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.

My few attempts to get my usual opponents to play an Apoc battle have always devolved into a round of complaints about how long it would take, especially with that wound allocation mess in 5th ed. I've therefore come up with a tentative set of alternative rules for collective unit attacks. This is much quicker, if somewhat abstracted. It works best if both sides use lots of big units with few special/different weapons, which seems to be the way that the codex lists seem to be going. I would appreciate any feedback, catcalls and downright insults, for I am ready to learn from whatever you've got to say.

Tad bit confusing. Armor Values? Do you mean Armor Saves and if so how does that translate to what you've written as I don't recall seeing such in your file.

Each armor save has a crresponding armor value.
Armor save Armor value
6+ 2
5+ 4
4+ 6
3+ 8
2+ 10

I realize that it would require thinking a different way about the way that units attack, but my intention is to make the way attacks are done much quicker. If you have any suggestions, I'd love to hear them.

warpcrafter wrote:Each armor save has a crresponding armor value.
Armor save Armor value
6+ 2
5+ 4
4+ 6
3+ 8
2+ 10

I realize that it would require thinking a different way about the way that units attack, but my intention is to make the way attacks are done much quicker. If you have any suggestions, I'd love to hear them.

I think the rules you've posted just need to be explained a bit better than they are. This also brings into question squads that have a model (or multiple models) with different armor saves than the rest of the squad (Black Templars Initiates/Neophytes, for example). Another problem that comes about is Invulnerable Saves.

I think its going to be very difficult to create sped-up rules for Apocalypse, as there's just too many factors that come into play (Toughness, Armor Saves, Cover Saves, Invulnerable Saves, Weapon Special Effects, etc). I'll try to think up some suggestions, but I don't know if I'll be able to.

You're right, it was a sudden inspiration in the middle of the night and I was so impressed by my own alleged smarts that I didn't playtest it before posting it. However, I've come up with a slight tweak that I believe would make 40K quicker to play, instead of that horribly flawed wound allocation system, which is one big mess as far as I am concerned.
The attacking player rolls to hit and to wound for the entire unit, then he rolls 1D6. If the roll is equal to or less than the attackers' WS or BS, depending on the type of attack, he may specifically allocate that many hits that the nominated models must save against. The rest of the saves and unsavable hits are resolved against the unit as a whole and the owning player chooses which models to remove as casualties. I don't have any ideas about units with different armor saves. The only ones that I can think of where it would be a problem are Black Templars and possibly Ork Nobs. At least this method is not such a radical change. Using the current system of wound allocation, in my opinion makes 40K nearly unplayable, especially combined with the frankly insane cover rules.