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 totally get why they got rid of templates for time and ease of placing models. But damn blasts took a hit mainly vs infantry, also no Cary over for units that had barrage....

Way it is now:
Example: battle cannon
Currently D6, average 3.5 dice, BS4, average 1.75 hits.

So that's 1-2 hits against any size infantry group on average... holy crap that's bad.

Fix: have 2 different attack types
Against infantry: 3d3 (only up to number of infantry in unit)
Against vehcile, monsters, etc: 1d6

Now minimum 3 dice, average 6 dice, BS4, average of 3 hits. Maybe even be 4d3, but this way you always get a few dice to roll for hits.

This may be more effective against 5 man squads then a 10 but before 5 infantry could easily be hit with a large blast template...

Some weapons have changes to d6 or roll 2 dice if squad has 5 or 10 or something but frankly my fix is simpler.

Also things that had barrage, give them some small boost to be able to hit. Or even better (more "realistic") give them a chance of wounding other units within 3 inches or something.

They did a strait pull over from aos where blasts are rare so big deal, but um HELLO this is 40k, blasts are wayyy more relevant.

A number of "blast" weapons have a special rule that "if you're firing at a unit x models or more get an extra dice for attack", and I feel like that should be if not standard across all blast weapons then at least more common on what used to be large blast weapons.

This works to make weapons like battle cannons still be decent at all targets, while smaller infantry units still have a chance to avoid taking a big hit, and have those "anti horde" blast weapons actually feel anti horde-ish. Weapons that already have this rule can either gain more dice when the reach the target number to compensate.

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
A number of "blast" weapons have a special rule that "if you're firing at a unit x models or more get an extra dice for attack", and I feel like that should be if not standard across all blast weapons then at least more common on what used to be large blast weapons.

This works to make weapons like battle cannons still be decent at all targets, while smaller infantry units still have a chance to avoid taking a big hit, and have those "anti horde" blast weapons actually feel anti horde-ish. Weapons that already have this rule can either gain more dice when the reach the target number to compensate.

Agreed. I think small blasts should be 1d3+1 per five members of the unit, large blasts default to 2d3+2 per five members, and flamers get 1d6+1 per five.

Do note: I pulled these values out of my ass, so they can easily be tweaked.

How do you model situations like lots of small/solo units all bunched up together? ("I'm firing into this blob of solo Acolytes" or so)

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Luke_Prowler wrote:
A number of "blast" weapons have a special rule that "if you're firing at a unit x models or more get an extra dice for attack", and I feel like that should be if not standard across all blast weapons then at least more common on what used to be large blast weapons.

This works to make weapons like battle cannons still be decent at all targets, while smaller infantry units still have a chance to avoid taking a big hit, and have those "anti horde" blast weapons actually feel anti horde-ish. Weapons that already have this rule can either gain more dice when the reach the target number to compensate.

Agreed. I think small blasts should be 1d3+1 per five members of the unit, large blasts default to 2d3+2 per five members, and flamers get 1d6+1 per five.

Do note: I pulled these values out of my ass, so they can easily be tweaked.

I've said this in other threads, but my personal preference is to just do away with the random number of hit dice for blasts, since you need to roll to-Hit anyway. It's easier to scale, and simplifies things further as you're no longer rolling to see how many rolls you take. So Type D3 becomes Type 2, Type D6 becomes Type 4, Type 2D6 becomes Type 7 and so-on (i.e- as close to average as possible).

As for scaling for every X models; that won't work as it'd hideously disadvantage horde armies again. There is some upper limit to how much damage a blast can do after all. This is why I think the current style of changing the type if more than 5/10 models is the right way to go, as it sets an optimal target size if you're going for models killed.

The only thing I'd do then is maybe have it also apply to Titanic targets; if 10 models are easier to hit, then you'd think a titan ought to be as well. Though I'd limit that to weapons without high Damage values (i.e- enabling vs. Titanic for a Battle Cannon would be OP).

They probably could of done a xDx+x model a little more to help curb the randomness. especially for directed templates like a lemon battle cannon vs an in direct one like the bass.

Initially I suggested in another thread that blast weapons just need more attacks. For example, my suggestion for the battlecannon was to bump its attacks up to 2D6 will reducing its damage to 1. Like an AoS artillery weapon in reverse, on account of how damage allocation works in this game. But I get the feeling that this is still too random for many people.

Since the random factor of rolling to hit is still an issue, maybe they should just have the maximum dice result possible as their attacks. A battlecannon have six attacks for example (or twelve if you reduce its damage to one).

While we're talking about this, I really think that 'Template' weapons need another go around. Instead of being randomized autohits, it should be something where they automatically hit X amount of times, but cannot get more hits than there are enemy models within range in the target unit.

So, for example, a Flamer gets 6 automatic hits if firing at a large, nearby Ork Boyz horde, but if only a couple boyz were in range it would get 2-3, and if it were firing at a single model it would get 1 hit. Hand Flamers would still just get three hits, twin heavy flamers would get between 1-12.

This would make flamers a more viable choice against hordes, rather than a sub-par alternative to weapons with longer range and a consistent ROF.

I feel like I'm the only one on this forum that has actually played 8th ed. Battle Cannons are good! They are very good! They are better than 7th Battle Cannons! Yes the math hammer doesn't look promising but in practise they hurt. I have lost many Berzerkers, rhinos and even Knights to Leman Russ vanilla.

Sometimes I feel like I'm beaten senseless by the math hammer. It's one thing to run the numbers but things can be different in practice. Has anyone else played with the battle cannon Russ?

Waaaghpower wrote:
While we're talking about this, I really think that 'Template' weapons need another go around. Instead of being randomized autohits, it should be something where they automatically hit X amount of times, but cannot get more hits than there are enemy models within range in the target unit.

Personally I'd like to see that kind of limitation return for all shooting; while it may be simple, I don't like that in 8th we can once again wipe a whole unit with only a single model visible or in range. So that kind of limitation really could do with being back for all shooting. Given that everything is pretty mobile in 8th (including Heavy weapons), it would force people to actually use that movement more to set up better firing positions.

What gw did with blasts was only about halfway there.

The random number of attacks does a good job at replicating a scattering marker. That is, if the random shots could come anywhere near hitting.

A better representation would have been to have 1 shot that creates dx hits.

So; taking the battle cannon: fire as heavy 1; if it hits, that blast hits the unit D6 times. Thid shows the large blast landing on the unit but scattering in a way that it hits 1-6 models. A miss would still just be a miss.

You could do this across the board: small blast is d3, large d6, specifically anti-infantry still add dice for units >10. If the gun does 2d6(or d3) it becomes type 2, with each hit rolling the appropriate dice.

So now the battle cannon fires a single shot that when it hits, hits the unit between 1 and 6 times averaging about 3; just like firing a large blast at a conga-lined squad in 3rd-7th.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
So; taking the battle cannon: fire as heavy 1; if it hits, that blast hits the unit D6 times. Thid shows the large blast landing on the unit but scattering in a way that it hits 1-6 models. A miss would still just be a miss.

Eh… not sure if I like that idea; it would make it seem like Leman Russ gunners have no idea what they're doing.
One thing I like in Necromunda is that with blasts weapons, you roll to-Hit, and only scatter if you miss. You could model something more than like that, but again it comes back down to randomising random rolls.

A middle ground might be if a Battle Cannon were… say, Heavy 2, and rolled 2 wounds per hit. This way you're probably not going to miss as easily with both "shots", but it diminishes the damage you can do as you only catch a unit with the edge of a blast, or shrapnel etc.
But my personal preference is still a fixed number of shots; e.g- if the Battle Cannon were Heavy 3 (probably with less Damage), then three hits is a solid hit (smack in the middle of the unit), two is a little off target, 1 is a near miss, and 0 hits is a straight up miss/dud/fired it up in the air like a lunatic/whatever.

I'm now in the park of just giving them the maximum amount of attacks their dice roll would allow (3 in most cases, 6+ for bigger weapons). The roll to hit is the variable, like all weapons.

I don't know about IG blasts but Ork Blast weapons are all but unusable now. Why take a KillKannon when its range 24, S7 -2 AP and D6 shots hitting on 5s. average roll is 3.5 so thats 1 hit on average, before I could sometimes wipe out half a tactical squad with a decent hit, now i have to roll a 6 to reliably kill 2 models.

SemperMortis wrote:
I don't know about IG blasts but Ork Blast weapons are all but unusable now. Why take a KillKannon when its range 24, S7 -2 AP and D6 shots hitting on 5s. average roll is 3.5 so thats 1 hit on average, before I could sometimes wipe out half a tactical squad with a decent hit, now i have to roll a 6 to reliably kill 2 models.

Would giving it a full six shots help it out? Or since it's a lower strength and more inaccurate, maybe it needs nine or even twelve attacks. I'm wary of going overboard though.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
What gw did with blasts was only about halfway there.

The random number of attacks does a good job at replicating a scattering marker. That is, if the random shots could come anywhere near hitting.

A better representation would have been to have 1 shot that creates dx hits.

So; taking the battle cannon: fire as heavy 1; if it hits, that blast hits the unit D6 times. Thid shows the large blast landing on the unit but scattering in a way that it hits 1-6 models. A miss would still just be a miss.

You could do this across the board: small blast is d3, large d6, specifically anti-infantry still add dice for units >10. If the gun does 2d6(or d3) it becomes type 2, with each hit rolling the appropriate dice.

So now the battle cannon fires a single shot that when it hits, hits the unit between 1 and 6 times averaging about 3; just like firing a large blast at a conga-lined squad in 3rd-7th.

This has the exact same damage output as blasts do now it just shuffles the damage around into either a lot of damage or 0 damage

I am of two minds in this.

One is to make you roll to hit, if you miss you get half the number of hits rolled, a hit will get the entire amount. So Orks will be hitting d3 (basically) most of the time with a kill cannon but occasionally get a d6.

The other is to simply count each random attack number (besides grenades and weapons that auto-hit) always count as having rolled the max number

Both of these changes give you better averages of damage and they each have a different benefit. Halving the number on a miss is better at showing how blasts worked last edition. The flat number of shots decreases unnecessary dice rolls and speeds up gameplay.

Maybe it should be a regular roll to hit, and then the D3/6 Is automatic?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Maybe it should be a regular roll to hit, and then the D3/6 Is automatic?

The problem with that is that it makes it too binary, and only further penalises armies with poor BS, as instead of doing less damage than other armies they can end up doing none at all.


I still think the simplest solution is to give all blast weapons an average number of hit dice (i.e- Type D3 -> Type 2, Type D6 -> Type 4, Type 2D6 -> Type 7 etc.) and just leave the uncertainty in the to-Hit rolls only; the more hits you get, the better placed the blast was. Less accurate armies are still disadvantaged a bit (and so should have blast weapon points lowered accordingly), but we're no longer dealing with so much randomness in the game, which is a good thing.

Random numbers of random rolls is, and always was, a really dumb mechanic for GW to have; it just makes things even more unpredictable, in a game where there is already too little in the way of real tactics. It puts me off using blast weapons entirely as anything too unpredictable is therefore unreliable.


Random auto-hits for flamers etc. however works okay; though personally I'd rather have them also have a fixed number of "shots" and roll to-Hit as well, as it's not only more consistent, but also suggests some actual amount of skill involved to using the weapons, which currently there isn't. In that case all they need is a better chance of hitting during Overwatch (e.g- hit on normal BS roll).

 Future War Cultist wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:
I don't know about IG blasts but Ork Blast weapons are all but unusable now. Why take a KillKannon when its range 24, S7 -2 AP and D6 shots hitting on 5s. average roll is 3.5 so thats 1 hit on average, before I could sometimes wipe out half a tactical squad with a decent hit, now i have to roll a 6 to reliably kill 2 models.

Would giving it a full six shots help it out? Or since it's a lower strength and more inaccurate, maybe it needs nine or even twelve attacks. I'm wary of going overboard though.

To make me ever want to take a Kill Kannon on a Battle Wagon (pretty much the only platform for the weapon) you would need to give me probably a flat 12 shots total. Not 2D6. 12 shots sounds absurd right? at BS2 though that = 4 hits. And at S7 that is about 3 wounds against Tactical Marines who then get a 5+ save so maybe 2 Dead Marines. Even then it would be meh. if you wanted to buff it to make it worth taking most of the time it would need 18 shots. conversely you could give it 6 shots that Autohit and I would be just as happy. So yeah. D6 or even 3D6 wouldn't cut it.

I'm ok with Ork blast weapons getting more shots on account of their poor BS. It gives them the opportunity to do more damage than other blast weapons, but they're unlikely to reach their full potential.

 Haravikk wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Maybe it should be a regular roll to hit, and then the D3/6 Is automatic?

The problem with that is that it makes it too binary, and only further penalises armies with poor BS, as instead of doing less damage than other armies they can end up doing none at all.


I still think the simplest solution is to give all blast weapons an average number of hit dice (i.e- Type D3 -> Type 2, Type D6 -> Type 4, Type 2D6 -> Type 7 etc.) and just leave the uncertainty in the to-Hit rolls only; the more hits you get, the better placed the blast was. Less accurate armies are still disadvantaged a bit (and so should have blast weapon points lowered accordingly), but we're no longer dealing with so much randomness in the game, which is a good thing.

Random numbers of random rolls is, and always was, a really dumb mechanic for GW to have; it just makes things even more unpredictable, in a game where there is already too little in the way of real tactics. It puts me off using blast weapons entirely as anything too unpredictable is therefore unreliable.


Random auto-hits for flamers etc. however works okay; though personally I'd rather have them also have a fixed number of "shots" and roll to-Hit as well, as it's not only more consistent, but also suggests some actual amount of skill involved to using the weapons, which currently there isn't. In that case all they need is a better chance of hitting during Overwatch (e.g- hit on normal BS roll).

How is my idea further penalizing low BS armies more than they already are with Blast weapons? Basically with every 3 shots with an Ork blast weapon they get 3 to 6 hits.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Haravikk wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Maybe it should be a regular roll to hit, and then the D3/6 Is automatic?

The problem with that is that it makes it too binary, and only further penalises armies with poor BS, as instead of doing less damage than other armies they can end up doing none at all.


I still think the simplest solution is to give all blast weapons an average number of hit dice (i.e- Type D3 -> Type 2, Type D6 -> Type 4, Type 2D6 -> Type 7 etc.) and just leave the uncertainty in the to-Hit rolls only; the more hits you get, the better placed the blast was. Less accurate armies are still disadvantaged a bit (and so should have blast weapon points lowered accordingly), but we're no longer dealing with so much randomness in the game, which is a good thing.

Random numbers of random rolls is, and always was, a really dumb mechanic for GW to have; it just makes things even more unpredictable, in a game where there is already too little in the way of real tactics. It puts me off using blast weapons entirely as anything too unpredictable is therefore unreliable.


Random auto-hits for flamers etc. however works okay; though personally I'd rather have them also have a fixed number of "shots" and roll to-Hit as well, as it's not only more consistent, but also suggests some actual amount of skill involved to using the weapons, which currently there isn't. In that case all they need is a better chance of hitting during Overwatch (e.g- hit on normal BS roll).

How is my idea further penalizing low BS armies more than they already are with Blast weapons? Basically with every 3 shots with an Ork blast weapon they get 3 to 6 hits.

Because that means for ORK blast weapons they will only be inflicting damage 2 turns out of 6 on average. I mean that is absolutely OK with me, but they should be Priced accordingly. At the moment our Blast weaponry is both USELESS and OVER PRICED. Again I point you to the KillKannon.

27pts for a 24in S7 -2AP D6 shot weapon at BS2? I would maybe pay 10pts for that at the absolute most and even then I wouldn't do it that often because it takes up Troop capacity in the Battlewagon.

There is just so much wrong with ork blast weapons that it needs to be redone across the board for our next codex

Maybe an idea would be have the weapon have a number of shots equal to the number of models in the target unit with a maxium
Ie Battlecannon Heavy Blast 8
So the maximum hits a battlecannon could do would be 8 to units with 8+ models
Then have vehicles classed as multiple models, so against another tank a battle cannon would have 4 shots (simulating how directily the shell hit the target)

 Absolute_Maniac wrote:
Maybe an idea would be have the weapon have a number of shots equal to the number of models in the target unit with a maxium
Ie Battlecannon Heavy Blast 8
So the maximum hits a battlecannon could do would be 8 to units with 8+ models
Then have vehicles classed as multiple models, so against another tank a battle cannon would have 4 shots (simulating how directily the shell hit the target)

Does that mean you then need to roll to hit against those 8? or are you saying they are auto hits?

Because if its Autohits that is fine but it would need to be less then 8.

If it isn't autohits then no, because yet again that feths over my Ork blast weapons. Case and point, a 8 shot Killkannon will still only hit 2.6 times out of those 8 shots. And that of course is assuming it doesn't have the hard to hit rule or a similar one. Then I am down to 1 hit out of 8 on average.

SemperMortis wrote:

 Absolute_Maniac wrote:
Maybe an idea would be have the weapon have a number of shots equal to the number of models in the target unit with a maxium
Ie Battlecannon Heavy Blast 8
So the maximum hits a battlecannon could do would be 8 to units with 8+ models
Then have vehicles classed as multiple models, so against another tank a battle cannon would have 4 shots (simulating how directily the shell hit the target)

Does that mean you then need to roll to hit against those 8? or are you saying they are auto hits?

Because if its Autohits that is fine but it would need to be less then 8.

If it isn't autohits then no, because yet again that feths over my Ork blast weapons. Case and point, a 8 shot Killkannon will still only hit 2.6 times out of those 8 shots. And that of course is assuming it doesn't have the hard to hit rule or a similar one. Then I am down to 1 hit out of 8 on average.

I think it would need to roll to-Hit, otherwise you're not representing the ability of those firing it, but the Killcannon could be argued to have either a higher number of maximum "shots" and/or a lower cost. I definitely do think that GW has failed entirely to factor typical BS into its weapon pricing, which is a big part of why Ork blast weapons are such terrible value.

 Haravikk wrote:

SemperMortis wrote:

 Absolute_Maniac wrote:
Maybe an idea would be have the weapon have a number of shots equal to the number of models in the target unit with a maxium
Ie Battlecannon Heavy Blast 8
So the maximum hits a battlecannon could do would be 8 to units with 8+ models
Then have vehicles classed as multiple models, so against another tank a battle cannon would have 4 shots (simulating how directily the shell hit the target)

Does that mean you then need to roll to hit against those 8? or are you saying they are auto hits?

Because if its Autohits that is fine but it would need to be less then 8.

If it isn't autohits then no, because yet again that feths over my Ork blast weapons. Case and point, a 8 shot Killkannon will still only hit 2.6 times out of those 8 shots. And that of course is assuming it doesn't have the hard to hit rule or a similar one. Then I am down to 1 hit out of 8 on average.

I think it would need to roll to-Hit, otherwise you're not representing the ability of those firing it, but the Killcannon could be argued to have either a higher number of maximum "shots" and/or a lower cost. I definitely do think that GW has failed entirely to factor typical BS into its weapon pricing, which is a big part of why Ork blast weapons are such terrible value.

I agree 100% and they also aren't the sharpest tools in the shed to start with.

Case and point is the KillKannon costing MORE then a Battle cannon. The KK costs 27 the Battle Cannon costs 22, the Battle Cannon has 3x the range and +1 strength to the Kill Kannon, they have the same -2 AP and D3 damage. Ohh and the Battle Cannon is hitting on 4s the KillKannon on 5s. Good work GW.

Goddamn it gw.

I don't think the difference in points cost for the Battle cannon vs. KillKannon can really be read into. You attach them to different units that have different built in points costs. What is too say that some of the costing hasn't been built in on that side?