Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
As I think the current cover save in 40k, is an over abstract way to deal with cover.
Cover SHOULD affect the chance to see/hit the target.
It SHOULD NOT replace the physical protection of the target.
6+ cover saves makes the attaker re-roll 6s to hit.
5+ cover saves makes the attacker re-roll 5s and 6s to hit.
4+ cover save makes the attacker re-roll 4s,5s, and 6s to hit.
Roll to wound and save as normal.
This makes units in cover harder to hit , (but not impossible to hit or harder to wound.)
And the better the cover, the higher the chance the attacker will miss the target.
This is just a new idea up for discussion.
What do you folks think?
It's also a huge kick where it hurts for low BS forces. If you need a 3 to hit then rerolling 6 doesn't hurt much - infact rerolling 4+ is still better odds than a 4+ save. If you need 5 or 6 to hit then say goodbye to your shooting phase.
It could work but the game isn't balanced for it - orks would get hammered, marines would effectively get double saves in cover against small arms, and necrons would get gimped - again.
It's not a bad idea, but as A.T. said the game isn't built for it. It would require an overhaul of the bs system to make it possible for lower bs or non-shooty armies to even hit anything with shooting.
Quick question, let's say orks were shooting at marines in 4+ cover. Would orks get to reroll both the successful 5s and 6s and the failed 4s?
If they don't, an ork has a 1/9 chance to hit marines and a 1/18 to actually wound one. Add in the 1/3 chance for that wound to stick and only 1/54 shots will remove a model. Even for orks, that's rough.
Space Marines: Bringing Swords to Gunfights since 30k. And winning.
"Why is there a big red button on the bridge that says 'Exterminatus?'" "Why wouldn't we have one of those? I love that thing."
Covers really difficult, I like this idea but it is biased. I might playtest it though if I get bored.
Other ideas are to:
-use the fantasy system.
-Make cover worse save but allow it as well as other saves (solve the problem of, oh no I didn't get behind that tree in time so my armour has DISAPPEARED). It also means it effectively reduces the amount of times you hit the target. If you want to make it feel more realistic, roll the save after their to hit roll. Doesn't change the statistics but makes more sense (uses current system because its easier to remember all saves after to wound, than having an exception). Of course, the sae cover grants would have to be reduced for this to work, otherwise it'd just be broken.
i think the thing ur missing, is that the cover save are represented as the dude or troop just dive in cover..to try and avoid the hit/wound.. but doesnt mean theyre always crouched in it... so ur way of using it or trying to change the cover rule is a bit rediculous IMO...especially that i play orks
Cover save is actually more to do with the firer trying to get a good shot, and not being able to (hence why if you shoot at a unit hidden behind another, the 'saved' wounds don't get applied to the front unit)
Thanks for the feed back.Here are the effects of the old and new system.Cover value down the L/H side.BS value from 5 to one across tha top
Old Sys BS
5 4 3 2 1
6 69% 56% 42% 28% 14%
5 56% 44% 33% 22% 11%
4 42% 33% 25% 17% 8%
3 28% 22% 17% 11% 6%
5 4 3 2 1
6 81% 61% 42% 22% 3%
5 78% 56% 33% 11% 3%
4 75% 50% 25% 11% 3%
3 72% 44% 25% 11% 3%
As the new system is trying to effect the chance to hit, allowing high BS units to be more effective on targets behind cover , and low BS troops being less effective.
It worked out quite well!
I was thinking that low BS units like Orks were more likely to assault targets in cover than rely on thier lack luster shooting.(Its more orky ! )
As the low end of the cover (4+ and 3+ ) seem to cause the problems.
How do you feel about re classifying cover to go with the new system?
This type of cover just obscures the target unit from view.
Things like smoke, wire entaglements, fences,hedges , long grass,crops, interveening units, etc.
(I include interveening units in this catagory as an abstraction , unless we want to complicate shooting by working out if misses effect the interveening unit(s).)
6+ cover save , if the unit is up to 50% obscured from the attackers view.
5+ cover save, if the unit is over 50% obscured from the attackers view.
6+ Cover save makes the attacker re-roll any 6s to hit.
5+ Cover save makes the attacker re roll any 5s and 6s to hit .
This type of cover obscures the target unit from view, and is substatial enough to provide a degree of physical protection.
Things like buildings , rubble, fortifications etc.
In addition to making the attacker re roll to hit as for light cover,Heavy cover MAY improves the physical protection of the unit.
The unit in heavy cover MAY use the heavy covers protection instead of thier normal armour save.
4+ save for improvised hard cover.(Rubble, buildings , heavy walls etc.)
3+ save for hard cover from purpouse built fortifications.(Bunkers Trenches etc.)
The cover type and protection levcel should be agreed before the game starts.If the level of obscurment is in debatable count it as less than 50%.
This is a sort of hybrid between the current system and my new system.
I am just proposing some ideas for concideration, all comments and constructive critisism is welcome.
Last edited by Lanrak; October 8th, 2010 at 10:55.
It does seem quite interesting but to the 2nd Edition part of my brain this just seems a bit like an overly complicated version of to-hit modifiers!
I actually quite like the current cover saves system as it is a quick (albeit abstract) way of representing cover. If you want it to be more realistic, I would say just change your shooting actions to declare target, cover saves, roll to hit, armour save (as you could get both of course), roll to wound. The current shooting phase just simplifies this to reduce the amount of dice you have to roll and keep the game flowing.
Just my two cents, as I've said your system does seem quite interesting!