GCE Core Rules feedback and suggestions

[Bester]

That's why I thought it excessively skewed to high results.

*If my maths is correct, 26/36, which is more than 2/3rds of the time.

It is a rokkit after all.

The 2/3rds of the time math, even if correct, doesn't reflect the cost of the Big Gun, it's chance of hitting, or its auto ammo roll. The weapons description alludes to this, "Rokkits tend to be unreliable but when they work they are extremely effective and can blow apart a buggy or smash open a gate."

There is currently a huge opportunity cost to taking the Rokkit Launcher. By making it a proper anti-vehicle option it becomes a viable option again.

I dont have the full list of other weapons in my head, are there weapons with damage stats variations...

There aren't many default options with a Damage die:

Orks & Diggas

• Rokkit Launcher D6
• Harpoon Gun D3
• Krak Stikkbomb D6*

*It is already being discussed reducing Krak Stikkbombs to D3 making it more of an anti-personal option, seeing as Wounds max out at 3 anyway.

Rebel Grots:

• Krak Stikkbomb D6*

Diggas only:

• Ancient Guns D3
• Deff-ray D6

Muties only:

• Fusil D3
• Krak Grenade D6

 

[Bester]

Correction: Rokkit Ammo Roll is 6+, not Auto.

D6 Damage Probability Distribution (1d6 + 1d6, Min 2, Max 6)
2: 1/36 (≈ 2.78%)
3: 2/36 (≈ 5.56%)
4: 3/36 (≈ 8.33%)
5: 4/36 (≈ 11.11%)
6+: 26/36 (≈ 72.22%)

D3 Damage Probability Distribution (1d6 + 1d3, Min 2, Max 6)
2: 1/18 (≈ 5.5%)
3:2/18 (≈ 11.1%)
4: 3/18 (≈ 16.7%)
5: 4/18 (≈ 22.2%)
6: 8/18 (≈ 44.4%)

 

[Bester]

Ugh, only 3-minute window to edit!

 

[Ben_S]

The 2/3rds of the time math, even if correct, doesn't reflect the cost of the Big Gun, it's chance of hitting, or its auto ammo roll. The weapons description alludes to this, "Rokkits tend to be unreliable but when they work they are extremely effective and can blow apart a buggy or smash open a gate."

Yes, I'm talking about a shot that hits and penetrates.

That it can blow apart a buggy is pretty much a given. Anything that penetrates (a vital location) can do that, by rolling a 6 on the damage chart (normally a 1-in-6 chance of course).

The probability distribution for 2d6 still looks too effective to me. There's a 5-in-6 chance of 5+ on the damage table, which is very significant damage. That seems rather reliable.

I think the d6 damage is supposed to be part of the unrealiability. Remember, there's a 1-in-6 chance the damage roll would only be a 1 anyway (in which case, the Rokkit is no better than a Shoota and wouldn't even down a Boy with 2 Wounds).

Further, it seems a bit odd that a d6 roll of 1 would be better in this case than fixed damage 1.

 

[Bester]

Further, it seems a bit odd that a d6 roll of 1 would be better in this case than fixed damage 1.

Just need clarification on that last paragraph. Not sure what you mean.

 

[Ben_S]

Just need clarification on that last paragraph. Not sure what you mean.

I'm assuming it's only variable damage values (e.g. d6 or d3) that get added to the vehicle damage roll. (Right?) That is, a Kannon wouldn't get +1 for its fixed damage value. In that case...

If a Kannon wounds a Boy, it does 1 damage. If a Rokkit wounds a Boy, and rolls a 1 for damage, it does 1 damage. They're the same (when the Rokkit rolls a 1).

But if a Kannon penetrates a vehicle, it does d6 on the damage table. If a Rokkit penetrates, and rolls 1 for its damage dice, it's still effectively rolling d6 + 1 on the vehicle damage table. So, the d6 = 1 is better than a fixed value of 1.

That's what seemed odd to me.

 

[Bester]

If a Kannon wounds a Boy, it does 1 damage. If a Rokkit wounds a Boy, and rolls a 1 for damage, it does 1 damage. They're the same (when the Rokkit rolls a 1).

But if a Kannon penetrates a vehicle, it does d6 on the damage table. If a Rokkit penetrates, and rolls 1 for its damage dice, it's still effectively rolling d6 + 1 on the vehicle damage table. So, the d6 = 1 is better than a fixed value of 1.

That's what seemed odd to me.

It's a good observation and hasn't gone unnoticed.

A little background. This whole issue comes from the fact Damage is all about removing Wounds. The problem is, Vehicles don't have Wounds, they only have the one sudo "Wound" which falls under Armour and Penetration. A successful Penetration grants a roll on the appropriate Location/Damage Table.

If we were to apply Damage the same way we do for Warriors it would come after Penetration but before rolling on the Damage Table (not forgetting Armour Plates if fitted) but what would it mean for a vehicle?

When a Warrior fails their save and is struck with multiple Damage they need to make multiple Injury rolls.

So really it should be a case of rolling that many times on the location that has been penetrated.

 

[Ben_S]

really it should be a case of rolling that many times on the location that has been penetrated.

That's not a terrible idea. I don't know what the resulting probabilities would be.

Of course, it's all dependent on one penetration roll - though that is in keeping with non-vehicle targets (where there's just one roll to wound).

 

[Bester]

The problem is, the above is not that interesting or different from landing six hits on a Vehicle with a weapon like the 'Eavy Bolter (albeit in different locations.)

I also saw your suggestion about rolling two d6 and picking the highest which is nice but it's the same as Reinforced Ram.

The Rokkit Launcher has the honour (or dishonour) of being the strongest most high damage weapon players rarely choose.

I don't think I've ever gone up against it. I've certainly never picked it.

Addressing the question of Damage has the opertunity to also give an under utilised options a boost.

I'm not convinced, even with this change, players would take it.

 

[Ben_S]

If the problem is just that people don't take Rokkits, maybe it's because they're over-costed for what they do. The solution could be as simple as changing the cost, rather than redesigning vehicle damage around them.

 

[Bester]

If the problem is just that people don't take Rokkits, maybe it's because they're over-costed for what they do. The solution could be as simple as changing the cost, rather than redesigning vehicle damage around them.

I'm looking at points values tomorrow for another project so perhaps I should take a look at the cost.

For Damage on Vehicles, the most consistent method would be to bring it into line with how it works with Warriors. As stated above, roll that many times on the location that has been penetrated. It also has the benefit of being simple.

The only fiddly part would be dealing with multiple different results one after the other.

 

[Gornn65]

Sorry, I stepped away from this and got busy in RL.

I agree that this is a solid suggestion of rolling a D6, rolling your damage die, and choosing the higher of the two. For smaller damage weapons that do 1d3 dmg, for example, this doesn't help you roll 4-6, but it does help bring up the bottom end of your roll.


Even with that change, I'd agree the Rokkit costs too much.
My gut tells me that 9 or 10 is a better cost.

A Harpoon gun costs 7, and on average, will have the same strength of a Rokkit.
The range of a Rokkit is 30"
While the range of a Harpoon is 18"
Is 12" worth 6teef?
(There's an ork pickup line for someone, but not why we're here)


There's also the factor of XP earned per wound.
Eavy shoota (or spear gun) can gain multiple xp per round, while a rokkit / harpoon can only gain 1. (possibly more, but the odds of warriors have additional wounds is low) also rokkits are almost always firing at other vehicles.

I don't believe that the GCE or the original gorkamorka has solidly defined if you can get the 5xp per wound or pen multiple times with an eavy shoota, but that is an important factor.

I've seen people state both ways, we use XP per wound so an Eavy Shoota can rack it up. or in HTH you gain more.
Personally, I like that the gunner can gain a lot of XP, because we roll randomly to determine how levelling affects it.

In my gang, my gunner has gained 2 WS, 1 S and 1 T. So at the end of every game, I am throwing a challenger against him to knock him out of the gunner seat and give someone else a chance to go get in there, but also to get him out of the gunner seat and into HTH faster!

So far every warrior has lost...

 

[Wurrkop]

Not exactly sure where to put this but its GCE feedback and suggestions adjacent so:

The TOC sections of the GCE web version page need a scrollbar, at least when some of the items are expanded and the TOC grows beyond the window height.

EDIT: A persistent local fix is using the Stylus extension in which ive done:

This adds a scrollbar when the length exceeds 85% of the vertical height.

Ive added this here since i think the fix could be upstreamed to the page, works for all the currently up books.

 

[Wurrkop]

Movement:
Obviously models can not end their movement on top of other models.
(excluding boarding vehicles but thats a separate action outside of this question)
I expect that enemies are impassable and have to be navigated around.
But what about friendlies?
Do gangers go "'Scuze me.", and the stationary friendly ganger lets them pass, as long as their movement is enough that their bases clear each other.
Or are friendlies also impassable?

Excuse me for quoting myself but i think the question got buried among in other discussion.

Any thoughts by the roolzboyz?

 

[Gornn65]

Excuse me for quoting myself but i think the question got buried among in other discussion.

Any thoughts by the roolzboyz?

Personally, I play pretty fast and loose with this part as it often doesn't really matter.

If I was being very nitpicky, I would say that you can move through your friendly unit, since technically they all move at the same time. This creates an exception for things like Overwatch, where the model would specifically not be moving, but I'd likely still allow it.

 

[Flamekebab]

Not exactly sure where to put this but its GCE feedback and suggestions adjacent so:

The TOC sections of the GCE web version page need a scrollbar, at least when some of the items are expanded and the TOC grows beyond the window height.

EDIT: A persistent local fix is using the Stylus extension in which ive done:

This adds a scrollbar when the length exceeds 85% of the vertical height.

Ive added this here since i think the fix could be upstreamed to the page, works for all the currently up books.

I need to take a look at the ToC code a bit in general, as well as a few other things that need fixing (such as why the degrees symbol gets replaced with an O!).

 

[Wurrkop]

Note that Warriors may only Charge the nearest enemy Warrior, although they may choose to ignore enemies who are Down or Pinned.

First we’ll deal with a single Warrior being Charged by multiple attackers and then we can take a look at how other setups are handled.

Firstly the outnumbering player can choose the order in which their Warriors take on the outnumbered Warrior. The first combat is resolved as normal.

So, should one of these combat situations come up where both sides have multiple Models in Hand-to-Hand Combat it’s up to the outnumbering player to decide how to split their forces. Each enemy Warrior needs at least one attacker assigned to them but other than that the split can work however the outnumbering player wants.

Since im trying to videogamify i having hard time wrapping my head around the Complicated multiple-combatant setups.

Do they actually happen in a mechanical sense?

Charging means one warrior gets engaged with another warrior, multiple warriors can charge the same warrior.
IF that outnumbered warriors survives then (if he is lucky) his buddies will charge in to support him.
When his friends charge in they will each be engaged with one warrior.
If they were grouped to one side then they would be outnumber the closest of the enemy warriors.
if they were spread out around the initially outnumbered guy before charging in they might be engaged with different warriors that are engaged with him.

The above seems to me like it should split down into 3 regular fights.

Had there just been one supporting blue guy then he would have pulled one attacker off the initial blue guy.

If there had another two blue guys just "offscreen" to the top and bottom charging in then i think this would have left the middle red and blue guys in a regular combat and the outer two red guys each being outnumbered by two blue guys.

Since a warrior can only charge one other warrior it seems to me to becomes clear who is to fight who by engagement already, when do the Complicated multiple-combatant setups happen/trigger to allow the outnumbering player to "reshuffle" engagements?

 

[Ben_S]

I don't have an answer, but I can't see your picture. ('Content not viewable in your region' - is this imgur?)

 

[Wurrkop]

('Content not viewable in your region' - is this imgur?)

Yes, i switched to imgbb. Does it appear now?

 

[Flamekebab]

I could have sworn we wrote about how things should work when things go from Multiple Combatant to one-on-one but I'm a bit too out of it to spot it. We should probably also add some explanation of hand-to-hand as a "blob" of sorts:

Since a warrior can only charge one other warrior it seems to me to becomes clear who is to fight who by engagement already, when do the Complicated multiple-combatant setups happen/trigger to allow the outnumbering player to "reshuffle" engagements?

A Warrior can only charge one Warrior? Is that something GCE stipulates? (Not a rhetorical question, I'm ill, remind me, please!)

Currently the Grot player has a fairly simple one-on-one and a basic multiple combatant situation, Grot 7 and Grot 8 taking on Ork 3.

The Orks then charge in, how do we unpick it?

The outnumbering player could decide that the match ups are:
1:6
2:7
3, 4, 5: 8

Or they could decide:
1, 2: 6
3:7
4, 5: 8

There's probably other combos but I can't be bothered to be exhaustive as I think the setup is clear enough to progress the discussion.