Big monsters generally have less splash targets so they kill models more reliably. I think splash is generally working fine for monstrous units, being tarpitted by enemy infantry is generally the exact thing they don't want to deal with. Although reducing splash targets for anti-infantry monstrous unit variants could be considered since that unit type is generally not worth taking if the unit costs more than 1k. 

I am not sure I follow the math here. Sure, the first 'swipe' doesn't kill anybody. The second takes out three. (Going by the example.) Depending on the relative attack speed, the splash approach may actually be *more* effective, rather than less.

Full damage on each entity hit, effectively triples the damage output. (Again, going by the example.) If more entities get hit, it is even worse. if everybody gets hit 'in full', the damage output needs to be nerfed accordingly to keep matters balanced. Pretty sure you are back at square one that way, with a less effective monster to fight other monsters (without splash).

​

Asamu#6386 wrote:

Well, there'd be a serious issue in many cases with splash attacks if damage was NOT divided among targets - imagine what monsters or other high damage single entities would do to units of cavalry, or even some monstrous units that their splash attacks work against, in such a case. They'd be killing basically every model they hit, and when they're attacking 6-10 models a swing, that's a lot.

There are problems in some cases with splash attacks dividing damage, but ultimately, it's for the best because of the huge variation in weapon strengths.

The fact that some monsters can't kill cavalry in a single hit is actually part of the problem with the ones that are designed to kill cavalry. 

​

Asamu#6386 wrote:

Well, there'd be a serious issue in many cases with splash attacks if damage was NOT divided among targets - imagine what monsters or other high damage single entities would do to units of cavalry, or even some monstrous units that their splash attacks work against, in such a case. They'd be killing basically every model they hit, and when they're attacking 6-10 models a swing, that's a lot.

There are problems in some cases with splash attacks dividing damage, but ultimately, it's for the best because of the huge variation in weapon strengths.

The main point is again being completely ignored. 

If damage was not divided equally, the game would function logically and intuitively. But instead of acknowledging that some monsters simply had too much melee damage, you are imposing that the issue is fundamentally tied to the splash damage.

The context of the issue is that units and especially single entitiy units are incredibly whack to balance because of the bloated health pools on everything.

The ideal fix is to reinterpret the baseline for all health and damage values. The immediate fix needed is to undo this curse of a logic-defying mechanic. 

If a monstrous unit deals too much damage, then lower its melee damage value. It's that simple. Changing the fundamental mechanics of the game instead to accomodate the nerf is beyond logic.

​

Alvieres#2794 wrote:

​

Asamu#6386 wrote:

Well, there'd be a serious issue in many cases with splash attacks if damage was NOT divided among targets - imagine what monsters or other high damage single entities would do to units of cavalry, or even some monstrous units that their splash attacks work against, in such a case. They'd be killing basically every model they hit, and when they're attacking 6-10 models a swing, that's a lot.

There are problems in some cases with splash attacks dividing damage, but ultimately, it's for the best because of the huge variation in weapon strengths.

The main point is again being completely ignored. 

If damage was not divided equally, the game would function logically and intuitively. But instead of acknowledging that some monsters simply had too much melee damage, you are imposing that the issue is fundamentally tied to the splash damage.

The context of the issue is that units and especially single entitiy units are incredibly whack to balance because of the bloated health pools on everything.

The ideal fix is to reinterpret the baseline for all health and damage values. The immediate fix needed is to undo this curse of a logic-defying mechanic. 

If a monstrous unit deals too much damage, then lower its melee damage value. It's that simple. Changing the fundamental mechanics of the game instead to accomodate the nerf is beyond logic.

If your suggestion requires rebalancing the entire game it's not "that simple". 

I also question your argument that attacks capable of hitting multiple entities dealing 100% of WS per target is "logical and intuitive", both because it goes against standard mechanical assumptions used in many games, and because this is a fantasy game in the first place with extremely unrealistic elements.

A chosen should always be able to survive an attack that sometimes kills a chaos warrior and always kills a marauder. Your suggestion makes that occurrence impossible and I'm not sure what proposed gain lowering health pools would provide. I'm a huge proponent of optimizing splash values to maximize unit performance in it's role but the fundamental system is good.

The suggestion is simple, actually. Changing the underlying code is uncomplicated, and adjusting the melee damage down for units is also a simple, yet menial, task which is part of the aspect of balancing the game as a whole.

This has nothing to do with fantasy as a theme or setting. Don't use strawman fallacies. 

There's also no defined "standard mechanical assumptions ". Whatever you find normal is subjective.

The argument I've presented is that it's unintuitive and illogical for weapon damage for each model to be divided among the opposing models hit. This is because the game, first of all, assigns a unit stat telling you how much damage that model deals. That damage being divided means it's not the true damage dealt to each model hit. That is unintuitive. Especially because no ui stat tells you how many models it will be divided amongst at max.

It's illogical that a monstrous mode is fundamentally at a disadvantage when fighting normal sized entities because it can't deal it's total damage to each model hit.

If a stat says x weapon strength, you expect the model to deal x damage where it hits. So if it hits more models then it deals more damage. This logical and intuitive.

There is no logical reason why a monster's attack would deal less damage to a model just because it is hitting two models (wherein its damage to each model would be HALVED) or more.

​

Alvieres#2794 wrote:

When a model performs a 'splash attack' (I.E. an entity attacks multiple entities that are classified as smaller than itself), the weapon damage gets divided equally among each entity hit. 

In-game example: 

A Beastmen Minotaur deals 110 damage. If the Minotaur attacks 1 Empire Spearman model, which has 69 HP, the Minotaur deals 110 damage and thus the Spearman is killed.

If the Minotaur attacks 3 Spearmen models, because the Minotaur has 3 'splash attack max targets', the Minotaur deals 110 damage divided by 3. That's 37 damage rounded up per model. None of the Spearmen models are killed in this attack.

What this means is, the more models are hit per splash attack, the less damage is dealt to each model. 

This is a too big nerf to large entities. 

If a large entity model engages in melee against a unit of infantry, its damage output is split and thus the time to kill each enemy infantry model increases. Meanwhile the infantry each deal their total weapon damage against the large entity, making the matchup much less favorable for the larger entity.

This is totally opposite of what should be expected. You want a large entity to do much better against smaller entities.

My proposal is that splash attacks against multiple models each deal the total weapon damage. 

This would mean the total weapon damage output per attack increases, as should be expected.

However, along with this change, entities such as the Minotaur should perhaps have their 'splash attack max target size' set to small instead of medium so that they don't cleave throgh cavalry the same way.

Splash attack is pretty necessary. If you completely remove it then all it achieves is that unit overkilling a single model. 

What I'd prefer is CA changing it similar to how wound allocation works in AOS and 40k. So overflow. Basically a single model takes all the damage, game checks if it dies and how much damage is left remaining, any damage left is applied to the next model and you keep going until there's no damage left to allocate. 

​

Alvieres#2794 wrote:

However, along with this change, entities such as the Minotaur should perhaps have their 'splash attack max target size' set to small instead of medium so that they don't cleave throgh cavalry the same way.

This would actually have the exact opposite effect. If a unit only splashes small units it delivers full damage to every other size of model above small. It's part of the reason that Skin Wolves are so good at killing cavalry. They deal full damage to cavalry while having a bonus vs large. 

​

Alvieres#2794 wrote:
@Jarms48#7854, I'm not advocating for removing splash damage. I'm advocating for splash damage not being divided amongst each model hit, but instead that splash damage deals the full melee damage to each model hit.
@Funzo#7954, you're both right and missing the point. Removing splash damage against medium entities and above would mean dealing the total melee damage against the model hit, yes. But that's exactly what I'm arguing should be the norm.

The point from there is that models shouldn't deal splash attacks to medium entities exactly so that they don't kill multiple cavalry models in one hit. Killing a model in one hit is not guaranteed anyway due to armour, so it's not exactly OP. 
If a large monster logically should be able to kill a cavalry model in one hit, then that should be reflected in the game. But right now it's not because of the fundamental nerf to splash attacks.

That's not what you have been arguing. You have repeatedly said that you want the weapon strength to be applied to each individual model. This would have the exact opposite effect. The unit would ONLY do splash attacks to units that are small or smaller. The Minotaurs in your example would actually reduce a cavalry unit to fifty percent in approximately twenty seconds. You would be getting the the EXACT opposite effect. 

You don't really seem to understand or respond to the premises of my arguments. You are also not explicity stating what is the opposite of what and in what way. If you want to argue a counterpoint you should be more concrete. Your statements are:

"You have repeatedly said that you want the [total] weapon strength to be [fully] applied to each individual model [hit]."

- Yes. That is exactly what I have said.

The unit would ONLY do splash attacks to units that are small or smaller.

I think splash attacks should only be dealt to entities that are small. Not medium entities like cavalry. 

Meaning: monstrous models would only be able to deal multiple hits to normal infantry models, not cavalry units. Instead, it would only be deal a single hit to a cavalry unit per attack.

This is not a fundamental rule, though. If preferred, it could just as well be capped at large entities rather than medium entities.

Other than that, your arguments are very vague and don't constitute much discussion.

​

Alvieres#2794 wrote:

You don't really seem to understand or respond to the premises of my arguments. You are also not explicity stating what is the opposite of what and in what way. If you want to argue a counterpoint you should be more concrete. Your statements are:

"You have repeatedly said that you want the [total] weapon strength to be [fully] applied to each individual model [hit]."

- Yes. That is exactly what I have said.

The unit would ONLY do splash attacks to units that are small or smaller.

- Yes, that is exactly what capping splash attack max entity size to small entities means. 

I think splash attacks should only be dealt to entities that are small. Not medium entities like cavalry. 

Meaning: monstrous models would only be able to deal multiple hits to normal infantry models, not cavalry units. Instead, it would only be deal a single hit to a cavalry unit per attack.

This is not a fundamental rule, though. If preferred, it could just as well be capped at large entities rather than medium entities.

Other than that, your arguments are very vague and don't constitute much discussion.

That wasn't your original premise. If that's your current stance, that's fine. 

I don't see where I have contradicted myself.

I honestly fail to see how the splash damage is illogical here. It's physics. When full force is applied to a single area, it's effects are more concentrated and have a greater impact. If that same force is spread over a wider area, it distributes that force evenly over the affected area instead resulting in less impact overall. Stat wise: weapon strength is the force being used, a unit's hp is how well it absorbs that force, and the model count is the area of the unit being affected. As a game mechanic, it makes perfect sense that if unit deals splash damage to models, then it would distribute that damage evenly between all affected models.

That's literally the point of splash damage.

It's supposed to spread out and be non-lethal but instead cleave damage across entities, which allows you to hide lords and heroes among their infantry or cavalry units to protect them. Same with other high-priority units.

So you're suggesting removing the very mechanism that allows an infantry unit in a square formation to guard something like the army's general or a siege weapon team.

Why would that be a desired change?