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 really do not like the WS system in 8th. You only have a fixed value which really bugs me because a Space Marine should not hit a normal guardsman and a Bloodthirster on the same value. It is really boring in my opinion and does not reflect the lore in any way shape or form.

So to fix this my idea is to firstly expand the old WS comparison chart so you have a value range from 2+ to 6+ to hit and not 3+ to 5+ as in previous editions and secondly to be more liberal with the WS of certain units. What I mean by that is, in prevous editions the WS of most units was in the 2-5 range, with heroes mostly in the 5-7 range and very few units and named characters had 8-10, which was more of a gimmik. So I propose to make more use of the 5-7 range for more elite units and heroes.

My expanded comparison chart:


So this is in principle similar to the strength/toughness comparison in 8th, but not quite. Same values hit each other on 4+, which I think is sensible. However I did not want to have 4+ only on identical values, so I expanded the range to when your opponent has one more WS than your unit. My lore reasoning for this is as follows: if your opponents WS value is just a little bit higher, you still have a bit of a bigger chance to land a lucky hit. After that it's relatively straightforward: if your opponents WS is 2 or 3 points higher you hit on 5+ and if its 4 or more points higher you hit on 6+.

Now if your opponents WS is 7 or more points higher you can't hit him according to my chart HOWEVER in such cases I would include a rule that 6+ always hits, BUT if it would be impossible for you to hit your opponent on your base WS value (WS3 against WS10) you can not benefit from +1 to hit auras or similar stuff. This is a small, but important distinction in my opinion.....it would however only come to play in fringe cases probably.

Now we need to adjust the WS values of the units. I can't do this for every unit in the game because it would take forever to write down and I would not adjust every unit, but I will give some examples for each WS and why I put said unit there (note that I am at least trying to go for lore coherency here while trying not to make units too op or too weak):

WS 1:
- Tyranid Spore Mines: they can't really fight
- vehicles like a Rhino Tank: Tanks should be able to hit in melee, but it makes sense that they should be easily avoidable. You could add a rule that they can infilct mortal wounds on 6s if they successfully charge something to make it more interesting.

WS 2:
- Ripper Swarms: they basically just exist to feed, so I think it makes sense to put them here.
- Grots: the wimpy tech geeks of the ork horde. I think its fair to put them here, but I would give them +1 to hit if they come in a big enough unit to push them to imperial guardsmen level, which is sensible I think.

WS 3:
- Standard Imperial Guardsman: trained soldiers, but not as good as Space Marines, which I think is sensible and in concordance with the lore.
- Hormagaunts: small standard tyranid "footsoldiers" that mostly rely on mass, similar to imperial guardsmen.
- Tau Fire Warriors: the Tau are technologically advanced, but are more focused on their ranged weapon skills than on melee combat. I considered putting them at WS2 considering their complete focus on ranged warfare and their rather bad close combat ability in the fluff, but I thought it would be too much of a nerf.
- Genestealer Cults Acolyte: I'd make them stronger than normal guardsmen, but not more proficient in combat.

WS 4:
- Standard Space Marine: I would keep the Space Marine as the standard benchmark for WS4 as it was in all previous editions.
- Chaos Space Marine: same as Space Marines with more spikes and tentacles.
- Ork Boyz: created for war, stonger than a normal human and utterly fearless, I think it makes sense to give them the same value as a Space Marine.
- Standard Necron Warrior: I think they fit best in this category. WS3 is too low and WS5 is too high for them.
- Eldar Guardians: a step below the melee centered Aspect Warriors
- Dire Avengers/Fire Drakes Aspect warriors: not melee focused aspect warriors, but still similar to a space marine based on the general swiftness of the eldar race.
- Dark Eldar Kabalite Warriors: the standard Dark Eldar doesn't really seek melee, cause they really only want to inflict as much pain as possible without while making sure to keep their body intact, so WS 4 seems fair here and in concordance with the fluff
- Carnifex: prime example for a complete wrecking machine, that does not have that much combat finesse, due to it basically being a living battering ram. Though I could also see this in the WS5 category for balance reasons, not sure if WS4 would be too low.
- standard Sisters of Battle: having a value range from 1-10 is tough, because I would put the Sisters between a standard Space Marine and a Guardsman, but missing that additional category I would definitely put them at WS4, because WS3 would be too low for them, both on the tabletop and in the fluff.
- Genestealer Cults Abberants: since their main thing is being a super strong hulking brute, WS4 seems fair, but I would give them toughness 5 just as a sidenote.
- Genestealer Cults Neophyte Hybrids: a step closer to the purestrain Genestealers.

WS 5
- 1. Company Space Marine Terminators: since the Terminator armor is only given to the best of the chapter it makes sense to put them here.
- Chaos Space Marine Terminators: same reason as Space Marine Terminators
- special chapter units: though many special chapter units are Terminators and would therefore fall in the aforementioned general Space Marine Terminator category, there are some non-Terminator chapter specific units I would also put in the WS 5 category. One that comes to mind would be the Blood Angels Sanguinary Guard for example.
- all Grey Knights: they have always been depicted as more elite Space Marines so WS5 for all Grey Knights (not only for Terminators) seems fair.
- Striking Scorpions Aspect warriors: melee focused Aspect warriors, but tougher and less mobile than Howling Banshees and therefore one step below.
- Mandrakes: I honestly don't have a particular lore reason to put Mandrakes in this category, but I think they fit here quite well
- Ork Nobz: more elite and bigger Orks than the Boyz. I thought about putting Meganobz at WS6, but I am really not sure...
- Necron Lychguard/Preatorians: elite Necron Warriors, though I considered putting them into the WS6 category according to their fluff, but I think it would be too much.
- Genestealer Cults Hybrid Metamorphs: another step closer to the purestrain Genestealers, but not quite.

WS 6 (now it's starting to become interesting):
- Genestealers: legendary for their close combat prowess since the earliest editions. One could argue that they are too cheap to have such a high WS but I think their lack of shooting and lower toughness balances this out.
- most Harlequins: super elite Eldar, who are known for their insane acrobatic fighting.
- Dark Eldar Incubii: since their whole thing is being super elite melee focused bodyguards, I think it would be fair to put them here.
- Eldar Howling Banshees: same as Incubii without the bodyguard aspect. Given their melee focus I think it is fair to put them a step above the other Aspect Warriors.
- Custodes: considering they are so few and represent the best humanity can field in terms of raw personal combat prowess.
- Space Marine Captains: I think WS 6 is a sizeable and sensible jump from the standard Space Marine for a Leader
- Ork Waaghboss: I think lore wise I could put a Waaghboss also in the WS 7 category, but I am not sure.
- Khorne Bloodletters: fitting in this category considering they are a fragment of the god of war.
- Khorne Berzerkers: their whole thing is crazed melee fighting and nothing else so WS 6 seems fair
- (Grey Knight Paladins: I think a case could be made for them to be included here, but I am not sure)

WS 7:
- Eldar Autarch/Dark Eldar Archon/Harlequin commanders: I think it makes sense to give Eldar/Dark Eldar commanders 1 point more than Orks/Space Marine commanders (though as I said I considered putting the Waaghboss in this category), considering that Space Marines and Orks are almost always tougher. Also I thought WS 8 would be too much of a jump even for a Harlequin commander, so I put him in this category too.
- Custodes Shield Captain: since the non-hero ones were WS6 it made sense to put the leader in this category.
- Tyranid Broodlord: A step above the standard Genestealer and therefore fitting in this category in my opinion.
- Vindicare and Culexus Assassins: not focused on melee, but still given they are assassins I think they fit well in here too.
- Chaos Lord: they are generally more powerful than standard Space Marine leaders and always were melee monsters on the table top so one point WS more than a standard space marine hero seems fair.

WS 8:
- Tyranid Hive Tyrant: huge monster whose creation was perfected by the hive mind and whose sole purpose is to chop your guys up.
- Eversor/Callidus Assassins: The more melee focused Assassins fit well here I think.
- Lord of Change: greater Demon focused on psycic powers
- Great Unclean One: given their toughness and their lack of dexterity compared to the other greater demons due to their mass, I think it's fair to put them here
- Tzeentch/Nurgle Demon Princes: they have always been melee monsters both on the tabletop and in the fluff, so WS 8 seems fair
- Harlequin Solitair: given it's lore and rules WS8 seems fitting.
- multiple named Characters: named characters are always difficult but I would put Ghazghkull and Drazhar here for example. I would also put Magnus and Mortarion in this category. Yes, they are both primarchs, but none of them is a melee specialist and their "low" WS compared to Guilliman is justified by Magnus' spellcasting an Mortarions toughness I think.


WS 9:
- Khorne/Slaanesh Demon Prince: since Tzeench demons are most notable for their psychic powers and Nurgle for their toughness, I think putting Khorne/Slaanesh princes a step above them seems fair.
- Keeper of Secrets: not WS10 material in my opinion, but close
- Lelith Hesperax: cause she's awsome and beeing sublime in melee is kinda her whole thing.
- Abaddon...?: I don't know, could also go into WS8 category
- Guilliman: I think Rowboat Girlyman fits well in here considering he's a primarch. Abaddon having the same WS as him could just be because he's been empowered by chaos that much, but like I said I could see Abaddon in the WS8 category aswell.


WS 10:
- Bloodthirster: the benchmark for WS10 and fitting for the embodiment of War
- Avatar of Khaine: I think it fits in here too given it is also the embodiment of a war god.
- Angron: if he ever comes out in 40k as a demon primarch, but also the 30k variant. Angron is a good example in my opinion for a "mortal" character who should be in this category, because, like his berzerkers, crazed melee fighting is his whole thing...just turned up to eleven.


Now I think to really make this interesting one would also have to implement more special rules for many units. For example Khorne Berzerkers get +1 to hit when they successfully charge or something. Or some unit that is good at guarding stuff according to the fluff then has a special rule where they are -1 to hit in melee when they defend a objecitve. Custodes were able to block incoming attacks in 7th......stuff like that.
I think this way the game would become more interesting again and more in concordance with the fluff.

Also before you tell me that this sucks and is the worst idea ever, it's just an idea I wanted to share. I don't claim this is the best solution ever.

Let me know what you think

Edits: had to edit some stuff so this becomes readable
Added some more units to my list.
Added vehicles like Rhinos into the WS 1 category as suggested by Bharring

Its fair. I don't mind it. But the issue becomes going back to remembering it all you know?

 iGuy91 wrote:
Its fair. I don't mind it. But the issue becomes going back to remembering it all you know?

This, pretty much.

8e does a lot of stuff wrong with combat, but honestly, the granularity of Weapon Skill probably wasn't one of them.

Changing Weapon Skill back to a comparison is fine if you stick to the Strength/Toughness system of 8e, because that's simple to remember. Is it equal? 4+. Is it more? 3+. Is it less? 5+. Is it double/half? 2+/6+. That's not great, but at least I don't need a chart.

Note that the main effect of this would be making combat units less lethal, because anything that would hit on a 2+ or 3+ will already do so in 8e. You're just making elites less dangerous to elites, in an edition where combat is already a bit of a limp noodle.

RevlidRas wrote:

 iGuy91 wrote:
Its fair. I don't mind it. But the issue becomes going back to remembering it all you know?

This, pretty much.

8e does a lot of stuff wrong with combat, but honestly, the granularity of Weapon Skill probably wasn't one of them.

Changing Weapon Skill back to a comparison is fine if you stick to the Strength/Toughness system of 8e, because that's simple to remember. Is it equal? 4+. Is it more? 3+. Is it less? 5+. Is it double/half? 2+/6+. That's not great, but at least I don't need a chart.

Note that the main effect of this would be making combat units less lethal, because anything that would hit on a 2+ or 3+ will already do so in 8e. You're just making elites less dangerous to elites, in an edition where combat is already a bit of a limp noodle.

I really cannot disagree with any of this, but I think the method I have proposed gives a little value back to more elite units and makes them again stand out a little bit more. You are right it takes some lethality out of melee combat, but that is a good thing in my opinion. Right now everything can hit and kill everything because there are just so many attacks and rerolls, by going back to a comparison you give back a little more value to elite units because they are harder to hit and it devalues hordes a little bit. In addition it also does not make more elite units too strong in my opinion because while a custodes would hit anything on 2+ in 8th, with this system he would not do so against a space marine for example.

I just got the feeling that GW in 8th ed tried to balance the lethality by just giving elite units more attacks and wounds, which is an utterly boring solution in my opinion. Also most elite units and heroes just hit on 2+ (either as a base value or because of some aura or sth) so there is no differentiation between them, which is not only boring from a lore perspective, but also from a gaming perspective in my opinion.
Also like I said, in addition to the method I have proposed I think more special rules in combat for the units would make things more interesting in addition.

I will concede that using a comparison chart is clunky, but I don't like the criticism of that fact for one reason: people are not stupid. If you were to play 2 games with this system you would probably know how your units hit from memory because, while more complicated than in 8th, it is not a very difficult system.

But again, I don't claim this is the best solution, but I think it creates more immersion and makes more sense than the 8th ed system.

Tiberias wrote:

Right now everything can hit and kill everything because there are just so many attacks and rerolls, by going back to a comparison you give back a little more value to elite units because they are harder to hit and it devalues hordes a little bit. In addition it also does not make more elite units too strong in my opinion because while a custodes would hit anything on 2+ in 8th, with this system he would not do so against a space marine for example.

If one of your main goals is to return a little durability to elite units in melee against less elite units, let me toss an idea I've pitched in the past at you:

Give especially talented melee units the "stabby" keyword. Give the absolute best melee combatants in the galaxy the "extra stabby" keyword. Exact terminology can change to something less silly, but stick with me.

So something stabby might be drukhari incubi or wyches with a certain drug or maybe vanguard vets. Basically, any unit that formerly had WS 5 or better in 7th edition would be stabby. Units that previously had WS 4 in 7th edition might be stabby if you really want to emphasize their melee prowess without giving them a flat offense bonus or a flat to-hit penalty in melee. Extra stabby units would be rare things like keepers of secrets, solitaires, Lucius the Eternal, phoenix lords, etc. Your average captain or autarch would not be extra stabby.

Stabby units impose a -1 to hit penalty in melee against non-stabby units. Extra stabby units impose a -2 to hit penalty in melee against non-stabby units and a -1 penalty against stabby and extra stabby units. The end result is similar to what your chart accomplishes, but it's significantly simpler. Guardsmen facing something stabby or extra stabby either hit on 5+ or 6+. Tac marines hit on either a 4+ or a 5+. Something stabby like harlequins would hit other stabby things on 3s as normal but would only hit on 4s against a legendary duelist like Lucius.

Used semi-sparingly, this would give you another level to pull to make melee elites a bit more desirable than just throwing waves of troops into the grinder without directly boosting those elites' average damage output. It also lets you stick to the nice and simple flat to-hit system of 8th edition rather than reintroducing a chart.

I will concede that using a comparison chart is clunky, but I don't like the criticism of that fact for one reason: people are not stupid. If you were to play 2 games with this system you would probably know how your units hit from memory because, while more complicated than in 8th, it is not a very difficult system.

In my experience, the issue with the to-hit chart in prior editions wasn't that it was so horribly complicated that the average person couldn't remember it. The issue was that it was just hard enough to explain and memorize to be off-putting for potential new players. Plus, there's something to be said for keeping added complexity in check, even if an individual rule only adds a little complexity. Difficult terrain, dangerous terrain, deepstrike rules, the to-hit charts, etc. weren't individually difficult to remember, but having to remember and roll for all of them multiple times over the course of a game was a little overwhelming. Small rules are collectively more overwhelming than the sum of their parts, so avoiding added complexity where possible is generally a good idea.

Easier way to do it:

WS2.............5+
WS3.............4+
WS4.............3+
WS5-6..........2+
WS7-8..........1+, inflict a -1 to-hit penalty in CC
WS9-10........0+, inflict a -2 to-hit penalty in CC

Wyldhunt wrote:

Tiberias wrote:

Right now everything can hit and kill everything because there are just so many attacks and rerolls, by going back to a comparison you give back a little more value to elite units because they are harder to hit and it devalues hordes a little bit. In addition it also does not make more elite units too strong in my opinion because while a custodes would hit anything on 2+ in 8th, with this system he would not do so against a space marine for example.

If one of your main goals is to return a little durability to elite units in melee against less elite units, let me toss an idea I've pitched in the past at you:

Give especially talented melee units the "stabby" keyword. Give the absolute best melee combatants in the galaxy the "extra stabby" keyword. Exact terminology can change to something less silly, but stick with me.

So something stabby might be drukhari incubi or wyches with a certain drug or maybe vanguard vets. Basically, any unit that formerly had WS 5 or better in 7th edition would be stabby. Units that previously had WS 4 in 7th edition might be stabby if you really want to emphasize their melee prowess without giving them a flat offense bonus or a flat to-hit penalty in melee. Extra stabby units would be rare things like keepers of secrets, solitaires, Lucius the Eternal, phoenix lords, etc. Your average captain or autarch would not be extra stabby.

Stabby units impose a -1 to hit penalty in melee against non-stabby units. Extra stabby units impose a -2 to hit penalty in melee against non-stabby units and a -1 penalty against stabby and extra stabby units. The end result is similar to what your chart accomplishes, but it's significantly simpler. Guardsmen facing something stabby or extra stabby either hit on 5+ or 6+. Tac marines hit on either a 4+ or a 5+. Something stabby like harlequins would hit other stabby things on 3s as normal but would only hit on 4s against a legendary duelist like Lucius.

Used semi-sparingly, this would give you another level to pull to make melee elites a bit more desirable than just throwing waves of troops into the grinder without directly boosting those elites' average damage output. It also lets you stick to the nice and simple flat to-hit system of 8th edition rather than reintroducing a chart.

I will concede that using a comparison chart is clunky, but I don't like the criticism of that fact for one reason: people are not stupid. If you were to play 2 games with this system you would probably know how your units hit from memory because, while more complicated than in 8th, it is not a very difficult system.

In my experience, the issue with the to-hit chart in prior editions wasn't that it was so horribly complicated that the average person couldn't remember it. The issue was that it was just hard enough to explain and memorize to be off-putting for potential new players. Plus, there's something to be said for keeping added complexity in check, even if an individual rule only adds a little complexity. Difficult terrain, dangerous terrain, deepstrike rules, the to-hit charts, etc. weren't individually difficult to remember, but having to remember and roll for all of them multiple times over the course of a game was a little overwhelming. Small rules are collectively more overwhelming than the sum of their parts, so avoiding added complexity where possible is generally a good idea.

I like your Idea of giving some melee proficient units -1 modifiers to be hit melee, but I would do this very sparsely and only in addition to the system I proposed. This is an example of what I meant when I said it would be necessary additionally to introduce special rules for the units. I think this would be necessary because there are so many reroll auras and +1 to hit auras and strategems. Just using a system of giving -1 to be hit modifiers to some units would not be enough for me personally

I also agree with you that it was difficult to get into previous editions because of the multitude of things you had to remember and consider, but 8th is already as easy and bland as it can possibly be, so adding some complexity won't hurt.

JNAProductions wrote:Easier way to do it:

WS2.............5+
WS3.............4+
WS4.............3+
WS5-6..........2+
WS7-8..........1+, inflict a -1 to-hit penalty in CC
WS9-10........0+, inflict a -2 to-hit penalty in CC

This is easier yes, but it does way to little for me. It is basically the 8th ed system where you have some modifiers in fringe cases, which is exactly what I did not want to achieve with the system I have proposed. The chart gives you layers of comparison between mutliple values which is the important part. It is not a big difference because we only have a d6, but an important one in my opinion to give back a little depth to melee combat and make unit comparison in melee more interesting. I really appreciate your input, but this system would not do nearly enough for me.


Another thing: do you in general approve of the redistribution of WS I proposed in my first post? As I said I could not do it for every unit, but I think I've given enough examples to make it apparent where I am going with this. The changes do not differ drastically from previous edition, but make more use of the 5-7 WS range as I mentioned.

It doesn’t follow 8th design philosophy, which is, I think, the main issue with it.

I doubt we'll go back to comparitive WS for determining hit rolls. I liked it, but they traded it away for simplicity intentionally; we're unlikely to go back. That said, some comments:
-WS1: Basic vehicles should probably be WS1. Getting hit by a Rhino should hurt. Bad. But it should be easy enough to avoid - and hit.
-Aspect Warriors: Probably the same as Marines (WS4), but certain aspects could be at +1 (Banshees, Incubi, possbily Scorps/Spears/Avengers), but might be too much bloat. I'd love for Exarchs to have increased WS (and BS) too, but that further moves away from the streamlining GW has been doing.
-I'd call out Autarchs, again, as "shouldn't be more skilled than Exarchs". But HeroHammer requires they be.

JNAProductions wrote:It doesn’t follow 8th design philosophy, which is, I think, the main issue with it.

Well yes, but that is the whole point of this concept. The design philosophy for 8th melee combat stinks in my opinion, hence this idea.

Bharring wrote:I doubt we'll go back to comparitive WS for determining hit rolls. I liked it, but they traded it away for simplicity intentionally; we're unlikely to go back. That said, some comments:
-WS1: Basic vehicles should probably be WS1. Getting hit by a Rhino should hurt. Bad. But it should be easy enough to avoid - and hit.
-Aspect Warriors: Probably the same as Marines (WS4), but certain aspects could be at +1 (Banshees, Incubi, possbily Scorps/Spears/Avengers), but might be too much bloat. I'd love for Exarchs to have increased WS (and BS) too, but that further moves away from the streamlining GW has been doing.
-I'd call out Autarchs, again, as "shouldn't be more skilled than Exarchs". But HeroHammer requires they be.

I do not think GW will ever go back either, the game will only get more and more bland, which is exactly why I wanted to bring this up. I will try this system at home with my friends and if it works for us and everybody likes it more than the 8th ed system, we will be using this and simply adjust unit WS values. I mainly brought this up so I can give people who do not like 8th melee combat as much as I do an idea for an alternative, aswell as to get feedback. I have no hope that GW would ever go back and adopt a deeper combat system in their future editions.

As for WS values: vehicles like rhinos getting WS1 is a good idea, I'll put that on the list. Regarding Aspect warriors, I will update the different shades of aspect warriors. Howling banshees (also Incubi) are fine at WS6 in my opinon. Striking scorpions are still sensible at WS 5 and Fire Drakes and Dire Avengers could be at WS 4. If you give the exarchs +1 in WS a Howling Banshee Exarch would have WS 7 (same as an Autarch), so you would not have such a bad case of herohammer.

Tiberias wrote:
I really do not like the WS system in 8th. You only have a fixed value which really bugs me because a Space Marine should not hit a normal guardsman and a Bloodthirster on the same value. It is really boring in my opinion and does not reflect the lore in any way shape or form.

So to fix this my idea is to firstly expand the old WS comparison chart so you have a value range from 2+ to 6+ to hit and not 3+ to 5+ as in previous editions and secondly to be more liberal with the WS of certain units. What I mean by that is, in prevous editions the WS of most units was in the 2-5 range, with heroes mostly in the 5-7 range and very few units and named characters had 8-10, which was more of a gimmik. So I propose to make more use of the 5-7 range for more elite units and heroes.

My expanded comparison chart:

Spoiler:

So this is in principle similar to the strength/toughness comparison in 8th, but not quite. Same values hit each other on 4+, which I think is sensible. However I did not want to have 4+ only on identical values, so I expanded the range to when your opponent has one more WS than your unit. My lore reasoning for this is as follows: if your opponents WS value is just a little bit higher, you still have a bit of a bigger chance to land a lucky hit. After that it's relatively straightforward: if your opponents WS is 2 or 3 points higher you hit on 5+ and if its 4 or more points higher you hit on 6+.

Now if your opponents WS is 7 or more points higher you can't hit him according to my chart HOWEVER in such cases I would include a rule that 6+ always hits, BUT if it would be impossible for you to hit your opponent on your base WS value (WS3 against WS10) you can not benefit from +1 to hit auras or similar stuff. This is a small, but important distinction in my opinion.....it would however only come to play in fringe cases probably.

Now we need to adjust the WS values of the units. I can't do this for every unit in the game because it would take forever to write down and I would not adjust every unit, but I will give some examples for each WS and why I put said unit there (note that I am at least trying to go for lore coherency here while trying not to make units too op or too weak):

WS 1:
- Tyranid Spore Mines: they can't really fight
- vehicles like a Rhino Tank: Tanks should be able to hit in melee, but it makes sense that they should not be easily avoidable. You could add a rule that they can infilct mortal wounds on 6s if they successfully charge something to make it more interesting.

WS 2:
- Ripper Swarms: they basically just exist to feed, so I think it makes sense to put them here.
- Grots: the wimpy tech geeks of the ork horde. I think its fair to put them here, but I would give them +1 to hit if they come in a big enough unit to push them to imperial guardsmen level, which is sensible I think.

WS 3:
- Standard Imperial Guardsman: trained soldiers, but not as good as Space Marines, which I think is sensible and in concordance with the lore.
- Hormagaunts: small standard tyranid "footsoldiers" that mostly rely on mass, similar to imperial guardsmen.
- Tau Fire Warriors: the Tau are technologically advanced, but are more focused on their ranged weapon skills than on melee combat. I considered putting them at WS2 considering their complete focus on ranged warfare and their rather bad close combat ability in the fluff, but I thought it would be too much of a nerf.
- Genestealer Cults Acolyte: I'd make them stronger than normal guardsmen, but not more proficient in combat.

WS 4:
- Standard Space Marine: I would keep the Space Marine as the standard benchmark for WS4 as it was in all previous editions.
- Chaos Space Marine: same as Space Marines with more spikes and tentacles.
- Ork Boyz: created for war, stonger than a normal human and utterly fearless, I think it makes sense to give them the same value as a Space Marine.
- Standard Necron Warrior: I think they fit best in this category. WS3 is too low and WS5 is too high for them.
- Eldar Guardians: a step below the melee centered Aspect Warriors
- Dire Avengers/Fire Drakes Aspect warriors: not melee focused aspect warriors, but still similar to a space marine based on the general swiftness of the eldar race.
- Dark Eldar Kabalite Warriors: the standard Dark Eldar doesn't really seek melee, cause they really only want to inflict as much pain as possible without while making sure to keep their body intact, so WS 4 seems fair here and in concordance with the fluff
- Carnifex: prime example for a complete wrecking machine, that does not have that much combat finesse, due to it basically being a living battering ram. Though I could also see this in the WS5 category for balance reasons, not sure if WS4 would be too low.
- standard Sisters of Battle: having a value range from 1-10 is tough, because I would put the Sisters between a standard Space Marine and a Guardsman, but missing that additional category I would definitely put them at WS4, because WS3 would be too low for them, both on the tabletop and in the fluff.
- Genestealer Cults Abberants: since their main thing is being a super strong hulking brute, WS4 seems fair, but I would give them toughness 5 just as a sidenote.
- Genestealer Cults Neophyte Hybrids: a step closer to the purestrain Genestealers.

WS 5
- 1. Company Space Marine Terminators: since the Terminator armor is only given to the best of the chapter it makes sense to put them here.
- Chaos Space Marine Terminators: same reason as Space Marine Terminators
- special chapter units: though many special chapter units are Terminators and would therefore fall in the aforementioned general Space Marine Terminator category, there are some non-Terminator chapter specific units I would also put in the WS 5 category. One that comes to mind would be the Blood Angels Sanguinary Guard for example.
- all Grey Knights: they have always been depicted as more elite Space Marines so WS5 for all Grey Knights (not only for Terminators) seems fair.
- Striking Scorpions Aspect warriors: melee focused Aspect warriors, but tougher and less mobile than Howling Banshees and therefore one step below.
- Mandrakes: I honestly don't have a particular lore reason to put Mandrakes in this category, but I think they fit here quite well
- Ork Nobz: more elite and bigger Orks than the Boyz. I thought about putting Meganobz at WS6, but I am really not sure...
- Necron Lychguard/Preatorians: elite Necron Warriors, though I considered putting them into the WS6 category according to their fluff, but I think it would be too much.
- Genestealer Cults Hybrid Metamorphs: another step closer to the purestrain Genestealers, but not quite.

WS 6 (now it's starting to become interesting):
- Genestealers: legendary for their close combat prowess since the earliest editions. One could argue that they are too cheap to have such a high WS but I think their lack of shooting and lower toughness balances this out.
- most Harlequins: super elite Eldar, who are known for their insane acrobatic fighting.
- Dark Eldar Incubii: since their whole thing is being super elite melee focused bodyguards, I think it would be fair to put them here.
- Eldar Howling Banshees: same as Incubii without the bodyguard aspect. Given their melee focus I think it is fair to put them a step above the other Aspect Warriors.
- Custodes: considering they are so few and represent the best humanity can field in terms of raw personal combat prowess.
- Space Marine Captains: I think WS 6 is a sizeable and sensible jump from the standard Space Marine for a Leader
- Ork Waaghboss: I think lore wise I could put a Waaghboss also in the WS 7 category, but I am not sure.
- Khorne Bloodletters: fitting in this category considering they are a fragment of the god of war.
- Khorne Berzerkers: their whole thing is crazed melee fighting and nothing else so WS 6 seems fair

WS 7:
- Eldar Autarch/Dark Eldar Archon/Harlequin commanders: I think it makes sense to give Eldar/Dark Eldar commanders 1 point more than Orks/Space Marine commanders (though as I said I considered putting the Waaghboss in this category), considering that Space Marines and Orks are almost always tougher. Also I thought WS 8 would be too much of a jump even for a Harlequin commander, so I put him in this category too.
- Custodes Shield Captain: since the non-hero ones were WS6 it made sense to put the leader in this category.
- Tyranid Broodlord: A step above the standard Genestealer and therefore fitting in this category in my opinion.
- Vindicare and Culexus Assassins: not focused on melee, but still given they are assassins I think they fit well in here too.
- Chaos Lord: they are generally more powerful than standard Space Marine leaders and always were melee monsters on the table top so one point WS more than a standard space marine hero seems fair.

WS 8:
- Tyranid Hive Tyrant: huge monster whose creation was perfected by the hive mind and whose sole purpose is to chop your guys up.
- Eversor/Callidus Assassins: The more melee focused Assassins fit well here I think.
- Lord of Change: greater Demon focused on psycic powers
- Great Unclean One: given their toughness and their lack of dexterity compared to the other greater demons due to their mass, I think it's fair to put them here
- Tzeentch/Nurgle Demon Princes: they have always been melee monsters both on the tabletop and in the fluff, so WS 8 seems fair
- Harlequin Solitair: given it's lore and rules WS8 seems fitting.
- multiple named Characters: named characters are always difficult but I would put Ghazghkull and Drazhar here for example. I would also put Magnus and Mortarion in this category. Yes, they are both primarchs, but none of them is a melee specialist and their "low" WS compared to Guilliman is justified by Magnus' spellcasting an Mortarions toughness I think.


WS 9:
- Khorne/Slaanesh Demon Prince: since Tzeench demons are most notable for their psychic powers and Nurgle for their toughness, I think putting Khorne/Slaanesh princes a step above them seems fair.
- Keeper of Secrets: not WS10 material in my opinion, but close
- Lelith Hesperax: cause she's awsome and beeing sublime in melee is kinda her whole thing.
- Abaddon...?: I don't know, could also go into WS8 category
- Guilliman: I think Rowboat Girlyman fits well in here considering he's a primarch. Abaddon having the same WS as him could just be because he's been empowered by chaos that much, but like I said I could see Abaddon in the WS8 category aswell.


WS 10:
- Bloodthirster: the benchmark for WS10 and fitting for the embodiment of War
- Avatar of Khaine: I think it fits in here too given it is also the embodiment of a war god.
- Angron: if he ever comes out in 40k as a demon primarch, but also the 30k variant. Angron is a good example in my opinion for a "mortal" character who should be in this category, because, like his berzerkers, crazed melee fighting is his whole thing...just turned up to eleven.


Now I think to really make this interesting one would also have to implement more special rules for many units. For example Khorne Berzerkers get +1 to hit when they successfully charge or something. Or some unit that is good at guarding stuff according to the fluff then has a special rule where they are -1 to hit in melee when they defend a objecitve. Custodes were able to block incoming attacks in 7th......stuff like that.
I think this way the game would become more interesting again and more in concordance with the fluff.

Also before you tell me that this sucks and is the worst idea ever, it's just an idea I wanted to share. I don't claim this is the best solution ever.

Let me know what you think

Edits: had to edit some stuff so this becomes readable
Added some more units to my list.
Added vehicles like Rhinos into the WS 1 category as suggested by Bharring

No thanks, I'll pass. It's fine as it is, sometimes you have to sacrifice lore to make a game quick and easy to play. This seems overly complicated and bloated, something 8th has done a great job thus far of avoiding.

At the end of the day, we're playing a GAME.

Perfectly valid opinion, I just have a different approach. For me the bland 8th ed system is not enough.

It's perfectly understandable that you like the quick 8th ed system, but saying it's a game were playing and therfore has to be quick and simple, is a bad argument.
Just because it's a game, does not mean it has to be bland and dumbed down.

Liek I said I will concede that my Idea is more complicated, but it's not really that difficult if you think about it. There are not that many options.

Your WS is the same as your opponents: 4+
Your WS is 1 point lower than your opponents: 4+
Your WS is 2 or 3 points lower than your opponent: 5+
4 Points lower: 6+
Your WS is 1 point higher than your opponents: 3+
Your Ws is 2 or 3 points higher: 2+
plus some fringe cases, that would rarely come into play.

It is more difficult to remember than the 8th system, but I really would not call it bloated.

Not a bad idea. Not sure how can people stand this new system where an Ork can hit a Chapter Master just as easily as he can hit a grot.

bouncingboredom wrote:
Not a bad idea. Not sure how can people stand this new system where an Ork can hit a Chapter Master just as easily as he can hit a grot.

This was one of the things that bothered me the most, it just does not make any sense.