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.

One thing about the old templates is that more bunched up units were punished more, and in theory (didn't always work out) larger units would have to bunch up more. Now you just cause D6 shots or whatever and ends up lacklustre.

How about Blast changes to add +D6 shots the larger the unit is? Maybe +D6 every 5 models in the unit.

So you have maybe 'Frag Missile' S4, Heavy 1 Blast

You have a base 1 shot. However, the Blast adds +D6 shots every 5 models in the unit, as they are more bunched up or were moving through tight spaces making them vulnerable or unwieldy. So shooting a unit of size 10, it now does (for example) 1+2D6 shots.

Large blast could be similar but maybe adding 2D6 instead.

I see where you're coming from, and I miss the ability to score a lot of hits on a very large closely bunched unit. I don't like adding more randomisation though, and rolling more dice slows down the game.

I've always liked the idea that blast and template weapons had a fixed maximum number of hits eg. template(5) or blast (10) etc where the number of hits was equal to the number of models in the target unit, capped by the number in brackets. so a blast(10) weapon targeting a unit of 5 models scores 5 hits and the same weapon targeting a unit of 20 models would score 10 hits.

One problem I would have with this:
According to this logic a 5 man guardsmen group huddled together in a ~3.5 cm radius circle in basecontact would get 1D6 hits from the blast, a 10 man squad stretched out in a thin line barely in unit coherency (so 2 inch in between any two models) would get 2D6, even if they span more than 40 cm.

I know basing the damage on number of models is easier, but it seems to me it's a poor approximation for blast weapons.

To be fair, there's a load of rules in eighth edition that are rather naff. I can understand the reasons for doing it but I feel it was the wrong direction IMO. This whole 'rule streamlining' thing kinda takes from some of the charm of the game, half the fun used to be understanding of the rules. Sometimes it would have a negative effect on the opposing gamer but they was the price of not knowing the rules in and out.

Pyroalchi wrote:
One problem I would have with this:
According to this logic a 5 man guardsmen group huddled together in a ~3.5 cm radius circle in basecontact would get 1D6 hits from the blast, a 10 man squad stretched out in a thin line barely in unit coherency (so 2 inch in between any two models) would get 2D6, even if they span more than 40 cm.

I know basing the damage on number of models is easier, but it seems to me it's a poor approximation for blast weapons.

Blast weapons themselves against static bunched up models makes no sense as they don't literally take turns in 'real life' (if they were actually fighting).

What this represents is the ease of which smaller units can move around. A small unit on tabletop can be bunched up at one moment, but during the 'time' the turn takes, they could be gone from the location and more easily taken cover within their location or have moved away. A larger, more crowded unit is more unwieldy so abstracted, they would be hit more even if the circle radius on tabletop if they are spread out; rather than be a literal representation, it represents blasts on abstracted unit density rather than literal model position.

@ ease to move around: I don't know. I mean 10 guys spread out in a line seem quite mobile to me, while 5 guys trying to huddle up in a crater for cover do not. But as rules go they are abstract anyway.

Still it would be awkward that a flamer hitting one end of a long line of infantry might end up wiping models 20'' away.

I think it should simply have been:

Large Blasts: 2D6 shots.
Small Blasts: D6 shots.
Templates: D6+3 autohits.

Basically just 2x the current shots former templates and blasts got with the new edition. Sometimes even 3x considering that ork burnas are crappy D3 autohits.

Blackie wrote:I think it should simply have been:

Large Blasts: 2D6 shots.
Small Blasts: D6 shots.
Templates: D6+3 autohits.

Basically just 2x the current shots former templates and blasts got with the new edition. Sometimes even 3x considering that ork burnas are crappy D3 autohits.

An average of 6.5 strength 10 AP -4 hits per d-scythe wraithguard, you say!? Well, if you really want my 5 man squad to hit you 32.5 times each time they fire...

Daba wrote:One thing about the old templates is that more bunched up units were punished more, and in theory (didn't always work out) larger units would have to bunch up more. Now you just cause D6 shots or whatever and ends up lacklustre.

How about Blast changes to add +D6 shots the larger the unit is? Maybe +D6 every 5 models in the unit.

So you have maybe 'Frag Missile' S4, Heavy 1 Blast

You have a base 1 shot. However, the Blast adds +D6 shots every 5 models in the unit, as they are more bunched up or were moving through tight spaces making them vulnerable or unwieldy. So shooting a unit of size 10, it now does (for example) 1+2D6 shots.

Large blast could be similar but maybe adding 2D6 instead.

I do very much support the idea of increasing the number of shots fired by blast/template weapons based on the number of models in the target unit. however, a few things:

* There's not really a need to make the number of shots random . You can speed up the resolution of such weapons significantly by simply making such weapons X shots per Y models. So a flamer might do 3 shots per 5 models (rounding up) in the target unit.

* There's no need to standardize the exact amount across all weapons. As pointed out above, 5 d-scythes pack much more of a punch than 5 flamers. It would be easy enough to add a "Blast(X/Y)" rule that quickly indicates how many shots a weapon gets per how many enemy models. That way, a particularly powerful blast could scale up with the target unit size more slowly if you wanted it to be less efficient against infantry than a competitor. A whirlwind might be Blast(3/5) compared to a vindicators (3/10) or (1/5), as an example. Both would get more shots when firing at larger units, but the lower strenght shots of the whirlwind would scale up faster than the vindicator's high strength shots.

* Blasts NOT punishing units for buching up anymore is a feature, not a bug. Old blasts basically just punished people for not wasting extra hours of their lives agonizing over centimeters of spacing. Or for playing melee hordes that were forced to clump up anyway in order to get all their attacks in close combat. While it might be "realistic" to blast a chunk in a clump of orkz, it's not generally very satisfying for the ork player. Plus, it would be yet another thing that favors shooting over melee, so there's that. Scaling blast shots based on target unit size is fine, but let's not drag in mechanics that punish units for spacing.

Causing X hits per Y models is a bit less smooth (to my mind) than causing 1 hit per model, up to a maximum of X.

It is a lot easier, and quicker, to glance at a horde of orks and determine that yes, there are more than 5 models in the unit, than it is for you co count the models to determine if there are 24 or 25 models left. Particularly if there are 2 mobs right next to each other to muddy the water.

My beef with blast weapons is their effectiveness against single models. I have advocated in the past for Ordnance weapons, which would fire 2 profiles at the same target, one for the direct hit and another for the explosion. Direct hit would be the sort of 1 shot S10 AP-4 Dam D6 profile, explosion would be2D6 shots S6 AP-2 Dam 1. This would allow battlecannons to be decent at clearing chaff without being OP for killing tanks, but also with a chance of a direct hit doing lots of damage. It would make killing infantry with big guns feel like collateral damage more than their primary purpose. Plus the dramatic idea of a direct hit on a primaris marine blowing it to pieces whilst his friends are splattered by the blast...

Easy fix: just give blast/flamer style weapons +1 shot/hit per 5 models in the target unit.

Pointed Stick wrote:
Easy fix: just give blast/flamer style weapons +1 shot/hit per 5 models in the target unit.

That's basically my pitch, but with the option to give them +X shots per Y models so that you can control the rate at which such weapons scale a bit better. So a flamer might get 3 shots per 5 models while a frag missile only gets 2, but the flamer is a lot harder to get into range.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 some bloke wrote:
Causing X hits per Y models is a bit less smooth (to my mind) than causing 1 hit per model, up to a maximum of X.

It is a lot easier, and quicker, to glance at a horde of orks and determine that yes, there are more than 5 models in the unit, than it is for you co count the models to determine if there are 24 or 25 models left. Particularly if there are 2 mobs right next to each other to muddy the water.

I see where you're coming from. A few things:

* I really think it should be the number of shots that goes up rather than the number of hits. Historically, blast weapons have always had the potential to scatter wide. Requiring players to actually make to-hit rolls would retain that.

* Counting 24 vs 25 boyz is a fair point. I'm just not all that fond of a given blast always being at "maximum performance" against even a modestly-sized squad. So if a frag missile has a max of, say, 5 shots/hits, then you'll always be at your max damage output against even small, elite squads. Granting extra shots based on the target's squad size gives us weapons that are consistently more effective against hordes than elites (something the currently rules struggle to offer) and represents the old school increase in likelihood of hitting some/more models when shooting at a large squad.

My beef with blast weapons is their effectiveness against single models. I have advocated in the past for Ordnance weapons, which would fire 2 profiles at the same target, one for the direct hit and another for the explosion. Direct hit would be the sort of 1 shot S10 AP-4 Dam D6 profile, explosion would be2D6 shots S6 AP-2 Dam 1. This would allow battlecannons to be decent at clearing chaff without being OP for killing tanks, but also with a chance of a direct hit doing lots of damage. It would make killing infantry with big guns feel like collateral damage more than their primary purpose. Plus the dramatic idea of a direct hit on a primaris marine blowing it to pieces whilst his friends are splattered by the blast...

I don't hate that, but I feel that my proposal kind of covers a lot of the same ground. Under my proposal, you could give a gun a high strength and damage characteristic but only give it 1 shot per 5 models (or whatever) meaning that its anti-horde offense scales up much more slowly than something like a frag missile that does 3 shots per 5 models (or whatever). Your approach sounds good, but mine involves fewer steps to resolve.

If you want blast-type weapons to be worse against small and single-model units, that's easy: just say that the number of shots/hits can never exceed the number of models in the unit. So the final rule would look like this:

"This weapon gains an additional shot/hit for every 5 models in the target unit, but the total number of shots/hits can never exceed the number of models in the unit."

If flamer and blast-style weapons had this rule, I think they'd be in a pretty good place.

I like the Relic Contemptor conversion beamer's approach, personally. One high-powered shot with a special rule saying "If this shot causes a model to be removed as a casualty the target unit takes (extra hits at a reduced profile)." Allow the weapon to keep a profile that'll do some damage to hard targets but not turn it into a high-rate-of-fire anti-tank gun.

A different thought:

Blasts are explosions, which are not only deadly, but disruptive.

How about Blast weapons get the "Blast" Rule, which states if you suffer any causalities, your movement is halved next turn and you only hit on 6+ for shooting or CC for that turn?

This way you're getting a benefit, but you're not adding more dice rolls to the game.

You should roll once and hit X many times, as opposed to the randomised machine guns they are currently.

 Togusa wrote:
A different thought:

Blasts are explosions, which are not only deadly, but disruptive.

How about Blast weapons get the "Blast" Rule, which states if you suffer any causalities, your movement is halved next turn and you only hit on 6+ for shooting or CC for that turn?

This way you're getting a benefit, but you're not adding more dice rolls to the game.

That would make blast weapons extremely powerful. You'd be able to pretty reliably make non-vehicle units hit on 6's and make it impossible for non-vehicles to cross the table on foot. There is a toned down version of this in the form of thunderfire cannons. You could probably give more weapons a similar rule via stratagem, but I don't think I want to see that sort of rule on the humble frag missile. That would be like giving your whole army 7th edition Invisibility against all your opponent's infantry.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hellebore wrote:
You should roll once and hit X many times, as opposed to the randomised machine guns they are currently.

Well, that would make your offense more "spiky." Which could be a flavorful thing, but that's about the only benefit I see to it. The nice thing about granting more shots based on the size of the unit you're shooting at is that it creates weapons that are better against hordes than they are against non-hordes. What you're proposing would basically average out the same as an X shot weapon (although single die rerolls would benefit it more).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I like the Relic Contemptor conversion beamer's approach, personally. One high-powered shot with a special rule saying "If this shot causes a model to be removed as a casualty the target unit takes (extra hits at a reduced profile)." Allow the weapon to keep a profile that'll do some damage to hard targets but not turn it into a high-rate-of-fire anti-tank gun.

I don't hate it, but I'm not sure I want to have to resolve two sets of attacks every time I shoot blast weapons. Plus, it feels a little strange that I'm only able to do extra damage if my normal damage kills something first. An X shots per Y models weapon might average 4 wounds. Your weapon might average 1 wound and then 3 more if the first wound kills something. Meaning that a lucky save on the first wound suddenly makes the extra damage not happen. Seems like explosions should be explodey regardless of whether or not the guy closest to the blast makes his first save.

Wyldhunt wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I like the Relic Contemptor conversion beamer's approach, personally. One high-powered shot with a special rule saying "If this shot causes a model to be removed as a casualty the target unit takes (extra hits at a reduced profile)." Allow the weapon to keep a profile that'll do some damage to hard targets but not turn it into a high-rate-of-fire anti-tank gun.

I don't hate it, but I'm not sure I want to have to resolve two sets of attacks every time I shoot blast weapons. Plus, it feels a little strange that I'm only able to do extra damage if my normal damage kills something first. An X shots per Y models weapon might average 4 wounds. Your weapon might average 1 wound and then 3 more if the first wound kills something. Meaning that a lucky save on the first wound suddenly makes the extra damage not happen. Seems like explosions should be explodey regardless of whether or not the guy closest to the blast makes his first save.

The point is to take some inspiration from Warmachine or WHFB's blasts that do an initial hit at one strength and blast damage at half strength. You can make the one initial hit really powerful (=massively more likely to kill something) because doing that doesn't translate into making a bunch of really powerful hits the way it would if you have uniform blast damage.

I'm 100% behind a single, powerful shot and then several, less powerful shots, representing the shell and the blast.

doing X hits per Y models is a way to do it, but still features a lot of counting. If you were a horde army faced with multiple, separate missile launchers, you would be forever counting models to work out how many hits you do.

I see the issue with X hits, up to the unit size, as you quite rightly say that exactly 5 models should be less likely to take 5 hits than 30 models. Perhaps 1 hit per 2 models, up to X, so for most things this would be 5, so you just have to count if there are 10 or more models to get the full 5 shots. a unit of 5 would take 3 shots. Combining the 2 would be a slightly more complex rule to learn, but give the right flexibility in the rules.

My final proposal, for the most accurate reflection of blast weapons in the game, would be:

"Blast X" weapons fire 1 shot for every 2 models in the target unit, rounding up, up to a maximum of X. For example, a "Blast 4" weapon will fire 1 shot for every 2 models in the target unit, up to a maximum of 4 shots.
Example:
Missile Launcher (Frag): S4 AP0 Heavy Blast 8

gets 3 shots on a 5 man squad, 8 shots on a 16+ man squad.

Ordnance weapons have 2 profiles, and must fire the "Shell" profile first. The Shell profile is a strong, single shot, which is typically good at killing tanks. The Blast profile which follows is weaker and lower damage, but with potentially more shots. The blast profile gains +1 to hit if the Shell profile successfully hits.
Battlecannon:
Shell: S8 AP-4 Dam 2D3 Heavy 1,
Blast: S5 AP-1 Dam 1 Heavy Blast 6

If it shoots a tank it gets 1 shell shot and 1 blast shot.
If it shoots a unit of 5 it gets 1 shell shot and 3 blast shots.
If it shoots a unit of 30 it gets 1 shell shot and 6 blast shots.


Maintaining their role as multipurpose but removing their ultimate-tank-killing profile.

Honestly, I liked the templates so I'd go with something like place the template somewhere in LOS of the firer, roll scatter and it hits that many models.

pm713 wrote:
Honestly, I liked the templates so I'd go with something like place the template somewhere in LOS of the firer, roll scatter and it hits that many models.

I'd much rather have you place template, then roll to-hit for each model under the template.

So if you cover 8 models with a Large Blast, you roll to-hit 8 times. Scatter dice are... Iffy at best.

Wyldhunt wrote:

 Togusa wrote:
A different thought:

Blasts are explosions, which are not only deadly, but disruptive.

How about Blast weapons get the "Blast" Rule, which states if you suffer any causalities, your movement is halved next turn and you only hit on 6+ for shooting or CC for that turn?

This way you're getting a benefit, but you're not adding more dice rolls to the game.

That would make blast weapons extremely powerful. You'd be able to pretty reliably make non-vehicle units hit on 6's and make it impossible for non-vehicles to cross the table on foot. There is a toned down version of this in the form of thunderfire cannons. You could probably give more weapons a similar rule via stratagem, but I don't think I want to see that sort of rule on the humble frag missile. That would be like giving your whole army 7th edition Invisibility against all your opponent's infantry.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Hellebore wrote:
You should roll once and hit X many times, as opposed to the randomised machine guns they are currently.

Well, that would make your offense more "spiky." Which could be a flavorful thing, but that's about the only benefit I see to it. The nice thing about granting more shots based on the size of the unit you're shooting at is that it creates weapons that are better against hordes than they are against non-hordes. What you're proposing would basically average out the same as an X shot weapon (although single die rerolls would benefit it more).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I like the Relic Contemptor conversion beamer's approach, personally. One high-powered shot with a special rule saying "If this shot causes a model to be removed as a casualty the target unit takes (extra hits at a reduced profile)." Allow the weapon to keep a profile that'll do some damage to hard targets but not turn it into a high-rate-of-fire anti-tank gun.

I don't hate it, but I'm not sure I want to have to resolve two sets of attacks every time I shoot blast weapons. Plus, it feels a little strange that I'm only able to do extra damage if my normal damage kills something first. An X shots per Y models weapon might average 4 wounds. Your weapon might average 1 wound and then 3 more if the first wound kills something. Meaning that a lucky save on the first wound suddenly makes the extra damage not happen. Seems like explosions should be explodey regardless of whether or not the guy closest to the blast makes his first save.

I should have said, but I'd only allow my blast weapon on tank based weapons systems (Cannons and the like.)

 JNAProductions wrote:

pm713 wrote:
Honestly, I liked the templates so I'd go with something like place the template somewhere in LOS of the firer, roll scatter and it hits that many models.

I'd much rather have you place template, then roll to-hit for each model under the template.

So if you cover 8 models with a Large Blast, you roll to-hit 8 times. Scatter dice are... Iffy at best.

I'd be happy with that. I added scatter because it was a penalty and it makes sense to me conceptually but representing it with keeping hit rolls is fine with me.

What if some of the games LARGEST weapons functioned like so....

Macro-Cannon (Quake Shell) | Range 180" | Heavy D6 | S 9 | AP -2 | Dmg D3 | (Blast)

Blast: Before resolving ranged attacks with this weapon, select a model with a wounds characteristic of 14 or less in the target unit that is within range and line of sight. This weapon fires an additional time at each unit within 3" of that model.


So the target unit takes the big hit (2d6 shots), while surrounding units take d6. It has to target a model within range AND line of sight, so you can still hide characters from it, but at the same times characters need to be careful else they get hit too. Really big stuff, like Daemon Primarchs and Knights and other Fortifications, are too large of a target, and so no "explosion" happens.

I really would just save this for the really massive explosive weapons in the game, since it'd eat up a lot of time to do this, but it would add a sense of "KABOOM!" to such an attack.

IDK, my idea is;

If it hits a unit with more than 1 model then it gets 1D3 hits, if it hits a unit with 10 or more models then its 2D3 hits instead.

This shows its a blast radius

 Amishprn86 wrote:
IDK, my idea is;

If it hits a unit with more than 1 model then it gets 1D3 hits, if it hits a unit with 10 or more models then its 2D3 hits instead.

This shows its a blast radius

This has the issue with low BS blasts being able to completely miss. You're buffing strong BS users for using indiscriminate weapons. A bomb should be the easiest thing to hit things with.

So I've been a long time lurker here but I've been tinkering with my own 40K ruleset inspired by a combination of 8th, Kill team and AoS with a few influences from past editions as well. I think I've found a pretty elegant solution for Blast type weapons.

Basically what I did was add two new sub types of weapons for Blast and Ordnance which weapons will have in addition to their other types. So in my rules a plasma cannon would become Heavy Blast 1, and an Earthshaker cannon would become Heavy Ordnance 1. Then the following applies to those weapons

Blast
Each successful hit roll with this weapon causes an additional D3 hits on the target. On a failed hit roll of any result other than a 1 when targeting a unit with five or more models, this weapon still causes a single hit. This weapon can never cause more hits against a target unit than there are models in that unit.

Ordnance
Each successful hit roll with this weapon causes an additional D6 hits on the target unit. On a failed hit roll of any result other than a 1 when targeting a unit with five or more models, this weapon still causes D3 hits. This weapon can never cause more hits against a target unit than there are models in that unit.

 Zeruel13 wrote:
So I've been a long time lurker here but I've been tinkering with my own 40K ruleset inspired by a combination of 8th, Kill team and AoS with a few influences from past editions as well. I think I've found a pretty elegant solution for Blast type weapons.

Greetings to a fellow "alternative 40K rules writer". I think the dumpster fire of 8th edition has spawned a lot of us.

 Zeruel13 wrote:

Blast
Each successful hit roll with this weapon causes an additional D3 hits on the target. On a failed hit roll of any result other than a 1 when targeting a unit with five or more models, this weapon still causes a single hit. This weapon can never cause more hits against a target unit than there are models in that unit.

Ordnance
Each successful hit roll with this weapon causes an additional D6 hits on the target unit. On a failed hit roll of any result other than a 1 when targeting a unit with five or more models, this weapon still causes D3 hits. This weapon can never cause more hits against a target unit than there are models in that unit.

Way too complicated and too much rolling. You could simplify all of this to just "This weapon's number of shots is limited to the number of models in the target unit," and then give each blast weapon a number of shots equal to how big the blast is. For Ordnance weapons, just give them more shots.

I think for simplicity it should look like:

Blast (X): when a hit is rolled, roll a number of wound rolls equal to the value listed.

This means that smaller units take more damage per model because they are at the centre of the explosion.

Alternatively:

Blast (X): when a hit is rolled, roll a number of wound rolls equal to the value listed, up to one roll per model in the unit.

Pointed Stick wrote:

 Zeruel13 wrote:
So I've been a long time lurker here but I've been tinkering with my own 40K ruleset inspired by a combination of 8th, Kill team and AoS with a few influences from past editions as well. I think I've found a pretty elegant solution for Blast type weapons.

Greetings to a fellow "alternative 40K rules writer". I think the dumpster fire of 8th edition has spawned a lot of us.

 Zeruel13 wrote:

Blast
Each successful hit roll with this weapon causes an additional D3 hits on the target. On a failed hit roll of any result other than a 1 when targeting a unit with five or more models, this weapon still causes a single hit. This weapon can never cause more hits against a target unit than there are models in that unit.

Ordnance
Each successful hit roll with this weapon causes an additional D6 hits on the target unit. On a failed hit roll of any result other than a 1 when targeting a unit with five or more models, this weapon still causes D3 hits. This weapon can never cause more hits against a target unit than there are models in that unit.

Way too complicated and too much rolling. You could simplify all of this to just "This weapon's number of shots is limited to the number of models in the target unit," and then give each blast weapon a number of shots equal to how big the blast is. For Ordnance weapons, just give them more shots.

It's not actually more complex or more rolls than we have normally. In fact, it would be less dice.

Currently:

Roll a D6 for the amount of shots, roll that many shots (say 4), roll to wound (say 2), roll saves.

Proposed:

Roll to hit (1 dice), if it hits roll a D6 for the number of hits, then roll these to wound (say 4) and then roll saves. if it misses, but isn't a 1, then roll 1 wound instead.

If anything, it would be quicker and less dice. It just means you change the number of dice mid-roll, like Tesla, and Dakkax3, and probably a multitude of other rules which already exist.

rolled a 1? Miss
rolled a 2+, 1 hit
rolled Bs+, 1 + D3/D6 hits

I would still like to have the blast be a different profile, so you either miss, get 1 blast hit, or 1 main hit and D3/D6 blast hits. Larger blasts would be miss, D3 blast, or 1 hit and D6 blast. However, I concede that my suggestion would definitely be more complex than it is now, and probably too much so.

Every edition up to now has pretty much always included scatter die rolls for blast... anything is simpler and easier than that at least. Still, I was wondering if anyone would find a way to streamline an idea I had. What if you picked a spot to shoot and then roll a d6 for range. Every unit within that many inches of takes d6 auto hits. Basically you get a scatter die and variable size template. Issues are: that’s a to hit roll, an “I can’t believe it’s not a scatter die” roll, and a number(s) of hits roll, then to wound rolls... potentially for multiple different units individually. You could also just scrap the to hit roll and make it automatic. Rather than make it amazing against a single horde unit, I figure that maybe templates should bring a bit of positioning back into a game, and punish the guard player with 60 guardsmen on the table with no room to spread them out or that parked multiple units of heavy weapons teams in a nest in the corner. I bet one of you could take the intention of my idea and make it work a lot smoother