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.

Just a alternative to the current Close combat AP for MC, GMC and walkers (inc SH's)

Close combat attacks are now only AP4 as default.

Some weapons then give AP 3 or AP2.

Extra armour pen disc should be link to this as well, possible AP2 weapons only (but possibly AP3)

So for example a Shooting Carnifex has AP4 close combat attacks, if armed with Talons it gains AP3 and Crushing Claws gives it AP2

In the same vain Shooting Dreadnought, sentinels & Killkans gain AP4

This would stop Riptides and Ghosthelms punching tank to death (that's what their guns are for) and makes it a bigger choice on Wraithknights about what weapons options you take.

It also brings standard CC in line with Stomp attacks which are only AP4

I'd be OK with that, combined with a roll of 6 on the Stomp chart becoming "Models under the blast marker take hits at Strength D AP 1" instead of "removed from play".

Why not just make Smash AP3 Rending? And give it to all Walkers as well?
IMO AP4 is too weak for MCs. AP3 makes a bit more sense, with Rending representing that off change of them crushing stuff (AP2 for T value models, D3 extra for Armour Pen)

Alternatively, Make Smash AP3 and 6s to hit are +2str AP1 instead of having to trade all attacks for 1 at 2xStr.

"Why not just take the cc rules away from things like Tau battlesuits which shoudn't be able to wreck things in cc AND at range, and then make GMC more expensive again so that their points reflect the rules they have? This way armies with MC that rely on being good in cc such as daemons and tyranids aren't debuffed more than usual. No? You don't care about/don't know that some codexes rely on MC smash to be competitive? Oh, I guess I'll just take my heresy somewhere else"
-Me every time this discussion comes up.

MC smash is currently OP as hell given the going rate for power weapons and the insane durability of MCs.

Martel732 wrote:
MC smash is currently OP as hell given the going rate for power weapons and the insane durability of MCs.

MC rules, GMC rules, SH rules and StrD weapons are all considered OP because GW are giving them out to every other unit, it wouldn't be so bad if only select models could get these rules.

 mrhappyface wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
MC smash is currently OP as hell given the going rate for power weapons and the insane durability of MCs.

MC rules, GMC rules, SH rules and StrD weapons are all considered OP because GW are giving them out to every other unit, it wouldn't be so bad if only select models could get these rules.

I don't think SH walkers or tank are particularly strong. They both fold up against D and melta and even HP stripping as the Eldar demonstrate vs IK all the time. Without list tailoring, MCs are a total nightmare, as melta weapons are basically useless against them.

BA struggle mightily against Tyranid MCs because of no access to the grav cannon, and no death stars.

MC fold pretty easy against mass fire, even at low strength. Melta weapons are still strength 8 Ap2 so wounding on 2s and going straight through their armour.

You don't need to tailor your list to deal with MC you just need to bring some weapons with volume of fire rather than high strength.

 mrhappyface wrote:
MC fold pretty easy against mass fire, even at low strength. Melta weapons are still strength 8 Ap2 so wounding on 2s and going straight through their armour.

You don't need to tailor your list to deal with MC you just need to bring some weapons with volume of fire rather than high strength.

MCs don't die to low STR fire. It takes 27 BS4 S3/4 shots to put a single wound on a carnifex. Relying on that, you will eat my entire list before I kill a single Carnifex.

MCs are still getting their toe in cover save vs melta and melta has terrible ROF. GMCs are getting toe in cover and FNP. Useless.

So, yeah, I would need to tailor to do well vs MCs, but even than BA can't bring enough firepower to reliably not get smashed.

Martel732 wrote:


MCs don't die to low STR fire. It takes 27 BS4 S3/4 shots to put a single wound on a carnifex. Relying on that, you will eat my entire list before I kill a single Carnifex.

So one unit of veteran guardsmen over two turns? Or two tactical squads over two turns? (Two turns is one volley at full range and one in rapid fire)

Once again the problem isn't with the MC rule because you can easily shoot up MC's before they get close. The problem arrises when the MC's which can wreck you in cc can also shoot.

 mrhappyface wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


MCs don't die to low STR fire. It takes 27 BS4 S3/4 shots to put a single wound on a carnifex. Relying on that, you will eat my entire list before I kill a single Carnifex.

So one unit of veteran guardsmen over two turns? Or two tactical squads over two turns? (Two turns is one volley at full range and one in rapid fire)

Once again the problem isn't with the MC rule because you can easily shoot up MC's before they get close. The problem arrises when the MC's which can wreck you in cc can also shoot.

Two tac squads over two turns generating a single wound? That's so horrible. They're being assaulted by that point.

MCs are not easy to deal with without specific weapon profiles.

Martel732 wrote:

 mrhappyface wrote:

Martel732 wrote:


MCs don't die to low STR fire. It takes 27 BS4 S3/4 shots to put a single wound on a carnifex. Relying on that, you will eat my entire list before I kill a single Carnifex.

So one unit of veteran guardsmen over two turns? Or two tactical squads over two turns? (Two turns is one volley at full range and one in rapid fire)

Once again the problem isn't with the MC rule because you can easily shoot up MC's before they get close. The problem arrises when the MC's which can wreck you in cc can also shoot.

Two tac squads over two turns generating a single wound? That's so horrible. They're being assaulted by that point.

MCs are not easy to deal with without specific weapon profiles.

Sorry, I misread your original post.

I don't know what to tell you, I do not know of anyone who cannot deal with MC, most people I know can even deal with tau MC and GMC with reasonable succes.

Are they list tailoring? It really skews things to know whether to bring the melta or not.

Wow, if only I knew how overpowered Carnifexes really were! Silly me, thinking all this time that Tyranids suck!

Moving on, I love the concept of giving these bigger models a variety of "moves" for different situations, but it's hard to find a balance. Often, in 6th, Smash was just objectively better - Trygons trading only a small number of Attacks in exchange for S10. But in 7th, making a Smash attack is only useful against things that the MC can't hurt, and isn't usually very effective. It should be a bonus, but not "double Strength", because that means every single MC, no matter what size, can reach S10. +2 or so would be more fitting.

Rather than the 6th or 7th methods, Smash attacks could be calculated as half attacks, the halving taking place after any modifiers? The issue with 6th's method was that it halved base Attacks and then allowed modifiers, which resulted in a very small loss to the overall number of Attacks. 7th went the complete opposite way and made it just 1, ever. Halving the final number might be a good enough balance between the two.

I like the idea of them having AP4 naturally and AP values on their weapons, it's what I use in my own rules as well. Things like the Riptide (even though it should be a Walker) that are only armed with guns and bare fists shouldn't have AP2, but their sheer size should still count for something. AP4 and the model's unmodified Strength value (normally 6) does just fine for that.

Walkers don't really need Smash. Either they have AP2 S8-10 weapons already (powerfists), or they're meant to be shooting platforms (Sentinels, gun-only Dreadnoughts, War Walkers). I'd add that Weapon Destroyed results on melee weapons still allow them to be used with reduced effectiveness, though. If anything were to be added to such models, something more like a ram move would be better; without being armed for combat (literally, in some cases) or legs long enough to kick with, a Walker can only attempt to batter foes with its hull, which isn't represented well by Smash.

If Smash were more of a nuanced decision than flatly superior/inferior, it'd be great. That said, it'd be interesting if Carnifex crushing claws were effectively "all Smash all the time" in the sense that they resemble a Smash attack in profile, and would change little or none when Smashing. A Carnifex should gain little by choosing to Smash, but it should have some reasonable benefit in certain situations.

Adding Concussive to Smash attacks could make them an interesting tactic in MC/MC combat, as in a lower-Initiative MC trying to discombobulate its opponent so it can destroy it in the next round. Or a weak melee fighter by MC standards using Smash as its only hope for doing much damage.

EDIT: Melta is hardly "useless", wounding on 2+ and ignoring armour. If "toe in cover" is your issue, why not suggest, just maybe, to remove that instead? Giving MCs the same cover rules as vehicles makes total sense.

Carnifexes would be a lot better if ScatterLasers, D-Scythes and Grav Cannons didn't exist, to be fair. The problem is that MCs are hard-countered by the high amount of High ROF, High Strength shooting in the meta at the moment. The ones that shoot really well and have high saves, or are flying, tend to come out on top anyway. Honestly, I like the idea of AP4 (it makes sense when you look at the fluff for a power mace, and most shooty MCs are not that strong.) as long as the actual Smash attack is still ap2, or even ap1. Would give those models with smash an actual reason to use it instead of just punching everything normally, and would buff those MCs with dedicated melee weapons in comparison to those without.

"Melta is hardly "useless", wounding on 2+ and ignoring armour."

Not enough shots for mcs to care.

Quit complaining and use a Krak Missile. Carnifexes (and a fair few otehr MCs) get shredded by them.

On to the actual topic: AP 3 seems reasonable and then Smash for +2 S and AP 2 for half the number of attacks seems ok to me as well.

For the record MCs getting AP 2 has never bothered me.

Martel732 wrote:
"Melta is hardly "useless", wounding on 2+ and ignoring armour."

Not enough shots for mcs to care.

I'm sorry that your 10pt gun doing 25% damage a shot on my 100-200pt Monstrous Creature isn't enough for you.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"Melta is hardly "useless", wounding on 2+ and ignoring armour."

Not enough shots for mcs to care.

I'm sorry that your 10pt gun doing 25% damage a shot on my 100-200pt Monstrous Creature isn't enough for you.

But it doesn't. There's always cover. And FNP. And IWND. And 5W MCs. And 6W GMCs w/ T8. And failure to kill it means it hits my squad and fights as if I had done nothing at all. Totally fair.

And it's not a 10 pt gun. There's the opportunity cost of buying worthless marines in order to take said gun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimmor wrote:
Quit complaining and use a Krak Missile. Carnifexes (and a fair few otehr MCs) get shredded by them.

On to the actual topic: AP 3 seems reasonable and then Smash for +2 S and AP 2 for half the number of attacks seems ok to me as well.

For the record MCs getting AP 2 has never bothered me.

I don't use MLs because they are terrible weapons.

Once again we run into the issue that Monstrous Creatures are not inherently overpowered, but that several overpowered units currently in the game happen to be Monstrous or Gargantuan Creatures. FNP and IWND are rare. 5W MCs are still losing 20% wounds to a meltagun.

"Always" is a vast overstatement. Furthermore, melta doesn't one-shot non-MC things of equivalent cost to what you are describing, either. Are Imperial Knights overpowered because they aren't likely to be wiped out by a single meltagun in a single Tactical Squad?

Melta is not meant to be a specialist anti-MC weapon. However, any melta weapons in your list will by no means be "useless" against enemy MCs if they happen to bring mostly MCs.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
Once again we run into the issue that Monstrous Creatures are not inherently overpowered, but that several overpowered units currently in the game happen to be Monstrous or Gargantuan Creatures. FNP and IWND are rare. 5W MCs are still losing 20% wounds to a meltagun.

"Always" is a vast overstatement. Furthermore, melta doesn't one-shot non-MC things of equivalent cost to what you are describing, either. Are Imperial Knights overpowered because they aren't likely to be wiped out by a single meltagun in a single Tactical Squad?

Melta is not meant to be a specialist anti-MC weapon. However, any melta weapons in your list will by no means be "useless" against enemy MCs if they happen to bring mostly MCs.

They never get the job done. That's pretty useless. Basically, all low-ROF weapons in the game have been greatly devalued.

I think Smash shouldn't be native to all MC's but a special rule only to those that are close combat oriented (or can be taken as an upgrade). In that case Smash should also be half the base attacks of the model again, being only a single attack means I'm counting on luck quite a bit, whilst MC's without Smash should be AP3 base.

This would at least give Trygon's a reason to exist once more (maybe, a Carnifex with Crushing Claws will still be point for point massively better at killing tanks) but might be a headache to work out on units that are meant to be good at both ranged and close combat (like the Talos).

 Imateria wrote:
might be a headache to work out on units that are meant to be good at both ranged and close combat (like the Talos).

Why? Its close combat and shooting profiles don't have to be mutually exclusive specialisations. If it's meant for close combat, give it Smash.

Smash could even be linked to Weapons as well as Wargear. One thing I think was a miss with the Triarch Stalker was to make those massive forward Legs as Weapons which give the Walker Smash. Kill the Weapons, you kill its ability to Smash.

For MCs/GMCs, though, that won't work. You cannot (currently) disarm an MC any more than an Infantry model or a SuperHeavy. In these cases, I do think that GW should take a page from Age of Sigmar and tie a Monstrous Creature's effectiveness, namely Attacks and number of Weaopns they can Shoot, maybe Smash and MTC as well, to the number of Wounds they currently have versus their maximum total.

 Frozen Ocean wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
"Melta is hardly "useless", wounding on 2+ and ignoring armour."

Not enough shots for mcs to care.

I'm sorry that your 10pt gun doing 25% damage a shot on my 100-200pt Monstrous Creature isn't enough for you.

It's not a 10 point gun. It's a 24 point model wielding said gun, which model is part of an 80 point or more squad (if only 5 men in squad).

Simple fix would be to give MCs and GCs damage tables, to signify them being damaged and losing effectiveness.

This also serves to equalize vehicles and MCs/GCs

Any unsaved wound, after the first unsaved wound, leads to a damage table roll: - I say this because after the first wound its fluffy that the beast or super robot(tau/eldar) would still be functioning. This could open up more rules that could modify the table or rule....
Table MC/GC
1 - I felt that! - Adds +1 to hit until next turn. Both shooting and CC
2 - Shaken - Snapshooting next turn + needs 6's to hit in close combat until the next turn
3 - Stunned - Shaken results + all movement distances are halved until next turn
4 - Massive Hit - Weapon Destroyed + Unit halves all movement (movement penalty only occurs once if Massive hit is rolled in subsequent turns)
5 - Immobilized + Adds +2 to hit permanently. Both shooting and CC
6 - Critical Hit - Instantly suffers D3+1 wounds

One thing to consider though are D weapons and grav. MC's would be majorly nerfed by introducing a table like this if these weapons are allowed to exist in their current form.

My Ideas for changes are below!

Something no one has suggested is changing d weapons to be similar to how the FW R'varnas weapons work. If you're not familiar, basically they become more powerful as the target gets bigger.
Destroyer weapons table changes, based off of the cluster fire rule:

Infantry - Str 6 Ap5
Bulky - Str 7 Ap4
Very Bulky models, as well as those with the Bike/Jetbike/Beasts/Cavalry type, 8 Ap3
Extremely Bulky and Artillery/Monstrous Creature/Flying Monstrous Creature/ Vehicles Str 9 Ap2
Buildings and fortifications/- Str10 Ap1
GCs/Super Heavy Vehicles/Flyers/Walkers etc - Suffer D3+3 Str 10 Ap 1 hits.

- Something like this keeps the flavour and fluff of Destroyer weapons, in that their primary use is against other titans, but allows them to stay in the game which lets people use their toys.

Grav changes -
Still Wound based on armor save. Change to AP -. Add Rending. Add a new rule called Crippled
Crippled - Any unsaved wound caused by a grav weapon forces a unit to take a toughness test. Failed tests cause all non-vehicle units to halve all movement distances for the rest of the game. - represents their crushed armor hampering their ability to move.

Smash should be on walkers. its basicly like them curbstomping a thing.

it however should not give AP2 to all attacks. only when it makes a smash attack which should only be a 1 attack at double str as it currently is.

it should represent a riptide or a dreadnought crushing a guy with its feet.

that way you need to have dedicated CC weapons but still give MC which generally should be on the tough side a little something something.

its also a simple fix that would take no time to add.

edit: also i do hate the toe in foot ruins for a 4+ save thing. only infantry should benefit from area terrain (as they are now) mc should nee the same vehicle cover save mechanics of needing 25% cover to benefit 75% or more for a +1 (IIRC i dont remember if that changed or the %)