42971
Post by: Kal-El
Now that we have confirmed how hull points work the vehicle amounts of hull points, are vehicles pretty much done? Granted a tech Maine can repair d3 a turn... But who's gonna buy a bunch of theses to repair when points are better spent else where. Seems like to me vehicles are going to be glanced to death turn one often.
25127
Post by: Razgryz
Most vehicles will have 3 HP, that means minimum 3 glances to wreck, barring any pens. I doubt vehicles will go away, but they won't be the kings of the battlefield anymore, which is probably the point of the rule.
It just means that players can't rely on transports to govern the flow of the game. Especially with the extra modifiers for AP2 and 1 weapons, melta got a lot more deadly.
55847
Post by: Buttons
Kal-El wrote:Now that we have confirmed how hull points work the vehicle amounts of hull points, are vehicles pretty much done? Granted a tech Maine can repair d3 a turn... But who's gonna buy a bunch of theses to repair when points are better spent else where. Seems like to me vehicles are going to be glanced to death turn one often.
Techmarines can repair D3 a turn? Can techpriests? I would love a reason to field techpriests.
42971
Post by: Kal-El
Yeah I am thinking about nixing my 7 vehicles I currently use :(. Guess I will save them for 7th and apoc
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Vehicles will have drastically lower lifespans.
Armies that simply rely on transports as 1 or 2 turn battle taxi's won't change, armies that rely on them throughout the game (Eldar, Tau, Guard, DE, etc) will really feel it.
The Hull Points system is very easy to game and gimmick, especially for lower AV vehicles where glances with lots of small arms fire are possible (my bolters do 2 glances, my next missile hit just needs to roll a 2+ to kill it, etc), and coupled with the new vehicles are "WS0 if stationary, WS1 if moving", vehicles basically are done if anything gets into base contact with them.
Don't expect to see dreads do much of anything in 6E either.
42971
Post by: Kal-El
And gw put exclamations after the dreads have hull points in white dwarf I think lol.
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
Not to be overly snarky, but this is one of the many reasons why I still play play games of 4th Edition with my buddy. Vehicles were neither the kings of the battlefield(thought they were plenty good), nor were they overly nerfed the other way like it sounds like they are going to be now.
I will especially feel 6th edition if I (ever) play it with my fledgling Eldar army, as so far they are themed heavily like Saim-hann, with several Vypers, a Falcon and a Wave Serpent along my squads of Jetbikes. Hull points and how they function sound like they will suck for that.
41111
Post by: Daston
Do we know that it is 1 glance means an auto -1 HP? Or does it depend on what is rolled on the damage table? Ie a crew shaken result might not make it loose a HP
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Daston wrote:Do we know that it is 1 glance means an auto -1 HP? Or does it depend on what is rolled on the damage table? Ie a crew shaken result might not make it loose a HP
Glances do not roll on a damage table, it's just -1 Hull Point, no other effects. So in some ways it's good, but it means that it's really, really easy to kill them off.
AegisGrimm wrote:Not to be overly snarky, but this is one of the many reasons why I still play play games of 4th Edition with my buddy. Vehicles were neither the kings of the battlefield(thought they were plenty good), nor were they overly nerfed the other way like it sounds like they are going to be now.
O_o
Do you play 4E with anything but skimmers? especially non-skimmer *transports*? Because outside of the invinci-skimmers, you generally only saw sit-back-and-shoot tanks and transports basically were just used as mobile terrain.
I remember routinely being de-mech'd turn 1, Leman Russ tanks being destroyed by bolt pistols in the arse, etc.
4E was where tanks could be killed by glances, pen's killed on a 4+, tanks couldn't get cover (only a 4+ roll to downgrade a pen to a glance), any penetrating hit automatically forced disembarkation, destroyed transports auto-pinned passengers and forced wounds on a 4+ with explosions getting rerolls, ordnance could kill all passengers, etc.
Except skimmers, which for the two big skimmer armies had wargear to remove the drawbacks of skimmers and could, as long as they moved 6", basically only be killed on damage rolls of 6 or double 6 in the case of Falcons, never had to worry about forced disembarkation, were only ever hit on 6's in CC, could never be exploded, etc.
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
Not to be overly snarky, but this is one of the many reasons why I still play play games of 4th Edition with my buddy. Vehicles were neither the kings of the battlefield(thought they were plenty good), nor were they overly nerfed the other way like it sounds like they are going to be now.
You realize by now that Tri-Falcon Eldar were the GK of that generation right? They were indeed the King of the battlefield, alongside Fish of Fury.
55206
Post by: Von Chogg
ZebioLizard2 wrote:Not to be overly snarky, but this is one of the many reasons why I still play play games of 4th Edition with my buddy. Vehicles were neither the kings of the battlefield(thought they were plenty good), nor were they overly nerfed the other way like it sounds like they are going to be now.
You realize by now that Tri-Falcon Eldar were the GK of that generation right? They were indeed the King of the battlefield, alongside Fish of Fury.
Notice the guy says he plays eldar... Maybe he didn't move from 4th because we eldar vehicles were no longer invincible...
OT: Shame about dreadnoughts. I really liked dreads, but if they will just be peppered to death, not much point... :(
Von Chogg
41111
Post by: Daston
Vaktathi wrote:Daston wrote:Do we know that it is 1 glance means an auto -1 HP? Or does it depend on what is rolled on the damage table? Ie a crew shaken result might not make it loose a HP
Glances do not roll on a damage table, it's just -1 Hull Point, no other effects. So in some ways it's good, but it means that it's really, really easy to kill them off.
Ah balls :(
48860
Post by: Joey
No longer possible to make a tank useless with a single glancing hit (weapon destroyed), or invalidate a transport with a single hit (immobilised), and some codexes are capable of spamming so many vehicles that the enemy realistically will not be able to cope.
As far as we know, penetrating damage is the same. So people are getting all hot and bothered over hull points. Well, good luck glancing 9 chimeras and 3 Russes to death at 2,000 points 
Next time you play a game with your mech, take a mental note of how many glancing hits your transports get before they get exploded. I mean, if you're relying on glancings to kill Rhinos atm then you're doing something wrong.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Joey wrote:No longer possible to make a tank useless with a single glancing hit (weapon destroyed), or invalidate a transport with a single hit (immobilised), and some codexes are capable of spamming so many vehicles that the enemy realistically will not be able to cope.
As far as we know, penetrating damage is the same. So people are getting all hot and bothered over hull points. Well, good luck glancing 9 chimeras and 3 Russes to death at 2,000 points
It's not too hard, in fact, played a game...two days ago where had we been using hull points (was keeping track after hearing more concrete info about the rumors) I'd likely have been down to 1 vehicle of 11 by my turn 3, whereas with the current rules I was down to 1 of 11 on turn 6. It's not hard to glance a whole lot, lots of CC attacks, necron gauss, scatterlaserspam, etc is all very capable of it. Hell, a 6man Warp Spider squad under the proposed rules will on average kill an AV11 vehicle (Rhino, Ravager, Predator side, etc) with one volley through nothing more than knocking off hull points.
44702
Post by: Trondheim
Damnit GW! Why did you make me buy so many Leman Russes! Well I guess human wave can be fun too..... I think I need a new army if this seem to work like I fear, or many more Guardsmen
49496
Post by: Great White
Land raiders will still be kinda hard to take out.
22761
Post by: Kurgash
And their time has passed, a new champion to carry the torch is upon us. War, war never changes.
48860
Post by: Joey
Vaktathi wrote:Joey wrote:No longer possible to make a tank useless with a single glancing hit (weapon destroyed), or invalidate a transport with a single hit (immobilised), and some codexes are capable of spamming so many vehicles that the enemy realistically will not be able to cope.
As far as we know, penetrating damage is the same. So people are getting all hot and bothered over hull points. Well, good luck glancing 9 chimeras and 3 Russes to death at 2,000 points
It's not too hard, in fact, played a game...two days ago where had we been using hull points (was keeping track after hearing more concrete info about the rumors) I'd likely have been down to 1 vehicle of 11 by my turn 3, whereas with the current rules I was down to 1 of 11 on turn 6. It's not hard to glance a whole lot, lots of CC attacks, necron gauss, scatterlaserspam, etc is all very capable of it. Hell, a 6man Warp Spider squad under the proposed rules will on average kill an AV11 vehicle (Rhino, Ravager, Predator side, etc) with one volley through nothing more than knocking off hull points.
What you're saying is that it's easy to take out AV12 spam if your opponent knows you're spamming AV12 and brings the tools to deal with it
I mainly play against MEQ, 90% of my tanks are popped by meltas or lascannon penetrations.
7075
Post by: chaos0xomega
Im hoping that as a collecive group we have missed something that makes this rule make sense... the avg list is able to put out a dozen glancing hits/turn vs av12, and easily could get a few vs av13... basically av 14 is the only tough nut to crack but even that is not terribly difficult
24743
Post by: Bassline
chaos0xomega wrote:Im hoping that as a collecive group we have missed something that makes this rule make sense... the avg list is able to put out a dozen glancing hits/turn vs av12, and easily could get a few vs av13... basically av 14 is the only tough nut to crack but even that is not terribly difficult
20 Necron warriors rapid fire so get 40 shots
BS 4 so 2/3 of the shots hit. 26.6' hits which 1/6 of them will glance a land raider giving 4.4' glances. What will destroy it as only 4 Hull Points
20 Warriors I think are cheaper then a land raider (codexs not with me though atm)
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Don't need to specifically tool to defeat AV12 spam. Chimeras die to CC attacks and Gauss Spam no differently than Predators, Rhinos, Wave Serpents, Devilfish, Annihilation Barges, Hammerheads, Leman Russ tanks, Ghost Arks, or Battle Wagons, and they aren't exactly immune to lascannons or meltas.
102
Post by: Jayden63
Vaktathi wrote:Joey wrote:No longer possible to make a tank useless with a single glancing hit (weapon destroyed), or invalidate a transport with a single hit (immobilised), and some codexes are capable of spamming so many vehicles that the enemy realistically will not be able to cope.
As far as we know, penetrating damage is the same. So people are getting all hot and bothered over hull points. Well, good luck glancing 9 chimeras and 3 Russes to death at 2,000 points
It's not too hard, in fact, played a game...two days ago where had we been using hull points (was keeping track after hearing more concrete info about the rumors) I'd likely have been down to 1 vehicle of 11 by my turn 3, whereas with the current rules I was down to 1 of 11 on turn 6. It's not hard to glance a whole lot, lots of CC attacks, necron gauss, scatterlaserspam, etc is all very capable of it. Hell, a 6man Warp Spider squad under the proposed rules will on average kill an AV11 vehicle (Rhino, Ravager, Predator side, etc) with one volley through nothing more than knocking off hull points.
Through dedicated fire (not split fire) missile launcher long fangs should drop one AV12, 3 hull point vehicle per turn. Add in a cyclone missile launcher WG and its almost certain to happen.
48860
Post by: Joey
Bassline wrote:chaos0xomega wrote:Im hoping that as a collecive group we have missed something that makes this rule make sense... the avg list is able to put out a dozen glancing hits/turn vs av12, and easily could get a few vs av13... basically av 14 is the only tough nut to crack but even that is not terribly difficult
20 Necron warriors rapid fire so get 40 shots
BS 4 so 2/3 of the shots hit. 26.6' hits which 1/6 of them will glance a land raider giving 4.4' glances. What will destroy it as only 4 Hull Points
20 Warriors I think are cheaper then a land raider (codexs not with me though atm)
IG veteran squad with meltas can waste Land Raiders in 5th, they're 100 points.
And I think you'll find the contents of that Land Raider will have a thing or two to say to those unmeched warriors standing 12" from their ride Automatically Appended Next Post: Vaktathi wrote:Don't need to specifically tool to defeat AV12 spam. Chimeras die to CC attacks and Gauss Spam no differently than Predators, Rhinos, Wave Serpents, Devilfish, Annihilation Barges, Hammerheads, Leman Russ tanks, Ghost Arks, or Battle Wagons, and they aren't exactly immune to lascannons or meltas.
My chimera gets charged by CC, it's dead. Same in 5th.
Or are your chimeras immune to melta bombs and power fists all of a sudden? Automatically Appended Next Post: Jayden63 wrote:Vaktathi wrote:Joey wrote:No longer possible to make a tank useless with a single glancing hit (weapon destroyed), or invalidate a transport with a single hit (immobilised), and some codexes are capable of spamming so many vehicles that the enemy realistically will not be able to cope.
As far as we know, penetrating damage is the same. So people are getting all hot and bothered over hull points. Well, good luck glancing 9 chimeras and 3 Russes to death at 2,000 points
It's not too hard, in fact, played a game...two days ago where had we been using hull points (was keeping track after hearing more concrete info about the rumors) I'd likely have been down to 1 vehicle of 11 by my turn 3, whereas with the current rules I was down to 1 of 11 on turn 6. It's not hard to glance a whole lot, lots of CC attacks, necron gauss, scatterlaserspam, etc is all very capable of it. Hell, a 6man Warp Spider squad under the proposed rules will on average kill an AV11 vehicle (Rhino, Ravager, Predator side, etc) with one volley through nothing more than knocking off hull points.
Through dedicated fire (not split fire) missile launcher long fangs should drop one AV12, 3 hull point vehicle per turn. Add in a cyclone missile launcher WG and its almost certain to happen.
4 missile launchers (correct me if I'm wrong) gives 2.6 hits, half of those will glance or penetrate. So that's 1.3 hull points.
19347
Post by: gregor_xenos
Bassline wrote: 20 Warriors I think are cheaper then a land raider (codexs not with me though atm)
lol... sigged.
102
Post by: Jayden63
Joey wrote:jayden63 wrote:
Through dedicated fire (not split fire) missile launcher long fangs should drop one AV12, 3 hull point vehicle per turn. Add in a cyclone missile launcher WG and its almost certain to happen.
4 missile launchers (correct me if I'm wrong) gives 2.6 hits, half of those will glance or penetrate. So that's 1.3 hull points.
Full long fangs have 5 missile launchers, cyclone WG adds 2 more. 7 shots. Hitting on 3s is = 4.62 hits. 2.32 hits either glance or pen against AV12. It will only require .64 of luck to get that third HP down.
48860
Post by: Joey
Jayden63 wrote:Joey wrote:jayden63 wrote:
Through dedicated fire (not split fire) missile launcher long fangs should drop one AV12, 3 hull point vehicle per turn. Add in a cyclone missile launcher WG and its almost certain to happen.
4 missile launchers (correct me if I'm wrong) gives 2.6 hits, half of those will glance or penetrate. So that's 1.3 hull points.
Full long fangs have 5 missile launchers, cyclone WG adds 2 more. 7 shots. Hitting on 3s is = 4.62 hits. 2.32 hits either glance or pen against AV12. It will only require .64 of luck to get that third HP down.
Long Fangs base - 75 points, +5 missile launchers 50 points. I don't know what a cyclone WG is.
So you're saying that THE single most undercosted unit in the game MIGHT make its points back in 3 turns of shooting against an uncovered enemy.
Yeah I stand by my point. 125 point unit taking out a 55 point unit isn't exactly great.
42494
Post by: nomotog
3 HP seems a little low, but I think I like this rule better then how things are now. It's a little to easy for one glancing shot to disable my tank for the round.
52812
Post by: Tiger9gamer
I'm guessing my new vindicators might suck now :(
24743
Post by: Bassline
gregor_xenos wrote:Bassline wrote: 20 Warriors I think are cheaper then a land raider (codexs not with me though atm)
lol... sigged.
Just checked a GKLR is 255 with no upgrades and with upgrades it take you to above 260 points, and 20 warriors is 260 points.
48860
Post by: Joey
Tiger9gamer wrote:I'm guessing my new vindicators might suck now :(
Old rules -
single glancing hit. Rolls a 5, your weapon is destroyed. Seeya!
New rules -
Can take a few hits before being taken out.
So, no.
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
Joey wrote:Tiger9gamer wrote:I'm guessing my new vindicators might suck now :(
Old rules -
single glancing hit. Rolls a 5, your weapon is destroyed. Seeya!
New rules -
Can take a few hits before being taken out.
So, no.
Correction, single glancing hit = Completely useless except as a metal box in general regardless of roll.
28383
Post by: Mahtamori
I thought I saw Rixitotal ( http://www.reddit.com/r/Warhammer/comments/vj64o/im_sitting_here_with_a_new_40k_rulebook_ama/?sort=new) write that a) penetrating damage table basically had Vehicle Destroyed - Wreck replaced with Crew Shaken (i.e. 1-2 Shaken, 3 Stunned, 4 weapon destroyed, 5 immobilised, 6 explodes) and that b) penetrating hits do not remove hull points. <-- strike that, rixitotal read it wrong
102
Post by: Jayden63
Joey wrote:Jayden63 wrote:Joey wrote:jayden63 wrote:
Through dedicated fire (not split fire) missile launcher long fangs should drop one AV12, 3 hull point vehicle per turn. Add in a cyclone missile launcher WG and its almost certain to happen.
4 missile launchers (correct me if I'm wrong) gives 2.6 hits, half of those will glance or penetrate. So that's 1.3 hull points.
Full long fangs have 5 missile launchers, cyclone WG adds 2 more. 7 shots. Hitting on 3s is = 4.62 hits. 2.32 hits either glance or pen against AV12. It will only require .64 of luck to get that third HP down.
Long Fangs base - 75 points, +5 missile launchers 50 points. I don't know what a cyclone WG is.
So you're saying that THE single most undercosted unit in the game MIGHT make its points back in 3 turns of shooting against an uncovered enemy.
Yeah I stand by my point. 125 point unit taking out a 55 point unit isn't exactly great.
Last time I checked wave serpents were typically 110 points, Hammerheads (12 side armor) 190, devilfish 90, etc.
Not every army in the game has 35 point transports. D-fish used to be mildly overpriced, now I feel that they are greatly overpriced. Its not that hard for some units to get their points back. Even a 6 man normal SM devisquad will get their points back if they choose the right targets.
52812
Post by: Tiger9gamer
Joey wrote:Tiger9gamer wrote:I'm guessing my new vindicators might suck now :(
Old rules -
single glancing hit. Rolls a 5, your weapon is destroyed. Seeya!
New rules -
Can take a few hits before being taken out.
So, no.
So my vindicators may be able to shoot something before being taken down?
Btw, since I am too slowed to follow along, can someone explain how rhinos are going to get worse? heard a rumor someplace.
102
Post by: Jayden63
Tiger9gamer wrote:I'm guessing my new vindicators might suck now :(
Don't count them out yet. AP2 gives +1 on the table. And you just have to touch the tank with 1/8" of an inch of the template and it takes the full S10 hit. As such, I think they are going to give as much as they are going to take.
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
Last time I checked wave serpents were typically 110 points, Hammerheads (12 side armor) 190, devilfish 90, etc.
Hammerheads aren't Transports.
Eldar and tau are from 4th, when skimmers were overpowered so they costed more, can you give some recent examples? Necrons at least.
28383
Post by: Mahtamori
Rhinos are so cheap that they can't possibly get worse unless they actually start causing casualties to marines when they explode. 35 points for something which at worst offer protection from at least one squad's shooting and at best offer extra movement and significant protection against several squads of shooting is... dirt cheap.
30265
Post by: SoloFalcon1138
OH MY GOD THE SKY IS FALLING!!!
For rules that are barely even known, everyone is still freaking out, huh?
Your vindicators will be fine, Tiger, as we tried to convince you in your own Chicken Little thewad.
28383
Post by: Mahtamori
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Last time I checked wave serpents were typically 110 points, Hammerheads (12 side armor) 190, devilfish 90, etc.
Hammerheads aren't Transports.
Eldar and tau are from 4th, when skimmers were overpowered so they costed more, can you give some recent examples? Necrons at least.
Douche Canoe 80 points, complete with sweeping attacks and shielding.
Ghost Ark 110 points, although not as fast.
Night Scythe 110 points I've never heard about before I opened the Necron codex (which was today, I don't play them only against them) which seems ... I don't know... why does it have Aerial Assault if it's only got a single weapon?
102
Post by: Jayden63
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Last time I checked wave serpents were typically 110 points, Hammerheads (12 side armor) 190, devilfish 90, etc.
Hammerheads aren't Transports.
Eldar and tau are from 4th, when skimmers were overpowered so they costed more, can you give some recent examples? Necrons at least.
These armies exist. I have one of them myself. But my point wasn't specifically against transports. Just that some armies are going to drop most tanks quite easily. Hell, necron warriors can rapid fire a LR to death in just one turn of shooting.
42494
Post by: nomotog
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Last time I checked wave serpents were typically 110 points, Hammerheads (12 side armor) 190, devilfish 90, etc.
Hammerheads aren't Transports.
Eldar and tau are from 4th, when skimmers were overpowered so they costed more, can you give some recent examples? Necrons at least.
Skimmers get a save now. Would that make up for their price?
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
Jayden63 wrote:ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Last time I checked wave serpents were typically 110 points, Hammerheads (12 side armor) 190, devilfish 90, etc.
Hammerheads aren't Transports.
Eldar and tau are from 4th, when skimmers were overpowered so they costed more, can you give some recent examples? Necrons at least.
These armies exist. I have one of them myself. But my point wasn't specifically against transports. Just that some armies are going to drop most tanks quite easily. Hell, necron warriors can rapid fire a LR to death in just one turn of shooting.
Hmm, we will see generally, they gave some neat things to vehicles, maybe extra armor or various things will be wanted in order to properly defend a tank better.
Night Scythe 110 points I've never heard about before I opened the Necron codex (which was today, I don't play them only against them) which seems ... I don't know... why does it have Aerial Assault if it's only got a single weapon?
Because it's a flyer.
48860
Post by: Joey
Jayden63 wrote:
Last time I checked wave serpents were typically 110 points, Hammerheads (12 side armor) 190, devilfish 90, etc.
Not every army in the game has 35 point transports. D-fish used to be mildly overpriced, now I feel that they are greatly overpriced. Its not that hard for some units to get their points back. Even a 6 man normal SM devisquad will get their points back if they choose the right targets.
I am not responsible for 4th editions' over-priced transports. Chimeras are 55 points btw.
Jayden63 wrote:Tiger9gamer wrote:I'm guessing my new vindicators might suck now :(
Don't count them out yet. AP2 gives +1 on the table. And you just have to touch the tank with 1/8" of an inch of the template and it takes the full S10 hit. As such, I think they are going to give as much as they are going to take.
Right but the table is essentially the old one -1. So AP2 is the same as normal shots now, AP3 and worse is like AP- now, and AP1 is the same as it is atm. So penetrating hits are pretty much the same.
28383
Post by: Mahtamori
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Night Scythe 110 points I've never heard about before I opened the Necron codex (which was today, I don't play them only against them) which seems ... I don't know... why does it have Aerial Assault if it's only got a single weapon?
Because it's a flyer.
Yeah, but the special rule does nothing for it is what I mean.
60076
Post by: XV8 Crisis Suit
nomotog wrote:ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Last time I checked wave serpents were typically 110 points, Hammerheads (12 side armor) 190, devilfish 90, etc.
Hammerheads aren't Transports.
Eldar and tau are from 4th, when skimmers were overpowered so they costed more, can you give some recent examples? Necrons at least.
Skimmers get a save now. Would that make up for their price?
Not really, seeing as I already get that save for like 5/10 points...
47547
Post by: CthuluIsSpy
Mahtamori wrote:ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Night Scythe 110 points I've never heard about before I opened the Necron codex (which was today, I don't play them only against them) which seems ... I don't know... why does it have Aerial Assault if it's only got a single weapon?
Because it's a flyer.
Yeah, but the special rule does nothing for it is what I mean.
Consistency, I would imagine. All of the other flyers have AA, ergo the Night Scythe must also have AA. Also, I thought fast vehicles can't fire a main weapon after moving 12" (in this current edition. Not sure about 6th)
23071
Post by: MandalorynOranj
I think it's a bit early to be doom-saying so much. Am I worried that my Mechdar won't work that well in 6th? Of course! Am I going to sell off my Wave Serpents and Fire Prisms? No! Let's wait a few days and see how things pan out.
28383
Post by: Mahtamori
CthuluIsSpy wrote:Mahtamori wrote:ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Night Scythe 110 points I've never heard about before I opened the Necron codex (which was today, I don't play them only against them) which seems ... I don't know... why does it have Aerial Assault if it's only got a single weapon?
Because it's a flyer.
Yeah, but the special rule does nothing for it is what I mean.
Consistency, I would imagine. All of the other flyers have AA, ergo the Night Scythe must also have AA. Also, I thought fast vehicles can't fire a main weapon after moving 12" (in this current edition. Not sure about 6th)
Cruising Speed is 6-12" and it allows 1 weapon and n defensives. The Scythe has a single weapon and no defensives that I can see. Edit: It might, just might, add Skyfire rule to the thing I guess. (Hooray for Hornets which in that case got even better compared to Vypers)
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
Notice the guy says he plays eldar... Maybe he didn't move from 4th because we eldar vehicles were no longer invincible...
Nope, not at all. The only reason my Eldar even have more than one skimmer tank (that I modeled to swap from a Falcon to a Wave Serpent for different games) is because my buddy gave me his for my 30th birthday. And that's for an army that's barely even 6 months old and 1,000pts so far.
I'd be careful about what you are trying to claim I am-especially when it's to claim I'm a puss.
I've played troop heavy armies since 2nd edition. In 3,000+pts of Ultras I have an old Crusader and two Rhino MK1's, my Black Legion have two Rhinos, and my Oldcrons don't have a single Monolith. If anything, my SOB are freaks be being mech-heavy, with 2 Rhinos, an Immolator, and an Exorcist.
Hell, my favorite army is my Space Wolves 13th company from the Eye of Terror codex, who don't have access to vehicles or Dreads at all!
7637
Post by: Sasori
Mahtamori wrote:ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Last time I checked wave serpents were typically 110 points, Hammerheads (12 side armor) 190, devilfish 90, etc.
Hammerheads aren't Transports.
Eldar and tau are from 4th, when skimmers were overpowered so they costed more, can you give some recent examples? Necrons at least.
Douche Canoe 80 points, complete with sweeping attacks and shielding.
Ghost Ark 110 points, although not as fast.
Night Scythe 110 points I've never heard about before I opened the Necron codex (which was today, I don't play them only against them) which seems ... I don't know... why does it have Aerial Assault if it's only got a single weapon?
NS is 100, and the Ghost Ark is 115. Rumors also say that the GA will be getting 4 Hullpoints. I doubt we will be seeing any GA though, as the new Flyer rules seem pretty fantastic. I imagine the NS will be the Transport of choice, if the Necron player wants Transports.
7950
Post by: marielle
MandalorynOranj wrote:I think it's a bit early to be doom-saying so much. Am I worried that my Mechdar won't work that well in 6th? Of course! Am I going to sell off my Wave Serpents and Fire Prisms? No! Let's wait a few days and see how things pan out.
I should wait at least two years before selling your stuff.
Look at 8th. The rules came out. The interwebz declared that cavalry was dead, that you had to have massive infantry units, that the only spell worth taking was purple sun, premeasuring has taken the skill out of the game etc. Two years down the line the interwebz wisdom has been pretty much proved wrong., not least because the wisdom only proved true if you believed it and played by those rules.
23071
Post by: MandalorynOranj
marielle wrote:MandalorynOranj wrote:I think it's a bit early to be doom-saying so much. Am I worried that my Mechdar won't work that well in 6th? Of course! Am I going to sell off my Wave Serpents and Fire Prisms? No! Let's wait a few days and see how things pan out.
I should wait at least two years before selling your stuff. Look at 8th. The rules came out. The interwebz declared that cavalry was dead, that you had to have massive infantry units, that the only spell worth taking was purple sun, premeasuring has taken the skill out of the game etc. Two years down the line the interwebz wisdom has been pretty much proved wrong., not least because the wisdom only proved true if you believed it and played by those rules.
I think I phrased that badly, I'm not planning on selling my stuff at all, just to wait before making harsh judgements  . I am scouring eBay for some more foot troops though, but I'd be doing that anyway since there are sure to be plenty of people unloading armies around now.
7075
Post by: chaos0xomega
Reading tge gw news article posted today on vehicles etc, i noticed that it said 'lucky glancing hits' reduce hull points.... maybe its only if you glance and roll a 6 or somethin??
28315
Post by: GalacticDefender
The Hull points can sort of help vehicles as well. They can't be one-shotted by meltas now.
49493
Post by: Painbiro
GalacticDefender wrote:The Hull points can sort of help vehicles as well. They can't be one-shotted by meltas now.
Don't pens ignore hull points? If so, then we will still be seeing meltavet spam all the way from Ultramar to Terra.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
28315
Post by: GalacticDefender
We already see meltavet spam all the way from Ultramar to Terra. And I'm not sure...
34243
Post by: Blacksails
Quick, lets overreact and sell all of our vehicles!
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
GalacticDefender wrote:The Hull points can sort of help vehicles as well. They can't be one-shotted by meltas now.
Yes they still can, being hit by a meltagun has the same chance to kill a vehicle as in 5E
Painbiro wrote:
Don't pens ignore hull points? If so, then we will still be seeing meltavet spam all the way from Ultramar to Terra.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
Pens still very much remove hull points.
49496
Post by: Great White
If pens take hull popints then how can you be one shotted?
37729
Post by: AresX8
Because you can be blown up on a pen on a roll of a 6.
49496
Post by: Great White
Ahhh, makes sense.
37700
Post by: Ascalam
Frankly i'll be glad if vehicles take a back seat this edition.
We might actually see troops somewhere other than the side of the table 'they're embarked' section..
I don't particularly care if my vehicles get nerfed along with them, because as a whole mine aren't that great anyway 
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Ascalam wrote:Frankly i'll be glad if vehicles take a back seat this edition.
We might actually see troops somewhere other than the side of the table 'they're embarked' section..
I don't particularly care if my vehicles get nerfed along with them, because as a whole mine aren't that great anyway
I really would not, I've always like playing with tanks, and if they're too flimsy to use, then they're not fun. There wasn't anything wrong with vehicle survivability in 5th, there just wasn't any reason not to take transports, and until GW starts allowing infantry to take a more diverse array of actions (e.g. digging in a-la Flames of War, spotting for heavy weapons/artillery/orbital strikes/etc, creating/clearing obstacles and minefields, etc) that impact the battle, transports are always going to be preferable to not having one, unless they make them deathtraps like they were in 4th, and that really doesn't solve anything.
5th was the first edition that non-skimmer armies got transports useful as something other than mobile terrain (or one turn assault skateboards in the case of 3E rhino-rush lists), once non-skimmer armies had good transports then seemingly all hell broke loose despite Eldar, Tau, and DE armies typically being very heavily mechanized all through 3E and 4E.
Great White wrote:If pens take hull popints then how can you be one shotted?
Because you still roll on the damage table as normal, and then it takes a hull point too.
35241
Post by: HawaiiMatt
Don't you all think you're over-reacting just a bit?
Let's say the razorback spam is across the table from me.
I do some shooting and score a total of 6 glancing hits.
Being perfectly average, I roll 1,2,3,4,5 and 6.
In 5th edition, that's 1 with no gun, 1 that can't move, 3 that can't shoot, and 1 that can't move or shoot.
In 6th edition, I'd just destory 2 razorbacks.
So, you're all honestly thinking that 2 dead razorbacks vs 6 gimped spells the end of mech?
In 5th edition, my opponent would shoot back with 1 of 6 razorbacks (the immobilized one), in 6th, he shoots back with 4 of them.
I don't see how this is anything but a healthy boost to vehicles.
-Matt
37700
Post by: Ascalam
Vaktathi wrote:Ascalam wrote:Frankly i'll be glad if vehicles take a back seat this edition.
We might actually see troops somewhere other than the side of the table 'they're embarked' section..
I don't particularly care if my vehicles get nerfed along with them, because as a whole mine aren't that great anyway
I really would not, I've always like playing with tanks, and if they're too flimsy to use, then they're not fun. There wasn't anything wrong with vehicle survivability in 5th, there just wasn't any reason not to take transports, and until GW starts allowing infantry to take a more diverse array of actions (e.g. digging in a-la Flames of War, spotting for heavy weapons/artillery/orbital strikes/etc, creating/clearing obstacles and minefields, etc) that impact the battle, transports are always going to be preferable to not having one, unless they make them deathtraps like they were in 4th, and that really doesn't solve anything.
5th was the first edition that non-skimmer armies got transports useful as something other than mobile terrain (or one turn assault skateboards in the case of 3E rhino-rush lists), once non-skimmer armies had good transports then seemingly all hell broke loose despite Eldar, Tau, and DE armies typically being very heavily mechanized all through 3E and 4E.
Great White wrote:If pens take hull popints then how can you be one shotted?
Because you still roll on the damage table as normal, and then it takes a hull point too.
Yeah, but you play Guard . Vehicles EVERYWHERE
My DE and Ork vehicles fall over in a stiff breeze in 5th, and will still do so in 6th.
Each to their own, i suppose, but i got tired of going whole games without seeing a single infantry model being placed by an opponent..
33172
Post by: ChiliPowderKeg
Good thing for me that I hate using Devilfish.
My Hammerheads however will be much more difficult to protect in matches versus Nids though.
Get some aggressive Hiveguard and bye-bye goes S6 templates.
7075
Post by: chaos0xomega
I was under the impression that glancing hits could still shake etc.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Ascalam wrote:
Yeah, but you play Guard . Vehicles EVERYWHERE
Two actually.
However, to be fair I also play CSM's, Eldar, Tau, and have 1000-1500pt Grey Knight, Tyranid, and SoB armies.
My DE and Ork vehicles fall over in a stiff breeze in 5th, and will still do so in 6th.
Each to their own, i suppose, but i got tired of going whole games without seeing a single infantry model being placed by an opponent..
I can understand that, though, as I said, there are other ways of accomplishing that.
38809
Post by: michaelcycle
Over at bols someone who "managed to get their hands on the book early" posted this about vehicles. Looks like no more moving 12" dropping the melta boys off and shooting. And it appears you have to snapfire when moving. If all this is true vehicles get an 18" (12+6) range of movement but that's the only plus so far.
Vehicles
- Vehicles are now limited to move at the maximum of 12" in the Movement Phase (though it can move further in the Shooting Phase if desired)
- Vehicles can opt to move "Flat Out" in the Shooting Phase, adding an extra 6".
- Vehicles movement and weapons. Defensive and Primary Weapons are gone. You can fire all of your weapons at most of the time. But moving faster will result in less weapon fired at basic BS, the rest will be fired at BS1 (Snap Fire)
- Fast Skimmer moving Flat Out can be more lethal (fire more weapons than in 5th and moving faster [12" Normal + 18" Flat Out])
- Skimmer got a cover save called Jink, basically 5+ cover save and improved to 4+ if going Flat Out.
- Vehicles count as WS0 (auto-hit) if stationary and WS1 (3+ hit) if moved. No idea on how Fast or Skimmer will have bonus, as cover aren't used in Assault.
- Flyers are now in, with its own rules.
- Flyers can move very fast and is hard to target (6 only to hit) unless the shooter has Skystrike rules that allow them to shoot flyer at normal BS.
- When moving fast (called "Zooming") Flyers cannot move less than 12" and cannot disembark any models.
Vehicle and Damage
- New Vehicle Damage Chart, one to rule them all. 1-2 being Shaken, 3 Stunned, 4 and 5 Weapon Destroyed and Immobilised, and 6 Explodes! You only roll the table if the shot penetrate the Armour. Wrecks occur only from taking certain amount of Glancing Hits.
- AP 2 weapons add +1 to the chart, while AP1 adds +2.
- AP"-" is no longer -1 on the table.
- Open-Topped is +1 as well.
- No more "Half Strength if the center hole is off", you always use full strength for any blast that hits the vehicle.
- Hull Points - a new style "wound" for vehicles. Any Glancing Hits removes 1 Hull Point, Penetrate Hit removes 1 Hull Point as well as rolling on the Damage Chart above. If reduced to 0 HP, the vehicle becomes Wreck.
- Vehicles has 3 or 4 HP, notable 4 HP vehicles are Ghost Ark, Land Raider, and Monolith. Details can be found in the rulebook appendix. (Bloodwing stated that some player propose that the formula for Hull Points is Front + Side(once) + Rear divide by 3. Fractions rounding down - this seems to be true.
Vehicle and Passenger
- Passenger can only disembark if vehicle move 0-6".
- Disembarking rules changes, you now place models in base contact with the access point and move up to 6" - this is the furthest distance the unit may move.
- Embarking is pretty much the same.
- Unit count as moving if the vehicle moved 0.1-6", and can only "Snap Fire" if the vehicle move 6.01 - 12"
- Open-topped transport rules are the same (access points and fire points)
- Exploding Flyer that has "zoomed" will result in a S10 no armour save on its passenger. And some sort of S6 Large Blast at any unit under the point the vehicle goes on flame.
44276
Post by: Lobokai
...So all those trashy auto glance powers and equipment (Tau, SM psykers) just became "gold Jerry! Gold!"
28383
Post by: Mahtamori
Snapfire when moving is for heavy weapons or for embarked inside vehicles with fire points, no? The difference is that meltavets and Fire Dragons lost about 2" positional range.
43680
Post by: mercury14
Lobukia wrote:...So all those trashy auto glance powers and equipment (Tau, SM psykers) just became "gold Jerry! Gold!"
Swooping Hawk haywire grenades hitting on a 3+, glancing on a 2+...
34242
Post by: -Loki-
mercury14 wrote:Lobukia wrote:...So all those trashy auto glance powers and equipment (Tau, SM psykers) just became "gold Jerry! Gold!"
Swooping Hawk haywire grenades hitting on a 3+, glancing on a 2+...
And this is the sort of thing you can expect to be FAQ'd on release as well. IIRC, part of this release is heavy FAQing of existing codices.
43680
Post by: mercury14
-Loki- wrote:mercury14 wrote:Lobukia wrote:...So all those trashy auto glance powers and equipment (Tau, SM psykers) just became "gold Jerry! Gold!"
Swooping Hawk haywire grenades hitting on a 3+, glancing on a 2+...
And this is the sort of thing you can expect to be FAQ'd on release as well. IIRC, part of this release is heavy FAQing of existing codices.
Yeah better nerf this quick before there's a reason to ever use a 'Hawk! Gotta keep these suckers useless and unplayable!
29294
Post by: wererat
All vehicles are faster now, have more mobile shooting, skimmers all get a natural 5+ cover save, a glance will still let you move, shoot, etc. Not a bad trade. Also don't forget that str 6 weapons mounted on vehicles are vulnerable to the same fire in return and infantry anti tank will have to be careful with new wound allocation.
For example my melta guy, instead of being upfront to get the metla in to 6" asap will now be in the middle/back of the squad, making it just a tad bit harder to get in that range.
30289
Post by: Omegus
Vehicles are not exactly phased out with this edition.
Main battle tanks with FAV13/14 will still be quite potent since the damage chart is now -1, and glancing shots do not stop them from shooting. They can move faster while still firing all of their weapons. The only possible disappointment is the lack of changes to the squadron rules.
Fliers/Skimmers will also be efficacious due to their speed/difficulty hitting them.
What this really hits are the slew of cheap, difficult to destroy transports. These now aren't the pillbox bunkers they used to be, but they still have their uses in getting your infantry to the various primary/secondary objectives, as well as blocking enemy routes/creating terrain to hide behind when they blow up.
Now, this is only theory, but it seems like the vehicle changes improve heavy tanks and skimmers/fliers, while relegating transports to a support role. This seems like a huge improvement over the previous edition, where the transports could basically win the game for you. I'll be glad for no more razorback spam or IG parking lots.
Plus, this makes footslogging lists viable again. All in all, I think it's about as balanced as GW can get.
58669
Post by: Grugknuckle
ZebioLizard2 wrote:Not to be overly snarky, but this is one of the many reasons why I still play play games of 4th Edition with my buddy. Vehicles were neither the kings of the battlefield(thought they were plenty good), nor were they overly nerfed the other way like it sounds like they are going to be now.
You realize by now that Tri-Falcon Eldar were the GK of that generation right? They were indeed the King of the battlefield, alongside Fish of Fury.
Which is why 5th Ed Eldar players are always whining about SW and GK being overpowered.
37700
Post by: Ascalam
Actually almost everyone whines about GK being over powered...except Gk players
SW are strong, and against some armies a touch much.
58669
Post by: Grugknuckle
I think the big effect of hull points is to make Flyers the new king. We haven't been able to digest the new rules for flyers yet, but we DO know that when shooting at flyers, you need a 6 to hit unless you're an AA unit.
This makes perfect sense to me as it seems that GW wants all of us MEQ players who already own 10 - 12 SM vehicles (Rhinos, Razorbacks, Predators, Land Raiders) to now buy a bunch of Storm Talons and Storm Ravens. That is a standard "new rules edition" tactic - Let's nerf all of the models that they already own and make the new model kits bad-ass.
30289
Post by: Omegus
Again, only transports are "nerfed", in that they don't dominate the game anymore but still have their uses. Yeah, they aren't tough to kill, but they are also 50 points or less. This stops people buying the minimum amount of bodies just to buy more razorbacks.
44749
Post by: Skriker
Jayden63 wrote:Through dedicated fire (not split fire) missile launcher long fangs should drop one AV12, 3 hull point vehicle per turn. Add in a cyclone missile launcher WG and its almost certain to happen.
Ummm...they should *already* be able to do that as is without hull points.
I've always found vehicles rather useless against those armies that are prepared for them. All adding hull points means is that armies that aren't full of lots of meltas or lascannons will now have a chance against fully armored opponents at lower points values. That is all this means. Against opponents with lots of heavy weapons or meltas, vehicles are just as vulnerable as they ever have been.
The dice are a fickle tool and people will not *always* get the perfect rolls that will wipe out a fully armored opponent in one turn with non-heavy weapons. Such a situation will be *very* rare.
Skriker
58669
Post by: Grugknuckle
Ascalam wrote:Actually almost everyone whines about GK being over powered...except Gk players
SW are strong, and against some armies a touch much.
This argument belongs somewhere else, but....I'm going to take the bait anyway.
I'll admit that Jaws of the World Wolf is too easy to abuse. Especially when you can snipe monstrous creatures with it, Jaws feels a little unfair to Tyranids.
An argument could be made that Grey Hunters should probably cost 19 or 20 points each instead of 18 - just because they have "counterattack" otherwise, they are identical to tactical marines. So I have no sympathy for people who complain that GH are overpowered. Yeah, they're good, but not overpowered.
Long Fangs are also good, but really not that much better than a vanilla devastator squad. Sure they can split fire, but they almost never do. The only real advantage over devastator marines is that *some* of their weapon options are cheaper - but not significantly IIRC. Vanilla marines can also do missile launcher spam - just like SW - except they can add meat sheilds to their devastator squads. Long Fangs cant.
Also...vanilla marines have access to all kinds of stuff that SW don't. So I think it balances out. I've seen some pretty tough vanilla space marine lists, but no one is calling them overpowered.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Omegus wrote:Again, only transports are "nerfed",
There are a rather large number of non-transport, non-AV14 vehicles in the game that get hit just as hard (pretty much everything IG have outside of Russ tanks, all Eldar vehicles, etc), and a lot of armies (read: guys that don't have MEQ statlines and can't take 30 strong infantry units, or where taking such infantry units makes for an entirely different army) really rely on those transports to live rather than just being 1 turn skateboards like MEQ armies.
Trying to run Dreadnoughts, Hellhounds, Ravagers, Fire Prisms, effectively is not going to be fun in 6E, and (if I'm remembering the CC changes right), tanks will disappear even faster in CC than they have before thanks to hull points coupled with being hit in CC on a 3+ if moving.
Grugknuckle wrote:Ascalam wrote:Actually almost everyone whines about GK being over powered...except Gk players
SW are strong, and against some armies a touch much.
This argument belongs somewhere else, but....I'm going to take the bait anyway.
An argument could be made that Grey Hunters should probably cost 19 or 20 points each instead of 18 - just because they have "counterattack" otherwise, they are identical to tactical marines. So I have no sympathy for people who complain that GH are overpowered. Yeah, they're good, but not overpowered.
Counterattack, Acute Senses, and that all important CCW that tac marines don't get, for *15* points.
Long Fangs are also good, but really not that much better than a vanilla devastator squad. Sure they can split fire, but they almost never do. The only real advantage over devastator marines is that *some* of their weapon options are cheaper - but not significantly IIRC. Vanilla marines can also do missile launcher spam - just like SW - except they can add meat sheilds to their devastator squads. Long Fangs cant.
Long Fangs can get 5 weapons for 140pts with 6 dudes. It costs Vanillla Marines 180pts for 4 heavy weapons with 5 dudes. That's a significant difference, especially for min/max alpha strike armies.
44749
Post by: Skriker
Omegus wrote:Now, this is only theory, but it seems like the vehicle changes improve heavy tanks and skimmers/fliers, while relegating transports to a support role. This seems like a huge improvement over the previous edition, where the transports could basically win the game for you. I'll be glad for no more razorback spam or IG parking lots.
Plus, this makes footslogging lists viable again. All in all, I think it's about as balanced as GW can get.
Very good breakdown Omegus and pretty spot on IMHO. 
Skriker
58669
Post by: Grugknuckle
Omegus wrote:Again, only transports are "nerfed", in that they don't dominate the game anymore but still have their uses. Yeah, they aren't tough to kill, but they are also 50 points or less. This stops people buying the minimum amount of bodies just to buy more razorbacks.
Agreed. It also stops people from driving around in their rhinos for 6 turns and never disembarking. Plus, even though 4 glances kills a Land Raider, it's pretty difficult to get 4 glances on a land raider by shooting it. Just keep your LR's out of close combat - a couple of powerfists or a squad with meltabombs could easily wreck a landraider in CC.
But you know what? Necrons are going to love this since guass guns are rapid fire and always glance on a 6!
43680
Post by: mercury14
Omegus wrote:Again, only transports are "nerfed", in that they don't dominate the game anymore but still have their uses. Yeah, they aren't tough to kill, but they are also 50 points or less. This stops people buying the minimum amount of bodies just to buy more razorbacks.
I disagree. Eldar rely on their vehicles to survive the game and move on objectives. Now they're reduced to very expensive tanks that will just get wasted with three glances. Eldar transports are 110+ points, not expendable 35 point Rhinos. And Falcon holo-fields are virtually worthless since they no longer apply to glances and they'll still lose a hull point with a pen no matter what. A 5+ cover save isn't going to protect them much.
The alternative in foot-slogging Eldar is also nerfed. T3 plus a mere 5+ cover isn't playable, especially considering that Rapid-Fire is buffed and also out-ranges crappy shuriken weapons.
29294
Post by: wererat
mercury14 wrote:Omegus wrote:Again, only transports are "nerfed", in that they don't dominate the game anymore but still have their uses. Yeah, they aren't tough to kill, but they are also 50 points or less. This stops people buying the minimum amount of bodies just to buy more razorbacks.
I disagree. Eldar rely on their vehicles to survive the game and move on objectives. Now they're reduced to very expensive tanks that will just get wasted with three glances. Eldar transports are 110+ points, not expendable 35 point Rhinos. And Falcon holo-fields are virtually worthless since they no longer apply to glances and they'll still lose a hull point with a pen no matter what. A 5+ cover save isn't going to protect them much.
The alternative in foot-slogging Eldar is also nerfed. T3 plus a mere 5+ cover isn't playable, especially considering that Rapid-Fire is buffed and also out-ranges crappy shuriken weapons.
This is the sad part about so many different and unique armies! Not everyone can skip and jump in the field of flowers when things are changed. Poor oldcrons had to wait until the very end of 5th before they got a codex that could compete again. Eldar seem to be taking the hit this edition but at least there are allies to help buff out the weaknesses.
30289
Post by: Omegus
Eldar are indeed hurting, but at this point they will be 2 editions behind, so that's to be expected. They should be getting a new book sometime in the next 18 months or so. I mean, what else is left to update? Chaos, Dark Angels, Tau and Black Templar (and maybe C:SM in there somewhere if DA get a unique codex)?
43680
Post by: mercury14
Omegus wrote:Eldar are indeed hurting, but at this point they will be 2 editions behind, so that's to be expected. They should be getting a new book sometime in the next 18 months or so. I mean, what else is left to update? Chaos, Dark Angels, Tau and Black Templar (and maybe C:SM in there somewhere if DA get a unique codex)?
What are Eldar players supposed to do for the next 18 months?
At least our best units will be really powerful still.... In DE/Tau armies. Expect to see Eldrad in a heap of DE lists.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Omegus wrote:Eldar are indeed hurting, but at this point they will be 2 editions behind, so that's to be expected. They should be getting a new book sometime in the next 18 months or so. I mean, what else is left to update? Chaos, Dark Angels, Tau and Black Templar (and maybe C:SM in there somewhere if DA get a unique codex)?
A new codex isn't going to change the problem that pretty much every vehicle Eldar have fall into the same area as razorbacks and chimeras do when it comes to hull points, as everything they have is AV10-12 and that is highly unlikely to change.
Also...Sisters still need a real update
54729
Post by: AegisGrimm
It seems right now the best thing Eldar will have going for them in 6th is that their "Dreadnaught" ala Wraithlord escapes the use of Hull points.
My two Falcon/Wave Serpents and a couple of Vypers sound like they aren't going to last very long............
43680
Post by: mercury14
Vaktathi wrote:A new codex isn't going to change the problem that pretty much every vehicle Eldar have fall into the same area as razorbacks and chimeras do when it comes to hull points, as everything they have is AV10-12 and that is highly unlikely to change.
Also...Sisters still need a real update
When Razorbacks and Chimeras cost 130 points each, then they'll have the same problem Eldar do.
Eldar also lost the ability to threaten CC termis in melee due to power weapons being nerfed. And since 6th edition says you can't assault the turn you disembark even if the transport doesn't move (unless you have assault ramps), the fragile Eldar CC units now have to weather a turn of shooting before making an assault move. And then they have to get shot at again in overwatch. And then they can assault IF the opponent didn't spend the disembarking turn simply moving away.
Mech Eldar is officially dead. Footdar is dead. Our psychic powers have largely been shared with other armies, not to mention other armies get access to a greater range of powers. War Walkers and Vypers are AV10, just 2 hull points, and now die quickly to bolter fire. Not to mention their previously-small profile vs template weapons is pretty much meaningless now since all parts of templates do full damage. Seer councils are dead due to so much anti-psyker, jetbikes no longer getting 3+ cover saves, and witchblades being nerfed down to 3+ 2D6 vs vehicles. The Witchblade nerf was a very specific nerf targeted directly at the already underpowered, old Eldar codex that was being hit with a slew of other nerfs. Why on earth did GW deem it necessary???
AegisGrimm wrote:It seems right now the best thing Eldar will have going for them in 6th is that their "Dreadnaught" ala Wraithlord escapes the use of Hull points.
My two Falcon/Wave Serpents and a couple of Vypers sound like they aren't going to last very long............
Wraithlords fold super quickly against all the AP2-3 weaponry out there. And with 5+ cover they're going to go down even faster now.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
mercury14 wrote:
When Razorbacks and Chimeras cost 130 points each, then they'll have the same problem Eldar do.
I was pointing out that yeah, it hurt Eldar a lot more, it also Hellhounds, Dreadnoughts, Basilisks, etc are also just as afftected by these things as anything Eldar and do cost ~130 points. That's what I was trying to point out.
Eldar also lost the ability to threaten CC termis in melee due to power weapons being nerfed. And since 6th edition says you can't assault the turn you disembark even if the transport doesn't move (unless you have assault ramps), the fragile Eldar CC units now have to weather a turn of shooting before making an assault move. And then they have to get shot at again in overwatch. And then they can assault IF the opponent didn't spend the disembarking turn simply moving away.
Mech Eldar is officially dead. Footdar is dead. Our psychic powers have largely been shared with other armies, not to mention other armies get access to a greater range of powers. War Walkers and Vypers are AV10, just 2 hull points, and now die quickly to bolter fire. Not to mention their previously-small profile vs template weapons is pretty much meaningless now since all parts of templates do full damage. Seer councils are dead due to so much anti-psyker, jetbikes no longer getting 3+ cover saves, and witchblades being nerfed down to 3+2D6 vs vehicles. The Witchblade nerf was a very specific nerf targeted directly at the already underpowered, old Eldar codex that was being hit with a slew of other nerfs. Why on earth did GW deem it necessary???
Just Because.
30289
Post by: Omegus
Well, at least Basilisks have the option of firing indirectly, and since you don't have to hit vehicles with the center of the template, that S9 (does ordnance still get 2d6 pick highest?) is quite potent. On top of that, if you really want to, you can always have guaranteed terrain to hide it behind.
42971
Post by: Kal-El
I am thinking that the survivabilty of the transports is going to boil down to who gets to go first turn. I know in 5th that only one list mattered against me in who went first...the razorback spam. 2/2 games against this army in 5th took out every single bit of mobility in my list. 7-8 transports rhinos/razorbacks 1 game, and a stormraven, 2 land raiders, an 2 rhinos/razorbacks the 2nd game. It looks as though any army that can glance av11 and 12 will be able to do the same as a RB spam list turn one possibly. I am not changing my list anytime soon I want to play test a couple months. The mobilty is great now and as said the transports are cheap...so baring how my turn ones go will dictate if they stay or not in my list.
There are heavy pros and cons to the transports now, more so than in 5th imo.
Also dreadnoughts dont seem so great in CC imo either since 3 glances wreck it...you don't even need a hammer or fist any more to fight these guys or a lucky grenade.
30289
Post by: Omegus
First turn is not as huge due to Night Fighting being in effect. The heavy weapons shooting at your vehicles will undoubtedly be more than 24" away, so all your vehicles have automatic 5+ cover saves (or better if they already have a cover save).
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Omegus wrote:Well, at least Basilisks have the option of firing indirectly, and since you don't have to hit vehicles with the center of the template, that S9 (does ordnance still get 2d6 pick highest?) is quite potent. On top of that, if you really want to, you can always have guaranteed terrain to hide it behind.
With a minimum range of 36" that encompasses most of the board typically (meaning it can't indirect fire at anything closer than 36"), and with all the flyers/outflankers/deep striking units in the game (not to mention helps to outflanking and DS'ing units in the 6E rumors), they likely won't last long sadly
Still doesn't help stuff like dreads, ravagers, hellhounds, etc :(
38809
Post by: michaelcycle
It just makes me mad seeing that I invested so much time and money into an army that used to be pretty good get such a big hit. Same thing with my friend's eldar list - wave serpents are now over priced tin cans.
I'll play a few games with my list and see what happens before I really start to squeal. But yeah looks like flyers will be king. and massed fire str4+ infantry.
38926
Post by: Exergy
Razgryz wrote:
It just means that players can't rely on transports to govern the flow of the game. Especially with the extra modifiers for AP2 and 1 weapons, melta got a lot more deadly.
The old penetrating table had 5 being wrecked and 6 being explodes
the new pen table has only 6 being explodes.
old stype ap2 weapons go +0 and ap1 got +1
new styel ap2 get +1 and ap1 get +2
so basically a lascannon has the same chance it did in 5th to destroy a rhino in one shot
a melta gun also has the same chance to destroy a rhino in one shot.
Autocannons and missile launchers now have 1/2 the chance to destroy a vehicle in one shot, but can now glance things to death.
42971
Post by: Kal-El
I forgot about the new night fight rules. Not so bad then.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Lootas are going to be very powerful under the new rules, almost absurdly so against anything that isn't AV13.
A full squad of lootas is practically assured to kill off anything less than AV13 under the new rules unless it rolls min shots.
Against AV12 with max shots they'll inflict 5 glances/pen's on average, with 2 shots each they'll inflict 3.33 (enough to kill anything with AV12), and with 1 shot they'll inflict 1.66 (so usually 2).
Against anything AV11 or under, even rolling minimum shots, they'll likely kill it regardless.
.
30289
Post by: Omegus
As much as I liked my chimeras, I do like this vehicle change... at least in theory. That many missiles flying at a single transport should blow it out of the water.
That said, I do really feel for the Eldar players. Still, their book has been behind the curve for a while now, and they should be getting updated relatively soon. And who knows what the accompanying FAQs will do.
42856
Post by: Tye_Informer
michaelcycle wrote:
Vehicle and Damage
- New Vehicle Damage Chart, one to rule them all. 1-2 being Shaken, 3 Stunned, 4 and 5 Weapon Destroyed and Immobilised, and 6 Explodes! You only roll the table if the shot penetrate the Armour. Wrecks occur only from taking certain amount of Glancing Hits.
- Hull Points - a new style "wound" for vehicles. Any Glancing Hits removes 1 Hull Point, Penetrate Hit removes 1 Hull Point as well as rolling on the Damage Chart above. If reduced to 0 HP, the vehicle becomes Wreck.
- Vehicles has 3 or 4 HP, notable 4 HP vehicles are Ghost Ark, Land Raider, and Monolith.
If I read this right, 20 Necron Warriors become deadly against a land raider. Surround the land raider and glance it to death with shooting, killing everything inside because they can't disembark, No risk of blowing it up and getting assaulted the next turn (which is exactly what happens in 5e) because you don't "get to" roll on the damage table for glances.
35241
Post by: HawaiiMatt
Vaktathi wrote:Lootas are going to be very powerful under the new rules, almost absurdly so against anything that isn't AV13.
A full squad of lootas is practically assured to kill off anything less than AV13 under the new rules unless it rolls min shots.
Against AV12 with max shots they'll inflict 5 glances/pen's on average, with 2 shots each they'll inflict 3.33 (enough to kill anything with AV12), and with 1 shot they'll inflict 1.66 (so usually 2).
Against anything AV11 or under, even rolling minimum shots, they'll likely kill it regardless.
.
Against anything in 5+ cover, you get:
15 shots - 5 hits - 1.67 glance/pen - 1.1 get through cover.
30 shots - 10 hits - 3.33 glance/pen , 2.2 get through cover
45 shots - 15 hits - 5 glance/pen, 3.3 get through cover
Against AV13, halve all results.
Color me unimpressed. On average, they will fail to hull point to death an AV12 unless parked in the open, and they roll max shots.
That's a 225 point anti-tank unit that has T4 and 6+ save, and each wound cuts into their fire power.
3 Chimeras with heavy stubbers show up at 195. If they shoot first, and both sides have cover, The chimmeras should sweep them from the table.
How about 3 hydras, also 225 points. They fair pretty well in that shoot out as well.
I think people are hitting the panic button way too early.
-Matt
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
HawaiiMatt wrote:Vaktathi wrote:Lootas are going to be very powerful under the new rules, almost absurdly so against anything that isn't AV13.
A full squad of lootas is practically assured to kill off anything less than AV13 under the new rules unless it rolls min shots.
Against AV12 with max shots they'll inflict 5 glances/pen's on average, with 2 shots each they'll inflict 3.33 (enough to kill anything with AV12), and with 1 shot they'll inflict 1.66 (so usually 2).
Against anything AV11 or under, even rolling minimum shots, they'll likely kill it regardless.
.
Against anything in 5+ cover, you get:
15 shots - 5 hits - 1.67 glance/pen - 1.1 get through cover.
30 shots - 10 hits - 3.33 glance/pen , 2.2 get through cover
45 shots - 15 hits - 5 glance/pen, 3.3 get through cover
Against AV13, halve all results.
Color me unimpressed. On average, they will fail to hull point to death an AV12 unless parked in the open, and they roll max shots.
That's a 225 point anti-tank unit that has T4 and 6+ save, and each wound cuts into their fire power.
3 Chimeras with heavy stubbers show up at 195. If they shoot first, and both sides have cover, The chimmeras should sweep them from the table.
How about 3 hydras, also 225 points. They fair pretty well in that shoot out as well.
I think people are hitting the panic button way too early.
-Matt
keep in mind that requires the vehicles to get cover, not always possible by any means even in 5E, and there are AV12 tanks in the game other than cheap anti-infantry platforms, you're basically comparing them to quite possibly the best anti-infantry platforms to throw against them (and lets not forget that you can't buy chimeras on their own, and very few people takes stubbers). Against Stormravens, Hellhounds, Fire Prisms, etc, they will be very scary indeed.
44749
Post by: Skriker
mercury14 wrote:Wraithlords fold super quickly against all the AP2-3 weaponry out there. And with 5+ cover they're going to go down even faster now.
My primary question is: have the rules for determining a glancing hit changed at all? Is it still based on equalling the AV of the target facing?
If so you people need to stop complaing about Eldar being ruined. It is a rare day indeed when a unit with rapid fire weapons (that aren't plasma guns!) gets glancing hits on anything that is AV10, and pretty much impossible for them to do so against AV12. A bolter would need an 8 on the penetration die to reach 12... d6s stop at 6, so no worry there. Now if they changed glancing hits to be any hit that doesn't penetrate then everyone is equally screwed. If not, what exactly is the big problem here?
There have been a number of complaints that the Cover save of 5+ is useless, but at the same time assuming that those firing bolters can *easily* roll a 6 on the penetration roll. So which is it? Impossible or easy? You can't have it both ways. Against really light vehicles concentrated rapid fire weapons can get the job done, but that only makes sense. A Vyper isn't a battle tank it is a lightly armored assault vehicle. It isn't supposed to run into close range and let a bunch of marines just open up on it at close range and if you let that happen then you can't complain when your vyper is destroyed. Keep it moving. Take advantage of its longer ranged heavy weapon and you have no worries. Facing IG with lasguns? Well then your AV10 vyper has nothing to fear at all since a lasgun cannot even glance AV10.
Most of the glancing hits will come from the heavy weapons in an army, not from rapid fire weapons and these weapons already would regularly do in your typical AV10 Vyper anyway. So what exactly have you lost? Not a whole lot really. Eldar aren't ruined. Not even close.
The only army that gets any kind of unfair advantage with hull points is the Necrons with their gauss weapons. Everyone else is in the same boat: Rapid fire weapons aren't going to be causing all that many more glancing hits now than they ever have.
Skriker
320
Post by: Platuan4th
Skriker wrote: It is a rare day indeed when a unit with rapid fire weapons (that aren't plasma guns!) gets glancing hits on anything that is AV10, and pretty much impossible for them to do so against AV12.
Since I'm a smart ass: Necron Warriors have rapid fire guns that can glance AV12.
6094
Post by: Azza007
Platuan4th wrote:Skriker wrote: It is a rare day indeed when a unit with rapid fire weapons (that aren't plasma guns!) gets glancing hits on anything that is AV10, and pretty much impossible for them to do so against AV12.
Since I'm a smart ass: Necron Warriors have rapid fire guns that can glance AV12.
In fact against AV14 they have the same chance as AV10 or 12.
42971
Post by: Kal-El
It's the hull points that's the problem. Before you could get glanced 6 times on 1 tank and the guy rolls a combination of 1-2s maybe a 3...and your tank was still alive...now it's dead on that 3rd glance. The problem is glances on hull points is kinda powerful IMO.
43680
Post by: mercury14
Skriker wrote:
My primary question is: have the rules for determining a glancing hit changed at all? Is it still based on equalling the AV of the target facing?
If so you people need to stop complaing about Eldar being ruined. It is a rare day indeed when a unit with rapid fire weapons (that aren't plasma guns!) gets glancing hits on anything that is AV10, and pretty much impossible for them to do so against AV12. A bolter would need an 8 on the penetration die to reach 12...d6s stop at 6, so no worry there. Now if they changed glancing hits to be any hit that doesn't penetrate then everyone is equally screwed. If not, what exactly is the big problem here?
There have been a number of complaints that the Cover save of 5+ is useless, but at the same time assuming that those firing bolters can *easily* roll a 6 on the penetration roll. So which is it? Impossible or easy? You can't have it both ways. Against really light vehicles concentrated rapid fire weapons can get the job done, but that only makes sense. A Vyper isn't a battle tank it is a lightly armored assault vehicle. It isn't supposed to run into close range and let a bunch of marines just open up on it at close range and if you let that happen then you can't complain when your vyper is destroyed. Keep it moving. Take advantage of its longer ranged heavy weapon and you have no worries. Facing IG with lasguns? Well then your AV10 vyper has nothing to fear at all since a lasgun cannot even glance AV10.
Most of the glancing hits will come from the heavy weapons in an army, not from rapid fire weapons and these weapons already would regularly do in your typical AV10 Vyper anyway. So what exactly have you lost? Not a whole lot really. Eldar aren't ruined. Not even close.
The only army that gets any kind of unfair advantage with hull points is the Necrons with their gauss weapons. Everyone else is in the same boat: Rapid fire weapons aren't going to be causing all that many more glancing hits now than they ever have.
Skriker
This post is really kind of absurd and denies reality. Str4 and up guns will take a hull point from a War Walker or Vyper - and they only have two hull points. They were already low durability units as you say, but then 6e came along and they went from fragile to so delicate any light breeze can kill them. Staying out of range isn't really an option in a game full of flyers, deep strikers, fast units, and long-range weaponry. And our War Walkers move 6 inches - how do you expect them to stay out of range? Scatter lasers are only 36" bro.
But the biggest problem isn't these two units. It's our Wave Serpents and Falcons. Eldar rely on their high-tech, expensive vehicles with staying power to provide them mobility to help control the battle. But 6e turned our beautiful skimmers into overpriced tin cans that aren't much harder to kill than a 35 pt Rhino.
Most heinous is the change to disembarking troops. We now have to:
Turn 1) Zoom up in a Wave Serpent
Turn 2) Disembark Banshees. But they can't assault the turn they disembarked so they have to stand around in the open, getting shot to pieces with T3 and light armor.
Turn 3a) If the enemy is still in range (and they could have easily just walked away the turn the Banshees had to burn doing nothing), they may initiate assault.
Turn 3b) The Banshees face a second round of shooting when initiating assault.
The nerf to cover hurts us more than T4 armies. T3 Eldar take a ton of wounds and relying on 5+ cover against newly improved Rapid-Fire weapons is a bloody mess. Guardians went from crappy to completely unplayable. Our Rangers and Pathfinders lost their greatest asset and are now easily shootable. And our Jetbikes no longer get a 3+ cover save. And oh by the way, we have exactly zero options to combat Termis in CC with the power weapon nerf. I could go on.
Our glass cannon is basically just glass now. It's a plain fact in so many ways. I really have no idea how you could deny it.
37700
Post by: Ascalam
While i agree with you, you have one (count em...one) option vs termies IIRC
Scorpion Exarchs can take a scorpion claw (powerfist) i think.
But yes, if you aren't T4, 3+ armour you're basically fethed, as far as i can see from the rumours so far. Wish i could say i'm surprised, but i'm not .
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
Our Rangers and Pathfinders lost their greatest asset and are now easily shootable.
You lost your AP1 on a 5/6? you lost +2 to cover? The gained 6 to pick your wound target nerfs you somehow?
Str4 and up guns will take a hull point from a War Walker or Vyper - and they only have two hull points. They were already low durability units as you say, but then 6e came along and they went from fragile to so delicate any light breeze can kill them. Staying out of range isn't really an option in a game full of flyers, deep strikers, fast units, and long-range weaponry. And our War Walkers move 6 inches - how do you expect them to stay out of range? Scatter lasers are only 36" bro.
Hmm, how many S4 guns shoot within 36"? And even than you'd have a max of about 10 to 15 models at that range, unless somehow your just letting these units getting into range to rapid fire you to glance you to death. As for the rest, yeah it'll hurt, it hurt before, except now if your lucky you still get to actually shoot rather than stand there doing nothing an entire round.
And our Jetbikes no longer get a 3+ cover save.
5+ always, 4+ if moving fast, +1 to both with skilled rider.
And oh by the way, we have exactly zero options to combat Termis in CC with the power weapon nerf. I could go on.
Depending on how it goes, we need to see what weapons for Eldar remain AP3 and the like.
Turn 1) Zoom up in a Wave Serpent
Turn 2) Disembark Banshees. But they can't assault the turn they disembarked so they have to stand around in the open, getting shot to pieces with T3 and light armor.
Turn 3a) If the enemy is still in range (and they could have easily just walked away the turn the Banshees had to burn doing nothing), they may initiate assault.
That's..how it works in 5th too? With the exception of overwatch regardless.
43680
Post by: mercury14
Ascalam wrote:While i agree with you, you have one (count em...one) option vs termies IIRC
Scorpion Exarchs can take a scorpion claw (powerfist) i think.
But yes, if you aren't T4, 3+ armour you're basically fethed, as far as i can see from the rumours so far. Wish i could say i'm surprised, but i'm not .
Yeah lol. But that Exarch is in an anti-horde unit that's unable to stand up to CC termis in the least bit. And on average he'll only kill one, unless it has a storm shield then he's not even likely to do that.
37700
Post by: Ascalam
True enough. Just being pedantic
Frankly termies are going to be broken enough now, even without the Storm Shields etc.
43680
Post by: mercury14
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
You lost your AP1 on a 5/6? you lost +2 to cover? The gained 6 to pick your wound target nerfs you somehow?
Key phrase here, 'wound target'. That shot still has to roll a 4. That's a useful buff, but the nerf here is that Rangers now have a lame 4+ cover save and are extremely shootable. Even Pathfinders will die twice as quickly as in 5e. That's a huge nerf.
ZebioLizard2 wrote:Hmm, how many S4 guns shoot within 36"? And even than you'd have a max of about 10 to 15 models at that range, unless somehow your just letting these units getting into range to rapid fire you to glance you to death. As for the rest, yeah it'll hurt, it hurt before, except now if your lucky you still get to actually shoot rather than stand there doing nothing an entire round.
I'm not terribly concerned about Vypers going down to bolter fire. But slow War Walkers will die to virtually every weapon in the game now. WWs were one of the two or three options in our Codex that weren't overpriced. They're still playable now, but with 2 hull points they can no longer be considered a very good unit. Also keep in mind that templates do full damage on all parts of the plate, meaning WW squadrons are going to get multi-spanked now. I really don't see how you aren't seeing a nerf here.
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
5+ always, 4+ if moving fast, +1 to both with skilled rider.
Skilled Rider? Are you suggesting that Shining Spears are playable? I hope not.
I'd much rather have the 3+ cover save than the new rules. Jetbikes are objective snatchers/contesters and that 3+ save was always crucial to that role for avoiding small arms fire. If Jetbikes were combat units then I'd agree with you the new way is better. But they're just not. This is definitely a nerf.
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Depending on how it goes, we need to see what weapons for Eldar remain AP3 and the like.
Yeah I guess we'll see. Because right now it looks completely grim.
ZebioLizard2 wrote:That's..how it works in 5th too? With the exception of overwatch regardless.
No, it's not the same at all. In 6e, units may not assault the turn they disembark even if their transport is stationary. The only exception is assault vehicles.
In 5e you could disembark Banshees/etc and assault if your WS hadn't moved yet. In 6e Banshees have to stand there doing nothing for one turn while they get annihilated. Then any survivors have to endure a phase of overwatch shooting. 2 rounds of shooting hurts more than 0. That's a nerf in my book. A monumentally huge one that renders a huge range of our units unplayable.
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
No, it's not the same at all. In 6e, units may not assault the turn they disembark even if their transport is stationary. The only exception is assault vehicles.
In 5e you could disembark Banshees/etc and assault if your WS hadn't moved yet. In 6e Banshees have to stand there doing nothing for one turn while they get annihilated. Then any survivors have to endure a phase of overwatch shooting. 2 rounds of shooting hurts more than 0. That's a nerf in my book. A monumentally huge one that renders a huge range of our units unplayable.
I've not heard this at all, considering
Can units move after they disembark if the tank has previously moved?
- Passenger can only disembark if vehicle move 0-6".
- Disembarking rules changes, you now place models in base contact with the access point and move up to 6" - this is the furthest distance the unit may move.
[–]Rixitotal[S] 4 points 52 minutes ago
yes.
[–]skarred 1 point 51 minutes ago
so this cancelles out the nerf to open topped vehicles! WOOOO (thats right right?) I can move tank 6, disembark squad, they move 6, then charge 2D6? Yes, yes! Make my day here...
[–]Rixitotal[S] 4 points 48 minutes ago
yes that right. sorry if i wasn't clear! lol. so ..many..questions
Key phrase here, 'wound target'. That shot still has to roll a 4. That's a useful buff, but the nerf here is that Rangers now have a lame 4+ cover save and are extremely shootable. Even Pathfinders will die twice as quickly as in 5e. That's a huge nerf.
Seeing as that was the exact same in the version they were introduced (4th), and the fact they are now actually worthwhile by shooting things. I'd say the buff overcomes the nerf.
I'm not terribly concerned about Vypers going down to bolter fire. But slow War Walkers will die to virtually every weapon in the game now. WWs were one of the two or three options in our Codex that weren't overpriced. They're still playable now, but with 2 hull points they can no longer be considered a very good unit. Also keep in mind that templates do full damage on all parts of the plate, meaning WW squadrons are going to get multi-spanked now. I really don't see how you aren't seeing a nerf here.
Yes it is a nerf, it means vehicles will die before 5th round yes, but eldar isn't exactly a codex with properly costed vehicles (in 5th or 6th..or 4th really), this is one that has to be fixed by an actual codex update.
Skilled Rider? Are you suggesting that Shining Spears are playable? I hope not.
Some people still use them, plus I forgot that standard jetbikes can't get it, my bad.
Yeah I guess we'll see. Because right now it looks completely grim.
Having checked the book, mirrorswords ignore all armor, that likely will end up as AP2, but that's not much of a consolation just to have the exarch as the killer.
58878
Post by: DexKivuli
I think this change does hurt armies that are dependent on transports (relative to the current ruleset). However, given the ubiquity of metal boxes in lists, they probably needed a bit of a kicking down.
I use Necrons, so I obviously (potentially) benefit from the glancing wounds (especially if rapid fire changes too). However, I think this only really helps with transports.
My most common enemy is Tau, and the big tanks shoot from a long way away. Necrons aren't easily getting a large volume of glances at that range. Frankly, if I was, I'd be happy under the current ruleset, as I'm sure I'd get at least one 'weapon destroyed'.
At the moment, I kill them with Overlords in Barges. I don't think this will change if the new rules are as indicated.
46151
Post by: Saptilladerky
I can't wait to try out some voltaic staffs on Crypteks now! Sure you gotta get a little close, but attatch 2 to some warrior squads holed up in ghost arcs.../drool.
60134
Post by: Hetelic
Firstly, to everyone complaining their vehicles will get glanced to death.. Why are you not in cover?  A vehicle with 2-3 Hull points sitting in cover/ behind smoke launchers ect is going to be -more- survivable than the same vehicle in 5e. I agree that the rules aren't going to make -everything- better; theres no way one set of sweeping rules can improve every single aspect of the game, however, i think hull points are going to make a lot of thing much better. From my reading of the info in this thread, it looks like vehicles are going to be tougher against single high-strength attacks, but fall easier to multiple lower strength attacks. Which is going to shift the meta away from the -need- to take str9-10 weapons just to deal with Land Raiders/ Monoliths.
Secondly, to eldar players. Yeah, the rules don't look to great for you just now; But your codex is a bit old now, almost 2 editions behind. I fully believe when it gets updated you will be much more competative, and you'll get your cheap-ass 45point transport skimmer with a 5+ inv, as well as some kind of techy flyers.
Don't sweat it.
Wait till the rules are out; play a few game; see how things work
43680
Post by: mercury14
ZebioLizard2 wrote:
No, it's not the same at all. In 6e, units may not assault the turn they disembark even if their transport is stationary. The only exception is assault vehicles.
In 5e you could disembark Banshees/etc and assault if your WS hadn't moved yet. In 6e Banshees have to stand there doing nothing for one turn while they get annihilated. Then any survivors have to endure a phase of overwatch shooting. 2 rounds of shooting hurts more than 0. That's a nerf in my book. A monumentally huge one that renders a huge range of our units unplayable.
I've not heard this at all, considering
Can units move after they disembark if the tank has previously moved?
- Passenger can only disembark if vehicle move 0-6".
- Disembarking rules changes, you now place models in base contact with the access point and move up to 6" - this is the furthest distance the unit may move.
[–]Rixitotal[S] 4 points 52 minutes ago
yes.
[–]skarred 1 point 51 minutes ago
so this cancelles out the nerf to open topped vehicles! WOOOO (thats right right?) I can move tank 6, disembark squad, they move 6, then charge 2D6? Yes, yes! Make my day here...
[–]Rixitotal[S] 4 points 48 minutes ago
yes that right. sorry if i wasn't clear! lol. so ..many..questions
Your quote doesn't disprove anything I said, other than add in that open-topped transports have the same advantage as assault vehicles. WS are neither open-topped nor assault vehicles, therefore their troops cannot assault the same turn they disembark. Over on Warseer there are multiple people claiming to have the book who are stating this. Apparently it's on page 79. http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?329875-Official-WarSeer-Warhammer-40-000-6th-Edition-discussion-thread/page207
And while I'm at it, Witchblades got nerfed. Instead of str9 vs vehicles they're str3 + 2d6. Ugh.
Hetelic wrote:Firstly, to everyone complaining their vehicles will get glanced to death.. Why are you not in cover? A vehicle with 2-3 Hull points sitting in cover/ behind smoke launchers ect is going to be -more- survivable than the same vehicle in 5e. I agree that the rules aren't going to make -everything- better; theres no way one set of sweeping rules can improve every single aspect of the game, however, i think hull points are going to make a lot of thing much better. From my reading of the info in this thread, it looks like vehicles are going to be tougher against single high-strength attacks, but fall easier to multiple lower strength attacks. Which is going to shift the meta away from the -need- to take str9-10 weapons just to deal with Land Raiders/ Monoliths.
Secondly, to eldar players. Yeah, the rules don't look to great for you just now; But your codex is a bit old now, almost 2 editions behind. I fully believe when it gets updated you will be much more competative, and you'll get your cheap-ass 45point transport skimmer with a 5+ inv, as well as some kind of techy flyers.
Don't sweat it.
Wait till the rules are out; play a few game; see how things work
I don't know about anyone else, but I usually kept my WWs in cover in 5e. I'll do the same in 6e, only my WWs will die much more easily. Also there's a new rule where you can target models not in cover when the majority of the unit is. That way there's no cover save but hits can only be applied to the part of the unit not in cover. So no more putting 2 WWs in cover while the third sticks out for a nice line of fire.
44749
Post by: Skriker
Platuan4th wrote:Skriker wrote: It is a rare day indeed when a unit with rapid fire weapons (that aren't plasma guns!) gets glancing hits on anything that is AV10, and pretty much impossible for them to do so against AV12.
Since I'm a smart ass: Necron Warriors have rapid fire guns that can glance AV12.
Yes and your smart ass comment ignores the last sentence of my post which specifically states that the Necrons are the only real exception to this.
Skriker Automatically Appended Next Post: mercury14 wrote:This post is really kind of absurd and denies reality. Str4 and up guns will take a hull point from a War Walker or Vyper - and they only have two hull points. They were already low durability units as you say, but then 6e came along and they went from fragile to so delicate any light breeze can kill them. Staying out of range isn't really an option in a game full of flyers, deep strikers, fast units, and long-range weaponry. And our War Walkers move 6 inches - how do you expect them to stay out of range? Scatter lasers are only 36" bro.
Actually no. Str 4 guns *can* take a hull point from a War Walker or Viper, not *will*. You still have to roll a 6 for penetration to cause that glancing hit. It isn't guaranteed and since you complain that a 5+ cover save is useless one can extrapolate that since making a 5+ is so tough getting a 6+ isn't going to happen much at all. A Str 5 weapon needs a 5+ to glance, and again since a 5+ cover save is useless needing a 5+ for a glancing hit is also kind of useless too, isn't it? A str 4 weapon has always had the "chance" of glancing an AV10 vehicle, but now a unit only armed with str 4 weapons can ultimately destroy the AV10 vehicle with enough concentrated fire. This isn't the end of the world and just means that you can just charge your Vypers up to a line of marines and kill them with impunity and little risk. Heaven forbid you should have do something more tactically sound than driving stright up to your target and shooting them point blank.
As for your complaints about dropping off your assault troops here is a simple solution: Don't disembark them out in the open right in front of the enemy shooting line. A duh..
You are welcome to whine and moan and complain all you want that you army is now useless and ragequit and sell them on ebay. Doesn't change that fact that I think you are wrong. Eldar have ALWAYS been fragile, but whining that your light vehicles are now useless because they are vulnerable to the *same* exact weapons as before is just silly.
Skriker
Automatically Appended Next Post: mercury14 wrote:I don't know about anyone else, but I usually kept my WWs in cover in 5e. I'll do the same in 6e, only my WWs will die much more easily. Also there's a new rule where you can target models not in cover when the majority of the unit is. That way there's no cover save but hits can only be applied to the part of the unit not in cover. So no more putting 2 WWs in cover while the third sticks out for a nice line of fire.
Oh noes! A cheesy tactic that tried to cheat the rules has been nerfed and you actually have to *be* in cover to get the protection of cover. How sad for you.
Skriker
43680
Post by: mercury14
Skriker wrote:
[size=9]
Actually no. Str 4 guns *can* take a hull point from a War Walker or Viper, not *will*. You still have to roll a 6 for penetration to cause that glancing hit. It isn't guaranteed and since you complain that a 5+ cover save is useless one can extrapolate that since making a 5+ is so tough getting a 6+ isn't going to happen much at all. A Str 5 weapon needs a 5+ to glance, and again since a 5+ cover save is useless needing a 5+ for a glancing hit is also kind of useless too, isn't it? A str 4 weapon has always had the "chance" of glancing an AV10 vehicle, but now a unit only armed with str 4 weapons can ultimately destroy the AV10 vehicle with enough concentrated fire. This isn't the end of the world and just means that you can just charge your Vypers up to a line of marines and kill them with impunity and little risk. Heaven forbid you should have do something more tactically sound than driving stright up to your target and shooting them point blank.
Oh that's a good point. Because you know, that's exactly what I was doing. I've always driven my Vypers and WW up to point blank range to shoot things.
Yeah bro. Way to assume a bunch of completely false crap.
Skriker wrote:As for your complaints about dropping off your assault troops here is a simple solution: Don't disembark them out in the open right in front of the enemy shooting line. A duh..
So disembark Banshees a little out of the way - but somehow also in assault rangefor the next turn. I don't know what kind of players you face but the people I play against aren't stupid enough to intentionally sit their units next to Banshees the turn after they disembark. They'll move away. Not to mention that disembarking locations that are "out of the way" and in assault range at the same time often do not exist depending on the terrain.
Again, you're assuming I'm an idiot that puts his units intentionally in harm's way, devoid of any rational thought. Is there any way you could argue your position without relying on such dim assumptions?
Skriker wrote:You are welcome to whine and moan and complain all you want that you army is now useless and ragequit and sell them on ebay. Doesn't change that fact that I think you are wrong. Eldar have ALWAYS been fragile, but whining that your light vehicles are now useless because they are vulnerable to the *same* exact weapons as before is just silly.
Skriker
No you're flat-wrong. Before Wave Serpents and Falcons were tough as hell, not fragile. Wave Serpents were even tougher than Land Raiders against Melta. And go look at the odds of wrecking a Holo-Falcon, even without cover or fortune.
And in 6e, WS and Falcons are still costed for being tough as hell to bring down. Only they're easy to bring down.
Regarding light vehicles, they're far more vulnerable to the same weapons as in 5e. This is an undeniable fact that you willfully ignore.
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
So disembark Banshees a little out of the way - but somehow also in assault rangefor the next turn. I don't know what kind of players you face but the people I play against aren't stupid enough to intentionally sit their units next to Banshees the turn after they disembark. They'll move away. Not to mention that disembarking locations that are "out of the way" and in assault range at the same time often do not exist depending on the terrain.
Movement is now 6 + d6(run)
Movement with charging is 6 + D6 with 2D6. With fleet you get to reroll run and one D6 in the 2D6
If you cannot outrun them with a potential 24", your dice luck is just truly horrible.
44749
Post by: Skriker
ZebioLizard2 wrote:So disembark Banshees a little out of the way - but somehow also in assault rangefor the next turn. I don't know what kind of players you face but the people I play against aren't stupid enough to intentionally sit their units next to Banshees the turn after they disembark. They'll move away. Not to mention that disembarking locations that are "out of the way" and in assault range at the same time often do not exist depending on the terrain.
Movement is now 6 + d6(run)
Movement with charging is 6 + D6 with 2D6. With fleet you get to reroll run and one D6 in the 2D6
If you cannot outrun them with a potential 24", your dice luck is just truly horrible.
Most definitely this.
The changes don't exist in a void and if you only focus on one aspect of things and complain about it ignoring things like this that also can make a big change to the same situations in assault arguing is kind of pointless.
Skriker Automatically Appended Next Post: mercury14 wrote:Oh that's a good point. Because you know, that's exactly what I was doing. I've always driven my Vypers and WW up to point blank range to shoot things.
Yeah bro. Way to assume a bunch of completely false crap.
Sorry mate, but the way you are complaining this is what it sounds like you want to be able to do. Keep at range and those rapid fire weapons aren't a threat at all. Of course you've complained that keeping at range is just impossible too, so whatever.
mercury14 wrote:So disembark Banshees a little out of the way - but somehow also in assault rangefor the next turn. I don't know what kind of players you face but the people I play against aren't stupid enough to intentionally sit their units next to Banshees the turn after they disembark. They'll move away. Not to mention that disembarking locations that are "out of the way" and in assault range at the same time often do not exist depending on the terrain.
Again, you're assuming I'm an idiot that puts his units intentionally in harm's way, devoid of any rational thought. Is there any way you could argue your position without relying on such dim assumptions?
Considering that movement and charge rules have changed for fleet troops your charge range is much longer now. When we play we have a lot of terrain on the table to limit the impact of the longest range weapons. This leaves us plenty of cover and terrain to use to get closer to our enemies and to assault without just being out in the open for a turn first. Also, if an enemy unit is sitting on an objective they aren't just going to abandon it just because their unit is threatened.
mercury14 wrote:No you're flat-wrong. Before Wave Serpents and Falcons were tough as hell, not fragile. Wave Serpents were even tougher than Land Raiders against Melta. And go look at the odds of wrecking a Holo-Falcon, even without cover or fortune.
And in 6e, WS and Falcons are still costed for being tough as hell to bring down. Only they're easy to bring down.
Regarding light vehicles, they're far more vulnerable to the same weapons as in 5e. This is an undeniable fact that you willfully ignore.
Yep I am willfully ignoring it. My point is that they are not going to autodestroyed just because they are light vehicles. It is all about movement, range, and staying in motion. This is even more so for the Eldar which are supposed to be about maneuver anyway. One of my armies is Dark Eldar and it isn't as if their light vehicles are so much better than Eldar vehicles. I just don't consider the rules changes the end of the world as you apparently do and the Dark Eldar have a very current codex compared to the ancient Eldar codex. Sorry that your Wave Serpents aren't tougher than land raiders anymore. They certainly don't cost as much as a land raider either.
I just read the first 6e battle report in White Dwarf. Not a single vehicle in the game was taken out so much more quickly because of Hull points at all and there were plenty of vehicles on each side. The vehicles still did their usual jobs, they brought lots of mobile fire power to the game and were hard hitting as usual. They didn't magically pop because they now have hull points. They all took heavy weapons fire to destroy or were attacked by monstrous creatures. All the hull point changes mean is that people don't *have* to have melta, lances, or lascannons in every army just because an opponent might bring something heavy to the table. Someone can take out a land raider with a lot of krak missile shots. They aren't the end of the world and vehicles will still be useful in the game.
Sorry, but just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I am willfully ignoring anything. It just means that I disagree with you.
Skriker
58669
Post by: Grugknuckle
Vaktathi wrote:
Counterattack, Acute Senses, and that all important CCW that tac marines don't get, for *15* points.
Long Fangs can get 5 weapons for 140pts with 6 dudes. It costs Vanillla Marines 180pts for 4 heavy weapons with 5 dudes. That's a significant difference, especially for min/max alpha strike armies.
Point taken. But even though this does not fully compensated for it what you've said above, vanilla marines do have access to stuff that SW's don't. And... SW  isn't as bad as GK .
Automatically Appended Next Post: mercury14 wrote:
What are Eldar players supposed to do for the next 18 months?
I've been playing 40K since the 90's bro. 18 months is not that long to wait for a codex. I'm sure you'll get your codex and then everyone will be whining about how OP Eldar are. Be patient and have faith. ... in the emperor.
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
I've been playing 40K since the 90's bro. 18 months is not that long to wait for a codex. I'm sure you'll get your codex and then everyone will be whining about how OP Eldar are. Be patient and have faith. ... in the emperor.
Oh god not again, 4th edition was already bad enough and having Falcon Spam all over again would just be such a disappointment.
Point taken. But even though this does not fully compensated for it what you've said above, vanilla marines do have access to stuff that SW's don't. And...SW isn't as bad as GK .
And SW's have access to better stuff that Vanilla marines don't, what exactly is this trying to prove?
They are cheaper (shouldn't be)
They are better (still cheaper, they should be at least 17 points due to CCW/ BP combo over the vanilla)
And being not as bad as the worst thing..Yeah no that still didn't excuse DE or VC back in fantasy.
102
Post by: Jayden63
I think units that employ auto glance weaponry like Haywire grenades, haywire blasters, emp grenades, etc. are things that are going to be devastating to vehicles.
Best part is removing hull points just wrecks the vehicle, not exploding it, so your not killing your own guys when the tank drops.
10 haywire grenades/blaster shots will drop any tank in the game that has moved 12" or less.
23534
Post by: Macok
ZebioLizard2 wrote:Movement is now 6 + d6(run)
Movement with charging is 6 + D6 with 2D6. With fleet you get to reroll run and one D6 in the 2D6
If you cannot outrun them with a potential 24", your dice luck is just truly horrible.
I think there was a rulebook source that said there is no assaulting after running. Fleet or no fleet. Fleet gives reroll to one or both die on assault, nothing more.
Skriker wrote:Yep I am willfully ignoring it. My point is that they are not going to autodestroyed just because they are light vehicles. It is all about movement, range, and staying in motion. This is even more so for the Eldar which are supposed to be about maneuver anyway. One of my armies is Dark Eldar and it isn't as if their light vehicles are so much better than Eldar vehicles. I just don't consider the rules changes the end of the world as you apparently do and the Dark Eldar have a very current codex compared to the ancient Eldar codex. Sorry that your Wave Serpents aren't tougher than land raiders anymore. They certainly don't cost as much as a land raider either.
That is partially true, at least in shooting. In CC serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck now. They may not cost as much as land rider but they are 2x or 3x times the price of Chimera, Rhino (a typical, scatter serpent is 105).
And now range, movement and staying in motion means little. IoMs weapons have the same or more range. Movement? No difference. They get longer turbo-boost (non-fast can turbo-boost too) but that means no shooting. Staying in motion? 3+ to hit no matter if you're fast or not. There are nice things about the serpent but it don't magically out-run and out-range other armies. And it did loose more than Rhino or Chimera. It definitely isn't the end of the world, not even close, but it is getting worse while being behind already.
38926
Post by: Exergy
Vaktathi wrote:HawaiiMatt wrote:Vaktathi wrote:Lootas are going to be very powerful under the new rules, almost absurdly so against anything that isn't AV13.
A full squad of lootas is practically assured to kill off anything less than AV13 under the new rules unless it rolls min shots.
Against AV12 with max shots they'll inflict 5 glances/pen's on average, with 2 shots each they'll inflict 3.33 (enough to kill anything with AV12), and with 1 shot they'll inflict 1.66 (so usually 2).
Against anything AV11 or under, even rolling minimum shots, they'll likely kill it regardless.
.
Against anything in 5+ cover, you get:
15 shots - 5 hits - 1.67 glance/pen - 1.1 get through cover.
30 shots - 10 hits - 3.33 glance/pen , 2.2 get through cover
45 shots - 15 hits - 5 glance/pen, 3.3 get through cover
Against AV13, halve all results.
Color me unimpressed. On average, they will fail to hull point to death an AV12 unless parked in the open, and they roll max shots.
That's a 225 point anti-tank unit that has T4 and 6+ save, and each wound cuts into their fire power.
3 Chimeras with heavy stubbers show up at 195. If they shoot first, and both sides have cover, The chimmeras should sweep them from the table.
How about 3 hydras, also 225 points. They fair pretty well in that shoot out as well.
I think people are hitting the panic button way too early.
-Matt
keep in mind that requires the vehicles to get cover, not always possible by any means even in 5E, and there are AV12 tanks in the game other than cheap anti-infantry platforms, you're basically comparing them to quite possibly the best anti-infantry platforms to throw against them (and lets not forget that you can't buy chimeras on their own, and very few people takes stubbers). Against Stormravens, Hellhounds, Fire Prisms, etc, they will be very scary indeed.
new rules, you only need 25% of the vehilce covered to get 5+
43680
Post by: mercury14
Macok wrote:
That is partially true, at least in shooting. In CC serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck now. They may not cost as much as land rider but they are 2x or 3x times the price of Chimera, Rhino (a typical, scatter serpent is 105).
And now range, movement and staying in motion means little. IoMs weapons have the same or more range. Movement? No difference. They get longer turbo-boost (non-fast can turbo-boost too) but that means no shooting. Staying in motion? 3+ to hit no matter if you're fast or not. There are nice things about the serpent but it don't magically out-run and out-range other armies. And it did loose more than Rhino or Chimera. It definitely isn't the end of the world, not even close, but it is getting worse while being behind already.
Skriker will happily ignore the facts you present, just as he ignored mine.
It's pretty cool how he his response to my point about War Walkers being weakened was that they should focus on maneuverability and staying in motion. Because he thinks their 6" move makes them capable of great feats of speed or something. Maybe he thinks walkers get a cover save for moving a couple inches? Or that 6" speed is sufficient to keep opposing transports and jump units at bay?
He'll ignore the fact that Wave Serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck in CC now. He'll insist that comparing WS to land raiders is a more valid exercise than WS to transports. He'll keep arguing through a cloud of hyperbole. And he'll keep assigning me positions that I do not have and then attacking those positions.
33774
Post by: tgf
hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.
37700
Post by: Ascalam
tgf wrote:hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.
Not really,
They might die easier, but they will tear the other army's vehicles apart too.. especially the Psyflemen..
38926
Post by: Exergy
tgf wrote:hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.
Those who bought 9 Venoms are the victim of the same joke. Well anyone who bought any DE really? Automatically Appended Next Post: Ascalam wrote:tgf wrote:hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.
Not really,
They might die easier, but they will tear the other army's vehicles apart too.. especially the Psyflemen..
vehicle spam is alright I think but there are going to be some lists that are going to come up that will totally eat vehicle spam in a way not seen in 5th. Eventually I think people are going to get tired of carting around the huge vehicle case to fit all those tanks in.
24470
Post by: Orblivion
mercury14 wrote:Macok wrote:
That is partially true, at least in shooting. In CC serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck now. They may not cost as much as land rider but they are 2x or 3x times the price of Chimera, Rhino (a typical, scatter serpent is 105).
And now range, movement and staying in motion means little. IoMs weapons have the same or more range. Movement? No difference. They get longer turbo-boost (non-fast can turbo-boost too) but that means no shooting. Staying in motion? 3+ to hit no matter if you're fast or not. There are nice things about the serpent but it don't magically out-run and out-range other armies. And it did loose more than Rhino or Chimera. It definitely isn't the end of the world, not even close, but it is getting worse while being behind already.
Skriker will happily ignore the facts you present, just as he ignored mine.
It's pretty cool how he his response to my point about War Walkers being weakened was that they should focus on maneuverability and staying in motion. Because he thinks their 6" move makes them capable of great feats of speed or something. Maybe he thinks walkers get a cover save for moving a couple inches? Or that 6" speed is sufficient to keep opposing transports and jump units at bay?
He'll ignore the fact that Wave Serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck in CC now. He'll insist that comparing WS to land raiders is a more valid exercise than WS to transports. He'll keep arguing through a cloud of hyperbole. And he'll keep assigning me positions that I do not have and then attacking those positions.
You mean the way you ignore his too? You complain that rolling 6s for S4 weapons to dmg AV10 vehicles is too easy, and yet you think rolling 5+ to get your cover save is too hard. You quite literally have double the chance to get your cover save than they do of getting their glancing hit. Pick one, is 5+ too rare or is 6 too common? It can't be both.
33774
Post by: tgf
All kidding and na na nana boo boo aside. This is a good change, in 5th people were avoiding infantry squads or mining them out to get the transports, that tells me transports were far to good. The game is not tank hammer, its about the infantry.
43680
Post by: mercury14
tgf wrote:All kidding and na na nana boo boo aside. This is a good change, in 5th people were avoiding infantry squads or mining them out to get the transports, that tells me transports were far to good. The game is not tank hammer, its about the infantry.
People will still load up on transports just as much as before. They're easier to pop now, but the problem wasn't that. The reason there are so many transports is because:
1) Rhinos are too cheap
2) There aren't enough turns to walk across the map Automatically Appended Next Post: Orblivion wrote:
You mean the way you ignore his too? You complain that rolling 6s for S4 weapons to dmg AV10 vehicles is too easy, and yet you think rolling 5+ to get your cover save is too hard. You quite literally have double the chance to get your cover save than they do of getting their glancing hit. Pick one, is 5+ too rare or is 6 too common? It can't be both.
If you read my posts, I'm not depending on S4 weaponry to make my argument. I'm mostly talking about WS going from very durable to flimsy, while still being costed as a powerful/durable tank.
48860
Post by: Joey
mercury14 wrote:
People will still load up on transports just as much as before. They're easier to pop now, but the problem wasn't that. The reason there are so many transports is because:
1) Rhinos are too cheap
2) There aren't enough turns to walk across the map
You can no longer assault out of a stationary vehicle, so that will stop razor/rhino spam in BA.
I'd agree though, shooty marine units hiding in metal boxes won't change, but meh. It's not that powerful anyway.
25925
Post by: Davros
Looks like my BTs LR will die even quicker now too !!!!!
42856
Post by: Tye_Informer
Orblivion wrote:You complain that rolling 6s for S4 weapons to dmg AV10 vehicles is too easy, and yet you think rolling 5+ to get your cover save is too hard. You quite literally have double the chance to get your cover save than they do of getting their glancing hit. Pick one, is 5+ too rare or is 6 too common? It can't be both.
I really hate to jump in the middle of this, but to quote Ron White "I had the right to remain silent, but I did not have the ability", so here goes.
This is not an "apples to apples" comparison. Rolling a 5+ cover save, each fail is a true fail and can hurt you very badly, so it is important to make most, if not all of them. Rolling a 6+ to glance a vehicle with 20 rapid fire Necron Warriors, a few fails are not that big of a deal, a bunch of fails are not that big of a deal because you only need 3 or 4 successes to wreck the vehicle. So, even though you are twice as likely to pass a 5+ cover save as you are to glance on a 6, you are way more than twice as nervous about failing individual 5+ saves.
Say your 3 hull point vehicle is being hit shot by 20 Necron Warriors in rapid fire range but you have a 5+ cover save. You know that you are twice as likely to make the cover save as the Necron is to make his 6s to glance, so you are feeling good.
Now, we switch to the Necron player's perspective.
20 warriors, rapid fire, 40 shots - Wow, that's a lot of dice, this is gonna be good.
Have to roll 3+, wow I made 26.5 hits - How on earth did I get a .5 hit? Shouldn't it have been 26.666666666666666667 (40*2/3)? Most be a below-average day. Well, let's go with it.
26.5 hits - Gotta roll 6s to Glance. 26.5 dice is still a lot of dice, this is gonna be good.
4.4 glances. Shouldn't that be 4.4166666666667 (26.5*1/6), well I guess still below average, but let's go with it.
Without the cover saves, that vehicle is DEAD! Hope he misses 3 of them.
Now we switch to your point of view.
Wow, 4.4 glances, I better make these 5+ saves!
Have to roll 5+, that might be tough.
4.4 cover saves and you miss 1.4 (average would be 1.4666666667 but you always roll above average)
4.4 glances minus 1.4 cover saves totals to 3 glances, dead vehicle. Bummer
As you can see, rolling 6+ glances is not as nerve-racking as 5+ cover saves because they are very different, individual dice that fail are not important for a 6+ hit because your focus is the successes versus a 5+ save where your focus is the fails. I could do the same example with a hypothetical BS1 AP2 S10 rapid fire weapon on 20 models. Every failed 5+ invuln save is a dead marine, but who cares about a few failed 6+ to-hit rolls because there are so many more dice that will be hits.
44749
Post by: Skriker
mercury14 wrote:Skriker will happily ignore the facts you present, just as he ignored mine.
It's pretty cool how he his response to my point about War Walkers being weakened was that they should focus on maneuverability and staying in motion. Because he thinks their 6" move makes them capable of great feats of speed or something. Maybe he thinks walkers get a cover save for moving a couple inches? Or that 6" speed is sufficient to keep opposing transports and jump units at bay?
He'll ignore the fact that Wave Serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck in CC now. He'll insist that comparing WS to land raiders is a more valid exercise than WS to transports. He'll keep arguing through a cloud of hyperbole. And he'll keep assigning me positions that I do not have and then attacking those positions.
Thanks for putting words in my mouth, mate. I disagree with you and you attack me instead of presenting evidence other than whining. Not wasting my time with you anymore. Just because you are convinced that your army is totally useless doesn't mean others have to agree with you on that fact. Having been through every edition of 40k since Rogue Trader, every time a new version comes out players of army X immediately complain how completely useless their army is and how they'll never win a game again in their life and when it comes down to it and the dice are rolled and the games are played it turns out to *never* be true that army X has become completely useless. So you keep lamenting, and I'll just wait until the numbers really come in from actual games being played.
Skriker
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Macok wrote:That is partially true, at least in shooting. In CC serpents are ridiculously easy to wreck now. They may not cost as much as land rider but they are 2x or 3x times the price of Chimera, Rhino (a typical, scatter serpent is 105).
And now range, movement and staying in motion means little. IoMs weapons have the same or more range. Movement? No difference. They get longer turbo-boost (non-fast can turbo-boost too) but that means no shooting. Staying in motion? 3+ to hit no matter if you're fast or not. There are nice things about the serpent but it don't magically out-run and out-range other armies. And it did loose more than Rhino or Chimera. It definitely isn't the end of the world, not even close, but it is getting worse while being behind already.
No a serpent doesn't magically outrun or out-range other armies, but if there is enough terrain on the table it also shouldn't just vanish the second the game starts either. Yes they are definitely more vulnerable in CC than before, but pretty much every vehicle is more vulnerable to CC now, especially light vehicles. It is making me rethinki buy scorchas for my newly forming ork army since they are more vulnerable now. Do I really want a buggy that has to get that close to do its thing with a template weapon? Usually the weapons on a serpent, war walker or vyper have a lot more range than the 8" flamer template.
Eldar are definitely suffering from old codex syndrome, no doubt, but it is definitely not the complete end of the world. I think rhinos should be cheaper than chimeras and serpents. They just don't have the same firepower, but chimeras and serpents should be closer in cost, along with razorbacks as they also fill that mobile fire support role after they drop off their charges. A lot of this comes from the fact that GW staff writing new codex books seem to do so in a bubble. It doesn't matter fully what is in the rules or even what is in earlier codex books. If they think something is cool or neat they put it in the book regardless.
The saddest thing is that today people are complaining how useless Eldar are now, meanwhile in a year or so when a new Eldar book comes out people will be complaining the other way. There is no happy medium with GW.
Skriker
42971
Post by: Kal-El
tgf wrote:hahahahaha f all you GK a-holes that purchased 9 razorbacks and 4 dreads jokes on you.
Grey Knights Dreadnoughts 2x twinlinked Autocannon with psybolt ammo and venerable = hits on 2, re-rolls 1 on hit. Glances AV10 on a 2, AV11 on a 3 = even more deadly than before imo. Regular bolters can pop rear armor of 10 now easy as well (but don't rely on that lol).
Basicly Autocannons, assault cannons, and anything that has a str of around 8 and high number of shots could easily pop AV11 in one volly of fire. I just think they should have just taken hull points off glances and put shaken, stunned, and shaken/stunned results on a D3 or something. I just don't see cinamatic from glancing vehicles to death. 1 of 2 things is going to happen. People stop taken as much armor and heavy weapons or people keep taking them and heavy weapons. We don't know people may favor flying machines or nothing...and force us to bring AA/S2A guns or flying machines ourselves. I for one am not happy I have to find points to incorperate that stuff into my army since I am not willing to risk just shooting them on 6's.
33774
Post by: tgf
Great point, accept that you are still stuck in 5th. No one will be playing vehicles in number if they are easy do destory so your 150 point dread gets to kill maybe 60 points in foot soldiers before getting wasted.
30289
Post by: Omegus
Vaktathi wrote:Omegus wrote:Well, at least Basilisks have the option of firing indirectly, and since you don't have to hit vehicles with the center of the template, that S9 (does ordnance still get 2d6 pick highest?) is quite potent. On top of that, if you really want to, you can always have guaranteed terrain to hide it behind.
With a minimum range of 36" that encompasses most of the board typically (meaning it can't indirect fire at anything closer than 36"), and with all the flyers/outflankers/deep striking units in the game (not to mention helps to outflanking and DS'ing units in the 6E rumors), they likely won't last long sadly
Still doesn't help stuff like dreads, ravagers, hellhounds, etc :(
You can indirect fire within your minimum range.
48370
Post by: SkyHawk
You can't assault anymore if you run (page 20 of BRB). So at most it's an 18" charge range as in 5th edition. Now, instead of guaranteed 13" of assault (6+D6+6), is 8" of guaranteed range (6+2D6)
26523
Post by: Ribon Fox
SkyHawk wrote:You can't assault anymore if you run (page 20 of BRB). So at most it's an 18" charge range as in 5th edition. Now, instead of guaranteed 13" of assault (6+D6+6), is 8" of guaranteed range (6+2D6)
Good, they have curtailed the frothing looney's charge range to some thing more manageable for my foot vets.
As for those saying less armour is going to be played, chances are even more will now be played (now that the IG goodies are open for the ally sub FoC).
Besides a tank is still a tank (and with the Guard even more so), no matter how much you bemoan the new HP system you'll still have to kill it before it kills you.
[As was once spoken to me]------- Man up, grow a pair (of what is your choice ), play the game and throw the dice. If you don't like it the go play Warmachine or FoW 
2676
Post by: Celtic Strike
I don't like the fact that 6th ed just really seemed to stick it to eldar. They were already a very weak codex with transports that cost 15-20 points more than they should. Now they'll go down a lot easier and our squishy troops won't be able to do anything.
People keep saying that Rhinos and Chimeras have the same problem which is only true to a point. Rhinos carry marines so they're fine. Chimeras can number into the high teens during a game and so will be very hard to bring down.
A standard 1750 of eldar will contain 5-7 transports that are now about 30-40pts too expensive with expensive and fragile guys inside that die very easily.
Guard can bring 30-ish autocannons. Orks can bring roughly the same number. GK's I don't know about you guys but I routinely see about 12 psycannons on the table + 3 Psy-dreads. They'll have NO trouble at all bringing down vehicles.
Our psykers aren't great anymore, 1/2 the armies got access to our powers and everyone can stop them. Our Banshees can now no longer hurt terms, we have no plasma other than star cannons that are 35 pts and BS 3 Assault 2. Our witchblades which used to be great against vehicles are now not and our Harlequins are the only thing that can take down the 100s of terminators that we find on the board and rending isn't consistent.
People who say eldar didn't get hit with a nerf hammer are exactly the same as white people who insist there is no trouble with racism in this country. Delusional.
49704
Post by: sfshilo
USE SQUADS. Front stuff gets hit first right? So one tank takes a beating turn 1, rotate his buddy up turn 2. Voila, back in it. Not only that, immobilized doesn't even wreck squad members any more!
SQUADS 4TW!
53740
Post by: ZebioLizard2
People who say eldar didn't get hit with a nerf hammer are exactly the same as white people who insist there is no trouble with racism in this country. Delusional.
Thank you for managing to bring race into an issue where there was never needed to be one!
19370
Post by: daedalus
tgf wrote:Great point, accept that you are still stuck in 5th. No one will be playing vehicles in number if they are easy do destory so your 150 point dread gets to kill maybe 60 points in foot soldiers before getting wasted.
I will still have my two GK Dreads in addition to all the terminators I was told were 'useless' back in 5th. By your rationale, it sounds like meching up would be the smart thing; The meta will be expecting infantry armies.
54426
Post by: DarkWind
Okay HP are great and crappy at the same time. I think it's great for the player that a vehicle won't wreck rite away as a result of terrain or glancing shots. Hp sucks for the player because e 3-4 glances in close combat (which is very easy for most armies) will shut down the vehicle.
58878
Post by: DexKivuli
To me, the new rules seem to make war walkers awesome. While they've definitely been made more fragile, they are also one of the best ways to exploit the weaknesses that the 'hull point rule' has created.
War walker with 2 shuriken cannons is 40 points, putting out 6 S6 shots each at 24" (or 70 points for 8 S6 shots at 36", although I prefer the budget option). Major transport killer.
They're definitely a glass cannon, but they're a relatively cheap glass cannon (in the scheme of things). Too damaging to ignore, and you're going to have to invest more points to stop them (unless you're using necrons).
I'm not saying that walkers haven't been made weaker. All I'm saying is that if you use them as a 'kamikaze' unit they could have potential.
2676
Post by: Celtic Strike
Yeah, I'll definately be pulling off my scatter lasers and putting Shuriken cannons on my war walkers. They should have 1-2 great rounds if I can move them around properly.
44749
Post by: Skriker
Celtic Strike wrote:People who say eldar didn't get hit with a nerf hammer are exactly the same as white people who insist there is no trouble with racism in this country. Delusional.
OK...welcome to invalidating your own credibility with silly drivel...
All I have to say on the eldar nerfhammer arguement is: Wraithlord as a monstrous creature and no longer a walker. Add in plenty of lance weapons and even enemy land raiders and monoliths are as vulnerable as eldar tanks are...
Skriker
11176
Post by: RicBlasko
Joey wrote:Tiger9gamer wrote:I'm guessing my new vindicators might suck now :(
Old rules -
single glancing hit. Rolls a 5, your weapon is destroyed. Seeya!
New rules -
Can take a few hits before being taken out.
So, no.
I can careless about hull points, as well, I use my tank for support. i dont roll around the whole game, shooting out the hatch, I think that was always lame. You take troops, then put them i in armor, then put that armor in a rolling can of armor, so you can be safe. I try to keep to fluff I guess, Now I did enjoy my Chaos Marines and their multi rhinos, only because I tried to speed to the ememy as fast as I can, without taking pot shots, then get into close combat (what a Rhino is for, moving people, not being a tank...it's like a Humvee, not a mobile weapon platform)
But, I can see where people are coming from. I have seen a lot of "well this unit can do this, and this unit can do that" lets cut down to the the basics here. Just because you have a Lascannon on the field it doesnt mean it will be in range, have sight, not be tied up, hit it's target. You can take 5 guys with Meltas, doesnt mean they will live to use them.
On the other side of the coin, taking say..Marines with ML, you pop a tank...then well, next turn you can pop another. So spending points on one unit, and saying "well it only took out 55 points" you forget, thats 55 points a turn. Three, four turns in, it not only took out more points BUT it also slowed you down, took away weapons you brought out. It is more than just points. I might waste time using an over priced unit to take out one HQ, but if you needed that HQ for some grand plan, then I did more than take points from you. It's why when I do use tanks, I target the weapons that can take those tanks out first. That leaves my armor safe to shoot the rest.
As far as hull points. I do think it's sad that i cxan take 4 SoB with Heavy Bolters (not seen the new rules so going with Heavy 3 Str 5) And fire 12 shots, and all I need is a 5 or 6 to take a hull point off a Rhino or the like. Even if it takes more than one turn, since another unit can finish it off. Now troops on footor in a ride can not take a hail of bullets.
A Melta is a Melta, it always wins as long as it hits.
58631
Post by: Gorfang EadSplitta'
Since im going to have 8 battlewagons that really only need one turn of movement, I think im going to be ok, at the worst ill lose 2 or 3 battlewagons turn one, and then I still have another 3
29910
Post by: Fire_for_effect
Meh, I don't think it makes vehicles obsolete, it just makes them more predictable. Many people seem to rant and complain saying that now their vehicles will be gone so quickly, but somehow I recall Leman Russes and Predators being blown up after taking one or two lucky hits.
Sure now it's less likely to have your vehicles take 20 glances and pens and just washing off due to some good luck, but it seems to have gotten better for everybody.
No longer can one dumb glance keep your 200 Point vehicle from firing for an entire turn and no longer can (with much probability) dump 400 points of shooting in a single vehicle and just shake it.
To me, 6th ed just balances things out well.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Fire_for_effect wrote:Meh, I don't think it makes vehicles obsolete, it just makes them more predictable. Many people seem to rant and complain saying that now their vehicles will be gone so quickly, but somehow I recall Leman Russes and Predators being blown up after taking one or two lucky hits.
With dedicated AT guns yes, and that's not likely to change. It's the lighter vehicles, and anything that gets into CC with anything that isn't a Land Raider, that's the issue.
In CC, 90% of units in the game can at least glance 90% of the vehicles in the game. Anything that's a Space Marine is packing Krak Grenades, meaning a bog-standard tac squad of marines is practically assured to kill anything that is rear AV10 (read: anything that isn't a Land Raider, Stormraven, or LR Demolisher) without ever even having to roll for a damage result. (10 attacks, 6.66 hit, 3.33 glances/pen's)
For lighter vehicles, mid strength (often primarily anti-infantry) shooting can cut them down very quickly indeed be it 200pt kitted Falcon of 35pt Rhino, and Necrons can clear a board of a dozen vehicles in just a couple of turns.
What we've basically got is a hamfisted mechanic overlayed on top of another mechanic to bypass it, they just decided that after X hits just call it dead and ignore the actual damage mechanic.
44749
Post by: Skriker
Fire_for_effect wrote:Meh, I don't think it makes vehicles obsolete, it just makes them more predictable. Many people seem to rant and complain saying that now their vehicles will be gone so quickly, but somehow I recall Leman Russes and Predators being blown up after taking one or two lucky hits.
Sure now it's less likely to have your vehicles take 20 glances and pens and just washing off due to some good luck, but it seems to have gotten better for everybody.
No longer can one dumb glance keep your 200 Point vehicle from firing for an entire turn and no longer can (with much probability) dump 400 points of shooting in a single vehicle and just shake it.
To me, 6th ed just balances things out well.
Well put and I agree wholeheartedly. We have all definitely benefited from the roll the 6 to hit and roll a 1 on the penetration table for years now. Yay you tank/walker/what-have-you survives forever. It is great except when you are the one frustratingly failing to destroy a single vehicle with a ton of concentrated railgun or lascannon fire. Last game I played I had a daemon possessed Nurgle Plague Hulk walker walk at my opponent's broadside squad and squash them in hand to hand after 5 turns of him hitting every shot and rolling nothing but 1s on the penetration table. Being daemon possessed that didn't affect my plague hulk and I just walked right up to them and stomped them into the ground. Now if they hit me 3 times my walker will be destroyed. Makes sense. 3 penetrating hits with a rail gun should really get the job done, regardless of the roll on the table. Yes there is still the possibility of a wreck or destroyed result on the 1st or 2nd shot, but the process doesn't go on forever now.
The inclusion of hull point damage on glancing hits now means that more armies have a chance of dealing with that monolith or land raider in the opposing force. Eldar get their lances so hit as if the armor was only 12, but everyone else needs to penetrate that 14. What happens if you don't have anything with a higher strength than 8 in your army? In the past it meant you were completely screwed. Now enough krak missiles fired at a land raider can cause enough glances to eventually destroyed it. Same with the monolith.
Light vehicles have become a little more vulnerable to lighter weapons, but not dramatically so. Most rapid fire weapons still need to roll a 6 to get a glance on many light vehicles and some *still* can't hurt light vehicles, like lasguns.
Skriker
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Skriker wrote:
Well put and I agree wholeheartedly. We have all definitely benefited from the roll the 6 to hit and roll a 1 on the penetration table for years now. Yay you tank/walker/what-have-you survives forever. It is great except when you are the one frustratingly failing to destroy a single vehicle with a ton of concentrated railgun or lascannon fire. Last game I played I had a daemon possessed Nurgle Plague Hulk walker walk at my opponent's broadside squad and squash them in hand to hand after 5 turns of him hitting every shot and rolling nothing but 1s on the penetration table. Being daemon possessed that didn't affect my plague hulk and I just walked right up to them and stomped them into the ground. Now if they hit me 3 times my walker will be destroyed. Makes sense. 3 penetrating hits with a rail gun should really get the job done, regardless of the roll on the table. Yes there is still the possibility of a wreck or destroyed result on the 1st or 2nd shot, but the process doesn't go on forever now.
It only went on forever with out-of-the-ordinary poor dice luck. Dump an 80pt squad of fire dragons, a squad of sternguard vets with combi-meltas, a 90pt quad melta CCS, etc and suddenly that Land Raider or Monolith was almost certainly toast.
The inclusion of hull point damage on glancing hits now means that more armies have a chance of dealing with that monolith or land raider in the opposing force. Eldar get their lances so hit as if the armor was only 12, but everyone else needs to penetrate that 14. What happens if you don't have anything with a higher strength than 8 in your army? In the past it meant you were completely screwed.
It means you didn't build an all-comers list and left out a critical capability that you shouldn't have. every army has ways to cover that angle, if you didn't bring it, that's your fault, not something the core rules need to adjust for. No different than if facing a 180 model ork horde and you only brought 30 dudes with nothing but power weapons, plasma/melta guns and no template/ RoF weapons.
Now enough krak missiles fired at a land raider can cause enough glances to eventually destroyed it. Same with the monolith.
Those aren't the issue, and it's incredibly unlikely for such to happen, much more likely is a situation like the above, where someone dumps 4-6 meltaguns into them and just stops rolling once they get that 3rd or 4th successful pen roll. What does hurt a lot more is those lighter vehicles.
Light vehicles have become a little more vulnerable to lighter weapons, but not dramatically so. Most rapid fire weapons still need to roll a 6 to get a glance on many light vehicles and some *still* can't hurt light vehicles, like lasguns.
And Scatterlasers, Heavy Bolters, Grenade Launchers, etc have suddenly become terribly effective anti-light vehicle weapons where they really shoudn't be.
Also keep in mind the CC aspect. Between hull points and vehicles never being hit on worse than a 3+ in CC, a tac squad assaulting anything that isn't a Land Raider, Walker or Stormraven has can almost count on killing it simply through hull points, with an average of 3.33 glancing/pen hits inflicted with krak grenades. Get into base contact with vehicle win, rinse, repeat, easymode.
30289
Post by: Omegus
Yeah, vehicles should either have more hull points, or they should recover some of the hull points (or all of them) at the beginning of the turn. When I first read the rumors about hull points, I thought the latter was how they would work.
23534
Post by: Macok
Vaktathi wrote:Skriker wrote:Light vehicles have become a little more vulnerable to lighter weapons, but not dramatically so. Most rapid fire weapons still need to roll a 6 to get a glance on many light vehicles and some *still* can't hurt light vehicles, like lasguns.
And Scatterlasers, Heavy Bolters, Grenade Launchers, etc have suddenly become terribly effective anti-light vehicle weapons where they really shoudn't be.
Also keep in mind the CC aspect. Between hull points and vehicles never being hit on worse than a 3+ in CC, a tac squad assaulting anything that isn't a Land Raider, Walker or Stormraven has can almost count on killing it simply through hull points, with an average of 3.33 glancing/pen hits inflicted with krak grenades. Get into base contact with vehicle win, rinse, repeat, easymode.
Yeah, a CC is what really makes Eldar vehicles extremely rubbish in this edition. It is just ridiculously easy to kill them that way. In fact a round of shooting from full unit of Long Fangs (unit widely considered at incredible efficiency / point ratio) has a worse chance of destroying Wave Serpent than the same amount of points in TAC marines has by hitting it with sticks. This is especially stupid considering the difference in cost of serpent and rhino and absolutely no difference in CC resilience. Serpent going for > 40" (with Star Engines) is still 3+ to hit, exactly the same as rhino moving 1". It can move faster than 36" unable-to-be-assauled fliers. That's just bad design.
I don't think HPs are the end of all vehicles. Rhinos and similar are still in. But they did throw already pricey Serpent, Falcon, Piranha way back in competitiveness line.
Skriker wrote:All I have to say on the eldar nerfhammer arguement is: Wraithlord as a monstrous creature and no longer a walker. Add in plenty of lance weapons and even enemy land raiders and monoliths are as vulnerable as eldar tanks are...
Ok, I guess you are just trying to be "funny" right now..?
Wraithlord was never a walker and lance is widely (deservedly) considered a very bad weapon. It is worse than lascannon against anything < 13AV, its pricier and goes on BS3 units. LanceSerpent is 135 points, LanceFalcon is 145. Guardians are currently competing for second worst troops with shooty T3 5+ unit BS3 12" gun while costing more than Ork Boy. Scatter Lasers are still our go-to weapon on Walkers, Vipers and pretty much everything.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Yeah, the problem is that some armies rely on transports to be mobile battle bunkers, others use them as a skateboard. The armies that use them primarily as a skateboard (MEQ's and DE) won't see as many issues. The armies where they were designed and intended as mobile battle bunkers (Eldar, Guard, Tau) are going to really hate this edition. Gun tanks also aren't really going to have a fun time either.
Had they given most vehicles 5 or 6 hull points, it might be a different matter, but it's so pathetically easy to smack on 3 HP's worth of damage that actually killing a vehicle by rolling a destruction result on the damage table is going to be a relatively rare event.
7809
Post by: Fango
As a DE player who takes lots of vehicles....in the 3 games I played this past weekend, I noticed that my vehicles either stayed in the air on average 1 turn longer, or when they did get pen'd, they exploded more often than not...Which happens when you are open topped getting hit with AP2 weapons.
Cover is easier to get now (25% instead of half concealed), If you have lots of Ruins on the table, you are getting 4+ cover saves, otherwise hugging terrain likely gets you 5+.
I did manage a lucky 'one-shot' kill on a Land Raider,...but all in all, I see lighter vehicles lasting a little longer...while heavy armored vehicles don't last the whole game anymore...
Also, target saturation is also key. I normally have at least 2 Raiders, 3-5 Venoms, and 3 Ravagers flying around in large games. When you present everything at once, your opponent has to prioritize and concentrate fire (if they are smart) or take one or two pot-shots at everything. Where vehicles really benefit from the HP rule.
Where you are gonna see less survivability is when you are used to taking a single Land Raider, a single Falcon, or just a couple of rhinos...then they are gonna become primary targets and go down fairly quickly.
Just keep in mind that one shot explosions are going to be more rare, as glances wont roll on the damage table (doesn't matter how good your AP is), and the table itself only has one destroyed result (6). But spamming lots of medium strength weapons, Auto Cannons, Scatter Lasers, etc. (even Heavy Bolters and Pulse weapons on side armor) will ensure you are at least consistently knocking off those HPs.
20887
Post by: xxvaderxx
Yep, and it killed 40k to me, but what are you going to do, i will not buy additional models to comply with bad rules, had the medium HP been 5 it would may be had been another story, but loossing my transports turn 1 or 2, to the mass S7 plasmaguns that are going to be flooding the gaming tables this edition is just not fun.
I love dreads, to bad save 2 of the BA variants now have neither the tooth or the guns to fulfill any significant role on the battlefield.
53428
Post by: Nemesor Dave
xxvaderxx wrote:Yep, and it killed 40k to me, but what are you going to do, i will not buy additional models to comply with bad rules, had the medium HP been 5 it would may be had been another story, but loossing my transports turn 1 or 2, to the mass S7 plasmaguns that are going to be flooding the gaming tables this edition is just not fun.
I love dreads, to bad save 2 of the BA variants now have neither the tooth or the guns to fulfill any significant role on the battlefield.
Who has mass plasmaguns? In 5h almost nobody had them. Also in 5th tanks could get 1 shotted more easily at long range. Now they need to be in mid range to get whittled down. I plan on playing my BA tanks more. It still looks like my flamestorm cannon will be useful.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Nemesor Dave wrote:xxvaderxx wrote:Yep, and it killed 40k to me, but what are you going to do, i will not buy additional models to comply with bad rules, had the medium HP been 5 it would may be had been another story, but loossing my transports turn 1 or 2, to the mass S7 plasmaguns that are going to be flooding the gaming tables this edition is just not fun.
I love dreads, to bad save 2 of the BA variants now have neither the tooth or the guns to fulfill any significant role on the battlefield.
Who has mass plasmaguns? In 5h almost nobody had them. Also in 5th tanks could get 1 shotted more easily at long range. Now they need to be in mid range to get whittled down. I plan on playing my BA tanks more. It still looks like my flamestorm cannon will be useful.
It is a lot easier however to kill vehicles through weight of fire. An Autocannon in 5E needed an average of 36 shots at BS3 to kill an AV12 tank (36/2=18hits/6=3pens/3=1wrecked/explodes). Now it just needs an average of 18 shots (18shots/2=9hits/3=3 glances/pen's) with the (admittedly reduced) chance to still insta-kill present on top of that.
Given the utter lack of need to roll on a damage chart really to kill vehicles and reduced cover saves, plasma weapons will likely be more popular in 5th, all those old PG models getting cracked out of their cases from 4E armies.
44749
Post by: Skriker
Vaktathi wrote: It means you didn't build an all-comers list and left out a critical capability that you shouldn't have. every army has ways to cover that angle, if you didn't bring it, that's your fault, not something the core rules need to adjust for. No different than if facing a 180 model ork horde and you only brought 30 dudes with nothing but power weapons, plasma/melta guns and no template/RoF weapons.
Yeah an "all comers" list. Even trying to do that it is impossible to build a perfect "all comers" list. You put in what you can, but you can't put too much of any one thing into the army or you'll be critically short elsehwere so what you end up with is some ability against everything, and having 4-6 meltaguns to take out tanks doesn't exactly fit in a lot of "all comers" list. While all of you special weapons are geared towards anti-tank what are you using to deal with the hordes that can appear? I can get some missile launchers and a couple metlas and still have some other abilities to deal with hordes too, but then if one of the big boys shows up I am screwed unless I can get my couple meltas close enough to do some good and any opponent worth their salt will make that hard for me to do. Just because I have meltas doesn't mean I'll get them within 8".
And Scatterlasers, Heavy Bolters, Grenade Launchers, etc have suddenly become terribly effective anti-light vehicle weapons where they really shoudn't be.
Funny I recall scatterlasters being billed as anti-infantry and light vehicle weapons, same with heavy bolters, so why shouldn't they be effective at that job?
Also keep in mind the CC aspect. Between hull points and vehicles never being hit on worse than a 3+ in CC, a tac squad assaulting anything that isn't a Land Raider, Walker or Stormraven has can almost count on killing it simply through hull points, with an average of 3.33 glancing/pen hits inflicted with krak grenades. Get into base contact with vehicle win, rinse, repeat, easymode.
Historically armored vehicles have *always* been vulnerable to infantry attacks. They are not designed for close in point defense and once infantry get within their fire bubble, can pretty much have their way with the armored vehicle placing grenades and mines into vulnerable places and watching the tank just become a useless hunk of junk. This is why the soviets started piling SMG armed troops on to the backs of their tanks, specifically to deal with the infantry threat.
If you leave your tanks sitting off by themselves and allow your enemy to get his infantry close enough to assault then yep you will probably lose your tank if they have krak grenades. If on the other you you support and protect your armor with your own infantry and keep them from being that vulnerable you aren't going to have to worry as much.
Yes vehicles are more vulnerable now, but they were too invulnerable before. Transports went from never being used to almost constantly being used, and there was a reason for that. Now that near invulnerability has been removed. Of course I'd be bothered if only 1 force had gotten hit with the hull points downgrade, but everyone has to deal with hullpoints now, so everyone is equally as stymied. In reading the first 6th edition battle report in White Dwarf, I didn't see hull points making the vehicles used any less viable.
Skriker Automatically Appended Next Post: Macok wrote:Ok, I guess you are just trying to be funny; right now..?
Wraithlord was never a walker and lance is widely (deservedly) considered a very bad weapon. It is worse than lascannon against anything < 13AV, its pricier and goes on BS3 units. LanceSerpent is 135 points, LanceFalcon is 145. Guardians are currently competing for second worst troops with shooty T3 5+ unit BS3 12" gun while costing more than Ork Boy. Scatter Lasers are still our go-to weapon on Walkers, Vipers and pretty much everything.
Yeah I'm just trying to be funny. The wraithlord gets some good buffs from the fact that it is a monstrous creature in the current rules. It especially doesn't suffer from any of the weaknesses that similar units in other armies still face with hull points and armor values that everyone is complaining about. You may consider the lance a bad weapon, but I don't and never have. I used the to great effect when I played Eldar a while back, popping leman russ tanks without breaking a sweat. They also give bonuses on the penetration table so even when shooting a light vehicle have a better chance of destroying them outright over other weapons. Boo hoo eldar are BS-3...still gives you a 50% to hit when you fire the weapons. That is better than ork boyz doing any shooting. Guardians, armed with assault weapons to a man, can also shoot all of their weapons into an enemy unit before a charge. Certainly makes them better than their nearest equivilent, Imperial guard. Just to avoid the "Well rapid fire weapons have longer range now" arguement, the point here is for preparing to assault and you can't assault if you aren't close enough to assault which will usually be within the short range of rapid fire weapons anyway.
And given that people seem to claim that scatter lasers and multi lasers are so much better now because they will decimate light vehicles, I don't see what the problem is on having them on war walkers either. Of course if you can't be bothered to take lance weapons and use one of the biggest anti-armor advantages that the eldar have, that isn't exactly my fault or the fault of the rules either now is it?
Skriker
15717
Post by: Backfire
Vaktathi wrote:
It is a lot easier however to kill vehicles through weight of fire. An Autocannon in 5E needed an average of 36 shots at BS3 to kill an AV12 tank (36/2=18hits/6=3pens/3=1wrecked/explodes). Now it just needs an average of 18 shots (18shots/2=9hits/3=3 glances/pen's) with the (admittedly reduced) chance to still insta-kill present on top of that.
Given the utter lack of need to roll on a damage chart really to kill vehicles and reduced cover saves, plasma weapons will likely be more popular in 5th, all those old PG models getting cracked out of their cases from 4E armies.
Isn't Obscured still 4+ cover save for Vehicles, and easier to get (25%)? Also, in your calculations you negated the chance for killing the vehicle via glancing which also existed in 5th ed, particularly with Open-topped vehicles. Particularly AP1 weapons often easily killed or immobilized Open-Topped vehicles with mere glancing hits. But yeah, mass glancing, if the army is capable of it, will be pretty killy against vehicles. Lootas will be mega scary in 6th.
44749
Post by: Skriker
Fango wrote:Also, target saturation is also key. I normally have at least 2 Raiders, 3-5 Venoms, and 3 Ravagers flying around in large games. When you present everything at once, your opponent has to prioritize and concentrate fire (if they are smart) or take one or two pot-shots at everything. Where vehicles really benefit from the HP rule.
First off, thanks for the commentary and examples Fango. Nice to get some word on the rules in action instead of just people complaining about how it is going to be.
Single vehicles are definitely at a disadvantage because it allows an opponent to focus all of their fire on that one vehicle. Eldar and DE especially have plenty of vehicles everywhere making for many more targets and making it harder to gang up on just one target. This was seen in the White Dwarf battle report too when both sides had 5+ walkers and vehicles and they still had just as much impact on the game as always.
Skriker
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vaktathi wrote:It is a lot easier however to kill vehicles through weight of fire. An Autocannon in 5E needed an average of 36 shots at BS3 to kill an AV12 tank (36/2=18hits/6=3pens/3=1wrecked/explodes). Now it just needs an average of 18 shots (18shots/2=9hits/3=3 glances/pen's) with the (admittedly reduced) chance to still insta-kill present on top of that.
Given the utter lack of need to roll on a damage chart really to kill vehicles and reduced cover saves, plasma weapons will likely be more popular in 5th, all those old PG models getting cracked out of their cases from 4E armies.
So you consider it a bad thing that one doesn't have to shoot at the same tank 30+ times just in the hopes of getting it destroyed. It may not be as perfect for the tank owner, but is a lot less annoying and frustrating for the person trying to destroy the tank. In 5e trying to destroy even a lighter AV12 vehicle in your example could often be a wondeful lesson in futility meaning that tank armies either dominated or a player had to stack the deck in their army with tons of anti-tank in the hopes of succeeding if they faced a tank army, but not being as useful against non-tank armies.
Just looking at your example numbers should make it clear why adding the hull points were a good thing. Gone are the days of utterly wasting heavy weapon fire to poor rolls on the penetrating table. Penetrate that tank 3 times and it is wrecked now. I *like* that a lot. I like the fact that a single tank can no longer dominate a fight due to being near impossible to kill, especially when you aren't play MEQ armies with their higher BS for shooting at them. Eldar long had anti-armor advantages and armor defense advantages that made them even harder to destroy, except with the heaviest of weapons. Now even eldar tanks need to use cover and protect themselves and can't just expect to soak up damage with impunity.
Skriker
15717
Post by: Backfire
^What Skriker said. Some people have complained increased randomness of 6th edition, but 5th edition Vehicle damage was very random - often you spent almost entire game trying to kill a Rhino with Railguns, other times you blew up a Land Raider with one shot. It could be very frustrating, and that's one thing where randomness has actually decreased from 5th.
23534
Post by: Macok
@Skriker
Please stop talking about guardians like they are any good. Nobody is going to believe you. They were bad and have gotten worse. Winning assault with guard it pathetic example.
And as for Eldar vehicles, again, you are completely wrong. First of all NOW they don't need to hug cover. They will get it by just moving and will get not any better from hiding behind others. Totally opposite of what you say.
Eldar mech-spam was not even close to most powerful mech builds out there. (Talking about 5th of course)
And Wraithlord was NEVER a walker and he NEVER had armour. It was Monstrous Creature from the beginning.
"Eldar and DE especially have plenty of vehicles"
What?
100 point (the cheapest) serpent vs 35 rhino?
100 serpent vs 105 chimera WITH troops unit inside?
I have no idea what game are you playing but it's not wh40k.
You have no idea what you are talking about or Eldar players near you are incredible cheaters.
Back on topic.
I really like the idea of HPs. It's just that the execution is bad, especially considering other rules that hit some more than others (like hitting vehicle moving 42" at 3+). Shooting one vehicle forever was dumb, it's good they changed it. But some armies were hit too hard.
I definitely won't quit and still enjoy the game. But that doesn't change the fact that vehicles in my army are overpriced and I am not happy about it.
I know, change your tactics, adapt, blah blah blah.
I'm not happy I have to change A to B. I wanted both to be useful.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Skriker wrote:
So you consider it a bad thing that one doesn't have to shoot at the same tank 30+ times just in the hopes of getting it destroyed.
When it's not a dedicated heavy AT weapon and armies can pack several dozen of them in, I'm ok with that. Notice nobody complaiend about autocannons being ineffective anti-transport weapons in 5th edition.
It may not be as perfect for the tank owner, but is a lot less annoying and frustrating for the person trying to destroy the tank.
Only if they continually rolled like crap and didn't bring heavy AT weaponry.
In 5e trying to destroy even a lighter AV12 vehicle in your example could often be a wondeful lesson in futility meaning that tank armies either dominated or a player had to stack the deck in their army with tons of anti-tank in the hopes of succeeding if they faced a tank army, but not being as useful against non-tank armies.
Autocannons are a wonderful example of why this isn't true, as they are rather dual-purpose weapons able to be taken in large numbers and effective against a wide range of foes, hence why they became more popular than ever before in 5E.
Just looking at your example numbers should make it clear why adding the hull points were a good thing. Gone are the days of utterly wasting heavy weapon fire to poor rolls on the penetrating table.
That's called rolling like crap, you're just as likely to roll nothing but 1's and 2's as you are to roll 5's and 6's, and you can roll all the 1's you want, a single 5 is all you needed. We don't turn around and say a Space Marine dies if he's forced to take 3 armor saves do we? No, if he makes 5/6/7/8 saves it's lucky but not typical, as they can fail the first save just as easily.
Penetrate that tank 3 times and it is wrecked now. I *like* that a lot.
If you like killing tanks to be a paint-by-numbers easymode thing. It basically turns them into a T6-10 3W model with no save (rather just a save against Instant Death) and a complete inability to do anything in CC and is hit at worst on a 3+, and usually reduced to affective T6 in CC even if otherwise stronger. One will notice that even relatively cheap MC's still have 3+ saves.
An AV12 vehicle now is functionally a T8 W3 unit with no save, AV11 a T7 W3 unit with no save. While initially that looks impressive, it's really not.
Hell, rhino's now are as easy to kill as 5 guardsmen in the open with autocannon fire, Ravagers even easier.
I like the fact that a single tank can no longer dominate a fight due to being near impossible to kill,
I never ran into a game where a single tank dominated it. Did you not bring sufficient AT guns?
especially when you aren't play MEQ armies with their higher BS for shooting at them. Eldar long had anti-armor advantages and armor defense advantages that made them even harder to destroy, except with the heaviest of weapons. Now even eldar tanks need to use cover and protect themselves and can't just expect to soak up damage with impunity.
Methinks you didn't play 5E and are remembering 4E. Eldar vehicles cost a lot of points relatively, and in general were most vulnerable to medium strength weapons with high RoF and not the heaviest of weapons, always have been. Eldar vehicle armies didn't exactly dominate anything in 5th ed and were typically considered rather mediocre.
39550
Post by: Psienesis
It bears noting that krak grenades, lascannons and heavy bolters are specifically designed to be anti-vehicle weapons, if not precisely anti-tank weapons.
That krak grenade is an anti-armor shaped charge. Blowing up cars, trucks, walkers, dreads, and IFVs is *exactly* what it was built for.
6772
Post by: Vaktathi
Psienesis wrote:It bears noting that krak grenades, lascannons and heavy bolters are specifically designed to be anti-vehicle weapons, if not precisely anti-tank weapons.
That krak grenade is an anti-armor shaped charge. Blowing up cars, trucks, walkers, dreads, and IFVs is *exactly* what it was built for.
Yeah, and that was fine in 5E, but "hit on rear armor" coupled with autohits or 3+hits and hull points makes them entirely too capable now.
When were HB's anti-vehicle weapons though just out of curiosity? lascannons and krak grenades I won't argue, but HB's have always really primarily been anti-infantry weapons as far as I can remember.
39550
Post by: Psienesis
The Heavy Bolter has always been a sort of "general purpose machinegun" for SM/MEQ and generally anyone who deploys them. Described, in-universe, for being equally good at tearing apart infantry and light vehicles, usually crew-served (by the IG, anyway), etc etc. Not exactly a tank-killer, but an armor-piercing explosive round is overkill for most anti-infantry applications.
44749
Post by: Skriker
[quote=MacokPlease stop talking about guardians like they are any good. Nobody is going to believe you. They were bad and have gotten worse. Winning assault with guard it pathetic example.
And as for Eldar vehicles, again, you are completely wrong. First of all NOW they don't need to hug cover. They will get it by just moving and will get not any better from hiding behind others. Totally opposite of what you say.
Eldar mech-spam was not even close to most powerful mech builds out there. (Talking about 5th of course)
And Wraithlord was NEVER a walker and he NEVER had armour. It was Monstrous Creature from the beginning.
You are welcome to your opinion and I am welcome to mine. I've played eldar, and pretty much every army in 40k at one time or another. I always found guardians more useful than grunt IG and that is what I said in my post. Didn't say they'd "win assault with guard", just that when compared to guard the ability to fire all weapons into a unit before assaulting it is pretty darn useful and it is. Aside from initative guard and the fact that guard have rapid fire weapons, they are otherwise similar stat and rolewise on the battle field.
Never said eldar mechspam was close to the most powerful mech builds out there either. Just that eldar vehicles with holofields, could last pretty long and eat up fire in glancing hits, which WAS a pretty useful ability for an AV12 vehicle. I am sure IG players would love to have been able to do that with their chimeras also. As for me being "completely wrong" about eldar vehicles, just because you can use some movement modes to get cover saves doesn't completely invalidate the use of cover, especially if you want to *shoot*. Sure you can zoom, zoom, zooming turbo boosting all day and meanwhile the weapons on the vehicle aren't doing anything useful for you, but if you want to play that way by all means feel free, just don't try to tell me I am wrong that eldar vehicles, like every other vehicle, can quite conveniently hide and use terrain to its advantage of cover saves also.
Never said that the Wraithlord ever was a walker, but it compares fully to them in appearance and role and now with the buff to monstrous creatures is even better on the table top. It is the same idea as a walker, but doesn't have any of the annoyances of being a vehicle to tie it down. So it *is* even better now in the new rules. Is that a bit clearer for you?
"Eldar and DE especially have plenty of vehicles"
What?
100 point (the cheapest) serpent vs 35 rhino?
100 serpent vs 105 chimera WITH troops unit inside?
I have no idea what game are you playing but it's not wh40k.
You have no idea what you are talking about or Eldar players near you are incredible cheaters.
Again with the I have no idea what I am talking about I have played eldar and had more than plenty of vehicles in my army...every eldar army I see has at least 1 wave serpent, at least one if not 2 falcons or their variants and a BUTTLOAD of jetbikes with vyper support. Add in a unit of War walkers and that adds up to plenty of vehicles, just like my Dark eldar army with multiple skimmers, jet bikes and venoms. I didn't say they had a ton of HEAVY vehicles, just a ton of vehicles. With all those targets it is hard to just wipe them out in a single turn unless the eldar player is a total moron.
Back on topic.
I really like the idea of HPs. It's just that the execution is bad, especially considering other rules that hit some more than others (like hitting vehicle moving 42" at 3+). Shooting one vehicle forever was dumb, it's good they changed it. But some armies were hit too hard.
I definitely won't quit and still enjoy the game. But that doesn't change the fact that vehicles in my army are overpriced and I am not happy about it.
I know, change your tactics, adapt, blah blah blah.
I'm not happy I have to change A to B. I wanted both to be useful.
Everyone has to make changes to the way they play due to the new rules. One thing I am really happy about is with respect to squadrons. It always really irritated me that if a single member of a squadron was immobilized they were destroyed out of hand. Now at least, if a bike or a walker is made immobile somewhere useful it can still provide some support fire instead of just dying.
I agree with you on hitting moving vehicles in hand to hand. Should be harder at each movement bracket. Non-moving vehicles unsupported by infantry are definitely sitting ducks waiting for meltabombs or krak grenades to be stuck in the important bits and blow them up, but a vehicle moving at 42" should be near impossible to hit in hand to hand at all, and grenades and meltabombs shouldn't be usable either since the tank moves by so fast to stick them anywhere important effectively. The HPs might not be as bad if the lightest vehicles had 3 and maybe the heaviest had 5. That would help the lighter stuff last a little longer. Honestly, though, from the 6th edition games I seen run and talked to others about that they have played I haven't seen HPs being the big ending of vehicles that people claim they are. I haven't seen eldar in action yet, but I have seen Dark eldar and dark eldar also have plenty of pretty looking, but otherwise not really heavily armored vehicles on the table.
It also doesn't help that there is really little to no internal control or plan for balance across the codex books, especially the marine books. The basics for the chapter marine books should come straight from the generic marine codex, and if the unit is better than its counterpart in the vanilla codex it should cost more. If your force is supposed to be focused in hand to hand then its heavy weapons should cost *more* than the vanilla codex devastators and not less. One of the dumbest aspects of the whole allies thing is that vanilla marine forces can now ally with a chapter specific list to buy units to fill in for a specific unit in their army for cheaper than their own more basic units. That is just dumb. It is what ultimately leads to some codex lists like Tau and Eldar to generally be way behind the power curve and leaves the game contencious instead of balanced.
Skriker Automatically Appended Next Post: Vaktathi wrote:I never ran into a game where a single tank dominated it. Did you not bring sufficient AT guns?
Lucky you. A single unexpected land raider and it meant most armies were done unless they could get a melta within 8" or a power fist into melee. Neither of which was always easy to do, especially if the land raider owner moved their land raider smartly. Also you can have all the AT in the world, but if they use the terrain to keep your heavy guns from being able to target them it doesn't matter how much you have. While you are trying to move your guns for a shot, they are chewing up the rest of your army. It is also near impossible to plan for EVERY contingency in a game coming up, especially if you don't know who/what you are playing on a day at your FLGS.
Methinks you didn't play 5E and are remembering 4E. Eldar vehicles cost a lot of points relatively, and in general were most vulnerable to medium strength weapons with high RoF and not the heaviest of weapons, always have been. Eldar vehicle armies didn't exactly dominate anything in 5th ed and were typically considered rather mediocre.
Not thinking 4th, those eldar were insane back then and got all the overpowered uber army abuse in those days. Holofields did enable the lighter armored eldar vehicles to survive extra long when you consider their baseline toughness and AV12. Eldar vehicles in 5th were considered lousy because they no longer completely dominated the game anymore. They weren't as super awesome as they used to be, but they weren't useless either.
Skriker
26170
Post by: davethepak
I hate to say it, but all this "vehicles are useless" and "they are just dead, as you can reliably take them out..."...
Its kind of like playing a bunch of monstrous creatures.... (except they have a chance to be ID via range).
Seriously, I play nids and other vehicle armies, and nid players have been dealing with the fact that they can get whittled away reliably all along.
I am not saying its exactly the same (as a vehicle can still be taken out with one lucky shot) and while most big nids have more wounds than a vehicle...per points, they have less (you can buy three or four av11/12 transports for the cost of a big MC).
Again, I am not debating here, nor trying to start an argument or anything...I am just pointing out, that basically vehicles have wounds now...and for players who are used to big things with wounds...they will adapt the fastest.
Combine that with the fact that you can't just glance a vehicle and ignore it for a turn (ok, that rhino is stunned, I can move to the next one....) things will not be worse....they will just be different.
|
|
