Jump to content

Welcome to Da WAAAGH
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Unlessness of buggies, a solution?

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1
Dod g. Git

Dod g. Git

    Mushling

  • Grotz
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East Sussex UK
First of all sorry everyone I seem to be bogarting the forum at the moment. Now, among the players I have gathered for my campaign there is the prevailing opinion that buggies are pretty useless, being that they cost as much as a trukk, have no stated ability to transport (not that I'm sure that matters much in GoMo) or space do to the same. In short why bother with them? You get everything you'd get from having one when you get a trukk and in has more space for boyz and scrap. In solution, me and one of my players came up with the idea of making the buggy cheaper, more lightly armoured and giving the driver a gunz mount (like a bike.) Thus changing the buggy from a trukk with no bootspace into something more akin to an expensive bike with a big gunz mount. This was the result. Cost 15 teef Uses bike hit location table. Moves like a trukk. equipped with a big gunz mount (operated by a gunner) and a gunz mount (operated by the driver.)
We'z Diggaz! We'z may not be az 'ard az dem Orkz are, but we'z got betta gubbinz!

#2
Flamekebab

Flamekebab

    Tankbusta Boy

  • Boyz
  • 442 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cambridge, UK
It's something we've been vaguely chatting about too. If memory serves Liam (Skippy) suggests that their inclusion is probably due to pre-existing kits at the time rather than any game design reason.

What's the reason for including a gun mount for the driver if it has a gunner for a big gun?

I like the idea of using the bike hit location table but when I think about it that means the crew (i.e. the gunner) has no armour. Perhaps it'd be better to keep its armour stats as they are (the only difference in armour between the two is the crew location, if memory serves) and instead just specify that it's a gun platform with no crew capacity?

I'll have to give it some thought but I definitely agree that buggies as they are at the moment are kinda dumb!

First of all sorry everyone I seem to be bogarting the forum at the moment.

Pish-posh! The forums are here to be used - I love seeing new posts and topics to stick my over-opinionated nose into!

#3
Dim_Reapa

Dim_Reapa

    Ban Stikk Target

  • Grot Rebelz
  • 4,808 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Durham City, UK
  • Army Name:Trotskin'z Revulushun
Sure, there seems to be no physical, obvious advantages in rules, but it doesn't mean there aren't logical reasons for the way buggies are. Regarding Transport, any vehicle in GoMo can be a transport, including Bikes. To take it away from any vehicle is pretty pointless, because it overemphasises others and it isn't necessary. Of course Buggies can carry Orks, why wouldn't it? Transport is about two things: physical accommodation (what the model holds) and common sense (players not being douche bags). A Bike that gets a 2 foot platform on its back wouldn't move. Buggies are there primarily as an aesthetic. If they were made any better (faster, for instance) than a Trukk, they suddenly get taken more often and they start getting bigger than the biggest trukks you've seen. So there was no way the Buggy was going to be obviously different. But there are a few important pointers. Firstly, it works more or less as a trukk (one less thing to learn about), it's as tough as a trukk, and it can still be a weapons platform that can keep up with pretty much any vehicle in the game barring bikes. On top of that, it has a smaller footprint, so it's harder to hit and easier to manoeuvre. So it can transport a few extra models, but be kept nice, small, nippy and killy. Take a look at the Mektown's Most Notorious campaign. There's loads of Buggies on that picture, and they're being used precisely because they're smaller than Trukks. Sure they cost the same, but if you're going to have two vehicles, and you don't trade a bit of speed for all-terrain (i.e. get a trakk), then you can have 2 or so of either. It's an extra option. Pigeonholing rules into it to make it more obvious, or to say it can't transport stuff is so far from what GoMo is about that the buggy either remains unpopular, or becomes a no-brainer.

#4
Dod g. Git

Dod g. Git

    Mushling

  • Grotz
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East Sussex UK

What's the reason for including a gun mount for the driver if it has a gunner for a big gun?

I like the idea of using the bike hit location table but when I think about it that means the crew (i.e. the gunner) has no armour. Perhaps it'd be better to keep its armour stats as they are (the only difference in armour between the two is the crew location, if memory serves) and instead just specify that it's a gun platform with no crew capacity?

I'll have to give it some thought but I definitely agree that buggies as they are at the moment are kinda dumb!


Well, the reason for the driver getting a gun mount is partially for attack bike equivalence (the guiding idea behind this re-imaginging of buggies) and partially to make the buggy an ouutright fighting vehicle that has scrificed armour and transor cpacity for with more firepower.

In essence these rules make a buggy into anything from a small trukk to a bike and sidecar.

The reason for using the bike tables, which I was a bit disgusted to find gave an exposed biker the same amount of armour as a driver in an armoured trukk`s cab. If yu think abou i8t the original models gunner stood on a rear flatbed, clear of the vehicles armour (unless you count the rollcage.) This also tallied with the idea of a sidecar mounted big gun idea too as I can`t see orks bothering with much more than a seat with a wheel or two.

In short my vision of a buggy is basically two bikes welded together at the forks withone big front wheel, with oneork straddles thetwo seats, driving and firing the gunz and another ork stands precariously on the back with a big shoota hosing anyone who gets too close with plenty of dakka.

In regards to dim repa the buggy exists in GoMo because GW had the kit on the shelf and wanted to see money in it`s pocket instead, there is no other reason. It`s just a redundant hangover for 40k, in a game where if you want small trukk with less space for the ladz you simply bulid a smaller trukk.
We'z Diggaz! We'z may not be az 'ard az dem Orkz are, but we'z got betta gubbinz!

#5
Dim_Reapa

Dim_Reapa

    Ban Stikk Target

  • Grot Rebelz
  • 4,808 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Durham City, UK
  • Army Name:Trotskin'z Revulushun

In regards to dim repa the buggy exists in GoMo because GW had the kit on the shelf and wanted to see money in it`s pocket instead, there is no other reason. It`s just a redundant hangover for 40k, in a game where if you want small trukk with less space for the ladz you simply bulid a smaller trukk.


You seem very sure of yourself. Well, maybe it is, maybe it isn't. You're going to change it anyway. Have fun.

It's Dim_Reapa by the way.

#6
WeRT

WeRT

    Syringe Squig

  • Grotz
  • 76 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Poland - Kraków
  • Army Name:Waaagh?
Agree with Dim_Reapa and Flamekebab. That is why i do my buggies by myself. I was thinking about this problem year ago and i made this table: Attached File  scheme.jpg   40.5KB   13 downloads After few more considering of this problem i back to start point. Why? Mostly because this game is for fun. It's don't need to be logic, fair.

#7
Dod g. Git

Dod g. Git

    Mushling

  • Grotz
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East Sussex UK
Considering the good points brought up here I don't think I'll bother changing buggies. I still don't like buggies much, but maybe a big gunz sidecar gubbinz for bikes might be a better way forward.
We'z Diggaz! We'z may not be az 'ard az dem Orkz are, but we'z got betta gubbinz!

#8
Dod g. Git

Dod g. Git

    Mushling

  • Grotz
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East Sussex UK
Considering the good points brought up here I don't think I'll bother changing buggies. I still don't like buggies much, but maybe a big gunz sidecar gubbinz for bikes might be a better way forward.
We'z Diggaz! We'z may not be az 'ard az dem Orkz are, but we'z got betta gubbinz!

#9
Dim_Reapa

Dim_Reapa

    Ban Stikk Target

  • Grot Rebelz
  • 4,808 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Durham City, UK
  • Army Name:Trotskin'z Revulushun
I certainly don't want to discourage people from doing house rules and whatnot, but I think the main reason why Buggies aren't really special has more to do with balance as I said, rather than anything else. Selling models may have come into it (but it was a much more different GW in those days), but I suppose the crucial thing with GoMo is that your vehicles are what they are. Too many specific rules discourages customisation.

If you want a simple deal-sweetener for the Buggy, why not give it a 180o fire arc (so long as passengers on board aren't in the way)? That way, the buggy's a little bit different in how it can be used, but not radically different. To be honest when I was looking for reasons that any of us may have overlooked for the Buggy, I was rather disappointed to find that the turret made sod all difference.

#10
Dod g. Git

Dod g. Git

    Mushling

  • Grotz
  • 31 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:East Sussex UK
So a big gunz mount gubbinz, how do you learned chaps think it sould be costed? I recall that read somewhere someone wrote up rules for a transport platform on bikes, that'd be a good start for a costing guide wouldn't it?
We'z Diggaz! We'z may not be az 'ard az dem Orkz are, but we'z got betta gubbinz!

#11
Flamekebab

Flamekebab

    Tankbusta Boy

  • Boyz
  • 442 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Cambridge, UK
Hmmm. Sorry for the slow response, I was moving house! I quite like Dim's idea of widening its firing arc. It could be added to the rules in a patch I was planning. I don't always mount my guns facing forward - sometimes a side-facing weapon is more fun. It's actually more limiting but it makes play a bit more interesting than the normal orientation.