[Doombreed]

Hey all, it's been a while since I've posted anything of real importance so I thought I would try to discuss something I was thinking about the other day.

While coming up with a new Khorne Beserker army list I started to breakdown how actual combat is worked out. Now I'm fully aware that the Warhammer universe is not like real-life but it seems that how they go about combat a little differently. For example when you are in the shooting phase it would make way more sence if a model/unit takes aim (picks target), fires (rolls to hit), sees if the projectile punctures the armour (opponent rolls his/her ASave), then see if the weapon actually damages the target (you roll to wound). Discuss and I will add my opinions to what I had thought of.

 

[The144thCadianPlatoon]

that is more realistic but i think they just did it the way it is because it's easier for the game. it makes the person shooting feel happier that they got wounds instead of just being shut down before they have a chance. idk

 

[Azezel]

The current method is quicker as the attacker doesn't have to give up the dice halfway through. That's all there is to it.

Player one does everything, then player two does everything.

 

[GrizBe]

More realisitc it may be, but the current system is more streamlined.

 

[the Autarch]

i too have thought of this but ultimately most of my units never get armor saves anyway so i dont care.....damn bolters

 

[CursedUNTILLDEATH]

I have thought the same thing for years. Its just simpler to have it the way it is guess.

 

[HivefleetIngensus]

I thought that same thought less than a week ago, and did the math. Surprsingly, form what I got, the numbers don't change, and still cause roughly the same amount of wounds.


6 marines with bolters shoot at termagants.

Current method: 4 hits, approximately 2.67 wounds, ignores armour, so thats 2.67 casualties.

New idea: 4 hits, 4 wounds (ignores armour) , around 2.67 casualties.

Now, lets say they're shooting other marines, and there are more marines shooting. 10marines with bolters shooting at other marines (doesn't matter what type, as long as they are T4 3+ armour save).

Current method: (aproximately) 6.67 hits, 3.335 wounds, and 1.11 failed armour saves.

New idea: (aproximatley) 6.67 hits, 2.22 failed armour saves, and 1.11 wounds.

From what I get, it always results in the same amount of casualties either way. As far as I can see the math is right, but if I am wrong, please correct me.



But yeah, I like it better the way we have it now. One guy does what he needs to do, then the other guy does what he needs to do. Instead of one guy rolls, then the other does, then the first guy rolls again. Its simpler the way we have it now.

 

[Calamari]

What I think is strange is the fact that if cover doesn't stop a shot, it will increase the power of the shot to the point where armour is useless. For example:

A guardsman with carapace armour goes to ground from a bolter shot. He fails his cover save and dies immediately, his armour could stop the bolt but why doesn't it do anything?

 

[HivefleetIngensus]

I guess it's so that the game doesn't take forever, since even a normal marine will become extremely hard to kill. 4+ cover save, then a 3+ armour save, could potentialy stop a bucketload of shots. Imagine a TH/SS Terminator. 4+ cover save, 2+ armour save, then a 4+ invulnerable save. They'd be unkillable.

It would take so very long to just kill one model, there would be very few casualties in a standard game. It'd be crazy.

 

[Unforgiven302]

What I think is strange is the fact that if cover doesn't stop a shot, it will increase the power of the shot to the point where armour is useless. For example:

A guardsman with carapace armour goes to ground from a bolter shot. He fails his cover save and dies immediately, his armour could stop the bolt but why doesn't it do anything?

40K physics, plain and simple.

 

[Holmstrom]

I'm sure you can definitely do this with some homebrew rulesets, but most people probably wouldn't want to deal with it because of how much more time it would take to drop an enemy squad.

 

[Doombreed]

I didn't really do any math I just tested it out a bunch of times with dice so it probubly wasn't very accurate. I think the cover save should be tuned down to a 5+ for most things and a 6+ for the light stuff anyway but thats just me.

 

[Azezel]

The cover rules as they stand are pretty good combined with true line of sight (the current cover rules would be terrible with previous edition rules). Making cover saves 5+ would hurt all armies, but it would hurt those with worse armour more than it would hurt MEQ.

The same goes for allowing multiple saves - MEQ benefit more than other armies.

 

[Dave T Hobbit]

Having played since Rogue Trader, where each model declared a target model and you got all of your saves, it was slower even without full realism.

When it came to actual "realistic" systems, e.g. as re-fighting WWII battles with accurate profiles and wind drift and everything else modelled with maths, I started to lose the fun part way through my first movement.

 

[The144thCadianPlatoon]

yeah actually i thought of it this morning what a cupple of you sed, that it is just faster to do it the way it is because u dont have to roll, give dice to other guy, he rolls, gives dice back, etc. insted u just roll roll roll and may be he can roll. easier

 

[jaws900]

realistic isn't always better. When questions arrise i often think to real life actions (troops not being able to fire flamers otu of rhinoi hatchs for an example of a comman question) however making real life a core part would make it insanly complicated

 

[bitsandkits]

That is a very good ponder, the best thing to do with the rules of 40k is simply just accept them and move on, its mostly all bollocks.

 

[CLT40k]

I agree that it would be more realistic... but I think it would give an unfair advantage for MEQs... as they would have 2 chances to avoid a wound.

 

[Dave T Hobbit]

Realism would change the way saves are calculated.

For example, a cover save can be viewed as intervening material that the shot has to pass through, so would reduce the velocity of a projectile, reducing it's ability to penetrate armour, but would not have the same effect on a laser weapon, or it could be viewed as a reduction in the area that could be hit so would affect all weapons equally but would be a reduction in the chance to hit.

Taking further realism, troops would probably not adjust their aim for bushes but would adjust for walls, so you would need to specify whether you were aiming for an exposed area or firing thorough to determine to hit modifiers, and cover saves.

That is just cover saves, the unrealism goes on: my Ork horde is fearless until they are reduced by one more Ork at which point they are taking tests on their leadership; in a more realistic system the number of troops and their effect on psychology affected you would be only one of many modifiers.

Also, in a more realistic system there would not be Elves with laser rifles :wink: