Switch Theme:

Should you be able to destroy Limbs/Weapons on MCs?  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Poll
Should it be possible to destroy limbs/weapons in MCs, in a similar manner to vehicles?
Yes.
No.
No, but they should suffer some other form of lasting damage (please elaborate).

View results
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in au
Infiltrating Broodlord





Brisbane

I love the MC hate-train that the Riptide, Dread Knight and Wraith Knight have created. A new thread everyday with an idea on how to nerf MC's, that never give one iota of thought to the 2 codices that use multitudes of MCs as staples in their list.

Admittedly I'm probably just salty because Tyranids and Daemons are my main armies on the tabletop and favourite in both fluff and aesthetics.

 
   
Made in us
Imperial Guard Landspeeder Pilot




On moon miranda.

 the_Armyman wrote:
 Vaktathi wrote:
To be fair, there have always been IG units able to do that. That's how they manage to work as an army, especially because their other guns certainly aren't gonna do squat


Not really. Vets with three specials were a product of 4th Edition, and they became instantly popular for obvious reasons. Prior to that, if you wanted one squad with that firepower, you had to take a Special Weapon Squad. At BS3. And no transport. My point being that there used to be compromises and trade-offs when building a list. Elite units with high pricetags and/or limited range and mobility were the ones packing the heat. S10 was a rarity and for good reason. Nowadays, IG can run 15 LR Demolishers in one CAD and still be Battle Forged.

If GW hadn't dug this hole, I'd genuinely feel bad for them. There is no easy way to fix the current arms race without pissing off the playerbase (again).
Vets with 3 specials were entirely an option going back to the original 3.0E codex and 3.5E codex, they were just an Elites unit (instead of Troops) until 5E, but you could take up to 3 units of "stormtroopers" as troops with 2 specials also with the 3.5E codex.

Either way, nothing new, the only reason they increased in popularity is because the Chimera finally became something that actually worked because it wasn't nearly 100pts after kit and had fire points that didn't make it absurdly easy to kill (and the core rules changed making non-skimmer transports something other than pointless deathtraps). One will notice that people still don't run vets without a transport. A huge deal with the Vets is that they're just cheaper to buy, easier to build, and easier to transport than platoons, which are also now more expensive with the new book (particularly if you want to mechanize them) while the Vets didn't get nerfed.

As for 15 demolishers in one CAD, well, yeah, but that'd be 2550pts, exceedingly short ranged, and 15 squadroned tanks are only about as effective as ~8-10 unsquadroned tanks. Meanwhile, in terms of S10, IG lost the Medusa from the Codex, and the Manticore (through the core rules) got its primary AT capability neutered. That said, IG have always been able to run absurd amounts of stuff in a single FoC, even in 3rd edition you could get 6 tanks and like 142 infantry in each Troops FoC slot if points were no issue.

IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.

New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights!
The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.  
   
Made in us
Morphing Obliterator





San Francisco, CA

 Zande4 wrote:
I love the MC hate-train that the Riptide, Dread Knight and Wraith Knight have created. A new thread everyday with an idea on how to nerf MC's, that never give one iota of thought to the 2 codices that use multitudes of MCs as staples in their list.

Admittedly I'm probably just salty because Tyranids and Daemons are my main armies on the tabletop and favourite in both fluff and aesthetics.
speaking just for myself, here, I'm not hating on MCs at all. I just take issue with certain mechanical walkers being arbitrarily classified as MCs (and gaining significant benefits in the process) while others are classified as vehicles. why should a riptide be classified any differently than, say, a dreadnought?

Night Lords P&M Blog: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/502731.page
Salamanders P&M Blog: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/436120.page

"Sternguard though, those guys are all about kicking ass. They'd chew bubble gum as well, but bubble gum is heretical. Only tau chew gum." - MajorStoffer

"Everytime I see someone write a message in tactics saying they need help because they keep loosing games, I want to drive my face through my own keyboard." - Jimsolo 
   
Made in au
Infiltrating Broodlord





Brisbane

 varl wrote:
 Zande4 wrote:
I love the MC hate-train that the Riptide, Dread Knight and Wraith Knight have created. A new thread everyday with an idea on how to nerf MC's, that never give one iota of thought to the 2 codices that use multitudes of MCs as staples in their list.

Admittedly I'm probably just salty because Tyranids and Daemons are my main armies on the tabletop and favourite in both fluff and aesthetics.

speaking just for myself, here, I'm not hating on MCs at all. I just take issue with certain mechanical walkers being arbitrarily classified as MCs (and gaining significant benefits in the process) while others are classified as vehicles. why should a riptide be classified any differently than, say, a dreadnought?


It shouldn't, the Riptide variants, Dreadknight, and Wraith Constructs should all be Walkers. But unfortunately they're not. A Monstrous Creature should be just that, a creature.. not a Metal Wraithbone walking thing with a living/ghost pilot.

 
   
Made in dk
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets




Denmark.

This is the third time in two days I mention it, and I'll gladly do it again - there are no reason to differnetiate Vehicles and Mobstrous Creatures in the game at the moment. They have largely the same function in game, MCs being more melee and Vehicles more transports and guns.

This doesn't mean that all differences should be removed - I'd hate that, actually. Vehicles could naturally ignore Poisoned and Fleshbane, but be vulerable to Melta (1D3 Wounds when within half range, maybe?) , Armourbaneand Lance, while MCs are untouched by Armourbane and hurt normally by Lance and Melta, but can be taken down by and Fleshbane.Poisoned

Any extra damage worth of note is already here - Concussive, Strikedown and so forth.

And of course the Riptide and Dreadknight should be Vehicles, following tge rules above.
   
Made in gb
[DCM]
Moustache-twirling Princeps





Gone-to-ground in the craters of Coventry

No, too messy. There's enough to keep track of already.

 The Wise Dane wrote:
And of course the Riptide and Dreadknight should be Vehicles, following tge rules above.
And the Eldar Wraiths? Are they MCs or vehicles? They're built, yet have no pilot.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/11/26 13:04:21


6000 pts - 4000 pts - Harlies: 1000 pts - 1000 ptsDS:70+S+G++MB+IPw40k86/f+D++A++/cWD64R+T(T)DM+
IG/AM force nearly-finished pieces: http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/images-38888-41159_Armies%20-%20Imperial%20Guard.html
"We don't stop playing because we grow old; we grow old because we stop playing." - George Bernard Shaw (probably)
Clubs around Coventry, UK 
   
Made in dk
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets




Denmark.

 Skinnereal wrote:
No, too messy. There's enough to keep track of already.

 The Wise Dane wrote:
And of course the Riptide and Dreadknight should be Vehicles, following tge rules above.
And the Eldar Wraiths? Are they MCs or vehicles? They're built, yet have no pilot.

True, but their material is biological as I recall. Choosing if the things ought to be Vehicles or MCs are basically up to the producer's feelings about, so Wraithknight could go both ways.
   
Made in us
Hungry Ghoul



Corning, NY

 The Wise Dane wrote:
 Skinnereal wrote:
No, too messy. There's enough to keep track of already.

 The Wise Dane wrote:
And of course the Riptide and Dreadknight should be Vehicles, following tge rules above.
And the Eldar Wraiths? Are they MCs or vehicles? They're built, yet have no pilot.

True, but their material is biological as I recall. Choosing if the things ought to be Vehicles or MCs are basicallzy up to the producer's feelings about, so Wraithknight could go both ways.


Wraithknight has a physical pilot. It is a walker.
Wraithlord is a construct which is adopted as the physical body of a fallen Eldar spirit. It is a monstrous creature.
Wraithguard are not big enough to qualify.

I feel the "does it have a pilot" question should answer if it is a vehicle or not. Though we then have to reevaluate dreadnoughts...
   
Made in us
Preacher of the Emperor





St. Louis, Missouri USA

No. All the monstrous creatures this would need to apply too should be walkers anyway.

 
   
Made in dk
Bonkers Buggy Driver with Rockets




Denmark.

When merging Vehicles and MCs, ALL things classifying as Walkers and Walking MCs will be the same thing, only differentiated by their "Organic" or "Mechanical" USRs!

DID I STUTTER?
   
Made in us
Hungry Ghoul



Corning, NY

 The Wise Dane wrote:
When merging Vehicles and MCs, ALL things classifying as Walkers and Walking MCs will be the same thing, only differentiated by their "Organic" or "Mechanical" USRs!

DID I STUTTER?


I was saying not to merge vehicles and MCs. Just move the piloted MCs to be vehicles and keep the distinctions we have now. Im still in the "no chart for MCs" camp
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: