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.

Pancakey wrote:

 Brotherjulian wrote:
I miss templates for flame weapons. Are you going to tell me I hit a 30 man conscript squad with a Hellhound and I'd only get d6 of them? The variable damage die doesn't scale for densely packed models.

10,000 times this.

No counter to cheap hordes. Guess what rules now?

Gods, could you imagine if Vindicators still dropped S10 AP2 pie plates? It'd be glorious.

Primarily a HH player who enjoys 40k as well, I love me a blast template and was sad to see them go.

Nothing like dropping a pie plate on a horde of bodies.

I’m glad they are gone. As cool as they were visually they slowed the game down so much and caused so many arguments. Nothing fun about tripling the length of the movement phase just to make sure all your units were perfectly spaced. Then there was always that player whose template would drift directly to units despite not aiming that way and then the “does the template cover this guys toe” argument. Just giving blast weapons more shots or an increased amount against larger groups is definitely the way forward.

I mean, I don't know what people's communities are like on here but were people really arguing about blast templates?

"Hey man, does the template clip this model"

"Looks close enough to me, go ahead bud"

Is liek how 99% of my conversations about blast templates have ever gone.

They're called tournaments. The things we inexplicably provide tons of prize support, cash, and money for...and then wonder why people pull shenanigans.

 xeen wrote:


So just to give a response on the time thing. I love this game and wish I could take all day to play games. I have been playing since I was 13 years old. I am 37 now. But I don't have all day to play one game anymore. I have a few hours if I am lucky as I have a family and a job and time for hobbies is really limited. That is why I like that the game now plays quicker, because I want to try to get a game in the limited time I have to play. That is why I love a lot of the changes that 8th made. I understand your point that you liked the greater layer of rules, which is a fair opinion, but as for your comment "I just don;t understand that mindset." as to wanting to play quicker, this just letting you know where that mindset comes from. It is not to rush for the sake of rushing, but so people like me can even play. If the game took all day, I would have to sell my stuff because I don't have a full day to play a game. In fact that is one of the reasons I didn't really play 7th, because games just to so long. That is why I can't do tournaments (even though I would love too). So this is why some of us want a faster paced game.

First off, I don't see how templates slowed stuff down so much UNLESS players spent their time measuring 2inches between each model to minimize exposure rather than spacing by eye and theatrics, hugging the hillside or skirting the forest and so on. That is the fun of the game, for myself, and I don't understand the mindset that enjoys min-maxing to WAAC as if this fantastic battle simulation weren't the point. I just don't, frankly can't. Alien to me..

Now, so far as you have so little time (and I appreciate that, I really do, I have so little time too but also aim to get play time all at once, like for a whole day once every few months or even once a year! and I aim also for some scattered hours here and there for painting and so on in between) here is an idea:
Play with fewer models, on smaller tables.
Use better rules, greater realism, with fewer models on smaller tables. Do it more often, if that fits your schedule, but don't try to play 2000points in 2 hours, because that demands that the system get watered down for the rest of us who enjoy the fine grains and layers more than the wham-blam-thank-you-man dice-bonanza.

Asmodios wrote:
I’m glad they are gone. As cool as they were visually they slowed the game down so much and caused so many arguments. Nothing fun about tripling the length of the movement phase just to make sure all your units were perfectly spaced. Then there was always that player whose template would drift directly to units despite not aiming that way and then the “does the template cover this guys toe” argument. Just giving blast weapons more shots or an increased amount against larger groups is definitely the way forward.

Cover this guy's toes? We always count the base (except for skimmers) when using templates. The only time it gets tricky is when a template is near the table center and it's more difficult to get a top view of the template. Hardly worth scrapping the whole concept though. If people want to measure out their models in units to be exactly 2" apart there are other remedies, such as a 10 minute time limit per movement phase. We've even used 5 minute limits on movement phases (for other reasons) and even ork players can manage it.

 amanita wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I’m glad they are gone. As cool as they were visually they slowed the game down so much and caused so many arguments. Nothing fun about tripling the length of the movement phase just to make sure all your units were perfectly spaced. Then there was always that player whose template would drift directly to units despite not aiming that way and then the “does the template cover this guys toe” argument. Just giving blast weapons more shots or an increased amount against larger groups is definitely the way forward.

Cover this guy's toes? We always count the base (except for skimmers) when using templates. The only time it gets tricky is when a template is near the table center and it's more difficult to get a top view of the template. Hardly worth scrapping the whole concept though. If people want to measure out their models in units to be exactly 2" apart there are other remedies, such as a 10 minute time limit per movement phase. We've even used 5 minute limits on movement phases (for other reasons) and even ork players can manage it.

Yeah, I was always waiting for the laser skirted templates on elevated stands, but nobody ever came up with them - at least, I never saw anything like that for sale. Something that would shine a thread of light onto the table the size of a template, and which could be done by simply mounting a counterweighted lazer pointer on a base that allowed it to spin above the field, so that it could shine down an adjustable circle of light directly onto the table. Could solve all sorts of WAAC issues. But, in all the games that I ever played, there was never a problem that "I will get the next beer" wouldn't fix.

I'm happy they're gone.

Templates, when first introduced (when 3 tanks was a lot!) were okay.

Now, when you have all sorts of stuff running around, they don't make sense.

A good 7th question that bothered me is "why is a Baneblade cannon shell equally effective to a lascannon against single-model units?" That logic never followed, and the logic of 8th is that it actually does do more damage to single model units.

I also hated the fiddlyness of it. With each machine having two different-sized templates and one being 10" wide, then you ended up hitting multiple units. Or did you? It depends. Did your opponent space them out enough? If he took the time, I hope you had a book to read in the movement phase. If he didn't, then you still might not hit them because of scatter. In fact, scatter might be bad enough that you completely miss your original target, even with a 10" template. Oh but don't worry, now you have to fire this 5" template.

And then you fire your wyverns...

 amanita wrote:

Asmodios wrote:
I’m glad they are gone. As cool as they were visually they slowed the game down so much and caused so many arguments. Nothing fun about tripling the length of the movement phase just to make sure all your units were perfectly spaced. Then there was always that player whose template would drift directly to units despite not aiming that way and then the “does the template cover this guys toe” argument. Just giving blast weapons more shots or an increased amount against larger groups is definitely the way forward.

Cover this guy's toes? We always count the base (except for skimmers) when using templates. The only time it gets tricky is when a template is near the table center and it's more difficult to get a top view of the template. Hardly worth scrapping the whole concept though. If people want to measure out their models in units to be exactly 2" apart there are other remedies, such as a 10 minute time limit per movement phase. We've even used 5 minute limits on movement phases (for other reasons) and even ork players can manage it.

by cover toes, I meant "touch the base" there was always issues with a select few players templates continuing to move a little extra or on a different line then the scatter dice indicated and these weren't WAAC players either I think some people honestly just kinda guide the template subconsciously the way they want it to go. It simply just slowed the game down too much and always left room for some dumb argument where a 3rd party would end up guiding templates. I originally had the "omg they took away our templates" thought but after one game I realized just how much quicker and more enjoyable it made games.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'll disagree on that. If the Battle Cannon was hitting 2-3 models minimum, it wouldn't have been as bad as it was. Scattering + spacing made hitting 3 models a rare prospect, when you were more likely to get just 1 or 2.

No, 2-3 was a pretty consistent minimum. Remember, at 2" coherency a 5" blast template centered over one model will hit that model and any model within coherency of it. Usually, unless you scattered all the way to the edge of a unit you'd have at least two models in coherency with your target model.

With the new Grinding Advance rule, you're getting an average of 7 shots, which is 3.5.

Only because GW acknowledged my point and gave LRBTs double shots. The single D6 that represents a 5" blast template is so inadequate that they had to give the LRBT the equivalent of two 5" blast templates per turn just to make it a relevant unit.

And don't get me started on the Plasma Cannon sponson. Nobody took Plasma Cannons! At least now with the average of 2 shots you're getting a hit, rather than hoping the shot lands on at least one guy.

Don't over-think it, it's just an example of a blast weapon. Feel free to pick any of the other D3 shot small blast equivalents. And before 8th you weren't hoping that the shot lands on at least one guy, you were almost guaranteed to get it. On all but the most extreme scatter you'd hit at least one model, and that's in the worst-case scenario of models at maximum coherency distance. That's a lot more consistency, on top of the ability to pile up tons of hits if you could catch your target at less than maximum coherency (such as if you just forced them to disembark from a transport).

Can someone explain to me how it's more "intuitive, realistic, and fun" to have my Demolisher tank shoot itself instead of the carnifex 6" in front of it?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Can someone explain to me how it's more "intuitive, realistic, and fun" to have my Demolisher tank shoot itself instead of the carnifex 6" in front of it?

You could make a rule where a unit could not shoot itself, but maybe still be damaged by a point blank explosion? Or drifts may not go past the front of the shooter?

But if you are looking for realism perhaps your quest should go beyond 8th Ed mechanics? You know, where a battle among super heavy tanks has all the tactical nuance of playing shuffle board with bowls of pudding. Less actually, since positioning is irrelevant. You could even remove spoonfuls of pudding to represent tank 'wounds' as the titanic bean counters slog it out. Now that would be fun!

Warmachine also solved the scatter dilemma it by stating that a weapon could not scatter more than half the distance to the target enemy unit in question. Tweak it accordingly (personally I have a soft spot for a game modelling being able to throw grenades through windows or bounce them off walls) and go from there.

I personally havent witnessed any time decrease due to the lack of templates. now I'm just rolling D6 multiple times . my game time hasnt dropped at all. if anything it's increased due to the number of models I can bring for the same points cost.

Sure, templates led to some stupid things (like my wolfy friends Vindicator shooting itself in the back when trying to point blank blast my Thunderer) but that was mainly due to GW's shoddy rules writing. As MagicJuggler mentioned, you simply have to implement a rule whereby blasts cannot scatter more than half the distance between the target and firing unit and you have your problem solved.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Can someone explain to me how it's more "intuitive, realistic, and fun" to have my Demolisher tank shoot itself instead of the carnifex 6" in front of it?

You used "realistic" in a sentence that also involved a Carnifex, a 20' tall alien killing machine that can punch bone spikes through tank armor 5x stronger than steel.