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.

@ Purifier

You started this by charging into the thread before reading it - jumping up and down and screaming about how all close combat will now be one sided etc etc.

You then kept saying I was whining - hardly Rule 1 !

Why is it so hard to understand that my issue is that the best fighters in the universe should have a more than good chance at hitting the worst fighters in the universe - why is that so wrong and apparently breaks the game.

WS 6-10 should just hit WS3 on a 2+ as MANY on this thread agree with.
Why is is fine for BS 6-10 to hit on 2 + with a re-roll (variable target) but high WS gains zero reward compared to high BS

Celestine is ok against some opponents - WS 7, I7, S5 AP3 - but she still can never hit on better than 3+ - WHY? when she shoots - she can hit on a 2+ / 5+

Can't use melta bombs against infantry - why is that relevant?

He is Kaela fething Mensha Khaine. He swings Wailing Doom as fast as he likes!

WS/I 10 say so!

On a more serious note, he'd probably splat 3-4 Grots on the assault, and he's unlikely to take a single wound. So Grots are testing at -3/4. And he sweeps anything not I5 regardless of roll.

With the table as it is, if a WS6 Chaos Lord makes it into CC with most of my units - even some of my CC units - he's probably going to win. May not be the first round, but it'll probably happen.

It does suck when Asurmen loses a challenge to an already-wounded Nob, because he didn't hit *at all*. It happens. But when that happened, it was all 1's anyways. Dice are dice.

But then you have some wild swings in stats that shouldn't be. Cypher strikes before Baharoth? Vindicare Assassin being better swordsmen than Jain Zar? Random low-rent Archons having the same statline as Asurmen? Some of the abstractions are rather abstract.

Generally speaking, once a unit gets into CC with something weaker than it, its victim can't do anything but flail until its dead. Perhaps its not removing a unit a turn, but even Scatterbikes, some of the ugliest shooting in the game, when they shoot a Marine squad (of equal numbers, so substantially fewer points), aren't going to stop it from doing their thing next turn. The survivors (there will be survivors) can shoot at whoever is in range. The reverse though - charge a 10man Tac squad into a 10-man Jetbike squad - isn't true. The Tacs keep them in combat until they break or die. Won't be a single turn, but the odds of the Windriders winning is low.

Also note that BS has no defensive use. WS does. So it shouldn't be straight up the same numbers.

If a change were made, deviations in both directions need to be accounted for. And breakpoints should be minimized.

Bharring wrote:
He is Kaela fething Mensha Khaine. He swings Wailing Doom as fast as he likes!

WS/I 10 say so!

On a more serious note, he'd probably splat 3-4 Grots on the assault, and he's unlikely to take a single wound. So Grots are testing at -3/4. And he sweeps anything not I5 regardless of roll.

With the table as it is, if a WS6 Chaos Lord makes it into CC with most of my units - even some of my CC units - he's probably going to win. May not be the first round, but it'll probably happen.

It does suck when Asurmen loses a challenge to an already-wounded Nob, because he didn't hit *at all*. It happens. But when that happened, it was all 1's anyways. Dice are dice.

But then you have some wild swings in stats that shouldn't be. Cypher strikes before Baharoth? Vindicare Assassin being better swordsmen than Jain Zar? Random low-rent Archons having the same statline as Asurmen? Some of the abstractions are rather abstract.

Generally speaking, once a unit gets into CC with something weaker than it, its victim can't do anything but flail until its dead. Perhaps its not removing a unit a turn, but even Scatterbikes, some of the ugliest shooting in the game, when they shoot a Marine squad (of equal numbers, so substantially fewer points), aren't going to stop it from doing their thing next turn. The survivors (there will be survivors) can shoot at whoever is in range. The reverse though - charge a 10man Tac squad into a 10-man Jetbike squad - isn't true. The Tacs keep them in combat until they break or die. Won't be a single turn, but the odds of the Windriders winning is low.

Also note that BS has no defensive use. WS does. So it shouldn't be straight up the same numbers.

If a change were made, deviations in both directions need to be accounted for. And breakpoints should be minimized.

Why would it be all 1's - the character is as likely to roll 2's and fail as 1's and fail - and that's my issue.

Whilst it can be amusing to watch the commander of the Ravenwing kicked to death by a pair of tau Pathfinders (true story) - I think it should happen a lot less than it does.

I think I will stick a poll in proposed rules and see what happens.............

I was referring to a specific instance where it happened. The dice were all 1s there.

The flipside is just how much more powerful should they be? Should one Marine that makes it into a full 12man FW squad wipe them?

Bharring wrote:
I was referring to a specific instance where it happened. The dice were all 1s there.

The flipside is just how much more powerful should they be? Should one Marine that makes it into a full 12man FW squad wipe them?

No def not - unless we are using Movie Marines

What I would want is if you manage to actually charge a close combat master into combat with relatively inept opponents he/she would be almost certain to hit unless a fluke happens (represented by rolls of a 1).

So the Avatar of Khaine charges and hits on 2+ against anything that it would not consider a true rival. if it however faces a worthy opponent then its still hitting on 3's or 4's. Same with everything else. The only things a Marine is going to hit on a 2+ is something with WS 2 or less.........and that seems more than fine to me.

I should say that we have tried it in quite a few games and no one has yet had any issues - on either side.

 Mr Morden wrote:
@ Purifier

You started this by charging into the thread before reading it - jumping up and down and screaming about how all close combat will now be one sided etc etc.

Wasn't jumping up and down, wasn't screaming. There you go again. Lay off the hyperbolic ridicule.

 Mr Morden wrote:

You then kept saying I was whining - hardly Rule 1 !

Yeah, that was a poor choice of words. I just don't know what else to call this. I can't think of a nice word to describe this nonsense.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Why is it so hard to understand that my issue is that the best fighters in the universe should have a more than good chance at hitting the worst fighters in the universe - why is that so wrong and apparently breaks the game.

Why is it so hard to understand that I'm not saying that it would break the game. I'm saying that it would have almost no effect at all on the game except where it doesn't even matter anyway?
Why is it so hard to understand that this would only make already predetermined fights even more one-sided. It just makes the ultra-rare fun of seeing a weakling stand up to a stronger foe even more rare. It just solidifies an outcome we already assumed we were gonna get anyway.
It's less fun and doesn't do anything to balance out melee or come to terms with the problems that melee does have.

And you're the one that started bringing armour saves and other things into this.

 Mr Morden wrote:

WS 6-10 should just hit WS3 on a 2+ as MANY on this thread agree with.

You keep saying that. The amount of people in this thread (i.e the people that even care) are not "MANY." It's what. 4 people?
And that's why I'm here to begin with. People (you specifically) are looking at ONLY BS and WS and comparing them, saying that if one of them can hit on X then the other should also be buffed from what it is. You're looking at the stats in a vacuum that they don't belong in. There are looooads of factors that play a part in why WS and BS are different. I'm here to try and give the full picture.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Why is is fine for BS 6-10 to hit on 2 + with a re-roll (variable target) but high WS gains zero reward compared to high BS

There isn't zero advantages. Your high WS means you can still hit at 3+ against others with a higher than average WS and you have a high chance to have others hit you at 5+.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Celestine is ok against some opponents - WS 7, I7, S5 AP3 - but she still can never hit on better than 3+ - WHY? when she shoots - she can hit on a 2+ / 5+

Yeah, she's "ok." Not a melee beast. Which is exactly where she should be.

She shoots using a template. She hits automatically. Do you think she should hit in melee automatically too? Is that your point?
But let's say she had a bolter instead. At best she would have 2 shots that could hit on 2+. She has more attacks than that in close combat. Don't you see how that levels it out? More attacks means more hits.

She also has, like many of the top level melee, a master crafted weapon, so she can actually reroll a missed attack. Something you have been toting as a shooting specific thing. There are rules that give you this too, like preferred enemy, which in effect raises it from a 3+ to a 3++.

 Mr Morden wrote:

Can't use melta bombs against infantry - why is that relevant?

You gave an example of a crew that is basically made to take out tanks. I was giving several examples of how melee can do that too (both against infantry and tanks) for same or lesser price, and you completely ignored anything that didn't fit with your narrow perspective.

Lets read your first inspired post again

Hardly. It's basically every fight this would affect by a lot.

The units that are already hard off, to be specific. All marines are WS4, and crush most opponents that are WS3. These are who it would hurt the most, and this matchup is *very common*
It would mean those would go from hitting 50% of all hits to hitting 33%. That's pretty massive for a guardsman trying to swing his I1 power fist at a marine.
It's an army wide huge nerf to the melee of those already suffering in melee. It's not like the gretchen have any chance against the Khorne daemon in close combat as it is, so why exactly are you clamouring for nerfs to the gretchen?

Your idea is bad and there is good reason for the WS table to be the way it is.

So zero reading comprehension or total misrepresentation.

Again We have actually tried it IN games and for us its more fun - so you have tried it and found it less fun - or are just arm chairing and telling us how it will be?

Like I said I'll do a poll and I'll see what happens and what those who are interested think.

 Mr Morden wrote:
Lets read your first inspired post again

Hardly. It's basically every fight this would affect by a lot.

The units that are already hard off, to be specific. All marines are WS4, and crush most opponents that are WS3. These are who it would hurt the most, and this matchup is *very common*
It would mean those would go from hitting 50% of all hits to hitting 33%. That's pretty massive for a guardsman trying to swing his I1 power fist at a marine.
It's an army wide huge nerf to the melee of those already suffering in melee. It's not like the gretchen have any chance against the Khorne daemon in close combat as it is, so why exactly are you clamouring for nerfs to the gretchen?

Your idea is bad and there is good reason for the WS table to be the way it is.

So zero reading comprehension or total misrepresentation.

Again We have actually tried it IN games and for us its more fun - so you have tried it and found it less fun - or are just arm chairing and telling us how it will be?

Like I said I'll do a poll and I'll see what happens and what those who are interested think.

Yeah, I missed that in the first post that you weren't talking about a direct BS=WS. I made a mistake there, and you have tried to regurgitate it every single post since as if it invalidated everything I have said since. It hasn't. You can't refute anything I've said since as I changed my critique to actually refute all your claims, and all you have at this point is my first misinformed post.

So keep trying. You have nothing. The idea is still pointless at best and bad at worst. Try to expand the view of the change you are hoping to bring.
I wouldn't try it because I can't even think of anyone besides my Celestine that it would affect in the games I usually play. If you're so desperate to get some buffs that you will rearrange the system just to work for you specifically, you need to look over how objectively you are considering this.

You can make as many polls as you want. You will make them in the vacuum that you have been spouting here, thinking nothing of the balance against the rest of the melee system.

 Purifier wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:
Lets read your first inspired post again

Hardly. It's basically every fight this would affect by a lot.

The units that are already hard off, to be specific. All marines are WS4, and crush most opponents that are WS3. These are who it would hurt the most, and this matchup is *very common*
It would mean those would go from hitting 50% of all hits to hitting 33%. That's pretty massive for a guardsman trying to swing his I1 power fist at a marine.
It's an army wide huge nerf to the melee of those already suffering in melee. It's not like the gretchen have any chance against the Khorne daemon in close combat as it is, so why exactly are you clamouring for nerfs to the gretchen?

Your idea is bad and there is good reason for the WS table to be the way it is.

So zero reading comprehension or total misrepresentation.

Again We have actually tried it IN games and for us its more fun - so you have tried it and found it less fun - or are just arm chairing and telling us how it will be?

Like I said I'll do a poll and I'll see what happens and what those who are interested think.

Yeah, I missed that in the first post that you weren't talking about a direct BS=WS. I made a mistake there, and you have tried to regurgitate it every single post since as if it invalidated everything I have said since. It hasn't. You can't refute anything I've said since as I changed my critique to actually refute all your claims, and all you have at this point is my first misinformed post.

So keep trying. You have nothing. The idea is still pointless at best and bad at worst. Try to expand the view of the change you are hoping to bring.
I wouldn't try it because I can't even think of anyone besides my Celestine that it would affect in the games I usually play. If you're so desperate to get some buffs that you will rearrange the system just to work for you specifically, you need to look over how objectively you are considering this.

You can make as many polls as you want. You will make them in the vacuum that you have been spouting here, thinking nothing of the balance against the rest of the melee system.

Yeah you keep spouting the same old stuff and have a nice life

Yeah Ignore the statement about WE changed it to have more fun - apparently WE were playing the game wrong as its not your game and how you want to play it.

I have specifically stated WHY I thinks its a good idea - a number of other people agreed - you didn't and apparently are god fricking almighty and always right.

You keep that mind tightly shut and mouth open to shout down anything that does not fit.

Have a nice life.......

 Mr Morden wrote:


Yeah you keep spouting the same old stuff and have a nice life

Yeah Ignore the statement about WE changed it to have more fun - apparently WE were playing the game wrong as its not your game and how you want to play it.

I have specifically stated WHY I thinks its a good idea - a number of other people agreed - you didn't and apparently are god fricking almighty and always right.

You keep that mind tightly shut and mouth open to shout down anything that does not fit.

Have a nice life.......

Haha, yeah, on page three you changed it from a public debate hailing everyone to agree with you to a thing where it's suddenly me being an aggressor on the way your group plays for having an opinion that wasn't the same as yours.
Have fun with your system, but don't make out like I'm a bad guy for highlighting the weaknesses in your argument when you post it on a public bulletin board.

Have a great life.

Some people have added Consolidate into Combat and Charge from Reserves too. They like the change.

Many other players - myself included - would hate it.

A few players agreeing and liking it is a decent endorsement, but only says so much. It certainly doesn't prove its a good idea.

 Purifier wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:


Yeah you keep spouting the same old stuff and have a nice life

Yeah Ignore the statement about WE changed it to have more fun - apparently WE were playing the game wrong as its not your game and how you want to play it.

I have specifically stated WHY I thinks its a good idea - a number of other people agreed - you didn't and apparently are god fricking almighty and always right.

You keep that mind tightly shut and mouth open to shout down anything that does not fit.

Have a nice life.......

Haha, yeah, on page three you changed it from a public debate hailing everyone to agree with you to a thing where it's suddenly me being an aggressor on the way your group plays for having an opinion that wasn't the same as yours.
Have fun with your system, but don't make out like I'm a bad guy for highlighting the weaknesses in your argument when you post it on a public bulletin board.

Have a great life.

No I got sick of you spouting off that I was whining, and trying to make the thread all about you - which is still the case.

Some people have added Consolidate into Combat and Charge from Reserves too. They like the change.
Many other players - myself included - would hate it.
A few players agreeing and liking it is a decent endorsement, but only says so much. It certainly doesn't prove its a good idea.

No totally agree- we all like different things

I said I and others found it fun as one poster had categorically stated that "it is not fun" - based on nothing more than gut feeling of course and I feel that this may or may not be the case depending on the person.

We have not tried Consolidate Into Combat for a long long time - I wonder if they allow overwatch for the newly charged unit?

 Mr Morden wrote:

No I got sick of you spouting off that I was whining, and trying to make the thread all about you - which is still the case.

Yeah, how dare I reply to forum posts directed at me. Must be my giant ego.

 Purifier wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

No I got sick of you spouting off that I was whining, and trying to make the thread all about you - which is still the case.

Yeah, how dare I reply to forum posts directed at me. Must be my giant ego.

Must be - certainly seems like it

 morganfreeman wrote:

 Purifier wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:


Gee it'd sure be a shame if the game had elite units that were able to use what they're good at to kill a unit a turn. It's a good thing units like that don't exist- oh wait. There are like 50 of them in the shooting side of the game. -_-

List them. Hell, list 25 of them. Actually, I'll be nice, list 10. Alright, I'll be generous, List 5. Let's see if we can't find equal points melee that do just as well or better.

Problem with this is that it takes multiple turns, and fairly heavy investment in deployment methods, in order to get a melee unit in and let them start grumping.

Plenty of ranged units, and especially most powerful ones, can start laying down the pain-train turn 1.

That follows inherently from the fact that ranged weapons have got a longer range than H2H weapons.

As someone who uses kharn a lot, hitting on a 2+ is extremely powerful, I'd rather not have 2+ to hit but Rr based on weapon skill, if your higher rr 1's, double enemy W's rr all hits, or something easier like if your double enemy Ws, the model that is double gets prepared enemy against the target, doesn't confer to any unit they are leading.

I'd happily see saves removed from combat all together, but bringing in a parry mechanic, both players roll to hit at the same time, adding their Ws to a d6, higher results cancel out lower ones, to a maximum of 10, so a captain would need a 4+ to hit an avatar 1 on one, but grots and guardsman would find it impossible to hit an avatar, this could even remove the wound mechanic too, speeding up the game massively.

Things like power fists would work the same on vehicles, but couldn't be parried by things half their strength.

Just some musing and needs a lot of work.

CC maxes at 3+ because GW is dumb as gak.

If you've ever seen a skilled guy fight a chump you know that 3+ is a joke. Same goes for being hit on 4+ until you double - if anything increase the durability first and the hit chance later, or gods forbid, give the player a choice of more damage or less damage.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
Right, making a big change would swing too hard in close combat's favor. Even though my earlier post was complaining about shooting vs close combat damage output, I think the real answer is to give units ways of interacting at range other than killing each other's models - I'm talking pinning here, and not the crappy pinning USR that already exists, but a real core mechanic built into the DNA of the game. Instead of making close combat deadlier, make it so shooting (all shooting) is a little less deadly, but has a chance to contribute in some way to suppressing the enemy's shooting or movement.

If long range shooting was more effective at suppressing the enemy than killing them, and close range shooting and hand to hand combat were more effective at killing or breaking the enemy, I think you'd see more maneuvering to push each other off objectives. Then reform the mission system a bit so it isn't either schizophrenic chasing of Maelstrom objectives, or last turn springing on objectives in Eternal War. Then change out IGOUGO for proper alternating activations so one player isn't killing/suppressing the entire other army.

I guess what I'm saying is, 40k has so many problems I'd rather play a different game.

Genuinely made me LoL

Cause super high WS also offers protection.

And grots can't hurt an avatar allready. They're s2.

 koooaei wrote:
Cause super high WS also offers protection.

Tell you what, put your WS10 Avatar in front of my gunline, and we'll see just how much protection his high WS grants him.

He's talking about in CC.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
He's talking about in CC. If BS offered a defense against shooting, maybe you could argue that, but in this case it is meaningless.

Except that it's far from meaningless because the game is heavily focussed on shooting right now - so a tiny amount of protection while in melee is hardly substantial.

Furthermore, these are dedicated melee units we're talking about - if they're worried about taking damage in melee then it seems something is seriously wrong. Either they suck at their job or you suck at choosing targets for them. I'm not sure that the piddling protection afforded by high WS will help with either of those.

Then you have the fact that WS needs to be ridiculously high to get even this tiny amount of protection. Does WS7-8 offer any protection against WS4? Nope. You need to have 9+ for probably the most common WS in the game to need anything but 4s to hit you. And, WS5 never needs more than 4s to hit - even against a unit with the highest WS in the game.

Saying it offers no substantial protection I can agree with, but just saying "gunline army kills it" is not a problem with WS.

 Purifier wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

Again its not every combat - its when super elite combat characters or individual are fighting pitifully poor fighters....... as I said - Gretchen versus Greater Deamon of Khorne etc. The Bloodthirster should be hitting on 2's

Hardly. It's basically every fight this would affect by a lot.

The units that are already hard off, to be specific. All marines are WS4, and crush most opponents that are WS3. These are who it would hurt the most, and this matchup is *very common*
It would mean those would go from hitting 50% of all hits to hitting 33%. That's pretty massive for a guardsman trying to swing his I1 power fist at a marine.
It's an army wide huge nerf to the melee of those already suffering in melee. It's not like the gretchen have any chance against the Khorne daemon in close combat as it is, so why exactly are you clamouring for nerfs to the gretchen?

Your idea is bad and there is good reason for the WS table to be the way it is.

look dude...guardsmen that get in assaults are supposed to lose to marines. Your argument is pretty weak. It's marines that suffer for paying for ws4 when it basically means they still get hit on a 4+ vs almost everything weaker than them. paying for WS 2-3 and still hitting on 4's is the problem.

What about this. You never hit on worse then a 6+, for balance, and the only 2+/2+ is WS10 hitting WS1. Seems relatively fair.

Thoughts?

 Farseer Anath'lan wrote:
What about this. You never hit on worse then a 6+, for balance, and the only 2+/2+ is WS10 hitting WS1. Seems relatively fair.

Thoughts?

I like it myself (well no surprise there) - I'll see what our group feels about trying this version out

I certainly wouldn't object to that chart.

Made it in to a poll in the proposed rules section

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/653015.page

 Farseer Anath'lan wrote:
What about this. You never hit on worse then a 6+, for balance, and the only 2+/2+ is WS10 hitting WS1. Seems relatively fair.

Spoiler:

Thoughts?

I am mostly okay with this as long as :
- The rerolls to hit are removed, given we have a bunch of models with WS10 and that would be such a huge boost, and preferably
- All the stuff that reduce WS in the game is removed or toned down.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

I am mostly okay with this as long as :
- The rerolls to hit are removed, given we have a bunch of models with WS10 and that would be such a huge boost

I can think of only 3 in the entire game, none of which seem particularly strong.

Could you list the bunch of models that would benefit so much from this?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

- All the stuff that reduce WS in the game is removed or toned down.

What like?

The only thing that comes to mind is Fear, and if you tone that down any more you might as well just remove it from the game entirely.

Don't some of the psychic abilities do it as well?