Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Scyndria

Does anyone play the old beta?

51 posts in this topic

They have the same top-value, but the similarity ends there. There is no way you can describe these models as "roughly the same".

 

I wasn't describing the damage models as roughly the same but the "raw" damage value itself that is 27> (or 28> in the case of the autogun). And that was my original point concerning damage increments: you can increase the damage of two weapons by a seemingly flat value (for example the autguns/lasguns 13> to 28>/27>) but still make them vastly different with the damage model applied to the increased damage value. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On thing i got my eye on, after just a few minutes of scheming, is the Bolter and Pulse Rifle. As you said, your group may not have gathered some of the weapons, so you may lack the experience of the weapon use. But having the Pulse rifle dealing 2d10+40 pen 14, and the Bolter dealing 2d10+22 pen 4 and tearing. This is a huge imbalance.. On the boardgame, the Pulse Rifle has superior strength and range, but the same penetration. The Bolter has has tearing instead, increasing the overall damage from the 2d10s, but only has pen 4.. Only enough to penetrate a flak armour. On the boardfield, both the weapons ignores 5+ armour saves, which will be excatly like a guardsman flak armour,.

 

That's the plasma rifle and not the pulse rifle :D. Wait, I re-checked it and it isn't the plasma rifle either. I think you misread that part because no weapon does 2D10+40 damage with pen 14.... The pulse rifle does 3D10+25 damage with Pen 4. 

 

Actually, the maximum damage of the weapons equal to their tabletop Strength x 10 (+/- a few points). With energy weapons dealing more "fixed" damage and solid projectile weapons having more D10s in the damage roll (thus having a bigger chance for RF). 

 

 

**

I see that i made that mistake. Looking at the Plasma rifle as you noted. The damage of 3d10+23 pen 4 is okay-ish compared to the bolter, although a whole +1d10+2 damage is a huge difference imo. Also to be noted, that all Tau's weapons of the Pulse version (carbine, pistol and rifle) has the excat same firepower, but you still decrease it's damage due to size. All three weapons will heat up the electrones to the same degrees, as the same technology is no-different to each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They have the same top-value, but the similarity ends there. There is no way you can describe these models as "roughly the same".

 

It would be more fair to say that these models may produce similar results in extreme cases, but will most likely not be comparable.

 

The Lasgun and Autogun is far from balanced, as these two weapons are near the same compared to firepower. I would always pick the Lasgun in this setting, even tho the lack of special ammo.

I can only agree with you here. Your maths are all right. You make the Emperor proud.

Darth Smeg likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see that i made that mistake. Looking at the Plasma rifle as you noted. The damage of 3d10+23 pen 4 is okay-ish compared to the bolter, although a whole +1d10+2 damage is a huge difference imo. Also to be noted, that all Tau's weapons of the Pulse version (carbine, pistol and rifle) has the excat same firepower, but you still decrease it's damage due to size. All three weapons will heat up the electrones to the same degrees, as the same technology is no-different to each other.

 

The 1D10+2 damage is the jump from S4 (~40-49> damage) to S5 (~50-59> damage). And in our damage system, 3-4 or even 5-6 points of damage difference isn't really that big. You usually want to take the 10+ difference as most of your possible targets have damage soaks that are tiered in 10s too (for example, armor+Damage Resistance soaks up 10/20/30 of damage depending on the opponent so if you want to damage a tougher opponent then you will need 10+ extra damage and not 5-6). 

 

The Lasgun and Autogun is far from balanced, as these two weapons are near the same compared to firepower. I would always pick the Lasgun in this setting, even tho the lack of special ammo.

 

 

No, you would pick the Kom-Rifle or the Kom-Lasrifle  :D . The weapons are actually far from balanced, I'll admit this. There are vastly superior choices (like the Photonic Ray Gun) and there is a "NPC Trash Arsenal" category. But it is intentional on our part - sometimes, a bad gun should be just like that... bad. So when a PC mows down a whole squad of soldiers with his kitted-out Assault Pulser he won't have the feeling that maybe he should loot the bodies for a barebone Autogun because it has a "balance niche" he would like to try out. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I see that i made that mistake. Looking at the Plasma rifle as you noted. The damage of 3d10+23 pen 4 is okay-ish compared to the bolter, although a whole +1d10+2 damage is a huge difference imo. Also to be noted, that all Tau's weapons of the Pulse version (carbine, pistol and rifle) has the excat same firepower, but you still decrease it's damage due to size. All three weapons will heat up the electrones to the same degrees, as the same technology is no-different to each other.

 

The 1D10+2 damage is the jump from S4 (~40-49> damage) to S5 (~50-59> damage). And in our damage system, 3-4 or even 5-6 points of damage difference isn't really that big. You usually want to take the 10+ difference as most of your possible targets have damage soaks that are tiered in 10s too (for example, armor+Damage Resistance soaks up 10/20/30 of damage depending on the opponent so if you want to damage a tougher opponent then you will need 10+ extra damage and not 5-6). 

 

The Lasgun and Autogun is far from balanced, as these two weapons are near the same compared to firepower. I would always pick the Lasgun in this setting, even tho the lack of special ammo.

 

 

No, you would pick the Kom-Rifle or the Kom-Lasrifle  :D . The weapons are actually far from balanced, I'll admit this. There are vastly superior choices (like the Photonic Ray Gun) and there is a "NPC Trash Arsenal" category. But it is intentional on our part - sometimes, a bad gun should be just like that... bad. So when a PC mows down a whole squad of soldiers with his kitted-out Assault Pulser he won't have the feeling that maybe he should loot the bodies for a barebone Autogun because it has a "balance niche" he would like to try out. 

 

I have it difficult to see this as an argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your system is really complex. Mine is very simple compared to yours. A little bit of math and you pass on to the next player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't describing the damage models as roughly the same but the "raw" damage value itself that is 27> (or 28> in the case of the autogun). 

 

Perhaps we're really just arguing semantics here, but if you wish to compare "raw" damage values for two weapons it would make sense to compare their Expected Values (EV), ie: Mean, Average. (In this case 19 v 23)

 

To compare some theoretical maximum value tells you very little when one weapon will achieve this value 1% of the time, and the other 10%.

 

This is why we speak of Damage-Per-Second (DPS) in games like WoW: Max damage means very little, you have to consider damage spread and rate of attack.

Scyndria likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I wasn't describing the damage models as roughly the same but the "raw" damage value itself that is 27> (or 28> in the case of the autogun). 

 

Perhaps we're really just arguing semantics here, but if you wish to compare "raw" damage values for two weapons it would make sense to compare their Expected Values (EV), ie: Mean, Average. (In this case 19 v 23)

 

To compare some theoretical maximum value tells you very little when one weapon will achieve this value 1% of the time, and the other 10%.

 

This is why we speak of Damage-Per-Second (DPS) in games like WoW: Max damage means very little, you have to consider damage spread and rate of attack.

 

Thank you sir!

Finally someone speak of something that he knows of, and hopefully most of us would understand :P.'

 

Glad that someone agrees with me Darth Smeg :)

Darth Smeg likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see the old damage system worked on a bit more, though I'd prefer the majority of "random damage" coming primarily from the weapon and not from previous wounds. Or at least the ideas listed in it played around with.

I don't really see any reason why you couldn't integrate it with the old actions, half actions, reactions system, but maybe I'm missing something basic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to see the old damage system worked on a bit more, though I'd prefer the majority of "random damage" coming primarily from the weapon and not from previous wounds. Or at least the ideas listed in it played around with.

I don't really see any reason why you couldn't integrate it with the old actions, half actions, reactions system, but maybe I'm missing something basic.

Well, i have shown my damage system with the old beta's critical damage system. 

 

The only system that is not explained, is how you get regenerate damage suffered and medicae tests.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps we're really just arguing semantics here

 

By now, we are arguing about schematics here. You are constantly taking the damage model into account while I don't. Nobody can be perfect I guess  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I am the Lord-Nitpicker  :D

 

If you wish to be precise (you should!) then you should state that you're comparing potential Max Damage.

 

But if the's the case, then you could say that a Lascannons 5d10+10 is "roughly the same" as Hypothetical weapon with 1d10+50, as they both have the same "raw" (I assume you mean max) damage of 60.

 

Even though the first will have an EV of 37,5, and a min value of 15, and the second an EV of 55 and a minimum of 51. A more extreme example, sure, but the principle is the same.

 

Would you say these weapons are "roughly the same"?

Edited by Darth Smeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I am the Lord-Nitpicker  :D

 

If you wish to be precise (you should!) then you should state that you're comparing potential Max Damage.

 

But if the's the case, then you could say that a Lascannons 5d10+10 is "roughly the same" as Hypothetical weapon with 1d10+50, as they both have the same "raw" (I assume you mean max) damage of 60.

 

Even though the first will have an EV of 37,5, and a min value of 15, and the second an EV of 55 and a minimum of 51. A more extreme example, sure, but the principle is the same.

 

Would you say these weapons are "roughly the same"?

I agree with you here again Lord-Nitpicker :P

I saw the Plasma Rifle doing 2d10+40, pen 14, but the autocannon dealing 6d10+14 pen 7? They have same strength on the boardfield, but different penetration, still they are "roughly the same"? GG for having dual-wielding plasma rifles instead of using a Heavy weapon that has to be braced before use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would you say these weapons are "roughly the same"?

 

Of course not! They have different damage models, and this is where we have a misunderstanding. You are actually getting a little strawman-y here as you present this like I said something like "They do roughly the same damage in every possible situation." even though I disregard the last part when I talk about "damage" (really, no matter what you do, you will always deal 27> damage with the weapon) and refer to it as "damage model" (the stuff within that 27> damage including the average damage and all the possibilities to dish out variable damage values within that 27> range). 

 

Scyndria:

You can't double wield a plasma rifle because in our system, the Pistol Grip gives the Close-Quarters special quality and don't make the weapon one-handed. Also, remember that with the autocannon, you have a 60% chance for at least one Righteous Fury. Oh, and the plasma rifle presented in the armory section would be just S6 (as it deals 66 points of damage) on the TT and not S7 (would need to deal 70-79 points of damage). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scyndria:

You can't double wield a plasma rifle because in our system, the Pistol Grip gives the Close-Quarters special quality and don't make the weapon one-handed. Also, remember that with the autocannon, you have a 60% chance for at least one Righteous Fury. Oh, and the plasma rifle presented in the armory section would be just S6 (as it deals 66 points of damage) on the TT and not S7 (would need to deal 70-79 points of damage). 

 

**

Well, both of those weapons still have the same strength on TT. And i rather have an insane high standard damage, than 6d10's that can give a RF. And the reason to this is - You can only confirm 1, 1 whole RF no matter how many dices you have.

 

And just to remind you, Plasma rifles are for Battlesuits only, and they can always dual wield them due to fluff. ALWAYS.

And that is one of the few reasons to plasma rifles are insane with Commander Farsight on TT. Having 7 bodyguards + himself, that would make it 30 Plasma rifle shots with Rapid Fire..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Would you say these weapons are "roughly the same"?

 

Of course not! They have different damage models, and this is where we have a misunderstanding. You are actually getting a little strawman-y here as you present this like I said something like "They do roughly the same damage in every possible situation.

 

I don't want to get strawman-y, and I mean no offence. But your words were, and I quote:

 

You don't have to make a flat damage increase. For example, our Autogun does 2D10+8 damage while the Lasgun does 1D10+17. Roughly the same damage but still vastly different damage model. 

 

That is "Roughly the same damage but still vastly different damage model." 

 

My point has been all along that these weapons do not have "roughly the same damage", but I will concur that in very rare and optimal conditions, they will have roughly the same maximal value.

 

If we agree that "damage model" means distribution, expected values and all that, then I conclude that we most likely just disagree on the interpretation of your wording about "Roughly the same damage"

 

Not much to argue about, really, but I take what I can get  :P

Edited by Darth Smeg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to be clear, AtoMaki, I think it's great that you share your work with us!

 

I don't mean to be dismissive or arrogant, and I hope that my input here helps you and others to make EVEN BETTER and more balanced house rules, which are again shared with the community!

 

It's great, and keep it up! I do not mean to piss you off, and if you get bored with the statistics, I'll stop ;)

Scyndria likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we agree that "damage model" means distribution, expected values and all that, then I conclude that we most likely just disagree on the interpretation of your wording about "Roughly the same damage"

 

Yeah, I think it was actually my mistake. I guess that's what you get if your native language is not English :P . A little sloppy wording and people get all the bad ideas :rolleyes: . 

 

So to make it clear, with "roughly the same damage" I meant: "their damage is capped roughly at the same level, so if one of them is useless against X defense then the other will be useless too most of the time". Or better yet: their threat level is roughly the same. 

 

And hey, no bad feelings here, our system is still under construction so any feedback is welcomed. 

c8tiff likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If we agree that "damage model" means distribution, expected values and all that, then I conclude that we most likely just disagree on the interpretation of your wording about "Roughly the same damage"

 

Yeah, I think it was actually my mistake. I guess that's what you get if your native language is not English :P . A little sloppy wording and people get all the bad ideas :rolleyes: . 

 

So to make it clear, with "roughly the same damage" I meant: "their damage is capped roughly at the same level, so if one of them is useless against X defense then the other will be useless too most of the time". Or better yet: their threat level is roughly the same. 

 

And hey, no bad feelings here, our system is still under construction so any feedback is welcomed. 

 

I'm sorry too, being a bit offensive in my wording :P. That happens sometimes then you feel one´s words just falls to the ground.

We can totally agree that they may, at some "extreme cases" have the same maximum damage, but as Lord-Nitpicker has said, everything else is not the same.

 

I just find many unbalanced and maybe unreasonable things in your weapon/damage system. I made my own system after some hours of "cloud-thinking".. I had to find a fast, easy to learn system, that required a low level of time to figure out the damage, but still keeping the weapons damage value as much as possible the same.

 

:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am thinking for some time now how to use the old beta the best and what to modify. Well...

About the damage system:

We have this guardsman, named Bob. He has a flak armour (4 head, 5 on the rest of the body). He has a toughness bonus of 4.

He got struck by a bolt shell in the left leg. The bolter deals 1d10+5 pen 4. The bolt rolls a 9(+5), a total of 14.

He reduces the damage by 1 from the armour, and 4 from his TB. The new result is now 9 point of damage.

My system took an idea from the normal injuries and critical injuries. 

Every time you reach the target's TB (4 in this case), you will give an additional +5 damage to the hit location. In this situation, we have reached Bob's TB twice! Giving a whole +10 extra damage to the hit location. Now the damage Bob's leg receives is 19! Now we look at chart and figure out what the damage have of effect.

IF he receives another shot in the same leg, you just add the new damage to the his current value (19+x).

  • All body parts have their own values. You can easily have 14 damage on the Head, another 4 on the left Arm, and 19 on Left Leg.
Understandable :)?
What you do here is stretching the area of possible hit results. This may lead to deadly hits by luck, making them more dangerous and less predictable.

I have also read this thread and I see the problem. I am convinced, that if the rules dictate nonsense results, than more handwaving is not the answer and not a reason to keep bad rules.

There also is this thread and while I like such HP-free, location-wound-only concepts in other PnP systems, I find the semi random result tables in DH quite intriguing and would like to keep them.

So, what actually is their problem?

What I don't like is that many hits (the first ones, but see the 12 lasguns example from the other thread) leave the target with some abstract thing called wound, which isn't really something worth the name but more a promise to do worse damage next time. In this sense it is not very different from silly Healthpoints-systems from old videogame-imitating 80s PnP systems.

Still, what you (Scyndria) do doesn't really change this fact, but just lets you reach the dangerous effect more often and earlier by already high damage results, increasing the meaning of the damage roll and of prior wounds.

But I also wouldn't just increase the weapon damage, since there still is armour and toughness, and hits not penetrating the armour are perfectly OK.

Other solutions/options?

  • A bonus on the damage result table (as if everyone already had a wound) or, equivalently, lowering the result numbers.
  • Some effects, or maybe a single one with some kind of characteristic test, for results 0-10, more like in the old beta before update 3.
  • Some kind of combinations of the first two options, making hits really dangerous, but with specifying wounds by location, making characters more durable again and the called shot more useful.
Thoughts on that?

Just theory so far, I am not even playing DH yet.

Edited by Kuanor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I partly understand you Kuanor.. might be due to lack of english skills and my understanding.

 

My team likes the system.. Sure a lucky shot or attack will make things far worse.. but atm. it's not some random Righteous fury rolls that does it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My English is bad probably, sorry for that. ^^

Which parts do you find difficult?

But the difference between a RF roll and your system is only, if I get it right:

  • Only 10s count vs. high damage in general counts more
  • You see the lucky result next turn vs. you see it immediately
Compared like this, your system is probably superior to RF (depending on what you try to reach), but doesn’t solve the problem from the last post. Just another way to add more luck (instead of RF, but with more administration). Edited by Kuanor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, i like my way of solving the RF. With my system, you will see a skilled warrior more often dealing a mortal wound due to his high WS/BS (which is cheaper) than some psyker or adept..

 

As my topic about the damage system, mine is far more deadly.. At the moment, the strongest weapon used against the team is either a heavy stubber or chain axe. The 2. shot from the heavy stubber did cut of their medic's leg.. This can be due to the first shot hitting a soft spot, only making the next shot far more fatal.

 

My team doesn't really focus on the damage dealt as wounds, more as a describtion of how deadly the wound received is.
Ofc. we note down the damage dealt, but doesn't feel like a World of Warcraft health pool or any similar MMORPG pc game.
It's just easier to figure out the scenematic thing..

As said earlier, my team were surprised that their Desperado survived, even by getting shot in the eye. Sure it were mortal wound, but survived and got a bionic eye. And some insanity points :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, i like my way of solving the RF. With my system, you will see a skilled warrior more often dealing a mortal wound due to his high WS/BS (which is cheaper) than some psyker or adept..

Have you considered tying damage and hit location resolution to the attack roll?

At the moment we're fiddling with the idea of simply not having damage rolls, but instead giving weapons a fixed base damage value plus a fixed damage value per DoS.

We've also changed the distribution for Hit Location resolution, so higher attack skills have higher chances of inflicting, for example, head wounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0