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.

What if the number of hit rolls made by blast weapons was equal to half the model count of the squad they're targeting (rounding up), and capped out at the weapon's maximum attacks value?

E.g. a grenade launcher is Assault 6, Blast.
- If it targets an 8-model squad, it makes 4 to-hit rolls.
- If it targets a 15-model squad, it makes 6 to-hit rolls (capped at 6).
- If it targets a 3-model squad, it makes 2 to-hit rolls (rounding up from 1.5).

This would:
1. Make the Blast rule simpler to remember, and less arbitrary to calculate ("what's half your unit size, rounding up?").
2. Make Blast weapons more reliable/predictable, without totally removing their randomness (players would still need to roll hits).
3. Make the maximum number of attacks per Blast weapon more customisable (i.e. not being limited by dice to 3, 6, 12, etc).
4. Reduce the overall number of dice being rolled per turn (almost always a good thing).

Maybe this rule could be further split into 'Small Blast' (no. of attacks equaling a quarter of the target unit's model count) and 'Large Blast' (no. of attacks equaling the target unit's full model count). E.g. a plasma cannon (Small Blast) and a Baneblade cannon (Large Blast) fire at the same 6-model unit.
- The former makes 2 to-hit rolls (6÷4, rounding up).
- The latter makes 6 to-hit rolls.

You could even remove caps altogether, in which case a Blast weapon's attacks would be limited only by the number of models in the target unit.

So you want to make horde armies even worse?
Maybe if this comes with massive point drops and going back to hordes ignoring morale in most cases.

 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
So you want to make horde armies even worse?
Maybe if this comes with massive point drops and going back to hordes ignoring morale in most cases.

Assuming you mean the version without caps? Otherwise I'm not sure how it makes horde armies dramatically worse relative to non-horde ones; most factions field fairly large (e.g. 10-man) squads that would give you close (5 hit rolls) to the previous max and well above the average roll for current D6-hit weapons.

Right direction, but needs a little more nuance. Just give blast weapons more shots based on unit size. So a frag missile might make...
* 3 to-hit rolls base.
* 6 to-hit rolls against targets with 6+ models.
* 9 to-hit rolls against targets with 11+ models.

Exact numbers could vary from weapon to weapon and could be written as "Blast(x/y/z)" with x/y/z referring to <6, 6+, and 11+ respectively.

This gives designers more control over exactly how many shots the blast weapon has while still raising the average and maximum damage against larger squads (up to a point). So the example frag missile is getting a pretty great 9 shots against an 11 man squad of termagaunts but does NOT get 15 attacks agaisnt a 30 man termagaunt squad.

Morale should be changed for hordes because if you’re part of a huge unit you get the sense that “the enemy isn’t gonna target me out of this huge crowd” and it gives you a false sense of safety to be one of many.

The opposite is having to run forward with a tiny group of guys. You know the enemy is gonna be aiming their sights at you specifically. You’re not hidden among a huge group of guys.

 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
So you want to make horde armies even worse?
Maybe if this comes with massive point drops and going back to hordes ignoring morale in most cases.

To be fair, any change to blast rules should come with a heavy redesign to horde units.

Wyldhunt wrote:Right direction, but needs a little more nuance. Just give blast weapons more shots based on unit size. So a frag missile might make...
* 3 to-hit rolls base.
* 6 to-hit rolls against targets with 6+ models.
* 9 to-hit rolls against targets with 11+ models.

Exact numbers could vary from weapon to weapon and could be written as "Blast(x/y/z)" with x/y/z referring to <6, 6+, and 11+ respectively.

This gives designers more control over exactly how many shots the blast weapon has while still raising the average and maximum damage against larger squads (up to a point). So the example frag missile is getting a pretty great 9 shots against an 11 man squad of termagaunts but does NOT get 15 attacks agaisnt a 30 man termagaunt squad.

I personally think the proportion rule (number of hits equal to/half the number of models in the target squad) is way more elegant, and scales better as units take casualties, but admittedly your version would give a little more control (even if going up by increments of 5 feels more clunky and arbitrary).

PS: With caps, the weapons in the OP wouldn't get 15 attacks against a 30-model termagaunt squad either. E.g. an Assault 6 grenade launcher would get a maximum of 6 attacks, even against huge units with several dozen models.

My bad. I even read the hit cap part and forgot about it before I sat down to write my post. But to each their own. I prefer giving the designers control over how many hits a weapon can expect to land, but making it half the enemy model count would probably work.

 Some_Call_Me_Tim wrote:
So you want to make horde armies even worse?
Maybe if this comes with massive point drops and going back to hordes ignoring morale in most cases.

Using their example it would actually be the same for horde armies. 11+ models would still be max blast 6.

The only difference is that 3-4 models would give 2 shots, 5 would be 3 shots, 7-8 would be 4 shots, and 9-10 would be 5 shots.

If anything it’s a massive buff for D3 weapons into units with 3-5 models, a small buff to D6 weapons against units with 3-5 models, and a massive buff to D6 weapons against units with 7-10 models.

Well here's some simple maths regarding the average number of attacks:

Current D6 Blast weapon:
3.5 attacks vs units of 1-5 models.
4 attacks vs units of 6-10 models.
6 attacks vs units of 11+ models.

Proposed D6 Blast weapon:
2 attacks vs units of 1-5 models (assuming 3 models).
4 attacks vs units of 6-10 models (assuming 8 models).
6 attacks vs units of 11+ models (assuming 13 models).

Against common unit sizes, a weapon using the new rule would make:
1 attack vs a 1-model unit (-71% from current).
3 attacks vs a 5-model unit (-14% from current).
5 attacks vs a 10-model unit (+25% from current).
Against anything over this, they would both make their maximum number of attacks (6).

It's worth noting though that the main reasons for this rule change don't actually involve adjusting damage, but in my mind are:
1. Making the rule simpler to remember, and less arbitrary to calculate ("what's half your unit size, rounding up?").
2. Making blast weapons more reliable.
3. Reducing dice rolls (without totally removing randomness, as players would still need to roll hits).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Jarms48 wrote:
If anything it’s a massive buff for D3 weapons into units with 3-5 models, a small buff to D6 weapons against units with 3-5 models, and a massive buff to D6 weapons against units with 7-10 models.

As suggested in the OP, there could also be a 'Small Blast' version of the rule where you calculate a quarter of the unit's model count (to a minimum of 1 since we always round up). Although a quarter might be harder for some people to calculate on the fly than half (even if all it involves in practice is halving twice).

I feel like small blasts would just have lower caps rather than slower scaling.

I like the system, it's simple yet effective.

I do agree that smaller blasts should have lower caps rather than scaling tbh.
That seems more logical and representative.

Idk, to me the scaling helps represent the size of the blast... a small explosion will hit fewer members of any given unit than a large explosion will. Having all blast weapons scale the same way would make all blast weapons equally effective vs small units.

Larger units tend to cover more area, but at roughly the same density.
Which suggests a larger explosion will be able to catch more people, but still needs more people there to catch.

Note also that making larger blasts just a higher cap is much more scalable - you can have blasts of effectively any size.
If you just have small (1/2 models) and large (1/1 models) then you've only got two sizes.

As someone who uses a lot of blast weapons (imperial guard heh) and still can't always remember the break points, I like this idea. It might get a bit squiffy with small units of two or three models where an old large blast template would easily cover all models even with some scatter. Perhaps instead of a different cap for small, set a minimum number of attacks for large to a given number (3 maybe?) With the caveat that the number of attacks can never exceed the number of models... although that eats into the elegance to the point that it's probably best to just keep it to half or cap, whichever is lower. Units such as manticore where you roll multiple D6 could be handled with special rules or adding a number after blast (e.g., Blast 2) to indicate the number of attacks per model (but stated more elegantly haha)

I'd also consider going one step farther and applying it to all weapons that want to use a template (blast, flamer, certain psyker shinanigans).

The question is, how to we infiltrate GW HQ and slip this into the dev notes lol

DeadliestIdiot wrote:
As someone who uses a lot of blast weapons (imperial guard heh) and still can't always remember the break points...

Sincere question and not an attack: do some people genuinely struggle to remember the break points? They're basically...
* Count enemy models on one hand.
* Count enemy models on two hands.
* Can't count them all on your fingers.

Curious because if that's a thing people have trouble with, it's good to know/remember when making rule proposals in the future.

Wyldhunt wrote:

DeadliestIdiot wrote:
As someone who uses a lot of blast weapons (imperial guard heh) and still can't always remember the break points...

Sincere question and not an attack: do some people genuinely struggle to remember the break points? They're basically...
* Count enemy models on one hand.
* Count enemy models on two hands.
* Can't count them all on your fingers.

Curious because if that's a thing people have trouble with, it's good to know/remember when making rule proposals in the future.

I can never remember if it's 10+ or 11+ and 5+/6+...the confusion lies in is it greater than or greater than and equal to...

Also remembering what actually happens at each break point. "That enemy squad has more than 5 models... now what?"

And there are always new players who are still learning the rules.