UWZ - ranged weapons in cc -

[Oakwolf]

Page 120 & 127: Ranged Weapons Used in Close Combat
Q: How can I tell if a weapon can be fired in close combat, verses being used like a club? What is the damage if I do use it like a club?
A: If the weapon has a modifier listed under its CC category, it may be used in close combat and does the listed amount of damage. It is assumed you would be using the weapon in the most effective manor, whether by shooting it or using it as a club.

If the weapon has a dash, it cannot be used at all. The wielder would not be able to use it to effectively attack in close combat. Models with no usable weapon and no close combat weapon may not fight in CC.

The FAQ text puzzled me a bit, so i would just want to be sure i got the correct interpretation since it basically differs a bit from what the rulebook seems to imply (p. 50-51 section 8.7.5). I have read a few discussions about it on the forums and it has confused me further.

So based on the FAQ, will a trooper with a kratach do dmg 10 in CC rather than its ST?

[dmcgee1]

Unfortunately, this is one subject that seems to generate a lot of debate.  As it stands, now, officially and technically, the FAQ is correct.

There is a lot of discussion going on right now as to how to work this.  There are good points on whichever side of the debate we find ourselves.

One of the "house" rules that has a lot of merit is the following:

I am a huge proponent of the FAQ'd way of doing Ranged Weapons in CC.  John "Archer" Tinney and Jeff "jjdodger" Dodge are not.  This particular issue has given birth to an "argument that won't be resolved anytime soon."

Archer prefers to play it exactly as the rules state:  "Improvised clubs only, CC modifier, ST+0 DM. It is open to abuse any other way."  In part, I agree with him.  My Ilian Templars with Sectioner bayonets do a whopping 17 damage on a charge under the rules of the FAQ.  However, the rest of me hates it when my militia gets jumped by Mirrormen, only able to manage 4 damage against an AR 21 target.  jjdodger advocated John's philosophy, as well.  I almost had Archer swayed, and tried to put the pressure on Jeff.

Fortunately, I am enough of a pain in the ass to keep the argument going; so much so that it actually engaged that little part of Jeff's mind that comes up with wacky ideas to shut me up.  He proposed the following:

"What if we had a weapon called The Improvised Club?"

My brain then perked up. "What?  You're taking all the wind out of my sails - STOP!"

"No, I think this will work.  Give the weapon a basic stat line, say CC 0  DM ST+2, same as a Bowie Combat Knife.  That way, you can put a bayonet on it, remove the horrible CC modifier that rifles get by, in effect, turning the weapon into a Melee Weapon, and do decent DM in CC."

"Let me get this straight; you are prosing a rule that makes sense, is not overpowering, yet gives shooty troops a fighting chance in CC, and appeases all sides of the argument?  I like it (while being secretly envious that I didn't thik of it)."

"Good, type it up and present it to the FAQ Team."

"Yes, sir, Mr. Dodge, sir, right away!"

Please, consider the following:

p. 125
20.2 - TWO-HANDED WEAPONS

    This weapon stat Line is used for any model that wishes to use its weapon in CC as a melee weapon.  The weapon must be capable of being used in CC (cannot have a "--" CC modifier).  Flechette weapons may be used as Ad Hoc Weapons in CC.

    Ad Hoc Weapon in CC
    (concussive)
    CC    PB    SR    MR    LR     ER        DM
     0     --    --    --     --    --      ST+2
    Special Rules
    Natural Attack. Bayonets mounted on Ad
    Hoc weapons increase CC and DM as
    written and add (slashing) to the waepon's
    profile; -1 CC for each additional Load Out.

p. 134  
    Scythe of Semai HMG
    (ballistic)
    CC    PB      SR     MR    LR     ER         DM
     0   3(x3)  1(x2)  1      -2     --     13(ST+2)
    Special Rules
    Sectioner Bayonet (slashing).

This allows for all the fluff and for a bit of "realism" (read:  "makes sense").  Try it, if you are looking for a different way of makng CC work for non-CC cpecialits.

[Oakwolf]

I tend to like the way the FAQ did it for its simplicity, but yeah the issue of bayonets would come up inevitably.

It also brings me to the shotgun's dash in CC. If riffles can be used as clubs or even shooting, then shotguns should have been allowed too. The poor venusian ranger sgt. is one of the few lost souls in CC of the game, and there's no reason for a ranger to be that hopeless in CC.


The improvised club rule has a little problem: it leaves some troops with an integrated bayonet out of the loop (Belzarach and Yari). These were supposed to be the better riffle users of the lot. But the house rule turns the table around, since those troops could not get a load out for their gun.

I believe that weapon costs probably included the CC modifier as a way to balance them as well. So imho the CC modifier was there for a reason, and giving everyone a CC 0 improvised club gives a surprising bonus to those who had a CC - 4 gun compared to those who already had CC 0 or -2.

The best example are DL troops with the belzarach vs those with the kratach. With the improvised club rule...the belzarach stays the same with ST+2 DAM, while the Kratach used as a club gets +4 to CC and +2 DAM and still has a slot for a bayonnet on top of that, so with a sectionner, the undead legionnaire would get CC 0 ST+8 DAM, while the necromutant would be stuck at CC 0 and ST+2 DAM. This strikes me as wrong (the belzarach was and should always be potentially better in CC than the kratach)

In a way, the same applies to the Yari with the exception that it already had a ST+6 spear to it (meaning it gives +4 compared to the club rule, instead of +6 as the rulebook).

Lastly. The house rule for the scythe of Semai should use another bayonet than the sectionner if it intends to remain +2 DAM.

[dmcgee1]

The Scythe of Semai was "re-written" to take your points into account - the bayonet's damage is in addition to what is listed; please, tell me if it was not clear or if it needs to be written in a different way to make it so.  We should do the same for the Yari.

p. 132  
   Yari Shogun Assault Rifle
   (ballistic)
   CC    PB      SR     MR    LR     ER         DM
     0     0       1     -2     -4    --        10
   Special Rules
    Yari Bayonet (rending) - DM +4.


The Bezarach does not have an integrated bayonet, unless lised in the Model's profile.  Therefore, if a bayonet is mounted, if used in CC, it is considered an Ad Hoc, and follows the Ad Hoc weapon stat line.
Again, these rules are, in no way, official.  It was a great idea, in my opinion, and I mentioned it as food for thought (read:  Playtest!)

It also brings me to the shotgun's dash in CC. If riffles can be used as clubs or even shooting, then shotguns should have been allowed too. The poor venusian ranger sgt. is one of the few lost souls in CC of the game, and there's no reason for a ranger to be that hopeless in CC.

Read the part about Flechette weapons (the group to which Shotguns belong).

[luckyone]

We will have to play test this next month Dave.

[Dragon62]

Dave i believe if you check with Thom the Bezarach has an integrated Sectioner Bayonet that does dam 11 in CC. Thats why the weapon has no loadout ability and no penalty for use in CC. This also holds true for the Scythe of Semai HMG, it also has an integrated Sectioner Bayonet hence the no penalty CC.

[Oakwolf]

Thanks for zooming my eyes on the flechette part, i had skipped it for some odd reason.

I will also playtest this in my group. Look at the changes:

As per Rulebook

Belzarachs: CC:0  DAM: ST
Invader: CC: -4 DAM: ST

Both are pretty crappy weapons in CC due to the pathetic damage, but the belzarach was still much better. The increased CC also explained why it was a largely inaccurate weapon for shooting.

As per FAQ

Belzarach: CC: 0 DAM: 11
Invader: CC -4 DAM: 10

Now there's a major improvement in damage, making belzarach equipped units a threat in CC. A side effect, though...is that it completely discredits bayonets that increase damage from ST (ex. sectionner, Yari Shogun). Bayonets that increase CC become much more interesting by the same token.

With the improvised weapon rule

Belzarach: CC:0 DAM: ST+2
Invader: CC:0 DAM: ST+2

Important note: the belzarach does not have an optional load out, so cannot mount a bayonet!

The rule is greatly beneficial to ranged troops with weapons that used to be crap at hitting in CC, and even more so if they can put a load out. Troops like the ashigaru and necromutants get the shaft, comparatively speaking.

[dmcgee1]

Point by point:

Thanks for zooming my eyes on the flechette part, i had skipped it for some odd reason.

I will also playtest this in my group. Look at the changes:

As per Rulebook

Belzarachs: CC:0  DAM: ST
Invader: CC: -4 DAM: ST

Both are pretty crappy weapons in CC due to the pathetic damage, but the belzarach was still much better. The increased CC also explained why it was a largely inaccurate weapon for shooting.

The reason for the Belzarach being inaccurate is two-fold:
a.)  It is little more than a heavy sub-machine gun, not truly an assault rifle.  It is listed as an assault rifle mainly due to its damage, and its lack of multi-round fire at shorter range bands.
b.)  It does not suffer in CC, as most other assault rifle do, due to its short length (hence its inaccuracy).

As per FAQ

Belzarach: CC: 0 DAM: 11
Invader: CC -4 DAM: 10

Now there's a major improvement in damage, making belzarach equipped units a threat in CC. A side effect, though...is that it completely discredits bayonets that increase damage from ST (ex. sectionner, Yari Shogun). Bayonets that increase CC become much more interesting by the same token.

I agree with you on these points.  However, if you were to put a Sectioner Bayonet on a Kratach, suddenly, you have Legionnaires or - holy shnikeys! - Wheeled Templars running around doing 16 DM; 17 on a Charge![/b]

With the improvised weapon rule

Belzarach: CC:0 DAM: ST+2
Invader: CC:0 DAM: ST+2

Important note: the belzarach does not have an optional load out, so cannot mount a bayonet!

The rule is greatly beneficial to ranged troops with weapons that used to be crap at hitting in CC, and even more so if they can put a load out. Troops like the ashigaru and necromutants get the shaft, comparatively speaking.

The following models are equipped with the Belzarach:
Destroyers - (ST 7 and also has a Dispatcher blade - no need for Belzarach to be equipped with a bayonet; though, if it was, they Destroyer would be doing DM 12 in CC - the same as the Blade, and the Blade can Sweep.)
Necromutants - (ST 5 - they should avoid CC at all costs, but they have a chance to score damage if they do find themselves so embroiled.)
Necromutant Leader - (ST 5 and they're Zombie Masters - that what zombies are for, to handle the dirty work.  Throw a few of them in front of you, and run the other way! )
Necromutant Spotter - (ST 6 - just like regular Necromutants, but stronger!)
Undead Crewman - (ST 4 - He's a zombie.  If he gets into CC, at least the Carronade can still fire on its own!)
Neronian Legionnaires - (ST 4 - what do you want; they're not-as-brainless zombies...)
Necrotyrants - (ST 4 - they're Unscrupulous.  That won't do them any good if they're tied up in CC.)
Blessed Legionnaires - (see Zombies.)
Blight Commando/Sgt. - (ST 4 and all the goodness of Aura of Darkness; folks gotta pass a LD Test just to attack them in CC!)

I do not really see a play-balance problem here, but, I would not be averse to adding a Dark Legion Bayonet to the Belzarach, as the picture in the DL Armory shows.  I will run that one by Thom to see what he has to say about it.

As for the Ashigaru, I believe that we took this into account, nicely.  The weapon has a 1" reach, which means they don't even have to be in base-to-base contact to conduct CC, and can lend support to those who already are by virtue of that reach.  Further, they were doing ST+6 prior to the "re-write" - a coincidental 10 DM (they're ST 4) - same as if they'd have fired their weapon.

With the "re-write," they are, still, doing DM 10.  Worked out nicely.

To me, I would've been content to play by the FAQ.  However, because of the confusion created by the rules, as written, it left open for interpretation exactly what an "ad hoc" weapon was.

Having been in the military, and having wielded a bayonet, I know that not only would I attempt to stick my enemy, but would be pulling the trigger the whole time.  Yes, an M-16 makes a horrible spear, but, it is what it is.  That said, to me, the entire reason that the CC modifiers are listed is because it is difficult (not impossible) to bring a weapon of size to bear in the furball that is hand-to-hand combat.  Now, stick a Yari polearm on the end of that rifle, and see if it makes the job easier.

So, Dodger came up with what I think is a great way to interpret ad hoc weaponry.  It ain't official, and would not be used in a tournament - the FAQ would rule in a tourney.

If this still seems funky to you, please, try it, and report back.

Thanks.

[Oakwolf]

Here’s some food for thought in reaction/accordance to what you’ve pointed out.

The reason for the Belzarach being inaccurate is two-fold:
a.)  It is little more than a heavy sub-machine gun, not truly an assault rifle.  It is listed as an assault rifle mainly due to its damage, and its lack of multi-round fire at shorter range bands.
b.)  It does not suffer in CC, as most other assault rifle do, due to its short length (hence its inaccuracy).
As per FAQ

Hehe, I’d just want to bring you back into the light here , if you allow me. The Belzarach is stated it is very large and bulky (for your own pleasure, check the book at p. 480). The inaccuracy is due to the major recoil of the heavy rounds.
There are more things that make it classed as an assault rifle; It can fire at LR, something no submachine gun can do. It also has a negative modifier at point blank range, which is on par with most assault rifles.

The logical reason it has a CC 0 modifier is because of the traditional integrated bayonet since the original mutant chronicles RPG (and following warzone editions). Fluff, while just that, is often the root of rules, well implemented or not

I agree with you on these points.  However, if you were to put a Sectioner Bayonet on a Kratach, suddenly, you have Legionnaires or - holy shnikeys! - Wheeled Templars running around doing 16 DM; 17 on a Charge![/b]

And I agree that this is the main problem with the FAQ, but it had the merit of keeping the CC modifiers of the assault rifles, which I believe should be kept to keep the RC specialist from becoming all-purpose units overshadowing CC specialists.

 

The following models are equipped with the Belzarach:
Destroyers - (ST 7 and also has a Dispatcher blade - no need for Belzarach to be equipped with a bayonet; though, if it was, they Destroyer would be doing DM 12 in CC - the same as the Blade, and the Blade can Sweep.)
Necromutants - (ST 5 - they should avoid CC at all costs, but they have a chance to score damage if they do find themselves so embroiled.)
Necromutant Leader - (ST 5 and they're Zombie Masters - that what zombies are for, to handle the dirty work.  Throw a few of them in front of you, and run the other way! )
Necromutant Spotter - (ST 6 - just like regular Necromutants, but stronger!)
Undead Crewman - (ST 4 - He's a zombie.  If he gets into CC, at least the Carronade can still fire on its own!)
Neronian Legionnaires - (ST 4 - what do you want; they're not-as-brainless zombies...)
Necrotyrants - (ST 4 - they're Unscrupulous.  That won't do them any good if they're tied up in CC.)
Blessed Legionnaires - (see Zombies.)
Blight Commando/Sgt. - (ST 4 and all the goodness of Aura of Darkness; folks gotta pass a LD Test just to attack them in CC!)

I do not really see a play-balance problem here, but, I would not be averse to adding a Dark Legion Bayonet to the Belzarach, as the picture in the DL Armory shows.  I will run that one by Thom to see what he has to say about it.

Note: Necromutants shouldn’t have to avoid CC more than Blood Berets. In fact, they should actually be encouraged by the rules to get in there to get an edge over the sharpshooters. That is valid for all Belzarach toting troops, who pay for their other abilities in addition to the gun. Imho, one should not dismiss them in cc as part of a house rule balance simply because they have X ability or lack of.

I ran some tests here, and since I often play against Imperial, the debate is very visible in our games: I play Algeroth + Horde, with plenty of Belzarach armed troopers.


Our match ups:

Blood Beret fighting Necromuntant:
Original rule
To hit: 25%
To Damage: 35% (18 armor)
Improvised weapon
To hit: 45%
To Damage: 45%

Necromutant fighting Blood Beret:
Original rule
To hit: 35%
To Damage: 25% (20 armor)
Improvised weapon
To hit: 35%
To Damage: 35%

Ashigaru fighting Blood Beret
Original rule
To hit: 35%
To Damage: 50% (20 armor)
Improvised weapon
To hit: 35%
To Damage: 50%

So what does this all means?

Chance to hit:
This felt completely backward when testing: the worst assault rifles get the biggest bonus with the house rule. The Blood Beret basically was handed 20% more chance to hit compared to the rulebook. The best assault rifles in CC were stuck with nothing more. In the same manner, this is also unfair for troops who already pay for a sidearm or close combat weapon, especially when CC related load-out options are available for assault rifles.

Damage:

Most rifles were handed a free 10% more chance to damage, but comparatively, the Yari Shogun assault rifle was left out. It’s not as annoying as for the hitting chance, but still is an undeserved bonus in comparison. As before, this seemed unfair toward close combat and sidearm equipped troops, especially when CC related load-out options are considered. For example, a kratach with a sectioner will be bringing CC 0 and ST+8 damage, better than most CC weapons.

So far

There’ll be more to come, but so far I think that the FAQ is still a better thing to go for, simply because it retains the CC modifiers of the weapons and as such keeps the balance that was laid out between CC specialists, All-rounders and RC specialists. The real crux of the problem seems to be the load-out section, namely bayonets, so I’d be tempted to revisit that section instead of going for the house rule.

I really appreciated the house rule because it illustrated different issues, but I think that there might be a way to blend it with what the FAQ had gone for.

I’ll be back with suggestions once I have tested them properly.

Thanks for reading

[dmcgee1]

Excellent points.  I like the math, too.

Thanks for straightening me out on the Belzarach - I was going more on looks than on actual reading .  I tend to agree with you on the integrated bayonet, but the rules either missed this, or left it out for a reason; I'm not sure which.

I look forward to more discussion.

[Archer]

Why do I even bother....  because I helped write and test these damn rules...

The FAQ is wrong in omission of key information.   if you do a search for Sidearms, you will find the full clarification on the rule to include page numbers.

Only sidearms may be used with their weapon damage.  All other weapons, unless otherwise stated use the model's STR score.

Mistah Talamini was *supposed* to spell it out a while back but did not the last time this question arose...

[Archer]

SIDEARM class weapons may be used in CC and their normal damage value is allowed- for example, Joe Grunt of the Cap Light Infantry gets charged by a Karnophage  and lives through it.  On his turn he can choose to use his Pistol (using his CC score) to pistol-whip (dmg 4) or shoot (dmg 8 ).  The score to hit for shooting him is teh CC score.

Relevant sections of the rules are section 8.7.5 (Close Combat and Ranged Combat), 19.1.3 (Weapon Damage)  and 21.1 (Sidearms)

Side arms are the only shooting weapons that use their damage in CC as you can shoot with them

PER THE RULE BOOK (section 21.3, page 131) Rifles are only adhoc clubs.

  And to pull from the page you quoted (page 120) it states:

Weapon Damage

  The Damage of a Weapon is dependent upon the situation.  While in Close Combat, a weapons damage is derived from the Strength (ST) value of the model striking with it (unless its a Sidearm, which relies on the bullets to do the damage). The better or more deadly the Melee weapon is, the greater the bonus to the model's ST value.

Word for word and it clearly... CLEARLY... answers the question of the damage a non-Sidearm firearm does in CC.

[Archer]

Section 8.5, page 49 (top of page)

Unless otherwise stated in a model’s profile, models may not make Ranged Combat attacks while engaged in Close Combat. Nor can they use any special equipment that is not related to Close Combat while engaged in Close Combat. Items that require no active effort on the part of the user (such as gas masks and environmental suits) are an exception to this rule.

Section 21, page 127 under heading of Close Combat:

 "This range comes into play when a model is in Base contact with an enemy model and attempting to use an equipped weapon on that enemy model.  While Melee Weapons are best at these ranges, most other weapons suffer problems.  Sidearms are compact enough to allow a model to use it in Close Combat Range to shoot an opponent with greater Penetration and Harm, which is reflected in their bonus to hit.  ALL OTHER WEAPON TYPES, with the exception of SOME SPECIAL) are difficult to use at close combat range, with the butt of a weapon's stock being used to bludgeon an opponent, since the barrel cannot be brought to bear at an enemy that is so close."/

(section 21.3, page 131) Rifles are only adhoc clubs.


Weapon Damage (page 120)

  The Damage of a Weapon is dependent upon the situation.  While in Close Combat, a weapons damage is derived from the Strength (ST) value of the model striking with it (unless its a Sidearm, which relies on the bullets to do the damage). The better or more deadly the Melee weapon is, the greater the bonus to the model's ST value.

[dmcgee1]

This discussion i now leaving the realm of FAQ, and is now generating discussion on how to best make a change to what is, otherwise, a rule in need of change.

Would a moderater be kind enough to move this thread to the Warzone thread under Game Questions?

I apologize for discussing my opinions in he FAQ section.  I should have merely stated that the issue is FAQ'd. and until such a time as that is officially changed, then that is the way it is.

[Oakwolf]

Agreed with the discussion being un-FAQ material, but i appreciated it any way.