to a vehical moving 5 inches but then penned on a 5, but now penned on a 6 but glanced on a 5 unless it is hull down or smoked, and then it would be glanced on a 6 but since its the third tuesday of december, and you are firing at an oblique angle but wait its the second tuesday, and you are only firing a strength 6 gun vs armor 12, but in this case you are getting a side armor shot as you are in the right quadrant but with line of sight to only the front armor... 

Oh please. *rolls eyes*

It's reduced all penetration vs Hull Down to one dice roll, rather than introducing 'saves' for vehicles that don't save them and only work half the time. The rule is no more complicated than the rules for Rending, so don't exagerate things just to prove a point. You sound like the kind've person who goes mad at the mere mention of 'modifiers' with the way you're speaking.

Furthermore, we've been playing this way for over a year, testing our rules constantly, and this system works. It takes the infallible Hull Down rules from 3rd Ed (that were unbalanced, and made penetrating hits few and far between) and creates a way to beat Hull Down - all with a single dice roll.

BYE

Hear hear! I've been on the receiving end of 6's for AP and inflicting them; it really works and is very straightforward once you get the concept (if I could penetrate normally, I can do so on a 6 for AP all the time).

How is that terribly complex?

I just want you to imagine that you have two brand new players with nothing but a rule book, how would you write that rule so that there would be absolutly no confusion? It is one thing to have the person who wrote the rule teaching it to you. It is another to make it clear to some one with no prior knowledge. Call it a challange, can you write that rule in a way that is both consice and can can not be misinterpreted? My issue is not that it is a bad idea. I just think that it is overly complex

It has actually been something I've been thinking about more generally; I've spent the past day and a half (on holidays!) rewriting Codex Eldar Revisited in light of the 4th edition Codex, and examining ways of making things clearer.

Are you talking about the rulebook itself of HBMC's description of it?

I suppose the easiest way to get it across is that 6's for Armour Penetration always Penetrate (as long as you could Penetrate normally).

The only complicating thing is to describe the Lascannon vs AV 12 as opposed to the Multilaser vs AV 12; one can't simply say that that 6's always penetrate (or Multilasers will become the king of kiling Land Raiders!)

Also, our rules are designed for a somewhat higher level of player; more options usually involves somewhat more complexity (ie. if you can only ever shoot at one target at a time, very simple but limited; shooting at multiple targets by its very nature needs more rules in order for it to happen).

I suspect that we'll be putting up revised versions of the various Codices and rulebook soon enough; more than happy for you (and other Dakkaites) to have a look through and give us comments :-)

What about vs a smoked vehical?

milesteg, I think you misread H's ruleset for Penetrating on 6. If the weapon is eligible, then a roll of a 6 for armor penetration will penetrate. However, in the case of a Multilaser, if the weapon is not eligible to penetrate under normal cirucumstances (versus AV12), then a roll of a 6 means nothing. H explains it better than I, so I'd recommen re-reading his previous posts.

CK

Another option would be to give ST's demo charge options. That would give them them some extra quick burst firepower and separate them more from hardened vets.

Senior Officers don't generally get a look-in on IG lists - either a JO+Honorifica is picked, or an HSO is picked as the leadership stat is generally more important than the combat stats. Even if JOs were relegated to Platoons only, HSOs would continue to be a much better buy than SOs, so they still wouldn't get a look-in. Perhaps a way to make SOs more valuable would be to grant SOs a leadership of 9, but give the HSO a few extra leadership boosts, such as boost the Ld bubble to Telepathic Order range, or have the Company Standard for free or somesuch.

Ummm....Corpsman, I think you've misunderstood what I was getting at (wasn't making the point you are suggesting). Indeed, I am very familiar with HBMC's point as I helped him write the rules in the first place (we're friends in the reality of the materium, as opposed to the Warp that is Dakka...)

Sorry about the confusion, but I've been playing this rule for the past 3 years or so :-)

Smoke Vehicles, Hull Down and skimmers moving fast are all treated the same - all can be beaten on a roll of 6.

BYE

Posted By milesteg on 12/14/2006 3:38 PM
Ummm....Corpsman, I think you've misunderstood what I was getting at 

Ah. Indeed, I did misunderstand you. Now that I've re-read it, I see the point you are making.

With regard to your original statement, I do agree that this paradox of 6 equalling Penetrating hit is a bit of a paradox. I'm not sure if you mentioned it, but this would meant that a storm of Lasgun fire, when rolling for armor penetration, would become a super-effective (as well as incredibly cheap) method of killing enemy armor. I'm assuming that you have a provision in place to nullify that, but it would be entertaining nonetheless.

"My 130 guardsmen are all shooting their lasguns at your Terminator-filled Land Raider Crusader...looks like 67 hits, and...ooooh, that's 11 penetrating hits, pal. Good luck on that one."

"waaaaah..."

I'm very interested in seeing how your group handles the rewriting of the Imperial Guard.

H has been talking about a bunch of ideas that I very much like. I definitely plan on trying out the ruleset when you all finish it.

CK

Posted By Corpsman_of_Krieg on 12/14/2006 5:01 PM

With regard to your original statement, I do agree that this paradox of 6 equalling Penetrating hit is a bit of a paradox. I'm not sure if you mentioned it, but this would meant that a storm of Lasgun fire, when rolling for armor penetration, would become a super-effective (as well as incredibly cheap) method of killing enemy armor. I'm assuming that you have a provision in place to nullify that, but it would be entertaining nonetheless.

I believe that that would be in his first description of the rule.

"All hits count as glancing, but if you roll a 6 when penetrating, it counts as a Penetrating Hit (assuming you could penetrate normally)"

@Buoyancy
That would mean that if I rapid-fired with 6 Guardsmen, I would statistically get 6 hits and 1 penetration. FROM A LASGUN. So does that mean that my Land Raider Crusader has to fear the lowly firearm of the Guard?!?

I don't think that makes sense. In fact, I'm sure I'm missing something here. Please help me out of my confused state.

CK

I'm not sure what problem you're now having with the quite clearly laid out rule, since you apparently understood it in your first reply.  You seem to be talking past each other, considering that Milesteg said:

"I suppose the easiest way to get it across is that 6's for Armour Penetration always Penetrate (as long as you could Penetrate normally)."

To which you responded by stating:

"If the weapon is eligible, then a roll of a 6 for armor penetration will penetrate."

Which both have identical meanings, and both fit exactly with the original description of the proposed rule.

I'm not sure what is needed to fix Guard is an overall revision of the vehicle rules....it still seems a little bit more flexibility in the organization and armament in the list, and better defined roles for certain units, it what we need. Also, i think we identified tweaking some doctrines -- for example, paying less for smaller squads with per-squad doctrines, etc.

All this talk of general rules revisions for vehicles to help a weak Guard is like trying to fix a bent bike tyre with a sledgehammer.

-Adso

@buoyancy.

I understand what I missed now. It slipped my mind in writing that post, that only eligible weapons can penetrate on a 6. I thought for a second that suddenly all weapons were going to have a sort of rending ability (on the penetration roll instead of to hit).

CK

Posted By Corpsman_of_Krieg on 12/14/2006 5:01 PM

"My 130 guardsmen are all shooting their lasguns at your Terminator-filled Land Raider Crusader...looks like 67 hits, and...ooooh, that's 11 penetrating hits, pal. Good luck on that one."

"waaaaah..."

You're still misunderstanding. Rolls of 6 do not equal a Penetrating Hit. Rolls of 6 beat Hull Down/Smoked/Skimmers Moving Fast/Kustom Force Fieldz/etc. Aside from that nothing has changed, so you still have to equal or beat the armour value, it's just that if you beat the Armour Value with a 6, you Penetrate regardless of Hull Down/Smoke/etc.

BYE

And all this goes just to prove my point. Like I said, I like the idea, just think it is a little more complicated than it needs to be.

A target vehical does not benefit from any special rules or protections, when a 6 is rolled to penetrate its armor.

(not sure if this is any good, as you could argue that an eldar tank would not get to use spirit stones, or a av12 tank could not use extra armor when hit by a strength 6 gun)

I've fixed a bike tire with a sledgehammer.  It's a bumpy ride now but works ok. :thumbs up:  

An all Rough Rider Doctrine would be cool.  If for +20pts any unit could be upgraded to Rough Riders and have lances I might have to start a Polish Cavalry army.

Another thing I definitely feel would add to the Guard overall would be a fast, light vehicle that could transport 5 people.  It could be open topped like a jeep, but also be amphibius.  This would make command squads more useful.  If they could drive 12" jump out wherever, unleash melta/flamer hell and then charge, people might actually be afraid of us. Plus, it would be a cheap mechanized option.  I hate how chimeras can't be used in this way unless you spin them around and expose their rear to penetrating hits. ")  

Samwise look to the new centaur assault carrier from foregworld. I don't think its on themain page yet but it carts around 5 guys.

 

The scary thing about the Centaur is that it's a fast vehicle. So for about 50 points, you get a Rhino with double-move distance and a 3-Melta Vet Squad pouring out. Good for Guard, bad for the baddies.

@H: I understand now. I was confused (hugely), but that is what happens when we're reading words on a page and not listening to the nuance of a person's voice. Now that I understand, I have to agree with you and say that this is a good system that would beat down the old one pretty well without making anti-speeder units amazing at their job.

CK