BS skill thought

[megatrons2nd]

I was thinking, tell me if you think is to complex, that you remove ranges from weapons and replaced it with range bands. Example a bolter would have a 6" range band, and a Tau pulse Rifle an 8" range band. Then the BS would drop at each range band increment. IE a Marine would have a BS 4 up to 6", 3 up to 12", 2 up to 18" ect. Maybe this would offer the ability to raise the marines BS to the fluffed level and raise the level of others to account for the individual fluff. Of course Tau aren't as good as a marine but they are better than a standard guardsman.

A side note I would make pistol weaponshave a special 1" +1 BS rule with a 3" range band making a Marine BS5 at 1", 4 at 3", 3 at 6", etc..
Assault weapons would get a similar rule at 3" instead of the 1".

[theunwantedbeing]

Interesting idea but I don't think it really works that well in-game.

A Bs4 marine firing a Range band 6 weapon starts needing a 5+ to hit at just over 12" which is daft, he'll have a hard time hitting anything.
The same marine firing a Range band 9 weapon needs a 5+ to hit at just over 18". This better but still pretty terrible.
So when firing a Range band 12 weapon he needs a 5+ to hit at over 24", but this means he can hit things upto 36" away on a 5+!

If we use a Bs2 Ork then he will have a hard time hitting anything at any range and he'de really need to get weapons with much longer range bands than his more advanced counterparts to actually give him a shooting phase which wouldn't make any sense at all.

Not a great idea sadly.

[megatrons2nd]

Point taken. However, this was just a rough rules idea. Some fine tuning is definitely needed. On the same note you might actually be able to get some real use out of BS skills higher than 5. Also the Marines could get a BS higher than 4 and be more effective, and those armies that don't currently need a 4 but should be better than a 3 would be able to get that as well.

[Charistoph]

It could still have potential. Just add it on to the current ranges as they exist, say +BS*2" with the roll getting harder once you get past the BS 5 area. So a Boltgun with BS 4 operates like now, but a Shuripult with BS 7 hits on a 2+ up to 18", but at 20" it becomes 3+, and so on. That could be too complicated, though.

[Col. Tartleton]

Space Marine: Ballistic Skill 6
Bolter: Accuracy 6
6" Range; Hits on 1+
12" Range; Hits on 2+
18" Range; Hits on 3+
24" Range; Hits on 4+
30" Range; Hits on 5+
36" Range; Hits on 6

Tau Firewarrior: Ballistic Skill 5
Pulse Rifle: Accuracy 8
8" Range; Hits on a 2+
16" Range; Hits on a 3+
24" Range; Hits on a 4+
32" Range; Hits on a 5+
40" Range; Hits on a 6

Space Marine: Ballistic Skill 6
Melta Gun: Accuracy 6 (Assault)
0-2" Range; Hits on a 0+
6" Range; Hits on a 1+
12" Range; Hits on a 2+
18" Range; Hits on a 3+
24" Range; Hits on a 4+
30" Range; Hits on a 5+
36" Range; Hits on a 6

Yeah I like this. I had the same idea.

Space Marine: Ballistic Skill 6
Bolt Pistol: Accuracy 3 (Assault)
0-2" Range; Hits on a 0+
3" Range; Hits on a 1+
6" Range; Hits on a 2+
9" Range; Hits on a 3+
12" Range; Hits on a 4+
15" Range; Hits on a 5+
18" Range; Hits on a 6

Tau Firewarrior: Ballistic Skill 5
Pulse Pistol: Accuracy 3 (Assault)
0-2" Range; Hits on a 1+
3" Range; Hits on a 2+
6" Range; Hits on a 3+
9" Range; Hits on a 4+
12" Range; Hits on a 5+
15" Range; Hits on a 6

Basilisk Gunner: Ballistic Skill 4
Earthshaker: Accuracy 60 (Ordinance)
0-59" Range; Hit on a 4+; On Miss Scatter D6
60" Range; Hit on a 3+; On Miss Scatter D6
120" Range; Hit on a 4+; On Miss Scatter D6
180" Range; Hit on a 5+; On Miss Scatter 2D6
240" Range; Hit on a 6; On Miss Scatter 2D6

Leman Russ Gunner: Ballistic 4
Battle Cannon: Accuracy 30 (Ordinance)
0-29" Range; Hit on a 4+; On Miss Scatter D6
30" Range; Hit on a 3+; On Miss Scatter D6
60" Range; Hit on a 4+; On Miss Scatter D6
90" Range; Hit on a 5+; On Miss Scatter 2D6
120" Range; Hit on a 6; On Miss Scatter 2D6

This makes it a shooting game. Then Cover Saves mitigate To Hit rolls. This makes the whole "0+" thing more manageable. Basically the game will be Assault Units using their speed to move from cover to cover so they can get in close and make use of their initiative to shred their enemies. On the other hand ranges go up for most weapons and there's a real ability for ranged oriented infantry to mangle anyone trying to assault them. Realistically you can either get the jump on someone or you're going to get shot to pieces. If you can weather the fire and make it to assault, fine, but there's no way you can charge an alert unit and not get shot to pieces on the way in.

[Cricket1982]

I like the idea of stopping all these assault orientated armies we appear to have currently. Might be worth a bit more development

[Gaargod]

6

This makes it a shooting game. Then Cover Saves mitigate To Hit rolls. This makes the whole "0+" thing more manageable. Basically the game will be Assault Units using their speed to move from cover to cover so they can get in close and make use of their initiative to shred their enemies. On the other hand ranges go up for most weapons and there's a real ability for ranged oriented infantry to mangle anyone trying to assault them. Realistically you can either get the jump on someone or you're going to get shot to pieces. If you can weather the fire and make it to assault, fine, but there's no way you can charge an alert unit and not get shot to pieces on the way in.

Err...

40k isn't really just a shooting game. Realistically yes, the weapons should be so deadly as to make anything other than sitting behind cover and blasting away suicidal. But they're not, because screw it, chainswords.

I'm not a fan of making it 'did you reach the enemy lines alive? Yes? Excellent, you win'. That's precisely what happened in 4th ed with consolidate into combat - units annihilated stuff on the way in but if they actually made it, the close combat troops bounced from combat to combat, and you never got another chance to shoot at that. Makes for a very boring game, as it's basically turning into even more into a 'roll dice, see if you win' situation. As it is, although it's horribly clunky, there's still some sense of counter attacking and sacrificial units, etc.

If you want a range based modifier, try something like 1/3 of your range = +1 to hit, middle third = normal, last third = -1 to hit. Tis a bit difficult with the occasional 8" range guns, or similar, which don't divide into 3s, but it's not too bad. This would make short ranged shooting devastating, but long range is more survivable. Which is only appropriate.

[Rodman49]

This makes player's memorize essentially another chart that differs on weapons and Ballistic skills. I find this approach unlikely to be used in any platoon size (40+ models) game. It's too cumbersome, may be useful in a smaller system with less weapon types and variations though.

[bobafett_h]

Shooting should take range into account, but if rumours for 6th are true, it will have some basis on the movement of both the attacker and the target. In reality, there are even more factors such as the accuracy of the weapon, environmental conditions such as wind and gravity, plus the hand-eye coordination of the person firing which would all need to be accounted for too. A simple dice roll is random enough to cover all of these things without being overly complicated in my opinion...

Personally though, I don't really care how the rules for shooting and BS and things work in 6th, as long as Eldar Guardians and vehicles are better at shooting than Guardsmen and IG vehicles like they should be...

[lanrak]

Hi folks.
I have played a wide range of wargames with varying level of complexity and complication.
40k has over simplified its shooting resolution , to the point it needs lots of additional rules to get the diversity back.

Setting the basic chance of hitting the target , to a value on the TARGETS stat line.(As Many other game do.)

EG A Stealth value .
And then adding limited modifiers.
+1 to stealth value if...

In cover/partialy obscured
Over 36" away ,
Gone to ground.

+1 to attackers dice roll if
Under 12" away.
Attacker stationary this turn.
Attacker has enhanced targeting .

Then simply describe units BS as EFFECTIVE range , as the range the unit WILL hit the target, IF it sees the target.
EG, A lasgun used by ...
BS 2 unit effective range 20"
BS3 unit effective range 24"
BS 4/5 units effective range 28"
BS 6/7 units effective range 32"

Because units with better ballistic skill can hit targets further away.IF they can see the target.

This replaces a dice roll that ONLY represents the attacker skill.

With a roll with limited modifiers , that includes attacker and target disposition, range to target, skill of the attacker AND the skill of the target.

This is just a simple example to show how it could work.

I have not explained it that well .But I could explain the idea further if you like?.

[Corporeal]

yeah actually, can you lanrak? I like where your idea is going. Nail that sucker down, refine it and let's see how good it can get.

[lanrak]

Hi Corpereal.
I have played a few modern wargames that simulate modern warfare in an elegant and intuitive way.
IF we assume 40k should play like modern warfare considering it has modern warfare type units.(NOT large blocks of troops fighting in close formation with hand weapons supported by a few war machines.)

The problem is, evereytime I start a 'quick fix', I end up with a complete re-write.Changing all the game mechnics for those ' more apropriate for a modern wargame.'
And the end result has less rules complication and more game complexity.But it is so far from current 40k people are not too keen on it...

And I have lost touch with GW 40k.As I tend to use my 40k minis with other rule sets.(Less pages of rules, more actual gameplay.)

Would you be happy rolling ONE D10/12/20 per UNIT to aquire a target unit.
And if the target is aquired,( spotted identified and targeted) ALL the attacking units weapons in effective range will hit.(May not have any effect ,but they will hit.)

This also removes the need for artificial targeting restrictions .The player can risk trying to aquire a difficult target, or play safe aquiring a larger/closer target.

If you fail to aquire the target YOU LOOSE YOUR SHOOTING for that unit!

This would speed up game play no end.Especialy for mobs of 30 orks!

We could still roll saves per hit as normal.(Or in a more scalable but simpler way like FoW.)

Ill stop there...

[Charistoph]

Hi folks.
I have played a wide range of wargames with varying level of complexity and complication.
40k has over simplified its shooting resolution , to the point it needs lots of additional rules to get the diversity back.

Setting the basic chance of hitting the target , to a value on the TARGETS stat line.(As Many other game do.)

Diversity for the sake od diversity is not always a good thing. And while a good gunner can hit things outside the standard performance envelope for a weapon, there is still a limit to how far you can realistically hit something.

Let's compare a shotgun with a slug round, an assault rifle, a sniper rifle, and an artillery cannon. They all have different ranges of effectiveness that are standards, but a shotgun will never be as effective at the same range as the max range of the rifles, much less the cannon, just as the cannon really isn't designed to be used at the ideal assault rifle range, much less a shotguns (I know there is an exception to this last, but I'm talking about rounds for regular fire, not support).

So BS improving/disimproving range, I can see, but setting the range? Too much or too complicated.

I can agree with a comparison to a "Defense" stat, but that's something else.

[StygianBeach]

Too complicated. I think I would prefer close. Optimal. Long Range. with -1 to hit for close. no mod for half and -1 for Long range. For standard assult rifle.

Shotguns. SMG. Pistol would all be +1 for close. +0 for half and -1 for long.

[lanrak]

Hi all.
Maybe you misunderstood the principal I was refering to.

All weapons have thier current ranges as the 'standard effective range for BS3'.

But units with better balistic skill have improved range, units with poorer BS skill have reduced effective range.

When I used this in my new rule set, each unit had a reference card.(Playing card sized reference aid for each unit.Stats and weapon effects for each unit.)

The BS doesnt set the effective range , just modifies it .But rather than list all the modifiers we, just put effective ranges in for each faction /or unit if different BS to others in that army..
EG. Instead of putting IG BS 3, we simply put EFFECTIVE lasgun range at 24"for normal platoons , 20" for conscripts, and 28" for veterans.

[Charistoph]

Ah, woops, sometimes I read too quickly.

2" per BS may be a little too much, in my opinion. Maybe 1/2" - 1" could work. We don't need lasguns reaching like a Sniper do we? And the affect it would have on Assassins!

[lanrak]

Hi Charistoph.
I just used those figures as an example.(We could adjust effective ranges as necisary.)

When I wrote my new rule set,(still in development,) I wanted a simple way to alter unit performance, with a great degree of granualrity.

Eg if a unit needs a slight buff I could just improve its effective range by 1"

The current BS system only allows changes of 1 on a D6 eg 3+ to 2+ to hit!

The same way I used an AR value 1 to 14 to determine a units resistance to damage.(Grot 1 to Landraider14)
And an AP value to determine a weapons effectivness.5 to 12(Las gun to rail gun.)
Simply roll a D6 add it to your AR, if it is higher than the weapons AP you make the save!
(Along with a simple supression/ detailed damage charts for descrete/indescrete units.)

All these values can be adjusted up or down by a factor of 1 giving proportional results.(Making unit interaction varied and easier to balance...hopefuly)

[Emerett]

I don't think the idea works well for range, but I do like it for cover.

I think the warmachine skill system is better. The better their cover, the better chance they have no not being hit.

Cover should offer -1, -2, -3, -4 to bs instead of the stupid armor save.

[lanrak]

I agree that cover simply makes the units harder to see/hit.
So modifying the chance to hit is more intuitive than gaining an extra save.

Lots of games use a few simple modifiers to get a range of results that promote more tactical game play.

GW plc seems to want to restrict 40k to just roll a dice and see what happens.Which speaks volumes about GW plc view of its 40k gamers IMO.