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 admire GW's attempt to do away with templates, but I feel the variable number of shots doesn't quite cut it. Most blast weapons just feel like less reliable versions of regular guns.

So, I've come up with a possible way to tweak blast weapons so that they are more reliable, and more "blasty".

Instead of having a variable number of attacks, blast weapons will instead inflict a variable number "hits" after a single hit roll.
Examples ( I will be using Guard stuff since I'm most familiar with them):

Grenade Launcher (frag): Assault 1 / S3 / 24" / AP - / D1 / Notes: A successful hit roll applies 3+D3 hits to the targeted unit. A failed hit roll, other than a roll of 1, applies D3 hits. This weapon cannot apply more hits than there are models in the enemy unit.

To break it down for BS 4+:
- A roll of 1 completely misses and scores 0 hits.
- A roll of 2-3 scatters slightly offering an average of 2 hits
- A roll of 4+ hits the target perfectly, offering an average of 5 hits.

This also has the advantage of bringing up the grenade launchers average hits from 1.75 hits to 3.16 hits, thus making it more useful. On top of that, blast weapons become primarily useful against large squads, thus offering a decent anti-horde option that many people want.

We can apply the "notes" to any weapons that sport D6 shots currently.

Battle Cannon: Heavy 1 / S8 / 48" / AP -2 / Dd3 / Notes: A successful hit roll applies 3+D3 hits to the targeted unit. A failed hit roll, other than a roll of 1, applies D3 hits. This weapon cannot apply more hits than there are models in the enemy unit.

Now, there are weapons that have d3 attacks such as the plasma cannon:

Plasma Cannon: Heavy 1 / S7/ 36" / AP -3 / D1 / Notes: A successful hit roll applies d3 hits to the targeted unit. A failed hit roll, other than a roll of 1, applies 1 hit.

This particular weapon has more punch than other blast weapons and as such can hit a single model up to 3 times which means they can serve a generalist role at either hitting infantry or light vehicles with equal efficiency, unlike the battle cannon which cannot hit a single model more than once.
We can do this for other weapons such as the Demolisher (since these like to hit tanks and bunkers):

Demolisher Cannon: Heavy 1 / S10 / 24" / Ap -3 / Dd6/ Notes: A successful hit roll applies d3 hits to the targeted unit. A failed hit roll, other than a roll of 1, applies 1 hit.

Things like the basilisk can have the same notes as the battle cannon, but with a free reroll allowed. Manticores could offer the same amount of hits but can apply all those hits to a single model.

Earthshaker Cannon: Heavy 1 / S9 / 240" / AP -3 / Dd3 / Notes: A successful hit roll applies 3+d3 hits to the targeted unit. A failed hit roll, other than a roll of 1, applies d3 hits. This weapon cannot apply more hits than there are models in the enemy unit. You may reroll the number of hits. This weapon may target units not visible to the bearer.

Storm Eagle Rocket: Heavy 1 / S10 / 120" / AP -2 / Dd3/ Notes: A successful hit roll applies 3+d3 hits to the targeted unit. A failed hit roll, other than a roll of 1, applies d3 hits. This weapon may target units not visible to the bearer. Only one rocket may be fired per turn and each rocket may only be fired once per battle.

Now, obviously these values can be changed if you think some are too much or not enough, but i'm just trying to show the idea and how tweak-able it is. You could throw in some 6+d6 hits if you want or whatever.
The nice thing, though, is that battle cannons no longer eclipse vanquisher cannons at shooting tanks. So single shot cannons have more of a niche. (though vanquishers should still get buffed)

---Other minor changes:
-Flamers should get bonuses against units in cover (e.g. guaranteed 6 hits + ignore cover)
-Frag grenades should ignore cover.

I kind of like it. It feels like it reflects 'blast" weapons more accurately, and it offers more customization to differentiate such weapons. A few thoughts:

* Having all those "sliders" available to customize weapon performance will mean you have slightly more to remember about a weapon's statline than usual.

* I'm not sure how I feel about having most blast weapons hit at least once on a 2+, albeit at reduced damage than if they'd hit. Semi-authotting d-cannon artillery for eldar comes to mind as does an ork artillery gunline. On the other hand, hitting a couple of times with a bubble chucka doesn't seem game breaking.

* Not sure whether or not I like capping the number of hits that can be assigned to models. Obviously you'd need to redo a bunch of weapon profiles anyway, so this is probably very solveable, but I'd want to avoid unintentionally nerfing the damage output a weapon has against, for instance, a rhino because it's now stuck with a single hit against said rhino. But that's more a matter of specific execution and statlines.

Wyldhunt wrote:
I kind of like it. It feels like it reflects 'blast" weapons more accurately, and it offers more customization to differentiate such weapons. A few thoughts:

* Having all those "sliders" available to customize weapon performance will mean you have slightly more to remember about a weapon's statline than usual.

* I'm not sure how I feel about having most blast weapons hit at least once on a 2+, albeit at reduced damage than if they'd hit. Semi-authotting d-cannon artillery for eldar comes to mind as does an ork artillery gunline. On the other hand, hitting a couple of times with a bubble chucka doesn't seem game breaking.

* Not sure whether or not I like capping the number of hits that can be assigned to models. Obviously you'd need to redo a bunch of weapon profiles anyway, so this is probably very solveable, but I'd want to avoid unintentionally nerfing the damage output a weapon has against, for instance, a rhino because it's now stuck with a single hit against said rhino. But that's more a matter of specific execution and statlines.

- Remembering each effect is certainly an issue, but so long as they are kept similar to each other, it shouldn't be too bad (i hope). Grenade launchers and battle cannons have essentially the same rules. Plasma cannons and demolishers have the same rules etc... And, after playing it out, it's actually a bit faster than the current system once you get the hang of it. (no rolling multiple dice to hit)

- I'm actually quite fond of the 2+ to hit after giving it some thought. Not only does it represent large blasts scattering shrapnel and such but it also is minimal enough to not be over the top. It would also be countered by hits being capped, resulting in a decidedly different weapon system. Also, Ork artillery being consistently just a bit off is both amusing and actually useful for ork players since their shooting is lackluster anyway, though you still wouldn't want to forego boyz just because the artillery got better.
Another consideration is the -1 to hit. Such blast weapons would now only soft hit on a 3+, but that would take the sting out of going from a 4+ to a 5+. Or a 5+ to a 6+.

- The reason I threw that in there was to further differentiate between anti-tank and anti-infantry, as well as between anti-horde and anti-elite. Right now, multi-shot weapons are often better at killing single targets than single shot weapons. One example would be the Battle cannon and the Vanquisher cannon. If the Battle cannon could only hit a tank once, then you now have a reason to bring a vanquisher. (though the vanquisher is still worse than lascannon teams but that's a separate issue). Though, things like plasma cannons, and demolishers have smaller more concentrated blasts that can stack on a single target, which allows them to hit both infantry and tanks at equal efficiency.

Personally I think you could help blasts by allowing their wounds to spill over like mortal wounds.

One issue with the auto hits is the interaction with flyers. You probably need to add a rule that prevents blast type weapons from targeting flyers.

 evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
Personally I think you could help blasts by allowing their wounds to spill over like mortal wounds.

One issue with the auto hits is the interaction with flyers. You probably need to add a rule that prevents blast type weapons from targeting flyers.

I don't see any issue with blast weapons hurting flyers - what's the issue at hand is the template type weapons.

Furthermore, non-flyer battlefield role models with 'Hovering' special rule is stronger against templates than actual flyers. For example, if a raider was sitting on top of a hill 8" tall, the raider cannot be hit by 8" flamer because you have to measure to its hull (due to 'Hovering'), whereas a flyer (which typically does not have 'hovering' special rule therefore can be measured to the base) will be hit if it was situated on a same 8" tall hill.

Dandelion wrote:
This weapon cannot apply more hits than there are models in the enemy unit.

I'd change the above to this:

"This weapon cannot apply more hits than there are total wounds in the enemy unit."

Otherwise these weapons lose their effectiveness against high wound single models, such as vehicles.

 Kcalehc wrote:

Dandelion wrote:
This weapon cannot apply more hits than there are models in the enemy unit.

I'd change the above to this:

"This weapon cannot apply more hits than there are total wounds in the enemy unit."

Otherwise these weapons lose their effectiveness against high wound single models, such as vehicles.

Yeah, that was the intent, at least for some weapons:

The above rule is only intended for certain large blast weapons, such as grenade launchers and battle cannons to represent the blast only hitting each model once. I removed it for plasma cannons, and demolishers since they have smaller, more concentrated blasts. Certain specialized weapons like Storm-Eagle rockets could also apply all their hits to a single model despite having a larger blasts.

The goal is to have very clear anti-tank and anti-infantry cannons. So the battle cannons are anti-infantry while demolishers are anti-tank, with a few straddling the fence (hence why I made these a "notes" thing since you can add on any number of rules to better suit the weapon). Now, I have toyed with having a minimum number of hits (e.g. if a battle cannon hits, the minimum is 3 hits regardless of the number of models but I felt that was too clunky).

Since people have complained that hordes don't have an existing counter (i.e. everything that kills a guardsmen kills a marine but better) I wanted to create such a weapon. Since we have lascannons, melta, plasma, vanquishers, demolishers etc.. I don't believe throwing more anti-tank out there is all that necessary, especially given the relative fragility of tanks when everyone brings lascannons to a match.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
Personally I think you could help blasts by allowing their wounds to spill over like mortal wounds.

One issue with the auto hits is the interaction with flyers. You probably need to add a rule that prevents blast type weapons from targeting flyers.

It's not really an auto-hit, since it's basically a pseudo BS 2+. With flyers and -1 to hit, the 2+ to soft hit becomes a 3+ to soft hit. (since a roll of 2 becomes a roll of 1, much like the plasma rule). So flyers do still benefit from being flyers. And it's not all that bad since that's essentially what flak cannons do, they blow up near the plane but not on it. Given how often small arms and flamers can hit planes, I think it's one of the more reasonable abstractions.

Now, for the spilling over, I could see that for very specific weapons (like baneblade cannons). But the nice thing about this system is that any rule you want to add, you can just add. There's no "standard" USR for how every blast weapon works. Each can offer a different number of hits with any number of special quirks (ignore cover or hits spilling over for example)

Personally I prefer the model count system dandelion suggests. Being tougher shouldn't mean a model gets hit more.
Multi wound models are already seeing points drop after points drop as GW has handed out so many D dx weapons that multiple wounds are pointless for the most part now.
Punishing them by giving a battlecannon multiple attempts to one shot a model is punishing units that arn't exactlly shining even harder

I like it. I like how it interacts with flyers, I like how it differentiates between tough models and horde units, whole thing is a good concept imo.

A little part of me dies inside every time I see a flamer type weapon used as an AA weapon. I think that needs to be redone as well but that is for another thread. While it is true that air defense artillery uses blasts, those shells are not the same as the shells used in normal artillery. I think we both agree that demolisher cannons and quad mortars should not be good ADA. Why shell out for a hydra if a battlecannon does the job better?

This design is a bit heavy and complicated to resolve. In combination with Heavy rules and To Hit modifiers, it becomes a nightmare. Does a 2 cause 1 hit even if I have a -1 to hit from moving? Nat 1s to miss just becomes OP. Cadian forces would now have extreme advantages over other armies.

I do genuinely wish they would bring back a distinction for Blast weapons as it is very lacking in the current state of the game.

 evil_kiwi_60 wrote:
A little part of me dies inside every time I see a flamer type weapon used as an AA weapon. I think that needs to be redone as well but that is for another thread. While it is true that air defense artillery uses blasts, those shells are not the same as the shells used in normal artillery. I think we both agree that demolisher cannons and quad mortars should not be good ADA. Why shell out for a hydra if a battlecannon does the job better?

Don't worry, that won't be an issue. A battlecannon can only hit the "single model" flyer once (keep in mind that rule) on a 3+ at S8 AP-2 Dd3. Possibly useful in a pinch but not efficient use of the cannon. Quad mortars could hit up to 4 times on a 3+ as well, but thats 4 S4 hits at best. Again not efficient. So far, hydras win out by a lot, being able to hit up to 8 times on a 4+ at S7 AP-1 D2.

Now comes the demolisher (fewer hits, but they do stack). It can hit the aircraft once on a 3+, or up to 3 times on a 5+. The average being only 1 S10 AP-3 Dd6 hit per turn.
Now some math against a T7 3+Sv flyer:
Hydra:
8*1/2*1/2*1/2= 1 W (or 2 damage)
Demolisher:
1*2/3*5/6= 5/9 W (or 1.94 damage)
(just to be clear, I am not including Grinding Advance because I believe these changes will make it unnecessary, and we're changing all the guns anyway so we can remove it )

Considering that the Hydra is cheaper, overall it seems fine.

Also, there are a lot of abstractions in this game. If small arms (*cough* melta *cough*) can consistently hurt supersonic flyers then I don't see a problem with certain cannons being effective against them. And when I say certain cannons, I mean tank killer cannons like the demolisher not battle cannons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

etb342 wrote:
This design is a bit heavy and complicated to resolve. In combination with Heavy rules and To Hit modifiers, it becomes a nightmare. Does a 2 cause 1 hit even if I have a -1 to hit from moving? Nat 1s to miss just becomes OP. Cadian forces would now have extreme advantages over other armies.

I do genuinely wish they would bring back a distinction for Blast weapons as it is very lacking in the current state of the game.

Ah, but the rules are actually very simple:
- A roll of 1 is exempt from conferring any hits AFTER any modifiers

With a -1, a roll of 2 becomes a 1 and confers 0 hits. With -2 to hit, a roll of 3 becomes a 1 and confers 0 hits. So a Russ shooting a flyer can only get minimal hits on a 3+, while max hits are on a 5+. It's no different than the Plasma overheat rule.

However, with a +1, a roll of 1 still fails thanks to the core rules.

I've found it to play out pretty fast as well since you only roll 1 die to hit:
- Roll to hit
- Determine number of hits (1s give 0 hits, fails give min hits, pass gives max hits)
- Roll to wound


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Shas'O'Ceris wrote:
I like it. I like how it interacts with flyers, I like how it differentiates between tough models and horde units, whole thing is a good concept imo.

Thanks! I'm still looking to tweak it based on feedback before I start hammering GW with it

In real life you have an option on munitions so you should be able to fire AP rounds or high explosive fragmentation for infantry. So any heavy weapon should have two firing modes. A damn shame they don’t. It’s a lot more fun to be able to adapt to the situation.

“Load canister shot”

20 dice to wound. S4.

Or.

“Load Sabot round”

1 hit. Strength 12. -5. 2d6 damage.

warpedpig wrote:
In real life you have an option on munitions so you should be able to fire AP rounds or high explosive fragmentation for infantry. So any heavy weapon should have two firing modes. A damn shame they don’t. It’s a lot more fun to be able to adapt to the situation.

“Load canister shot”

20 dice to wound. S4.

Or.

“Load Sabot round”

1 hit. Strength 12. -5. 2d6 damage.

There are weapons that have options like that. A tau railgun can fire a solid shot or a submunition round for example. I'd be for it on more stuff, but maybe not "any" heavy weapon since I don't see lascannons changing fire modes.

Las cannons should have a couple firing modes like a fire prism. Just no linked fire. No reason a lascannon shouldn’t be able to fire low power rapid fire shots.

warpedpig wrote:
Las cannons should have a couple firing modes like a fire prism. Just no linked fire. No reason a lascannon shouldn’t be able to fire low power rapid fire shots.

They're called Multi-Lasers.

warpedpig wrote:
Las cannons should have a couple firing modes like a fire prism. Just no linked fire. No reason a lascannon shouldn’t be able to fire low power rapid fire shots.

That is like saying a Howitzer should be able to fire 9mm ammunition.

A lascannon is not a howitzer. It’s a much more precise energy weapon that conceivably has a recharge time depending on the power of its discharge. So low discharge shots should have rapid recharge periods

I feel like I say this on every blast-related thread, but the easiest fix is just a fixed number of shots, as the rolls to hit perfectly reflect how much of the blast hits the target.

Heavy D3 becomes Heavy 2, Heavy D6 becomes Heavy 4 (because rounding), Heavy 2D6 becomes Heavy 7 etc. It eliminates a totally unnecessary extra roll without changing the power of the weapon, and the more hits you roll, the more of the blast landed on the target, simple.

Otherwise moving forward more of them should be given "If unit contains X models or more" type abilities, to reflect the fact that more models means easier to hit. I get the rationale behind blasts not hitting more times than there are models in a unit, but I think it's better for the basic profile to just represent the damage vs. low volume targets, and the ability to expand for more.

 Haravikk wrote:
I feel like I say this on every blast-related thread, but the easiest fix is just a fixed number of shots, as the rolls to hit perfectly reflect how much of the blast hits the target.

Heavy D3 becomes Heavy 2, Heavy D6 becomes Heavy 4 (because rounding), Heavy 2D6 becomes Heavy 7 etc. It eliminates a totally unnecessary extra roll without changing the power of the weapon, and the more hits you roll, the more of the blast landed on the target, simple.

Otherwise moving forward more of them should be given "If unit contains X models or more" type abilities, to reflect the fact that more models means easier to hit. I get the rationale behind blasts not hitting more times than there are models in a unit, but I think it's better for the basic profile to just represent the damage vs. low volume targets, and the ability to expand for more.

The trouble with that is the fact that "blasts" are just like multi shot weapons and are no longer unique. Of course this depends on your preference, maybe you like that, maybe you don't. I was just trying to keep the blast "feel" since I think it's more interesting, but again that's just me.

The way blasts are handled seems a bit odd, in that you can have units that seem like they should be hit, not being hit simply due to how the mechanic works. Like a AM Commander in the middle of a command squad, is unhurt by a battle cannon blast that kills all 4 of the guys completely surrounding him. Or an enemy character is carelessly left in front of a unit so you shoot a Demolisher at him, hit him 10 times and not hit the unit 1" behind him at all.

With templates the 'model density' of a unit decided how many you could hit (with the resulting arguments over who was in or out, or half in or not), now no matter how close packed my guys are, you can still only hit the same maximum. I agree with the no more than one hit per model thing though, that makes most sense.

Instead: Blast Weapons - Nominate a target model within the unit, and roll to hit (rules for targeting characters still apply) for every model within X" (where X is listed on the weapons profile, i.e. Blast 2, Blast 3).
Extra rule to reduce character targeting shenanigans - Look out Sir: A CHARACTER hit by a BLAST weapon may allocate the hit to a friendly INFANTRY model within 3" instead, on a roll of 3+. (Even if that model has already been hit - poor sod gets hit twice for his bravery!)

Though I feel this may slow things down a bit, and still result in some in/out arguments. It seems to be quite difficult to find a way to make them work like it feels a blast weapon should work, and not be overly complex, argument prone or time consuming.

But then it's easy to snipe that heavy or special weapon out of a squad. I think they wanted to reduce that.

Dandelion wrote:

 Haravikk wrote:
I feel like I say this on every blast-related thread, but the easiest fix is just a fixed number of shots, as the rolls to hit perfectly reflect how much of the blast hits the target.

Heavy D3 becomes Heavy 2, Heavy D6 becomes Heavy 4 (because rounding), Heavy 2D6 becomes Heavy 7 etc. It eliminates a totally unnecessary extra roll without changing the power of the weapon, and the more hits you roll, the more of the blast landed on the target, simple.

Otherwise moving forward more of them should be given "If unit contains X models or more" type abilities, to reflect the fact that more models means easier to hit. I get the rationale behind blasts not hitting more times than there are models in a unit, but I think it's better for the basic profile to just represent the damage vs. low volume targets, and the ability to expand for more.

The trouble with that is the fact that "blasts" are just like multi shot weapons and are no longer unique. Of course this depends on your preference, maybe you like that, maybe you don't. I was just trying to keep the blast "feel" since I think it's more interesting, but again that's just me.

I don't see the problem; blast weapons and weapons with high rate of fire can both hit multiple targets, and both depend on ballistic skill to see how many you hit, so I don't think that mechanically they need to be all that different.

The main difference like I say would be more use of the "If the target unit contains N or more models" type abilities, so most or even all blast type weapons would have a basic number of "shots" against all targets, and an increased number against larger units, in the same way that the Demolisher Cannon already works.

This way there's no random rolls to hit (which is just extra dice-rolling) and a simple binary rule based on unit size. If the convention is set to five models, and double the number of shots, then this will be very easy to remember.