OGC Hand to hand combat system.

[James 40K Champ ***]

Everyone may *think* it is fine at the moment.

But the reality IS that we have weaked combat at least a bit, and that we HAVE taken some of the sting out of charging.

And I think thats sad in an atmosphere where more people stand and shoot than go for a fight

[Simon]

The reduction in effectiveness only affects big beasties and characters. The basic trooper is more effective in close combat, with close combat specialists like assault marines doing much better than before. The sting does still come into play from the charge. Before, it had a slight effect (+1 to your score, not much when you only roll one die) compared to the ability now to kill your opponent before they get a chance to hurt you. This is proven to be well worth it for my gaunts. They will almost always be charging, allowing them to counter their main weakness - low toughness and armour. Getting to strike first lets them cause some damage before they eventually get mopped up, and a drawn out combat is ideal for them. I prefer close combat by a long way over shooting. Best thing to do is an army swap and see things from the other side of the table.

[Adoni-Zedek]

High WS low wound models are worse off, and low WS high wound models are better off. In particular, Carnifexes are now much better against higher WS characters than before. In the original rules, the character is likely to win each combat, slowly wearing down the beastie over several turns, while taking no hits in return. Now the 'fex gets to hit back with 4 attacks after the character finishes its attacks. Ogryn champions are also much tougher in CC now.

I'd recommend changing the "to hit" table to emphasize WS a bit more, and allow an extra attack when charging. But you know that already.

[tturen]

Having assualted carni's on a couple occasions myself with my Wolf Lord I can see how the OGC rules would give me great pause. Its his high WS that keeps the lord alive. If he wins even by one he has no worries and lives to fight again. Now if the Carni gets to return attacks after he is struck there is no way I would even consider assualting a carni. They just got to many damn wounds and great armour.

WS should remain the critical factor in both systems.

[Adoni-Zedek]

My commander in Termi armor, chain fist, and conversion field used to eat carnifexes for breakfast. A Solitaire(WS8) could happily occupy a carnifex for quite some time, and only cost half the points. Not anymore, though. On the other hand, I do like the ability to have high initiative models strike first. That could be because I play eldar, Space Wolves (sort of) and Harlequins, all high-inititiative armies.

On my table, the Wolf Lord needs 4's to hit the carnifex, while the 'fex needs 5's to hit back. If the Wolf Lord has a sword, he can parry one of the 'fex's attacks, forcing a reroll, which might let him live for one more turn. Unless the Carnifex has venom sacs, each hit only inflicts one wound, so it's likely the wolf-lord can last at least a couple turns. But each of his hits inflict only one wound as well (unless he's got lightning claws or a chain fist or Thunderhammer), so he's likely doomed. (Out of curiosity, does your Wolf Lord have a name?)

I personnally wouldn't attempt to take on a carnifex in close combat with anything less than a 5-strong squad of terminators with thunderhammers and storm shields. But that's 480 pts (of my super terminators:4 6 5 5 5 2 6 2 10 at 75 pts each + weapons) to kill probably 230 pts worth of carnifex. Not really cost effective.

[James 40K Champ ***]

We should amend our to hit table, at least then higher weapon skill things have a chance of survival. What about things like banshees etc with really low toughness that relly on not being hit!

I just think its ignorant to nearly remove the entire importance of WS for the system, when certain things rely on that as their strength!

[Simon]

The problem with these scenarios of 'my lord used to kill canifexes' really comes down to realism. I actually think that a carnifex should always have been able to eat most things in a protracted combat and the thought of a man sized model going round upon round with the beast seems unrealistic to me.

Banshees actually don't have a high WS value (they're actually only WS 4) and in our rules set they are still as survivable on the charge. I actually disagree that the close combat has been made redundant completely. I can see no problems with it at the moment. Brown, remember that you are using like for like combats as your whole experience here, marine vs marine will always be drawn out. As I said, just give it a try and see what you think about it when you use proper CC troops.

[James 40K Champ ***]

Im not particularly drawing this from any expereince, Ive just always felt that we arnt doing weapon skill any justice with this system.

I do agree that a carni should rip most stuff to shreds.. but then the other arguments is that a skilled fighter can dodge and weave around its attacks, we know this from modern martial arts!!

I do like our combat, and I do agree you can still do some damage.. my point is just that we have taken the emphasis out of WS, and that could be put back in by jigging the to hit table slightly.

[El Capitan]

A draft of an amended table...


WS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 6
2 3 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 6 6
3 3 3 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5
4 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 5 5
5 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4
6 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4
7 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4 4
8 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4 4
9 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4 4
10 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 4


it could look something like that ?

[Adoni-Zedek]

I think that looks okay. If you make any changes, you should definitely make certain that one side still has an edge in a combat with WS vs WS+1 (3vs4 or 4vs5, etc), like you've got it there.

James said "I just think its ignorant to nearly remove the entire importance of WS for the system, when certain things rely on that as their strength! " I couldn't agree more.

[James 40K Champ ***]

That table makes more sence to me. If everyone is ok with it.

[Simon]

So basically if you have more than double the opponent's WS you hit on 2s.

Not bad, just as long as we don't put the extra attack in for charging (if we do it's bye-bye genestealers, hello wave upon wave of hormagaunts)

[Adoni-Zedek]

You need a WS 4 higher than your opponent to hit on a 2+
You need a WS 6 lower than your opponent to hit on a 6+. Sometimes.
You go from 3 fours in the first two lines to 4 fours from then on out. Was that diliberate, or just a slip up?

[zippysguitar]

am i reading that right, that a ws2 grethin has a 50/50 chance of hitting a ws4 banshee? !

thought something like the normal strength/toughness chart may be more suitable, as normally a difference of 2 in ur ws is effectively 2 more hits (presuming you roll same dice numbers) which makes a much larger difference than the new chart which gives you no significant bonus in that situation

a banshee should chop through a grethin without breaking step, like they do in the old system, but now they get two rolls at a 3+ which is easily failed and then gretchin can strike back with a 50/50 chance of hitting!

[Simon]

zippysguitar said:

a banshee should chop through a grethin without breaking step, like they do in the old system, but now they get two rolls at a 3+ which is easily failed and then gretchin can strike back with a 50/50 chance of hitting!

Actually a banshee mask will take care of the problem there, as the opponent basically cannot strike if the banshee charges. Therefore it would get two rounds of attacks before the grots could strike back. Now gretchin would beat howling banshees in the older editions as well, due to the fact that there would be many more of them and they'd begin to swamp the banshees. Striking scorpions are better if you are going to fight some cheap, disposable infantry.

[James 40K Champ ***]

This boils down to, if you have a higher weapon skill, you get +1 to hit.. (unless youve got a really high WS when it might be +2).

Its better, but i still feel like we arnt doing WS any justice.

[El Capitan]

An extra attack for charging would be very laughing bezerkers. That chart is just a mod. form the mordheim one and probably has mistakes...it was just a suggestion. Luke has suggested +1 to hit on the charge.
As for the banshees analogy, of course they'd be murdered if charging a mob. please refer to my article;
www.ogc.org.uk/Files/Articles/Main/INTOtheEYEOct06/articles.html

[Simon]

What about factoring it in with the parry rule, like if you have a higher WS than your opponent by at least 2 points, you add +1 to your roll and reverse it if you parry the attack of someone with a higher WS than you by 2 points?

Just seems like a banshee would be able to parry a genestealer with the same difficulty of a hive tyrant parrying a gretchin at the moment.

[Adoni-Zedek]

Well, you could try my table:

-----1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
--1 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
--2 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 6
--3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 6
--4 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 6
--5 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6
--6 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6
--7 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6
--8 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
--9 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5
10 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 4

Each 2 points of WS gives you a better chance of hitting.

We always say you must have Str and WS equal to at least 1/2 of your opponent's to parry, otherwise your parry attempt automatically fails. So a Harlequin (WS 5) with a powersword (S5) can parry anything (as long as it isn't Kharne, or some other un-parryable attack).

[James 40K Champ ***]

If you use that table in our rules you still have the problem that +1 WS gives no bonus in combat what so ever.

If the only single thing we are going to use weapon skill for is working out what out have to roll to hit in cc, I think +1 ws should defo give an advantage.

I think:
-----1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
--1 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 6 6
--2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6 6
--3 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 6
--4 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6
--5 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6
--6 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
--7 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5
--8 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4 4
--9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4
10 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3

Combat should be a little more potent than shooting, yet currently an equal stat profile has a better chance of hitting by shooting.

So while a combat army wastes time moving towards the enemy getting shot up, it finally gets there and has no better odds than the shooty one has had sitting blasting the force in half, and then ontop, the shooty army gets to attack them back in combat aswell..