[Epic] Blast Markers and War Engines (long)

From: Carl Billen <Carl.Billen_at_...>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 17:10:57 +0200

Because the list is filled again 'Blast Markers' and 'War Engines', I repost
a mail I sent to the list some 7 months ago :

(I haven't tried my 'stupid, but simple' rule yet, so that's why I send the
whole discussion)

Carl Billen wrote:
>
> How's this for a stupid, but simple rule:
>
> Each War Engine has a 'Blast Marker Ignorance' number, which equals its
> points value divided by 100, rounded up. This results in the following
> values:
>
> Warhound : 2
> Reaver : 4
> Warlord : 6
> Adeptus Titanicus Ordinatus : 2
> Imperator : 9
> Leviathan : 4
> Shadowsword/Baneblade : 2
> Ork Battle Fortress : 1
> Gargant : 3
> Great Gargant : 5
> Meag Gargant : 7
> Revenants : 2
> Phantoms : 4
> Cobra/Scorpion : 2
> Subjugator : 2
> Questor : 2
> Plague Tower : 2
> Lord of Battles : 3
> Hierodule : 4
> Hierophant : 5
> Dominatrix : 5
>
> When a War Engine wants to fire, the BMs on it are counted and the 'BM
> Ignorance Number' is subtracted. The result (if it is positive) is
treated
> with the normal BM rules; if it is negative, the WE can fire without
> problems.

Then Scott Shupe wrote :
> Good one. But why base it off of point values? Or rather,
>what kind of numbers do you get if you base it off of DC instead (so
>that a WE's ability to ignore BMs is related to its size & toughness)?
>Perhaps DC/2, or two-thirds of DC, or something like that (don't have
>my books handy). Could go a long way to making the Tyranid titans
>look worthwhile.

Then I replied :

Ok, let's look at the values when the 'BM Ignorance Number' would equal
DC/2:

Imperator : 12 Yuk !
Warlord : 6
Leviathan, Adeptus Titanicus Ordinatus, Reaver : 4
Shadowsword/Baneblade, Warhound : 2
Mega Gargant : 12 Also Yuk !
Great Gargant : 9
Gargant : 6
Battle Fortress : 2
Phantom : 4
Revenant, Scorpion, Cobra : 2
Plague Tower, Lord Of Battles : 4
Subjugator, Questor : 2
Dominatrix : 5
Hierodule : 6
Hierophant : 9

This would result in almost no change for the Imperial Troops (except for
the Imperator and the Ordinatus), no change for the Eldar, the Orks can soak
considerably more BMs (Great Gargants and Mega Gargants can eat BMs for
breakfast), Chaos has a slightly better Plague Tower and Lord of Battles,
and the 'Nids have better HieroBeasties, but the Dominatrix stays the same.

The question is, would the value be based on the starting DC, or the current
DC ? More 'realistic' results can be gained by using the current DC, as a
Titan which is almost shot to pieces would be susceptable to explosions
(BM)around them ('But Captain, the inertial dampers are offline ! We cannot
shoot straight, even with our fancy targeters !'). This would, however,
result in recalculation of 'BM Ignorance number' before each fire phase when
the War Engine was damaged.

Then Scott Shupe replied :

Current DC is a good idea, but you're right; it's too
much to think about during the game.

OK, I think I've got a good formula here: (DC/4)+1.
That scales back the numbers considerably while still giving a
'toughness' rating of 2 to the smallest WEs. Here's the line
up, small to large:
> Shadowsword/Baneblade, Warhound : 2
> Battle Fortress : 2
> Revenant, Scorpion, Cobra : 2
> Subjugator, Questor : 2
> Leviathan, Adeptus Titanicus Ordinatus,
> Reaver : 3
> Phantom : 3
> Plague Tower, Lord Of Battles 3
> Dominatrix : 3*
> Hierodule : 3
> Warlord : 4
> Gargant : 4
> Great Gargant : 5*
> Hierophant : 5*
> Imperator : 7
> Mega Gargant : 7
* rounded down

Looks much more reasonable to be, although the '7'
for Imps and Megas might be a bit extreme.... Hmmm, I'll
have to playtest this the next time I play (whenever the
heck that might be).

Of course, while this approach makes the Reaver
armed with 3 volcano cannons a viable option, the problem
is that FP-based weaponry on WEs becomes much stronger
than it was previously. I guess the solution to that is
to keep your troops out of FP-range for the enemy's WEs...
which would generally be a good idea anyway.

Mark A Shieh suggested :

How about basing it off of the old SM/TL size classes?
Anything smaller than a battle titan (SHVs and Scout Titans) can
handle 2 BMs with no problems, any battle titan can handle 3 BMs with
no problem, and the Imperator and Mega Gargant ignore 4 BMs? I'd like
to let Scout Titans get away with more due to their ability to move
quickly to evade fire, but it'd be complicated to do something like
ignoring 3 BMs on charge orders with the orders gone...
(Lord of Battles, Plague Tower, and Ordinatus are not Battle
Titan sized, IMHO. Lord of Battles is a Scout Titan, Plague Tower is
a SHV, and the Ordinatus shouldn't even be a WE if the Knights aren't.
I don't care how big you say the Ordinatus figure is, or how many
rules you give me that Gavin wrote for WD. :)

Shadowsword/Baneblade, Warhound : 2
Battle Fortress : 2
Revenant, Scorpion, Cobra : 2
Subjugator, Questor : 2
Adeptus Titanicus Ordinatus, 2
Plague Tower, Lord Of Battles 2
Leviathan, 2
Dominatrix : 2
  Reaver : 3
Phantom : 3
Hierodule : 3
Warlord : 3
Gargant : 3
Great Gargant : 3
Hierophant : 3
Imperator : 4
Mega Gargant : 4

Then Chris Miller told us :

> OK, I think I've got a good formula here: (DC/4)+1.
> That scales back the numbers considerably while still giving a
> 'toughness' rating of 2 to the smallest WEs. Here's the line
> up, small to large:
>
> --------> This is a _lot_ more reasonable as far as numbers, mostly
>
> > Imperator : 7
> > Mega Gargant : 7
> Looks much more reasonable to be, although the '7'
> for Imps and Megas might be a bit extreme.... Hmmm, I'll
> have to playtest this the next time I play (whenever the
> heck that might be).
>
> the problem
> is that FP-based weaponry on WEs becomes much stronger
> than it was previously. I guess the solution to that is
> to keep your troops out of FP-range for the enemy's WEs...
> which would generally be a good idea anyway.
>
--------> Yowch, this could be a real pain when you combine the 2 above
thoughts - that mega gargant has 24 fp in it's gun decks which can
shield it pretty well, and then you add 7 free BM's...
I like this idea as an alternative to mine and the current system, but
any kind of consistent stat-based relationship for these things seems
like it breaks when you hit these 2 big 'uns. Maybe forcing people to
allocate a special weapon to it before subtracting fp would balance
things ( that is, once you take "x" markers (your free hits) you have to
allocate all of your specials before you start marking fp), though I can
see problems here also.

Mike Reed then said :

If there are any units in the game which should be shrugging off blast
markers in industrial quantities, it's the Imperator and Mega-gargant.
They're supposed to be the most powerful machines of the two most
industrious races - these kind of rules to a good job of reflecting that.

And Scott concluded with :

Nah, too artificial... I have to say I really like
Mark's idea, about deriving it from the old size classes.
That way it's still based off of the WE's toughness but the
numbers are quite reasonable across the board and easy to
remember as well.

Carl Billen
Carl.Billen_at_...
Received on Thu Sep 10 1998 - 15:10:57 UTC