PDA

View Full Version : How to fix vehicles, walkers, escalation, stronghold, and invulnerable saves



Gungo
17-02-2014, 14:53
Gw doesn't want to remove the damage table and immobile results or loss of weapon results. So just keep hull points as is give all vehicles a 4+ armour save. Extra armour increases this save to 3+. Super heavies have a 2+. When you have 1 hull point left roll on a new vehicle damage chart that either 1-3 destroys a weapon or 4-6 immobilize the vehicle 50/50 chance. Any penetrating hit should also confer crew stunned. Any glancing should confer crew shaken.


This way there is no double chance at vehicle destroyed. You keep all the vehicle damage flavor. Make vehicles a bit more resilient to small arms fire but have additional effects tied to hull points.


Not every single monstrous creature should get smash.
Most walkers should get an invulnerable 5+ save. Some Special character walkers and monstrous walkers may have a 4+, kinda like the imperial knight rumour.


Strength D weapons need to be changed to str 10 ap1, armour bane, instadeath, fleshbane, and ignore cover. This is pretty much a garaunteed loss of hull point/wound and insta death to all but the extremely lucky or eternal warrior character.


To counteract the invulnerable save shenanigans ap2 should make invulnerable saves have. -1 modifier and ap 1 should give invulnerable saves a -2 modifier, except void shields.


The above changes fixes, vehicles, walkers, and super heavies/escalation/stronghold and invulnerable saves in 40k and keeps the game simple.

Lord-Gen Bale Chambers
17-02-2014, 19:51
I think you are working on the right issues, but I don't agree with your resolutions. Below are some changes my group is experimenting with (ie we all agree with them, but haven't play tested them enough yet).

1. +1 HP for every vehicle except fliers.

2. The explodes result on the vehicle damage chart now only does 1d3+1 HP of damage.

3. Walkers can fire over watch.

4. If a transport is stationary, a unit can assault out of it. They can't disembark and then assault, only assault directly out of it.

5. We modified the tables for str d weapons to make them weaker and allowed invulnerable saves against them. However, invulnerable saves require rolling two dice and taking the lowest. Also it doesn't out right destroy vehicles or deal HP damage to super heavies, it has to roll on the vehicle damage table with a +3.

This makes it much harder to get a lucky shot and destroy a vehicle. A unit with 3 meltas will still probably pop a vehicle, but it does bring the durability up while streamlining damage to all vehicles.

I don't think the vehicle armour saves will have much of a impact because nearly all mid-high end AT weapons will ignore them.

I also don't like the invuln modifiers. Penalizing everyone because there are a few abusive units/combos isn't how you fix a problem. I admit no one in my group uses any of this abusive units/combos so it isn't a concern for us.

Ironbone
17-02-2014, 20:35
3. Walkers can fire over watch.
They already can :p.


1. +1 HP for every vehicle except fliers.
Absoulety agreeed.


2. The explodes result on the vehicle damage chart now only does 1d3+1 HP of damage.
Similar to SH ones ? Interesting. I personaly would keep exposion, but make it a bit stronger, maybe flat out 3 or 4+ wound. Current str 3 is as dangerous as summer rain to SM.

Lord-Gen Bale Chambers
18-02-2014, 03:10
The explosion still occurs if the vehicle is destroyed, but it only happens on that roll if you wipe out the HPs. Sorry, I left this piece out.

The explosion is still very damaging to guard and other GEQ units. Making it so explosions cause serious damage to MEQ will result in the annihilation of any GEQ units. I can see why some people might want more here, but marines are supposed to be rock hard and with the arms race and all the ap 3 around now, I don't see a need to change this.

Regarding the walkers, I guess we missed that if true, I'll have to reread that piece. They should be in much better spot already though since the changes to vehicles I listed really help them.

Paint it Red
18-02-2014, 03:37
The fix to invulnerable saves is to make rolls of 1 and 2 always a fail. The solution is simple, 2+ invulnerable saves should not be allowed in the system.

bork da basher
18-02-2014, 09:20
The fix to invulnerable saves is to make rolls of 1 and 2 always a fail. The solution is simple, 2+ invulnerable saves should not be allowed in the system.

there are very few true 2+ invul saves available. i can only think of the dark eldar shadow field off the top of my head which disappears as soon as you fail one save. theres a big difference between 2+ invulnerable and 2+ cover save. a cover save is far easier to get around.


To counteract the invulnerable save shenanigans ap2 should make invulnerable saves have. -1 modifier and ap 1 should give invulnerable saves a -2 modifier, except void shields.

think about how this effects the majority of invul saves and how low AP weapons very often cause instant death to T3/4 models. then think about how 9/10 models with invulnerable saves have a 4+ or 5+ save. i don't think you've considered how this affects the game at all. the core rules for invul saves are not an issue. the extremely few models in the game capable of a 2+ rerollable, be it cover or invulnerable save are fractional in comparison and not game breaking on the whole. the issue is with the models themselves not the core rules. theres a big difference.

walkers are largely ok, it's the vehicle damage rules that hurt them (no differently to other tanks etc) IMO vehicles could make use of armour saves like normal models. if you view the armour penetration roll as a wounding roll..which it effectively is. you don't get a save unless you're in cover or have specific rules giving you one like war walkers for example. giving vehicles an armour save will give them a layer of protection against mid strength firepower that usually doesn't have a low ap. for example eldar scatter lasers, shuriken catapults and serpent shields all can hurt AV12 on a 6 but their ap is very high. giving tanks a 3+ or 4+ armour save would help at least mitigate the glance to death method of killing tanks which is by far the easiest and most common way armour dies in this edition. they would still not get a save vs low AP weapons like any other model with an armour save. you effectively have to hit, to wound, roll saves, cause damage. just like any other model.

D weapons are simply a mistake. make them S10 AP1 armourbane, fleshbane. thats more than adequate.

Paint it Red
18-02-2014, 23:02
there are very few true 2+ invul saves available. i can only think of the dark eldar shadow field off the top of my head which disappears as soon as you fail one save. theres a big difference between 2+ invulnerable and 2+ cover save. a cover save is far easier to get around.

Grimgore of true names combined with daemon tzeentch rule that reroll rolls of 1 for all saves and divination physic power that gives you 4+ invulnerable save. I also feel that stealth combining with shrouded on troops that also have 2+ armour is a bit too much. Why are there so many units that are harder to kill than land raiders?

But then again this is mostly a problem caused by battle brother allies.

bork da basher
19-02-2014, 06:30
Grimgore of true names combined with daemon tzeentch rule that reroll rolls of 1 for all saves and divination physic power that gives you 4+ invulnerable save. I also feel that stealth combining with shrouded on troops that also have 2+ armour is a bit too much.

But then again this is mostly a problem caused by battle brother allies.

again, it's the codex thats the problem not the core rule. grimoire is one item in a mid tier codex that can also backfire and give you a worse save. it also requires a certain build to pull off which is a big investment in points. i have no real problem with grimoire, i think daemons need all the help they can get to be honest.

units with stealth AND shrouded are quite rare. off the top of my head i can't think of a unit with stealth, shrouded AND a 2+ save which isn't a magic combination of psychic powers, abilities etc?

the allies system has a lot to answer for, it's largely just abused and i'd happily see the combinations you get via allied psychics and battle brother rules disappear entirely.



Why are there so many units that are harder to kill than land raiders?

it boils down to the tools you use to kill your target. a landraider is easy(ish) to kill with a weapon designed to kill it. a unit with 2+ cover and/or a 2+ armour save is just as easy to kill IF you use a weapon or method designed to kill it.

a landraider is immune to the great majority of weapons out there. that in itself makes it harder to kill than any unit is. all units are generally T3/4/5 with a very few being T6. everything S3 and above hurts ALL infantry, nothing below S8 hurts a landraider. you're options to kill a squad are wide open, literally any weapon in your army kills infantry. a handful will be able to kill the landraider.

wanderingblade
19-02-2014, 15:26
Two possible pieces of errata -

Grimoire of True Names works only on Daemons' natural invulnerable saves, not any granted to them by psychic powers/terrain.

Shadow Fields do not benefit from rerolls from Fortune

Problem solved, no?

Spiney Norman
19-02-2014, 15:38
Here would be my preference, get rid of the whole all glancing/penning hits take a Hp rule, and replace with the following amended damage chart

1. Shaken - snap shots only next turn (no HP lost)
2. Shaken + HP lost
3. stunned + HP lost
4. Weapon destroyed +HP lost
5. Immobilised +HP lost
6. Internal explosion - D3 HP lost
7. Explodes

Modifiers
+1 for Open topped target
+1 for AP2
+2 for AP1
-2 for glancing hit (to a minimum of 1)

That way only high power weapons can 1-Hit-kill vehicles, and glances only rob a HP 50% of the time (unless other modifiers are in play).

This is mainly because I think the damage chart is cool and characterful, you could just as easily change it so that glancing hits rob a HP on d6 roll of 4+ and pen hits take one automatically, but that seems less fun and "cinematic".

OuroborosTriumphant
19-02-2014, 15:43
Two possible pieces of errata -

Grimoire of True Names works only on Daemons' natural invulnerable saves, not any granted to them by psychic powers/terrain.

Shadow Fields do not benefit from rerolls from Fortune

Problem solved, no?

The latter fails to solve the Seer Council. They don't just rely on the Barons 2+ invulnerable for their 2+ reroll shenanigans. They also have a 2+ cover save (5+ jink, +2 from Conceal, +1 from Stealth via the Baron) and a 2+ armour save (3+, +1 from Protect).

wanderingblade
19-02-2014, 15:52
The latter fails to solve the Seer Council. They don't just rely on the Barons 2+ invulnerable for their 2+ reroll shenanigans. They also have a 2+ cover save (5+ jink, +2 from Conceal, +1 from Stealth via the Baron) and a 2+ armour save (3+, +1 from Protect).

You're right, it doesn't, but then I wasn't trying to - I was just getting rid of 2++ rerollables.

Debuffing the Seer Council enough to make it fair/fun while retaining the sort of power it should have is a slightly more difficult task and might take me more than the 30 seconds the first two took ;) Banning the Baron from joining units with a Psyker in sounds a reasonable start though.

Gungo
19-02-2014, 16:56
there are very few true 2+ invul saves available. i can only think of the dark eldar shadow field off the top of my head which disappears as soon as you fail one save. theres a big difference between 2+ invulnerable and 2+ cover save. a cover save is far easier to get around.



think about how this effects the majority of invul saves and how low AP weapons very often cause instant death to T3/4 models. then think about how 9/10 models with invulnerable saves have a 4+ or 5+ save. i don't think you've considered how this affects the game at all. the core rules for invul saves are not an issue. the extremely few models in the game capable of a 2+ rerollable, be it cover or invulnerable save are fractional in comparison and not game breaking on the whole. the issue is with the models themselves not the core rules. theres a big difference.
.
I know how it effects invulnerable saves. I don't think invulnerable saves are good for the game and ap1 weapons are rare and expensive enough and generally short ranged to not have a major impact. Insta death has it's own rule to circumvent it that is what eternal warrior is for or most monstrous creatures or simply having a high toughness such as 5 or more. Then there is fnp which ignores the wound and can help. There is enough rules for survivabilty for special characters that high powered expensive special weapons should have the ability to hurt models with invulnerable saves. Even void shields which are building sized super force fields have a built in mechanic to fall once breached. And yet a single character can repeatedly take nukes to the face and generally have a 33% to 50% chance to walk away like nothing happened. It's a silly hamfisted rule and makes no sense.

Gungo
19-02-2014, 17:09
there are very few true 2+ invul saves available. i can only think of the dark eldar shadow field off the top of my head which disappears as soon as you fail one save. theres a big difference between 2+ invulnerable and 2+ cover save. a cover save is far easier to get around.



think about how this effects the majority of invul saves and how low AP weapons very often cause instant death to T3/4 models. then think about how 9/10 models with invulnerable saves have a 4+ or 5+ save. i don't think you've considered how this affects the game at all. the core rules for invul saves are not an issue. the extremely few models in the game capable of a 2+ rerollable, be it cover or invulnerable save are fractional in comparison and not game breaking on the whole. the issue is with the models themselves not the core rules. theres a big difference.
.
I know how it effects invulnerable saves. I don't think invulnerable saves are good for the game and ap1 weapons are rare and expensive enough and generally short ranged to not have a major impact. Insta death has it's own rule to circumvent it that is what eternal warrior is for or most monstrous creatures or simply having a high toughness such as 5 or more. Then there is fnp which ignores the wound and can help. There is enough rules for survivabilty for special characters that high powered expensive special weapons should have the ability to hurt models with invulnerable saves. And if certain rare occasions like terminators need to be adjusted they can add FAQ +1 to the invulnerable save so that any ap2 weapon would have the same chance of hurtingn them as before but with the above change you will never see an invulnerable save better then 3+ Vs an ap2 wpn or 4+ vs an ap1 wpn.