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.

4th Ed. damage tables made vehicles death traps. 5th Ed. made them too resilient. Instead of adjusting the damage table to something reasonable in between, GW introduced the ridiculous concept of giving vehicles wounds. Now everyone is chasing their tail trying not to step in more hull point gak. Adjusting HP's is like another layer of glitter on that fresh turd GW served up.

Enjoy.

Could just be glance = 1-3 shaken, 4-6 stunned (would make extra armor more viable)

Pen = lose HP and roll on table.

This way you can still kill a vehicle with enough pens, but can't glance it to death.

So I think we need to step back and take a look at what the problem is.

It is not necessarily glances as much as what the current avg strength of weapons are. Which we see in s6 spam scattbikes.

So does solving glances even fix that issue? Not really.
s6 can still Pen AV10, AV11 which the majority of transports and rear armor are; which is why we are seeing vehicles getting wrecked all over the field. heck even a tau firewarrior can Pen AV10.


I don't think banning, for example ap4+ from harming vehicles is an answer, I think strength should be a factor. I am also fine with HP system, it makes sense considering after so many damage results a vehicle would become inoperable.

The problem is that reducing the strength of weapons means that MCs become tougher as well, which preserves the disparity we are trying to overcome.

I have long favored doing away with the damage table (why do vehicles need a die more table). Then double hull points of vehicles. So a Dread for instance would have 6 HP.

Then have
Glance (defined as AV <=Str + Roll <=AV +1) = -1 HP
Hit (AV+2 <=Str + roll<=AV + 3) = -2 HP
Pen (AV +3 < Str + roll ) = -3 HP

This would make single shot high strength weapons more desirable as they could put out Punishing amounts of damage to vehicles, but lower strength shots would have a harder time dealing with those same vehicles.

Then if you want you could make AP 1 a +1 to your roll, and AP - a -1.

HP as they stand right now encourage lots of glances over single big pens (3 Pens by 1 are infintely better than 1 pen by 10.) This somewhat reverses that trend.

Unit1126PLL wrote:The problem is that reducing the strength of weapons means that MCs become tougher as well, which preserves the disparity we are trying to overcome.

certainly, if I led you to think this is what I meant, it was not my intention.

Breng77 wrote:I have long favored doing away with the damage table (why do vehicles need a die more table). Then double hull points of vehicles. So a Dread for instance would have 6 HP.

Then have
Glance (defined as AV <=Str + Roll <=AV +1) = -1 HP
Hit (AV+2 <=Str + roll<=AV + 3) = -2 HP
Pen (AV +3 < Str + roll ) = -3 HP

This would make single shot high strength weapons more desirable as they could put out Punishing amounts of damage to vehicles, but lower strength shots would have a harder time dealing with those same vehicles.

Then if you want you could make AP 1 a +1 to your roll, and AP - a -1.

HP as they stand right now encourage lots of glances over single big pens (3 Pens by 1 are infintely better than 1 pen by 10.) This somewhat reverses that trend.

Good example. Similar to my initial strategy which was to scrap what it means to glance and pen currently.

Breng77 wrote:
I have long favored doing away with the damage table (why do vehicles need a die more table). Then double hull points of vehicles. So a Dread for instance would have 6 HP.

Then have
Glance (defined as AV <=Str + Roll <=AV +1) = -1 HP
Hit (AV+2 <=Str + roll<=AV + 3) = -2 HP
Pen (AV +3 < Str + roll ) = -3 HP

This would make single shot high strength weapons more desirable as they could put out Punishing amounts of damage to vehicles, but lower strength shots would have a harder time dealing with those same vehicles.

Then if you want you could make AP 1 a +1 to your roll, and AP - a -1.

HP as they stand right now encourage lots of glances over single big pens (3 Pens by 1 are infintely better than 1 pen by 10.) This somewhat reverses that trend.

In the past the table was the only thing that could kill them. If you don't roll a certain number on the table, then the vehicle doesn't die.
However, the HP system makes such a table unnecessary.

correct, I played in 4th and 5th and always thought the table was dumb, it was just too swingy and random. in 5th heavy Mech vs Heavy mech often became, are my damage table rolls better than yours, if so I win, if not I lose.

It was always a bad mechanic when you could pay 250 points for a tank and lose it to a single shot on turn 1. It also made vehicles the only models in the game that could be completely useless without dying.

Hull points are a great idea with poor implementation by GW in that it swung too far to making vehicles super easy to kill because it make high ROF weapons capable of glancing vehicles tons better at killing vehicles than Single shot high strength weapons. Since those same weapons are also better at killing infantry it removed choice from the game. I will always take the high ROF weapons.

Now if you have more HP and make penetrating a bit more difficult, you make glances less meaningful.

Currently the game works like this.

Either I take a bunch of weapons that can glance you a lot and reliably wreck your vehicles,

or I take things that can pen more easily and rely on the random table to kill you.


With the change it becomes a question of do I take a weapon that reliably can do 2-3 HP in one shot, or do I take one that neends a bunch of hits to glance.

Breng77 wrote:
I have long favored doing away with the damage table (why do vehicles need a die more table). Then double hull points of vehicles. So a Dread for instance would have 6 HP.

Then have
Glance (defined as AV <=Str + Roll <=AV +1) = -1 HP
Hit (AV+2 <=Str + roll<=AV + 3) = -2 HP
Pen (AV +3 < Str + roll ) = -3 HP

This would make single shot high strength weapons more desirable as they could put out Punishing amounts of damage to vehicles, but lower strength shots would have a harder time dealing with those same vehicles.

Then if you want you could make AP 1 a +1 to your roll, and AP - a -1.

HP as they stand right now encourage lots of glances over single big pens (3 Pens by 1 are infintely better than 1 pen by 10.) This somewhat reverses that trend.

I really like this idea!

I dont think HP are a bad thing... it removes the stupid thing of having to roll a 6 on a table in order to blow up a vehicle. Penetrate it all you like it might take a dozen pens to blow it up... or it might take just the one. However, like Breng says penetrating hits need more of a boost over glancing hits. At the moment, several glances are much more effective than a single penetrating hit which i really dont think should be the case... surely glancing hits are just stripping off armour whereas penetrating hits have the chance to ignite fuel tanks etc?

Scrap the damage table.

Its important to realize that HP and glancing hits removing HP was a consequence of vehicles being too difficult to kill. Anything that completely removes HP or the potential for removing HP with glancing hits reopens that problem and simply makes all vehicle heavy armies next to unstoppable. Even if notionally it might make sense to do that, it doesn't work mechanistically with where the game rules are now.

The easiest way, without effectively re-writing every vehicle's rules, is to make glancing hits no longer auto-remove HP. It is then just a question of what % of glancing hits removing HP make them comparable in survivability to MC's?-Maybe 1-in-6 or 1-in-3?

 aka_mythos wrote:
Its important to realize that HP and glancing hits removing HP was a consequence of vehicles being too difficult to kill. Anything that completely removes HP or the potential for removing HP with glancing hits reopens that problem and simply makes all vehicle heavy armies next to unstoppable. Even if notionally it might make sense to do that, it doesn't work mechanistically with where the game rules are now.

The easiest way, without effectively re-writing every vehicle's rules, is to make glancing hits no longer auto-remove HP. It is then just a question of what % of glancing hits removing HP make them comparable in survivability to MC's?-Maybe 1-in-6 or 1-in-3?

I will amend my previous post to be.

1-2 Nothing,
3-6 glance,
7+ glance + crew shaken

Ap1, Ap2 works with similar modifiers to the damage chart; Effectively acting as armor piercing ammo. I think reducing glances by a third would be appropriate, anything more I think is too much.

Glancing hits can't remove HP. Any mechanic that allows that won't change how they vehicles are killed,people will still just use multi shot weapons to glance things to death.

Glances need to do minimal damage and only shake or stun.

Pens should remove HPs in addition to the roll on the damage table. Multiple pens will still kill a vehicle if the damage rolls are bad.

MC/GC have the advantage of armor/cover/invuls and in many cases FNP. Vehicles have no saves other than cover and fnp, so removing HP by glancing is what kills them.

Again as long as glances have a chance to remove a HP, that's what people will build their armies around. Dedicated anti tank weapons should take.out tanks, not multiple shot med strength guns.

Any mechanic that completely eliminates the possibility of glancing hits from removing HP effectively ends up back to 5th ed when they were too tough.

I would remove glancing hits. (penetrating hits would reduce hull points as normal). That would be like all AVs would increase one. AV14 would be very tought.

 Draco wrote:
I would remove glancing hits. (penetrating hits would reduce hull points as normal). That would be like all AVs would increase one. AV14 would be very tought.

What does gauss do then?

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Draco wrote:
I would remove glancing hits. (penetrating hits would reduce hull points as normal). That would be like all AVs would increase one. AV14 would be very tought.

What does gauss do then?

Exactly, there are a few weapons and many units in the game that rely on "auto glance" wounds. Grav being another candidate. Glances don't need to go away, vehicles just need a chance for them not to happen. But as a few of us have said.. even simply removing glances doesn't "solve" vehicles getting RoF'd. Not to mention, if you remove glances, AV14 becomes extremely difficult for nearly every weapon aside from lance/melta. AV13 is already steps above AV12, but it also would become increasingly difficult to deal with.

Breng77 wrote:
I have long favored doing away with the damage table (why do vehicles need a die more table). Then double hull points of vehicles. So a Dread for instance would have 6 HP.

Then have
Glance (defined as AV <=Str + Roll <=AV +1) = -1 HP
Hit (AV+2 <=Str + roll<=AV + 3) = -2 HP
Pen (AV +3 < Str + roll ) = -3 HP

This would make single shot high strength weapons more desirable as they could put out Punishing amounts of damage to vehicles, but lower strength shots would have a harder time dealing with those same vehicles.

Then if you want you could make AP 1 a +1 to your roll, and AP - a -1.

HP as they stand right now encourage lots of glances over single big pens (3 Pens by 1 are infintely better than 1 pen by 10.) This somewhat reverses that trend.

Best idea so far. Ups durability but keeps AT weapons relevant.

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Draco wrote:
I would remove glancing hits. (penetrating hits would reduce hull points as normal). That would be like all AVs would increase one. AV14 would be very tought.

What does gauss do then?

They would rip one hull point or make one pen. Same for other special occasions if need.

What if we change nothing... except increase HP values by some formula... I want to say double.. but that would make super heavies outrageous to grind through while ignoring all neg damage effects on pens.

The issue with just upping HP is that it makes high ROF weapons that glance a lot even more desirable. Really overall the issue is that Tanks are currently overly vunerable to these types of weapons. At the same time the real Anti-tank weapons are not reliable due to low rate of fire. Thus they end up trying to rely on the damage table. Which is terrible.

It sucks when you spend tons of points on a vehicle to see it disapear to a single lucky shot on turn 1.

So to me as I proposed earlier the solution is 3 fold.

1.) Get rid of the damage table- it is and always has been terrible.

2.) Increase Hull points- this addresses the current low durability of vehicles. Doubling is a good general idea, but in general if they are raised it should be on a case by case basis, doubing a rhino to 6 hp makes sense, doubing a super heavy to 18 or so may not.

3.) Make penetrating hits, especially those greatly exceeding armor more powerful (not random like damage table), so causing multiple hull points of damage based on hit "quality". This addresses the issue that low ROF high strength weaponry is generally bad by comparison to lower str, higher ROF weapons.

 aka_mythos wrote:
Any mechanic that completely eliminates the possibility of glancing hits from removing HP effectively ends up back to 5th ed when they were too tough.

Not if pens remove a HP, after 3 pens a vehicle (most) is wrecked regardless of the damage rolls. 5th didon't have HP, so you could get 10 pens and roll stun and shaken on all of them.

With the HP mechanic in place, that won't happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grizzyzz wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Draco wrote:
I would remove glancing hits. (penetrating hits would reduce hull points as normal). That would be like all AVs would increase one. AV14 would be very tought.

What does gauss do then?

Exactly, there are a few weapons and many units in the game that rely on "auto glance" wounds. Grav being another candidate. Glances don't need to go away, vehicles just need a chance for them not to happen. But as a few of us have said.. even simply removing glances doesn't "solve" vehicles getting RoF'd. Not to mention, if you remove glances, AV14 becomes extremely difficult for nearly every weapon aside from lance/melta. AV13 is already steps above AV12, but it also would become increasingly difficult to deal with.

Necrons have weapons that can pen a vehicle as do marines. So they have options to deal with vehicles. There are other armies with out grav or Gauss that pen vehicles.

And vehicles should be hard to deal with and not be glanced to death.

Make anti tank weapons viable again. End the Era of ROF glance to death.

How about this?

Glances get a roll on the damage table at -2, but do not strip hull points.

Penetrating hits get a roll on the damage table and strip a hull point.

In addition, all vehicles gain double their current Hull points.