Dreadnoughts are great, except that they tend to be a poor-man's Terminator squad, and their points reflect this. While making Dreadnoughts bigger and mean, the Ironclad solution, is one idea, I figured it would be better to take the Kan solution, taking Dreadnoughts in squadrons like Landspeeders and other lighter vehicles would improve their presence on gaming tables.

Most definitely, getting three dreads on the table for one FOC slot would be pretty damn cool, you could have proper non-apoc dreadbash armies then

I'm pretty sure it wouldn't be beyond the scope of the fluff either, to say that dreads can either come along as infantry support like they do now, or as little knots of massive firepower/killyness to cause serious woe to the opposition, and also to look out for each other, they say that the dreads are particularly valuable to each chapter, well surely then a squad of three of the buggers watching each other's backs would be a surer way of keeping them in one piece. Imagine a three dread squad towards either end of your battle line mobile anchor points for your troops, ok, er, I think I'm going to have to go have a little lie down now...

I've thought about writing a home brew all dreadnought codex just for causual play with friends. I was planning to run 1 dread in each FOC but run squads of 3 as troop choices. Ironclads as HQs, venerables as elites and heavys, regular dreads as troops and fast attacks with troops in squads of up to 3. It would give me an exscuse (as if I need one) to get more dreads!

Centurion.

I'd switch Ironclads to Heavy and Venerable to HQ/Elite on the principle that it fits battlefield role and fluff better. I'd also say that Fast Attack Dreads must take a Drop Pod and have two Dread CCs.

How about we just say you can take any model in any FOC slot and be done with it?

Good idea Nurglitch. This would make Dreadnoughts more practical, even if the max were 2 per FOC.

In Apocalypse? Yeah, I can see a Formation of 3+ Dreads led by a Venerable Dread.

But regular 40k? Nah. Not unless you're prepared to allow Wraithlord Squads and Carnifex Broods...

They're nothing like one another DD. They have Toughness Values and take 3-4 shots to kill. Dreads have an AV and can be annihilated in a single shot.

There's no comparison unless you give all walkers a toughness value, rather than making them vehicles, ie:

Sentinel:
WS3 BS3 S5 T4(5) W2 I3 A2 Ld7 Sv4+
Scout/Infiltrate

War Walker:
WS3 BS3 S5 T4(5) W2 I3 A2 Ld8 Sv4+/5+(I)
Scout

Killer Kan:
WS3 BS3 S5 T5 W2 I2 A2 Ld7 Sv3+
Furious Charge

Deff Dread:
WS4 BS2 S6 T8 W3 I2 A3 Ld7 Sv3+
Furious Charge & Fearless

Chaos/Marine Dreadnought:
WS4 BS4 S6 T8 W3 I4 A3 Ld10 Sv3+
Insane & Fearless/Fearless

Venerable Dreadnought:
WS5 BS5 S6 T8 W3 I4 A4 Ld10 Sv3+
Fearless & Hard To Kill

Talos:
WS5 BS5 S6 T7 W3 I5 A3 Ld10 Sv3+/5+(I)
Ignore Difficult Terrain

Wraithlord:
WS4 BS4 S6 T8 W3 I4 A3 Ld10 Sv3+/5+(I)
Fleet

Carnifex:
WS4 BS3 S9 T7 W4 I4 A2 Ld10 Sv2+
(base statline, can be improved with biomorphs)


And Extra Armour (where applicable), for +15 points, would give them a 5+(I) save.

BYE

Groups of two would not be unreasonable, and makes them compete for a FoC. They are penalized by an immobolized result. They are still worth taking in Troop but compete with Kans for Heavy.

They do not do a whole lot for the points, besides stack armour. They need their twin-linked Rokkits and Big Shootas back while we are at it.

The one thing all "squad" based vehicles have in common unless I'm missing something...

AV 10 or 11 all around

Sooo, knock down the armor a point or two and we can talk about packs of three and fielding up to 18 per army then

You dont need to in the chaos situation lol they would just shoot each other 1 out 3 times lol

I used the Trait system of the SM codex to field 6 dreadnoughts in one of my games. The result was a masacred enemy followed by my own masacred force.

Would happily do it again if I could but as JohnHwangDD said, its doesn't work all that well in normal 40K.

However, would be nice to maybe get 2teams of 2dreads and a terminator squad for 3xFOC. Worth a try at least even if it is a useless list (it can join my collection of crappy army lists, hehe)

I noticed 1 big problem with 3 dreads per troop slot. How do you handle drop pods? Do you force any squad to use 1 pod per dread, build a new pod that holds 3 dreads or dread squads must start on the table.

Centurion.

@ Centurion. Good point

My first impression would be that each dreadnought would have to buy a drop pod for themselves but would be "deepstriked" at the same time and same location, so you place the one pod, then the second pod would have to be placed next to it. Similar to the multiple barrage rule I think, IIRC

Please bear in mind I have not yet bought 5th ED, so I don't know if any of those rules have changed. Please pity me for still being a 4th Ed head, lol

I do like the idea of all walkers having a T score instead of AV HBMC.


Centurion: I think that if you were to make multiple dreads in an FOS, you should make it just that. Not a squadron, but rather 1-3 or so that are independant units. Then they each buy their own pod.

Personally, now that only troops score, I am inclined to say that more vehicles should be 1-3 per FOS. It doesn't seem to me that their price dropped much to reflect the loss of effectiveness holding locations. Also, since troops only score, other than maybe HQs, I don't know that we really NEED an FOC for the other slots. It seems anymore that most armies' FOCs are now just Troops and Support.

We've been playing it that way for 5 or so years now. We have a walker/monstrous creature damage table for attacks S8 and above (so that they can be killed in one shot somehow), but as a stopgap (and to fit with 5th) my profiles above work well.

BYE

I don't like the idea of Dreads losing their vehicle status. That means that they can be turned into squigs by Zogwort, or some other ludicrous and unrealistic thing could happen to them.

Zogwort can only squig IC's, yes?

Anyway, dread squadrons have long been a staple of 40K background.

An easy way to handle this is 1 dread = 1 slot. One squadron of 2-3(or 4) dreads = 2 slots.

so if what you were proposing came to pass it would mean that i could have a master of the forge and 12 or 18 dreads in drop pods? that sounds a little much dont you think. i think that if you were to impliment this you would have to add in a few more provisos. they would have to be vehicle squadsrons so that immobilised results destroy them. if you wanted to take a squadron they would need a price hike and you would need to limit the number of squadrons you take to one or two per army.

If you were to go down this road then yes, it would have to have limits in place. A good example IMHO would be that you can field only two dreadnought squadrons in an army and those squadrons may only have a max of three dreads in them.

Thats way you can only ever get a max of 6Dreads as this would need to overwrite the taking dreads as elites to prevent a dreadnought horde army. hmmmm.....(rubs chin thoughtfully, A 2000pt army made up entirely of dreads, that could be worth seeing)

Cheese Elemental wrote:I don't like the idea of Dreads losing their vehicle status.

That means that they can be turned into squigs by Zogwort, or some other ludicrous and unrealistic thing could happen to them.

Agreed. Dreads *should* be vehicles - it's what makes them different from MCs. Otherwise, there's no point in having Walkers at all.

Agreed that it would be weird to have a pile of metal turn into a Spawn.

Naaaah, it's got a dude inside it to be warped by chaos energy. I think a cyberspawn could be awesome.
I also like the statlines HMBC suggested, but I'd go further, toughness and wounds for all vehicles, like fantasy.

The point of Dreads being vehicles, and vehicles existing in the first place is so that 40k isn't fantasy. If we wanted to play fanatasy, we'd do so.

The large number / variety of vehicles is the primary thing that sets 40k apart from any other 28mm game system. Getting rid of that would be a big step toward destroying what makes 40k special.

H.B.M.C. wrote:They're nothing like one another DD. They have Toughness Values and take 3-4 shots to kill. Dreads have an AV and can be annihilated in a single shot.

There's no comparison unless you give all walkers a toughness value, rather than making them vehicles, ie:

Sentinel:
WS3 BS3 S5 T4(5) W2 I3 A2 Ld7 Sv4+
Scout/Infiltrate

War Walker:
WS3 BS3 S5 T4(5) W2 I3 A2 Ld8 Sv4+/5+(I)
Scout

Killer Kan:
WS3 BS3 S5 T5 W2 I2 A2 Ld7 Sv3+
Furious Charge

Deff Dread:
WS4 BS2 S6 T8 W3 I2 A3 Ld7 Sv3+
Furious Charge & Fearless

Chaos/Marine Dreadnought:
WS4 BS4 S6 T8 W3 I4 A3 Ld10 Sv3+
Insane & Fearless/Fearless

Venerable Dreadnought:
WS5 BS5 S6 T8 W3 I4 A4 Ld10 Sv3+
Fearless & Hard To Kill

Talos:
WS5 BS5 S6 T7 W3 I5 A3 Ld10 Sv3+/5+(I)
Ignore Difficult Terrain

Wraithlord:
WS4 BS4 S6 T8 W3 I4 A3 Ld10 Sv3+/5+(I)
Fleet

Carnifex:
WS4 BS3 S9 T7 W4 I4 A2 Ld10 Sv2+
(base statline, can be improved with biomorphs)


And Extra Armour (where applicable), for +15 points, would give them a 5+(I) save.

BYE

Too intelligent to ever fly.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Cheese Elemental wrote:I don't like the idea of Dreads losing their vehicle status.

That means that they can be turned into squigs by Zogwort, or some other ludicrous and unrealistic thing could happen to them.

Agreed. Dreads *should* be vehicles - it's what makes them different from MCs. Otherwise, there's no point in having Walkers at all.

Agreed that it would be weird to have a pile of metal turn into a Spawn.

You all obviously either were not around or have forgotten when Wraithlords were dreadnoughts.

Dreadnoughts have needed to be AV13 for about a decade.

Glad GW is finally paying attention and changing some core mechanics.

Even if it is just change for changes sake, at least it's in the right direction.

JohnHwangDD wrote:The point of Dreads being vehicles, and vehicles existing in the first place is so that 40k isn't fantasy. If we wanted to play fanatasy, we'd do so.

The large number / variety of vehicles is the primary thing that sets 40k apart from any other 28mm game system. Getting rid of that would be a big step toward destroying what makes 40k special.

But the vehicles would still be there, just represented differently. And more consistently!

Stelek wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Agreed. Dreads *should* be vehicles - it's what makes them different from MCs. Otherwise, there's no point in having Walkers at all.

You all obviously either were not around or have forgotten when Wraithlords were dreadnoughts.

Dreadnoughts have needed to be AV13 for about a decade.

Obviously, my half-dozen Eldar Dreadnoughts armed wtih D-Cannons show that you're *wrong*...

No, Dreadnoughts are just fine at AV12, particularly under 5E rules which make Vehicles much sturdier and allow Walkers to Run. There's no point in embiggening everything, or we don't have differences. If people want sturdy Dreads, they can take Venerable or Ironclad Dreads.

would love to see i, but then a chain would start.

1: chaos would want em.
2: fex's would want the same.
3: deff dreads would want it, and kan unit sizes upgraded too.

it goes on.

i find fighting 6 a pain in the ass, fighting 18, thats just a piss take

JohnHwangDD wrote:

Stelek wrote:

JohnHwangDD wrote:Agreed. Dreads *should* be vehicles - it's what makes them different from MCs. Otherwise, there's no point in having Walkers at all.

You all obviously either were not around or have forgotten when Wraithlords were dreadnoughts.

Dreadnoughts have needed to be AV13 for about a decade.

Obviously, my half-dozen Eldar Dreadnoughts armed wtih D-Cannons show that you're *wrong*...

No, Dreadnoughts are just fine at AV12, particularly under 5E rules which make Vehicles much sturdier and allow Walkers to Run. There's no point in embiggening everything, or we don't have differences. If people want sturdy Dreads, they can take Venerable or Ironclad Dreads.

That's why dreads and defilers are so hot, and everyone is running soulgrinders x3 and ironclads x6.

Right? :S

I'm going to be running a Dread and 3 Defilers in my CSM army, and I'm not selling any of the 3 Dreads for my SM army.

Newsflash: Dreads aren't supposed to be commonly fielded. AV12 helps with that. GW is a *lot* smarter than you think.

I know dreads arnt supposed to be common, but an all dread army would be seriously fun for the occasional friendly game, just as something diffrent. Just seeing 15+ dreads on the table would be worth it.

Centurion.

JohnHwangDD wrote:I'm going to be running a Dread and 3 Defilers in my CSM army, and I'm not selling any of the 3 Dreads for my SM army.

Newsflash: Dreads aren't supposed to be commonly fielded. AV12 helps with that. GW is a *lot* smarter than you think.

Sales are down.

Crappy units nobody wants is why.

You saying you're the exception (you like running crap) to the rule (which is, paradoxically, DON'T run crap) doesn't make the rule any less true.

GW is a *lot* stupider than you think.

Remember, rules drive sales.

Bad rules drive sales down, not up.

GW is on the ropes and has the best technology.

Smarter? In Bizarro world, perhaps.

We don't live there.

40k sales are down? Really? From what I see, 40k is on an clearly upswing due to Apocalypse and 5th Edition. When I popped into the local Bunker, they had dozens of AoBR sets for sale; a few weeks later, they're all gone.

As for what's "crap", I think the jury's out on that. You not liking something for GT play doesn't make a unit crap. While you may hold yourself out there, actually, you're not the be-all, end-all of 40k gaming.

And as for just me, BoLS recently called out Terminators, Defilers and Summoned Daemons as "spectacular values" and "stunningnly effective". Perhaps they're just better generals out there who can extract more gameplay out of these units? Yes? Yes.

And WRT rules driving sales, that appears only to apply in your tiny little GT-focused world.

Or are you next going to start claiming that Apocalypse is a failure?

Or BoLS is full of noobs pandering to the masses of fanboiz who love their glop? I don't need to consider a unit for GT play to make me want to buy it, it needs to fill several criteria--in no particular order:

Looks (meaning it can't be a piece of crap model).
Price (and I'm not poor).
Performance (and I'm a great general, I can make crap work).

Perhaps a read of GW's financials just put out will show Apocalypse and 5th edition did not make even one quarter go in the black (and since it's public information, go ahead and tell everyone how great it is--make yourself look foolish is about all the truth will suffer, unfortunately).

Rules driving sales is what is behind every miniature company out there.

If you think otherwise, well...we're back to you making yourself look foolish, because it's obvious to the rest of us that bad rules make for fewer sales.

I have never stopped claiming that Apocacrap is a failure, did you have me on ignore for 6 months or something? Outside of the UK it's a big fail.

If you honestly believe the RULES drove sales instead of VALUE, you're definitely up at night.

Please don't equate Bunker sales with Independent retailer sales, if you knew anything about the market you'd know GW's own stores aren't what is keeping GW afloat. Even they learned that lesson (perhaps by closing a few and cancelling plans to build a few more? oh right, reality again...sorry!) why can't you note it at least?

Man, the fanboi in you sure brings out my nerd rage. lol

Speaking of, how about directing some of that nerd-rage towards the topic of the thread?

Kind of ironic that this thread was moved here. My original reason for suggesting this was to encourage people to buy more Dreadnought models and to use more in game.

all in all, if i ever collected SM again i would keep 6 in my army.
but allowing units of deads would mess up the balance and cause riots withother dread users (ork, chaos, so on)

Oh and before you or anyone else goes off on me, here are the actual facts.

This is an excellent site resource, give it a whirl.

http://www.extropica.com/?p=47

Have a nice day with the stock performance.

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=GAW.L&t=5y&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

Wow, down down down it goes...how low will it go?

Yeah, what do I know?

http://investor.games-workshop.com/latest_results/Results2008/full_year/fiveyear.aspx

Please, stop the madness with the fanboi antics.

Oh and here's a real nice graph for you to look at:

http://investor.games-workshop.com/latest_results/Results2008/full_year/financialreview.aspx

Wow we sure are growing! Look at that flatness.

Nurglitch wrote:Speaking of, how about directing some of that nerd-rage towards the topic of the thread?

Kind of ironic that this thread was moved here. My original reason for suggesting this was to encourage people to buy more Dreadnought models and to use more in game.

I bought 5 BR boxes (not because of you, because of the Ironclad Dread rules).

There, I directed some.

We need better rules--if land raiders can be horrifying, so too can dreadnoughts.

They should be.

I already own several, I'd run a pure dread force just because I could...if I could.

And it wasn't full of suck AV12 dreads.

@Stelek: How about you stop calling me "fanboi"? Kthxbai

We need better rules--if land raiders can be horrifying, so too can dreadnoughts.

stelek, points comparison?
and now lets move on to the wapons.
standard LR: TL lascannon x2, TL HB and so on.
dread: gets a basic option, or a missile launcher instead, or if you really go for it, 2 CC weps.

I already own several, I'd run a pure dread force just because I could...if I could.

And it wasn't full of suck AV12 dreads.

Great, and that would achieve nothing.

they are AV12 to be balanced.
who wants a dread that has over that, with the vulnerable rule?
that would just be stupidity.


Edit: quote box missed.

Points?

Easy.

Take a Ven Dread.

Give him a drop pod.

Add in a heavy flamer.

Is that close to what a land raider can do? No, but it's about as good as you can make a drop dread.

Cost: 10 points less than a chaos land raider.

What was that you were saying?

What was that you were saying?

i said nothing about a pod.
i said nothing of a drop dread.

so if its not as good as a LR weapon wise why should it be made better?
should every army have all vehicles / walkers upgraded to match the best one in the army? no.

it made how its made stelek, you cant pick a model you like then cry and moan about its rules hoping someone will take pity on you.
dreads are great models, if used right cause havoc, due to new rules they are harder to kill, mixed with the ven. rules they are a pain in the ass to kill
if you dont like its rules, take a LR instead.

JohnHwangDD wrote:The point of Dreads being vehicles, and vehicles existing in the first place is so that 40k isn't fantasy. If we wanted to play fanatasy, we'd do so.

Umm... what? Is that supposed to be an argument? Was that even a sentence? A coherent thought? Seriously DD, WTF mate?

JohnHwangDD wrote:@Stelek: How about you stop calling me "fanboi"? Kthxbai

He'll stop calling you one when you stop being one.

God I love it how he can't read my posts.

JD21290 wrote: they are AV12 to be balanced.

Balanced against what? They're junk units that people don't take.

BYE

BYE

Ha ha! This thread is a train WRECK! Somebody's been texting behind the wheel!

I'm not even going to shut it down, it's just too funny. I think I'll link to it in the DCM Mosh Pit.

(For the record, I think that the best solution to the dreadnought problem, at least for Loyalists, is to dramatically drop the price to, say, 40 points or so. Chaos is a whole other can o' worms.)

agreed iorek, points drop would be nice, like the ork dread maybe?
and dont drag any more mod's here
i have a habit of swearing, mixed with talking to stelek = a fair ammount of trouble

Chaos Dreads are even worse because you only get to control them for 4 turns out of every 6.

BYE

in thoery HBMC.
but it can be better, unless no enemy is in range.
and theres no way in hell you will screw up the roll 2 turns out of 6.
its all to do with luck, hence why mine used to stand there screaming and sooting the crap out of my termies most of the time.

It's all funny in this thread now.

JD21290 here's the math, bud.

1 and 6 are non-control rolls.

They occur 33% of the time.

33% of 6 turns is ______?

Correct answers on page 310.

stelek, im am not your bud, i cannot be smoked (shame)

roll a dice 6 times numbnuts.
in theory you would roll 1 of each number but in reality its all down to luck (or weighted dice)

this is weak stelek, have you got anything better? or just scraping the bottom of a barrel now?


Edit: if you can roll each number once with 6 dice then i would be using alot more bloody rattling guns.
see my point here?
rattling guns sum this up very well indeed.


as for you, i can think of a few choice words to sum you up, but since there ae mods lurking about ill leave it for now.

H.B.M.C:

You get to control them 100% of the time, there's no luck involved, only careful positioning.

JD21290 wrote:in thoery HBMC.

In probability, you mean.

JD21290 wrote:and theres no way in hell you will screw up the roll 2 turns out of 6.

Every time I roll a D6 I have a 1-in-6 chance of getting any number. This means that if I roll a dice 6 times I should get a 1, a 2, a 3, a 4, a 5 and a 6. Not in that order, and, of course, it won't happen all the time, but probability doesn'tshow what will happen, only what should happen. So in 6 turns I should roll one 1 and one 6, thereby losing control of my unit for 2 turns during a game.

This makes Chaos Dreads completely worthless, especially compared to other HS slots.

JD21290 wrote:its all to do with luck

In my experience there's no such thing as luck.

BYE

H.B.M.C:

Chaos Dreadnoughts are Elite choices, not Heavy Support.

You are correct. Well that means they're competing against Oblits. I don't think I need to expand upon that any more.

BYE

Man you know the worlds gone funny when Nurglitch is correcting HBMC.

And he's right.

Btw, Oblits are heavy.

It's defilers that you compete against with oblits.

Chaos dreads compete against terminators, which is 'bad'.

They're Heavy now?

Wow. I really hage purged most of that book from my memory. Hahahaa...

BYE

Problem with Deff Dreds there are better and more interesting units available, including MANz and Killa Kanz. They aren't the shooting platform they once were.

I know this thread is already off its rocker, but i think Dreads should get a structure point. They still have a chance of blowing up outright, but also have a 'wound' so they aren't as likely to die in one shot, regardless of the strength of what hit them.


Also, its a shame they suck, as they are cool models, and really fun to see in motion crushing things in the DoW game.

Are you talking about the unit that can take two Skorchas?

If dreads are to be fielded in squads, then they shouldn't have to keep unit coherency. This means drop pod assaults, and immobilized results don't make the squad useless.

Maybe just buy them like Imperial Guard Platoons?

Also, they should have Cyclone Missile Launchers instead of regular Missile Launchers...

Now that I can agree with. DML's were nice in 2nd Ed when they could fire multiple missiles. Now they're just lame.

BYE

H.B.M.C. wrote:And Extra Armour (where applicable), for +15 points, would give them a 5+(I) save.

BYE

The designers obviously don't think that 5+I will cut it anymore (why they lowered the I save on storm shields)

I think Extra Armour on dreads should be a 2+ invulnerable save.

Read the fluff, they are combat monsters, revered.

I don't think that a squadron is the answer, nor is making them harder to kill.

Just lower the price so that they are worth taking...

Squadrons would be helpful in me taking them, drop pods, as I could then run my 3 furiosos and 3 regular dreads in my BA force and still take 2 units of CCW scouts in elites and 2 whirlwinds in HS. Of course pea it would require that whirlwinds be in squadrons to, just like apocalypse...

I think though that scouts of any sort, even if elite are much better investment than dreads as they are as you have 10 wounds rather than the 1 potential 'wound' of a dreadnought...

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:I think Extra Armour on dreads should be a 2+ invulnerable save.

You can't be serious? You want them to shrug off fully 5/6ths of everything that's thrown at them?

BYE

Yes I'm serious.

Its already been pointed out in this thread that they are way overcosted (ven + drop pod + HF = about chaos land raider)

Dropping the cost would be simply too easy when you can make rules that will corespond with the fluff and rightly elevate dreads to where they should be in the space marine list... ranked up as an unkillable squadron of death.

Funneh.

Av13 would be a simple fix. That combined with the Run rule would be enough. A points drop (20-30, maybe?) would also work.

As discussed many times over the years, replacing the whole AV system for vehicles with everything using the Toughness/Wounds mechanic would be smarter and more consistent. It would also leave plenty of room to add little subrules if needed to give the flavor for different armies. Yakface wrote up a really good set just about two years ago:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/118694.page

Waaagh_Gonads wrote:I think Extra Armour on dreads should be a 2+ invulnerable save.

At that rate, it would be folly to take anything else - it would be the toughest model in the game, easily outclassing an AV14 Living Metal Monolith. AV12 is already immune to all small arms fire. Now you're making it effectively immune to Heavy weapons as well.

It is better than any Titan-class Void Shield.

I think this is a poor suggestion.

Agreed 2+ on top of being a vehicle would be a nightmare to deal with. The point cost to justify such an ability would be insane! Marines would have less than a 2% chance of blowing a standard dreadnought up with a Lazcannon. Way over the top.

Gonads is messing with you.

Well that's great, a Mod trolling a Proposed Rules thread. Wonderfully constructive.

BYE

*Shakes fist at Mannahnin in impotent rage*

Grrrrr!

Dreadnaughts should be able to assault out of a drop pod. Who is to say that its not carrying a Vanguard veteran inside?

G

Well if you wanted to have dreadnoughts in squadrons it would only help sm. becuase have a squad of csm dreadnoughts would proove stupid, becuase of there fire frenzy rule. So id say bugger that idea, its only gunna give sm even even more power, which alot of people would get pissed off about.

BDA

apocalipse you have a sheet with 1+ techmarien and 3+ dreads.

And they have Flank March no less. Quite a dangerous formation that.

BYE

and your marines get flank mach not only the formation
my main formation with carfol planing

I don't know about Dreadnaughts, but this would be great for my Ork Deffdreads. That's because whenever I put out just one, it is guaranteed shot-to-pieces on Turn 1. Three would up my survivability nicely. And it isn't as if this isn't expensive - I'd be approaching 300 points for a unit of 3 of these. So I say why not?

Kanz can do it. I think this sort of thing would be a great addition to Standard 40K.

Then just let me get 9 on the table when I fill up all my Heavy Support Choices.

Would Deff Dreadz in squadrons invalidate Kanz though?

BYE

No, why would they?

Spamming dreadnoughts is still the single best tactic in DoW as far as I can see. Just thought I'd add that.

Nurglitch wrote:No, why would they?

A squadron of Kanz... or in the same slot a squadron of tougher better Kanz.

You're not big on the ol' imagination, are you Nurgly?

BYE

JohnHwangDD wrote:In Apocalypse? Yeah, I can see a Formation of 3+ Dreads led by a Venerable Dread.

But regular 40k? Nah. Not unless you're prepared to allow Wraithlord Squads and Carnifex Broods...

Preach on brother. At AV 12 they are just too immune to basic weapons to be allowable in squads. If they were AV 10 (like every other vehicles available in squads) then it wouldn't be a problem since your basic trooper in just about every army (other than IG) would be able to hurt them. However any army that is made up entirely of units that 85% of armies out there can't hurt with their basic weapons is just broken.

Besides, since dreadnaughts are vehicles, they can't score even if they are troops so an all dread army wouldn't really work.

A squadron of Kanz... or in the same slot a squadron of tougher better Kanz.

You're not big on the ol' imagination, are you Nurgly?

and thats why you shouldnt think about collecting orks.

Kanz are designed for shooting, hence thier semi decent BS, deff dreads are mainly for combat due to increaced WS and 5 attacks (if given 2 CC weps)

you have a choice then, shooty chunk of metal or stompy chunk of metal.

H.B.M.C.:

Hey, nice cheap shot. Sure shows your quality.

But let me address the idea that given the choice between a squadron of Kans and a squadron of Dreds, a player would always choose the latter.

Dreds are not Kans. Kans shoot better than Dreds, cost much less, and can be armed with Grotzookas.

Kans are not Dreds. Dred fight better than Kans, cost much more, and can be taken as Troops choices if a Big Mek is chosen as an HQ.

Different units for different roles.

Really, this rule will only benifit the SM's and Orks what about everyone else? like CSM's who would never have any use for them unless the crazed rule was removed, or wraithlords and so on.

BDA

They could always make separate vehicle rules for Walkers, like their own damage table.

Nurglitch wrote:Hey, nice cheap shot. Sure shows your quality.

Cheapshot? Don't be absurd. Next you'll acuse me of being subtle...

Besides, all you seem to do in the Proposed Rule forum is come in and shoot everybody's ideas down. To put my comment to you in a less inflamatory manner - you seem to have a very hard time thinking outside the box. If it doesn't conform to pre-existing rules, you dismiss it out of hand. I find this behaviour of yours to be extremely strange considering that this is a Proposed Rules forum.

Nurglitch wrote:Dreds are not Kans. Kans shoot better than Dreds, cost much less, and can be armed with Grotzookas.

Kans are not Dreds. Dred fight better than Kans, cost much more, and can be taken as Troops choices if a Big Mek is chosen as an HQ.

Different units for different roles.

And both competing for the same slot equally because one is a Squadron and the other is not. You suddenly give the tougher one squadron ability, and the Kanz tend to get left behind. Who needs to shoot with Kanz anyway? That's what Lootas are for.

I can't see Kanz being able to do anything in an Ork army that other units can't do better or cheaper or both.

BYE

H.B.M.C.:

Surely if you had done creative work yourself you'd know how brainstorming works. First you find a problem, and then you come up with a solution. If there is no problem, then offering a 'solution' isn't 'thinking outside the box', it isn't thinking at all. If I seem overly critical, it's because most people posting on this forum don't appear to put in the groundwork necessary to come up with constructive proposals for rules, mistaking random day-dreaming for analysis and solution.

Take your own insight (or apparent lack thereof) into the use of Kans. You seem to think that a player has the choice of either taking Kans or taking Lootas. That is a false dilemma, because you can take Lootas and Kans, and taking both will enhance your army's shooting more than taking either alone.

Likewise consider the choice between a squadron of Kans and a squadron of Dreds, which I've gone over. You seem unable to consider the relative merits of their characteristics, which make Dreds considerably more effective in combat, but Kans considerably more effective in shooting point for point. While these two units actually do compete for some slots (they don't compete for Troops slots), they don't compete for the same roles so making them both squadrons does not affect their relative merits.

hmmm, some good points...

...but why not solve all the problems...

...and just collect craftworld eldar?

If Dredds started being in squadrons, the only way I could see Kans being worthwhile is if they "upgunned" them. The fluff reason could be that Kans are the test-beds for all kinds of wonky weapons that the Mekks aren't ready to mount on their precious, stompy lovelies, and who cares if a Grot in a can blows himself up?

Maybe mount them with options like a twinlinked deffgun, or modified versions of existing guns modified like snazzguns, or something unreasonably powerful and dangerous to both the target and the shooter... you know, Orky stuff.

Nurglitch wrote:Surely if you had done creative work yourself you'd know how brainstorming works.

...

Take your own insight (or apparent lack thereof)

Heh. Now who's making cheap shots.

And as far as having done creative work, for 5+ years our group has been writing the Revisited Project. Believe me when I say I know how writing rules works...

Nurglitch wrote:If I seem overly critical, it's because most people posting on this forum don't appear to put in the groundwork necessary to come up with constructive proposals for rules, mistaking random day-dreaming for analysis and solution.

And this is a problem... how?

Nurglitch wrote:You seem to think that a player has the choice of either taking Kans or taking Lootas.

Not at all. I know what parts of the FOC they occupy. People have the choice of either taking Kanz for shooty and Dreads for choppy... or ignoring the Kanz completely, taking Lootaz because they're much, much, much better shooty, and taking Dreads in place of the Kanz. Why fight to work out what you spend your HS slots on - shooty or choppy - when Lootas make that a moot point. They can do the shooty over in their Elite shots, while the Dreads do the choppy. No need for the Kanz because there's nothing they do that other units can't do better or cheaper.

You're right, I don't rate Kanz all that well. And as long as Dreads are better in HTH and Lootaz are better shooters, I see no reason to waste the HS slots on Grot-powered tinboyz.

Nurglitch wrote:Likewise consider the choice between a squadron of Kans and a squadron of Dreds, which I've gone over. You seem unable to consider the relative merits of their characteristics, which make Dreds considerably more effective in combat, but Kans considerably more effective in shooting point for point.

Yes, the Kanz are better than the Dreads for shooting, but there are other units that are better than the Kanz for shooting, so I won't bother with the Kanz, I'll spend the slots on Dreads, and get my shooting in a more effective unit elsewhere (like Lootaz).



[EDIT]: And now we're off topic, so I'm dropping this.

BYE