Balancing Fortifications, Str D weapons and Super-Heavy Vehicles.

[YorkNecromancer]

Fortifications, Str D weapons and Super-Heavy Vehicles are all going to be in 'regular' 40K. This IS happening, because it HAS already happened. Escalation and Stronghold Assault are real things now, and are official.

So, my question is: how do you think these things should be balanced for regular 40K?

Now, if you've read this and your immediate answer is one of the following:

• They can't be balanced.
• They shouldn't be in the game at all.
• They should be removed.
• Any kind of blanket ban of any of the three factors mentioned above.

Please DO NOT COMMENT. This is because that opinion has nothing to add to this discussion. This discussion is about creative ways to balance the three above mentioned factors, and removing them is off the table. Why? Because that's not creative; the superheavy models are awesome, and I want to see/use them in regular games, without them being a.) autowin buttons or b.) overcosted, easy kills.

So: how do we achieve the following success criteria?

1. All Fortifications viable, balanced, usable, fair, fluffy (i.e.: you can take a Fortification network and build a themed 'Trench' army, say).
2. Str D usable in regular games without it running roughshod over everything.
3. Superheavies viable, terrifying, but defeatable.

I would suggest that all the Fortifications are pretty much fine; even AV15 doesn't seem like a huge problem, so long as it's limited to a single building (which should yield significantly more VP's if it IS destroyed).

Str D, I would change to Poisoned 2+, AP1, Instant Death and give it an modified haywire rule, which scores a Glancing Hit on a 2+, a Penetrating Hit on a 4+. I would also limit D weapons to a maximum Blast template in diameter, unless we're talking a weapon mounted on a Warlord Titan equivelant or larger.

Superheavies seem okay, although I would perhaps use a 'percentage' system, where a Lord of War cannot be used in 1500pts or less, and may only take up 25% of your army's total points, which immediately knocks almost any army from using them in standard battles. Either that, or use the FoC chart from the Horus Heresy: Massacre book, where the army is limited to 3 Lord of War slots and 1 allied detatchment only; that would allow for things like Knight households or Baneblade companies, which would (I think) be kind of fun and fluffy, but not exactly unbeatable.

[Tyrendian]

yeah Strength D is the only problem I really see too - other than that most of the stuff is fine...
how about we use the fancy new Pizza Plate Template GW gave - the one us with multiple blast zones? have it be StrD in an inner 3" blast, S8 AP3 for 5", S6 AP4 for 7" and S4 AP5 for anything beyond that, with the blast going only as far out as your weapon tells you? [anyone understand what I'm trying to say here?...]
That still leaves it a bit too deadly against things it directly hits though probably... maybe something like a single auto-pen on Vehicles (like the old D), and D3 (maybe +1) wounds against other models, with Invulns being allowed but never better than 4+? I don't like the concept of things getting hit with something that powerful just walking away, even on a "1" to wound, and a Necron Tomb Stalker would then just laugh you in the face with its poison immunity (corner case I know^^)

[jifel]

I wouldn't mind a Strength 10 Fleshbane Armorbane Ignores Cover weapon as D. Perhaps have a special rule where each model wounded suffers two wounds for each failed save.

EDIT: And also, I think that Stronghold Assault is balanced as it is now, minus the D-weapon part.

[Mr Mystery]

Scenarios, with suitably altered victory conditions.

After all, any Lord of War option represents something ridiculously rare and valuable to it's fielding army. It's loss would be catastrophic to any war effort. So come up with victory conditions to reflect this. To pinch one from the previous Lizardman army book, and Lord Kroak, if the Superheavy is lost, the best your opponent can pull out of the game is a draw.

Likewise fortifications. They just don't suit certain scenarios (like the grab it and leg it objective one), so come up with an alternate scenario or three to replace it.

It's our game folks, GW just provide the framework

[Ivarr]

The balance for all 3 issues should be in the points.

Fortifications don't seem to be a problem. Strength D weapons should not be a problem either as you will pay a premium for them. (ie 370pts plus for the upcoming knights...nearly the cost of 10 CC terminators, which btw should easily destroy a knight in one turn of close combat!). And only the most extreme of super heavy is going to be impossible to deal with...and they are all prohibitively expensive for normal games. (Baneblades, Knights and even Warhounds are very killable)

All in all, I don't think rules changes are necessary to deal with any of them...I think people just need to adjust their thinking/army building to account for these new threats. I think perhaps the days of investing 800 plus points in a Deathstar may be ending, as these units are a big investment that will be vulnerable to str D assaults and str D guns. Might be a great change/challenge to the current meta...but not broken. (no more than 2+ poison or 2++ saves...both of which were deemed the "end of 40k" at one point or another)

The people who scream "the sky is falling" with each new challenge on here make me laugh...and then inevitably are some of the same people who come up with the ways to deal with each challenge in turn. I have faith that it will be the same with all of these topics.

[Tyrendian]

the only Super Heavy I see as truly game-breaking is the Revenant - that thing, with all the support Eldar will give it, just deletes two units per turn, period, no matter what you are (OK except for hordes...) while having basically an upgraded 4+ (sometimes rerollable should you get the right powers) invuln that even stops StrD and can move 60" per turn without drawback, so not even Night Fighting can mathematically keep you save from it no matter where you deploy

[Sly]

Change strength D to S10/AP1 as a starter, then add a few rules depending on what you think is balanced:
Ordnance, re-roll successful saves (I prefer this rather than adding another Ignore Cover weapon into the game), d3 wounds per failed wound on the same model... these would be my choice, but there are other suggestions out there that also work.

Basically, make it the best weapon stat in the game, but not just "remove everyone hit", so that paying points to get better saves, more wounds, etc, are not wasted points.

[lattd]

Lords of war can be no more than 25% of the army points. Strength D is made strength 10 AP1 armourbane, fleshbane instant death and forces rerolls on successful invulnerable saves? This makes D weapons the super killy guns that they are without being super stupid take half your army off the board per turn.

[Benjamin Blanchard]

The system as it is in Horus Heresy books works quite nicely concerning having a SH in your army, X army points means you can have X points of SH which are directly in the army list (way better this way than having it on a few half-dozen of different books).

I fully agree with the problem of D. I understand that from a fluff point it's supposed to be the ultimate weapons of the game, but it's often way too overpowered for what's facing it, and most of the time when you play on classic sized battlefield, it shoots so far that it makes the 40k range rule pointless.

I'm much more in favor of the "lighter" super heavies, like my Typhon : its main gun is really powerful, but it remains in the standard limits of the game, the range is not so enormous that it becomes tactically uninteresting, and its HP are just 2 more than a Land Raider, which makes it very enduring, even more with all the SH rules, but killable without your opponent have to deploy half of his army during half/whole game to destroy it.

The fact is that 40k is not Epic. Super heavies, super walkers, gargantuan creatures...all those were designed on a much larger scale on the first place, a scale where they almost were the common stuff so many things in your army could take the hit. So yeah, they have to be powerful, they have to cost a huge pile of points, but to include them more properly than now, maybe the D have to disapear in favor of usual in-limit weapons but with some bonuses, and here I'm thinking among other things those against others super heavies.

[The Imperial Fist]

I agree with D weapons being the problem for normal 40k. I was really surprised when they were included in Escalation. I also thought they'd use the HH: Betrayal formula for LoW slots - no more than 10% of your army can be spent on the LoW. Strange for FW to be less OP than standard GW.

The armourbane/fleshbane or S10 may be the way to "fix" it, as well as limiting things to no bigger than large blast. And I'd agree mostly that Stronghold Assault is fine the way it is without D weapons, except one thing - the fortification network involving 3 void shields, especially if they're the 3 hp variety, seems a bit wrong. A good shooty army could sit underneath overlapping ones, and you'd have to put 9 ap12 hits into them before you can actually hit the enemy. Tau would love that, or parking a SH underneath it. Could be very beardy with that one...