Switch Theme:

The order "Bring It Down" (Imperial Guard) needs to be changed.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in ca
Twisted Trueborn with Blaster



Ottawa

The current Bring It Down allows a squad of Imperial Guard to re-roll 1's to wound. Unfortunately, mathhammer-wise, this is identical to an existing order (Take Aim, re-roll 1's to hit). I think we need to buff Bring It Down, but at the same time, take it back to its monster- and tank-killing roots by making it effective only against certain targets.

The Militarum Tempestus already have the subfaction-specific order Elimination Protocols Sanctioned (re-roll all failed wounds against monsters and vehicles). We could make this effect the new Bring It Down, available to all Imperial Guard, and change Elimination Protocols Sanctioned to something else that reflects the Tempestus' "special ops" status (e.g. +1 damage against characters; or perhaps an effect allowing them to ignore Look Out, Sir!, but then it's the Mordians who'll need a new subfaction-specific order since they already have that).

Any other suggestions?

.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/27 20:14:53


Cadians, Sisters of Battle (Argent Shroud), Drukhari (Obsidian Rose)

Read my Drukhari short stories: Chronicles of Commorragh 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




Re-rolling hits or wounds of 1 is, as you've noted, mathematically identical – except in cases where an unmodified hit or wound roll is important, or where one roll just doesn't happen.

10 lasguns against an Intercessor Squad will inflict an average of 1.11 damage. With re-roll 1s to hit, they'll land +16% more hits, for an average of 1.30 damage. With re-roll 1s to wound, they'll land +16% more wounds, for an average of 1.30 damage. However, if that squad includes a plasma gun, re-rolling 1s means its chances of blowing up decrease from 16-33% to 3-6%. Re-rolling wounds of 1 doesn't make sniper rifles any more likely to land a mortal wound on an unmodified 6 to wound, however; the extra hits from re-rolling 1s to wound makes up the difference.

The only time that Bring It Down! is desirable is if you're using a flamer (as it doesn't have hit rolls), which doesn't fit the lore of the Order – or if you're playing my homebrew Indigan Praefects, which is unlikely, to say the least. So the faction loses nothing by removing it. Replacing it with the Stormtrooper Doctrine is probably the right way to go – it's powerful (+100% wounds, rather than +16%), but fits the fluff, and doesn't help out plasma very much, which is a plus.
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







It's also only mathematically identical if your to-wound roll is the same as your to-hit roll; it's better if your to-wound roll is better, and worse if it's worse. The increase in the amount of actual damage done is greater from adding rerolls of 1 to a 3+ than to a 4+.

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in us
Humming Great Unclean One of Nurgle





In My Lab

 AnomanderRake wrote:
It's also only mathematically identical if your to-wound roll is the same as your to-hit roll; it's better if your to-wound roll is better, and worse if it's worse. The increase in the amount of actual damage done is greater from adding rerolls of 1 to a 3+ than to a 4+.
That's not accurate.

Rerolling 1s on a d6 is always a 16.67% improvement, or 7/6.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




 AnomanderRake wrote:
It's also only mathematically identical if your to-wound roll is the same as your to-hit roll; it's better if your to-wound roll is better, and worse if it's worse. The increase in the amount of actual damage done is greater from adding rerolls of 1 to a 3+ than to a 4+.
Incorrect.

The amount of extra damage/success provided by a re-roll effect is equal to the number of re-rolls it allows you to perform, on average. The average number of re-rolls provided by a "re-roll 1" effect is always 1-in-6, or 16%. This is true regardless of whether you are re-rolling hit rolls on a 2+ or a 6+, or re-rolling wound rolls on a 3+ or a 5+. It doesn't matter. It's +16%.

The extra damage/success provided by a re-roll only becomes variable if you are re-rolling more than just 1s (which are automatic failures). If you're re-rolling all failures, then a 2+ roll (which only fails on 1) will still give you 1-in-6 re-rolls, but a 3+ roll will give you 1-in-3, and a 4+ roll will give you 1-in-2. If you're re-rolling 1s and 2s, then you're getting +33% on everything except 2+ rolls, where you get 16%. And so on.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




I was under the impression that if you had the choice of rerolling 1s you should choose the one that makes the rerolls easier. As in, making a 2+ roll is easier than making a 4+ roll, and so rerolling 1s on a 2+ is more valuable than rerolling 1s on a 4+. A reroll 1 is not really different than just having an extra attack, and an extra attack on 2+ is better than on 4+.
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran




Dandelion wrote:
I was under the impression that if you had the choice of rerolling 1s you should choose the one that makes the rerolls easier. As in, making a 2+ roll is easier than making a 4+ roll, and so rerolling 1s on a 2+ is more valuable than rerolling 1s on a 4+. A reroll 1 is not really different than just having an extra attack, and an extra attack on 2+ is better than on 4+.
Mathematically, there's no difference. You're going from [Number of Attacks] x [Hit Chance] x [Wound Chance] to [Number of Attacks] x [Hit Chance] x [Wound Chance] x 1.16. Where specifically you're inserting that modifier into the equation doesn't matter.

  • 100 attacks, hitting on 6+, wounding on 2+, gives you 16.66 hits and 13.88 wounds.
  • 100 attacks, hitting on 2+, wounding on 6+, gives you 83.33 hits and 13.88 wounds.

  • 100 attacks, hitting on 6+ (re-roll 1s), wounding on 2+, gives you 19.44 hits and 16.20 wounds.
  • 100 attacks, hitting on 6+, wounding on 2+ (re-roll 1s), gives you 16.66 hits and 16.20 wounds.
  • 100 attacks, hitting on 2+ (re-roll 1s), wounding on 6+, gives you 97.22 hits and 16.20 wounds.
  • 100 attacks, hitting on 2+, wounding on 6+ (re-roll 1s), gives you 83.33 hits and 16.20 wounds.
  •    
    Made in au
    Longtime Dakkanaut




    I've suggested to make it +1 to wound against vehicles/monsters.

    Whilst Bring It Down does work on flamers, no-one takes them, and if you actually want to take them you're better off using the Catachan order.

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/28 03:25:22


     
       
    Made in us
    Fixture of Dakka





    Jarms48 wrote:
    I've suggested to make it +1 to wound against vehicles/monsters.

    I tend to shy away from flat to-wound bonuses because of the way they impact different weapons differently. Lasguns would get a 100% increase in their chances of making a to-wound roll against a rhino while a heavy stubber or heavy bolter would only get a 50% increase, and a lascannon would only get a 25% increase. You could probably add a restriction saying that only weapons of strength X or higher receive the buff if you wanted to make it a more heavy weapon centric buff, but at the end of the day you'd still have two orders that were fundamentally doing the same thing (making you kill things better.)

    Rather than putting Bring it Down in direct competition with Take Aim, what if we made it do something other than directly boost offense? Maybe a target that suffers one or more unsaved wounds from a Bring it Down unit treats its wounds bracket as one lower in the following turn? "Bring it Down" might be a bit of a misnomer at that point, but it would turn the order into a way to get a lot of (short-term) impact out of a single unit's shots. Or maybe it lets you add +X to any explode tests made by units destroyed by BiDown units. Or maybe the affected unit gets to make an additional shooting attack at the end of enemy's Movement phase (meaning they have a chance to get out of sight to deny it).

    Any time a mechanics problem boils down to, "both of these buffs do basically the same thing," I'm inclined to think that one of those buffs is redundant. (And thus maybe doesn't need to exist.)


    ATTENTION
    . Psychic tests are unfluffy. Your longing for AV is understandable but misguided. Your chapter doesn't need a separate codex. Doctrines should go away. Being a "troop" means nothing. This has been a cranky service announcement. You may now resume your regularly scheduled arguing.
     
       
    Made in gb
    Regular Dakkanaut




    Wyldhunt wrote:
    Any time a mechanics problem boils down to, "both of these buffs do basically the same thing," I'm inclined to think that one of those buffs is redundant. (And thus maybe doesn't need to exist.)


    I disagree. Unless the two abilities/buffs/roles are exactly identical in effect, what you're describing are differing roles having their respective niches - some niches may be more situational than others, and some could even be so situational as to be rendered pointless, but that's an issue separate from the general principle. Whether having multiple abilities/buffs/etc with similar but slightly differing effects is good or bad design-wise depends heavily on the context. For instance, I would agree when it is for something like support character auras or regimental doctrines; since they are single decisions that last for the entire game, and often limits the player's ability to make a different choice at a different time (sometimes for more than one game, in instances of say tournaments or simply by not buying the associated model).

    In contrast, it would be good in something like an order; since the effect is temporary, does not prevent the player from using a different order at a later point, and so causes the player to try to figure out which effect is most beneficial to them in that particular situation. Moreover, having separate abilities allows designers to buff an effect for one specific situation (e.g. when shooting at MONSTER and VEHICLE units) without leading to the effect being overpowered in other situations.

    This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/28 06:48:21


     
       
    Made in gb
    Longtime Dakkanaut



    London

    They have a use in the limited situation when you can use the relic to issue multiple orders to the same unit.

       
    Made in gb
    Lord of the Fleet






    London

    The_Real_Chris wrote:
    They have a use in the limited situation when you can use the relic to issue multiple orders to the same unit.



    Or with Cadians, where you're rerolling 1's to hit anyway if you didn't move. I'm unsure if it needs to be buffed, as does this run the risk of your humble Lasgun suddenly becoming more powerful than intended?
       
    Made in ro
    Dakka Veteran




     Valkyrie wrote:
    Or with Cadians, where you're rerolling 1's to hit anyway if you didn't move. I'm unsure if it needs to be buffed, as does this run the risk of your humble Lasgun suddenly becoming more powerful than intended?
    That's why Cadia's Doctrine comes with a clause that upgrades Take Aim! to full hit re-rolls if you didn't move. Which is still better than re-rolling 1s to wound and hit, because you get to re-roll 3 results (1 to hit, 2 to hit, 3 to hit) instead of 2 results (1 to hit, 1 to wound).

    Wyldhunt wrote:
    Jarms48 wrote:
    I've suggested to make it +1 to wound against vehicles/monsters.

    I tend to shy away from flat to-wound bonuses because of the way they impact different weapons differently. Lasguns would get a 100% increase in their chances of making a to-wound roll against a rhino while a heavy stubber or heavy bolter would only get a 50% increase, and a lascannon would only get a 25% increase. You could probably add a restriction saying that only weapons of strength X or higher receive the buff if you wanted to make it a more heavy weapon centric buff, but at the end of the day you'd still have two orders that were fundamentally doing the same thing (making you kill things better.)
    Mechanically, there's very little difference between re-rolling all wound rolls and having +1 to wound, for a lasgun against a MONSTER/VEHICLE. Over the course of 100 hits, it's 33.33 wounds (with +1 to wound) vs 30.55 wounds (with re-roll wounds). In the case of small VEHICLE/MONSTER units with T5, where the lasgun is wounding on 5s instead of 6s, it's 50 wounds (with +1 to wound) vs 55 wounds (with re-roll wounds).

    So the main difference would be apparent on the unit's special weapons (especially plasma and melta) which would benefit more from re-rolls than +1 to wound.

    Other than that, the main distinction is that re-rolls make "unmodified 6 to wound" effects easier to trigger, but Militarum don't have any of those. Also, neither of them stack, so you'd want to ensure that it wasn't redundant; the only +1 to wound effects are a Tempestus strat and a Heavy Weapons Squad strat, and the only re-roll wound effect I can think of is Vengeance for Cadia.

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/28 14:17:10


     
       
    Made in ca
    Twisted Trueborn with Blaster



    Ottawa

    Wyldhunt wrote:
    Rather than putting Bring it Down in direct competition with Take Aim, what if we made it do something other than directly boost offense? Maybe a target that suffers one or more unsaved wounds from a Bring it Down unit treats its wounds bracket as one lower in the following turn? [...] Or maybe the affected unit gets to make an additional shooting attack at the end of enemy's Movement phase (meaning they have a chance to get out of sight to deny it).

    All current orders are "trigger it, resolve it and then move on", and I'm inclined to keep it this way. For example, the order Fix Bayonets has the targeted unit immediately fight as if it were the fight phase, giving it essentially two fight phases per turn, instead of giving it a bonus in the next fight phase. I welcome mechanics that don't require you to keep track of stuff over multiple phases or turns.

    Other ideas for Bring It Down:
    - Against monsters and vehicles, an unmodified wound roll of 6 inflicts a number of mortal wounds equal to the weapon's damage, and the attack sequence ends.
    - Against monsters and vehicles, an unmodified hit roll of 6 wounds automatically.

    .

    This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/07/28 15:01:25


    Cadians, Sisters of Battle (Argent Shroud), Drukhari (Obsidian Rose)

    Read my Drukhari short stories: Chronicles of Commorragh 
       
    Made in ro
    Dakka Veteran




    -Guardsman- wrote:
    Other ideas for Bring It Down:
    - Against monsters and vehicles, an unmodified wound roll of 6 inflicts a number of mortal wounds equal to the weapon's damage, and the attack sequence ends.
    - Against monsters and vehicles, an unmodified hit roll of 6 wounds automatically..

    The first doesn't do the right thing, the second is much too powerful.

    The first doesn't make you any more likely to wound a high-Toughness target, it just means they won't get a saving throw when you do. Against a MONSTER with high Toughness and a middling save, it's barely meaningful. It's really more of a Shuriken/Rend effect.

    The second is even stronger than +1 to wound. On BS4+, 1/3 of your hits are going to be unmodified 6s; you're effectively going from a 16.66% chance to wound to a 44.44% chance.

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/28 21:02:41


     
       
    Made in us
    Ollanius Pius - Savior of the Emperor






    Gathering the Informations.

    The mistake has always been allowing for the Order to be issued to everyone.

    Restrict it to Special and Heavy Weapon Squads only.


    Start from there. Work the squad mentalities into benefits.
    For example, sniper toting Special Squads could get the ability to negate a target's Aura abilities for a turn if they survive getting shot at(can't look inspiring if you're ducking! ).
       
    Made in gb
    Battleship Captain





    Bristol (UK)

    You really need to decide what you want Bring it Down! to do.
    Do you want it to enable massed lasgun fire to bring down vehicles? Or improve the chances of heavy weapons doing so?

    Personally, I'd prefer the latter. Those are the men you'd be instructing to bring down a tank!

    Restricting the order to heavy and special weapon teams makes sense.
    The exact buff then would matter less as you're less concerned about it buffing the 'wrong' thing.
       
    Made in gb
    Dakka Veteran




     kirotheavenger wrote:
    You really need to decide what you want Bring it Down! to do.
    Do you want it to enable massed lasgun fire to bring down vehicles? Or improve the chances of heavy weapons doing so?

    Personally, I'd prefer the latter. Those are the men you'd be instructing to bring down a tank!

    Restricting the order to heavy and special weapon teams makes sense.
    The exact buff then would matter less as you're less concerned about it buffing the 'wrong' thing.
    I think it's fine to keep it universal. Chap with the wings, five rounds, rapid!

    If it's intended to be "for" HW and SW squads, then just make it re-roll wounds rather than +1 to wound; that's better for guns that are wounding on a 3+/4+/5+, and worse for guns that are wounding on a 6+.

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/29 09:13:23


     
       
    Made in gb
    Battleship Captain





    Bristol (UK)

    Actually reroll wounds gives a better bonus the less likely you are to wound.
    Think of rerolls like "for every fail, make another attack".

    If something is wounding on 3s, rerolls improves by 33%. +1 to wound instead would be +25%
    But something wounding on 6s improves by 83%. +1 to wound instead would be +100%
    Hence reroll failed wounds would benefit massed lasguns more than it would heavy bolters.
       
    Made in gb
    Dakka Veteran




     kirotheavenger wrote:
    Actually reroll wounds gives a better bonus the less likely you are to wound.
    Think of rerolls like "for every fail, make another attack".

    If something is wounding on 3s, rerolls improves by 33%. +1 to wound instead would be +25%
    But something wounding on 6s improves by 83%. +1 to wound instead would be +100%
    Hence reroll failed wounds would benefit massed lasguns more than it would heavy bolters.
    Yes, but that's an abstract relative, rather than a practical comparison. Re-rolling to wound gives you more "extra attacks" the less likely you are to wound, that's true, but those extra attacks are still very unlikely to wound. Re-rolling to wound with a higher wound-chance gives you fewer "extra attacks", but each one is more likely to wound.

    Think of it this way – re-rolling to wound, while wounding on 6s, means that you will wound on 5 in every 30 hits, and get an extra hit for 25 in every 30 hits. Re-rolling to wound, while wounding on 5s, means that you will wound on 10 in every 30 hits, and get an extra hit for 20 in every 30 hits. The number of extra hits you get has gone down by 20%, but the number of wounds you'll do per hit has gone up by 100%.

    To give the concrete numbers:
  • 100 hits, wounding on 6s, give you: 16.66 wounds (+0), 33.33 wounds (+1), 30.55 wounds (re-roll).
  • 100 hits, wounding on 5s, give you: 33.33 wounds (+0), 50.00 wounds (+1), 55.55 wounds (re-roll).
  • 100 hits, wounding on 4s, give you: 50.00 wounds (+0), 66.66 wounds (+1), 75.00 wounds (re-roll).
  • 100 hits, wounding on 3s, give you: 66.66 wounds (+0), 83.33 wounds (+1), 88.88 wounds (re-roll).
  • 100 hits, wounding on 2s, give you: 83.33 wounds (+0), 83.33 wounds (+1), 97.22 wounds (re-roll).
  • This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/07/29 12:12:04


     
       
    Made in au
    Longtime Dakkanaut




     kirotheavenger wrote:
    You really need to decide what you want Bring it Down! to do.
    Do you want it to enable massed lasgun fire to bring down vehicles? Or improve the chances of heavy weapons doing so?


    I already do massed hotshot lasguns against vehicles. With Laurels of Command, FRFSRF and EPS that's 36 lasgun shots hitting on 3+ and rerolling all failed wounds. As Lambdan Lions that's also at AP-3, potentially even with reroll's of 1 to hit if they're near that character too. If you're facing a T6 or T7 vehicle there's also the option of spending 1 CP to make those hotshot lasguns S4 so you can instead wound of 5+.

    When it comes to standard lasguns though, a flat +1 to wound might generate more wounds than currently, but standard lasguns have no AP. Which still makes them very unreliable compared to something like a hotshot, which can already do it and far, far better.

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/02 01:39:23


     
       
    Made in gb
    Regular Dakkanaut




    Here's an idea, what if we give "Bring It Down!" the re-roll all failed wound rolls against MONSTERS and VEHICLES, since it is a better fit for the theme of the order.

    Then, change the effect for "Elimination Protocol Sanctioned!" to "all unmodified wound rolls of 6 inflicts 1 mortal wound on the target in addition to any normal damage". It would still be in keeping with the theme of the order, which is about how Scions are "trained to eradicate even the most fearsome enemies of the Imperium". It increases the deadliness of hot-shot lasguns and would syngergise well with some of the less frequently taken special weapons without further increasing the efficacy of plasma guns and meltaguns (which would have other orders that work better for them).

    This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/08/02 10:50:55


     
       
    Made in au
    Longtime Dakkanaut




    mr. peasant wrote:
    Here's an idea, what if we give "Bring It Down!" the re-roll all failed wound rolls against MONSTERS and [b/]VEHICLES[/b], since it is a better fit for the theme of the order.

    Then, change the effect for "Elimination Protocol Sanctioned!" to "all unmodified wound rolls of 6 inflicts 1 mortal wound on the target in addition to any normal damage". It would still be in keeping with the theme of the order, which is about how Scions are "trained to eradicate even the most fearsome enemies of the Imperium". It increases the deadliness of hot-shot lasguns and would syngergise well with some of the less frequently taken special weapons without further increasing the efficacy of plasma guns and meltaguns (which would have other orders that work better for them).


    Then we’d have to change the Lambdan stratagem too.
       
    Made in gb
    Regular Dakkanaut




    Jarms48 wrote:
    Then we’d have to change the Lambdan stratagem too.


    Am I mistaken in thinking that the Lambdan stratagem works differently? If memory serves, it causes unmodified wound rolls of 6 for hot-shot weapons only (i.e. lasguns, pistols, volley guns; and not include flamers or grenade launchers) to be resolved as mortal wounds (as opposed to adding additional mortal wounds). So, I wouldn't see any particular issue mechanics-wise.

    Though, I would not be opposed to changing the Lambdan stratagem to work the same way as this; with the modifier that units who receive the "Elimination Protocol Sanctioned!" order to deal additional mortal wounds on unmodified rolls of 5 and 6; not unlike how the Cadian doctrine interacts with "Take Aim!".

    This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2021/08/02 10:52:55


     
       
    Made in gb
    Longtime Dakkanaut



    London

    RevlidRas wrote:
    ]I think it's fine to keep it universal. Chap with the wings, five rounds, rapid!


    I meant the Gargoyle...

    (Assuming you are referencing the same ancient Doctor Who cartoon strip! The final panel was a shot 3rd Doctor with his cape laying on the floor and bemused Gargoyle looking on. It was based on the episode airing at the time I believe.)
       
    Made in gb
    Dakka Veteran




    The_Real_Chris wrote:
    RevlidRas wrote:
    ]I think it's fine to keep it universal. Chap with the wings, five rounds, rapid!


    I meant the Gargoyle...

    (Assuming you are referencing the same ancient Doctor Who cartoon strip! The final panel was a shot 3rd Doctor with his cape laying on the floor and bemused Gargoyle looking on. It was based on the episode airing at the time I believe.)

       
    Made in us
    Unbalanced Fanatic






    Hit rolls of 6 automatically wound?
    Wound rolls of 6 are resolved at +1 damage?
       
    Made in us
    Regular Dakkanaut




     Eipi10 wrote:
    Hit rolls of 6 automatically wound?

    Being sick this holiday, I've been fidding around with my simulator program, and I think that the "Hit rolls of 6 automatically wound" may be the solution here.

    So, taking 6 Skitarii Rangers with Galvanic Rifles as the baseline (54 points vs. guardsman 55 points, 12 shots), we come up with a target of ~2.0 wounds against intercessors, 4.4W against guardsmen and 1.3W against T6/3+ vehicles

    Making a Lasgun auto-wound on 6s does:
    *2.0W to Intercessors, same as 54 points of Rangers
    *3.6W against the rangers (32.4 points), vs. 4.4W (~24.2) points the Rangers do back to the guardsmen
    *1.6W to a T6/3+ armor model vs. the Ranger 1.3.

    Now, those are assuming 18 shots, which is FRFSRF at >12", or without FRFSRF within 12". With FRFSRF within 12", the numbers double. But that still doesn't look that bad, as that's 2 intercessors, or 7 rangers (which is overkill of the MSU of 5), or 3.2W to a T6+ tank.

    That actually makes guardsmen pretty good, in the best possible scenario. I would still need 3 squads of guardsmen, at point-blank range, under FRFSRF, and at full strength to take down ONE 5-man squad of intercessors, 4 squads at point-blank range to take down a 10-12W tank. To counter this, we still have no melee to speak of, and we don't get Doctrinas, Imperatives, strats or really-strong supporting units.



    Math highlights:


    Lasguns that auto-wound on 6s




    Sorry for the wall of code incoming, I couldn't get the SPOILER tag to work with the CODE tag
    If someone knows how to fix this, please let me know!

       
     
    Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
    Go to: