Fixing Vehicle Damage chart

[Reivax26]

I just had an idea on a way to fix the broken part of the Damage chart. When you roll to penetrate a vehicle, for ever 1 you go over the armor value of the vehicle, you should get a +1 on the damage chart. This would make so much sense that its probably never going to happen but it would be awesome if they did. Think about it, a Railgun fires at a Rhino. He rolls a 5 to penetrate. So since he's 4 over its armor value, its automatically destroyed because everything from immobilized down is now off the chart.

Just my 2 cents

[Bunnahabhain]

1)This should be in rules development.

2) It's an aweful idea. Truely aweful. Meltas are already the tank killers of choice, so we'll give them a special rule that virtually guarantees they'll destroy it every single time.

The vehicle damage table is good enough, there are dozens of other bits in 40K that want attention first. We just need increased risks/penalties to passengers, and a reason for infantry to actually disembark, and that'll fix transports.

[Reivax26]

I just wanted to post it to see how bad people would go off on it lol. I know its a horrible idea and should never even be thought of but I am laughing which is worth it.

[Fangschrecken]

The thing about the vehicle damage chart is that it isn't all that bad right now, and it wasn't that bad last edition, but a minor tweak in one direction or another makea huge difference in the meta game.

I would make glancing hit -1 instead of -2, but somehow also that glancing hits cannot destroy a vehicle (unless it is enough immobilized/weapon destroyed to do so). Perhaps a return to the seperate damage charts.

[MyNameDidntFit]

I just wanted to post it to see how bad people would go off on it lol.

Openly admitting to trolling, now there's an interesting tactic

I would make glancing hit -1 instead of -2, but somehow also that glancing hits cannot destroy a vehicle (unless it is enough immobilized/weapon destroyed to do so). Perhaps a return to the seperate damage charts.

And, suddenly, Necrons rule the table.

[copper.talos]

The problem is not the tanks nor the damage table. It's the transports.

[carldooley]

How about an addition to weapon destroyed - if on a transport you could choose to do d6 wounds to the passengers using the weapon's AP that penetrated the vehicle (instead of destroying a weapon)?

[CaptainGallas]

I don't think the idea that the strenght of the weapon would make a bigger difference is totally crazy.

The roll for armour penetration is a way of determing the power of the hit.
Rolling a 14 is more powerful than rolling 11, that is something everyone agrees to.

Shouldn't a roll of 20 be even more powerful then? Not +1 per point over as the OP suggested, but maybe a +1 if over 15 and a +2 if over 20?
And maybe the +1 and +2 would also apply on the strenght on the hit on the guys inside if the vehicle explodes?
Passengers taking S5/S6 hits instead of S4 would make a big difference, and maybe make the mech armies less powerful.

IMO, a S10 MC hitting a rhino, rolling double 6s and thereby getting a whopping 22, should not be able to get just a 1 on the damage chart and ruleswise beeing the exact same thing as rolling double 1s and getting a 12.

[Empirespy]

the problem is that Vindicators would just kill every tank, at least now you have a single D6 to save you.

[Eldoriath]

Well, tbh it doesn't really matter how hard you penetrate something or not. If you go through you go through, easy as that. Only thing that remains of importance is where the penetration hits.

Actually over-penetration could on the contrary make less damage in some cases since you don't shed as much energy in the target. But this is mroe true when talking about living persons rather then vehicles as far as I understood it. Just making a small "tunnel" (over penetration) makes less damage then creating a larger cavity that ends somewhere around 3/4 through the body.

[copper.talos]

How about an addition to weapon destroyed - if on a transport you could choose to do d6 wounds to the passengers using the weapon's AP that penetrated the vehicle (instead of destroying a weapon)?

The main problem is that you take out the transport and the unit inside is almost unharmed. They can shoot you next turn, assault etc. I think in that case the unit inside should become pinned autoimatically.

[Empirespy]

Well, tbh it doesn't really matter how hard you penetrate something or not. If you go through you go through, easy as that. Only thing that remains of importance is where the penetration hits.

Actually over-penetration could on the contrary make less damage in some cases since you don't shed as much energy in the target. But this is mroe true when talking about living persons rather then vehicles as far as I understood it. Just making a small "tunnel" (over penetration) makes less damage then creating a larger cavity that ends somewhere around 3/4 through the body.

Well the Tau Railgun should always make a hole, as it moves through the object so fast that it causes the inside of the tank to be sucked towards the tiny hole, in the case of people, sucking them inside out.

[carldooley]

The main problem is that you take out the transport and the unit inside is almost unharmed. They can shoot you next turn, assault etc. I think in that case the unit inside should become pinned automatically.

how about adding that on a stunned the unit embarked is pinned within (cannot fire or disembark(unless destroyed)), and being able to choose a lower result than the one that you roll. . .

after all, where do you want that pesky unit of assault terminators? stuck in its transport or tearing up the melta unit that just messed up their transport?

[The Dude]

This is more appropriate in the Rules Development forum.

Thread Moved

The Dude
The Warseer Inquisition

[MyNameDidntFit]

how about adding that on a stunned the unit embarked is pinned within (cannot fire or disembark(unless destroyed)), and being able to choose a lower result than the one that you roll. . .

But that doesn't make sense. How does Immobilised become Weapon Destroyed? You're rolling on the damage table to randomise the hit--if you roll a 4 it isn't arbitrarily a more powerful hit, rather that it hit the tracks/legs/wheels rather than the turret/arm/etc...

If a missile hits the tracks of my Leman Russ you'd better have a bleeding good explanation as to how that broke the main cannon.

[carldooley]

If a missile hits the tracks of my Leman Russ you'd better have a bleeding good explanation as to how that broke the main cannon.

don't get me wrong, 99 times out of a hundred I'd be perfectly content to roll a 5 or 6 on a pen. However, which is worse on a tactical level, losing the transport with its passengers popping into combat, or stopping the transport for a turn and keeping its occupants inside and useless?

[lanrak]

Having a proportional result makes sense.
But the curent resolution method was NOT developed for this type of proportionality.

If we use a unified resolution method that can be used for all units types, then proportianality can be introduced.
Eg if we use Armour values of 1 to 15 to cover all units.(Grots to Monoliths.)
And Armour penetration values on weapons from 5 to 20.

And simply make the armour save a D6 roll added to the Armour value.
If the total exeeds the AP vlue of the weapon , the model passes its armour saving throw.

This gives proportional saves without modifiers
And we can then use a similar comparison between Damage Threshold, and Damage Value of weapon , to determine the amount of damage done to the soft target behind the armour.

Check to see if the armour is defeated, then determine the amount of damage done.
Still just rolling a D6, but not using it in a deterministic way.

But this fits better with a complete re-write...

[Son of Sanguinius]

Oh, lanrak. Your perseverance is truly inspiring.

I think the vehicle chart works pretty well as is. I also don't think melta is overpowered. It's just extremely common because it's the most consistent tool in a mech-driven world. Certain units, like Fire Dragons, are ridiculously underpriced, however.

[hazmiter]

Penetrating hits should deal 1d6 + 1 hits on unit inside, at half of the str of the weapon, rounding down, plus at half the ap of the weapon in question.
Eg, melta gun penetrates a transport, does 1d6 +1 hits on passengers, at str 4, ap 4. Roll to wound as per usual.
Sound fair??? Or over powered..........
Then roll on vehicle damage table.... If vehicle blows up, its a bonus.....

[MyNameDidntFit]

don't get me wrong, 99 times out of a hundred I'd be perfectly content to roll a 5 or 6 on a pen. However, which is worse on a tactical level, losing the transport with its passengers popping into combat, or stopping the transport for a turn and keeping its occupants inside and useless?

But how on earth do you justify being able to choose that? If you fire a missile, causing a transport to explode you can't just suddenly yell out "NO, WAIT, DON'T EXPLODE!" and expect the laws of the universe to obey you.

Penetrating hits should deal 1d6 + 1 hits on unit inside, at half of the str of the weapon, rounding down, plus at half the ap of the weapon in question.
Eg, melta gun penetrates a transport, does 1d6 +1 hits on passengers, at str 4, ap 4. Roll to wound as per usual.
Sound fair??? Or over powered..........
Then roll on vehicle damage table.... If vehicle blows up, its a bonus.....

Sound fair? What? No. On averages, that's one wound against a Tactical Marine squad... or three wounds against a squad of non-MEQs or better. This means that your average "destroyed - Explodes!" result kills 8 Guardsmen or 3 Space Marines.

While the mobile bunker vehicle system isn't the greatest, that is certainly not the way to fix the imbalance.