I've heard that walkers are supposed to be bad but me and my friend read the walker rules and we can't spot any flaws.How are they bad?
P.S We're only noob's to 40k.

They don't have armor saves, nor as many wounds as most MCs, and so they just get hull pointed out quickly and don't accomplish much.

 the big goblin wrote:
I've heard that walkers are supposed to be bad but me and my friend read the walker rules and we can't spot any flaws.How are they bad?
P.S We're only noob's to 40k.

It's not that Walkers are bad when you look at them.

They're bad when you're looking at Marines/Eldar/IG/Tau/Necrons/Tyranids

Basically, your main contenders.

Now, Your Sentinels and Dreads and definitely War Walkers...have their place in army lists...but the standard S6/7 ignores cover spam of 6th edition says no to a lot of the good-ness of walkers.

Low armor, crap weaponry and slow for vehicles meant to get nice and close to the enemy. In general.

Thanks now I see.

Dreadnoughts are meant to be walking avatars of war, but in game they have the same hull points as a rhino which is a box on tracks.

They would be good in melee but you can never get them across the board intact, and there are cheaper and better options for shooting.

They are just free kill points for your enemy.

Some Dread builds and the Knights are the exception here, to be fair.

Eldar War Walkers are amazing units, and I feel if the design motif used for them were passed to other Walkers (mobility, a save of some form added), Walkers would feel like they are doing what you imagine they should with the weaknesses you imagine they should.

War Walkers are cheap with crazy aweome weapons, rules, and an invuln.

Knights are also Superheavies with crazy rules

Maulerfiends are decent if enough are taken because they're fast (Codex: DINOBOTS)

Seninels are cheap and guard have enough units that they aren't a priority to kill.

We're really looking at Dreads/Hellbrutes that aren't worth it (I could be forgetting others)

When it comes to Dreads you have rare builds that can achieve anything.

Venerable/Ironclad in a pod or GK Psyflemen are the only ones I ever see.



Though I have yet to face Raukaan.

Effectively they're MC's, but lack the armor save and can be crippled or insta-killed by any hit that exceeds the minimum roll required to "wound" them, while completely lacking armor/invul saves and have a harder time getting cover saves than MC's. There also are no "flying" walkers the way there are flying monstrous creatures.

Much of this applies to other vehicles as well and not just walkers, but in general, GW needs to drop either the concept of HP's, or it needs to drop the vehicle damage table and give them a save.

If they had any sort of save, they would be much more worthwhile.

Which is why Iron Hands make them slightly more effective. Put ironclads in a drop pod and take CT Iron hands and now you have an AV13 with IWND and 3 or 4 insta death attacks in close combat preceded by 2 Heavy flamers.

Now dont expect this unit to last very long. as it will attract every but of firepower from your opponent. But if you drop down two of these things, expect to cause a lot of havoc in your enemies game plan.

But yea, overrall, walkers are sub-par.

I can't believe no one mentioned grenades. In 5th edition you could only hit Walkers with grenades on a 6, but now you hit them according to weapon skill which is a big difference.

 ductvader wrote:

 the big goblin wrote:
I've heard that walkers are supposed to be bad but me and my friend read the walker rules and we can't spot any flaws.How are they bad?
P.S We're only noob's to 40k.

It's not that Walkers are bad when you look at them.

They're bad when you're looking at Marines/Eldar/IG/Tau/Necrons/Tyranids

Basically, your main contenders.

Now, Your Sentinels and Dreads and definitely War Walkers...have their place in army lists...but the standard S6/7 ignores cover spam of 6th edition says no to a lot of the good-ness of walkers.

The only one out of them I play against is IG.

The difference in effectiveness between AV13 and AV12 walkers is quite vast and marked.

And even then, they really should be more liberal with giving out saves, and Walkers should have hammer of wrath and smash.

 the big goblin wrote:
I've heard that walkers are supposed to be bad but me and my friend read the walker rules and we can't spot any flaws.How are they bad?
P.S We're only noob's to 40k.

They're not bad, objectively, they're just bad compared to other models that look like them (and are generally more expensive), specifically, monstrous creatures. The shorthand for converting MCs and vehicles is that T = AV-4. So it's roughly as difficult to pull a hull point from an AV12 vehicle as it is from a T8 monstrous creature.

Which sounds good, until you realise that monstrous creatures get armor saves (including some with a 2+, and most vehicles only have 3 HP (and several walkers only have 2) to your average MC's 6. Given that MCs are often better-armed than walkers on top of being at least 9 times more survivable, well, you can see why there isn't much going for walkers, especially since any weapon strong enough to handle a monstrous creature (which lots of lists are packed with, because MCs are scary) is going to have no problem whatsoever punching through a walker's armor.

Of course, it's all rather more nuanced than this (vehicles can suffer a vehicle explodes, but doesn't have to worry about ID, etc. etc.), but that's the long and short of it. They look like monstrous creatures, but are much weaker than them.

If this doesn't apply to your local gaming group, though, then it doesn't need to be a concern for you.

The good dreads are in FW, but they cost (in points) twice or almost 2.5x more than a normal dread.

I agree actually that for their points, they arent awful. When looking at most other Monstrous Creatures that have all those wounds and cool abilities, they are more than the ~100 or so points dreads cost. Even fully kitted out and in a drop pod, we are still less than 200 points. Whereas units like a Daemon Prince, Wraithknight or Riptide are going to cost you a minimum of 200.

(Also, this is my 1000th post. WAAAGH!)

 Icculus wrote:
I agree actually that for their points, they arent awful. When looking at most other Monstrous Creatures that have all those wounds and cool abilities, they are more than the ~100 or so points dreads cost. Even fully kitted out and in a drop pod, we are still less than 200 points. Whereas units like a Daemon Prince, Wraithknight or Riptide are going to cost you a minimum of 200.

(Also, this is my 1000th post. WAAAGH!)

My dakkafex gets more shots at a better strength then your HBolter mortis dread.

Trolololol.

 creeping-deth87 wrote:
I can't believe no one mentioned grenades. In 5th edition you could only hit Walkers with grenades on a 6, but now you hit them according to weapon skill which is a big difference.

We have a winner here, the number of nerfs walkers received in close combat multiply with one another to the point were the result was obviously unintended. For example, 6th edition krak grenades received a massive 3,600% buff in efficiency vs ork deff dreads. Ten 6th edition krak grenades are as effective as 360 5th krak grenades. Two 6th edition kraks are as powerful a one 5th edition meltabomb. It's a clear example of how GW doesn't run even basic math on their rules changes. In short, AV12 close combat walkers simply don't work in 6th, as anything they would plausibly want to charge can usually kill them more effectively. Even the maulerfiend, the only new CC walker in 6th, with its ridiculously long list of special rules, is very underwhelming.

On the other hand, the long-ranged, shooting walkers are little more than normal vehicles and can be judged on a firepower-to-cost ratio. SM dreads also have the benefit of being able to drop pod in, which increases their usability, and lets the use "rule of cool" as a crutch.

The only walker I have used is the Furioso Dreadnaught, which is quite a monster, but it also sports AV13 front armor which probably helps it out a lot. In general though they are just too vulnerable and squishy to be effective. Every time I see one, I gun for it...easy first blood in many cases.

The Walker and MC rules should be merged. It makes no sense that a SM dread is so much less survivable than a Tau Riptide. They are analogous to each other - both are behemoth mech suits or war. But one has 5 wounds that need to be ate off one at a time - the other can be insta-slagged by a single lucky melta shot. Not to mention, MC's will stay at 100% combat effectiveness down to the last wound, whereas Walkers can suffer weapon destroyed and immobilized results.

Walkers should have some way to remain effective like MC's do - or else MC's should suffer similar hits to their effectiveness the way Walkers do.

Granted, the Riptide is on a larger scale, but that notwithstanding, no reason why we need two sets of rule types to cover a very similar model class.

It doesn't help that there is a lot of MC that SHOULD be Walkers (i.e. Dreadknights and Riptides) which only makes the Walker sub-type seem awkward and pointless. They really need to revamp how AV works and try to fit in a save according to how high the AV is, to compensate the chance for it to be blown up in a single lucky shot. Instant death and Poison (outside of Tyranids and Dark Eldar) as a rule in of itself is also much rarer than all the anti-vehicle weaponry like Lance, Melta, Armourbane, etc. that is generally more widely available across armies which again just furthers the gap between MC and Walker.

Triarch Stalkers are cool. AV13 sorta and no need at all to get close. Turns your whole army into a twin-linked kill machine.

Walkers also suck because most of them have really underwhelming combat stats. So not only do they get annihilated by grenades now, but you're lucky if you kill 1 model per turn with them.

mustardParty wrote:
The Walker and MC rules should be merged. It makes no sense that a SM dread is so much less survivable than a Tau Riptide. They are analogous to each other - both are behemoth mech suits or war. But one has 5 wounds that need to be ate off one at a time..

6 Wounds. But yeah. It's madness.

A shame, too, because a lot of Walkers are really cool thematically and have great models. The best example is a Deff Dread, I would love to field one but I've never even bought the model because, realistically, it will be shelved nearly every game.

 Sparkadia wrote:

mustardParty wrote:
The Walker and MC rules should be merged. It makes no sense that a SM dread is so much less survivable than a Tau Riptide. They are analogous to each other - both are behemoth mech suits or war. But one has 5 wounds that need to be ate off one at a time..

6 Wounds. But yeah. It's madness.

A shame, too, because a lot of Walkers are really cool thematically and have great models. The best example is a Deff Dread, I would love to field one but I've never even bought the model because, realistically, it will be shelved nearly every game.

I'm going to have to agree. AV needs to go. Heck, even long ago we had battlesuits as troops, wraithguard as troops, wraithlords as a MC... it's time to just do away with the silly premise of vehicles. Add some special rules maybe but that's about it.

 the big goblin wrote:
I've heard that walkers are supposed to be bad but me and my friend read the walker rules and we can't spot any flaws.How are they bad?
P.S We're only noob's to 40k.

I don't think Walkers are bad, unlike some people.

Most walkers (especially like the already-mentioned Sentinel) are meant to fulfill a fire-support role and not the look-at-me-I-can-squish-you-I'm-a-tough-vehicle role.

The average 40k army usually has plenty of fire support though, which makes a lot of walkers seem underwhelming.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Sparkadia wrote:

mustardParty wrote:
The Walker and MC rules should be merged. It makes no sense that a SM dread is so much less survivable than a Tau Riptide. They are analogous to each other - both are behemoth mech suits or war. But one has 5 wounds that need to be ate off one at a time..

6 Wounds. But yeah. It's madness.

A shame, too, because a lot of Walkers are really cool thematically and have great models. The best example is a Deff Dread, I would love to field one but I've never even bought the model because, realistically, it will be shelved nearly every game.

I'm going to have to agree. AV needs to go. Heck, even long ago we had battlesuits as troops, wraithguard as troops, wraithlords as a MC... it's time to just do away with the silly premise of vehicles. Add some special rules maybe but that's about it.

It's funny, I've seen a lot of great suggestions on how to fix Walkers (on both Dakka and other places) and there are so many ways that would work - but I can guarantee you it will never happen. GW don't play that game, they'll just leave them as sub-par units and move along.

I mean, they don't even get Hammer of Wrath... in what world is a BIKE running in to you worse than being charged down by an enormous death machine. It's a joke.

 Mysterious Pants wrote:

 the big goblin wrote:
I've heard that walkers are supposed to be bad but me and my friend read the walker rules and we can't spot any flaws.How are they bad?
P.S We're only noob's to 40k.

I don't think Walkers are bad, unlike some people.

Most walkers (especially like the already-mentioned Sentinel) are meant to fulfill a fire-support role and not the look-at-me-I-can-squish-you-I'm-a-tough-vehicle role.

The average 40k army usually has plenty of fire support though, which makes a lot of walkers seem underwhelming.

Yet GW clearly want some to be used in Melee, or at least be able to have a swing. Walkers shouldn't be an excuse for a fire platform, that should be the job of Vehicles.

I wouldn't quite say fire-support due to the iconic Dreadnought being built to have a CCW and a gun rather than being a gun platform along with the maulerfiend being pure CC. I'm trying to remember all the walkers though... There's the Forgefiend which is plasma shots which can kill elite units, Maulerfiends which are pure CC, Helbrutes which are built to requrie you to have a gun and ccw although have slightly more options for CC than usual, Dreadnoughts which are fluffwise expected to have a gun and CCW (with a few extra gun choices), Defiler which is a schizo monster that is built to fire ordinance at long range and fire lascannons at vehicles close before charging with power fists or flamer before charging (so overall relatively middling), the eldar walker which is a fragile gun of doom, and the IG which is a fragile walker that shoots. So it seems more often than not walkers are somewhat balanced between the roles with more leaning to being shooty support. There's about 3 being fire support, 3 being middling, and 1 being for CC entirely.

But that's the problem. If you compare them, even at equal cost, walkers still don't do walkery things as well as monstrous creatures, and they're not nearly as good as support vehicles they're put up against.

Sometimes versatility is a very good thing. In the case of walkers, you're just gaining cheaper move-through terrain and a swing or two in close combat, while generally also being less durable and more expensive per-firepower to boot.

The problem is that what you lose in AV, HP, and firepower, you gain in... ... what? Monstrous creatures can smash and sometimes fly and are actually good in close combat, so it's not really the small gain in close combat (specifically, can only be hit on front armor instead of rear) that's going to do it.

My only hope is that given that walkers have been getting no cheaper or more expensive (cf. CSM defiler), while non-walker (and non-flier) vehicles are getting much cheaper (cf. russes), that the idea is that 7th is going to come by and do something to make walkers a lot better.

 Ailaros wrote:

My only hope is that given that walkers have been getting no cheaper or more expensive (cf. CSM defiler), while non-walker (and non-flier) vehicles are getting much cheaper (cf. russes), that the idea is that 7th is going to come by and do something to make walkers a lot better.

That seems a tad farsighted for the monkeys at GW.


Do not hold to hope, Ailaros... It has forsaken these lands.
(Watched Lord of the Rings last night. Apologies.)

 Sparkadia wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:

My only hope is that given that walkers have been getting no cheaper or more expensive (cf. CSM defiler), while non-walker (and non-flier) vehicles are getting much cheaper (cf. russes), that the idea is that 7th is going to come by and do something to make walkers a lot better.

That seems a tad farsighted for the monkeys at GW.


Do not hold to hope, Ailaros... It has forsaken these lands.
(Watched Lord of the Rings last night. Apologies.)

Holy crap, I was watching The Two Towers as well last night.

But uhhh... yeah. In 5th, walkers were insanely durable simply because they could tarpit entire units with ease (less-so for their ability to actually kill said unit though). An edition change could do them wonders.

 Andilus Greatsword wrote:

 Sparkadia wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:

My only hope is that given that walkers have been getting no cheaper or more expensive (cf. CSM defiler), while non-walker (and non-flier) vehicles are getting much cheaper (cf. russes), that the idea is that 7th is going to come by and do something to make walkers a lot better.

That seems a tad farsighted for the monkeys at GW.


Do not hold to hope, Ailaros... It has forsaken these lands.
(Watched Lord of the Rings last night. Apologies.)

Holy crap, I was watching The Two Towers as well last night.

But uhhh... yeah. In 5th, walkers were insanely durable simply because they could tarpit entire units with ease (less-so for their ability to actually kill said unit though). An edition change could do them wonders.

LotR buddies!

A revamp could work, but it would have to mean a major change in the general application of HPs. Orrr maybe not, I suppose Grenades going back to hitting on 6's would be a big deal for the melee-oriented Walkers, and perhaps a general AV13 for the 'tough' Walkers and AV 12 for the 'light' ones (Deff Dread vs Killa Kanz) so they can at least only be glanced by the vast horde of S7 guns.

I'd still much rather see a rework of the Walker rules into a sort of MC-like state. Not an MC, but something kind of close. There have been a ton of good suggestions on Dakkas Proposed Rules forum alone in this sort of direction.

Give Helbrutes Daemon rule! 5++ invulnerable!

Not great, but would help.

 StarTrotter wrote:
I wouldn't quite say fire-support due to the iconic Dreadnought being built to have a CCW and a gun rather than being a gun platform along with the maulerfiend being pure CC. I'm trying to remember all the walkers though... There's the Forgefiend which is plasma shots which can kill elite units, Maulerfiends which are pure CC, Helbrutes which are built to requrie you to have a gun and ccw although have slightly more options for CC than usual, Dreadnoughts which are fluffwise expected to have a gun and CCW (with a few extra gun choices), Defiler which is a schizo monster that is built to fire ordinance at long range and fire lascannons at vehicles close before charging with power fists or flamer before charging (so overall relatively middling), the eldar walker which is a fragile gun of doom, and the IG which is a fragile walker that shoots. So it seems more often than not walkers are somewhat balanced between the roles with more leaning to being shooty support. There's about 3 being fire support, 3 being middling, and 1 being for CC entirely.

Why does nearly everyone forget about Penitent Engines? Anyway, with only 2 DCCW with 2 built in Heavy Flamers, the Penitent Engine is definitely in the CC entirely group. Yet it isn't worth the cost in points nor the wasted HS slot, even for a squadron of three. I'd love to field the 9 of them I have more regularly, feth, I'd even probably pickup the additional 9 I could run @ 2000 points, but they are just such a terrible choice.

 Evil Lamp 6 wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
I wouldn't quite say fire-support due to the iconic Dreadnought being built to have a CCW and a gun rather than being a gun platform along with the maulerfiend being pure CC. I'm trying to remember all the walkers though... There's the Forgefiend which is plasma shots which can kill elite units, Maulerfiends which are pure CC, Helbrutes which are built to requrie you to have a gun and ccw although have slightly more options for CC than usual, Dreadnoughts which are fluffwise expected to have a gun and CCW (with a few extra gun choices), Defiler which is a schizo monster that is built to fire ordinance at long range and fire lascannons at vehicles close before charging with power fists or flamer before charging (so overall relatively middling), the eldar walker which is a fragile gun of doom, and the IG which is a fragile walker that shoots. So it seems more often than not walkers are somewhat balanced between the roles with more leaning to being shooty support. There's about 3 being fire support, 3 being middling, and 1 being for CC entirely.

Why does nearly everyone forget about Penitent Engines? Anyway, with only 2 DCCW with 2 built in Heavy Flamers, the Penitent Engine is definitely in the CC entirely group. Yet it isn't worth the cost in points nor the wasted HS slot, even for a squadron of three. I'd love to field the 9 of them I have more regularly, feth, I'd even probably pickup the additional 9 I could run @ 2000 points, but they are just such a terrible choice.

Bah! I defend myself with claims that the Penitent Engine is so overpriced for what it does that it's hard to remember (doesn't help that it's underplayed and I largely only build lists with Sisters themself because Sisters are glorious). Which reminds me, I also forgot the Soulgrinder which kinda can go both ways although I don't think he starts with a ranged weapon so he's either neutral or slightly leaning to CC

 Ailaros wrote:

My only hope is that given that walkers have been getting no cheaper or more expensive (cf. CSM defiler), while non-walker (and non-flier) vehicles are getting much cheaper (cf. russes), that the idea is that 7th is going to come by and do something to make walkers a lot better.

The only tanks that have gotten meaningful price drops have been some Russ variants, the Whirlwind, and Lascannon upgrades I think. Others have gotten more expensive or less capable (Hydra, Chimera, Dakkapred, etc) or stayed largely the same.

The problem is that with the change from 5th to 6th, vehicles got hit because they obviously wanted to do away with the prevalence of all mech armies. In the transition, which, in my opinion, was actually a good idea, the walkers, especially Dreadnoughts, were left greatly weakened. It's not inconceivable that they'll do something specifically for walkers in the next edition. Adding a few special rules and giving them an inv save would go a long way toward fixing them.

 Araenion wrote:
The problem is that with the change from 5th to 6th, vehicles got hit because they obviously wanted to do away with the prevalence of all mech armies. In the transition, which, in my opinion, was actually a good idea, the walkers, especially Dreadnoughts, were left greatly weakened. It's not inconceivable that they'll do something specifically for walkers in the next edition. Adding a few special rules and giving them an inv save would go a long way toward fixing them.

I think keeping HP is still a big mistake. I agree that they could plausibly use the existing rules with some changes (as you mentioned, stuff like adding an Invul and supercharged Run moves or something) but I think they would still be sub-par. Some rather big changes need to happen to make them worthwhile, unfortunately, IMO.

The only real benefit of a walker is that they can't be hurt by bolters and pulse fire and lascannons need 3s to wound.

In one sense AV12 is T9, but anti tank guns are psuedo s10.

Maybe that is the trick?

AV10 - T7
AV11 - T8
..
AV14 - T11

Leave weapon strengths the way they are, and add the USR High Yield for +1S vs "vehicles"

Andy06r wrote:
The only real benefit of a walker is that they can't be hurt by bolters and pulse fire and lascannons need 3s to wound.

In one sense AV12 is T9, but anti tank guns are psuedo s10.

Maybe that is the trick?

AV10 - T7
AV11 - T8
..
AV14 - T11

Leave weapon strengths the way they are, and add the USR High Yield for +1S vs "vehicles"

I've always thought maybe having vehicles become high toughness low wounds whilst MC became lower toughness high wounds might work out. It'd require some rules to be changed and some other exceptions but in the long run I think it might help to avod av and toughness fighting eachother for dominance like how we went from an edition where AV was god to now where you swear by MC.

Doing away with HP would cripple units that rely on Haywire to kill vehicles, like Tyranid Crones.

It'd also make Gauss weapons largely superfluous once again.

Hence why I'm more in favor of giving vehicles saves.

Alright that would make sense... Although doesn't haywire just basically lead to auto-glances and gauss weaposn would basically just get to wound things that would normally be resistant to guns already?

I'll agree at least they need saves.

 StarTrotter wrote:
Alright that would make sense... Although doesn't haywire just basically lead to auto-glances and gauss weaposn would basically just get to wound things that would normally be resistant to guns already?

I'll agree at least they need saves.

A lot of "nerf MC" or "buff vehicles" fixes punish Tyranids for the excesses of other armies, which rustles my jimmies when we've already been punished enough.

But yes, be more liberal in giving saves to vehicles.

honestly my problem comes more from being removed from the game due to college. I can hardly remember what haywire does anymore.

And I agree to nerf mc being too general. Whilst I think Walkers need a buff all around, I don't think vehicles need it as much. Tyranids in general just need a huge buff (especially to their CC)

The switch from vehicles as vehicles to vehicles as strange MCs would be easy.

For those fringe cases like meltaguns and gauss weapons, you just rewrite their special rules. They're only special because of said special rules in the first place. You could easily rewrite gauss weapons to cause 2 wounds instead of 1 against vehicular targets, and give meltaguns a modified form of instant death.

I think flying Monstrous Creatures should get a slight nerf so that they aren't the auto take they are right now. Maybe have them be jump infantry with jink saves?

To fix FMCs, you need to fix the rules for fliers in general, which are in desperate need of fixing. That's a discussion for the 7th ed wishlist I guess, though.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think flying Monstrous Creatures should get a slight nerf so that they aren't the auto take they are right now. Maybe have them be jump infantry with jink saves?

I can't tell if it's because FMC are good or if it's more due to normal MC being way too bad. Lots of ground MCs are just too slow and vulnerable to be taken.

The only real solution is to fix fliers in general as well as assault.

Yup. Okay, how about this. Walkers gain the Fast USR so that they aren't foot slogging as much.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Yup. Okay, how about this. Walkers gain the Fast USR so that they aren't foot slogging as much.

As I said, Walkers should have hammer of wrath and smash if Monstrous Creatures can have it for free.

 Kain wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Yup. Okay, how about this. Walkers gain the Fast USR so that they aren't foot slogging as much.

As I said, Walkers should have hammer of wrath and smash if Monstrous Creatures can have it for free.

I agree with hammer of wrath but the problem with smash is that many MC basically automatically come with Smash always on. (which is why Daemon Princes sadden me when they get one hit killed. Although not as painful as a riptide doing it)

 TheCustomLime wrote:
I think flying Monstrous Creatures should get a slight nerf so that they aren't the auto take they are right now. Maybe have them be jump infantry with jink saves?

I don't think FMC's are that bad, they're only really good when you spam them making them hard to deal with. A couple of FMC's isn't bad at all. If you don't use the Tyranid FMC-spam dataslate and just stick to a regular FOC, the FMC's aren't all that bad.

The reason the Flyrant is an auto-take is more because the walking Tyrant sucks, making the 35pt upgrade a no-brainer. You lose nothing but gain a lot of survivability and a lot of mobility.

Yeah, it's kind of always bothered me as well that walkers are slower than regular vehicles as well. 6+D6" only works when the unit is either embarked in a faster unit, or when you have a LOT of them to soak up field position. Walkers do neither.

I mean, at least MCs get MTC, and are more survivable.

Wait what exactly is MTC?

move through cover

 Kain wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Yup. Okay, how about this. Walkers gain the Fast USR so that they aren't foot slogging as much.

As I said, Walkers should have hammer of wrath and smash if Monstrous Creatures can have it for free.

Hammer of Wrath I can agree with but not Smash. Smash should only be for really big walkers like the Imperial Knight or what the Riptide should be. I think having them be fast would at least have them be better suited towards their intended battlefield role as close quarter battle units.

Walkers should also have MTC.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Yup. Okay, how about this. Walkers gain the Fast USR so that they aren't foot slogging as much.

As I said, Walkers should have hammer of wrath and smash if Monstrous Creatures can have it for free.

Hammer of Wrath I can agree with but not Smash. Smash should only be for really big walkers like the Imperial Knight or what the Riptide should be. I think having them be fast would at least have them be better suited towards their intended battlefield role as close quarter battle units.

Walkers should also have MTC.

Gonna agree on MTC. It seems silly for them not to have it.

Walkers aren't bad in their entirety, it's just that many of the most common Walkers are overpriced.

I doubt many people will say War Walkers or Imperial Knights are bad just because they're Walkers.

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Yup. Okay, how about this. Walkers gain the Fast USR so that they aren't foot slogging as much.

As I said, Walkers should have hammer of wrath and smash if Monstrous Creatures can have it for free.

Hammer of Wrath I can agree with but not Smash. Smash should only be for really big walkers like the Imperial Knight or what the Riptide should be. I think having them be fast would at least have them be better suited towards their intended battlefield role as close quarter battle units.

Walkers should also have MTC.

Given that the Imperial Knight sports a D strength melee weapon, and the Riptide is a Monstrous Creature, that would seem to be take it out of the picture completely then wouldn't it?

If a T5 Daemon Prince can smash, I'd say a Forgefiend that's half again as tall, with half again as many limbs, and is probably 4x the mass should probably be able to Smash (though if we're really looking at it, they really should be MC's in the first place, moreso than something like a Riptide which has an actual cockpit and pilot).

To be fair IK are an entirely different beast (pseudo-apoc machines)

As per War Walkers it probably is due to them being low priced AND not oriented to CC. A lot of the walkers are geared to be equal or somewhat built for CC which is where they start to suffer it seems.

Pardon the caps but

EVERYTHING GEARED FOR CC IS BAD IN 6TH.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Pardon the caps but

EVERYTHING GEARED FOR CC IS BAD IN 6TH.

Well except Flesh Hounds, Spawn, the Juggerlord, extremely kitted out Princes (that risk being too costly), and GLORIOUS LORD OF CHANGE BOOMSTICKS! (last isn't built for CC but I always find it too funny to not mention)

 Vaktathi wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Yup. Okay, how about this. Walkers gain the Fast USR so that they aren't foot slogging as much.

As I said, Walkers should have hammer of wrath and smash if Monstrous Creatures can have it for free.

Hammer of Wrath I can agree with but not Smash. Smash should only be for really big walkers like the Imperial Knight or what the Riptide should be. I think having them be fast would at least have them be better suited towards their intended battlefield role as close quarter battle units.

Walkers should also have MTC.

Given that the Imperial Knight sports a D strength melee weapon, and the Riptide is a Monstrous Creature, that would seem to be take it out of the picture completely then wouldn't it?

If a T5 Daemon Prince can smash, I'd say a Forgefiend that's half again as tall, with half again as many limbs, and is probably 4x the mass should probably be able to Smash (though if we're really looking at it, they really should be MC's in the first place, moreso than something like a Riptide which has an actual cockpit and pilot).

I was speaking about a sparkly, sweet sugar gum drop world where Riptides were walkers. In such fantasy realm they should have Smash if it were to be restricted to the bigger doods. I agree that Maulerfiends/Forge Fiends shouldn't be walkers but I don't think MC really suits them. Perhaps a new type of unit is in order?

 StarTrotter wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Pardon the caps but

EVERYTHING GEARED FOR CC IS BAD IN 6TH.

Well except Flesh Hounds, Spawn, the Juggerlord, extremely kitted out Princes (that risk being too costly), and GLORIOUS LORD OF CHANGE BOOMSTICKS! (last isn't built for CC but I always find it too funny to not mention)

Ok, everything except Daemons.

I'm a Tyranid player, so I'm used to automatically discounting any purely CC unit as terrible.

So yeah, if you're only looking at stuff like dreadnoughts walkers seem bad, but the same can be said of only looking at Genestealers and thinking Infantry are bad and only looking at Dark Angels Flyers makes Flyers look bad.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Pardon the caps but

EVERYTHING GEARED FOR CC IS BAD IN 6TH.

Well except Flesh Hounds, Spawn, the Juggerlord, extremely kitted out Princes (that risk being too costly), and GLORIOUS LORD OF CHANGE BOOMSTICKS! (last isn't built for CC but I always find it too funny to not mention)

Ok, everything except Daemons.

I'm a Tyranid player, so I'm used to automatically discounting any purely CC unit as terrible.

So yeah, if you're only looking at stuff like dreadnoughts walkers seem bad, but the same can be said of only looking at Genestealers and thinking Infantry are bad and only looking at Dark Angels Flyers makes Flyers look bad.

Please don't remind me of how bad the Tyranid codex is. Please don't. (I already have enough of a grudge for basically all but spawn, the juggerlord, and a 300 point daemon prince being entirely bad ideas of CC in chaos space marines, the Tyranid codex makes me rage to no end. Hell, the chaos daemon codex has quite a couple dud CC units and it's the closest we have to a good CC army)

 StarTrotter wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Pardon the caps but

EVERYTHING GEARED FOR CC IS BAD IN 6TH.

Well except Flesh Hounds, Spawn, the Juggerlord, extremely kitted out Princes (that risk being too costly), and GLORIOUS LORD OF CHANGE BOOMSTICKS! (last isn't built for CC but I always find it too funny to not mention)

Ok, everything except Daemons.

I'm a Tyranid player, so I'm used to automatically discounting any purely CC unit as terrible.

So yeah, if you're only looking at stuff like dreadnoughts walkers seem bad, but the same can be said of only looking at Genestealers and thinking Infantry are bad and only looking at Dark Angels Flyers makes Flyers look bad.

Please don't remind me of how bad the Tyranid codex is. Please don't. (I already have enough of a grudge for basically all but spawn, the juggerlord, and a 300 point daemon prince being entirely bad ideas of CC in chaos space marines, the Tyranid codex makes me rage to no end. Hell, the chaos daemon codex has quite a couple dud CC units and it's the closest we have to a good CC army)

Chaos Furies are a strong runner up for the worst unit in the game due to a statline even a grot would laugh at.

Leadership 2 on a model with such bad stats? Come on GW.

 Kain wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Pardon the caps but

EVERYTHING GEARED FOR CC IS BAD IN 6TH.

Well except Flesh Hounds, Spawn, the Juggerlord, extremely kitted out Princes (that risk being too costly), and GLORIOUS LORD OF CHANGE BOOMSTICKS! (last isn't built for CC but I always find it too funny to not mention)

Ok, everything except Daemons.

I'm a Tyranid player, so I'm used to automatically discounting any purely CC unit as terrible.

So yeah, if you're only looking at stuff like dreadnoughts walkers seem bad, but the same can be said of only looking at Genestealers and thinking Infantry are bad and only looking at Dark Angels Flyers makes Flyers look bad.

Please don't remind me of how bad the Tyranid codex is. Please don't. (I already have enough of a grudge for basically all but spawn, the juggerlord, and a 300 point daemon prince being entirely bad ideas of CC in chaos space marines, the Tyranid codex makes me rage to no end. Hell, the chaos daemon codex has quite a couple dud CC units and it's the closest we have to a good CC army)

Chaos Furies are a strong runner up for the worst unit in the game due to a statline even a grot would laugh at.

Leadership 2 on a model with such bad stats? Come on GW.

Still not as bad as the pyrovore . What's that? They are the worst unit in the game? All right guys let's remove their DS option making the one good thing they can do not exist! Chaos Furies can't be a Chariot of Tzeentch though. Who was the genius that made that thing?

As per furies, yeah, they are bad. Maybe not as bad as nurglings though . Still, I've had some fun with slaaneshi furies even if they basically suck.

 StarTrotter wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Pardon the caps but

EVERYTHING GEARED FOR CC IS BAD IN 6TH.

Well except Flesh Hounds, Spawn, the Juggerlord, extremely kitted out Princes (that risk being too costly), and GLORIOUS LORD OF CHANGE BOOMSTICKS! (last isn't built for CC but I always find it too funny to not mention)

Ok, everything except Daemons.

I'm a Tyranid player, so I'm used to automatically discounting any purely CC unit as terrible.

So yeah, if you're only looking at stuff like dreadnoughts walkers seem bad, but the same can be said of only looking at Genestealers and thinking Infantry are bad and only looking at Dark Angels Flyers makes Flyers look bad.

Please don't remind me of how bad the Tyranid codex is. Please don't. (I already have enough of a grudge for basically all but spawn, the juggerlord, and a 300 point daemon prince being entirely bad ideas of CC in chaos space marines, the Tyranid codex makes me rage to no end. Hell, the chaos daemon codex has quite a couple dud CC units and it's the closest we have to a good CC army)

Chaos Furies are a strong runner up for the worst unit in the game due to a statline even a grot would laugh at.

Leadership 2 on a model with such bad stats? Come on GW.

Still not as bad as the pyrovore . What's that? They are the worst unit in the game? All right guys let's remove their DS option making the one good thing they can do not exist! Chaos Furies can't be a Chariot of Tzeentch though. Who was the genius that made that thing?

As per furies, yeah, they are bad. Maybe not as bad as nurglings though . Still, I've had some fun with slaaneshi furies even if they basically suck.

Marked furies?

INVERSE HERESY!

The thing that annoys me the most?

Riptide: 3A

Helbrute: 2A

Dreadnought: 2A

Maulerfiend: 2A

WHO THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA. They are partially meant to be in melee but the Walkers actually are pretty bad in melee due to lack of hits!

Riptide 3A
All these other CC oriented units only getting 2A (honestly we retconned this to claim that they have two weapons so they get 3A and we still are thinking of rising this a bit more). Yeah it's stupid. It's just not enough to make a dent in anything. Can't kill enough elite units, not enough cheap units, certainly not a MC. Their only real hope is weathering a turn of assaults and hoping they either get lucky and sweep or are fighting a DP and insta-death it.

 StarTrotter wrote:
Riptide 3A
All these other CC oriented units only getting 2A (honestly we retconned this to claim that they have two weapons so they get 3A and we still are thinking of rising this a bit more). Yeah it's stupid. It's just not enough to make a dent in anything. Can't kill enough elite units, not enough cheap units, certainly not a MC. Their only real hope is weathering a turn of assaults and hoping they either get lucky and sweep or are fighting a DP and insta-death it.

You know what I hope? They get like 'blast' attacks, where each attack the walker gets is now a blast template. Kinda like some primarch weapons in 30k. This way you can potentially hit 1-4 units in b2b combat, maybe with a rule like strikedown and the like as well.

They should not be the equivalent to 3rd edition Terminator honors! It made sense back then, it's worthless now as price points keep dropping! I mean I know the reason, it just doesn't hold water gameplay wise.

The main thing that annoys me about this is how blatant it is. The GW design logic of "we want this to be better, let's give it Monstrous Creature rules even though it's a big robot" makes about as much sense as "Land Raiders are tough, and flyers are tough because of Snapfiring. Land Raiders are flyers now". Let's make Marneus Calgar a Superheavy Walker because why not?

Walkers got nerfed in 6th while MCs got buffed. They really do need to get Smash, at the very least. Also possibly have Hit and Run and a change to the Walker rules so that units can be locked in combat with a Walker. I am in favour of giving vehicles armour saves.

Wait hwo would smash really help Walkers though? It wouldn't really help most walkers as they tend to come with weapons that make them S10 anyways. Wait units don't get locked into combat with a walker?

AP2 and re-rolling armour penetration without it being dependent on the weapon. It's not a huge help, but it's something. It's also a start for allowing things like the Wraithknight to use Walker rules.

Yes, they can be locked in combat. I really don't know why I thought they couldn't. They should get Hit and Run, though (unless they were to be buffed enough to be equal to MCs), and Move Through Cover (the entry in the rulebook even begins with the flavour text "... they have mechanical limbs that allow them to stride forwards, ploughing through densely packed terrain with ease in order to bring their weapons to bear").

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
AP2 and re-rolling armour penetration without it being dependent on the weapon. It's not a huge help, but it's something. It's also a start for allowing things like the Wraithknight to use Walker rules.

Yes, they can be locked in combat. I really don't know why I thought they couldn't. They should get Hit and Run, though (unless they were to be buffed enough to be equal to MCs), and Move Through Cover (the entry in the rulebook even begins with the flavour text "... they have mechanical limbs that allow them to stride forwards, ploughing through densely packed terrain with ease in order to bring their weapons to bear").

Eldar wraith units have been MCs for a very long time.

Riptides could be walkers, but Eldar wraith units and Giant Necron Canopteks should remain MCs.

Dreadnoughts have two problems: rules changes and meta.

Rules changes, 6th edition made it both very easy to hit Walkers with grenades, and very easy to wither hullpoints from vehicles. In previous editions, Walkers were valuable tarpits since even if glanced, they were often hard to kill by most units. However, nowadays they die from 3 glances so that's a big nerf.

Meta, starting from 5th edition Space Wolves codex, points cost of heavy weapons was dramatically dropped. Spamming S7-S8 weapons in large numbers became suddenly much easier, which was bad news for vehicles and especially AV10-AV12 vehicles. Although 5th edition was said to favour vehicles, it favoured them only if present in very large numbers - ie. MSU and cheap transport spam. Dreadnoughts are scarce and relatively expensive vehicles with weak-ish armour protection - not a good place to be!

 Kain wrote:

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
AP2 and re-rolling armour penetration without it being dependent on the weapon. It's not a huge help, but it's something. It's also a start for allowing things like the Wraithknight to use Walker rules.

Yes, they can be locked in combat. I really don't know why I thought they couldn't. They should get Hit and Run, though (unless they were to be buffed enough to be equal to MCs), and Move Through Cover (the entry in the rulebook even begins with the flavour text "... they have mechanical limbs that allow them to stride forwards, ploughing through densely packed terrain with ease in order to bring their weapons to bear").

Eldar wraith units have been MCs for a very long time.

Riptides could be walkers, but Eldar wraith units and Giant Necron Canopteks should remain MCs.

I know they have, but eh. I really don't like it, and it being old and established doesn't mean it can't be changed. The problem is that there just isn't a space in the rules for them or Necrons that actually fits. They're not really Walkers or MCs, they're wraith-golem-things and living metal pseudo-robots - they should be immune to Poison and Haywire both, for example. The Wraithknight in particular is questionable, though, because it has a pilot.

I think the best thing would be to introduce types of Walkers, like "Fast Walker", "Heavy Walker", etc, along with "Ghost-thing" (for all Wraith units) and "Robot-thing" (for all Necrons) rules. It would give us categories for the ones that are essentially firing platforms with legs (War Walkers, Sentinels), huge-yet-agile mechs (Wraithknight, Riptide), walking tanks with fists (Dreadnoughts), and anything else (like the Daemon Engines that are essentially robot animals, perhaps). Maybe even a way to turn Crisis Suits into Walkers that doesn't totally break them. Really the "Walker" classification is just too narrow to apply to such a diverse range of things.

I know that striving for realism and attention to detail in rules isn't really going to work, but why does a Dreadknight have "more soul" than a normal Grey Knight for purposes of being fed on by the Doom of Malan'tai? Why can the Doom not feed on a Dreadnought at all? Argh!

 Frozen Ocean wrote:

 Kain wrote:

 Frozen Ocean wrote:
AP2 and re-rolling armour penetration without it being dependent on the weapon. It's not a huge help, but it's something. It's also a start for allowing things like the Wraithknight to use Walker rules.

Yes, they can be locked in combat. I really don't know why I thought they couldn't. They should get Hit and Run, though (unless they were to be buffed enough to be equal to MCs), and Move Through Cover (the entry in the rulebook even begins with the flavour text "... they have mechanical limbs that allow them to stride forwards, ploughing through densely packed terrain with ease in order to bring their weapons to bear").

Eldar wraith units have been MCs for a very long time.

Riptides could be walkers, but Eldar wraith units and Giant Necron Canopteks should remain MCs.

I know they have, but eh. I really don't like it, and it being old and established doesn't mean it can't be changed. The problem is that there just isn't a space in the rules for them or Necrons that actually fits. They're not really Walkers or MCs, they're wraith-golem-things and living metal pseudo-robots - they should be immune to Poison and Haywire both, for example. The Wraithknight in particular is questionable, though, because it has a pilot.

I think the best thing would be to introduce types of Walkers, like "Fast Walker", "Heavy Walker", etc, along with "Ghost-thing" (for all Wraith units) and "Robot-thing" (for all Necrons) rules. It would give us categories for the ones that are essentially firing platforms with legs (War Walkers, Sentinels), huge-yet-agile mechs (Wraithknight, Riptide), walking tanks with fists (Dreadnoughts), and anything else (like the Daemon Engines that are essentially robot animals, perhaps). Maybe even a way to turn Crisis Suits into Walkers that doesn't totally break them. Really the "Walker" classification is just too narrow to apply to such a diverse range of things.

I know that striving for realism and attention to detail in rules isn't really going to work, but why does a Dreadknight have "more soul" than a normal Grey Knight for purposes of being fed on by the Doom of Malan'tai? Why can the Doom not feed on a Dreadnought at all? Argh!

That would lead to a very large number of very small unit types, so I'm not sure if it's really optimal.

As for the Doom...poor thing isn't fieldable anymore.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:
The thing that annoys me the most?

Riptide: 3A

Helbrute: 2A

Dreadnought: 2A

Maulerfiend: 2A

WHO THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA. They are partially meant to be in melee but the Walkers actually are pretty bad in melee due to lack of hits!

I get the exact same feeling looking at a Haruspex's Attack stat.

 Kain wrote:
Eldar wraith units have been MCs for a very long time.

Revenant Titans have always been Walkers.

Super-heavy walkers.

Give them all toughness scores and make them Monstrous Creatures.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Super-heavy walkers.

Your point being...?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kronk wrote:
Give them all toughness scores and make them Monstrous Creatures.

I think my little Hive Tyrant heart might give out if we got another ridiculously durable super-manoeuvrable mecha with access to the best psychic support in the game all for less points than a Trygon Prime..

And also give them an invulnerable save and psychic powers.

 PrinceRaven wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Super-heavy walkers.

Your point being...?

They are quite a bit different.

Oh yes, they're incredibly different from Monstrous Creatures.

Additionally, if they run they should get shrouded as they kick up a bunch of dust. That would be cool.

 Ailaros wrote:
But that's the problem. If you compare them, even at equal cost, walkers still don't do walkery things as well as monstrous creatures, and they're not nearly as good as support vehicles they're put up against.

Sometimes versatility is a very good thing. In the case of walkers, you're just gaining cheaper move-through terrain and a swing or two in close combat, while generally also being less durable and more expensive per-firepower to boot.

The problem is that what you lose in AV, HP, and firepower, you gain in... ... what? Monstrous creatures can smash and sometimes fly and are actually good in close combat, so it's not really the small gain in close combat (specifically, can only be hit on front armor instead of rear) that's going to do it.

My only hope is that given that walkers have been getting no cheaper or more expensive (cf. CSM defiler), while non-walker (and non-flier) vehicles are getting much cheaper (cf. russes), that the idea is that 7th is going to come by and do something to make walkers a lot better.

What I think we could do is make walker completely different from normal vehicles. Give them armor points as opposed to hull points. They don't exist in the pen table. They have an armor save and are tougher to kill due to said armor point being equivalent to a pair of wounds (each save they make is x++). Make them immune to magic they can cast (so no deathstar dreadknights going around face-derping people).

I also think that they should be tough to kill in the case of dreads/brutes. As I recall correctly a naught is supposed to be able to exist in a hostile environment , even a planet undergoing exterminatus (flight of the eisenstein). Explain to me why lascannons can annihilate them to me if that's true?

The walkers all used to have a role.

Dready punched like a baws
Warwalker could shoot
And the sentinel was the mobile one with good armor

This way their roles are found again and you can actually cower in fear when a dread pods behind your adl and starts peddling his fists into your rangers, and laughing as the warwalker braved the frontlines cause his friends were all dead.

Instead of the polar opposite. Now you have people worrying about warwalkers spamming and laugh when a dread is on your friends water bench. Time to fix these walkers!

 Kain wrote:

That would lead to a very large number of very small unit types, so I'm not sure if it's really optimal.

As for the Doom...poor thing isn't fieldable anymore.

I know it's not, but it makes my point. I'm sure there are other powers and stuff that use Wounds to equal "soul tokens" or similar. As for being optimal, that would imply that GW strives for that sort of thing.

 ionusx wrote:

What I think we could do is make walker completely different from normal vehicles.

I approve of this a lot. They're just too different to other vehicles to just get a vague "Vehicle but with the Infantry type" ruleset.

EDIT: While we're at it, it's about time we got some Dreadnought and Chaos Dreadnought special characters. I know there are Forge World ones and Bjorn, but come on - they're supposed to be the most ancient and venerated heroes of the Chapter, and there are hardly any! As for Chaos ones, them all being completely insane because they're bored is stupid, but I don't particularly mind not getting any SCs.

40k already has a crap ton of USR's. You don't need to say "all walkers have blah USR's", you can just give them individually. If you think a Dreadnaught deserves HOW and a War Walker doesn't, just give the Dreadnaught HOW and not the War Walker. No need to give ALL walkers those rules and/or add tons of different types of walkers, just use the USR's we already have.

Saying Dreadnoughts are bad because they're Walkers is like saying Haruspices are good because they're Monstrous Creatures.
Dreadnoughts are bad because they're Dreadnoughts.

I don't think its the walkers rules that are bad, just a couple MC's that make them look bad. GUOs used to be considered very durable and the paid for it by having to slowly footslog to try to get into melee. The riptide takes a similar statline, slaps a 2+ save on it, gives it a jet pack, and arms it with some heavy duty guns; all for a similar cost. The rules are fine, its specific units that are poorly done.

JubbJubbz wrote:
I don't think its the walkers rules that are bad, just a couple MC's that make them look bad. GUOs used to be considered very durable and the paid for it by having to slowly footslog to try to get into melee. The riptide takes a similar statline, slaps a 2+ save on it, gives it a jet pack, and arms it with some heavy duty guns; all for a similar cost. The rules are fine, its specific units that are poorly done.

They didn't need to footslog, GUO 4th edition was able to deepstrike, and 3rd edition GUO could assault as soon as it arrived via daemonic summoning or possession.

 ZebioLizard2 wrote:

JubbJubbz wrote:
I don't think its the walkers rules that are bad, just a couple MC's that make them look bad. GUOs used to be considered very durable and the paid for it by having to slowly footslog to try to get into melee. The riptide takes a similar statline, slaps a 2+ save on it, gives it a jet pack, and arms it with some heavy duty guns; all for a similar cost. The rules are fine, its specific units that are poorly done.

They didn't need to footslog, GUO 4th edition was able to deepstrike, and 3rd edition GUO could assault as soon as it arrived via daemonic summoning or possession.

Very true, but I think the point remains they had nowhere near the offensive capability as the current top tier MC's. They can still deepstrike but DS heavy tactics have always seemed kinda risky to me.

HoW and Smash sound good.

Back in earlier editions walkers used to get a big bonus to combat resolution. Add some bonuses to combat resolution & psychology immune walkers might start running down MCs.

When you look at the cases with newer Monstrous Creatures coming into 40k (Whraithknight and Riptide) you have to understand that there really wasn't much 2+ save Shooti MCs out there. Tyranids had a few but they weren't all that competitive due to mobility issues.

When the Riptide came into the world 40k passed gas that should have ended the hobby and killed upper management. Instead people adapted by actually playing Tau. (If anyone was at Adepticon, you know what I mean... (Trip-Tides, Trip-Tides and Wraithknights everywhere) So you give something Mobility, throw in an absurd amount of fire power, then give it natural immunity to being double toughness ID'd AND a 2+ save, it sets the bar for broken.

You then take things that are like Daemon Princes and their removal of EW (? We still don't get this GW) or the fact you can no longer get them naturally T6 through Nurgle and you basically make them moot, when you throw a Daemon Prince at a Riptide you'd expect that Riptide to never be able to hit that Daemon Prince. Especially considering the massive difference in Weapon Skill, but someone in the department of rules decided that hitting things should never go beyond needing 5s (Fail btw) so even 1 lucky hit from a Riptide means your Daemon Prince who is no longer EW no longer T6 is dead if he fails his 5+.

Walkers became obsolete because of the above. I know a lot of people like their War Walkers and what not, heck, I love my Defiler, but their armor values suck, and the simple fact that you can destroy them on a lucky roll of 6 simply means they are inferior.

Think the only Tyranid 2+ is the swarmlord or a nonflying tyrant that took the armor upgrade, which kinda disappeared when wings came into the scene lol. Could be wrong, but i dont remember seeing anything better than 3+ outside those two after many, many battles with a tyranid friend while stationed in SKorea.

Walkers arent necessarily bad, but 9/10 of them are bad because of CC rules mainly. I play Tau, and quite frankly i'd still use the Riptide if it was an AV13 walker because its a GUN platform, i dont care about melee capabilities on a gun platform lol. Which is why ironclads or war walkers are still seen alot, they shoot they dont punch.


Also to the guy above, i agree the never hitting on 6s or unable to attack is dumb. My tau are WS2 outside the Commanders/Farsight, they shouldnt be able to even attempt to attack something with WS7+ lol. I dont mind the 3+ minimum to hit though.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Think the only Tyranid 2+ is the swarmlord or a nonflying tyrant that took the armor upgrade, which kinda disappeared when wings came into the scene lol. Could be wrong, but i dont remember seeing anything better than 3+ outside those two after many, many battles with a tyranid friend while stationed in SKorea.

Nah, the Swarmlord only ever had a 3+ armour save. Hive Tyrants used to be able to spend 40 points on a 2+ save (but you couldn't buy it and Wings) and Tyrannofices had a 2+ save but were ridiculously overpriced. In the new book the Hive Tyrant's 2+ option was removed but the Tyrannofex got a points reduction and is now actually worth fielding.
So yeah, we have a 2+ save.

Can someone name a vehicle that gets to make use of the more than two DCCW rule? I haven't found a vehicle yet with more than two at the most.

I believe Killa Kans are able to have up to 4.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
I believe Killa Kans are able to have up to 4.

Deff Dreads too.

Walkers became obsolete because of the above. I know a lot of people like their War Walkers and what not, heck, I love my Defiler, but their armor values suck, and the simple fact that you can destroy them on a lucky roll of 6 simply means they are inferior.

Honestly, walkers for 5th edition were pretty meh in melee as well, but not as bad as in 6th.

With the addition of Hull Points, Grenades on WS, and the fact that walkers still put out a negilible amount of attacks means that if they get used, they are stuck in the 5th edition autocannon role of ranged.

Even back then Killa kans were just shooty, it was better to dakkawalker then meleewalker, and that's been an issue for two editions now.

 Scipio Africanus wrote:
Can someone name a vehicle that gets to make use of the more than two DCCW rule? I haven't found a vehicle yet with more than two at the most.

Defilers, and if you want them to be any good in melee for their cost you're gonna have to trade in both their guns for more arms.

 Kain wrote:

 Scipio Africanus wrote:
Can someone name a vehicle that gets to make use of the more than two DCCW rule? I haven't found a vehicle yet with more than two at the most.

Defilers, and if you want them to be any good in melee for their cost you're gonna have to trade in both their guns for more arms.

I actually find this to be a worthwhile trade, given those guns are pretty much useless when firing the battlecannon. I generally replace the Reaper autocannon with another powerfist (for five attacks), but leave on the heavy flamer as this is still useful on overwatch - and the power scourge makes an overpriced unit far too costly.