PDA

View Full Version : What if armour saves where capped at 2+?



King Arthur
25-11-2014, 16:32
Would it be innately practical to have armour save capped at 2+? This can make heroes less durable and maybe less unkillable but gives more power back to the little guys at strength 3 and 4. Which are often looked down upon in any decision to buy unites in the current META thoughts????

daftpunkevo
25-11-2014, 16:45
Since S1 can wound T10 on a 6+, and the problem with character are the ward save more than anything, I think its a bad idea.
What are your little guys at strength 4 (which is huge for little guys) struggling against ?
You don't kill heros wih peasants, and its normal... You send the Heavy Weapon guys do that.
What is the scenario your little guys can't win ?

theunwantedbeing
25-11-2014, 16:51
Wouldn't make a whole lot of difference, if anything it's more incentive for characters to all be running around with 4+ ward saves.

It does give a nice bit of symmetry with ward saves though, as then they'de both be capped at 2+.

snyggejygge
25-11-2014, 17:07
IŽd rather see a 4+ cap on wardsaves rather than armoursaves.

King Arthur
25-11-2014, 17:15
I suppose it doesn't matter but depending upon the META I just see units like demis and jugglers go through every unit they touch in some games without taking wound and it just made me wonder what if... It also made me think especially with the thread of how many warrior str 5 attacks it took to slay them and it was ridiculous.

N00B
25-11-2014, 17:52
It probably wouldn't be a bad thing but I suspect than instead of Chaos and tin can empire dominating you would just get elf domination instead.

It would provide a boost to Orcs, Beastmen, Ogres and probably Demons of Nurgle that rely on T a bit more to survive (if armor is nerfed then slightly fewer high strength weapons around to deal with it - alternatively S4 becomes even more common as now it is NEVER wasted on armour).


Now if Wood Elves are a sign of things to come then there could be a lot more armour piercing being splashed about including removing multiple levels of AP which might have a similar effect.

Alternatives might be to give certain weapons a cap on the armour save that can be taken against them - so spears designed to puncture breastplates and dismount cavalry never allow better than a 4+ save... It might work.

Fighting Newfoundlander
25-11-2014, 17:52
Well it wouldn't help S3 guys at all unless try we're armour piercing. Also, you then have to recost everything from chaos knights to empire knights. I don't know if it is a solution, but it would be a big leg up for the strength 4 infantry

dalezzz
25-11-2014, 18:03
No one would use lances anymore?

underscore
25-11-2014, 18:05
To be honest I'd like to see both armour saves limited to 2+ and Wards to 4++.

Phenatix
25-11-2014, 18:12
Would capping all saves in general to be "one save per wound allocated, choose which save to use" like in 40k be too extreme? They already did this with regen vs ward saves and the world didn't end. It may make expensive characters too risky though, that would be my concern.

Lorcryst
25-11-2014, 18:30
I've had this discussion on these very boards several times, and I was proven wrong every time, so here goes :


Armour Saves are already capped at 1+ in the 8th ed rules.
A natural roll of 1 on the die is always a failure.


So in effect, even if you have a 1+ Armour Save, you still fail on 1, making your "practical" save 2+ (without Strength modifiers).

In other words, already the case, nothing to see here, move on please ...

theunwantedbeing
25-11-2014, 18:32
Would capping all saves in general to be "one save per wound allocated, choose which save to use" like in 40k be too extreme? They already did this with regen vs ward saves and the world didn't end. It may make expensive characters too risky though, that would be my concern.

It won't make a lot of difference, especially with combined profiles meaning character strengths are likely high enough to fully negate armour saves.

King Arthur
25-11-2014, 18:34
Not really it the modifiers which really make the difference and s4 does nothing do it which can be frustrating for some low strength troop, I also agree with the expensive character thing.

Phenatix
25-11-2014, 18:47
I've had this discussion on these very boards several times, and I was proven wrong every time, so here goes :


Armour Saves are already capped at 1+ in the 8th ed rules.
A natural roll of 1 on the die is always a failure.


So in effect, even if you have a 1+ Armour Save, you still fail on 1, making your "practical" save 2+ (without Strength modifiers).

In other words, already the case, nothing to see here, move on please ...
This is wrong because S4 currently applies a -1 to armor save. S4 vs 1+ armor save ==> 2+ armor save, fails on a 1. S4 vs (capped at) 2+ armor save ==> 3+ armor save fails on 1 or 2. As you can see, even though a roll of 1 always fails, capping at 2+ or 1+ makes a big difference. Well, it makes a 1/6 difference.


It won't make a lot of difference, especially with combined profiles meaning character strengths are likely high enough to fully negate armour saves.
I disagree with this. Just because characters may be ignoring armor saves for each other, doesn't mean such a change wouldn't have an impact. If you are only allowed a single save, then your 1+/4++ character is a lot less resilient vs normal infantry. Say you charge a block of Empire Halberdiers, you used to have a 1/6*3/6 = 8.3% chance of losing a wound, but if you could only take 1 save, you have a 1/6 16.7% chance of losing a wound. As you can see, this change would make super powerful characters twice as vulnerable to infantry blocks such as Halberdiers.

Of course you can debate about whether you should charge the large blocks back and forth, but the point still stands that against troops who can't fully negate a character's armor save would benefit greatly from only allowing 1 save.

N00B
25-11-2014, 18:50
Surely making super expensive characters a bit more risky is a feature, not a bug?

daftpunkevo
25-11-2014, 19:10
I've had this discussion on these very boards several times, and I was proven wrong every time, so here goes :


Armour Saves are already capped at 1+ in the 8th ed rules.
A natural roll of 1 on the die is always a failure.


So in effect, even if you have a 1+ Armour Save, you still fail on 1, making your "practical" save 2+ (without Strength modifiers).

In other words, already the case, nothing to see here, move on please ...

Wow looks like you absolutely didn't get the point.
Vs S4 core troop the 1+ Save become 2+ and the 2+ become 3+ which is a 50% armor buff (failing on 1 instead of 1 and 2)
This is what op is talking about, move on please.

Leogun_91
25-11-2014, 20:40
Would capping all saves in general to be "one save per wound allocated, choose which save to use" like in 40k be too extreme? They already did this with regen vs ward saves and the world didn't end. It may make expensive characters too risky though, that would be my concern.It would make ironbreakers useless and nerf all handweapon and shield troops but could work with a few updates to the army books.

Scammel
25-11-2014, 20:53
S4 is doing just fine these days. It's the S3 units that find themselves incapable of beating up a gnat with rickets and are thus, in many cases, totally reliant on Steadfast and gimmicks to have any relevance (and people want to take away the former because their Knights aren't good enough already). This change would do nothing to help the units that need help the most.

N00B
25-11-2014, 21:22
S4 is doing just fine these days. It's the S3 units that find themselves incapable of beating up a gnat with rickets and are thus, in many cases, totally reliant on Steadfast and gimmicks to have any relevance (and people want to take away the former because their Knights aren't good enough already). This change would do nothing to help the units that need help the most.

Actually I think it would help these. Now elsewhere things may be different but I think that at least 65% of things that have better than a 3+ save have a 1+ save. S3 attacks now can work - if you include things like the Razor banner or augment spells/hexes that lower armour. Add on the that things like guns, or repeating x-bows that have AP built into them and it does make a bit of a shift.

facepalm
25-11-2014, 21:51
Actually I think it would help these. Now elsewhere things may be different but I think that at least 65% of things that have better than a 3+ save have a 1+ save. S3 attacks now can work - if you include things like the Razor banner or augment spells/hexes that lower armour. Add on the that things like guns, or repeating x-bows that have AP built into them and it does make a bit of a shift.

Except if you have razor banners or augment spells then they are 95% of the time going to be going on your other units where they make even more of a difference. Pretty much every army has better options to try and buff, sure maybe that one time your St3 core infantry are the only unit you have in combat and nothing else is in range of anything else to charge then maybe its OK but razor banner and spells to buff st3 infantry is almost always going to be a very inefficient use of resources.

Don Zeko
25-11-2014, 22:02
Except if you have razor banners or augment spells then they are 95% of the time going to be going on your other units where they make even more of a difference. Pretty much every army has better options to try and buff, sure maybe that one time your St3 core infantry are the only unit you have in combat and nothing else is in range of anything else to charge then maybe its OK but razor banner and spells to buff st3 infantry is almost always going to be a very inefficient use of resources.

As a Dark Elf player, I disagree.

Foulacy
25-11-2014, 23:51
Im new to warhammer again after a very long break, can I just ask how can you get better than a 2+ save? Surely a model with a 1+ is invulnerable? Or is this just to show how hard a character is and the only way to kill him is with something that requires a ward save?

Lord Zarkov
25-11-2014, 23:59
Im new to warhammer again after a very long break, can I just ask how can you get better than a 2+ save? Surely a model with a 1+ is invulnerable? Or is this just to show how hard a character is and the only way to kill him is with something that requires a ward save?
A 1 always fails, but you apply modifiers from 1+ rather than 2+ - e.g. it's 2+ still vs S4, 3+ vs S5 etc

Back in 6th and 7th a fair few things could even get 0+ saves and IIRC one or two things even -1+

Wesser
26-11-2014, 06:54
Ehm how many combat characters is that we see anyway?

The problem isn't 1+ armour saves but that stuff like Daemon Princes and ScarVets casually walk around in it. It's not really a problem with for instance dwarfs (low move) or Empire (substandard fighters).

Problem is that DPs are ridiculously OP, that WoChaos can combine it with a ridiculous ward save and that ScarVets (with say greatweapon/LA/Coldone/AS helm) costs too little for what he does.


A few goofy characters isn't a problem with 1+ saves. We really don't need any more reason for people to just take wizards

Urgat
26-11-2014, 07:00
Wow looks like you absolutely didn't get the point.
Vs S4 core troop the 1+ Save become 2+ and the 2+ become 3+ which is a 50% armor buff (failing on 1 instead of 1 and 2)
This is what op is talking about, move on please.


The OP also talked about S3 troops, so Lorcryst's point is at least half valid. Don't go and cherrypick just what's convenient for you.

ErictheGreen
26-11-2014, 14:45
Problem is that DPs are ridiculously OP, that WoChaos can combine it with a ridiculous ward save

demon princes are a 4+ ward save at best, and that's if you spring for the ToP, which stops you taking other useful gubbins.
now if you were talking about a chaos lord with 1+ armour and a ridiculous ward save, i'd be inclined to agree. except up until end times, you couldn't take a level 4 if you took the lord, which was a pretty significant disadvantage

Wesser
26-11-2014, 17:26
demon princes are a 4+ ward save at best, and that's if you spring for the ToP, which stops you taking other useful gubbins.
now if you were talking about a chaos lord with 1+ armour and a ridiculous ward save, i'd be inclined to agree. except up until end times, you couldn't take a level 4 if you took the lord, which was a pretty significant disadvantage

I was referring to DP and then to heroes with 1+armour & 3+ Ward. DP Ward save isnt as bad an issue

N00B
26-11-2014, 17:51
I would rather see characters with a 3+/3++ than a 1+/4++...

Haravikk
26-11-2014, 18:15
I could only see a reduction to a 2+ minimum if there were exceptions; solid armour saves are one of the main advantages Dwarfs can have for example. The main problem is that it's just too trivial for other armies to get as well, particularly chaos. It was my main disappointment with the latest Warriors of Chaos army book as I'd hoped we might get away from the idea that Chaos characters have to be the best at pretty much everything as standard; Chaos can give power sure, but it rarely comes without a price, yet there's not a lot of evidence of that in army lists.

N00B
26-11-2014, 18:30
Chaos can give power sure, but it rarely comes without a price, yet there's not a lot of evidence of that in army lists.

I dunno... the forsaken and spawn entries suggest that there might be a price somewhere.

That said I would be happy if Chaos Armour was one point worse but gave a 5+ ward save, or maybe a 2++ vs certain types of attack (Tzeench - Flaming, Nurgle - Poison, Slaanesh - Armour piercing, Khorne - KB/HKB/Multiple Wounds (or maybe switched to protect from their hated god)).

Haravikk
26-11-2014, 18:52
I dunno... the forsaken and spawn entries suggest that there might be a price somewhere.
Sorry yeah, I really meant in terms of characters, didn't phrase that very well; I mean there's a chance of spawndom, but otherwise you've got a character that has high stats across the board including Strength and Toughness, plus easy to load up on armour. I'd kind of hoped a Chaos character's stats would become more dependent on their mark, maybe even units too.

But there are definitely too many armies with too much access to heavy armour still; I much prefer armies to be distinguished in other ways. It's also weird when Empire steel plate, Dwarf made or not, is just as good Gromril armour. I can understand a case for Chaos Armour being strong, but yeah, it'd be better to see it strong in a different way, as the models wearing it are already strong, tough, somewhat fast, good weapon skill etc. I've also never been a big fan of reducing mounts down to an armour-save bonus; I know it's simple, but I've never thought it was a great mechanic personally as every time I roll a save I wouldn't have made without that bonus I just wonder what kind of poor mangled creature my knights are now riding around on :P

N00B
26-11-2014, 21:22
Yeah, I much prefer being mounted giving you +1 to toughness (although barding I can accept to boost it). That way things like elven and Bretonian Heavy Cavalry can equal, but not beat a dwarf on foot.

I would also like to see combat lords of the same points value be more distinctive. As it is it seems to just be close to a scalar quality. There are not many naturally occurring A beats B, B beats C and C beats A type set-ups. Sure, some does come down to equipment but a few more army specific special rules would be nice.

Vaktathi
26-11-2014, 21:33
Is there anything actually game breaking about most beefy chaos characters aside from some shennanigans with Ward saves? Most of the time you aren't going to see a fully kitted combat lord, you might see a 1+ hero, but they're usually going to be taking that Lvl4 SorcLord instead, those beefy combat lords are something of a rarity in my experience. They also cost a pretty huge number of points relative to most other characters. I've never seen the 1+ be overpowering. When it's a 1+ on top of a 3++ ward that rerolls 1's, that got silly, but that was an issue with the Ward save, not the armor.

facepalm
26-11-2014, 21:51
i dont really see much wrong with 1+ saves. Sure your basic cheap infantry have a problem killing characters in 1+ but then again cheap basic infantry have a problem killing anything other than cheap basic infantry. Big blocks of 1+ cav can also be scary but pretty much every army has relatively simple ways to deal with units like these, via war machines, magic items, high strength units and magic. In all the many threads that break down into moaning about broken units 1+ saves are almost never mentioned. Cannons, BotWD, 3++ re-rollable 1s, Nurgle daemon princes, OP magic spells/phases ...... etc. All that would happen with capping at 2+ would be a shift in the meta where new 2+ save units would be ignored since in battle they woould almost never get better than a 4+ against anything decent.

popo
26-11-2014, 23:37
Regarding the armor, I always thought that the worse armor values had problems. If 6+/5+ has optional price attached to it, they are not taken.

N00B
28-11-2014, 23:21
True, but at the top end I think they always are. I dont think I have seen Silverhelms without a 2+ save for example nor Mournfang Cav (and that is sacrificing a weapon option on top of simply making the choice!). Unless a chaos character gets at least a 2+ save anyway (or it has already been taken) I dont think I have ever seen one without scaly skin.

decker_cky
29-11-2014, 04:19
Are empire knights and chaos knights a problem?

The problem is monstrous cavalry. Take away the armour save for being mounted from monstrous cavalry and the issue units sort themselves out.

For characters, dark elves with mundane 1+ saves on pegasi are the only problematic ones I see. Just make it so characters on flying mounts can't join units and that issue is somewhat curtailed.

TheOldblood
29-11-2014, 22:25
This would be all round a good move. It empowers lower strength units and reduces the tedium of never scoring wounds vs. 1+ saves. Personally I'd prefer something like a movement penalty for mounted armoured units but I don't know an elegant way to achieve that.

kramplarv
30-11-2014, 00:34
What would the movement reduction symbolize?

Lance Tankmen
30-11-2014, 02:10
i see no problem with +1 armour saves, the st3 guys cost like what 6-12 points maybe? elves are like 10+. the +1 Armour saves have maybe 3-8 guys and about 10 wounds, each 1 on a save hurts an awful lot imo

TheOldblood
30-11-2014, 11:38
What would the movement reduction symbolize?

The weight of armour?

It punishes fast high armour save units, which are a big problem right now. (Not every unit of this kind is problematic, some such as Chaos Knights are too pricey)

Urgat
30-11-2014, 12:14
Heavy armor and barding both used to decrease M by 1 each. Of course, chaos, gromril and ithilmar armors ignored that rule, and bretonnians ignored the barding malus, so, mostly, it was a rule that screwed up Empire, but heh :p

SuperHappyTime
30-11-2014, 21:19
Heavy armor and barding both used to decrease M by 1 each. Of course, chaos, gromril and ithilmar armors ignored that rule, and bretonnians ignored the barding malus, so, mostly, it was a rule that screwed up Empire, but heh :p

Dwarfs can't make armor that's more durable but lighter?
Brets can't breed sturdy horses meant to run well in barding?
Chaos warriors can't be overpowered and undercosted?

Urgat
30-11-2014, 21:40
Dwarfs can't make armor that's more durable but lighter?
Brets can't breed sturdy horses meant to run well in barding?
Chaos warriors can't be overpowered and undercosted?


Her... yes? So?

Col. Tartleton
01-12-2014, 02:40
I liked it better when you could have 0+.