How to fix cannons

[Montegue]

The "standard" Dwarf Setup is two canons, one GT, 1-2 Organ Guns. Some folks go with two and two (Canons and GTs). Most folks don't go with 2/2/1. At least, not that I have gathered. That's a hell of a lot of points invested in stuff that's only really useful in the early game, and points that can very easily be handed over late game as Close combat begins and as most armies have their extra units in place to hit the war machines when we are forced to move out of our castle to flank and support the CC units.

Part of the reason for two canons is that one of them can be flaming, which is good against things like HPAs. However, the other one can't be, which is good in case they've got a 2+ ward vs fire.

I have never seen anyone take three canons. The closest I have seen is two great canons and a Stank.

As for using a wall - don't position 4" back. Position along the wall, as close as you can legally get. Poof. No problem. Impossible to hit you with a canon ball without first destroying the wall. 100% coverage, or there abouts. You can also use the silhouette of a house or other building, if you're sneaky about it. I don't know how your opponents behave, but when someone's trying to position their big model, I let them know when I can and cannot get LOS with my canons.

You do realize, however, that the odds of a Grudge Thrower getting a direct hit are almost 50% when the GT has the Rune of Accuracy, right? Do you also want to see that nerfed? It's equally dangerous to big gribblies *and* it can decimate infantry hordes.

Really, what *should* dwarfs have that's scary? Because we don't have a Magic phase, and our infantry is sub par when compared to other elite infantry units. People whine about Organ Guns, and they whine about canons, and they wine about stone throwers, but forget that we can't move and we can't cast and that the only other model type we can field is infantry.

[The bearded one]

As for using a wall - don't position 4" back. Position along the wall, as close as you can legally get. Poof. No problem. Impossible to hit you with a canon ball without first destroying the wall.

That's actually not true, a cannonball can still hit a model behind a wall without hitting&destroying the wall.

let's say you take a targetpoint 4" in front of the obstacle; if you roll a misfire, the cannon doesn't go on, obviously. If you roll a 2 or a 4, the cannonball will land in front of/on top of the wall, so regardless of what the result is of the artillery dice on the bounce (except for misfires), the cannonball's bounce will hit the wall and destroy it, and stop. However if the roll on the initial artillery dice is a 6, 8 or 10, the start of the bounce will skip right past the obstacle.

For example, target point is 4" in front of the obstacle. The first artillerydice rolls a 6, so that the cannonball travels beyond the obstacle before it strikes the ground. Then you roll the second artillery dice to determine the length of the bounce, and everything underneath it is hit, which can be the monster hiding behind the obstacle if the cannonball strikes the ground close enough behind the obstacle to not have overshot the monster's base.

[Kurnous the Hunter]

All of this said, here is something which I would like to see. For cannons:

Place the marker: Before shooting, roll a d6. On the roll of a 1 it misfires. It it doesn't, roll to hit using the crew's BS. -1 to hit if shooting at skirmishers. No other modifiers. If it hits, the ball lands there. Then roll to bounce.
If you fail to hit, roll a d6. On a 1-3 it scatters d3'' to the left, on a 4-6 it scatters d3'' to the right. Then roll to bounce, with it going in the new trajectory.

For armies like dwarfs, this would make our engineers and master engineers wonderful. For the Empire, it makes getting an engineer a good investment. For ogres...well, your cannon is still a monster. It takes into account the BS of the crew, which I feel should be part of the game. We get a bit of a scatter, which is logical for a "miss", and really, it just makes sense. Landing a cannon shot at the right angle shouldn't be easy.

But one thing I would hate is for cannons to no longer do d6 wounds. When my first cannon misfires, and I am facing a dragon or hydra about to hit my lines, the roll of a 6 is the only thing left between me and a world of hurt. It is what I bring cannons for.

Great post and good suggestion. You seem like a reasonable person.

I too would like to see D6 wounds remain. I would have a slightly different table. Your table 0-24 range.
25+ Miss scatter D6 Hit Scatter D3
6 to hit always hits.

The one thing I hate about cannons is it forces all my characters (even non-monstrous) to hide in units. I want to be able to take a high level character and have them on foot / horse as a single model without the very REAL fear of being sniped in one hit!

[Montegue]

That's actually not true, a cannonball can still hit a model behind a wall without hitting&destroying the wall.

let's say you take a targetpoint 4" in front of the obstacle; if you roll a misfire, the cannon doesn't go on, obviously. If you roll a 2 or a 4, the cannonball will land in front of/on top of the wall, so regardless of what the result is of the artillery dice on the bounce (except for misfires), the cannonball's bounce will hit the wall and destroy it, and stop. However if the roll on the initial artillery dice is a 6, 8 or 10, the start of the bounce will skip right past the obstacle.

For example, target point is 4" in front of the obstacle. The first artillerydice rolls a 6, so that the cannonball travels beyond the obstacle before it strikes the ground. Then you roll the second artillery dice to determine the length of the bounce, and everything underneath it is hit, which can be the monster hiding behind the obstacle if the cannonball strikes the ground close enough behind the obstacle to not have overshot the monster's base.

Yes, but if you're not facing the wall, but in profile to it, the chances of the bounce landing on your base is pretty damn slim.

[Souppilgrim]

From a standpoint of both fluff and balance, I could see halving the distance a cannon ball moves through woods. Making it stop at woods is too big of a nerf, and unrealistic...a cannon can go through most trees without much trouble. I don't really support any other nerfs to cannons, well I think only 2 races should have them, but other than that...

[Lord Inquisitor]

Yes, but if you're not facing the wall, but in profile to it, the chances of the bounce landing on your base is pretty damn slim.

Chariot base, 1/6. Monster base, 1/3. Not quite "100% impossible".

[Lord Solar Plexus]

This is how it is gamebreaking.

What "this"? Where's the data that shows that cannon have an effect on the game?

You say it yourself: Cannon are only the tip of the iceberg (which might be true if they were actually dangerous to monsters, which they are often not). Perhaps Jervis should first nerf everything else?

[Luigi]

Speaking of dwarfs and artillery, am I the only one who has always taken 4 bolt thrower and max 2 organ gun (often none) and, with the advent of 8th edition dropped artillery altogether ?
I mean, I do not think that cannons are overpowered but honestly, I never liked them (especially the new plastic model: you'd think the best artificer of the world would come up with a cooler looking weapon of mass destruction...). Also I believe that most people are still in the mindset of 7th (ie pitched battles only) and that if you think at the fact that depending on which scenario is rolled cannons (and artillery and/or shooting in general) become much less scary

[cptcosmic]

artillery should be affected by BS and all BS modifiers and not be laserguided + able to hit things the unit does not even see.

[Cambion Daystar]

artillery should be affected by BS and all BS modifiers and not be laserguided + able to hit things the unit does not even see.

Agree, so i can subtract my BS from the roll on the artillydie?

Also, as long as you target something you can see it should be no problem hitting something behind/before it.

[Lord Solar Plexus]

artillery should be ... able to hit things the unit does not even see.

+1 internet.


Sorry.

[Montegue]

Chariot base, 1/6. Monster base, 1/3. Not quite "100% impossible".

So, not so much with the 60% then, right? Or even the 50%? And, when you include a 4+ ward, things look better and better.

When people argue that Canons have to be nerfed because they are affecting the meta game, they are arguing from a local perspective. Not only that, but the same logic can be applied all over the place. For example, 8th edition rules are forcing MSU tactics out of the game. Therefore, we need to nerf Horde formation so more people can field the MSU lists they want to field.

You can use the same argument with Dwarfs and magic. Dwarf anti magic is so powerful that it encourages people to not take wizards therefore it must be nerfed. Nevermind the effect that would have on the army in question - that's not important. What's important is what the people who feel entitled to optimal performance for their army want.

What I am arguing for is simple - the largest part of this game's strategy, in my opinion, is using the tools your army gives you to overcome the tools the other army has access to. That means using canons to overcome big monsters, but it also means using ambushers and artillery to counter artillery. It means using magic to deal with big threats like killy characters, and Killy characters to help weaker units outperform stronger enemies.

[The bearded one]

So, not so much with the 60% then, right? Or even the 50%? And, when you include a 4+ ward, things look better and better.

camping behind a fence, anyway, but that's only so long as the fence is intact.

To my displeasure the greatest tournament organisers in the netherlands generally don't have fences or obstacles on their tables, and for some reason nobody else either inside or outside the local group really likes using them either, while I think they're pretty great.

[Vaktathi]

Do away with the miserable "a cannonball hits both rider and monster" rule and everything is fine and dandy.

This, and run it like 40k blast templates where they can't snipe models out of a unit.

[Montegue]

That's unfortunate. Terrain is a big part of the game's balance. It helps to keep people from always hording, it preserves large targets against artillery, it breaks up engagements and the battlefield - without it we may as well just roll dice instead of moving things around. Not to mention the ambiance it adds to the game.

Part of that is cost prohibition - organizers aren't raking in money on the event, and terrain isn't cheap. It might be worth the effort to construct and provide extra terrain to your local tournament people in order to bring their game boards into line with 8th edition's rules.

[Phazael]

Our clubs events (SoCal area) have plentiful terrain and monsters are still a rare site, unless they are the underpriced or ward/regen variety. Having been to GTs on both coasts over the last three years, I can safely say its not a local meta thing. In fact, with the old empire book still in play, I saw three cannons a lot more than I saw monsters at tournements. I can't remember the last time I saw even a mid tier table with a chariot on it that di not have an Archlector riding it, as well. Cannons still have plenty to do when there are no monsters on the table. They still get to nail other people's artilery and can reliably punk off 4 or so derps a turn when fired into infantry units. Thats why even when the monsters stopped being used, armies were still generally packing two of them. That and two of them shelling a character repeatedly for a couple turns are nearly assured of dropping him at some point.

[Lord Inquisitor]

So, not so much with the 60% then, right? Or even the 50%? And, when you include a 4+ ward, things look better and better.

You keep saying "4+ ward" like most ridden mounts get one.

Yes, the probabilities I quoted earlier really are accurate and only moderately dropped by walls. You really don't get it. The degree of assumptions you are making are huge.

Assumption 1: the board has walls. Not every tournament table has walls on it. Often tournament organisers will theme boards, giving appropriate terrain to appropriate tables. Border Raids GT, for example, has some of the best boards I've ever seen, let alone at a tournament. Not every board had walls, in fact only a few really which were themed around human settlements.

Assumption 2: the walls are placed in a convenient location. Basically, what I'm asking for is walls sufficiently across the board that I can use them as cover, but not so close the enemy can occupy them or charge my valuable monster with elite troops, cav, other monsters or just a tarpit. Further assumption is that the wall is not more than 60-degree angle to anywhere war machines can be placed. Many players will put their cannons in the corners to make side-shots easier (standard operating procedure for ogres is one in each corner).

Assumption 3: That the monster, placed sideways-on to a wall, can then charge. The monster must be placed exactly adjacent to the wall or the probabilities go up. That puts it only able to charge to a 45-degree angle. Assuming the wall is an ideal 12" away from the enemy battleline, that means a minimum distance of 17", assuming the enemy places troops at the baseline exactly along that line and doesn't move them back. In practice, anything less than ideal conditions will mean it is not possible to get a charge by placing the monster side-on.

Assumption 4: The monster player gets the first turn. Otherwise it's two lots of cannon fire.

Assumption 5: That the wall will actually protect a monster. Assuming a moderate two cannons, we're talking about the following probabilities, assuming a monster-base side on to a wall.

First shot.
- Miss/misfire. 9/36 = 1/4 = 0.25
- Wall destroyed. 15/36 = 5/12 =0.4167
- Monster hit. 1/3 = 0.3333

Second Shot.
- If first shot missed or hit monster, same probabilities as shot one.
- If first shot destroyed wall, probabilities are: miss/misfire = 1/3, hit = 2/3

So if both fire, the probabilities are:
- both miss/strike the wall
Miss followed by miss/wallstrike [1/4 * (5/12 + 1/4)] + wallstrike followed by miss [5/12 * 1/3] = 1/6 + 5/36 = 11/36 = 0.3
- one strikes monster
Hit, followed by miss/wallstrike [1/3 * (1/4 + 5/12)] + Miss followed by hit [1/4 * 1/3] + Wallstrike followed by hit [5/12 * 2/3] = 2/9 + 1/12 + 12/36 = 23/36 = 0.583
- both strike monster
both hit = 1/9 = 0.11

So the probability of just two cannons inflicting at least one hit on the dragon behind the wall is 70%, incorporating an 11% chance both cannons hit. Put another way, there is only a 30% chance the wall will protect the dragon from being hit. Not quite 100% protection you were claiming. Obviously by the time you add a third cannon, the odds increase considerably because the wall is likely to be gone with the first or second shot and the odds of both mount and rider surviving become slim. Note also this assumes a side-on shot.

Add that to assumptions 1-4 and it is absurd to expect walls to protect you. As I said before I played a game on Saturday, I had both walls and buildings to hide behind in my deployment zone, but nothing I could move my monster behind in no-man's land and yep, he bought it to a cannon at the first opportunity. Walls are great if you can use them, but they only do so much and you cannot rely on them.

[Cambion Daystar]

And the next turn you are safe in combat.

[theunwantedbeing]

And the next turn you are safe in combat.

The combat has to end at some point.

[Lord Inquisitor]

And the next turn you are safe in combat.

Yes, safe in combat.

Only assuming:

• Only 2 cannons, no other ranged fire/spells
• First turn
• Walls on the table
• Walls in covinient position, not too far to charge, not too close to get charged
• Able to see and charge at least one unit despite being side-on to the enemy and that unit not being something that can threaten the monster/rider
• Enemy cannons not positioned on the flanks of the enemy
• Successful charge roll (after enemy get a move back/flee as applicable).

... then there's only a 60% chance (taking wounds and a 4+ ward on the rider into account) that both my monster or rider will survive.

That's the best case scenario.