The Problem of -1 to Hit

[Dracos]

Infiltrating and immune to Overwatch at 9” distance as a stratagem you say. Sold ... I’ll take that trade. Saves me 5 CP.

 

 

Of course that kills need for SftS so would have to have the Chapter Tactic Cameoline Power Armor :D

- Mor Deythan live again. ;)

[Stofficus]

The logical replacement, which GW has apparently gone with, is being able to receive the benefits of cover in the open under certain conditions. 

 

Raven Guard could get +2 to their save in cover, for the whole "use the shadows" angle, Eldar getting +1 to their save in the open if they move more than a certain distance in a straight line, and Mechanicum could be the same but only for not moving. 

 

Bonuses to one's save for being hard to hit makes a certain amount of sense, and the more destructive the weapon the less it cares about that, and the rules reflect it - it's much easier to counter or mitigate while still being useful. 

[Panzer]

Cover instead of hit modificator seems to make sense at first but doesn't really make sense to be honest. Why would something like plasma and lascannons work better against super stealthy or super fast units than weapons with lots if shots but no or little AP (stormbolter for example)? That's pretty backwards logic-wise.

 

That being said, I really don't think negative to hit modificators are a bad mechanic at all. Neither Raven Guard nor Alpha Legion (main strength used to be Cultists and slaanesh deep strike bombs) nor the AdMech faction with that rule are top tier armies or particularly unfair to play against. The problem is with stacking it on already strong units like the Eldar do and for shooty armies who rely on buffing their shooting with more shooting like the T'au (easily solved by letting Markerlights ignore negative to-hit modifier from not-moving sources).

[Stofficus]

Cover instead of hit modificator seems to make sense at first but doesn't really make sense to be honest. Why would something like plasma and lascannons work better against super stealthy or super fast units than weapons with lots if shots but no or little AP (stormbolter for example)? That's pretty backwards logic-wise.

 

That being said, I really don't think negative to hit modificators are a bad mechanic at all. Neither Raven Guard nor Alpha Legion (main strength used to be Cultists and slaanesh deep strike bombs) nor the AdMech faction with that rule are top tier armies or particularly unfair to play against. The problem is with stacking it on already strong units like the Eldar do and for shooty armies who rely on buffing their shooting with more shooting like the T'au (easily solved by letting Markerlights ignore negative to-hit modifier from not-moving sources).

 

You're not wrong - Eldar really are the egregious users (as it so often is with 40k...), as they get the most benefit from it, and can buff it even further (along with, well, everything else). Perhaps I was too eager to hope that Eldar wasn't the usual scourge it has been, and identified the wrong target. 

 

I still don't like the mechanic, as it is objectively lazy and doesn't offer much to change up tactics, but its flaw is most pronounced when it goes from annoying and boring to "so, my BS3+ unit is hitting your wave serpent on 6s?" 

[Claws and Effect]

No more than -1 to hit, total, from all sources would work.

 

Against massed firepower my -1 to hit is often the difference between life and death for my units.

 

Eldar really shouldn't be able to stack them like that, and it shouldn't apply to their vehicles other than fast flyers.

[Stofficus]

No more than -1 to hit, total, from all sources would work.

 

Against massed firepower my -1 to hit is often the difference between life and death for my units.

 

Eldar really shouldn't be able to stack them like that, and it shouldn't apply to their vehicles other than fast flyers.

 

More of the Guard model, where infantry get X benefit, but vehicles get Y makes the most sense. GW did it with Guard, and with no one else, for some unfathomable reason. 

 

So, for the "stealth" armies, infantry get -1 to hit, while vehicles can claim cover without needing 50% visible concealment, or gain it from 50% concealment, but don't need to be physically in cover, as an example suggestion. 

[Panzer]

No more than -1 to hit, total, from all sources would work.

Against massed firepower my -1 to hit is often the difference between life and death for my units.

Eldar really shouldn't be able to stack them like that, and it shouldn't apply to their vehicles other than fast flyers.

Problem with that is that most fast flyer already have their own source of -1 to hit anyway so it's the same as saying such rules plain don't work on vehicles.

The other problem is that if you say no more than one -1 to hit modifier then you give heavy weapons a free pass to move and assault weapons a free pass to advance against units with such a rule which doesn't make much sense either.

[HeresyBeliever]

 

 

Orks have a BS of 5+ most of there guns are assult weapons to help them run accross the table to get into combat. 

 

When they advance they half there shooting ability to BS 6+ 

 

So when playing against alpha legion for example then they can't run & shoot them at all. This is rough to be honest. 

 

Lets take the mission into account where it is -1 to hit over 18". Suddenly and ork player who doesn't move cant shoot a 36" ranged weapon at alpha legion as its -2 before  they move. 

 

The idea of them ignoring negative to hit modifiers unless it is self induced is 1 way. 

 

The other way is to give one of the "clan" traits a +1 to hit or a character like a big mek +1 to hit for all units within 6"

[MARK0SIAN]

A clan trait of +1 to hit would be really overpowered! Especially against armies that don’t have -1 to hit. You’d be giving Orks the same BS as guard and Tau whilst keeping their shot volume and decent CC ability.

[The Unseen]

Or we could not go against the game's focus on streamlined gameplay and lack of special rules, and just add a rule to main rulebook that either makes a 6 always a success, or a modified version of that like in bolt action, where a 7+ is rolling a 6 and then an additional 6.

Something that should've been in the game to start with, as if "everything can hurt everything" is a deliberate decision,  orks literally being unable to shoot eldar flyers seems pretty bad.

[PiñaColada]

Regarding stacking modifiers I think how they should change the rule to this system, hopefully it's achievable and not too muddy/complex but here goes. Your opponent can never stack more than-1 to hit you, doesn't matter what combo they throw at you. You can still however be worse off if your own unit advanced/ fired both profiles. Meaning you could theoretically be at a -2/-3 but at that point it was a tactical decision and it's on you. 

 

Having played against alaitoc many times some of their stuff is just plain too good, a -3 to hit hemlock, that unless you completely destroy, is still going to be zipping around at least 45" and auto-hitting as if it were on full health is just boring. I'm sorry if you disagree but I really can't see a good argument for why this is possible. 

When people in this thread say that raven guard aren't that strong so the trait isn't broken I think you're missing the point. The trait is super strong, space marines are not.

I'm not sure if it should be changed to always in cover instead or if they keep the -1 to hit the range should be upped to 24", which is still really strong.

 

Also the argument that because orks aren't a traditionally shooty army they shouldn't even get to try is mind-boggling.
 

[Triszin]

I'd suggest things like banshee's and other -1 to hit from eldar shouldn't get a -1 to hit

 

instead they should get a -1 to enemy BS or -1 to enemy WS.

 

-1 to hit en mass is boring, they need to be more careful in how they hand these army wide traits out.

[crimsondave]

6 should always hit.  Period.  A six always wounds, right?  It makes more sense to be impossible to hurt than it does impossible to hit.  It's really stupid that GW decided it wasn't a good mechanic for a high T model to be un-woundable by low S attacks but then decide it's OK to make units impossible to hit.

 

Another stupid thing is overcharge plasma blowing up should not be changed by negative to hit modifiers.  I understand 40k is just a dice game, but that makes no sense at all.  Should be only on natural 1's.

 

Also, to hit modifiers should be limited to -1 NOT counting self inflicted modifiers.  Example being and Eldar flyer only ever gets -1 to hit on it's own, but if you shoot at it with a Lascannon team you moved it's -2.  Your fault for moving them.

[Panzer]

I agree, a six should always hit. On top of that the Eldar stuff that stacks so badly needs to get a little rework. Doing both of those things should be plenty to reign the -1 to-hit rules in. It'd still be strong but not broken anymore.

[HeresyBeliever]

I agree 6's should always hit. 

 

It is that simple. The rule is there for overwatch

[NatBrannigan]

-1 to hit utterly cripples Guard. That's Guard not using some horrid Scion list. I use a nice normal Guard list and I've yet to beat a list with -1 to hit. Ran Raven Guard close and probably should have won (my fault) though, but that's more down to Codex Marines being pretty weak at the moment. That -1 to hit is devastating and depressing because I know that my fire power is going to be pretty useless for much of the game. Thank the Emperor for Bullgryns.

[Tyriks]

-1 to hit doesn't cripple Guard. My Stygies AdMech have lost about half their games against Guard. When running them as anything else (besides gunline Mars) playing against Guard is an uphill battle.

 

The same list against Orks is extremely one sided, though. I think if 6s always hit it would help, but the problem here it seems is more with Orks than with -1 to hit on its own. This is a shooting game and they just can't keep up. A "prime ork" treatment could help.

[Panzer]

It's also not very fair to compare things to Orks currently. I don't think they'll get something to help them shooting against -1 to-hit tactics, but as we know the Codex usually makes stuff cheaper and gives lots of useful army-wide rules, Stratagems and relics to boost an armys power. ;)

[Claws and Effect]

 

No more than -1 to hit, total, from all sources would work.

Against massed firepower my -1 to hit is often the difference between life and death for my units.

Eldar really shouldn't be able to stack them like that, and it shouldn't apply to their vehicles other than fast flyers.

Problem with that is that most fast flyer already have their own source of -1 to hit anyway so it's the same as saying such rules plain don't work on vehicles.

The other problem is that if you say no more than one -1 to hit modifier then you give heavy weapons a free pass to move and assault weapons a free pass to advance against units with such a rule which doesn't make much sense either.

To clarify:

 

I was taking into account the -1 fast flyers already get. Alaitoc flyers are sitting at -2.

 

And I was referring specifically to only one -1 penalty imposed on one unit by an enemy unit, not penalties imposed by, for example, moving and firing a heavy weapon or advancing and firing an assault weapon.

 

Meaning you can't cast Prescience on an Alaitoc Ranger for a -3 to hit, but if you move and fire a heavy bolter at a Raven Guard Infantry unit, it would still be -2.

 

Make more sense?

[Lord_Caerolion]

I could see the Orks getting a rule like "More Dakka: a roll of 6 to hit in the shooting phase is always successful for Ork units."

[Dracos]

 

No more than -1 to hit, total, from all sources would work.

Against massed firepower my -1 to hit is often the difference between life and death for my units.

Eldar really shouldn't be able to stack them like that, and it shouldn't apply to their vehicles other than fast flyers.

Problem with that is that most fast flyer already have their own source of -1 to hit anyway so it's the same as saying such rules plain don't work on vehicles.

The other problem is that if you say no more than one -1 to hit modifier then you give heavy weapons a free pass to move and assault weapons a free pass to advance against units with such a rule which doesn't make much sense either.

I wasn’t going to mention it but that is my concern with the -1 only idea. If the -1 was the limit from both the weapon and the target for max -2, I would find that very fair. (Especially if CT for Marines ever apply to vehicles like Eldar. Would keep the Xiphon alive longer. Lol) :)

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

I think that they should treat -1 to hit, like the beta rule for fnp where if you gain it from more than one source you have to pick one. Then for the units that are designed with it in mind, they can add it to their particular stealth rule. That addresses the -1 for moving because it wouldn't be an ability that your giving the unit, its a modifier caused by the opposing player.

 

Sixes also should always hit as well. 

 

As far as the mechanic in general, I'm not a huge fan but I don't see how a lot of armies are supposed to compete with gun lines without it. 

[utilityzero]

The armies that have it and most benefit are gun line armies themselves. Assault armies are still hamstrung in 40k and few if any of them get a -1 to hit chapter tactic.

 

I like the only one -1 rule. But letting moving a heavy or advancing with assault also stack.

[Warhead01]

I play Orks, I have not been impressed by a -1 to hit. It's hardly been a problem. 
I have units with BS4+ and use those for my "reliable" shooting.  
I'll take -1 to hit any day of the week over target unit gaining +2 to save for any reason. I want all of my hits, no matter how few, to be meaningful. 
I read above about Orks advancing and shooting their assault weapons. Needing a 6 to hit. I am very surprised that anyone would bother with that. I tried that in my second game of this edition and fount it completely pointless.  In all honesty I don't care about the -1 or -2 to hit. I have WS3+ and better in close combat. And that is exactly where I am going to be. 
Marines aren't really very good this edition compare to some past editions. I wont begrudge them a means of making a game out of it. 

 

As for other armies, do they not have other units that shoo better to choose from or buffs to help their shooting.  As an Ork player I see BS4+ as phenomenal.  
And, do these other armies not also have auto hit weapons they can put in their armies.  

 

[PiñaColada]

I don't know. Say you're playing against a gunline with the -1 to hit trait, so probably admech stygies or eldar alaitoc. Then you want to play a maelstrom of war mission so you roll for it. Oh it's cloak and shadows? So we're now playing with cover of darkness granting an additional -1 to hit over 18"? Should we just call it a good game before deployment and not even bother? I have no idea how GW ever thought that negative hit modifiers stacking would be a good idea.