|
Post by Eric formerly Eric on Mar 28, 2017 5:15:46 GMT -6
The white dwarf leaked GSC rules include movement values and the weapons have completely different profiles with To Hit and Armor modifiers. Obviously this is a different game, but it seems in line with the sigmarification and what we learned about 8th ed last week. imgur.com/a/VSMrK
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Mar 28, 2017 7:12:50 GMT -6
I like that system better than the AoS system actually, since its not just "this model always hits on a 3+ in combat even vs monsters and characters" - you still compare weapon skill, and weapons still have an affect on armor but they don't just flat ignore it, which is great for the game. I like the to hit modifiers too of close/long range, and the ammo rolls - which, if I'm not mistaken, mean that on a 4+ (for example) you get another shot, and then another on another 4+, etc. until you fail. That's an awesome mechanic for weapons that are supposed to be machine guns essentially but only ever had like 1-2 shots.
And the M characteristic is what I expected - 4+ move for basic infantry, with guys who are supposed to be a bit faster on their feet getting 6". That opens up the possibility for what we talked about in the other thread, the idea of things like hormagants and beast units getting 8-10" movement instead to showcase their speed. Very exciting stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Eric formerly Eric on Mar 28, 2017 8:15:22 GMT -6
On the other hand, it looks like they got rid of blasts and templates. I don't like that change. Also what does "damage" mean? Maybe that's how many wounds it causes? Like how a D weapon causes d3.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 28, 2017 8:18:52 GMT -6
On the other hand, it looks like they got rid of blasts and templates. I don't like that change. Also what does "damage" mean? Maybe that's how many wounds it causes? Like how a D weapon causes d3. I definitely see a reference to "Large Blast" on the blasting charges. That said, I didn't read if that means something other then using the template. IMO removing templates is good for the game. Units like the Wyvern and Thunder Fire Cannon have caused templates to take far to long to resolve and removing them only speeds up play, which 40k desperately needs. If this is AoS style, then yeah the Damage means the number of wounds it causes.
|
|
|
Post by Russell on Mar 28, 2017 8:30:01 GMT -6
AoS got rid of all the templates but now just do number of wounds. The Brettonnia trebuchet does D6 damage, but it automatically hits if it's shooting at a unit if it's a certain size. Kinda neat and definitely speeds up the game. Plus scatter dice can be too contentious especially if your name is Jeff and you don't know how angles work.
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Mar 28, 2017 8:33:20 GMT -6
Or Doug and all the faces of your scatter die are "hit"
|
|
|
Post by jefferestinpeace on Mar 28, 2017 8:49:53 GMT -6
I have no idea what arrows mean
|
|
|
Post by Eric formerly Eric on Mar 28, 2017 9:29:53 GMT -6
Meh, I like having to account for blasts, templates etc when moving units. It adds another dimension and risk/reward analysis to the game. Similarly with casualties being the dudes closest to the firing unit.
|
|
|
Post by Nick P on Mar 28, 2017 11:21:42 GMT -6
But in the end its the same thing -you're still having your opponent roll 5-6 dice To Wound your unit; what does it matter if they used a template to generate the hits, or a 2D6 mechanic or similar?
|
|
|
Post by Eric formerly Eric on Mar 28, 2017 11:28:03 GMT -6
Because it affects movement strategy. Do I move up all my gants into a clump to get them within 12" firing distance of your unit or do I sacrifice a few extra shots by spreading out the unit to avoid a blast hitting 6 of them. Do I try to hide my whole 10 man unit in this small building if you are gonna drop a squad a flamers right next to them or do I keep them spread out outside of the terrain. It adds another element to movement strategy imo.
|
|
|
Post by Eric formerly Eric on Mar 28, 2017 11:30:19 GMT -6
Also with barrage vs. Blasts, if I keep my storm shield guys out front, then a barrage to the middle of my squad will take out all of my non-shielded guys.
|
|
|
Post by daniel, why on Mar 28, 2017 12:57:02 GMT -6
The Short and Long range modifiers were in the original Necromunda (and 2nd Ed, I'm pretty sure). I think Nick is right about the ammo--the Sustained Fire rule used to let you throw a bunch of dice until your weapon jammed up.
Pretty excited about this!
I do have to agree with the template haters. It doesn't really add anything to the game, and it's become so far abstracted you might as well just roll some dice for number of hits, Sigmar style. However, I can see it being fun in a small skirmish game with individual models rather than blobs of units. Presumably the game will be quick in other ways so it won't be a such a drag to work out.
|
|
jesse
neophyte
Posts: 732
|
Post by jesse on Mar 28, 2017 16:11:38 GMT -6
Short and long range modifiers, sustained fire, and ammo rolls are all Necromunda things with some (not ammo rolls, I think) being part of second edition. Sustained fire used to be special die that had options for one, two, or three shots or jams and some weapons could roll multiple of these dice, but later Necromunda editions changed sustained fire to D3 shots per die.
Ammo rolls were where, if you roll a 6 to hit, you then have to roll over the ammo rolls to not run out of ammo.
Other than short/long range, I sort of hope neither of the other mechanics make it into 8th, while they work great in Necromunda, they would bog down a game of 40k.
|
|
|
Post by Joelercoaster on Mar 28, 2017 16:23:56 GMT -6
Agreed - modifiers are quick on a squad level because it's all the same (or at least no worse than seeing which are in rapid-fire range). But sustained fire/ammo rolls for each member would bog things down pretty bad, potentially. More so ammo roll, sustained fire we kind of have in that certain weapons have a variable number of shots as is. A single batch of 'd3 per model' isn't all that terrible, I don't think.
But yeah, a lot of it could be ported *back* into 40k and be done well... key words "could be" and "done well". High hopes, moderate expectations, but hormagaunts with 9" move would be sweet.
|
|
jesse
neophyte
Posts: 732
|
Post by jesse on Mar 28, 2017 16:39:21 GMT -6
I kind of liked how hormagaunts moved in old editions, where it was a 6" move, but a 12" charge range, but variable charge range would have to go bye-bye for that to work.
As to templates, as someone who uses a lot of templates, I love them. They make positioning models hugely important, both for avoiding them and for where you place your flamers in a squad. I think the biggest reason, though, is a selfish one: I can't see a way for templates to be removed without needing them. I can reliably get something like 16-20 hits with a squad of 4 heavy flamers. With a move to variable hits, moving into a strong firing position right in the enemy's face and letting loose will no longer matter: instead I'll want to stay max distance away and hope for the best, which almost certainly be far fewer (I can't imagine flamers causing more than D6 hits, if that).
|
|