vehicle damage tables - Warhammer 40K Fantasy
 

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!


Register Now!

User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    112
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    18 (x1)

    vehicle damage tables

    I just thought about this...

    Make the vehicle damage table use a D6, but have the results on a chart ranged 1 through 10.

    Roll the D6, and add 1 for each point the penetration roll exceeded the armor factor.

    WIth this type of setup, we would only need one table. a 6 result would never result in a vehicle destroyed. glances and stuns would be fairly commonplace. one shot kills against armor would be a bit more rare, more along the lines of a point black good melta shot with a high delta off the armor rating, et. al.

    Apply negative modifiers to the roll for things like skimmers moving over 6", monoliths, and the like, the specifics of which could be worked out later.

    It would add slightly more to the complexity of the rules, but make mechanized armies viable IMHO...

    Just a quick thought.


  2. Remove Advertisements
    Librarium-Online.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Son of LO Manu_Forti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    South Australia
    Age
    30
    Posts
    2,076
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    117 (x6)

    I think that would complicate things too much. The current rules are ok. I just think the glancing hit table should have a 'no damage' rating. This represents the shot simply blowing off a light or other non essential objects.
    I dont see why every glancing hit should be able to damage the vehicle to a point where the crew are unable to shoot (as a minimum).
    Dark Elves - Game #28 vs High Elves: Draw
    W L D
    21 5 5

  4. #3
    Sadomachiatto Karmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Frankfurt, Germany
    Posts
    7,076
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    ReputationReputation
    790 (x8)

    It's a pretty cool idea think, and certainly warrants further investigation.

    I still think that fast moving skimmers should be:

    a) harder to hit
    b) harder to shoot from
    c) add +1 to the glancing table.
    LO Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous
    Anyone who's as loyal and motivated to doing what they love as you are is respectable in my book
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyric
    I'm taking leave of my senses and shall be out of my mind until further notice.

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    112
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    18 (x1)

    definitely skimmers should be harder to hit.

    Hopefully in the next version of 40K, they'll make cover and fast skimmers count as a negative modifier to hit instead of how it's done now. That would fix a few inconsistencies. Hull down would just make a tank harder to hit , for example, and it would be sensible for all models to make maximum use of cover. The only problem with this would be resolving for ordinance, which just lands where it lands and affects whatever is under it.

  6. #5
    durus Diggums Hammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Victoria B.C
    Posts
    2,578
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    178 (x7)

    I think they need to so something for vehicles though......

    A 160+ ish Leman Russ can killed with one Lascannon shot.

    The same pointish Uber Dakka Carnifex with 5 wounds, 2+ save needs at least 5. The Carnifex can keep shooting while taking in wounds. Every time the Russ gets glanced or penetrated it can't fire and do damage on the enemy, if it didn't get destroyed!
    "A love for tradition has never weakened a nation, indeed it has strengthened nations in their hour of peril."
    Sir Winston Churchil

  7. #6
    I'm Back! Koss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    chaos wastes
    Age
    27
    Posts
    2,351
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    ReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputationReputation
    176 (x6)

    how about a weapons ap contributes to this. an ap2 weapon will get a bonus, while an ap6 weapon will get a penalty. P.S. this(yours that is) is a great idea.
    That is not dead which may eternal lie,
    for in strange aeons even death may die.

  8. #7
    Sadomachiatto Karmoon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Frankfurt, Germany
    Posts
    7,076
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    ReputationReputation
    790 (x8)

    Quote Originally Posted by Diggums Hammer View Post
    The same pointish Uber Dakka Carnifex with 5 wounds, 2+ save needs at least 5. The Carnifex can keep shooting while taking in wounds. Every time the Russ gets glanced or penetrated it can't fire and do damage on the enemy, if it didn't get destroyed!
    Aah.. this is an argument which doesn't really work.

    All the bolters in the world can't stop a lemon rusk.

    But a carnifex? That can be killed by gauss or bolter fire.

    Swingies and roundabouts.
    LO Rules

    Quote Originally Posted by Anonymous
    Anyone who's as loyal and motivated to doing what they love as you are is respectable in my book
    Quote Originally Posted by Cyric
    I'm taking leave of my senses and shall be out of my mind until further notice.

  9. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    92
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    12 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Karmoon View Post
    Aah.. this is an argument which doesn't really work.

    All the bolters in the world can't stop a lemon rusk.

    But a carnifex? That can be killed by gauss or bolter fire.

    Swingies and roundabouts.
    Don't Russ' have a nice low back armour that bolters can glance. Come to think of it, charge a standard marine squad into it's rear and the Russ is going down.

    Marines can rip most vehicles apart with thier bare hands in CC assuming they don't rush the front armour.

  10. #9
    Member Kabanov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Sherborne
    Age
    26
    Posts
    130
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Reputation
    10 (x1)

    Quote Originally Posted by Kossolax_the_Foresworn View Post
    how about a weapons ap contributes to this. an ap2 weapon will get a bonus, while an ap6 weapon will get a penalty. P.S. this(yours that is) is a great idea.
    Currently, AP1 is auto-penetrate, and AP- is glance only. In this system, I guess they'd add one and subtract one respectively? Adding in modifiers for each AP value woul make things a tad complex...

    As for the main idea, I think it's brilliant. It limits the chances of a "lucky hit", but as I've said elsewhere, 40K doesn't really work on a scale where lucky hits are relevant (after all, if you can get a 1 in a million chance shot with 2 good die rolls, that seems a bit biased). It would also make tanks a lot more fun to use, deliberate AT weapons that much more effective (never anything more irritating than firing 3 lascannons at a tank and triple-stunning it), and speed the game up a little.

    However, I do run into one problem. I tried out a provisional damage table, and it would make heavy armour almost impossible to destroy from range. This isn't quite accurate - it's difficult to knock out an MBT or the like, but not impossible. Also, things like the Land Raider with all its uber-gubbins would become almost unstoppable (not that it's not already)...

    But it would be nice to field a mech company against 'Nids and have a decent chance of winning...
    If it ain't broke, it might need fixing.

    The difficult we do immediately. The impossible may take a little longer.
    US Army Corps of Engineers

    Member of Advanced 40K development team (self-appointed)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts