New OOTS products from CafePress
New OOTS t-shirts, ornaments, mugs, bags, and more
Page 5 of 50 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141530 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 150 of 1485
  1. - Top - End - #121
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Aliess View Post
    Everything from 2nd is my stock answer. Third really dulled the game down so you could put more models on the board, although I did like the changes to melee so you don't have to do it one model at a time.
    The changes to speed up melee were excellent, as were the changes to determining To Hit rolls and Armour Penetration replacing Armour Modification.

    One of the worst things about 8th edition that had me seriously worried was that it went back to that type of system - fortunately nowhere near as comprehensively, but in 2nd Edition you had to measure the range of every model in the unit, because 1/16th of an inch different would mean an extra -1 to hit and they all had to be worked out with other modifiers (target in partial or half cover, did the shooter move this turn, does the target have equipment or an ability to change the value...) individually.

    In 7th edition, 5 marines in a shooting phase was "I have five marines, they have Rapid Fire, 3's to hit, roll 10 dice, 4's to wound, roll your Save if you have one"; 2nd Edition had at least 3 more steps even before you had hit and tried to wound anything. Thankfully 8th didn't go back down that road, but the framework for it was there.

    I kind of miss the alternative Turn Actions that were in the game in 2nd/3rd edition, though - when Overwatch or Going To Ground had to be designated as an action rather than applied as a Stratagem, for example. I understand why it was taken out - games would grind to a halt as both armies capped an objective and then sat on Overwatch for 4 turns waiting for the other to try and do something about it - but at the same time it was more fun and tactically suspenseful than just "shoot or run" every turn, and it encouraged you to do things that would interact with your opponent's turn in more ways than just cycling your deck because they can't stop you.

    I too miss Tank Shock, and Ramming. It almost never came up but having the option was always entertaining if not sensible.

    Things that I am *definitely* glad are gone:
    Unique Weapon Penetration rules (Dreadnoughts had 22AV on their front. Lascannons used to roll 3d6+9, Heavy Plasma Cannons had 1d10+1d8+1d6+10 - good luck finding a d8 in the early 90's UK).

    Vehicle Damage Tables (My Lascannon just broke the front armour of your Dreadnought! Now roll a 1d6 to determine where I've hit it, and then another 1d6 to arbitrarily decide if absolutely nothing happens or it explodes and kills the unit standing next to it; this is fair and fun.)

    Squats (I don't care what the "retro" article on Bell of Lost Souls says, or why Goonhammer thinks they should be brought back; Squats were bad mechanically, thematically, aesthetically, and even people who collected them were pretty glad when they were put out of their misery.)
    Last edited by Wraith; 2021-04-07 at 05:03 AM.
    ~ CAUTION: May Contain Weasels ~
    RPG Characters What I Done Played As (Explained Badly)
    17 Things I Learned About 40k By Playing Dark Heresy
    Tales of a Role-Play Gamer - Horrible Optimisation

  2. - Top - End - #122
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    Eldan's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Switzerland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    I do remember once playing against a meme list that had something like eight unequipped rhinos, who just dismounted all their marines and then tankshocked everything across the board. That was interesting. They were cheaper than the marine squads and could seriously disrupt your formation if you didn't have enough antitank weapons.
    Last edited by Eldan; 2021-04-07 at 05:06 AM.
    Resident Vancian Apologist

  3. - Top - End - #123
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    This one goes out to Avaris:

    9th Ed. The Good I Rarely Talk About
    • Command Points revamp massively improved Stratagem-use, and Stratagem-importance. Did not change the nature of alpha strikes like marketing said it would. In fact it only made alpha strikes - and defending against them - even more important. With a few notable exceptions that even a braindead idiot could figure out, Stratagem-choice and timing (combined with how Reinforcements works) is actually one of the few 'player choices' still left in the game that affect the game on a turn-by-turn basis. The revamping of Command Points, means that 'player skill' actually comes into effect now.
      For example; Rather than "CPs win games." and trying to spam as many +CPs into your army as you can to give you the most available options - they with the biggest toolbox, wins. Now - in 9th Ed. - your toolbox still needs to be big. But you no longer have the massive toolbox, and you can't afford for every problem to be a nail...At least, most Factions can't - some Factions have Terminators.
    • An entire unit moves, or none of it does. Cleans up conga-lining from an Objective to a Heavy weapon.
    • Entire revamp of how Reinforcements can enter the board opens up many units to be viable - specifically, slow melee-based ones. It's weird that casuals on the internet don't use Reinforcements and I still hear that Bladeguard aren't good to this day.
    • Heavy ranged weapons, only penalise Infantry. Opens up many non-Infantry units to be viable (specifically the cheaper Vehicles)
    • Monsters and Vehicles can shoot whilst Engaged.
    • Removing multi-Charge significantly decreases the effectiveness of hordes.
    • Always Fight First is back in the game.
    • Objectives being standardised to 40mm-diameter is a significant improvement over 'Objectives are whatever size you want them to be.'
    • You don't need Troops to build a viable army. This allows people to build the army they want without taxes.
    • Command Re-roll nerf.
    • Customisable Secondary Objectives are a nice idea.


    9th Ed. - The Bad You've All Heard Before
    • Unit coherency rules for units with 6+ Models makes units of <5 'most efficient' use of board control.
    • What a Vehicle's 'Hull' is, is inconsistent. Still. Especially as 'movable' parts of the model are still allowed (and arguably encouraged).
    • 'Within' and 'Wholly Within' still a very annoying distinction. Just make everything 'wholly within' and clear up all the confusion. Increase Aura range if you have to...Or don't. Auras too stronk.
    • Perils of the Warp still in the game. Get punished for random rolls.
    • Look Out, Sir! was nerfed...And then got made irrelevant via Bodyguard-like rules. Many Characters are now immune to bullets - including Sniper-like attacks - encouraging elite-style armies and bringing back HeroHammer - and not for the better.
    • Blast is a terrible rule that disproportionately affects hordes. This is one of the reasons you don't see hordes in the meta. The fact that you don't see hordes in the meta, allows for 'sneaky' horde-lists to sneak in, as they build to the meta knowing that they can't be beaten. Tournaments - especially one-off lists - can not be applied to the casual meta. But the internet for some reason, does.
    • To Wound chart still sucks.
    • Dealing Mortal Wounds isn't a rarity, nor special, anymore. To the point where GW now inserts Ignore Mortal Wounds abilities as a matter of course. Simultaneously invalidating what makes Mortal Wounds a thing, and also one of the defining portions of the meta.
    • Removing multi-Charge significantly decreases the effectiveness of hordes.
    • Changing Overwatch to a Stratagem, significantly increased the effectiveness of melee alpha strikes.
    • Always Fight Last needs to be applied way more liberally.
    • Combat Attrition tests are needlessly stupid.
    • There are no different rules for small games vs. larger games.
    • Power Rating is still useless as an army-building mechanic. However, GW went and tied additional rules to Power Rating (e.g; Reinforcements), meaning that even players who use Points still have to know about Power Rating, even though it's terrible.
    • You don't need Troops to build a viable army. This funnels people towards the 'Good Stuff Only' meta as they no longer need to pay taxes.
    • Actions are often too punishing to do, for most units.
    • Customisable Terrain is dumb, and funnels people towards the 'Good Stuff Only' meta. Yes. It applies to Terrain, too.
    • Open Play still broken AF.
    • Going first is too strong for good armies. Against certain armies, going first is mandatory if you even want a chance at winning (e.g; vs. Death Guard).
    • Secondaries too shallow in their application. As with Terrain, choose the best ones and ignore the others. GW is infamously bad at 'balancing' more than...4...Things at once. *Looks at entire game*...Oh. That explains a lot.
    • Narrative Play - specifically Crusade - is a ****ing joke.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2021-04-07 at 06:38 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  4. - Top - End - #124
    Banned
     
    LansXero's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Lima, Peru
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by LeSwordfish View Post
    Now I have to play the game.
    Sounds positively boring.

    An army centered around Morathi can still TP and double shoot and double-hit on 6s your face off if she gets to go first, so making the centerpiece model unkillable is awful (same bs with Kroak) but trying to pass it off as interesting counterplay to a faction like Slaves that is solidly high mid-tier when DoK are at the top feels disingenuous.

    More on topic, having these rules on duelists is fine since their impact is limited; having it on force multipliers or units central to the entire army is opressive and lame.

  5. - Top - End - #125
    Orc in the Playground
     
    RogueGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Broomfield CO
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    I miss deep striking Landraiders.

    They always died, because they would scatter onto another unit. But it was fun. On a related note, back in 5th ed, I made a little 5 man assautl sqd with inferno pistols who could routinely deep strike well within the half range of three inchs to spot kill any vehicle on the board. Then they would die to being surrounded by the whole enemy army.

    I'm really glad they got rid of hull points in vehicles. it was poor implementation.
    Now, Back to Lurking!
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant
    I think I'm going to defer to his wiser judgment in this case, because I'm probably going to keep writing responses and that will only lead to me getting myself in trouble somehow.
    - I should follow this advice more often.

    Belkar's Death Countdown best guess: 31/49 days used before Belkar is gone forever more! - updated to morning at 1190!

    Hey, its the Blog where I write! Dice Roles

  6. - Top - End - #126
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Ornithologist View Post
    I miss deep striking Landraiders.

    They always died, because they would scatter onto another unit. But it was fun. On a related note, back in 5th ed, I made a little 5 man assautl sqd with inferno pistols who could routinely deep strike well within the half range of three inchs to spot kill any vehicle on the board. Then they would die to being surrounded by the whole enemy army.

    I'm really glad they got rid of hull points in vehicles. it was poor implementation.
    I miss deep striking Monoliths that didn't die when they scattered onto a unit, because they displaced that unit.

    Hull points, though, were terrible. Turning Vehicles into monstrous creatures, but with no armor save, fewer wounds, and a table of extra bad stuff that could happen if your opponent rolled 1 or more above your "toughness"... Not good.

    I miss the old to-wound formula. It made every point of strength meaningful, instead of the current system where strength 7 and 9 are relatively useless. It wasn't hard; It was just subtraction, for crying out loud.
    Steam ID: The Great Squark
    3ds Friend Code: 4571-1588-1000

    Currently Playing: Warhammer 40000, Hades, Stellaris, Warframe

  7. - Top - End - #127
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Blackhawk748's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Tharggy, on Tellene
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Squark View Post
    I miss deep striking Monoliths that didn't die when they scattered onto a unit, because they displaced that unit.

    Hull points, though, were terrible. Turning Vehicles into monstrous creatures, but with no armor save, fewer wounds, and a table of extra bad stuff that could happen if your opponent rolled 1 or more above your "toughness"... Not good.

    I miss the old to-wound formula. It made every point of strength meaningful, instead of the current system where strength 7 and 9 are relatively useless. It wasn't hard; It was just subtraction, for crying out loud.
    Same here. The weird halfway system we have now (between just straight up fixed To Wound on the unit statcard and the old system) is one of the things I thought was weird about 8th and it remains weird in 9th. Like, please don't go to the AoS system where Grots wound a Bloodthirster on a 5+. Thats just silly, but going with KoW's method of the To Wound being in place of Toughness would make plenty of sense.

    Or just bring back the old chart.
    Quote Originally Posted by Guigarci View Post
    "Mr. Aochev, tear down this wall!" Ro'n Ad-Ri'Gan, Bard
    Tiefling Sorcerer by Linkele
    Spoiler: Homebrew stuff
    Show
    My Spell, My Weapon, Im a God

    My Post Apocalyptic Alternate Timeline setting: Amerhikan Wasteland


    My Historical Stuff channel

  8. - Top - End - #128
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackhawk748 View Post
    Same here. The weird halfway system we have now (between just straight up fixed To Wound on the unit statcard and the old system) is one of the things I thought was weird about 8th and it remains weird in 9th. Like, please don't go to the AoS system where Grots wound a Bloodthirster on a 5+. Thats just silly, but going with KoW's method of the To Wound being in place of Toughness would make plenty of sense.

    Or just bring back the old chart.
    Even if they just brought back the old chart and had it so that you never made it impossible to wound something would be perfectly fine by me. Or maybe just a slightly different chart.

    But really, while I find the wound chart simple, it isn't awful. Just simple.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  9. - Top - End - #129
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Renegade Paladin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    The current chart makes To Wound get really wonky at high Strength and/or Toughness. Against T4 infantry (the most common in the game) heavy bolters and autocannons are functionally identical. In the old system, they'd actually have a To Wound difference.
    "Courage is the complement of fear. A fearless man cannot be courageous. He is also a fool." -- Robert Heinlein


  10. - Top - End - #130
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade Paladin View Post
    The current chart makes To Wound get really wonky at high Strength and/or Toughness. Against T4 infantry (the most common in the game) heavy bolters and autocannons are functionally identical. In the old system, they'd actually have a To Wound difference.
    That's true. But these wonky cases aren't in of themselves bad. Just wonky and feels weird. Like that seems bad, but currently an autocannon and a heavy bolter are identical in points (at least for Imperial Guard). So really the choice is actually between getting an extra shot to be better at killing infantry, or extra strength to be better at killing light vehicles? Or heavy infantry at least.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  11. - Top - End - #131
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Renegade Paladin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    That's true. But these wonky cases aren't in of themselves bad. Just wonky and feels weird. Like that seems bad, but currently an autocannon and a heavy bolter are identical in points (at least for Imperial Guard). So really the choice is actually between getting an extra shot to be better at killing infantry, or extra strength to be better at killing light vehicles? Or heavy infantry at least.
    Against Imperial Guard it makes a considerable difference because our infantry is T3 and T5, and vehicles short of the Russ are T5, 6, or 7, all of which the autocannon is better against. But if you're gearing to fight the Guard, your meta is really screwy.
    "Courage is the complement of fear. A fearless man cannot be courageous. He is also a fool." -- Robert Heinlein


  12. - Top - End - #132
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Avatar By Astral Seal!

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Renegade Paladin View Post
    Against Imperial Guard it makes a considerable difference because our infantry is T3 and T5, and vehicles short of the Russ are T5, 6, or 7, all of which the autocannon is better against. But if you're gearing to fight the Guard, your meta is really screwy.
    At their current stats, an Autocannon only ever outperforms the Heavy Bolter against T6.
    They are equal against T7.

    At every other Toughness Value, a Heavy Bolter does better.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Linkele
    Show

    Spoiler: Individual Avatar Pics
    Show

  13. - Top - End - #133
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Renegade Paladin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    At their current stats, an Autocannon only ever outperforms the Heavy Bolter against T6.
    They are equal against T7.

    At every other Toughness Value, a Heavy Bolter does better.
    S7 has better To Wound than S5 at every one of those toughness values. The difference is greatest at T6 (3+ vs 5+), but there at all of them. But what really grinds my gears is S10 not being better than S7 at killing, say, Ravenwing Land Speeders.
    "Courage is the complement of fear. A fearless man cannot be courageous. He is also a fool." -- Robert Heinlein


  14. - Top - End - #134
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    At their current stats, an Autocannon only ever outperforms the Heavy Bolter against T6.
    They are equal against T7.

    At every other Toughness Value, a Heavy Bolter does better.
    Really? That seems odd. Lets go through it, assuming Imperial Guard because their math is easier and they can easily take lots of both.

    Toughness Heavy Bolter Autocannon
    T3 1.0 wounds dealt 0.8 Wounds dealt
    T4 1.0 Wounds dealt 0.7 Wounds dealt
    T5 0.8 Wounds dealt 0.7 Wounds dealt
    T6 0.5 Wounds dealt 0.7 Wounds dealt
    T7 0.5 Wounds dealt 0.5 Wounds dealt


    The complicated part comes from rerolls. With Heavy Bolters benefiting more from rerolls to hit, and Autocannons from rerolls to wound. Considering that rerolls to hit are generally pretty easy to get, I'd say the Heavy Bolter is the clearly superior choice. But the difference is actually pretty close. The only spot the Heavy bolter really outshines the Autocannon is T3 and T4. Oh, and T8. Everywhere else is nearly even or in the favor of Autocannons. Still T4 and T8 are pretty massive points of contention. That's where you want to perform better, so yeah, 9 times out of ten, Heavy Bolter is the way to go. Makes me wonder what T6 stuff we've got in the game though.
    Last edited by Forum Explorer; 2021-04-07 at 10:48 PM.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  15. - Top - End - #135
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Renegade Paladin's Avatar

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Indiana
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    Makes me wonder what T6 stuff we've got in the game though.
    The aforementioned Land Speeders, Tauroxes, Armored Sentinels, open-topped Guard vehicles (Basilisk, Wyvern, etc), probably a bunch of stuff in the non-Imperial armies that aren't coming immediately to mind (wouldn't surprise me if that's where they put the open-topped Ork vehicles, for instance).
    Last edited by Renegade Paladin; 2021-04-07 at 10:56 PM.
    "Courage is the complement of fear. A fearless man cannot be courageous. He is also a fool." -- Robert Heinlein


  16. - Top - End - #136
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Destro_Yersul's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    sector ZZ9 plural-z alpha
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    Even if they just brought back the old chart and had it so that you never made it impossible to wound something would be perfectly fine by me. Or maybe just a slightly different chart.

    But really, while I find the wound chart simple, it isn't awful. Just simple.
    I'm pretty ok if it's impossible for some strength values to wound some toughness values. You shouldn't be able to hurt a tank by punching it, y'know? Or plinking at it with a handgun.
    I used to do LP's. Currently archived here:

    My Youtube Channel

    The rest of my Sig:
    Spoiler
    Show
    Avatar by Vael

    My Games:
    The Great Divide Dark Heresy - Finished
    They All Uprose Dark Heresy - Finished
    Dead in the Water Dark Heresy - Finished
    House of Glass Dark Heresy - Deceased

    We All Fall Down Dark Heresy - Finished

    Sea of Stars Rogue Trader - Ongoing

  17. - Top - End - #137
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Destro_Yersul View Post
    I'm pretty ok if it's impossible for some strength values to wound some toughness values. You shouldn't be able to hurt a tank by punching it, y'know? Or plinking at it with a handgun.
    I disagree from a gameplay perspective. I feel a problem with things like Wraithlords and vehicles in past editions was that they were invincible to damage below a certain strength, and that made balancing them much harder.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  18. - Top - End - #138
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Destro_Yersul's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    sector ZZ9 plural-z alpha
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    I disagree from a gameplay perspective. I feel a problem with things like Wraithlords and vehicles in past editions was that they were invincible to damage below a certain strength, and that made balancing them much harder.
    Sure, it's harder to balance them that way. I just don't feel that's necessarily a problem. I want my vehicles to be invincible to damage below a certain strength.
    I used to do LP's. Currently archived here:

    My Youtube Channel

    The rest of my Sig:
    Spoiler
    Show
    Avatar by Vael

    My Games:
    The Great Divide Dark Heresy - Finished
    They All Uprose Dark Heresy - Finished
    Dead in the Water Dark Heresy - Finished
    House of Glass Dark Heresy - Deceased

    We All Fall Down Dark Heresy - Finished

    Sea of Stars Rogue Trader - Ongoing

  19. - Top - End - #139
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Destro_Yersul View Post
    Sure, it's harder to balance them that way. I just don't feel that's necessarily a problem. I want my vehicles to be invincible to damage below a certain strength.
    "I don't feel that the game potentially being ruined [even further], for my benefit, is a problem."

    I mean. Some of us feel that way, for sure. But none of us actually come out and say it directly.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  20. - Top - End - #140
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Destro_Yersul View Post
    Sure, it's harder to balance them that way. I just don't feel that's necessarily a problem. I want my vehicles to be invincible to damage below a certain strength.
    Well I don't. There really isn't anything else to say about that is there?
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  21. - Top - End - #141
    Titan in the Playground
     
    LeSwordfish's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Oxford, UK
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    "I don't feel that the game potentially being ruined [even further], for my benefit, is a problem."

    I mean. Some of us feel that way, for sure. But none of us actually come out and say it directly.
    Hang on, sorry, the entire game up to 7th ed was ruined? Entirely for destro's benefit? Str 4 not breaking AV14 was "ruined" was it? Man, you could have saved yourself so much time if you'd known the game you wrote dozens of battle reports for was irredeemably ****!
    - Avatar by LCP -

  22. - Top - End - #142
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by LeSwordfish View Post
    Hang on, sorry, the entire game up to 7th ed was ruined? Entirely for destro's benefit? Str 4 not breaking AV14 was "ruined" was it? Man, you could have saved yourself so much time if you'd known the game you wrote dozens of battle reports for was irredeemably ****!
    You say that, but I remember when that was implemented - there was outcry, and it caused a huge shift in the meta from which the game still hasn't recovered.
    The dominance of Tau/Aeldari in 6th and much of 7th - not to mention the fact that they were still perfectly viable in 5th despite having a 4 year old Codex - was in no small part down to the fact that they could spam Starlances and happily ignore the stuff that other armies faltered at.

    In short, I remember when Ironclad Dreadnoughts with their mighty AV13 fronts were 'broken'. It sounds like a completely alien concept to the modern audience, but there we are.

    Did that 'ruin' the game? Depends who you ask. Were you playing Taudar in 6th/7th, in which case it was absolutely fine and nothing to worry about, or were you playing as literally anybody else and being on the receiving end of a Parking Lot and/or Jet-seer-star?
    ~ CAUTION: May Contain Weasels ~
    RPG Characters What I Done Played As (Explained Badly)
    17 Things I Learned About 40k By Playing Dark Heresy
    Tales of a Role-Play Gamer - Horrible Optimisation

  23. - Top - End - #143
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    ElfPirate

    Join Date
    Aug 2013

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    You say that, but I remember when that was implemented - there was outcry, and it caused a huge shift in the meta from which the game still hasn't recovered.
    The dominance of Tau/Aeldari in 6th and much of 7th - not to mention the fact that they were still perfectly viable in 5th despite having a 4 year old Codex - was in no small part down to the fact that they could spam Starlances and happily ignore the stuff that other armies faltered at.

    In short, I remember when Ironclad Dreadnoughts with their mighty AV13 fronts were 'broken'. It sounds like a completely alien concept to the modern audience, but there we are.

    Did that 'ruin' the game? Depends who you ask. Were you playing Taudar in 6th/7th, in which case it was absolutely fine and nothing to worry about, or were you playing as literally anybody else and being on the receiving end of a Parking Lot and/or Jet-seer-star?
    Armour Values came in 3rd and did not ruin the game any more than literally every other change from 2nd edition did in the minds of those who were used to playing a game of 1 Lvl4 psyker, 10 infantry and 2 huge tanks. Where the lvl4 psyker not only did 90% of the shooting but also meleed the entire opposing army.

    Don't confuse armylist problems with basic rules problems. Being unable to wound T10 with S4 e.g. isn't a problem in of itself. That GW gets the idea that letting someone take an entire army of T10 walkers e.g. because that way sells models is the problem.

    AV was an elegant solution to a problem of how to simulate the relative impermeability of vehicles vs infantry weapons while making both relevant on the same table. Tau/Aeldari shouldn't be allowed to ally and shouldn't be allowed as many good weapons. Don't blame that on AV:

  24. - Top - End - #144
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by LeSwordfish View Post
    Hang on, sorry, the entire game up to 7th ed was ruined?
    Having played through 5th Ed.'s 'Mech is King' era, and what 'You can't hurt Vehicles, lol' did to the game, yes.

    Str 4 not breaking AV14 was "ruined" was it?
    Having played through 3rd Edition, with Land Raiders, and "If you don't have Meltaguns, you lose." era, yes.

    Man, you could have saved yourself so much time if you'd known the game you wrote dozens of battle reports for was irredeemably ****!
    No. What I had then, was what I had, and it was great, because I didn't know any better.

    I played through 8th Ed., and - despite Drasius' objections to the contrary - that was the best edition ever. I have no desire to go backwards. One of the reasons that 8th Ed. was so good, is that with enough dice, with enough re-rolls, with Stratagems and with Psychic powers, and with resource investment, S3 attacks, were actually competitive against Knights. The fact that you could have a Knight Castellan, and Hormagaunts or Cultists or Guardsmen, on the same battlefield, was part of what made 8th Ed. great. The diverse meta, in playstyle. Because all attacks matter(ed).

    I have no desire to see 'invincible' units ever again. The problem is that those units are actually cropping up again, now. Rather than saying "Those units shouldn't be in the game." or those rules shouldn't be in the game, we've got players saying "Not only should those units/rules be in the game, but my Faction should have them too, so that there's even more of them." As I've brought up a couple of times now, the more Mortal Wounds are introduced into the game, the more it is necessary to defend against them. However, in most cases, anything that defends against Mortal Wounds, defends against everything else, too.

    Now, maybe there's a way to do it that makes sense;
    Regularly Resilient. This model has Ignore Wounds (5+) against attacks with a Strength of 3 or less.

    ...or maybe against attacks that have AP-? Not sure. But I do know that bringing back "Your unit is 100% useless against my unit." is very definitely a step backwards.

    "It takes 894 Lasguns to destroy [unit]."

    Spoiler: Hell Yeah
    Show
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2021-04-08 at 05:21 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  25. - Top - End - #145
    Firbolg in the Playground
     
    Griffon

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by snowblizz View Post
    AV was an elegant solution to a problem of how to simulate the relative impermeability of vehicles vs infantry weapons while making both relevant on the same table. Tau/Aeldari shouldn't be allowed to ally and shouldn't be allowed as many good weapons. Don't blame that on AV:
    Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. I liked the AV rules and a lot of the changes that came in with them - AP1 having special properties against vehicles, 'Rending' keywords on what are nominally anti-infantry weapons to give them an edge, etc - and I thought that 8th Edition's practice of making everything into "a big monster" was as much as a step backwards as it was an innovation. I'd have liked to see more middle ground.

    But my point was, the rules didn't explicitly ruin the game but they definitely changed what was important in the game, and forced it to become something very different to what it used to be. Whether or not it changed for the worse depended less on the changes themselves, and more on whether it changed what you wanted from the game. The game has always been playable, but that's not the same thing as always offering the same experience.

    Some of it is meta-shifts from power-creeping codices, sure, but some of it is also dictated by underlying mechanics. Multiple Small Units (MSU) was a big thing a while ago that happened due to morale and targeting rules, for example - it went away for 8th edition and has recently re-emerged in most builds. Sure, Space Marines were the best at it, but other armies followed suit where they could because it was just the best way to play. Sucks to be an Ork player in such an edition, but then, that's nothing new either.
    ~ CAUTION: May Contain Weasels ~
    RPG Characters What I Done Played As (Explained Badly)
    17 Things I Learned About 40k By Playing Dark Heresy
    Tales of a Role-Play Gamer - Horrible Optimisation

  26. - Top - End - #146
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Avatar By Astral Seal!

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    Really? That seems odd. Lets go through it, assuming Imperial Guard because their math is easier and they can easily take lots of both.

    Toughness Heavy Bolter Autocannon
    T3 1.0 wounds dealt 0.8 Wounds dealt
    T4 1.0 Wounds dealt 0.7 Wounds dealt
    T5 0.8 Wounds dealt 0.7 Wounds dealt
    T6 0.5 Wounds dealt 0.7 Wounds dealt
    T7 0.5 Wounds dealt 0.5 Wounds dealt


    The complicated part comes from rerolls. With Heavy Bolters benefiting more from rerolls to hit, and Autocannons from rerolls to wound. Considering that rerolls to hit are generally pretty easy to get, I'd say the Heavy Bolter is the clearly superior choice. But the difference is actually pretty close. The only spot the Heavy bolter really outshines the Autocannon is T3 and T4. Oh, and T8. Everywhere else is nearly even or in the favor of Autocannons. Still T4 and T8 are pretty massive points of contention. That's where you want to perform better, so yeah, 9 times out of ten, Heavy Bolter is the way to go. Makes me wonder what T6 stuff we've got in the game though.
    Well, Reroll 1s to-hit/wound is always a 7/6 improvement, whether you need a 2+, a 6+, or anywhere in between.

    Reroll All is actually the better the worse your base chances are, so Reroll All Wounds would benefit Heavy Bolters MORE than Autocannons.

    Again-the only time the Autocannon is actually better is T6.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Linkele
    Show

    Spoiler: Individual Avatar Pics
    Show

  27. - Top - End - #147
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    ElfPirate

    Join Date
    Aug 2013

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    Sucks to be an Ork player in such an edition, but then, that's nothing new either.
    My friend considered 3rd a heaven for the Orks.

    IMO worse is playing Chaos. You got the statline of a marine so should logically be able to compete, but you never really were allowed to. You were always Space Marien for all the bad things, but never Space Marine for any of the good things.

  28. - Top - End - #148
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Wraith View Post
    But my point was, the rules didn't explicitly ruin the game but they definitely changed what was important in the game, and forced it to become something very different to what it used to be. Whether or not it changed for the worse depended less on the changes themselves, and more on whether it changed what you wanted from the game. The game has always been playable, but that's not the same thing as always offering the same experience.
    That's very well said.

    Especially within context of saying that in 8th Ed., Vehicles were changed to simply being 'big models' with higher Toughness and more Wounds, and that you didn't like that, or just a Monster with a different Keyword. Whereas I, did like it.

    I think to clarify, my dislike of the AV system comes from:

    1. S4 vs. AV11 (or S4 vs. T8, for Monsters) sets up a bad meta that I just didn't like and wasn't at all inclusive. I've already played through that edition. I don't want to go back.

    2. Streamlining AV into Toughness, makes the game simpler and easier to understand in a way that doesn't - IMO - diminish the game. However, I think the issue also lies in the ****ty To Wound table, and the fact that in the current game, nothing is over T8. Whilst S9 and 10 (and Mortal Wounds), do exist. The problem isn't that Vehicles have a Toughness value. The problem is that Vehicles have a Toughness value, whilst also removing their...Toughness (see above).

    Making Vehicles or Monsters T9 or even T10, would actually improve a lot of the current problems with Vehicles and Monsters just dying and being generally terrible. The issue isn't lack of AV. The issue is lack of T10.
    Remember, AV14 at the time was equivalent to T10.5. That's what made Land Raiders so good.

    Well, ****. There you go.

    The problem isn't that AV is gone. The problem is that all Vehicles got nerfed.
    At base, AV10 was equivalent to ~T7. Clearly, there are Vehicles in the game that were AV10, that are now T6 - or even 5 - and it's worse from there.
    Last edited by Cheesegear; 2021-04-08 at 06:23 AM.
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

  29. - Top - End - #149
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Avatar By Astral Seal!

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheesegear View Post
    (or S3 vs. T8, for Monsters)
    S3 vs. T7
    S4 vs. T8

    You could only wound three points higher than your Strength value. Just a minor nitpick.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Linkele
    Show

    Spoiler: Individual Avatar Pics
    Show

  30. - Top - End - #150
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Lizardfolk

    Join Date
    Jan 2008

    Default Re: Warhammer 40K Tabletop Thread XLII: The Dice Make Fools of Us All

    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    S3 vs. T7
    S4 vs. T8

    You could only wound three points higher than your Strength value. Just a minor nitpick.
    It's a typo. Clearly I was talking about S4 (vs. AV11 in context).
    Spoiler: My Mum Says I'm Cool
    Show
    Quote Originally Posted by Anuan View Post
    Cheesegear; Lovable Thesaurus ItP.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lycan 01 View Post
    Cheesegear, have I told you yet that you're awesome?
    Quote Originally Posted by MeatShield#236 View Post
    ALL HAIL LORD CHEESEGEAR! Cheese for the cheesegear!
    Quote Originally Posted by Shas'aia Toriia View Post
    Cheesegear is awesome

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •