40k Mod on the basis of the SST Core Rules

[Arkon4000]

Hi Community,

sorry for the long break again. The topic is very extensive and for a guy how write and speak English not as his mother tongue is still more difficult, to write the whole subject in an understandable English. So a big sorry for the long waiting time.

I wouldn't fret abbout posting something quickly. And if the posts as epic as our last ones it will be a while before I could properly respond to it.

I'm happy that you aren't fret if it took a bit longer. But I'm afraid that the post will be very long again. But it is massive pack of new ideas, suggestions and comments.

Ok, this might be a bit disjointed in places. And I'll try and gather some thoughts about skill levels.

Please remember that we create a mod and don't make a 1:1 transfer. This does not work, for that the differences are too great between the both rulesets. I take the original rules as a source of inspiration but the fluff serves also as a source.

True, and it is something I was failing to grasp properly, particularly with the Piercing trait. Trying to keep within the 40K equivalents (power weapons ignoring saves), I tended to overpowering most of the close combat weapons in this respect.

This is not a problem. I make this type of mistake often. It's hard to concentrate on the essentials. The power weapons are very difficult anyway, because we are accustomed other standards. Galatea constantly reminded me on the kill value. We have to think always about what should the weapon do in the game. What type of target should they fight mainly. And how does the weapon also fit to their background.

Nice idea, but I'm not sure if it make sense to set the piercing so high. The weapon has a high attack roll for CC and the chance is great that you reach very often the kill value of an enemy unit. In these cases the piercing is useless. A Piercing of 3 makes it for the adopted unit difficult enough to make a successful armor save.

It should have read 3xD10+3. Against most infantry, it is likely overkill. Fitting for what it is. The piercing is for use against vehicles, many of which may have higher Kill scores and thick armour. It might also apply to attacking things like Terminators (and maybe the Monstrous Tyranids, Tau battlesuits and Eldar wraith constructs). But as you say, Piercing/3 makes it a difficult armour save to make.

What about 2x DCCW (Furioso) build? Could try something modifying the DCCW along the lines of the Pair of Lightning claws?

DCCW - CC: 3xD10+3, Traits: Piercing/3
Pair of DCCWs - CC: 4xD10+4, Traits: Piercing/4

I like your idea and we can try this method. But we should then ensure that we integrate these mechanics uniform. All weapons that have a similar function should act according to this method.

But I would think it more useful if we leave the piercing value to 3. Instead, I would suggest the following profile:

CC: 4xD10+4
Traits: Piercing/3

To keep the method of the pair of claws (+1D/+1 Damage bonus/+1 Piercing) I would suggest a change of the single profile like that:

CC: 3xD10+3
Traits: Piercing/2

A potential damage output of 14 should be strong enough for the vehicle combat. The Kill Value would not reach a level of more than 16. So a Furioso would be a very hard enemy in close combat.

But one question still remains just how hard we want to make other fighters? I think for the Wraith Lord or the Bloodthirster.

I've taken the slow trait, because I wanted to represent the lower initiative from the original 40k rules. But the Ready trait could solve this problem even better. I think it's fair that a model with one of these weapons, can also use them against the enemy if it has time to prepare for the attack and gets the opportunity to act or react... I took a moment to think about it and I like the idea and it makes sense if you imagine it in a real fight.

I did think that was why you went with Slow. And while it kind of fits, I thought Ready would make more sense as it implies your preparing for a Haymaker type strike/Grabbing and Ripping something off/Cutting a big hole into something.

That is exactly the picture, that I have when I read your suggestion. It makes sense in the combination of the lower initiative. The Fighter who want to use this weapon with his full power, must take the reaction/attack of his enemy at first and attack as second.

Ready and Killshot fit well, but with the Killshot trait we need no more piercing (score hit = score kill => no armor save). Which damage value should we set for this weapon?

Oops. Good catch with the Piercing and Killshot. I think that one was copy/paste.

No Problem! *gg*

Some thoughts on damage of power weapons in general. What if a generic power weapon just add +1 to the users Piercing Trait or grants it at 1 if they do not have it?

Good question. In my view it should be a +1 for the piercing value of the fighters stats, because the weapon increase the basic ability of the fighter to penetrate enemy armour. (see below for my reflections for this thoughts.)

I think this point is a similar issue like the case with the parry trait what I have mention in the non weapon discussion. This is a good option to solve this problem in general.

We have in this mod much more CC-weapons than in SST and we should clarified how we want to use them in the game. Should we create the possibility that a CC-weapon increase the games stats of a model or should we keep them separate so they can not influence each other?

We could them have a low-power type attack profile for the Chain Fist, Power Fist, and Thunderhammer which just count them as Power Weapons. However, with the Ready Action then you then use the alternate profile to attack with. As to damage values of this alternate attack, the bonus needs to be worth while to use the Ready action as opposed to just making two regular attacks.

However, as Tactical and Assault Terminators both attack at 2xD10 and Piercing/2, I'd suggest dropping them back to Piercing/1. The standard power weapon bonus inherent in all their gear (including a Chaplains Crozius?) would then bring them back to Piercing/2. As would be marine sergents with power weapons.

However, an imperial guard sergent or howling banshee would only be piercing/1 with a power weapon. Perhaps this is a bit weak. If we make the default bonus Piercing/+2 this does power up the Space Marines further, but they are genetically modified super humans so I'm a bit less concerned. Another option is to drop Piercing from the Space Marine profile - brought back through gear (chainswords, pistols, power weapons etc.), or just make power weapons a flat Piercing/2

So for example (I went with the less random profiling, though there is nothing to stop you going with more randomness either if it seems to fit the concept better):

Chain fist - CC: 2xD10+2, Traits when Ready: Multi-hit, Piercing/3
Power fist - CC: 2xD10+2, Traits when Ready: Piercing/3
Thunder hammer - CC: 2xD10+3, Traits when Ready: Killshot
The above three Close Combat Weapons may be used without a ready action with the following profile
CC: As weilder, Traits: Piercing/+1

Single Lightning claw - CC: As weilder, Traits: Piercing/+1
Pair of Lightning claws, CC: +1xDice+1, Traits: Parry, Piercing/+1

Notes:
* Assault terminator with Pair of Ligtning claws would be CC: 3xD10+1, Traits: Parry, Piercing/2
* When a Marine Sergent gets a power fist he'd get the same Ready Attack bonus so his basic CC: 2xD6+2 Piercing/2 attack becomes 2xD10+2 piercing/3 when readied with a power fist.

Thank you for this interesting thoughts. At first I like the picture of the charged and uncharged profiles for the fists and hammer. With this splitting we can create a powerful profile for this weapons what really fit to their backgrounds but we give them a disadvantage in combat.

To pick up my question from above: I would like to create the possibility that model and weapon can influence each other. I would like to pick up your proposal with the dropping of the Piercing value.

If we continue to develop your idea, then we should reduce the use of a piercing value to these units which are able to penetrate armour with no additional equipment / armament. The Warrior Bug is a good example. His piercing value caused by the strength of his jaws and arms, so it makes sense to shown this piercing value in his basic profile.

Therefore, I find your proposal very good that we represent the "technical" piercing in the weapons stats. We may differentiate between the Piercing/3 and Piercing/+3. The first value count as fixed and the second value refers to the model profile, and adds or increase it if necessary. These rules, we could set for the traits of the mod.

If we reduce the piercing for the Space Marines or drop it completely. Then a distinction between power weapon and chain sword would come into play again. The chain sword would give a Piercing/+1 and the power weapon would give a Piercing/+2.

This concept would can also be transferred to other skills such as Parry (as already mentioned). In addition, we could naturally reduce the number of traits in the basic profile that we make certain skills available by Herotic traits. This topic I have not been given the necessary attention.

Why such a short range?

Because it's a small pistol, not much room in it for pressurisation gear and fuel, they also had silly small templates in 40K 2e and Necromunda. The other option, perhaps, is to just use it as a One Shot flamer.

After I have looked at lot of material from the first and second Edition, I share your view. The template for the Handflamer was really very small. Therefore, we reduce the range.

Meltagun & Multi-melta...

Thanks for the reminders folks, my brain did eventually put two and two together properly a few hours after posting.

No Problem!!

Do you really think it makes sense to increase the range? A shotgun is still a weapon for close combat or for very short range. The Slow trait also makes not illogical impression on me. Can you please explain to me why you think these changes make sense?

Yes, I do think they need to increase in range particularly to make them preferable to pistols, especially so if you decide to keep the slow trait. 15" is the same range as a re-statted heavy flamer, and the bolt and plasma pistols. Slug shot is generally statted at a greater range then buckshot in most game sytems (perhaps not the best of reasons). The AA-12 (below) has a range of 100m listed.

With droppign slow, I was going for the semi-automatic assault shotgun idea instead of the break open, breach loading antique shotgun. In particular this thing - Auto Assault-12 (I think it was used in the film Predators) - also Franchi SPAS-12 (has an attachment that spreads buck shot into a plane and can single load individual rounds), NeoStead 2000 (two seperate magazines to select from) and Pancor Jackhammer.

Your ideas were well comprehensible. My original idea for this weapon is based strongly on the comparable weapon of MI from SST. However, I will consider the extension of the range. What would you find useful? A Semi-Automatic Shotgun (not slow) or a pump action (slow)?

Your suggestions were:

Shotgun Bullet
- Increase Range to 20"
- reduce piercing to 2
- remove Slow

Shotgun Shot
- Increase Range to 15"
- remove Piercing and Slow
- replace spread with a LZ

In my view the LZ trait doesn't fit very well for this weapon. If you use even the LZ (X "/LoS) trait the weapon would be like a grenade launcher, what does not really fit. The scrap charge disintegrates immediately upon leaving the barrel and not only on impact with the ground. I don't know whether it would fit better if we use the Beam or LZ (Stream) trait.

Why should I redcue the range? I see no reason for that... Ok in the original rules the boltgun has a maximum range of 24" but I have discussed this issue with another game designer (he create a new 40k ruleset) and he has come for his system to the same view as me. The range is simply too short for this weapon. Hence we have taken both 30 inches as range for the boltgun.

Again, its a throw back to GWs 40K rules (especially as 24" scales to around 50m?). I do agree that the rifle type weapons should have longer ranges. And doing so would make a different game to how GW rules play, which favours surviving being shot to get into close combat.

I think that is no bad thing. The low lethal level of GW 40k is one of the main problems that make it impossible to fight on a high tactical level. The SST-System is fast and brutal. And I think that fits much better for the "the grim nightmare of the far future, where there is only war and the galaxy's alight...". With this System the players have to change their fighting tactics.

Any range increase needs to be factored into the other races weapons such as the Guardsmans 20" lasgun as it currently stands.

I based the values of the IG lasguns on the Morita assault rifle of the MI, because it is similar in the basic idea. It's just an easy-to-use and maintain weapon. The ammunition is just only different from a regular rifle.

Additionally, range can be used to represent how far a soldier is capable of shooting accutrately. So a 40K BS of 4 is more accurate then BS 3. Perhaps the effective weapon range could be also increased to take this into account.

The main question is how we bring that on the table. I think you're right that the training of a soldier is the key element how far he can fire a gun effectively.

At the moment I read the rule set of "Force on Force" from Ambush Alley Games. In this rule set is the training level of your troops a key element of the game. The units with various levels of training have a corresponding "Optimal Range" (Green troops have a lower optimal range than elite troops). If the enemy is in this range, the shooting unit receives a bonus. May be we could use that in modified form. I think we can solve the problem with a similar rule in a more elegant way than trying to use the weapon profiles for it.

Also, I can't remember if SST had the Ready action to allow shots at double range (by re-rolling hits)?

It is only a re-rolling of the damage dices but no doubling of the range of the weapons.

The [Auto]-trait is a special trait that is supposed to represent the different combat tactics of the Space Marines on the battlefield. When the Marines split their squads and everyone is fighting alone, they use aimed shots. This is represented by using of the 3"-LZ around the target unit.

If they work together as a squad or fire team, the 3"-zone make no sense, because too many potential hits would find no more targets. Hence a unit of Space Marines would create the normal Auto-zone of 6 " for their boltguns.

It ultimately depends on how we want Marines to work.

From the first post, I was under the impression the army (save for scout squads) was made up of individual models. And like you described, would use the small bursts of 'aimed' shots approach rather then the blaze wildly. I don't think there is anything stopping you specifying a different fire zone with a second (or third) action.

Perhaps having the marines operate in small teams to support each other, rather then individually would go a long way to helping this. I’ll post some thoughts on this shortly

The Storm bolter is more then just two bolters stuck together. It fires more shots and each terminator is more likely to need and use the Auto fire zone.

I should explain my thoughts to you. When we decided to give the Marines the independent trait, the question remained whether the Marines still act as a squad or not. For larger battles it's make more sense to concentrate your firepower and so we decided to allow the squad formation. But this would mean that the damage area for the bolter fire would be too small if we keep the 3 inch radius.

For example, a squad of 10 Marines shoot with their bolters on an enemy unit. If they had no Auto trait they would only cover a 3-inch area around the target model with their fire. In this small area a maximum of 20 damage dice would impact. Therefore, they will need the Auto Trait in the squad formation. But when a Space Marine is acting alone a 6 inch radius would be too great.

To solve this problem we came up with the idea to create a special Auto trait with extra rules.

To underline the role of the Space Marine Sergeant inside a Squad, I have developed a series of special actions that may apply by the sergeant in the form of commands. These commands will help then by the squad forming and termination.

My orders have been established, the following three:

My Target, on my Sign! - FIRE!
This action can be performed by the sergeant instead of a normal action. Each Space Marine within 6 inches around the sergeant shoots at the target that was determined by the Sergeant. All weapons with the [Auto] Trait generate a 6-inch area around the selected target model for this shot action. Lines of sight and weapon ranges are still valid. Weapons with the traits "Ready," "Slow" or "heavy" should not be fired with this action.

Close Formation, Brothers!
This action can be performed by the sergeant instead of a normal action. When the sergeant uses this action, all squad members formed around the sergeant. All models that are not in 6-inch - command range, move directly to the sergeant. Note that the maximum movement range of the model is not exceeded. The Space Marine squad is treated from that point as one unit and is subject to the normal rules. The sergeant, acting as a unit leader. All weapons with the [Auto]-Trait use from that point, the normal rules for the Auto-Trait.

Spread!
This action can be performed by the sergeant instead of a normal action. The Sergeant resolves with this action the troop formation. Each model moves immediately its maximum movement range away from the Sergeant. All models of the squad get back to their "independent" status and act as such.

I think this special action system can be extended by some additional commands, which are also suitable for senior officers.

Ok I think the "slow" trait not fit for this weapon. The weapon should be able to react. The "Heavy" trait should avoid that a model shoot with this weapon if it use their special ability "Shoot on the run". So I think we keep this trait. I'm not sure about the "Ready" Trait. I think we should try both in a test game.

On increasing the penetration I have to think because the weapon already has a very high damage roll. In addition, the weapon receives a bonus depending on the size of the target model. Hence the probability is very high that the gun often throws a kill.

I was thinking a Ready action to reflect a getting the best out of a shot. There is also nothing that suggests a user of a sniper weapon shouldn’t be able to react with it. However, the reaction shot will be far from optimal for the weapon.

Should we split the profile? So that the model receive a bonus by taking a Ready action or should we solve that in another way?

Quick thought on the Sniper Rifle though. I think they should be rather universal for the most part. An Imperial sniper rifle for the IG wouldn't be much different from a modern M40 rifle in terms of power (the Lasgun itself is equated as being about as strong as a G3/FAL/CETME rifle.) the Astartes sniper rifle is powered by an extra energy pack, but is otherwise just an upgraded IG sniper rifle... So, I suppose for sake of ease, we can just take the Barret .50 cal sniper stats from one of the other books for it. No need to overcomplicate a sniper weapon by tacking on tons of traits.

Wolfprophet's idea works for me for the Imperial Tech. Copy what the SST sniper systems (or Modern) use and tweak as necessary? It should also serve as a useful starting point for the Eldar's Ranger Long Rifle and the Vindicare Assassin's rifle.

If I understand Wolfprophet's proposals correctly and if I take the values for the M40 from BF Evo Modern Combat as a basis for the IG sniper rifle then the following profile would be the result:

IG Sniper Rifle
Range: 50"
Damage: D6
Traits: Accurate - Sniper (additional suggestion from me)

Would this profile as you imagine it? Or should it creates a higher damage?

If I remember correctly, I have read that the SM Scout sniper rifle using Bolter ammo and is no upgrade laser rifle.

But if we use the Barret M109 (from BF Evo MC) as a basis, then the result would be a similar profile as the bolter, which would only have a higher range.

SM Sniper Rifle
Range: 60"
Damage: D6+2
Traits: Accurate - Piercing/2 - Sniper - Multihit (additional suggestion from me)

What do you think?

Why would I do that? Is it too crazy, to differentiate the weapons more? Why should a terminator use the same assault cannon, like a Dreadnought? Why should not there be multiple power levels for the lascannon? I would like to take opportunity that offer this mod to revised some mistakes and nonsense of GW.

Because currently you have, for example, Las-cannon, Twin-linked Las-cannon, Devastator Lascannon, Annihilator Las-cannon, Twin-linked Godhammer Las-cannon. I do think that there can be some variability (especially as you point out with the Dreadnaught/Terminator Assault cannon), but I think that there needs to be a bit of simplicity as essentially the weapons are pretty much the same (just a couple of points of damage and the Twin-linked Las-cannon and Annihilator Las-cannons are exactly the same). Complexity can just bog a game down.

Ok, the problem with the twin-linked weapons we have already solved. These weapons get a universal special rule. By this rule, this type of weapon double their damage roll when they take a shot action (see your note below). As a result we can drop these entries. Hence we have now three different energy levels for the lascannon. Is that still too much?

In addition, in each unit or vehicle appears only one type of energy level. A Land Raider has his Godhammer, a Predator has his Annihilator and the Devastator has his portable lascannon. So I see no problem at the moment with the laser weapons.

The AA-trait makes perfect sense for this missile, and would also represent a good supplement to the onboard system.
<snip>

I think about it. What do you think about the idea that we put this two weapons together in one weapon?

Hunter Killer Missile - Example
Range: unlimited
Damage: D10+5
Traits: Killshot - LZ (2") - one-shot - AA - Agile - Direct Fire - Free

I do like the idea of combining them, it provides space marines a useful bit of AA without having to rely on the Imperial Guard or Imperial Navy. My only concern is the Agile Trait. I don't think the Imperium would uses highly advanced and precious 'logic engine' able to track and adapt to a flyer's evasive movements in a cheaply available and disposable munition, theyed just issue you with lots more dumb missiles to shoot. Remember, the imperial guard can tool up with loads of these things. Tau seeker missiles on the other hand.... The Free trait certainly fits.

I'd maybe consider changing the Missile Launchers AA round to reduce the Damage a bit, and drop the Agile.

What do you think about that?

Hunter Killer Missile - Example
Range: unlimited
Damage: D10+3
Traits: Killshot - LZ (2") - one-shot - AA - Direct Fire - Free

The weapon could be mounted on vehicles. Should we also design a normal portable AA missile for the Rocket launcher or not?

As I have already written above, the "Heavy" trait should avoid that a model shoot with this weapon if it use their special ability "Shoot on the run". The Question now which trait we keep in the profiles. I think the Heavy Trait is ok. But about the "Ready" and the "Slow" Trait, we should discuss.

1. Should a heavy weapon to be able to react or not? (slow)
2. When a heavy weapon is able to react, should this reaction require a "Ready" Action or not? (Ready)

Hmm, difficult. There are also pros and cons to each, especially with how this would go down with the other races.

We may also defer that question for now and wait until we've developed some weapons for the other races. Then we can be even better determine which solution makes more sense. In my view it is also possible that there is no general answer for this question, because the solution is also very dependent on the single weapon and their combat role.

About these weapons, I thought long and hard. I have discussed this problem with Galatea, and we have solved the problem on the same principle as the twin fifty from SST. This weapon also has the double damage profile of a single caliber .50 BMG.

I see no problem on this weapons with this stats. The weapons lost their rerolls for the roll to hit from the original 40k-rules but get the double damage chance(!!). All weapons of all other armies that work this way, I would treat in the same way. That is not specific for the Space Marines.

OK, I like that we have a rules precedent. We can then simply describe Twin-linking a weapon as rolling double attack dice.

Ok then we solve it with a general special rule. I think that we can explain this in the basic rules for the mod and we can also mention this rule in the unit description of the appropriately equipped models/vehicles.

Your proposal for the Hurricane Bolter System sounds good. You're right, that a damage profile would be pretty hard with 12 dices per system. However, we are talking about an assault vehicle which is intended to strike breaches. So the Hurricane Bolter System should be able to cause corresponding damage. I have to think about it...

Yep, I thought 12 dice to start with, then remembered a vehicle also mounts two of these systems. 2 times 12xD6+2 does not bear thinking about. Thats why I halved the Dice and used multi-hit to incraese the damage of shots. It does make it particularly effective against Space Marine equivalent infantry though.

I think you're right. The Land Raider can roll up to 12 damage dice with both systems in his front area. But we should give the Land Raider the ability to fire both systems in one shot action. Although I would set a fixed fire arc for this weapons, so the system can't fire in a 360° area around the tank.

We should not forget the storm grenade launcher for the Land Raider Crusader. We could create it in a similar mechanic like the Hellseed Y-Rack system of the Ape Marauder or as a Stream attack. Or do you have other ideas?

Dreadnought Assault Cannon
Range: 40"
Damage: 5x D6+3
Traits: Piercing/2 - Auto

Terminator Assault Cannon
Range: 30"
Damage: 4x D6+2
Traits: Piercing/1 - Auto

I made this profile as a proposal for the assault cannon to make the weapon more special. From my perspective, it makes no sense that Terminators and Dreadnoughts use the same weapon.

My reasoning was assumed that the terminator weapon is something that is comparable to today's minigun or mircogun.

The basic idea for the Dreadnought weapon was that is comparable to a weapon like the GAU-8 Avenger. A great walker should be able to carry a larger weapon than a servo-supported armour.

My profiles are based on the Sixgun from SST and on the GAU from Modern Combat. The only additional traits that would make sense for me yet, would be "Prone" and "Multihit". Prone only for the Terminator Weapon and Multihit for both weapons.

Both definitely needs work, the Terminator Assault cannon is just a poor version of the heavy bolter.

There is also the assault cannon on the Land-speeder and the twin-assault cannons on the Land Raider Crusader and Baal Predator. I'd go for vehicle mounted (Dreadnaught) and Terminator versions.

I'm now the same opinion. In the direct comparison with the heavy bolter, the assault cannon loses with their stats. However the Terminators have currently no access to a heavy bolter option. But I would upgrade the Terminator Assault Cannon, also to define this weapon from the storm bolter. My suggestion for a change would be this:

Assault Cannon - 10mm
Range: 50"
Damage: 6x D6+2
Traits: Piercing/3 - Auto

I've increased the range and the number of shots. I've also increased the piercing value, to represent the armor-piercing effect of this weapon. The weapon is still one point weaker than the heavy bolter, but the longer range and stronger piercing compensate this disadvantage.

I've also renounced to distinguish the weapons by Terminator type or Dreadnaught type but I take the calibre as a differentiator. With the help of this sign we can more easily determine what kind of weapon can be mounted on a vehicle / model. But in my view the Space Marines use for the twin-linked version of the assault cannon a smaller calibre then the heavy calibre what I write below.

Destructor Autocannon
Range: 50"
Damage: 2x D10
Traits: Piercing/2

Twin-Linked Autocannon
Range: 50"
Damage: 4x D6+2
Traits: Piercing/1 - Auto

Let me explain why I would like to split this weapon. Based on the strength of autocannon from 40k I've written the first profile. This profile has been criticized as being too strong, because the Predator not only has access to this weapon. But a reduction of the weapon profile would made a Predator with this weapon nearly useless.

So I've considered how to divide the weapon useful. The main gun of a tank will certainly have a larger caliber than 30 or 40mm, so it was the only logical way, in my view, to use the first profile for the main gun. The twin-linked Autocannon is the only weapon of this type that is used in addition of the Space Marines. The Dreadnought can use it for example.

Here is the problem that this weapon is in direct competition with the assault cannon. Because the profile looks a little worse in comparison to the assault cannon, I had the following idea to make the weapon still attractive. We should give this weapon the "AA" Trait, because anti-aircraft guns are in short supply at the Space Marines anyway. And the Dreadnought can use two weapons of this type, one in each arm. With the AA-Trait for the weapon he become a good platform for anti aircraft fire. (Like the riflemen from Battletech )

I kind of agree in splitting them into multiple sizes as the modern IFV autocannon seems to cover everything from 25mm (Bradley) to 100mm+ (BMP-3). Just as long as it has a high rate of fire.

The Destructor Autocannon I agree with you, strong is good and appropriate. I'd probably increase to piercing/3 and maybe add a LZ. The Annihilator turret would still be an upgrade on a predator. The Baal turret would still offer something different.

In the Dreadnaught role, it has to compete with the Dreadnaught assault cannon (40" 5xD6+3 Auto, Piercing/2), and twin-linked heavy bolter (40" 6xD6+3 Auto, Piercing/2, Multi-hit) (twin-linked las cannon and the missile launcher are for different roles)

The twin-linked autocannon can also fit as a reaper autocannon for Chaos Terminators, and could loose the twin-link for the Imperial guard man portable version. Hydra's and the Russ variant (and chimera upgrade?) could be based of the predator version.

Assault Cannon and Autocannon definitely need some thoughts.

You are right. I've made some thoughts after I had looked at the individual values again. Especially I was not aware of the problem within the Dreadnaught configuration. So thank you for your note. I incorporate some of your suggestions in my approach.

But I think that a larger calibre gun has no high cadence. So I left the number of shots at the heavy auto cannon at a low level. The values are now comparable with the 40mm CTWS cannon from BF Evo MC of the British Army.

My proposed solution is as follows:

Heavy Autocannon (Destructor)
Range: 50"
Damage: 2x D10
Traits: Piercing/3 - LZ (2"/LoS) - Direct Fire

Light Autocannon (Twin-Linked)
Range: 60"
Damage: 4x D6+2
Traits: Piercing/2 - Auto - AA

Assault Cannon - 30mm
Range: 50"
Damage: 5x D6+3
Traits: Piercing/3 - Auto

Heavy Bolter (Twin-Linked)
Range: 40"
Damage: 6x D6+3
Traits: Piercing/2 - Auto - Multihit - Heavy - Prone (Losing this Traits if use as vehicle weapon or as twin-linked version)

I think with this change we make every weapon useful. We have different range areas, which be covered by the weapons. You get more shots, if you choose a weapon with a shorter maximum range. And each weapon has an individual trait combination which I think is quite appropriate.

Please do me a favour. Could you describe your considerations for the Reaper Auto Cannon, for the portable version of the IG, the Hydra and Russ versions in more details. So that I get a chance to see the direction in which your ideas go. That would be very helpful for me.

Why do you think that we have to reduce the range for the weapon? I know that the weapon is a siege weapon for a siege tank but if the range is to short the weapon is not really effective.

Its the 40K throwback issue form before again. You can discount this suggestion.

No problem.

See my comment for the melta. I have set this trait, because I think the weapon is very powerful and even more if they have unlimited supply. But what is the reason that you think we have to remove the trait?

Mainly just down to reducing the amount of record keeping. They are also sort of self limiting as they can only be placed with the use of a Ready action.

I think that you're right. That would simplify and expedite the flow of the game without creating too much the advantages.

I had taken this idea from the 2nd Edition.

I'm glad you didn't use the weapons, missiles and grenades from Rogue Trader.

I buy a copy of Rogue Trader at ebay. I'm looking forward it. I hope I find a few more inspirations for this mod with this book.

It's done. Puuh that was a lot of work. Sorry it become real epic.

I'm looking forward for your comments.

Greetz
Arkon

 

[Silvereye]

Where did September go...?

Hope to post something back soon.

 

[Arkon4000]

@Silvereye

No problem. I enjoy my holiday the last weeks and do nothing for the mod. I have to post something for your answer from the 11th of August. So it is not necessary that you stress yourself. Relax and take the time that you need to answer.

Greetz from good old Germany

Arkon

 

[wolfprophet]

I return! finally. Sorry for the long disappearance guys. Been pretty busy.

Also, I see I missed a few things...
like the forum changing to this eye hurting bright white.

 

[Silvereye]

I return! finally. Sorry for the long disappearance guys. Been pretty busy.

Yeah, that's a good line for me as well.

sorry for the long break again. The topic is very extensive and for a guy how write and speak English not as his mother tongue is still more difficult, to write the whole subject in an understandable English. So a big sorry for the long waiting time.

No problems, your English is very good, certainly far better than I'd manage in another language. While I can order beer in about a half dozen languages, it hardly counts for fluency let alone be a suitable level for a technical discussion. It also doesn't help that I've just done a computer rebuild and I'm still beating software to work how I want it to. Re-installs are a pain. Hopefully I've continued our discussion here, but let me know if I have missed anything.

It is also getting to a point where a re-post of the mod so far might be a good thing. If only to bring some semblance of order back into things. Example rules and traits concepts - particularly for the weapon traits, space marines troops and equipment, Space marines army selection.

... A potential damage output of 14 should be strong enough for the vehicle combat. The Kill Value would not reach a level of more than 16. So a Furioso would be a very hard enemy in close combat.

But one question still remains just how hard we want to make other fighters? I think for the Wraith Lord or the Bloodthirster.

Furioso should be hard to beat in close combat, this is what it is optimised for. With the other dreadnaught like constructs, or equivalent monstrous creatures, I think we can make small changes to make them better or worse basic close combat, and use other traits to really differentiate them. Ultimately it will really depends on playtests to get the balance right I suspect.

Wraithlord/Carnifex/Tyrgon/Ork Dread-?-thing (the big can) - All generally similar. We can use Hits, Target, Kill and Save to differentiate between the ways of building them and perhaps use the Wraithsword, Scything talons, etc. to increase their Size when making close combat attacks.
Greater Demons - Bloodthirster/Great Unclean One/Keeper of Secrets/Lord of Change/Avatar of Khaine/C'tan - Magically buffed and stuff. Immune to 'normal' Killshots?
Dreadknight *sigh* where do GW make this stuff up from...? First (and best) one of these I saw was actually a conversion looted by orks....

Good question. In my view it should be a +1 for the piercing value of the fighters stats, because the weapon increase the basic ability of the fighter to penetrate enemy armour. (see below for my reflections for this thoughts.)

I think this point is a similar issue like the case with the parry trait what I have mention in the non weapon discussion. This is a good option to solve this problem in general.

We have in this mod much more CC-weapons than in SST and we should clarified how we want to use them in the game. Should we create the possibility that a CC-weapon increase the games stats of a model or should we keep them separate so they can not influence each other?

If we continue to develop your idea, then we should reduce the use of a piercing value to these units which are able to penetrate armour with no additional equipment / armament. The Warrior Bug is a good example. His piercing value caused by the strength of his jaws and arms, so it makes sense to shown this piercing value in his basic profile.

Therefore, I find your proposal very good that we represent the "technical" piercing in the weapons stats. We may differentiate between the Piercing/3 and Piercing/+3. The first value count as fixed and the second value refers to the model profile, and adds or increase it if necessary. These rules, we could set for the traits of the mod.

If we reduce the piercing for the Space Marines or drop it completely. Then a distinction between power weapon and chain sword would come into play again. The chain sword would give a Piercing/+1 and the power weapon would give a Piercing/+2.

This concept would can also be transferred to other skills such as Parry (as already mentioned). In addition, we could naturally reduce the number of traits in the basic profile that we make certain skills available by Herotic traits. This topic I have not been given the necessary attention.

I am in agreement with you, I think the weapon should be able to influence the weiders profile in many cases. However it should also be able to replace it entirely if the weapon is that poor or powerful.

Your ideas were well comprehensible. My original idea for this weapon is based strongly on the comparable weapon of MI from SST. However, I will consider the extension of the range. What would you find useful? A Semi-Automatic Shotgun (not slow) or a pump action (slow)?

Your suggestions were:

Shotgun Bullet
- Increase Range to 20"
- reduce piercing to 2
- remove Slow

Shotgun Shot
- Increase Range to 15"
- remove Piercing and Slow
- replace spread with a LZ

In my view the LZ trait doesn't fit very well for this weapon. If you use even the LZ (X "/LoS) trait the weapon would be like a grenade launcher, what does not really fit. The scrap charge disintegrates immediately upon leaving the barrel and not only on impact with the ground. I don't know whether it would fit better if we use the Beam or LZ (Stream) trait.

I think we should go with the not-slow shotguns. They are supposed to be standard issue to space marine scouts (bolter is an upgrade) and favoured by veteran guardsmen (over lasguns). Certainly the choice of shot makes for a useful tactical weapon. If we feel they are firing too many shots, we could always drop the number of dice in the damage roll rather then adding traits.

With the Shotgun Shot, I certainly see what you mean about it begining to seem grenade-like. From your options I'd probably go for Beam instead of LZ(Stream).

I think that is no bad thing. The low lethal level of GW 40k is one of the main problems that make it impossible to fight on a high tactical level. The SST-System is fast and brutal. And I think that fits much better for the "the grim nightmare of the far future, where there is only war and the galaxy's alight...". With this System the players have to change their fighting tactics.

Totaly agree.

The main question is how we bring that on the table. I think you're right that the training of a soldier is the key element how far he can fire a gun effectively.

At the moment I read the rule set of "Force on Force" from Ambush Alley Games. In this rule set is the training level of your troops a key element of the game. The units with various levels of training have a corresponding "Optimal Range" (Green troops have a lower optimal range than elite troops). If the enemy is in this range, the shooting unit receives a bonus. May be we could use that in modified form. I think we can solve the problem with a similar rule in a more elegant way than trying to use the weapon profiles for it.

Both methods would perhaps work in a very similar way. Modifying the profile would perhaps be the more complex way of doing it, though it would likely give a more elegant solution. Personally, I'd actually do the opposite for the "Optimal Range" mechanic. If the enemy is outwith the troops optimal range they receive penalties. Perhaps a middle-ground where the training level of the troops just alters the weapons range by a bit? It could also be tied into the Veteran and Elite traits, as well as adding a Green (or Rookie or Conscript) trait. The "Regular" troops would not have any bonuses or penalties.

If I understand Wolfprophet's proposals correctly and if I take the values for the M40 from BF Evo Modern Combat as a basis for the IG sniper rifle then the following profile would be the result:

IG Sniper Rifle
Range: 50"
Damage: D6
Traits: Accurate - Sniper (additional suggestion from me)

Would this profile as you imagine it? Or should it creates a higher damage?

If I remember correctly, I have read that the SM Scout sniper rifle using Bolter ammo and is no upgrade laser rifle.

But if we use the Barret M109 (from BF Evo MC) as a basis, then the result would be a similar profile as the bolter, which would only have a higher range.

SM Sniper Rifle
Range: 60"
Damage: D6+2
Traits: Accurate - Piercing/2 - Sniper - Multihit (additional suggestion from me)

What do you think?

Both look OK, except for the sniper trait. Multi-hit on the SM Sniper Rifle works nicely as it's firing bolter rounds.

Sniper
This weapon is extraordinary accurate. It may always allocate it's damage dice to specific models within a fire zone.

I'm not too sure about this, for example when you have whole squads equipped with sniper rifles (Ratlings, Eldar Rangers, Space Marine Scouts), they are likely to fill a fire zone.

You could always allow models with a Sniper rifle to either operate in small teams or become independent and they can then create their own firezones.

I'm still not sure how, and if, they should be able to react.

The [Auto]-trait is a special trait that is supposed to represent the different combat tactics of the Space Marines on the battlefield. When the Marines split their squads and everyone is fighting alone, they use aimed shots. This is represented by using of the 3"-LZ around the target unit.

If they work together as a squad or fire team, the 3"-zone make no sense, because too many potential hits would find no more targets. Hence a unit of Space Marines would create the normal Auto-zone of 6 " for their boltguns.

It ultimately depends on how we want Marines to work.

From the first post, I was under the impression the army (save for scout squads) was made up of individual models. And like you described, would use the small bursts of 'aimed' shots approach rather then the blaze wildly. I don't think there is anything stopping you specifying a different fire zone with a second (or third) action.

Perhaps having the marines operate in small teams to support each other, rather then individually would go a long way to helping this. I’ll post some thoughts on this shortly

The Storm bolter is more then just two bolters stuck together. It fires more shots and each terminator is more likely to need and use the Auto fire zone.

I should explain my thoughts to you. When we decided to give the Marines the independent trait, the question remained whether the Marines still act as a squad or not. For larger battles it's make more sense to concentrate your firepower and so we decided to allow the squad formation. But this would mean that the damage area for the bolter fire would be too small if we keep the 3 inch radius.

For example, a squad of 10 Marines shoot with their bolters on an enemy unit. If they had no Auto trait they would only cover a 3-inch area around the target model with their fire. In this small area a maximum of 20 damage dice would impact. Therefore, they will need the Auto Trait in the squad formation. But when a Space Marine is acting alone a 6 inch radius would be too great.

To solve this problem we came up with the idea to create a special Auto trait with extra rules.

To underline the role of the Space Marine Sergeant inside a Squad, I have developed a series of special actions that may apply by the sergeant in the form of commands. These commands will help then by the squad forming and termination.

My orders have been established, the following three:

My Target, on my Sign! - FIRE!
This action can be performed by the sergeant instead of a normal action. Each Space Marine within 6 inches around the sergeant shoots at the target that was determined by the Sergeant. All weapons with the [Auto] Trait generate a 6-inch area around the selected target model for this shot action. Lines of sight and weapon ranges are still valid. Weapons with the traits "Ready," "Slow" or "heavy" should not be fired with this action.

Close Formation, Brothers!
This action can be performed by the sergeant instead of a normal action. When the sergeant uses this action, all squad members formed around the sergeant. All models that are not in 6-inch - command range, move directly to the sergeant. Note that the maximum movement range of the model is not exceeded. The Space Marine squad is treated from that point as one unit and is subject to the normal rules. The sergeant, acting as a unit leader. All weapons with the [Auto]-Trait use from that point, the normal rules for the Auto-Trait.

Spread!
This action can be performed by the sergeant instead of a normal action. The Sergeant resolves with this action the troop formation. Each model moves immediately its maximum movement range away from the Sergeant. All models of the squad get back to their "independent" status and act as such.

I think this special action system can be extended by some additional commands, which are also suitable for senior officers.

I think that using marines as a full 10 man squad could be as problematic as using them as individuals and that perhaps a different approach might be better. Using the original Space Hulk - Deathwing add-on, Terminators could be added to the marines mission roster in pairs when building a force; and in Dawn of War 2 the Marines operate in small groups of three or four. So stealing the fireteams from BF:Evo we could have:

Space Marine Tactical Squad
The squad consists of one Sergent and three Tactical Marines armed with with bolter, bolt pistol, krak and frag grenades (400 points).
Options:

• * Add 0-2 fire teams of three Tactical Marines with bolter, bolt pistol, krak and frag grenades (+300 points per team)
  * The sergent may replace his bolter with a bolt pistol and chainsword (0 points)
  * Upgrade Sergent to Veteran Sergent (+50 points) and purchase upgrade equipment (+X points)
  * Replace 1 Tactical Marine's bolter in fire team 1 OR 2 with a Flamer, Melta-gun or Plasma gun (+X points)
  * Replace 1 Tactical Marine's bolter in fire team 3 with a Heavy bolter, Las-cannon, Missile Launcher, Multi-Melta, Plasma Cannon (+X points)
  * The whole squad may take a Rhino transport (+xxx points); or each fire team may take a Razorback transport (+xxx points each); or the whole squad may deploy from a force's Drop Pods (if assets are avaialable)

Space Marine Devastator Squad
The squad consists of one Sergent, one Devastator Marine with 'Heavy Weapon' and two Devastator Marines with bolter, bolt pistol, krak and frag grenades (4xx points).
Options:

• * Add 0-2 fire teams of one Devastator Marine with 'Heavy Weapon' and two Devastator Marines with bolter, bolt pistol, krak and frag grenades (+3xx points per team)
  * The sergent may replace his bolter with a bolt pistol and chainsword (0 points)
  * Upgrade Sergent to Veteran Sergent (+50 points) and purchase upgrade equipment (+X points)
  * Replace up to 1 Devastator Marine's bolter in any fire team with a Heavy bolter, Las-cannon, Missile Launcher, Multi-Melta, Plasma Cannon (+X points)
  * The whole squad may deploy from a dedicated Rhino transport (+xxx points) or each fire team may deploy from a dedicated Razorback transport (+xxx points each); or the whole squad may deploy from a force's Drop Pods (if assets are avaialable)

Both example space marine squads offer a standard fireteam of 4 Marines and two additional teams of three marines can be added to the squad. The teams can operate independantly from each other, or could combine together to form a larger unit if necessary.

A potential idea might be to just say an independant model may never use the Auto trait. Although this might fall apart somewhat with the likes of Muagan'Ra and the Tau battlesuit commanders. I don't have a problem with independent characters generating their own Auto fire zones, they'll never be likely to fill the zone anyway or contributing to a fire teams zone if they have joined the team as a leader.

Ok, the problem with the twin-linked weapons we have already solved. These weapons get a universal special rule. By this rule, this type of weapon double their damage roll when they take a shot action (see your note below). As a result we can drop these entries. Hence we have now three different energy levels for the lascannon. Is that still too much?

In addition, in each unit or vehicle appears only one type of energy level. A Land Raider has his Godhammer, a Predator has his Annihilator and the Devastator has his portable lascannon. So I see no problem at the moment with the laser weapons.

Looks a lot better. But you left out the (twin) Lascannon that space marine Dreadnaughts can carry.... (I'd just call it an 'Annihilator' class) Again the Devastator and Annihilator Las-Cannons could also be used as a basis for the Imperial Guard variants - Devastator is served by 2 crewmen, Annihilator is vehicle armament. The guardsmen profile might adjust the damage dice and perhaps range (not as skilled as a Space Marine).

Ok then we solve it with a general special rule. I think that we can explain this in the basic rules for the mod and we can also mention this rule in the unit description of the appropriately equipped models/vehicles.

Sounds excellent.

What do you think about that?

Hunter Killer Missile - Example
Range: unlimited
Damage: D10+3
Traits: Killshot - LZ (2") - one-shot - AA - Direct Fire - Free

The weapon could be mounted on vehicles. Should we also design a normal portable AA missile for the Rocket launcher or not?

Looks good. How about for the man portable AA missiles, we make them available to squad Missile Launchers through the use of Techmarine armoury slots at a cost of a few points per launcher?

As I have already written above, the "Heavy" trait should avoid that a model shoot with this weapon if it use their special ability "Shoot on the run". The Question now which trait we keep in the profiles. I think the Heavy Trait is ok. But about the "Ready" and the "Slow" Trait, we should discuss.

1. Should a heavy weapon to be able to react or not? (slow)
2. When a heavy weapon is able to react, should this reaction require a "Ready" Action or not? (Ready)

Hmm, difficult. There are also pros and cons to each, especially with how this would go down with the other races.

We may also defer that question for now and wait until we've developed some weapons for the other races. Then we can be even better determine which solution makes more sense. In my view it is also possible that there is no general answer for this question, because the solution is also very dependent on the single weapon and their combat role.[/quote]
Thinking further, being able to react with heavy weapons might also allow you to set up an 'overwatch' like fire corridor.

I think you're right. The Land Raider can roll up to 12 damage dice with both systems in his front area. But we should give the Land Raider the ability to fire both systems in one shot action. Although I would set a fixed fire arc for this weapons, so the system can't fire in a 360° area around the tank.

We should not forget the storm grenade launcher for the Land Raider Crusader. We could create it in a similar mechanic like the Hellseed Y-Rack system of the Ape Marauder or as a Stream attack. Or do you have other ideas?

These things also mount twin Assault Cannon in the front arc as well, so weight of fire to the front isn't ever going to be an issue unless weapons have been disabled. Hmmm, fire to the front for a single shoot action and fire independently for two shoot actions? Sounds OK, maybe mention combining to create a single fire zone in the unit rules - weapons targeting being optimised to the front or something? I'd actually forgotton the grenade launchers existed to tell you the truth. How about: Free action, one shot, stream (width of the land raider) of frag grenades to the front; or is that too nasty?

<Long conversation here>

OK, so we both seem to favour a vehicle and infantry version of the weapon systems and need to make them all viable against each other and the Heavy bolter. I'm still thinking about this and will post more soon.

I buy a copy of Rogue Trader at ebay. I'm looking forward it. I hope I find a few more inspirations for this mod with this book.

It's still holds up OK as a squad or two scale skirmish game just as long as you don't try to play a 'modern' 40K sized game, but please, please ignore the vehicle rules, they are horrible.

 

[locarno24]

I think we should go with the not-slow shotguns. They are supposed to be standard issue to space marine scouts (bolter is an upgrade) and favoured by veteran guardsmen (over lasguns). Certainly the choice of shot makes for a useful tactical weapon. If we feel they are firing too many shots, we could always drop the number of dice in the damage roll rather then adding traits.

Remember that shotguns carried by scouts and guardsmen aren't the same - scouts use "manstopper" rounds that have massively powerful charges; effectively it's a pump-action elephant gun.

 

[Silvereye]

Remember that shotguns carried by scouts and guardsmen aren't the same - scouts use "manstopper" rounds that have massively powerful charges; effectively it's a pump-action elephant gun.

True, I think that Marine scouts and Adeptus Arbites use similar pattern shotguns, and bolter rounds are issued as upgrade loads for the Arbites shotguns. These rounds were also an available upgrade in Necromunda.

As to how the Marine and Guard weapons should compare...? Hmm....

 

[basaint]

Any chance we're going to see this in document form via online or pdf soon?

 

[Arkon4000]

@basaint

It is definitely planned. However, I underestimated the size of the project and it will certainly cost a lot of work until the whole can bundle as a PDF. At the moment I'm working through the whole thread and try to get an overview of all changes and their implementation. I will try to write a change log to give everyone a overview.

I would be glad if more people would participate in this project, also with ideas for other armies. This mod also offers the chance to make very radical changes within the different armies.

Greetz
Arkon

 

[Arkon4000]

Hi Community,

Sorry for the long break but at the moment I find not the time to resume my work. By reading the rules for Tomorrow's War / Force On Force, I got a few new ideas as we could define the Space Marine company in a new way. I hope you like it. I think it is a kind of radical change but I think this change would give the Battle Company a touch of military force.

Space Marine Battle Company

1x Space Marine Command Squad
2x Space Marine Tactical Platoons
1x Space Marine Assault Platoon
1x Space Marine Devastator Platoon

Space Marine Command Squad
Battle Brother Captain w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother Chaplain w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother Apothecary w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother Standardbearer w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol

Space Marine Tactical Platoon

Battle Brother Lieutanent w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon

3x Space Marine Tactical Squads

Space Marine Tactical Squad

Battle Brother Sergeant w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon

Fire Team Alpha
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother (Specialist) w/Heavy Weapon/Bolt Pistol

Fire Team Beta
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother (Specialist) w/Assault Weapon/Bolt Pistol

Fire Team Gamma
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol

Space Marine Assault Platoon

Battle Brother Lieutanent w/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon

2x Space Marine Assault Squads

Space Marine Assault Squad

Battle Brother Sergeant w/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon

Assault Team Alpha
Battle Brother w/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother w/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother w/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother (Specialist) w/Assault Weapon/Bolt Pistol

Assault Team Beta
Battle Brother w/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother w/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother w/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother w/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother (Specialist) w/Assault Weapon/Bolt Pistol

Space Marine Devastator Platoon

Battle Brother Lieutanent w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon

2x Space Marine Devastator Squads

Space Marine Devastator Squad

Battle Brother Sergeant w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon

Support Team Alpha
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother (Specialist) w/Heavy Weapon/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother (Specialist) w/Heavy Weapon/Bolt Pistol

Support Team Beta
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother (Specialist) w/Heavy Weapon/Bolt Pistol

Support Team Gamma
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother (Specialist) w/Heavy Weapon/Bolt Pistol

C&C are welcome.

Greetz
Arkon

 

[Silvereye]

Hi Arkon,

I like it. It's still looks exactly the same as a battle company (so no inquisitors out to burn the heretic :mrgreen: ).

My comments,

Battle Company
Change to Space Marine Tactical Platoon structure to 3x Space Marine Tactical Platoons of Lieutanent and 2x Space Marine Tactical Squads. Each lieutenant will then be in command of 2 squads of marines and the Company structure will also apply to the Tactical companies as well as the Battle, Assault and Devastator companies. (I don't think that the First company needs that level of command, and scouts are likely to be deployed in squads where needed rather then at whole a company level.)

Space Marine Command Squad
Not too sure of the Command Squad, maybe drop the Company Commander and chaplain and have them independant. Command squads can then be formed from support staff and company veterans if required, or support staff could be attached to other squads.

1+ Company Command Section:

Commander
Battle Brother Captain w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol/CC-Weapon
Battle Brother Chaplain w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol/Crosius

Company Support Staff
Battle Brother Apothecary w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother Librarian w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Battle Brother Standardbearer w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol

Company Veteran Fire Team
Veteran Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Veteran Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol
Veteran Battle Brother w/Bolter/Bolt Pistol

"Company Veterans" could also replace the "Lieutanents" as platoon level commanders, and we then get a nice command escalation from small [Company Veteran] to medium [Company Captain] to large [Chapter Master] games.

Space Marine Tactical Squad
I'd put the heavy weapon in Fire Team 3. We could also get heretical and allow a second special weapon in the other fire team?

Space Marine Assault Squad
I'm not sure that they need to operate in groups of 5 as marines are individually powerful. But I could maybe see groups of 3 getting overwealmed by mobs.

 

[Arkon4000]

Hi Guys,

big sorry for the really long break. I have to many projects at the moment and I must solve a few problems with the SST-System before I could write something. I get some new ideas for a some things that might bring a fresh wind in this project.

The first problem was my experience system. The system what I developed for the Space Marines, had some difficulties. So I would like to revise this system. The experience system is now a bit reduced and so far limited to the reaction system. A little brainstorming would be helpful to expand the system with some skills. What skills make sense for the individual levels of experience? But please keep in mind that the game system should be fluently playable as possible.

Traits for the experience level
The traits of experience show the training or discipline level of a unit. A unit with a better level of training/experience can act faster and more efficiently on the battlefield. If a squad leader has a higher experience level than the unit that he leads, the unit benefit from the presence of the officer as long as he is part of the unit or he is alive. The unit use than the experience trait of the officer.

Green
A unit with the Green Trait count as an inexperienced or undisciplined unit. A unit with the Green trait has a reaction zone of 6 inches.

Trained
A unit with the Trained trait has a reaction zone of 8 inches.

Veteran
A unit with the Veteran trait has a reaction zone of 10 inches.

Elite
A unit with the Elite trait has a reaction zone of 12 inches.


The second critical point is the lack of initiative in the SST-System. In my view we need a further component in order to differentiate the armies from one another better in their different tactical skills and mobility. For this I would like to put an initiative phase at the beginning of each game turn. Both players roll their dice against each other. The winner of the roll act in this turn at first. I think the turn order is very important in close combat because the damage is created only from the active unit. The target has only in the subsequent reaction the ability to strike back. From this point of view, it is essential who is the first player of the game turn and who can act as second.

Traits for initiative
The initiative traits show the tactical flexibility of a fighting force. At the beginning of each game turn, both players roll the dice with highest initiative value, which exist in their army. The player who had the initiative in the previous turn will receive a +1 to his dice roll. The player with the highest score start this turn. In the event of a tie, the player starts who had the initiative in the previous turn.

The following initiative values are possible:
D6
D6+1
D6+2
D6+3
D10
D10+1
D10+2
D10+3

You can purchase additional modifiers via Herotic traits to increase the tactical flexibility of individual models. If you lose a model with the current highest initiative value within the force, the next higher value replace this value for the next initiative phase. This rule is intended to represent that the loss of a high commander can affect the entire force. The success of an operation may be jeopardized by this loss, if there is no equivalent substitute in the army.

That's all for now. I hope you like my new ideas and I would like to get some feedback for this.

I hope that I can rework the Space Marine in the next time.

Greetz
Arkon