Kirb your enthusiasm!


"Pink isn't a color. It's a lifestyle." - Chumbalaya
"...generalship should be informing list building." - Sir Biscuit
"I buy models with my excess money" - Valkyrie whilst a waitress leans over him

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Discussion: Fixing one gun tanks (again)

We've done this a few times and the fact of the matter is the point is moot (or was always moot since Games Workshop doesn't listen) as 6th edition is printed and ready but it's a fun intellectual and design exercise (and if 6th ed is just that bad...). Anyway, how to fix one gun tanks without completely changing them? For the most part, the majority of tanks have a major gun just some of them have one really big gun and little to nothing else (Exorcist, Vindicator, Fire Prism, etc.). This is an issue because that tank can become relatively worthless more so compared to their multi-gun compatriots (i.e. a single weapon destroyed result).

The solution is simple in theory - make such guns harder to take off. The how is the question. The simplest and most common answer is to give such guns a 4+ save - something which is done in Apoc for certain vehicles. The problem with this is you can end up with an invincible main weapon or you have the same issue as before - it gets blown off early and the gun is useless. It's the same point against randomness here and without a 2D6 system it's too unreliable. It's a great easy fix but we'd want something more in-depth to actually make such platforms more viable.

There are two main ideas I've seen bandied about places I like. One is burnable armor (i.e. Extra Armor, Spirit Stones, etc.) and the other is hull points specifically for big guns.

Burnable armor is an interesting concept, particularly when combined with the potential for vehicles to be destroyed if they sustain X damage results from individual shooting sources a turn. If such upgrades become ignore damage effect without penalty to the amount of results they can take, that becomes a pretty powerful upgrade (and Living Metal then shits all over Fortitude) and thus the trade-off to keeping it or 'burning it' to ignore a higher damage result (specifically an immobilised or weapon destroyed result) forces some important decisions on the player (which we like and want). By being able to burn such armor and basically force your opponent to cause two separate weapon destroyed results (i.e. not from the same unit), you've increased the usefulness of such tanks by a controlled amount - an amount you control.

The other option is hull points for the individual vehicle in mind but only for their main weapon. This again gives you a set variable in how many weapon destroyed results are needed to remove a main gun - two or three would be the general rule of thumb. Furthermore, if vehicles are still operating under the destroyed if taking X damage results in a single turn from individual sources, there's a combined effect for such which works nicely (in theory) to mitigate weak tank durability and one gun syndrome.

There's also a combination of both (obviously hull points for guns would need to be on the lower side of the scale) but I think this becomes too good for such weapon systems.

Anyway, let's get some thoughts and discussion rolling for some good old fashioned think tank fun =D. Which of these do you think is better? Another option entirely? I certainly think the flat 4+ roll leaves something to be desired but at the end of the day, it's a quick and easy fix...

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...