Jump to content



Photo

FFG PLEASE LISTEN!!! MORE RACES IN PDF PLOX NOW


  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#41 ak-73

ak-73

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,057 posts

Posted 21 June 2014 - 11:26 AM

 

 

Okay, I'm intrigued. What are the key features of your set of tank rules? Hit locations, I assume? Because "Hull Down" position would be probably the most important component missing in tank warfare in 40K Roleplay.

 

Alex

 

 

Location of hit, armor thickness and angle, angle of impact, location of crew positions inside the vehicle, relative motion of the vehicle and target.

 

Then we get into things like number of rounds that a given hull holds in it's ammo racks (not to be confused with magazines as are represented in weapons stat lines), variant munitions, turret transverse speeds, ammo rack location, mines, losing a track/wheel, spall liners, Schürzen and improvised armor, going hull down (as you mention), mine launchers, and realistic vehicle critical hits.

 

 

Armour angle and angle of impact might be overkill for games on the abstraction level of 40K Roleplay. Hit location does matter, in particular top and bottom armour are required. It would have been very easy to add that to the game. I think FFG should add times put more effort into adding granularity (see my inquiry to you about Small Craft rules in the other thread), instead of creating a d10 version of 40K or BFG.

 

Reload times also matter a lot, obviously. I like your idea, it sounds like Combat Mission gone 40K but, tbh, it seems a bit too much. The games aren't entirely simulationist and realistic rules probably ask too much from your average gamer. What I would have liked was a middle ground approach somewhere between what we have got in 40K RP (d10 40k rules) and what you have created there.

 

For me, it would have been enough if realistic tank warfare tactics would be required to be effective within the game mechanics. To give players a basic feel for what armoured warfare in the 41st millenium is really all about.

 

Alex


My 40K Blog (essentially a Best Of FFG Forums):

http://www.40kroleplay.weebly.com

House Rules, Rule Clarifications, Game Aids, New Creatures, consolidated official Deathwatch Squad Mode rules, 40K Tabletop to 40K Roleplay comversions, etc.


#42 BaronIveagh

BaronIveagh

    Member

  • Members
  • 893 posts

Posted 21 June 2014 - 01:14 PM

Looking at bare minimum/middle ground areas, these are required:

 

hit locations (turrets in particular gall me because turret side and rear armor tend to be so much thinner) hits to hatches and sponsons (since, again, thinner), and engine and ammo rack locations.  Top and bottom armor values I agree with.  The demolisher in particular is noted to have thicker than normal top and bottom armor (testing against it's side armor values as opposed to rear)

 

The number of rounds an ammo rack holds for a given weapon (this information has been released by Forgeworld at various points for all Leman Russ Variants).

 

 

rules for spalling on a non penetrating hit.

 

A sensible critical hit table not cribbed from 40k 2nd and 3rd ed critical hit cards.


Edited by BaronIveagh, 21 June 2014 - 01:16 PM.

  • ak-73 likes this

#43 ak-73

ak-73

    Member

  • Members
  • 4,057 posts

Posted 21 June 2014 - 04:17 PM

Yep, agreed. I would like to add this:

Damaging main gun or tracks much easier than punching through hull armour. Much more important than hatches. The history of the Ferdinand should serve as an example.

Accurate damage rules for using SS Heavy Weapons on any target with a certain size. (Having Titans in mind.) This should represent aiming for weak spots. (Btw, I think SS Heavy Weapons should be Inaccurate for targets up to human-size. Lascannons Snipers are a tad bit too much.)

Simple visibility rules, depending on position in vehicle.

Some vehicle actions similar to Voidship combat in RT.

Slow Turret vehicle quality.

 

It doesn't need to be a lesson in Advanced Armoured Warfare. If the novice players understand that they ideally seek hull down position whenever possible and that an advancing tank is best accompanied by friendly infantry to keep melta at bay, that should do for most battles.

 

Specific scenarios can later handle added rules such as for soft ground, etc.

 

Alex


My 40K Blog (essentially a Best Of FFG Forums):

http://www.40kroleplay.weebly.com

House Rules, Rule Clarifications, Game Aids, New Creatures, consolidated official Deathwatch Squad Mode rules, 40K Tabletop to 40K Roleplay comversions, etc.


#44 Adeptus-B

Adeptus-B

    Part-Time Super Villian

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 22 June 2014 - 02:06 PM

The discussion of tanks, being both entirely unrelated to the topic of this thread and worthy of more detailed discussion, should really be moved somewhere else...


  • Amroth and pearldrum1 like this

#45 Magnus Grendel

Magnus Grendel

    The Empire Needs You!

  • Members
  • 1,352 posts

Posted 23 June 2014 - 07:13 AM

The problem is, not many of the 'new' races belong as PCs, either. Slaugth I'll give a maybe (especially if the players end up signed on to the Syndicate), the others are just no.

 

I'm all for more Rak'Gol/Yu'Vath Shennanigans, though. We 'know' they're after Yu'Vath relics but it'd be cool to see an ultimate goal. The Rak'Gol finding an operational Yu'Vath base or capital ship (like the ones in the adventures we've seen to date) would be scaryawesome.

 

In fact, you could tie all three together as a sort-of-sequel to Dark Frontier...

 

  • Adventure intro - somehow the PCs get dragged into working with/for the Syndicate, either on a one-off basis (helping them as a cold-trade go-between) or because they or one of their allies owes them money.
  • The syndicate wants to exploit the prizes to be had in the derelic Yu'Vath facility where the psycharus worm took the players.
  • The Rak'Gol attack (having skirmished with the players and located this facility)
  • The players find out who they're working for and are caught acting as the footsoldiers for one xenos race, fighting a second xenos race, in the derelict military facility of a third xenos race - which has just been reactivated and cut off any escape into the warp until this mess is sorted out....


#46 Errant

Errant

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,180 posts

Posted 23 June 2014 - 07:43 AM

I just want neat aliens like the ones that think the entire galaxy is a giant opera and battlefields are like verses. Additional xeno PCs seems like such a wasted amount of creativity.


  • Tenebrae likes this

#47 Adeptus-B

Adeptus-B

    Part-Time Super Villian

  • Members
  • 1,895 posts

Posted 23 June 2014 - 09:03 AM

The problem is, not many of the 'new' races belong as PCs, either.

 

Again, this proceeds from the misconception that the tiny number of aliens we have seen so far are the only aliens in the galaxy, when in fact there are supposed to be innumerable 'minor' xeno races in the 40Kverse; hence FFG can create all the new Koronus-native xenos they want, including ones designed specifically to be used as PCs in RT.


  • pearldrum1 likes this

#48 Nameless2all

Nameless2all

    Member

  • Members
  • 756 posts

Posted 23 June 2014 - 09:09 AM

I've started converting aliens from Aliens Unlimited and Aliens Unlimited Galaxy Guide from Palladium Books, and Ultimate Alien Anthology from Star Wars. Yea, I know. I'm a heretic at heart. :)

For a collection of fan created material, please refer to the link below. Some of it was edited/created by myself and friends, while most is other fan material. Happy gaming people.https://drive.google.com<p>-"May your endeavors always be prosperous, though they may not always be profitable."





© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS