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.

I'm just gonna' throw this one in, but my group once "fixed" the game by doubling the cost of all special/heavy weapons. Only the subpar ones (like the grenade launcher or the heavy bolter) were spared. This actually made things much better: the grenade launcher, for example, is quite a good deal for 5 points next to the 20-points meltagun and the 30-points plasma gun. Similarly, the heavy bolter was pretty decent for 10 points - a cheap alternative to the 20-points autocannon and a good heavy weapon filler if you don't have the points for the 40-points lascannon.

Also, the Astartes heavy bolters were Salvo 2/3 and had Strikedown.

I havent run any math on it yet, but...

What if armor saves and penetration resistance were separated?

Most units get a 3+, 4+ or 5+, saving 2+ and 6+ for the most extreme ends of the spectrum. Most things would have a 50% chance to save, plus or minus a bit. Mareens, guardsmen, orks, pretty much everything.

However, on the statline is a resistance stat which can be from 1-6 or 1-10. No rolls are made. If the penetration is same or higher than the resistance value, armor is negated.

This keeps all armor 5+ or worse from being useless (because every damn thing besides lasguns have at least some AP, so its effectively no armor), and keeps thing away fron the "nigh unwoundable" end of the spectrum.

Invulnerable saves would simply be low chance armor with high resistance that you have the option of using.

Martel732 wrote:
But with a D10 system, we could do so much more. We could have armor from 2+ to 10+ and all the corresponding APs. We could have real differentiation between weapons.

It would be quite a leap to go to D10, but you're right, it probably is is the logical way to improve the rules. Its mainly an issue of trying to translate the perofrmance of units to the new system -easier said then done. I came up with this rough work a while ago with the intent to write a set of rules. Might be of interest to you...

Super Heavy armour (terminator, mega mrmour) 2+ save
Reinforced Heavy (artificer) 3+
Heavy (power, heavy aspect) 4+
Medium (carapace, tau, ork 'eavy armour, aspect, tough chitin) 6+
Light (flak, mesh, medium chitin) 8+
Basic (ork vests, light chitin) 9+


pulse rifle AP9
bolter AP8
heavy bolter AP8
autocannon AP6
battle cannon AP4
plasma AP3
krak missile AP3
melta AP1
lascannon AP2

If you're going to go to all the trouble of making a D10 system just so that the Heavy Bolter has a niche to sit in in terms of AP, then you should at least fill out the gaps in the 6-10 range that would make it mean something :p

Move 'eavy Armour and Tough Chitin to 7+, and make the Heavy Bolter AP7. Having it and the regular Bolter both be AP8 with no difference between the more obscure armour types makes the whole thing pointless.

 thegreatchimp wrote:
It would be quite a leap to go to D10, but you're right, it probably is is the logical way to improve the rules. Its mainly an issue of trying to translate the perofrmance of units to the new system -easier said then done. I came up with this rough work a while ago with the intent to write a set of rules.

Logical? Arguably so. Practical? Hardly, I'm afraid. As I mentioned before, switching the dice type for the game would be a complete overhaul of the system and would render the game unplayable for years until all the codexes got their stats updated; since clearly not every Strength 3 is going to become Strength 5, etc.Thus far, I've yet to see anyone forward how a switch could undisruptively take place.

I think the Heavy Bolter, in regards to Space Marines in particular, should be able to move and fire with no penalty to their BS and at rate of fire 4. I am comparing it to the support weapons modern militaries use today, in this case the Heavy Bolter would be that "SAW". For imperial Guard you could give the same rules to the Heavy Stubber, can move and shoot normally and it gets rate of fire 4.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
If you're going to go to all the trouble of making a D10 system just so that the Heavy Bolter has a niche to sit in in terms of AP, then you should at least fill out the gaps in the 6-10 range that would make it mean something :p

Move 'eavy Armour and Tough Chitin to 7+, and make the Heavy Bolter AP7. Having it and the regular Bolter both be AP8 with no difference between the more obscure armour types makes the whole thing pointless.

It's worth considering. The list I put together is only a rough idea. Maybe the bolter should be AP9? On one hand it would be proper for light armour to provide some protection. On the other it is supposed to fire armour piercing rounds that tear through such things. Maybe it should be AP8, it being the excptional armour piercing rifle, wheras other rifles like shuriken catapult and pulse rifle only get AP9. Hard to say. Would need extensive playtesting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

mr. peasant wrote:

Logical? Arguably so. Practical? Hardly, I'm afraid. As I mentioned before, switching the dice type for the game would be a complete overhaul of the system and would render the game unplayable for years until all the codexes got their stats updated; since clearly not every Strength 3 is going to become Strength 5, etc.Thus far, I've yet to see anyone forward how a switch could undisruptively take place.

I've thought about the same problems -Going from D6 to D10 statistically some things are going to translate as being weaker or more powerful than they were before. It would initially cause more turmoil than a black crusade to competitive players and yes, the codexes would all require an immediate replacement. But imo its not much more of an upset than the transition of 2nd ed to 3rd, which was a complete overhaul , and that hardly made the game "unplayable for years."

As it is there's a lot of imbalance and inconsistencies in the game due to the limitations of D6. A switch might be welcomed positively by most players, simply by allowing that greater range of stats and probabilities.

Give it Ignores Cover.

Only give it ignores cover after buying incendiary ammo.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

mr. peasant wrote:

Logical? Arguably so. Practical? Hardly, I'm afraid. As I mentioned before, switching the dice type for the game would be a complete overhaul of the system and would render the game unplayable for years until all the codexes got their stats updated; since clearly not every Strength 3 is going to become Strength 5, etc.Thus far, I've yet to see anyone forward how a switch could undisruptively take place.

I've thought about the same problems -Going from D6 to D10 statistically some things are going to translate as being weaker or more powerful than they were before. It would initially cause more turmoil than a black crusade to competitive players and yes, the codexes would all require an immediate replacement. But imo its not much more of an upset than the transition of 2nd ed to 3rd, which was a complete overhaul , and that hardly made the game "unplayable for years."

As it is there's a lot of imbalance and inconsistencies in the game due to the limitations of D6. A switch might be welcomed positively by most players, simply by allowing that greater range of stats and probabilities.

I apologise but you're going to need to shed a little bit more light on this for me as that's a bit before my time; so I'm not sure what those changes were. What was the main difference between 2nd and 3rd edition; specifically with respect to changes in model stats? Also, what was GW's solution between the start of the new edition and the release of the new codexes?

mr. peasant wrote:
I apologise but you're going to need to shed a little bit more light on this for me as that's a bit before my time; so I'm not sure what those changes were. What was the main difference between 2nd and 3rd edition; specifically with respect to changes in model stats? Also, what was GW's solution between the start of the new edition and the release of the new codexes?

No problem. Models stat lines weren't actually too different from what we have now, with the excpetion of:
Moverment was a varying stat (Eldar used to move 8" and most other models 6" I believe.)
Veteran units and sergeant / champions used to have considerably more impressive statlines than the regular troops (specifically space marine vets who were WS5 BS5.
Heroes and Generals had much higher WS and BS than the troops, and higher toughness than them too. So a marine commander was T5.
Orks were less melee orientated and were WS3 BS3 and only 1 attack
MCs went right up to toughness 10 and 10 wounds (this was offset by heavy weapons being able to cause many wounds)

However the core rules were very different and they drastically altered the power of various units. Its been a while since I read those old books but I'll list the most applicable things that were dropped for 3rd.
There were a lot of special rules specific to certain units that have since been replaced with universal key words
Each model fought individually against each model and received bonus attack dice for outnumbering an opponent. Attacks worked differently though. You picked the highest number from the dice rolled, added it to WS, then did the same with the opposing model. The lowest total was subtracted from the highest and that corresponded to the number of hits the losing model took. (Needless to say, a sincle combat phase took forever!)
Weapons weren't very balanced, particularely heavy weapons which made small arms of limited use. They used ridiculous combinations of dice for vehicle armour penetration (e.g. missile launcher D6+D10+8). Assault cannons fired 3-9 shots, each as powerful as a krak missile!)
Tanks and heavy weapons for marines, guard and eldar were much more accurate because they had access to targeters (+1 to hit). Many weapons also had +1 or even +2 to hit at short range. There was penalties for cover and moving fast, etc, but it was generally easier than it is now to score a hit with a marine.
Every single vehicle had a "datafax" card with its own varying speed, armour thickness for different parts like turret and hull, and specific damage charts. Also bikes were vehicles and likewise had a datafax.
Invulnerable saves were generally limited to force fields available to ICs
Termiantor and meganob armour was mighty! Meganob. Heavy aspect and power armour was ok. Carapace was passable. Everything else was rubbish.

I had stopped playing the game when it went to 3rd, but from what I remember they did a mass update of all the codexes and released it at the same time as the new edition.

Hope thats helpful

Movement was 4" for everyone except Eldar and some 'nids, who had 5", like in modern Fantasy.

Stats were generally higher all round - T4 Eldar weren't uncommon, for example - and much more varied. Weapons were significantly different - back in 2e, a Shuriken Catapult was something like Ranger 24", S4, Sv -3, Sustained Fire - basically a Storm Bolter with a better armour save modifier. You also had to buy them, because Guardians has lasguns as their default weapon. Eldar Shurikat spam was considered the epitome of cheese.

The solution to updating all the armies at once: Every army had a bare-bones codex contained within the rulebook itself. No army-wide special rules or special snowflake rules, just a basic army list for Space Marines, Eldar, Orks, Chaos Space Marines, Dark Eldar, Tyranids and Sisters of Battle. Oddly, even though Necrons were released before third edition dropped, they weren't included in the rulebook, while Dark Eldar, who were first released in that rulebook, were.