Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

All vehicles now have three toughness values and armor saves-one for their front, one for their side, and one for their rear. Best used with Devastating Blows.

Walkers and Skimmers can, once per shooting phase, perform an up to 90 degree pivot in response to being targeted.

Google Doc with Space Marine vehicles found here.

I like this, but you would, naturally, need to expound upon the idea quite a bit. Similar concepts get tossed around pretty frequently here.

Obviously, you'd want to include changes that allow haywire, armor bane, and melta to work against against vehicles with T instead of AV. I suggest something like:
* Haywire = poison for vehicles; no devastating blows
* Melta = fleshbane for vehicles while within half range.
* Armorbane = fleshbane for vehicles

I also like the idea of introducing a "Mechanical" rule to the game that can be applied to all vehicles, necrons, crisis suits, etc that makes them susceptible to the above rules but immune to the effects of fleshbane, poison, etc.

I'm also not sure we really need three different values. Provided the vehicle's toughness is under 8, strength 4 models will still be able to hurt them in melee on 6s just like now. Personally, I don't find that armor facing adds much to the game (aside from making vehicles melee-able), but I do find that disputes about armor facing can be annoying.

I like the once/turn pivot idea in general. It would be a cool addition to normal 40k. I just think I like the idea of having a single toughness value a bit more. If the multiple toughness values or armor facing systems were kept, I'd enjoy playing with the 90* pivot rule. That said, why only give it to walkers? It seems like a skimmer would probably be agile enough to adjust its facing in response to enemy fire.

Added Skimmers to the list of things that can pivot in response to being shot.

And there's an issue with making, say, Necrons Mechanical-Dark Eldar. They're now wounding pretty much every Necron either on 6s or not at all.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Added Skimmers to the list of things that can pivot in response to being shot.

And there's an issue with making, say, Necrons Mechanical-Dark Eldar. They're now wounding pretty much every Necron either on 6s or not at all.

This is a very fair point. Not that my dark eldar ever feel like they're doing much damage to warriors and immortals in the first place. ^_^;

Theoretically, if we were to perform broader changes, dark eldar should probably have access to a few more weapon types that would be effective against armies like 'crons. Or simply have something like the "corrossive" rule that specifically gives them poison against "mechanical" units that are not of the vehicle type. I feel the addition of the "mechanical" rule would do more good than harm, but you are correct about this being a particularly problematic case for dark eldar.