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.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Or maybe the Bolter isn't better enough to warrant a difference?

In that case, why does it warrant AP5 while the lasgun warrants AP- in the current AP system?

Because it's much better than the Lasgun at penetrating Flakk Jackets, which are weaker than the weakest spots in Terminator Armour?

Alright, what about battlecannons? Str 8 AP3. Is their penetration not any better against Terminator Armor than an open-handed slap, or a lasgun, or a bolter?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Or maybe the Bolter isn't better enough to warrant a difference?

In that case, why does it warrant AP5 while the lasgun warrants AP- in the current AP system?

Because it's much better than the Lasgun at penetrating Flakk Jackets, which are weaker than the weakest spots in Terminator Armour?

Alright, what about battlecannons? Str 8 AP3. Is their penetration not any better against Terminator Armor than an open-handed slap, or a lasgun, or a bolter?

Not by enough, no. That's just how tough Terminator Armour (and other 2+ saves) are. Look at the AP grading as a sort of logarithmic scale. The step from penetrating 6+ armour (Ork T-Shirts) to 5+ armour (flakk jackets, Guardian armour) isn't too big; neither of the armours are particularly strong, and neither cover much more than parts of the torso and head. On to 4+ save (carapace armour, whatever Fire Warriors wear) where the armour covers most if not all of the body; here the force required to damage the armour is much greater. The difference between 5+ and 4+ is thus bigger than the difference between 5+ and 6+.

On to 3+ (Power Armour, Wraithbone, Tyranid armour thingamajigs), where the armour covers the entire body (or, in the case of Wraithbone, IS the entire body). The armour is made up of complex materials and generally augmented by some sort of technological gizmos and gadgets. The power required to get through something like this is pretty substantial.

2+ armour (Terminator Armour, Tyranid Armoured Shells, Fleshmetal) is armour made from materials of incredible fortitude. A shot would have to be magnitudes more powerful to pierce 2+ armour compared to 3+ armour. As such, even a Battle Cannon or an Earthshaker Cannon, weapons that destroy even 3+ armour, are not strong enough to reliably damage 2+ armour. They're strong, but they've not got the penetrative properties of melta, plasma or a Railgun slug.


As an example, if you had to break through a blast door build to withstand a nuclear blast, throwing a stick of dynamite at the door would be much, much more powerful than slapping the door, but both would have essentially zero chance of doing any damage to the door.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Or maybe the Bolter isn't better enough to warrant a difference?

In that case, why does it warrant AP5 while the lasgun warrants AP- in the current AP system?

Because it's much better than the Lasgun at penetrating Flakk Jackets, which are weaker than the weakest spots in Terminator Armour?

Alright, what about battlecannons? Str 8 AP3. Is their penetration not any better against Terminator Armor than an open-handed slap, or a lasgun, or a bolter?

Not by enough, no. That's just how tough Terminator Armour (and other 2+ saves) are. Look at the AP grading as a sort of logarithmic scale. The step from penetrating 6+ armour (Ork T-Shirts) to 5+ armour (flakk jackets, Guardian armour) isn't too big; neither of the armours are particularly strong, and neither cover much more than parts of the torso and head. On to 4+ save (carapace armour, whatever Fire Warriors wear) where the armour covers most if not all of the body; here the force required to damage the armour is much greater. The difference between 5+ and 4+ is thus bigger than the difference between 5+ and 6+.

On to 3+ (Power Armour, Wraithbone, Tyranid armour thingamajigs), where the armour covers the entire body (or, in the case of Wraithbone, IS the entire body). The armour is made up of complex materials and generally augmented by some sort of technological gizmos and gadgets. The power required to get through something like this is pretty substantial.

2+ armour (Terminator Armour, Tyranid Armoured Shells, Fleshmetal) is armour made from materials of incredible fortitude. A shot would have to be magnitudes more powerful to pierce 2+ armour compared to 3+ armour. As such, even a Battle Cannon or an Earthshaker Cannon, weapons that destroy even 3+ armour, are not strong enough to reliably damage 2+ armour. They're strong, but they've not got the penetrative properties of melta, plasma or a Railgun slug.


As an example, if you had to break through a blast door build to withstand a nuclear blast, throwing a stick of dynamite at the door would be much, much more powerful than slapping the door, but both would have essentially zero chance of doing any damage to the door.

Right. But what about different levels of nuclear blast? Why would a 12 kiloton nuke smash the door wide open with no chance of failure, while a 11.99 kiloton nuke would be of no consequence?

4+ is great. Best armor out there if you face grav weapons, bolters, want to keep things alive (50% saves) but don't want to pay for 3+ protection.

If anything, 4+ is the perfect sweet spot for 6th ed.

I question the OP's 40k IQ, seriously, with this thread

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Or maybe the Bolter isn't better enough to warrant a difference?

In that case, why does it warrant AP5 while the lasgun warrants AP- in the current AP system?

Because it's much better than the Lasgun at penetrating Flakk Jackets, which are weaker than the weakest spots in Terminator Armour?

Alright, what about battlecannons? Str 8 AP3. Is their penetration not any better against Terminator Armor than an open-handed slap, or a lasgun, or a bolter?

Not by enough, no. That's just how tough Terminator Armour (and other 2+ saves) are. Look at the AP grading as a sort of logarithmic scale. The step from penetrating 6+ armour (Ork T-Shirts) to 5+ armour (flakk jackets, Guardian armour) isn't too big; neither of the armours are particularly strong, and neither cover much more than parts of the torso and head. On to 4+ save (carapace armour, whatever Fire Warriors wear) where the armour covers most if not all of the body; here the force required to damage the armour is much greater. The difference between 5+ and 4+ is thus bigger than the difference between 5+ and 6+.

On to 3+ (Power Armour, Wraithbone, Tyranid armour thingamajigs), where the armour covers the entire body (or, in the case of Wraithbone, IS the entire body). The armour is made up of complex materials and generally augmented by some sort of technological gizmos and gadgets. The power required to get through something like this is pretty substantial.

2+ armour (Terminator Armour, Tyranid Armoured Shells, Fleshmetal) is armour made from materials of incredible fortitude. A shot would have to be magnitudes more powerful to pierce 2+ armour compared to 3+ armour. As such, even a Battle Cannon or an Earthshaker Cannon, weapons that destroy even 3+ armour, are not strong enough to reliably damage 2+ armour. They're strong, but they've not got the penetrative properties of melta, plasma or a Railgun slug.


As an example, if you had to break through a blast door build to withstand a nuclear blast, throwing a stick of dynamite at the door would be much, much more powerful than slapping the door, but both would have essentially zero chance of doing any damage to the door.

Right. But what about different levels of nuclear blast? Why would a 12 kiloton nuke smash the door wide open with no chance of failure, while a 11.99 kiloton nuke would be of no consequence?

Because that is not how the AP scaling system works. It is a general representation of the armour piercing capabilities of a given weapon. A bolter has almost a guaranteed chance of bypassing flak armour, but doesn't have quite the punch to go through carapace armour, so is designated AP 5 accordingly. Any chance of failiure will be represented in the to hit or to wound rolls (ie only causing a minor flesh wound, the round is redirected by the shape of the armour, etc). In this system, your difference of 0.01 kiloton force in a nuke would be rounded up. And in 40k, there is always a chance for faliure; when your nuke is deployed right, it will easily go through the door. But a small miscalculation could have the same nuke merely scorching the door.

As for the slap to battlecannon reference, I'm not sure if anyone's remembering the added strength of such a weapon, and ergo the higher chance of generating wounds. Terminator armour does have weak points, so barring a weapon that can surely get through them, the best way to break them is by drowning them in gunfire. The stronger, the better. One stick of dynamite may not do much damage to those doors, but keep throwing them and you'll do something. The same number of slaps will have a very low damage output, but will do more than one. A boltgun will do better against terminator armour than a lasgun because it has more raw power. Same as for a heavy bolter - it isn't geared to dealing with that kind of armour, but has a better chance to through its strength and rate of fire over the bolter.

I'd almost go as far as to say they've made saves pointless all together as with all the shots at AP2/3 ignore cover what is the point of a save anyways? I mean either be shot and take 20+ wounds(because everything is str 5 or higher and re-rolls are so abundant) and have to save them on a 2+ or just you don't have any as Heldrakes, ignore cover Tau and Ion Accelerators/ Dark Reaper Star/ Grav gun bikers with ignore cover Libby/ tau commander or / Eldar and rending everything/ignore cover Wave-serpents, pretty much wipe anything it fires at... and that right there is a lot of armies... let me re-phrase that (The armies being played right now, you don't see too many Blood angel players, not too many orks and certainly no longer any nids because they can't even cross the field!), so really I would actually like to see them pull back on Ignore cover and re-roll to hit and actually get back to a game where taking a combo doesn't mean auto-wipe per turn.

As a SM player, I feel the same about my 3+ honestly. There are soo many large blast AP2 pie plates being tossed about now that I am losing 7-8 marines in one go. And half the time that's when they are in cover!

 SickSix wrote:
As a SM player, I feel the same about my 3+ honestly. There are soo many large blast AP2 pie plates being tossed about now that I am losing 7-8 marines in one go. And half the time that's when they are in cover!

Yes, I went two games in a row where I never even got a save.

My Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks cry rivers of tears for all you Power Armour players complaining about your saves being ignored.

Bu-frigging-hu.

Steelmage99 wrote:
My Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks cry rivers of tears for all you Power Armour players complaining about your saves being ignored.

Bu-frigging-hu.

I understand all of those out there who fell we are getting what we should get, but The two thing Marines are sobose to be is a Forgivein Jack of Trades army.
We are suposed to be able to absorb lots of damage with 1/2 to 1/3 the models Orks and Guard are putting on the table.
Your Armies are suposed to die in droves, thats why you are cheep.

Steelmage99 wrote:
My Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks cry rivers of tears for all you Power Armour players complaining about your saves being ignored.

Bu-frigging-hu.

Except you are not paying huge points for a save. What you ARE getting is mass wounds. Which is what you want in this kind of environment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Anpu42 wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:
My Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks cry rivers of tears for all you Power Armour players complaining about your saves being ignored.

Bu-frigging-hu.

I understand all of those out there who fell we are getting what we should get, but The two thing Marines are sobose to be is a Forgivein Jack of Trades army.
We are suposed to be able to absorb lots of damage with 1/2 to 1/3 the models Orks and Guard are putting on the table.
Your Armies are suposed to die in droves, thats why you are cheep.

When marines die in droves, the game ends real fast.

Marines pay for a lot more than wearing a small tank as armour.

Steelmage99 wrote:
My Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks cry rivers of tears for all you Power Armour players complaining about your saves being ignored.

Bu-frigging-hu.

Why? Your Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks aren't paying 15 ppm.

It's like... do you even actually play the game at all?

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Marines pay for a lot more than wearing a small tank as armour.

Which SHOULD be reflected in-game, but isn't.

I feel 4+ armour is better in this edition compared to last. In 5th edition, you nearly always got 4+ cover save, so what was the point of 4+ armour? Ok, it protected in close combat but if you played Tau, it didn't matter, in fact it was sometimes detrimental since you wanted to lose combat.

Sure, nowadays there seems to be overwhelming amount of low-AP weaponry so armour saves often don't help a lot.

If armour save modifiers returned I'd want to see my terminators saving on 2D6 again.

Otherwise, no.

Off the top of my head.

Bolters were -1 save
Lasguns were -1 save
Shuriken catapults were -2
Plasma guns and pistols were -2
Meltaguns were -4
Assault cannons were -4
Krak missiles were -6
Lascannons were -6

Power swords were -3
Power axes were -2 one handed, or -3 two handed
Power fists were -5
Lightning claws were -5
Chainfists were -5
Thunder hammers were -5 (I don't recall any melee weapons going to -6)

Thunder hammers were awesome. Auto-wound/auto armour penetration, D6 wounds.

 Hollowman wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Plumbumbarum wrote:
AP system is better than save modifiers

But why? It's a less balanced system.

If nothing else, the AP system makes more sense from a realism perspective. Most weapons do have a set band of armor/thickness they are able to penetrate, and that is that. The fact that your gun can shoot through a flak jacket does not in any way shape or form make it better able to shoot through 6 inches of steel. If you want to shoot through 6 inches of steel, you need a different gun. End of story. There's no way an AP5 weapon would realistically have an increased chance of shooting through terminator armor.

The game is an abstraction of reality. A lasgun CAN kill a terminator. It has a 1 in 6 chance. As does a boltgun, as does a bare fisted punch, as does a Chem Cannon. All are 1 in 6. This is not anymore realistic than any other system.

I'm not sure in what sense it is unbalanced either... you know exactly what you are paying for and you get what you are paying for, with both weapons and armor. In a modifier system, there's a lot more flex to what you are paying for, and better armor saves and better AP weapons are both less useful.

You can read why it's unbalanced in this very thread. Someone saying they went 2 games without being able to take a save, because there is so much AP 3, the points they paid for their 3+ save was pretty much wasted. Now, the army that had the AP3 obviously paid the points to get that AP3. If they turn around and face a horded Tyranid army, those points were wasted. My IG army with lots of AP4 is only average against a Marine army, but against a non-MEQ army, it's awesome. That is unbalanced. If what is currently AP4 instead had a -2 save modifier (and had an increase in points to match), then those AP4 weapons would be worth similar value regardless of what army you play against.

I like the IDEA that one weapon is awesome against power armour and another weapon is awesome against hordes but sucky against power armour... however from an actual game perspective, that is unbalancing.

IMO, the best system is to have 3 different stats for each weapon...

Strength
Save Modifier
Armour Penetration

The strength defines how well you deal with toughness, so things like monstrous creatures. Save Modifer defines how well you get through infantry armour. Something like an Autocannon is obviously a better armour penetrator than a lasgun, and I feel that it should be represented as such regardless of whether you are playing against Tyranids or Space Marines (at the moment it is a better armour penetrator against Tyranids, but not Space Marines). Armour Penetration is how well you get through vehicular armour, and it doesn't have to be linked to Strength or AP/Save modifer at all.

Currently we have a rock paper scissor system within the AP system. This is what I don't like and feel is inherently unbalancing. If you changed the rock paper scissor system to Str vs Toughness, Save Modifier vs Infantry Armour, Armour Penetration vs Vehicle Armour, I think it'd be a much more balanced system.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:
If armour save modifiers returned I'd want to see my terminators saving on 2D6 again.

If the save modifier system came back, I could see terminators getting a double 3+ save. So roll to save once, if you get a 3+, you save, if you don't, you roll again and get a 2nd 3+ save.

The modifiers eat in to the first save first, then the 2nd save, so against a -2 save weapon, you'd get a 5+ save followed by a 3+ save. Against a -6 save modifier weapon, your first save would be entirely negated, but you'd still get a 5+ save from the 2nd save.

Maybe that's too much maths for your average gamer, but I think it's better than the old 2D6 system which required you to roll individually for each wound you took.

A lasgun has a 1/3 chance of wounding a terminator then a 1/6 chance of bypassing its save, so about a 1/18 chance of inflicting a wound.

A bolter has a 1/2 chance of wounding a terminator then a 1/6 chance of bypassing its save, so about a 1/12 chance of inflicting a wound.

A bolter is about 50% better at killing terminators than a lasgun is.

An autocannon has a 5/6 chance of wounding a terminator then a 1/6 chance of bypassing its save so about a 5/36 chance of inflicting a wound.

An autocannon is about 67% better at killing terminators than a bolter is.

AP4 weapons often have multiple shots which make them even better at killing terminators than high strength single shot weapons.

I could do the calculations for that but I dislike doing binomials in my head.

 Lobukia wrote:
4+ is great. Best armor out there if you face grav weapons, bolters, want to keep things alive (50% saves) but don't want to pay for 3+ protection.

If anything, 4+ is the perfect sweet spot for 6th ed.

I question the OP's 40k IQ, seriously, with this thread

I think the problem with 4+ saves is most armies that have them don't have a lot of them. If EVERYTHING in your army had a 4+ save, it'd be pretty good. If the only thing in your army that has a 4+ save is Tyranid Warriors, Hive Guard, and Biovores... guess what every single Heavy Bolter is going to be aiming at, lol.

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:
A lasgun has a 1/3 chance of wounding a terminator then a 1/6 chance of bypassing its save, so about a 1/18 chance of inflicting a wound.

A bolter has a 1/2 chance of wounding a terminator then a 1/6 chance of bypassing its save, so about a 1/12 chance of inflicting a wound.

A bolter is about 50% better at killing terminators than a lasgun is.

An autocannon has a 5/6 chance of wounding a terminator then a 1/6 chance of bypassing its save so about a 5/36 chance of inflicting a wound.

An autocannon is about 67% better at killing terminators than a bolter is.

AP4 weapons often have multiple shots which make them even better at killing terminators than high strength single shot weapons.

I could do the calculations for that but I dislike doing binomials in my head.

A direct hit from a Battlecannon, Manticore missile, or Basilisk shell has an exactly equal chance of killing a Terminator to a multilaser or scatter laser, while being infinitely better at turning Land Raiders to paste.

Why?

AP should change with range, it would make armour saves more viable unless you were being blasted at short range, then again, BS should change at range also.

All plasma based weapons should change from AP2 to AP3 for a start, and a melta gun should be AP1 within 6 inches, AP2 within 9 and AP3 at +9. They should be powerful weapons but come with an inherent risk, in that you must get really close to get the full benefit, it also makes more sense for the double Armour penetration for vehicles, why wouldn't it struggle against heavy Armour in the same way.

I know my example doesn't apply to 4+ but a heavy bolter should only be ap4 at sub half range for example and then make all but certain weapons the same - a rail rifle should be at full AP for the whole shot .

Whether it's realistic or not it doesn't matter, the firefights should be up close and personal and it would make assault more viable again without actually changing any assault rules whilst slightly nerfing the boring gun line as it would require movement.

Why? Your Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks aren't paying 15 ppm.

those units in venoms do . Same with my vets . And unlike marines neither the DE , nor the IG have a safty net in form of ATSKNF.

As an old 2ed player i like ap system better. A weapon either penetrates or not. Less math and more sense. Of corse bad luck always plays a role in real life: here 1 always fails.

Maybe some weapon stats shall be revised though. Marines sound be more durable (I'm IG player) and less abundant, use lots of cover, have cover to hit modifiers, have range modifiers...

Wait, that's another game!

IIRC in 2nd ed the -1 over S3 was applied only If weapon did't have its own modifier, for example to S in CC but I might be wrong.

I like AP, but I think armour should have two stats: their save and their pen resistance (PR). This way the AP of the weapon is compared to the PR of the armour to determine whether or not they get their save, then you roll the save.
Take Ork Boyz, they don't wear a lot of armour, hence a 6+ save, but the armour they do wear is really thick and probably isn't easily penetrated by a lasgun. So if Ork Boyz armour had a 6+ save with a PR of 4 they could still get their armour save against lasguns without actually increasing the save.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Freman Bloodglaive wrote:
A lasgun has a 1/3 chance of wounding a terminator then a 1/6 chance of bypassing its save, so about a 1/18 chance of inflicting a wound.

A bolter has a 1/2 chance of wounding a terminator then a 1/6 chance of bypassing its save, so about a 1/12 chance of inflicting a wound.

A bolter is about 50% better at killing terminators than a lasgun is.

An autocannon has a 5/6 chance of wounding a terminator then a 1/6 chance of bypassing its save so about a 5/36 chance of inflicting a wound.

An autocannon is about 67% better at killing terminators than a bolter is.

AP4 weapons often have multiple shots which make them even better at killing terminators than high strength single shot weapons.

I could do the calculations for that but I dislike doing binomials in my head.

A direct hit from a Battlecannon, Manticore missile, or Basilisk shell has an exactly equal chance of killing a Terminator to a multilaser or scatter laser, while being infinitely better at turning Land Raiders to paste.

Why?

Why indeed! I think this is another case for vehicles having wounds, toughness, and armor saves.

I fully agree with Tanks having a pen resistance AND a save.

It would be just like rolling to wound and then making your armor save on infantry.

Makumba wrote:

Why? Your Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks aren't paying 15 ppm.

those units in venoms do . Same with my vets . And unlike marines neither the DE , nor the IG have a safty net in form of ATSKNF.

How are you paying 15 PPM for Vets?

Further, IG have Orders (GBITF), no?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Makumba wrote:

Why? Your Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks aren't paying 15 ppm.

those units in venoms do . Same with my vets . And unlike marines neither the DE , nor the IG have a safty net in form of ATSKNF.

How are you paying 15 PPM for Vets?

Further, IG have Orders (GBITF), no?

You are not seriously equating Get Back In The Fight with And They Shall Know No Fear, are you?

.. people complain about the storyline never moving forward and, yet, here we have all these aliens suddenly adapting to better technologies to fight all these bald apes, and yet people complain about that, too. The Imperium will develop armor sufficient to reduce the effectiveness of these new hyper-penetrating weapons in a few thousand years. Which is hell of fast for the Imperium.

Steelmage99 wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

Makumba wrote:

Why? Your Imperial Guard, Dark Eldar and Orks aren't paying 15 ppm.

those units in venoms do . Same with my vets . And unlike marines neither the DE , nor the IG have a safty net in form of ATSKNF.

How are you paying 15 PPM for Vets?

Further, IG have Orders (GBITF), no?

You are not seriously equating Get Back In The Fight with And They Shall Know No Fear, are you?

No, I'm just pointing out that Guard have their own Morale shenanigans too.