I've been working at this thing for a while now, and have a LOT of feedback and support from this forum as well as my home group. This is a rule set for creating your own vehicles and monstrous creatures (as well as their oversized counterparts) for warhammer 40k. I think it is nearing completion, but it will continue to be updated as need be based on your suggestions. The rules here will give you a very good starting g point for making your own units. If you rebuilt the ones from the codecies, I personally feel you would end up with better balance than what is out now.
At the end there are a couple houserule suggestions to balance things out a bit, but that was more for personal reference and you should feel free to ignore them.
Hmmm, vehicle design, how does your formula rate the weapon options for the Hammerhead Tau tank? Besides the obvious clusterfeth that is the secondary weapon cost options? In previous editions the tank was significantly less expensive, but had to pay something like +15 points for the ion cannon and +50 points for the railgun. Now the base platform is much more expensive but the cost of the weapons are comparable.
Also, Tau devilfish, how does its cost vs capabilities rate vs other transports? It always felt way too expensive, but I'm actually beginning to enjoy it in 7th.
The hammerhead matched out fine, as did the devilfish. The rail gun is 3.5 meltaguns to add to a vehicle now. The devilfish only falls short when compared to the waveserpent, and I pointed out that one already
Automatically Appended Next Post: The weird one for tau was the bomber, the generator itself is over 50 points! Way too expensive for what it does...
Where did you find updated (official) rules for this? The only GW design rules I know of are from a long time ago, well before d-weapons, pulse bombs, etc, even existed.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: The hammerhead matched out fine, as did the devilfish. The rail gun is 3.5 meltaguns to add to a vehicle now. The devilfish only falls short when compared to the waveserpent, and I pointed out that one already
Automatically Appended Next Post: The weird one for tau was the bomber, the generator itself is over 50 points! Way too expensive for what it does...
I will agree on the bomber. I don't know if you have access to Forge World stuff, but how about the Barricuda flier? I love the thing, but how does it compare to the codex fliers on a point to capability standpoint?
All together, I tested the update I did with around 25 different vehicles. My math makes them 5-15 points over for normal sized vehicles, and around 40 over for superheavies. That is intentional so people don't abuse it.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: I was told that I would probably catch hell if I posted the updated rules, so I figured I'd talk about some of the results. Starting with the revenant titan. While the thing is very synergistic in and of itself, it isn't actually undercosted! Its weapons and survivability is in line with other superheavy vehicles, the speed is what makes it crazy. Apparently GW point costed it at around 125 points by itself.
Now, believe it or not, the wave serpent only pays a whopping total of 15 points for the serpent shield. Which is definitely under costed.
Anyone have any questions about any faction besides necrons? ( I haven't had a chance to update them yet)
This is pretty common with the superheavies, particularly bigger ones. You can take 5 Baneblades at 2500+pts and throw them against a 1500pt Reaver Titan and the Reaver's going to come out ahead every time, same thing with a Heirophant or the like.
It is strange, the vehicles all use the same math, but get very different results on the table. The metrics used are survivability, speed/ armor, damage output, and special rules/options. Games workshop hasn't changed their process for making vehicle rules, just adjusted the points.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: I took a month, mathed it out, and built vehicles from every codex from land speeders to phantom titans. My math is dead on, and now I wanna share
Ok, so what you're saying is that you invented your own rules that produce output that matches GW's point costs. What exactly is the purpose of this?
I wanted to post it for the community, it was fun, and people have mentioned how cool it would be to have an updated version. I was originally going to link it in proposed rules, found out that would be a bad idea. Pm me if you want a copy to play around with!
The only thing bad about VDR is months of me having to put up with gakky, WAAC, poorly converted models some of my gaming mates will show up with, if I try to use a VDR vehicle of my own.
In that case, I'll post the rules here tomorrow! I didn't get any input from dark angels vehicles, sorry. They're the only marine faction I don't have access to :(
The VDR rules aren't now, nor have they ever been, what GW used to price out its vehicles. In fact, at the time the VDR rules were published it was impossible to design an existing vehicle at the cost published in its codex, VDR typically resulted in a roughly 30% price increase IIRC.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: In that case, I'll post the rules here tomorrow! I didn't get any input from dark angels vehicles, sorry. They're the only marine faction I don't have access to :(
Download link added to my first post! Feedback is appreciated
chaos0xomega wrote: The VDR rules aren't now, nor have they ever been, what GW used to price out its vehicles. In fact, at the time the VDR rules were published it was impossible to design an existing vehicle at the cost published in its codex, VDR typically resulted in a roughly 30% price increase IIRC.
While the VDR rules they provided aren't exact, I'm guessing they didn't create a completely new algorithm for us to use.
chaos0xomega wrote: The VDR rules aren't now, nor have they ever been, what GW used to price out its vehicles. In fact, at the time the VDR rules were published it was impossible to design an existing vehicle at the cost published in its codex, VDR typically resulted in a roughly 30% price increase IIRC.
While the VDR rules they provided aren't exact, I'm guessing they didn't create a completely new algorithm for us to use.
I don't believe they use an algorithm, period, nor would one want to when it comes to really costing units. There are far too many interactions between the stats of vehicles, their weapons, USR's and unique special rules, not to mention all the units they mesh with in their army and how they might synergize. You aren't going to capture all that in a formula, so you take an educated guess at it and you playtest.
Edit: and I suppose it's possible they had a basic formula for arriving at their initial guess, but from what I remember of the original VDR, it was something they came up with specifically to make rules on the fly for wacky new units. The VDR tended to be overpriced because it needed to be, otherwise all kinds of broken combinations would slip through.
Well, I knocked together three vehicles, see if they seem reasonable. I couldn't find an option for Sonicblasters though! I jsut decided, on the basis of nothing, to price them at 20 points.
Magnum Opus, 255 pts
A large tank, covered in leering mouths and gaping speakers and emitting a continuous babble of cacophonic discord into the air. It slowly grinds across the field, its sonic weaponry bursting heads and leaving swatches of the enemy with ruptured organs.
Superheavy Tank
BS 4
F 14
S 13
R 13
HP 6
Smoke Launchers, Spotlight, Dirgecaster, Combi-Bolter
Blastmaster with Large Blast
TwinLinked SpeedLoading Sonicblaster.
Rhapsody, 105 pts
A light hovering vehicle, manned by two Noisemarines who direct the battle as though they are involved in some form of performance. The screeching siren slung beneath the vehicle drives off those who come to close, while the rear mounted sonicblaster rips apart the bodies of more distant foes.
Small, Light Skimmer
BS 4
F 10
S 10
R 10
HP 2
Twinlinked Sonicblaster
Torrent Doomsiren
Overture, 100 pts
A slight walker frame, almost an exo-suit, bears the figure of a single Noisemarine forward ahead of his fellows. Protected by an aura of warp interference, the Overture strides froward to begin each battle with howls of destruction forcing the enemy to dive to the ground.
Small, Light Walker
WS 4
BS 4
S 5
F 10
S 10
R 10
I 4
A 2
Fleet, Scout, Daemon
Two Blastmasters
chaos0xomega wrote: The VDR rules aren't now, nor have they ever been, what GW used to price out its vehicles. In fact, at the time the VDR rules were published it was impossible to design an existing vehicle at the cost published in its codex, VDR typically resulted in a roughly 30% price increase IIRC.
While the VDR rules they provided aren't exact, I'm guessing they didn't create a completely new algorithm for us to use.
I don't believe they use an algorithm, period, nor would one want to when it comes to really costing units. There are far too many interactions between the stats of vehicles, their weapons, USR's and unique special rules, not to mention all the units they mesh with in their army and how they might synergize. You aren't going to capture all that in a formula, so you take an educated guess at it and you playtest.
Edit: and I suppose it's possible they had a basic formula for arriving at their initial guess, but from what I remember of the original VDR, it was something they came up with specifically to make rules on the fly for wacky new units. The VDR tended to be overpriced because it needed to be, otherwise all kinds of broken combinations would slip through.
As I've worked on this, I've noticed that certain armies gain benefits for free with their vehicles, I believe this is where the army synergy lies.
@slaanesh devotee, those look awesome, good job!
@mathew, I would do that, but the variables for them are way to scattered. I wouldn't have been able to do this if I didn't have a starting g point.
Thanks for taking the time to check this stuff out, feel free to make more! And necrons are comming this weekend
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Slaanesh-Devotee wrote: Well, I knocked together three vehicles, see if they seem reasonable. I couldn't find an option for Sonicblasters though! I jsut decided, on the basis of nothing, to price them at 20 points.
Magnum Opus, 255 pts
A large tank, covered in leering mouths and gaping speakers and emitting a continuous babble of cacophonic discord into the air. It slowly grinds across the field, its sonic weaponry bursting heads and leaving swatches of the enemy with ruptured organs.
Superheavy Tank
BS 4
F 14
S 13
R 13
HP 6
Smoke Launchers, Spotlight, Dirgecaster, Combi-Bolter
Blastmaster with Large Blast
TwinLinked SpeedLoading Sonicblaster.
Rhapsody, 105 pts
A light hovering vehicle, manned by two Noisemarines who direct the battle as though they are involved in some form of performance. The screeching siren slung beneath the vehicle drives off those who come to close, while the rear mounted sonicblaster rips apart the bodies of more distant foes.
Small, Light Skimmer
BS 4
F 10
S 10
R 10
HP 2
Twinlinked Sonicblaster
Torrent Doomsiren
Overture, 100 pts
A slight walker frame, almost an exo-suit, bears the figure of a single Noisemarine forward ahead of his fellows. Protected by an aura of warp interference, the Overture strides froward to begin each battle with howls of destruction forcing the enemy to dive to the ground.
Small, Light Walker
WS 4
BS 4
S 5
F 10
S 10
R 10
I 4
A 2
Fleet, Scout, Daemon
Two Blastmasters
The magnum opus is actually 300 points, you add the weapons base cost back to the bonus. Still, love the vehicles!
Share this nonsense with EVERYBODY!
@mathew, I would do that, but the variables for them are way to scattered. I wouldn't have been able to do this if I didn't have a starting g point.
I had the infantry done once upon a time. It wasn't hard, it just needed some reverse engineering, and choosing a starting point. I chose marines, but that was when they were 15 points each. I have tried doing it again, but it appears it is a simple 1 point for each change, and 1 point for 6 inches of range.
Using Eldar/Dark Eldar as an example: Guardian Defenders are 9 points each, and so are Storm Guardians. They both have the same rules, only the Catapult changed to a pistol and CC weapon. The CC weapon and pistol up their attacks to 2, making them the same cost. Dire Avengers get a better save by 1 point, a better LD by 1 point, 6" more range for 1 point, and Counter attack for 1 point, making them 13 points. Dark Eldar Kabalite Warriors Get 6" more range for 1 point(don't forget the Battle Focus rule), the special rules for the guns make them different but not necessarily better than the other, lose 1 point for the loss of grenades, and lose 1 point because they can't assault after shooting. Making them 8 points each. Wyches gain 1 for initiative, lose 1 for the SV, lose 1 for the loss of 6" of Range(again due to Battle Focus), gain 1 for Dodge, and gain 1 for combat drugs. Making them 10 points per model.
Yes, I understand some of the rules are bad as compared to others, and I know I am adding the maximum distance to the Battle Focus roll, but it works. Have fun, please note that further upgrades were not done, and I feel that GW just randomly throws numbers at upgrades. Does an upgrade to SV4+ on Guard units still cost almost as much as a marine?
@mathew, I would do that, but the variables for them are way to scattered. I wouldn't have been able to do this if I didn't have a starting g point.
I had the infantry done once upon a time. It wasn't hard, it just needed some reverse engineering, and choosing a starting point. I chose marines, but that was when they were 15 points each. I have tried doing it again, but it appears it is a simple 1 point for each change, and 1 point for 6 inches of range.
Using Eldar/Dark Eldar as an example: Guardian Defenders are 9 points each, and so are Storm Guardians. They both have the same rules, only the Catapult changed to a pistol and CC weapon. The CC weapon and pistol up their attacks to 2, making them the same cost. Dire Avengers get a better save by 1 point, a better LD by 1 point, 6" more range for 1 point, and Counter attack for 1 point, making them 13 points. Dark Eldar Kabalite Warriors Get 6" more range for 1 point(don't forget the Battle Focus rule), the special rules for the guns make them different but not necessarily better than the other, lose 1 point for the loss of grenades, and lose 1 point because they can't assault after shooting. Making them 8 points each. Wyches gain 1 for initiative, lose 1 for the SV, lose 1 for the loss of 6" of Range(again due to Battle Focus), gain 1 for Dodge, and gain 1 for combat drugs. Making them 10 points per model.
Yes, I understand some of the rules are bad as compared to others, and I know I am adding the maximum distance to the Battle Focus roll, but it works. Have fun, please note that further upgrades were not done, and I feel that GW just randomly throws numbers at upgrades. Does an upgrade to SV4+ on Guard units still cost almost as much as a marine?
Now that is interesting, I had started to break it down based on minimum unit size, and build them in clusters of wounds from 1-10. I'll see what I can do with that as a starting point in the future. I have to catch up on my 2 RPG's I'm currently running.
Reinokarite wrote: With some aproximation Nephilim Jet Fighter comes out to be around 150 points without it's "Dedicated Hunter" rule. Pretty fair.
Automatically Appended Next Post: And LS Vengeance is 114 points. I like it more and more.
Yeah, they were WAY off with the special land speeders and flyers. I think they were afraid of the ap2 at the start of 6th ed. and the blind rule isn't as strong as they thought it would be. Glad you like it, keep'em comming!
@mathew, I would do that, but the variables for them are way to scattered. I wouldn't have been able to do this if I didn't have a starting g point.
I had the infantry done once upon a time. It wasn't hard, it just needed some reverse engineering, and choosing a starting point. I chose marines, but that was when they were 15 points each. I have tried doing it again, but it appears it is a simple 1 point for each change, and 1 point for 6 inches of range.
Using Eldar/Dark Eldar as an example: Guardian Defenders are 9 points each, and so are Storm Guardians. They both have the same rules, only the Catapult changed to a pistol and CC weapon. The CC weapon and pistol up their attacks to 2, making them the same cost. Dire Avengers get a better save by 1 point, a better LD by 1 point, 6" more range for 1 point, and Counter attack for 1 point, making them 13 points. Dark Eldar Kabalite Warriors Get 6" more range for 1 point(don't forget the Battle Focus rule), the special rules for the guns make them different but not necessarily better than the other, lose 1 point for the loss of grenades, and lose 1 point because they can't assault after shooting. Making them 8 points each. Wyches gain 1 for initiative, lose 1 for the SV, lose 1 for the loss of 6" of Range(again due to Battle Focus), gain 1 for Dodge, and gain 1 for combat drugs. Making them 10 points per model.
Yes, I understand some of the rules are bad as compared to others, and I know I am adding the maximum distance to the Battle Focus roll, but it works. Have fun, please note that further upgrades were not done, and I feel that GW just randomly throws numbers at upgrades. Does an upgrade to SV4+ on Guard units still cost almost as much as a marine?
Now that is interesting, I had started to break it down based on minimum unit size, and build them in clusters of wounds from 1-10. I'll see what I can do with that as a starting point in the future. I have to catch up on my 2 RPG's I'm currently running.
I had a formula that...mostly worked. Hormagaunts broke it, due to the BS, and not having a gun. They ended up costing like 2 points or something like that. Here is the formula I created:
Ranged: ([BS multiplied by weapon range(per 6") ] plus [Weapon Strength times AP]) multiplied by RoF I used a RoF of 2 for small blasts, 4 for large blasts and 3 for templates.
Melee: ([WS plus initiative] times[Strength plus AP]) times number of Attacks
I included the bonus for 2 close combat weapons where applicable.
Survivability: Wounds times [ (toughness times SV) plus LD]
Overall: Ranged plus Melee plus Survivability divided by 3
I worked out numbers that worked(aside from AP on melee weapons that is a new addition) on most troops choice units. Feel free to prioritize the numbers as you wish. Maybe you can get the formula to work better.
@mathew, I would do that, but the variables for them are way to scattered. I wouldn't have been able to do this if I didn't have a starting g point.
I had the infantry done once upon a time. It wasn't hard, it just needed some reverse engineering, and choosing a starting point. I chose marines, but that was when they were 15 points each. I have tried doing it again, but it appears it is a simple 1 point for each change, and 1 point for 6 inches of range.
Using Eldar/Dark Eldar as an example: Guardian Defenders are 9 points each, and so are Storm Guardians. They both have the same rules, only the Catapult changed to a pistol and CC weapon. The CC weapon and pistol up their attacks to 2, making them the same cost. Dire Avengers get a better save by 1 point, a better LD by 1 point, 6" more range for 1 point, and Counter attack for 1 point, making them 13 points. Dark Eldar Kabalite Warriors Get 6" more range for 1 point(don't forget the Battle Focus rule), the special rules for the guns make them different but not necessarily better than the other, lose 1 point for the loss of grenades, and lose 1 point because they can't assault after shooting. Making them 8 points each. Wyches gain 1 for initiative, lose 1 for the SV, lose 1 for the loss of 6" of Range(again due to Battle Focus), gain 1 for Dodge, and gain 1 for combat drugs. Making them 10 points per model.
Yes, I understand some of the rules are bad as compared to others, and I know I am adding the maximum distance to the Battle Focus roll, but it works. Have fun, please note that further upgrades were not done, and I feel that GW just randomly throws numbers at upgrades. Does an upgrade to SV4+ on Guard units still cost almost as much as a marine?
Now that is interesting, I had started to break it down based on minimum unit size, and build them in clusters of wounds from 1-10. I'll see what I can do with that as a starting point in the future. I have to catch up on my 2 RPG's I'm currently running.
I had a formula that...mostly worked. Hormagaunts broke it, due to the BS, and not having a gun. They ended up costing like 2 points or something like that. Here is the formula I created:
Ranged: ([BS multiplied by weapon range(per 6") ] plus [Weapon Strength times AP]) multiplied by RoF I used a RoF of 2 for small blasts, 4 for large blasts and 3 for templates.
Melee: ([WS plus initiative] times[Strength plus AP]) times number of Attacks
I included the bonus for 2 close combat weapons where applicable.
Survivability: Wounds times [ (toughness times SV) plus LD]
Overall: Ranged plus Melee plus Survivability divided by 3
I worked out numbers that worked(aside from AP on melee weapons that is a new addition) on most troops choice units. Feel free to prioritize the numbers as you wish. Maybe you can get the formula to work better.
I don't know when I'll be able to do this project. With vehicles, the numbers are more static, and benefits per model are more easily quantifiable. How much does giving plasma grenades cost, for example. The whole unit has them, but only one may shoot with them, they can all use them in melee, but only against certain targets. I feel the math would be based on the base UNIT first, then divided by constituent models to native at a base cost.
I've been looking at the Necron vehicles, I'm thinking that the more restrictive the races vehicle allowance is, the more free stuff they get. Necrons get a lot of things, seemingly without cost! The gauss flayer array only costs 10 points! Quantum shielding is 35
Maybe that was my problem. I was trying to figure everything on a model by model basis, and upgrades are done as a squad. The base model costs seemed to work, but upgrades failed.
Another interesting find! With superheavy vehicles, when they have weapon swap options for free, they pay for the biggest gun and the rest scale down from there. That's why(a lot of times) there is an auto include gun. The others literally aren't worth the points.
Yes. I have several imperial titan weapon point totals on hand, can't remember which one they go on...
Gattling blaster 166
Melta cannon 292
Laser blaster 298
Volcano cannon 350
Apocalypse missile launcher 170
Knight paladin battle cannon 60
Knight errant melta cannon 79
Turbolaser destructor 275
Vulcan megabolter 121
Inferno gun 240
Plasma blastgun 293
As you can see, the point totals vary widely. They opted to make you pay for the biggest so the points wouldn't be too off, but you could take other variations for fluff and local meta purposes.
I have to applaud the efforts of this for one main reason:
A way that makes sense to ensure a fair points cost assigned to a model.
This is the single most broken thing about 40k: when huge points "deals" are given or other models are charged too much.
Half the fun of something like Battletech is jumping into making your own custom Mech according to the rules.
40k needs something to test if points values are fair.
Again, well done, now I need to dust-off my old spreadsheet for vehicle creation (that article ages ago was so much fun!)
I also enjoyed it (obviously) I actually found the chapter approved book with it at half price books. When using this version to make current vehicles, you'll be around 10-15 points over what the codex says, and superheavies are normally around 40 points over. I did that on purpose because I didn't want people to abuse it to gain an unfair advantage, and to make the opponent more comfortable with the concept of playing against it.
The design in my head is the imperial knight, - the shoulder armor, with a pile of pieces from the doomsday ark. Possibly using the support arches as a replacement for the upper armor plating...
Depending on what I can successfully model, I am debating between a 6" tall Lychguard looking walker, or some massive Canoptek Construct.
Fluffwise, I could see either one. Does it really matter how big a Necron's body is ? They could have just transefered the conciousness of a great Necron warrior into an oversized body. On the other hand, there is really no upper limit for the the size of a Canoptek Construct as well.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: If it was smaller than an imperial knight, people will complain if you stomp their carnifex with something the size of A dreadnaught.
True, true. If I go with the humanoid chasis, it would probably be based on a 6" T-800 action figure, which is about the same height as an Imperial Knight. If I go with a crawly Canoptek Construct, it would proably be a bit shorter, but sprawl out over the entire Knight sized base.
Quick question about the carriage upgrade. How far can a vehicle with this upgrade pull another vehicle with a single movement? Say a tank moves 12" in the movement phase, does whatever it's towing move the same distance or can it only be towed 6"? What about flat out, skimmers, and fast vehicles?
spitfire703 wrote: Quick question about the carriage upgrade. How far can a vehicle with this upgrade pull another vehicle with a single movement? Say a tank moves 12" in the movement phase, does whatever it's towing move the same distance or can it only be towed 6"? What about flat out, skimmers, and fast vehicles?
Good question! It's 6", max. I'll add that to the next update.
Evil Party Girl wrote: Hi. Nice work. I couldn't find price for fire points, access points, whether side sponson / reduced arc or TL made weapons cheaper. Cheers.
Go with your gut and other similar vehicles in regards to fire points, and access points. In regards to reduced arc and whatnot, the points are for potency of the weapon. If after a few games you think it should drop a couple points for it, go ahead! These rules are a guideline that is very close to what I believe games workshop uses to design vehicles, therefore, it should always be play tested Glad you like it BTW!
I tried to price my grav rhinos and thought wow these are kind of expensive. But then I tried to price a codex rhino and it looks like its 45 points (por 50 points incl 5 points for repair?) without considering is a Troop choice and has 2 firing points. That's 30% more expensive. If I take 25-30% off what the grav rhino came too, I'm quite happy with the price.
Did you make things more expensive to offset the 'Its home brew and OP' argument? Or does the % difference decrease for 100+/200+ points vehicles?
Automatically Appended Next Post: My bad, recalculated the standard rhino for 40 (+ no values for repair, troop, firing points) - not too far off, but those three items are quite useful on the table top.
It's more the former. It isn't really a percentage, it's a 10-15 point overcosted for normal vehicles, and around 40 for superheavies. That's why I say play test them, that way you and your regular opponents can see where you want things to be.
In the old V.D.R., you could make a flimsy vehicle with ridiculous firepower for almost nothing, I offset that by making the durability and speed a higher cost than it really needs to be.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Evil Party Girl wrote: I tried to price my grav rhinos and thought wow these are kind of expensive. But then I tried to price a codex rhino and it looks like its 45 points (por 50 points incl 5 points for repair?) without considering is a Troop choice and has 2 firing points. That's 30% more expensive. If I take 25-30% off what the grav rhino came too, I'm quite happy with the price.
Did you make things more expensive to offset the 'Its home brew and OP' argument? Or does the % difference decrease for 100+/200+ points vehicles?
Automatically Appended Next Post: My bad, recalculated the standard rhino for 40 (+ no values for repair, troop, firing points) - not too far off, but those three items are quite useful on the table top.
Awesome hover rhinos! Also, while useful, they don't REALY affect the capabilities oh the vehicle itself. I've been tinkering around with transport capacity point values, I just haven't found an easier way to price it. The repair is probably worth nothing due to it not giving back the hull point and only working 1/6 of the time anyway.
I know you have draw the line somewhere but if this was 43(12) it works super well for F11 S11 R10. Otherwise Rhino must be a tank and gets +5 extra tax for the extra 1 armour. As a light vehicle it comes to 35 points. Yey!
I think a lot of people who will be pricing imperial vehicles probably have conversions based on Rhinos (and Chimera) patterns. Would be nice to calibrate tables for common STC patterns.
--
I hope my questions/comments are not coming across as negative. I think your tables are awesome.
Ok I'll leave you alone for a while after this one. But I noticed a massive difference in utility (not combat effectiveness) for the INQ Land Raider when Corteaz stopped getting the scoring unit rule for war bands (and dedicated transports). Nothing like a AV14 4HP scoring units packed full of CC goodness. In my group, people generally play the minimum troop slots, so ninja'ing a malestrom objective on a crowded board is not unusual.
That said, drop pods and transports for blood angels & space wolves are the same price as dedicated transports but loose ObSec I guess.
I know you have draw the line somewhere but if this was 43(12) it works super well for F11 S11 R10. Otherwise Rhino must be a tank and gets +5 extra tax for the extra 1 armour. As a light vehicle it comes to 35 points. Yey!
I think a lot of people who will be pricing imperial vehicles probably have conversions based on Rhinos (and Chimera) patterns. Would be nice to calibrate tables for common STC patterns.
--
I hope my questions/comments are not coming across as negative. I think your tables are awesome.
I actually thought about giving non skimmer imperial vehicles the tank upgrade for free, since that is what all their vehicles are.
No, you don't come across as being negative! I need the criticism and feedback to make this thing work the only imperial army I play is spacewolves, so I didn't make a ton of personalized stuff for the humans. I just made sure they were in the right ballpark as I went through the breakdown phase.
In regards to obsec and other such bonuses, those aren't based on the vehicle itself, but the mission played in. If you play purge the alien, would you wanna PAY points for objective secured?
I wanted something the equivalent of an Imperial Knight, so I started with the imperial Knight Stat line, and then reduced the Initiatiative to 2.
WS 4, BS 4, S 10, I 2, A 2,
6 Hull points to get into the superheavy catergory +300pts
11 armor with quantum shielding was just to fragile for a super heavy, so 13 all around. Then I realised that there is no option for the shield like the Imperial Knights have, and opted for front armor 14 +90 pts
WS 4, BS 4, S 10, I 2, A 2, F 14, S 13, R 13, 6 HP Super Heavy Walker
Living Metal seemed llike a mandatory add-on for a Necron Heavy Vehicle. +5pts
Time for the Big Guns
TESLA OBLITERATOR - Tesla Sphere + Haywire Upgrade 25pts+50pts = 75 pts
NECRON CANOPTEK LEVIATHAN - Necron Super Heavy Walker 510 points
WS 4, BS 4, S 10, I 2, A 2, F 14, S 13, R 13, 6 HP Super Heavy Walker
Living Metal, Fear, Hammer of Wrath, Invincible Behemoth, Move Through Cover, Relentless, Smash, Strikedown
TESLA OBLITERATOR - 24" S7 AP - Heavy 5, Tesla, Haywire
GAUSS FLAYER ERADICATOR ARRAY - 24" S4 AP 5 Salvo 10/20 Gauss, Independant Targeting
adamsouza wrote: I wanted something the equivalent of an Imperial Knight, so I started with the imperial Knight Stat line, and then reduced the Initiatiative to 2.
WS 4, BS 4, S 10, I 2, A 2,
6 Hull points to get into the superheavy catergory +300pts
11 armor with quantum shielding was just to fragile for a super heavy, so 13 all around. Then I realised that there is no option for the shield like the Imperial Knights have, and opted for front armor 14 +90 pts
WS 4, BS 4, S 10, I 2, A 2, F 14, S 13, R 13, 6 HP Super Heavy Walker
Living Metal seemed llike a mandatory add-on for a Necron Heavy Vehicle. +5pts
Time for the Big Guns
TESLA OBLITERATOR - Tesla Sphere + Haywire Upgrade 25pts+50pts = 75 pts
NECRON CANOPTEK LEVIATHAN - Necron Super Heavy Walker 510 points
WS 4, BS 4, S 10, I 2, A 2, F 14, S 13, R 13, 6 HP Super Heavy Walker
Living Metal, Fear, Hammer of Wrath, Invincible Behemoth, Move Through Cover, Relentless, Smash, Strikedown
TESLA OBLITERATOR - 24" S7 AP - Heavy 5, Tesla, Haywire
GAUSS FLAYER ERADICATOR ARRAY - 24" S4 AP 5 Salvo 10/20 Gauss, Independant Targeting
You actually pay 100 points for the additional 3 hull points, with what you have spent, pointwise , it would have 12 hull points good job on that beast, BTW!
CalgarsPimpHand wrote: The VDR tended to be overpriced because it needed to be, otherwise all kinds of broken combinations would slip through.
But in standard GW fashion, they just made fluffy conversions unplayable while ridiculous WAAC abominations slipped through the cracks.
AV 9 drop pods with 50 bolters, anyone?
Av9 all around, immobilized, open topped, 3hp with 50 bolters? That'd be 165 points, that die the turn it comes in. Not a very good vehicle, especially since that price doesn't include the inertial guidance system or any sort of transport capacity. I deliberately tried to end that nonsense, and feel like I did a pretty good job. Not to mention, that you have to model that, and good luck getting 50 bolt guns on a rotating turret to be able to shoot them all at the same thing!
Edit: it also would only get to fire ONE of those guns the turn it drops, because it was still moving combat speed.
I never really had problems so much with people making their VDR vehicles broken good. It was mostly the ghastly models themselves.
A kid at the FLGS brought a 4" tall Gundam on a 6" square base with super heavy stats. It was the size of a Contemptor Dreadnaught with Warhound titan level stats.
There was also a guy with a poorly painted 6" T800 with plasma guns glued to his shoulders, of a similar power level.
Ugh! That would be a crappy thing to see! I used mine to make my wraithknight model the beast it should be. It annoyed me the an imperial Knight could stomp it, or worse, a tyranid hierodule! Those are literally less than half my knights size.
So, my knight is a 495 point superheavy walker with a strD melee weapon, 2 shuriken cannons, titan holofields, and a gattling, blast star cannon. He does everything a big stompy robot should
Spy_Smasher wrote: LB, you think you can run this vehicle through your VDR for me? I tried, but I am a bit dumb and genuinely can't figure it out.
Super-heavy Vehicle
BS3, 14/13/12, 9HP
Demolisher Cannon
TL Heavy Bolter
Searchlight
Smoke Launchers
(Above as Baneblade)
Inferno Gun (Off a Warhound Titan)
Absolutely! That beast will cost 585 points. Not a bad way to eliminate infantry enmass, and won't be too much of a point sink at,1500-1850 point games
I noticed that there was no Hurricane Bolter on the list (unless I'm just being daft and have missed it?).
Or would I just take three bolters and twin-link them all?
So... I think that flamers really shouldn't be able to take rending.
Flamer 4 points
Underpowered -25%
Shred +50%
Torrent +150%
Poisoned(4+) +25%
Rending +20% after all other additions.
(4+4*.5+4*1.5+4*.25)*1.2-(4*.25)=15 points
(4+2+6+1)*1.2-1=15
So 2 variants of the modified crop duster
Kroot Small Flyer
9 all around -25 points
Open topped free
Flyer 25 points
Shrouded 30 points
Two of the above gun 30 points
60 points
Tau Small Flyer
9 all around -25 points
Open Topped free
flyer 25 points
Skimmer 20 points
Shrouded 30 points
Two of the above gun 30 points
80 points
So... honestly shrouded isn't super important,
but it is kinda nice to pretend they have survivability.
strip shrouded, and the kroot ship costs literally the guns
it carries.
Which are the scary bit I think. It comes from
flamers being silly cheap. Because they are not supposed
to have torrent. Mathhammer time!
Say the flamers can each only hit 4 models, which is on the really
conservative side. 3 wounds, at least one 6 means a rend.
Two of these bad boys will kill 2 terminators on average per shooting phase...
for 30 points.
You can also double down on survivability and take stealth...
but that is a waste. You can just jink for your 2+ cover save.
If it draws fire after one round of shooting, it has mades its points back.
Now for a heavier version. We don't like the sunshark, we want
to kill all of the infantry.
Tau Medium Flyer
9 all around -25 points
Open Topped free
flyer 30 points
Skimmer 20 points
Shrouded 30 points
four of the above gun 60 points
115 points of death to everything.
Twice the firepower for far more then twice the cost. A much worse version. The kroot version is cheaper, but will also Not be able to hover and spin to finish off whatever needs to just die.
Didn't see any rules for squadrons, but I could definitely see the first version In a farsight army, taking far more detachments then anyone should.
Also, if you want to conserve points, Stealth+agile are 10 points less and basically the same effect as shrouded.
For added hilarity, stick 2 gun drones on a kroot Mark 1 when you are spamming them. 54 points for 2 drones and an added aerial threat.
Dumb thing, If you really are just spamming as many detatchments as possible... The Kroot Mark 1 without shrouded cost exactly as much as the guns it carries... so give it only one gun, and take two for the price of one. Watch your enemies AA be utterly overloaded by 15 point flyers.
Edit:
Now, lets see what the super heavy version would look like.
Tau Super Heavy Flyer
3 extra hull points 100 points
12 all around 40 points
Enclosed free
flyer 40 points
Skimmer 20 points
Shrouded 30 points
Stealth 15 points
Disruption Pods 15 points
Now, the gun issue. We can pile on as many as we want, and we want a lot. The chassis alone costs 260 points, and super heavy status
only matters for firing more then 4 guns... SO! for 350 points we can put 6 flamers on it... a lot of firepower, but not enough.
for 410 points, we can get 10 flamer templates... now we are getting somewhere. For 500 we can take 16 flamers.
16 of the above gun 240 points
500 points
This... is a center piece. If you can get it on the field, it will kill any non-vehicle non-flyer. Might be worth putting a couple missile pods on it for anti-flyer defense.
Kroot Small Flyer
9 all around -25 points
Open topped free
Flyer 25 points
Shrouded 30 points
Two of the above gun 30 points
60 points
Tau Small Flyer
9 all around -25 points
Open Topped free
flyer 25 points
Skimmer 20 points
Shrouded 30 points
Two of the above gun 30 points
80 points
...
Edit:
Now, lets see what the super heavy version would look like.
Tau Super Heavy Flyer
3 extra hull points 100 points
12 all around 40 points
Enclosed free
flyer 40 points
Skimmer 20 points
Shrouded 30 points
Stealth 15 points
Disruption Pods 15 points
Now, the gun issue. We can pile on as many as we want, and we want a lot. The chassis alone costs 260 points, and super heavy status
only matters for firing more then 4 guns... SO! for 350 points we can put 6 flamers on it... a lot of firepower, but not enough.
for 410 points, we can get 10 flamer templates... now we are getting somewhere. For 500 we can take 16 flamers.
16 of the above gun 240 points
500 points
This... is a center piece. If you can get it on the field, it will kill any non-vehicle non-flyer. Might be worth putting a couple missile pods on it for anti-flyer defense.
Which actually puts these at 88pts, 108pts, and 724pts respectively.
More if you're supposed to add both sides on the side armour (I'm waiting for clarification on this, but I think you don't).
Ond angel is right with the weapon cost system, and no, you only add side armor once.
If you jink, you can't fire the flamers, so, if your kroot skimmer does happen to kill 2 terminators( which with 8 hits/6 wounds isn't guarenteed) the terminators stormbolters will either kill it, or make it jink to survive. Thereby neutering the vehicle.
Stealth + agile is only as good as shrouded if you are jinking, don't forget the survivability granted by shrouded+ other cover.
I really appreciate you guys picking apart the rules set, that's why I put the V.D.R. up here on dakka! Thanks, and keep up the good work
If you jink, you can't fire the flamers, so, if your kroot skimmer does happen to kill 2 terminators( which with 8 hits/6 wounds isn't guarenteed) the terminators stormbolters will either kill it, or make it jink to survive. Thereby neutering the vehicle.
Stealth + agile is only as good as shrouded if you are jinking, don't forget the survivability granted by shrouded+ other cover.
I really appreciate you guys picking apart the rules set, that's why I put the V.D.R. up here on dakka! Thanks, and keep up the good work
Umm... no, unless you changed the system since you put examples in the PDF, Ord Angel is wrong.
His math works if every upgrade besides underpowered cost 100% more. Because you add all the modifiers together at the end, along with the modified base cost. The only thing I wasn't sure of was when to add the rending 20%. I assumed after you totaled the cost, but it could just as easily mean after you totaled the additions due to modifiers, but before you add in the new base cost.
edit
Also didn't notice that you can take an upgrade multiple times. In that case, 2 more instances of underpowered drops the price to 13. Which drops the SHs cost to 468... which is nearing actually useful.
/edit
It is also a flyer, those terminators shoot 2 shots, hit on a 6, glance on a 5 and pen on a 6. 1/36 to pen, 1/18 to glance. If it dosn't jink... but honestly for the 30ish points it costs absorbing a round of shooting for many things it worth it. So it jinks for a 4+ save. 1/72 to pen, 1/36 to glance. They need to Glances to bring it down. 72 bolter rounds... to take down 30 points worth of flyer. or 15 points if you take the single gun variant. Worth? Worth.
Using actually expansive anti air, like a missile side with VT. Without marklighter support, it hits on 4s(rerolling), glances on 2s, and pens on 3+ with its missile pods, and glances on 4s and pens on 5&6 with its smart missile system. So (1/2+(1/2*1/2))*5/6=5/8 to at least glance with the missile pods. (1/2+(1/2*1/2))*1/2= 3/8 to at least glance. it gets 4 of each so 2 hull points stripped on average. Unless it jinks, wich brings it down to 1.375 hull points lost. Mark lighters make life hard, just assume 1-2 in enough to make this a near certain kill... which is fine for our 30-15 point annoyance.
Since when can you get a flyer cover? They fly... yes you lose survivability if you don't jink... but you only need to jink if they are bringing enough firepower to bring you down. In which case you take it and earn some of your points back by denying their shooting a better target. Nutering the vehicle... for a round... after which it forces them to shoot at it again or enjoy some more flamer.
If you jink, you can't fire the flamers, so, if your kroot skimmer does happen to kill 2 terminators( which with 8 hits/6 wounds isn't guarenteed) the terminators stormbolters will either kill it, or make it jink to survive. Thereby neutering the vehicle.
Stealth + agile is only as good as shrouded if you are jinking, don't forget the survivability granted by shrouded+ other cover.
I really appreciate you guys picking apart the rules set, that's why I put the V.D.R. up here on dakka! Thanks, and keep up the good work
Umm... no, unless you changed the system since you put examples in the PDF, Ord Angel is wrong.
His math works if every upgrade besides underpowered cost 100% more. Because you add all the modifiers together at the end, along with the modified base cost. The only thing I wasn't sure of was when to add the rending 20%. I assumed after you totaled the cost, but it could just as easily mean after you totaled the additions due to modifiers, but before you add in the new base cost.
It is also a flyer, those terminators shoot 2 shots, hit on a 6, glance on a 5 and pen on a 6. 1/36 to pen, 1/18 to glance. If it dosn't jink... but honestly for the 30ish points it costs absorbing a round of shooting for many things it worth it. So it jinks for a 4+ save. 1/72 to pen, 1/36 to glance. They need to Glances to bring it down. 72 bolter rounds... to take down 30 points worth of flyer. or 15 points if you take the single gun variant. Worth? Worth.
Using actually expansive anti air, like a missile side with VT. Without marklighter support, it hits on 4s(rerolling), glances on 2s, and pens on 3+ with its missile pods, and glances on 4s and pens on 5&6 with its smart missile system. So (1/2+(1/2*1/2))*5/6=5/8 to at least glance with the missile pods. (1/2+(1/2*1/2))*1/2= 3/8 to at least glance. it gets 4 of each so 2 hull points stripped on average. Unless it jinks, wich brings it down to 1.375 hull points lost. Mark lighters make life hard, just assume 1-2 in enough to make this a near certain kill... which is fine for our 30-15 point annoyance.
Since when can you get a flyer cover? They fly... yes you lose survivability if you don't jink... but you only need to jink if they are bringing enough firepower to bring you down. In which case you take it and earn some of your points back by denying their shooting a better target. Nutering the vehicle... for a round... after which it forces them to shoot at it again or enjoy some more flamer.
I would like to apologize to you, you're Right. The flamers you made would stomp anything without an armor value, but would die imediatly to a Quadgun turret or any other flyer pointed at them. I will be removing the rending option from flamers in the next update thanks for taking the time to show me!
Edit: I was running off of 4-5 hours of sleep and feeding a baby when I first read these posts, so again, I apologize for my failed attempt at math.
It is more an issue that flamers cost so little and the upgrades are percentage based. Fleshbane flamers cost 8 points, 10 with shred or twinlinking. and oh god I did mess up my math.
Underpowered is -50%... 50 $%#^ percent. so actually the flamer costs 10 points.... meaning the SH costs 420 points. Still way to much, but getting better.
edit: I am unclear, is the 1+1 in the attacks line for all the races supposed to mean they have 1 attack base +1 for each extra weapon? Or is it supposed to mean they all have two attacks.
Assuming the former..
Lets try some new flavor of brokenness.
I have a real liking for small vehicles. They are very points efficient.
I think I will build a mini Y'vahra as a Tau CC specialist.
Small Tau Fast Jet Walker, the .
9 all around -25 points
Open topped free
Fast 10 points
Shrouded 30 points
Stealth 15 points
Move Through Cover 10 points
Jet status 20 points
60 points before guns...
So for the armermants, I was thinking something a little weird.
A weapon with two profiles, to test out what that can do.
So first profile is...
Burst cannon 12 points
Armor bane 18 points
Lance 12 points
Gatling 18 points
Long barrel 6 points
Lesser APx2 -6 points
60 points by itself.
Now I thought long and hard about the second profile... but the thing is that gun is stupidly expensive. An actual alternate fire would be nice,
but just using the cheapest option leads to a massive random point break. So, for the sake of being overly OP...
Alternate fire,
Flamer 4 points
Total cost: 60*.75+4*.5=47 points... 13 points of for getting the option to have a flamer... yeah.
Add two of the Depleted uranium burst cannon to the walker for 94 points.
Total cost: 154 points of tank killing insanity. Yes it can't take a punch, it is made to abuse JSJ and cover. In cover it gets a 2+ save. If you are facing down Tau I recomend finding some LOS blocking cover.
WAIT... HOLD THE PRESSES! Flamer the category should be the template category! Flamers are small arms, and cannot purchase most of the offending upgrades. Flamer was a category in 4th ed.
The 1+1 means they have two attacks, as long as you purchase a melee weapon for them, otherwise, they only would have one attack.
You have to pay to weapons per attack, if you add more attacks with the ferocious rule, if you lose the weapon, you still have attacks, just lose the weapon bonus. With multiple weapons, your attacks dwindle as you lose weapons. The main reason to purchase ferocious is to Not have to model a million melee weapons.
As an aside, if at any point you make a decision while making a vehicle with these rules based entirely on trying to save points, that's stretching the reason these rules exist.
The dual profiles seems the most abusable. I would say add an clause that says "If the sum is less then the cost of the most expensive weapon, the weapon costs as much as the most expensive weapon."
That is why I am trying to make the most broken stuff possible... you don't find a systems weakness by building reasonable things.
So, now that we aren't allowed to just get a price break for doing what we were wanting to do any which way...
That is a lot for just one gun... but on the killy front: 8 twinlinked shots re rolling 2d6 to pen...
Say we are trying to pen a 12+ av target. need a 7+ to glance.
3/4 to hit, 7/12+(5/12*7/12)=119/144 chance to glance(yeah... simplifying that is going to be fun).
8 shots means 6 hits, and like 5 glances, and a little over half of those are pens. One will kill a landraider every round... so speed loader is overkill... unless we only take one. but spreading out the points is better.
Now, for a sane alternate firing option.
We want to keep this about the same price as the original gun while adding options. 25% of 60 is 15... so we have about 30 points to play with before we have to really justify ourselves.
We have an excelent antitank weapon, so lets get some anti infantry on it.
I like burst cannons, gattling looks awsome but actually... speed loader+twinlinked is the same price but better... also it is available to more guns... What the hell?
Unless we take speedloader off the first gun... then it just keeps the price exactly the same! This is really, really dumb...
So our gun, a dual profile burst cannon.
First profile is Twinlinked Armorbane Lance Shred Burst cannon with two Less AP. 48 points
Second Profile Twinlinked Rending Poison(4+) Shred Speed loader Burst cannon with two Less AP and 4 less strength. 24 points
Total cost per gun: (48*.75+24*.5)=48 points.
Total cost of the better stealth suit: 156 points.
Ability to kill literally any unit within range: Priceless.
The issue is you are taking underpowered to lower the cost and then taking special abilities that ignore the lowered Strength.
I would suggest that underpowered can not be combined with other ablities. Frankly, other than fluff reasons, I don't see the need for underpowered at all. You could probably get rid of it as an option, to eliminate potential abuse.
I originally didn't have it as an option, a friend asked to add it after i was done. (I really should have said no to that one)and speed load is there for big risk, big reward options. You could take it, or another identical weapon. One may get destroyed with a single 5 on the damage table, the other may get to fire less depending on vehicle speed.
I would say, that any small arms fire should just add to the points of the original.
Keep up the good work!
Edit: I will be removing the option for "underpowered" and the option for armor value 9 in the next update. That seems to be the cause of most of the problems. Also, shred doesn't allow rerolls for armor penetratration. I am thinking about removing any options that weaken a weapon actually. If it needs weakened (due to a rediculous combo of abilities) you don't get points back for it.
For underpowered, I would honestly make it -25% to reduce the weapons strength to 1, if it wasn't already 1. It is fluffy for poisoned weapons to be S1, but it shouldn't give you 200% off.
I mean speed loader is silly because it only cares about the base price, not after all of the other modifires... which would actually make it kinda fair.
so either two 20 points, or 14 points for one with speed loader. taking another flamer just to provide weapon destroyed protection still leaves you 4 points cheaper.
In my notebook, speed loader is added after everything else, like haywire and Titan killer. That would explain why I was comming up with different math for some of these.
LordDavenport wrote: For underpowered, I would honestly make it -25% to reduce the weapons strength to 1, if it wasn't already 1. It is fluffy for poisoned weapons to be S1, but it shouldn't give you 200% off.
It's "fluffy" for S1 Poisoned weapons, but "underpowered" it effectively is giving it a point reduction with no reduction in effectiveness.
It's better to eliminate "underpowered" all together, and let people who want the "fluffy" S1, just make their weapon S1 without a point reduction.
When I designed my Necron Knight Titan equivalent, I dropped the I to 2, without a point reduction, because it was fluffy.
Actually if your chance to wound by normal is just as good as your poison chance to wound, you shred. So it comes down to how many points you want to spend on getting that reroll for certain...
Honestly 25% off is mostly to be equal to the poison increase.
LordDavenport wrote: Actually if your chance to wound by normal is just as good as your poison chance to wound, you shred. So it comes down to how many points you want to spend on getting that reroll for certain...
Honestly 25% off is mostly to be equal to the poison increase.
I'm thinking I am going to be dropping the ability to lower cost period. It seems to be the best way to stop a lot of shenanigans, and the low av, super weapon vehicles were what I was warned against when I first posted this thing.(it was a problem with the original also)
That is going to be my first major change for the system. I'm thinking that vehicle squadrons will be adding a point per hull point for each vehicle that can be added. So a squadron of 5 light vehicles would add 8 points to each vehicle. What do you guys think?
Squadrons actively make the models worse... given that glances/pens can just roll over, and they can only have one target for their own shooting. The only benefit is fielding more in a single slot... Which is nice, but most of the things you would want to spam will be losing more then they get.
Honestly, I wouldn't put a price tag on it, but rather limit the size of the thing that can squad by codex.
like 60 or less for Eldar, DE, SM, CSM, and Necrons.
100 or less for Orks
150 or less for IG.
These numbers are chosen at random, so honestly you could use actual math instead. Mostly I think IG should get bigger squadron enabled vehicles because that is their schtick. everyone else should be at some point below that...
LordDavenport wrote: Squadrons actively make the models worse... given that glances/pens can just roll over, and they can only have one target for their own shooting. The only benefit is fielding more in a single slot... Which is nice, but most of the things you would want to spam will be losing more then they get.
Honestly, I wouldn't put a price tag on it, but rather limit the size of the thing that can squad by codex.
like 60 or less for Eldar, DE, SM, CSM, and Necrons.
100 or less for Orks
150 or less for IG.
These numbers are chosen at random, so honestly you could use actual math instead. Mostly I think IG should get bigger squadron enabled vehicles because that is their schtick. everyone else should be at some point below that...
That sounds legit, I'll look into any max point totals and see what I come up with. In the system I had in my head, you might spend 6 points per vehicle.
What do you think, in regards to power level, of your various vehicles you've made without the option of av9 and no ability to lower weapon point totals?
Now lets try a broken CSM walker... given the varriety of fixes being tossed around in place. No price reduction... hmm...
CSM Large Walker
13 front, 11 side, 11 rear. 40 points
Open topped 5 points
Fast 20 points
IWND 15 points
Fleet 5 points
Move through cover 10 points
Transport 20 models 20 points
Power fist 15 points
13 extra attacks from ferocious 33 points
169 points.
So... I actually kinda want to see this one in play before I make any comments. It is definitely the mauler fiends big brother.
Load it up with a squad of terminators, and run it at the enemy. rely on pure moxie to get to close range... your 14 attacks should clear your way to your objective through tarpits.
edit: @Lythrandire Biehrellian:Their abuses get covered, and they are now really bad? Well, except the flamer one. That just needs to be treated as small arms except able to take torrent or something.
It forces makers toward chunkier ships, given that you need a goodly amount of fire power to excuse the points you throw at the body.
edit:edit: Ok, forgot walkers can swing PF at initiative. So... yeah... it is one weapon destroyed result from a very bad day... but it can kill most reasonable units before they can swing... and is a transport before anything else.
Gorka/morka naught say yes, and one of those "It dosn't say I can't" Moments.
Better question: Is paying 45 points for +1 av to front and rear, 20 unit transport capacity, and 10 ish attacks worth it? Yes, yes it is.
The ferocious rule adds attacks based on the weapon used, so power axe would make the points jump up another 77 points, or, if using the power fist, it would add 154 points. I would go for the axe, personally.
And your walker would only go up about 26 points with just the antitank gun on it, still deleting land raiders.
Is there anything to stop taking a normal weapon once, and then making it ferocious to your hearts desire?
Given that attacks are attacks, and you chose the profile used...
Saying "ferocious only works with the weapon it is bought for" just defeats the purpose of the upgrade, as taking n normal weapons means you can still get as many attacks as you want.
This is a general issue with the system, taking as many guns as you want, leading to stupid amounts of firepower.
I would just do what you did with the Small vehicle size, and limit the different sizes armament. like 6 for medium, and 10 for large.
There comes a point where you have to decide between creative freedom and game balancing restrictions.
You could also resort to pointing and laughing at people when they try to play obvious game breaking monstrousities.
In any case, whatever restriction you make, someone will go out of their way to attempt to exploit them.
Vehicle classes, with armament restiction sounds like a good approach.
I would also like to suggest some sort of upper limit on weapon upgrades, like no more than 3 modifications to any particular weapon profile. That alone should cut down on possible abuse.
They have one in the book I got the original V.D.R. in, it is a hot mess to start with due to tyranids no being the only faction with m.c.'s now. I'll look at it again.
I like the idea of limiting the amount of weapons things can carry, and the idea of limiting upgrades too! There is already a cap on attacks (10) so I don't know if that is needed. Maybe only purchase ferocious once for non superheavies...
I started updating the V.D.R. this morning. Upgrades for weapons now have 2 categories and a limit on how many of each you can purchase. And vehicles have a max limit on how many weapons they can carry, with tanks getting extra. I should be able to post it in the morning.
IdicBeer on youtube converted MsDonalds Incredibles Omnidroids into Necron Power Generators for a terrain piece he did.
I bought a half dozen of them on Ebay, and I was thinking of using them as Necron Light Walkers
Necron Canoptek Eradicators - Fast Light Walker
WS 4 BS 4 S 6 I 2 A 1 HP 2 F 11 S 11 R 11
Telsa Sterilizer - 24" S5 AP- Heavy 5, Tesla, Haywire
The Tombs on Necron worlds occasionally get infested with lower life forms, such a rodents, sentient fungus, humans, etc.. and it is the purpose of the Canoptek Eradicators to patrol the hallways of the ancient crypts and eliminate any such infestions they may encounter.
Spoiler:
F 11 = 5pt
S 11 = 10pt
R 11 = 5pt
Small = 0pts
Fast = 10pts
Tesla Sphere = 25pts
* Haywire Upgrade @10pts per shot = 50
Total = 105 pts
I plan on modelling a Tesla Sphere on the top of each of them.
While pondering giviing them a melee attack, I noticed that the Dreadnught Close Combat Weapon is not on the list. Although I imagine you just use a Power Fist as an equivalent
adamsouza wrote: IdicBeer on youtube converted MsDonalds Incredibles Omnidroids into Necron Power Generators for a terrain piece he did.
I bought a half dozen of them on Ebay, and I was thinking of using them as Necron Light Walkers
Necron Canoptek Eradicators - Fast Light Walker
WS 4 BS 4 S 6 I 2 A 1 HP 2 F 11 S 11 R 11
Telsa Sterilizer - 24" S5 AP- Heavy 5, Tesla, Haywire
The Tombs on Necron worlds occasionally get infested with lower life forms, such a rodents, sentient fungus, humans, etc.. and it is the purpose of the Canoptek Eradicators to patrol the hallways of the ancient crypts and eliminate any such infestions they may encounter.
Spoiler:
F 11 = 5pt
S 11 = 10pt
R 11 = 5pt
Small = 0pts
Fast = 10pts
Tesla Sphere = 25pts
* Haywire Upgrade @10pts per shot = 50
Total = 105 pts
I plan on modelling a Tesla Sphere on the top of each of them.
While pondering giviing them a melee attack, I noticed that the Dreadnught Close Combat Weapon is not on the list. Although I imagine you just use a Power Fist as an equivalent
As far as I can tell, they stopped calling it a DCCW in 6th (or partway through), and started calling them Power Fists (or Klaw for Orks- essentially the equivilent from each 'dex)
I really like your rules so far. Maybe I missed it, but I am not seeing the dreadnought weapons anywhere namely the seismic hammers, chainfists, DCCWs. That kind of thing. Sorry if it is there and I just missed it. I am also not seeing the super heavy weapons. I really love what you have done and are doing. I would love to see something like this for building units, characters, unique characters, and relics. Not saying you should do it, but someone could take what you have done here and apply it to other aspects of the game and maybe in the end create a balanced game.
NorseSig wrote: I really like your rules so far. Maybe I missed it, but I am not seeing the dreadnought weapons anywhere namely the seismic hammers, chainfists, DCCWs. That kind of thing. Sorry if it is there and I just missed it. I am also not seeing the super heavy weapons. I really love what you have done and are doing. I would love to see something like this for building units, characters, unique characters, and relics. Not saying you should do it, but someone could take what you have done here and apply it to other aspects of the game and maybe in the end create a balanced game.
Thanks! Those weapons are simply a power fist with additional rules attached! Add the armorbane rule, or concussive to the base weapon and voila!
What do you guys think of the splitting up of the different modifications?
NorseSig wrote: I really like your rules so far. Maybe I missed it, but I am not seeing the dreadnought weapons anywhere namely the seismic hammers, chainfists, DCCWs. That kind of thing. Sorry if it is there and I just missed it. I am also not seeing the super heavy weapons. I really love what you have done and are doing. I would love to see something like this for building units, characters, unique characters, and relics. Not saying you should do it, but someone could take what you have done here and apply it to other aspects of the game and maybe in the end create a balanced game.
Thanks! Those weapons are simply a power fist with additional rules attached! Add the armorbane rule, or concussive to the base weapon and voila!
What do you guys think of the splitting up of the different modifications?
Ahh ok I get how it works a bit better now. You find the closest base to whatever the weapon is and modify it from there. I am trying to build an Ironclad or Contemptor with Seismic Hammer and Chainfist with a heavy flamer and melta-gun on each arm to use as an HQ or maybe LOW (with venerable and eternal warrior maybe orbital bombardment in place of the hunter-killers. Yes, I know venerable and eternal warrior doesn't come on these units). The flamers and meltas would work a bit like the servo harness. choose up to two to fire.
I think splitting of various weapon options might be a good idea. Maybe a few more in depth examples here and there to further idiot proof these things. Take a look at the battlemech construction rules for battletech. Formly FASA now Catalyst Games.
Sorry to be a pain in the rear, but how would you price an ion shield, automantic shielding, and a conversion beamer/heavy conversion beamer?
Ahh ok I get how it works a bit better now. You find the closest base to whatever the weapon is and modify it from there. I am trying to build an Ironclad or Contemptor with Seismic Hammer and Chainfist with a heavy flamer and melta-gun on each arm to use as an HQ or maybe LOW (with venerable and eternal warrior maybe orbital bombardment in place of the hunter-killers. Yes, I know venerable and eternal warrior doesn't come on these units). The flamers and meltas would work a bit like the servo harness. choose up to two to fire.
So, because I want to avoid doing other things...
Large SM Walker
FA13/SA12/RA10 45 points
Enclosed free
Normal movement speed 15 points
Jump pack 40 points
Hit and Run 12 points
Deep strike 25 points
cerimite plating 30 points
Heavy flamer with torrent, pining, twinlinked, and speed loader 64 points each
gives us 32 points for the melta... call it a shred twinlinked longbarreled melta gun. 38 points
so two of a dual profile gun with those, 64*.75+38*.5=48+19=67 points each, call it 134 points for the two.
Now we add the melee attack...
SIesmic hammer is just a thunder hammer with AP1... which we can't so, yeah thunderhammer it is.
take one for 20 points.
take a powerfist with armor bane 38 points.
359 points total... wow this is way to expensive. Might be worth stripping cerimite plating, or the jump pack.
Ahh ok I get how it works a bit better now. You find the closest base to whatever the weapon is and modify it from there. I am trying to build an Ironclad or Contemptor with Seismic Hammer and Chainfist with a heavy flamer and melta-gun on each arm to use as an HQ or maybe LOW (with venerable and eternal warrior maybe orbital bombardment in place of the hunter-killers. Yes, I know venerable and eternal warrior doesn't come on these units). The flamers and meltas would work a bit like the servo harness. choose up to two to fire.
So, because I want to avoid doing other things...
Large SM Walker
FA13/SA12/RA10 45 points
Enclosed free
Normal movement speed 15 points
Jump pack 40 points
Hit and Run 12 points
Deep strike 25 points
cerimite plating 30 points
Heavy flamer with torrent, pining, twinlinked, and speed loader 64 points each
gives us 32 points for the melta... call it a shred twinlinked longbarreled melta gun. 38 points
so two of a dual profile gun with those, 64*.75+38*.5=48+19=67 points each, call it 134 points for the two.
Now we add the melee attack...
SIesmic hammer is just a thunder hammer with AP1... which we can't so, yeah thunderhammer it is.
take one for 20 points.
take a powerfist with armor bane 38 points.
359 points total... wow this is way to expensive. Might be worth stripping cerimite plating, or the jump pack.
That's the beauty of the ruleset, if you get too rediculous with weapon options, the survivability of the vehicle makes it not worth the points spent. It should work as a deterrent for cheesiness thanks for trying it out!
I did notice that feature when I was making that last walker cutom. That's why I opted for a more fragile weapons platform, instead of an unstoppable behemoth.
I like what you guys have so far, keep up the good work!
Adamsouza, those little walkers are sweet! As an eldar player (whole species) I have to say that I'd love to pop those little balloons
Ahh ok I get how it works a bit better now. You find the closest base to whatever the weapon is and modify it from there. I am trying to build an Ironclad or Contemptor with Seismic Hammer and Chainfist with a heavy flamer and melta-gun on each arm to use as an HQ or maybe LOW (with venerable and eternal warrior maybe orbital bombardment in place of the hunter-killers. Yes, I know venerable and eternal warrior doesn't come on these units). The flamers and meltas would work a bit like the servo harness. choose up to two to fire.
So, because I want to avoid doing other things...
Large SM Walker
FA13/SA12/RA10 45 points
Enclosed free
Normal movement speed 15 points
Jump pack 40 points
Hit and Run 12 points
Deep strike 25 points
cerimite plating 30 points
Heavy flamer with torrent, pining, twinlinked, and speed loader 64 points each
gives us 32 points for the melta... call it a shred twinlinked longbarreled melta gun. 38 points
so two of a dual profile gun with those, 64*.75+38*.5=48+19=67 points each, call it 134 points for the two.
Now we add the melee attack...
SIesmic hammer is just a thunder hammer with AP1... which we can't so, yeah thunderhammer it is.
take one for 20 points.
take a powerfist with armor bane 38 points.
359 points total... wow this is way to expensive. Might be worth stripping cerimite plating, or the jump pack.
That's the beauty of the ruleset, if you get too rediculous with weapon options, the survivability of the vehicle makes it not worth the points spent. It should work as a deterrent for cheesiness thanks for trying it out!
I wasn't looking to go completely nuts. I was looking for something to represent a captain or chapter master who had been a Forgefather that was intered into a contempter or ironclad who was known for his thunder hammer and chainfist and love of melta and flamers.. Something around 300 points maybe a bit more to be a bit like a draigo or some other high point cost unique character. Nothing fancy ie not much for upgrades beyond what a contemptor or ironclad might have. I'm leaning towards contemptor since it is an older design and I envision this guy as an older relugated to legend so to speak.
If you were to drop the speed loader upgrade from the flamer/melta guns, maybe use a multimelta instead of a long barreled melta gun, you could shave off around 70 points, and the jump pack already give you deep strike. So there is another 25. So your vehicle will actually cost you about 267. That should be about what you wanted
adamsouza wrote: Lythrandire Biehrellian, as a possible future update, maybe include examples of the various size classes
Sure can, I do in my notebook. I didn't know if it was necessary on the final version.
Thank you. It would be helpfull, especially to newer players who may not be familiar with all the various armies and their vehicles.
I second this. The easier you make it for the new players or players with limited experience the better. Making things idiot friendly is usually a good thing. It means less confusion and questions in the long run. Please keep up the great work. This kind of thing inspires conversions which is a definite plus to the hobby.
adamsouza wrote: Lythrandire Biehrellian, as a possible future update, maybe include examples of the various size classes
Sure can, I do in my notebook. I didn't know if it was necessary on the final version.
Thank you. It would be helpfull, especially to newer players who may not be familiar with all the various armies and their vehicles.
I second this. The easier you make it for the new players or players with limited experience the better. Making things idiot friendly is usually a good thing. It means less confusion and questions in the long run. Please keep up the great work. This kind of thing inspires conversions which is a definite plus to the hobby.
Have you considered a weapon upgrade to improve ap by 1 for like maybe 100%? Maybe limit it to being taken 1 - 3 times obviously the max would be ap1. Maybe even limit it to what type of weapons or vehicle classes can take it and/or if you take this upgrade you can't take another or vice versa. I would say a taking it once would be enough. This would let a person better duplicate certain weapons.
Upgrades are already capped at a total of 3. So... yeah.
Though honestly I am now a little scared of AP4 SMS. They kinda turn into Heavy flamers on crack... Multching anything that generally hides in cover anyways from a good distance out.
Though this points out that a Torrent heavy flamer is only 25 points... Idk.
Played with the idea, decided against it because it can drastically change the normal preferred target of then weapon. If you wanted to do it, try it for an extra 20 poi ts or so and see what your opponents say about it.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Played with the idea, decided against it because it can drastically change the normal preferred target of then weapon. If you wanted to do it, try it for an extra 20 poi ts or so and see what your opponents say about it.
Only reason I suggested it was so a person can duplicate an ap1 DCCW. But I understand the concern. Though a change in target due to a better ap may prove interesting. Though it becomes problematic quickly on weapons that hit a LOT of models at once like blast, template, and barrage. Maybe limit it to melee?
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Played with the idea, decided against it because it can drastically change the normal preferred target of then weapon. If you wanted to do it, try it for an extra 20 poi ts or so and see what your opponents say about it.
Only reason I suggested it was so a person can duplicate an ap1 DCCW. But I understand the concern. Though a change in target due to a better ap may prove interesting. Though it becomes problematic quickly on weapons that hit a LOT of models at once like blast, template, and barrage. Maybe limit it to melee?
Other than the ability to say the weapon is ap1, how often are st10 ap2 equipped robots having trouble destroying vehicles? That's the only benefit that particular upgrade would give you. Like I said, if you really feel it matches the fluff of your dreadnaught, you can just add it. Where is the dreadnought with ap1 located? I'll try and price it out as a separate melee weapon.
Imagine a Dreadnaught with
AP3/2 Heavy Flamers
Gattling AP3 Heavy Bolters
This is why I suggested it be on MELEE weapons or at least exclude from template, blast, and barrage weapons; and limit to only being taken ONCE. Though on the heavy bolters I think it would be alright. 3 ap 3 heavy bolters don't scare me. The idea of allowing it on ap2 weapons only works too.
LordDavenport wrote: a 25% upgrade to make AP2 weapons AP1.
It literally helps kill vehicles, more would be to much. But that would be enough for people to think about it.
Call it overpenetration, sounds like a good deal to me. We'll make it an add on too, that way it won't be an easy decision. I'll add that to the next update
LordDavenport wrote: a 25% upgrade to make AP2 weapons AP1.
It literally helps kill vehicles, more would be to much. But that would be enough for people to think about it.
Call it overpenetration, sounds like a good deal to me. We'll make it an add on too, that way it won't be an easy decision. I'll add that to the next update
what else do you folks have for me?
Sounds good. Maybe add the ion shield for those making knights, and the automantic shielding and the helical targeting array for dreads. Maybe even limit these abilities to walkers only and possible size restrictions. Can't think of anything else offhand with those rules. Not saying there isn't but I am just not seeing it at the moment.
It's a pleasure. I originally started it for just my local group, I actually figured someone else would have done it. When I saw they hadn't, I figured I'd throw it out here and see what everyone thought.
In regards to the title, another thing I had noticed was that the more restrictive the races build options are, the cheapernthe weapons. Eldar and dark eldar, for example, get better costed weapons than the imperium, but have weaker guns per point than the necrons.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: It's a pleasure. I originally started it for just my local group, I actually figured someone else would have done it. When I saw they hadn't, I figured I'd throw it out here and see what everyone thought.
In regards to the title, another thing I had noticed was that the more restrictive the races build options are, the cheapernthe weapons. Eldar and dark eldar, for example, get better costed weapons than the imperium, but have weaker guns per point than the necrons.
Which kinda makes sense. More versatility/options usually equates increased price point. Though this can get skewed if the less options are significantly superior. one of my favorite options that you included is the removes gets hot! option. I despise that rule. Every single time I have taken plasma the plasma unit blows itself up doing nothing.
I added it because there are several weapons based off of the plasma cannon on various platforms, and I didn't see a weapon that is they would be based on. So I figured it was an upgrade they added.
So, I was thinking about an upgrade for walkers to allow them the one time purchase of a +1 to initiative. Was thinking the points total would be (# of attacks x new initiative modifier)
What do you guys think? The main bonus of higher initiative is being able to attack before your opponent. I am also adding a designation to tau, eldar/dark, and necrons. It will limit them all to skimmers and walkers, I plan on calling it "hyper advanced" that way I can save space in the description.
First, I want to thank you for doing all of this; it's great work and helped me out a great deal when I put together my fandex.
Secondly, I think the Walker initiative option would be great. The Cerastus Knight-Lancer enjoys the bonus only on the first turn, but I think that can be compensated for easily enough after the fact. Doing attacks * new initiative bonus sounds like it should scale just fine.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: So, I was thinking about an upgrade for walkers to allow them the one time purchase of a +1 to initiative. Was thinking the points total would be (# of attacks x new initiative modifier)
What do you guys think? The main bonus of higher initiative is being able to attack before your opponent. I am also adding a designation to tau, eldar/dark, and necrons. It will limit them all to skimmers and walkers, I plan on calling it "hyper advanced" that way I can save space in the description.
I like it, but I also have a soft spot for walkers and think they don't get enough love (at least dreadnoughts don't).
So I just eyeballed a stock Tau Broadside as a Light Walker with12/11/10 armour and 2 HP. It came in at 71 points with the Blacksun Filter (multi-teacker is redundant).
For 11 extra points the model gains the ability to move and shoot plus immunity to small arms. It also loses its armour save, which may not be a fair trade, especially against autocannon spam (though Lascannons would 1 shot Broadsides regularly).
I thought about going for a medium for the slightly higher AV, but upgrading from 2 wounds to 3 Hull Points seemed a bit much. Though, if the Seeker Missile option counts as a third weapon, it may be necessary.
Interesting thought exercise anyway. Crisis suits as a light walker might work out too, though the stats for HQ characters could get crazy.
Riptide etc would probably have to be heavy or superheavies.
Jefffar wrote: So I just eyeballed a stock Tau Broadside as a Light Walker with12/11/10 armour and 2 HP. It came in at 71 points with the Blacksun Filter (multi-teacker is redundant).
For 11 extra points the model gains the ability to move and shoot plus immunity to small arms. It also loses its armour save, which may not be a fair trade, especially against autocannon spam (though Lascannons would 1 shot Broadsides regularly).
I thought about going for a medium for the slightly higher AV, but upgrading from 2 wounds to 3 Hull Points seemed a bit much. Though, if the Seeker Missile option counts as a third weapon, it may be necessary.
Interesting thought exercise anyway. Crisis suits as a light walker might work out too, though the stats for HQ characters could get crazy.
Riptide etc would probably have to be heavy or superheavies.
I made a broadside at 10 av all the way around and 2 hull points, open topped. It equaled out to about the same points, and it made the broadside immune to str3, bit weaker against everything else. Also, one shot weapons don't count towards the maximum number of weapons equipped by a vehicle.
I can certainly add bs2,to the list for tau, yay drones!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alcibiades wrote: I think GW also factors physical size of the model into the cost. It's not all a matter of stats.
Actually, the issue is that they pile on special rules to make the bigger models more points. The gork/morkanaught is costed the way it is due to the amount of guns it is swinging around. If size dictated a point increase, then the godhammer pattern land raider wouldn't be overcosted if using bs4 for the twinlinked lascannons.
So, I recreated the old Harlequin dreadnaught, using their current vehicles as a baseline to avoid breaking their theme.
WS5 BS4 STR5 AV 10-10-10 I6 A2 HP2 open topped walker
Holofield (5+ invuln unless immobilized)
Leaping grace, (ignore movement penalties for terrain, 12" movement)
hit and run
fleet
1x haywire blaster
2 x Cegorach's caress (STR+1 AP2 armorbane)
I wanted that to be the case, it is kind of the Harlequin shtick. It is an elite slot too, so fits in their detachment. I have a flyer built statistically as well. It is basically a night wing interceptor, but trades the bright lances, shrouded, and agile for 2 of the new prism weapons, a 5+ invulnerable save and the one use 4+
It's priced at 5 points less than the interceptor.
Had family stuff to take care of, will post the next update wednesday morning.
Adjusted prices
Some new rules
Adding the Harlequin faction to the list
Adding more "build a weapon" examples, including the dreaded eldar pulsar
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Had family stuff to take care of, will post the next update wednesday morning.
Adjusted prices
Some new rules
Adding the Harlequin faction to the list
Adding more "build a weapon" examples, including the dreaded eldar pulsar
That is perfectly fine. You are entitled to have a real life lol. I am looking forward to the update. Keep up the great work.
Did overpenitration get nixed, or is that planned for afuture update? Maybe I just missed it, if so I apologize.
I would suggest somehow adding an example of each vehicle type for each size just to prevent certain sizing shenanigans.
For long barrel there should be something that says how much longer a barrel can be than the normal so you don't have someone adding a 6inch barrel to a rhino or something silly like that. I played a game recently where the guy used a home built deimos predator. The vehicle was about the right size except the gun barrel which added 6 inches to the barrel of the magna melta cannon.
Speaking of, what did you think of the additional build-a-weapon examples?
I like them. May I suggest adding one more making use of one of the add after all other calculations one. It SHOULD be a no brainer, but I find a person is sometimes surprised by how often the no brainer things are what confuses people or people get into RAI vs RAW arguments over.
I think for walkers and other vehicles with bases we should include what size base they should be on.
I didn't think it was needed, but then I played a guy in my local group yesterday who used these rules to make a Super heavy dreadnought that was the size of a regular dreadnought on a regular dreadnought base. I flat out told him no. We need to make sure that there are rules that doesn't allow underhanded things like this. It was a cool conversion, but no way am I playing against a superheavy that is the size of a dreadnought and is hard to target and can take cover with impunity.
Ouch, that would be a bother. I can't do standard base sizes though. A warwalker is a size category smaller statistically than a dreadnought, but they have the same base. A superheavy should look the part, the only one that didn't was the transcendent C'tan, and he isn't anymore.
Edit: glad you guys are utilizing these rules! Nice to hear that peoples creations are being brought to games
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Ouch, that would be a bother. I can't do standard base sizes though. A warwalker is a size category smaller statistically than a dreadnought, but they have the same base. A superheavy should look the part, the only one that didn't was the transcendent C'tan, and he isn't anymore.
Edit: glad you guys are utilizing these rules! Nice to hear that peoples creations are being brought to games
Yeah, the super heavies is the biggest issue, but a lot can be solved by saying if it is x size it gets y base for things that have bases.
And maybe say if It is modeled after a certain unit or similar to a certain unit the model must be about that size.
That should fix a lot of shenanigans of that sort.
I will say most people are honest, but there is always going to be that one guy who will take advantage of any loop hole they can. A lot of the rules for things need to be written taking those people into account.
I bashed out the Wyvern mortars using 2x BS3 Ork Lobbas (15pts ea). IC is a 75% bump, Shred is a 50% bump. So basically the Mortars should cost 67.5 points. The basic Wyvern chassis and BS3 Heavy Bolter add another 25pts. So now the Wyvern costs about 90-95pts, by the VDC.
I can use this as a tool to verify costing, but I'll first ask - am I using this right?
Yoyoyo wrote: I bashed out the Wyvern mortars using 2x BS3 Ork Lobbas (15pts ea). IC is a 75% bump, Shred is a 50% bump. So basically the Mortars should cost 67.5 points. The basic Wyvern chassis and BS3 Heavy Bolter add another 25pts. So now the Wyvern costs about 90-95pts, by the VDC.
I can use this as a tool to verify costing, but I'll first ask - am I using this right?
Keep in mind he has things costed to come out 5-15 points more expensive than ordinary stuff and about 40points more expensive for super heavies to help prevent people from abusing the system. So keep that in mind if you are using it to double check the costs of vehicles.
Yoyoyo wrote: I bashed out the Wyvern mortars using 2x BS3 Ork Lobbas (15pts ea). IC is a 75% bump, Shred is a 50% bump. So basically the Mortars should cost 67.5 points. The basic Wyvern chassis and BS3 Heavy Bolter add another 25pts. So now the Wyvern costs about 90-95pts, by the VDC.
I can use this as a tool to verify costing, but I'll first ask - am I using this right?
Don't have the book n front of me, but the lobbas are large blast, aren't they? That would make them more expensive to start than the small blast mortars. But yes, I think you are doing it correctly
You may need to bump up the max possible troop capacity to 25 for large vehicles. I mention this because of the Spartan Assault Tank. It has a Transport capacity of 25.
Maybe add rules for the Caestus Assault Ram might be useful. Namely the Misericorde. Which treats power armor, artificer armor, and Terminator armor as ignoring bulky for transport capacity. The ramming rules are neat too.
Jefffar wrote: The Misercorde rule might be a point savings on a transport if you look at it as treating all models as Bulky.
You mean something that does the opposite or Misercorde don't you? Treat models as Bulky. Would this treat Bulky as very bulky, and very bulky as extremely bulky?
There are always going to be vehicles that break norms, and the spartan assault vehicle is one of them. I didn't include that level of transport for the same reason I didn't include the 5th hull point option. Those things are rare enough that I didn't want to meddle with it untill I had everything clean cut and finalized. I'll see what I can don't or future updates
Jefffar wrote: The Misercorde rule might be a point savings on a transport if you look at it as treating all models as Bulky.
You mean something that does the opposite or Misercorde don't you? Treat models as Bulky. Would this treat Bulky as very bulky, and very bulky as extremely bulky?
No, the Assault Ram gets to transport 10 bulky terminators, but it can only carry 10 non bulky PA iinstead of the 20 it should.
I know that's not the way its worded, but that's the effect and making that restriction a penalty can help explain why the Assault Ram is surprisingly cheap for a flying land raider.
Jefffar wrote: The Misercorde rule might be a point savings on a transport if you look at it as treating all models as Bulky.
You mean something that does the opposite or Misercorde don't you? Treat models as Bulky. Would this treat Bulky as very bulky, and very bulky as extremely bulky?
No, the Assault Ram gets to transport 10 bulky terminators, but it can only carry 10 non bulky PA iinstead of the 20 it should.
I know that's not the way its worded, but that's the effect and making that restriction a penalty can help explain why the Assault Ram is surprisingly cheap for a flying land raider.
That is what I said. It ignores bulky rule for terminators so it can carry ten of them or carry a max of 10 power armored/artificer armored men. Said it twice. Misercorde is actually an upgrade it modifies a carrying capacity of 10 to ignore bulky rule.
There you go! I magnetized my wraithknight to allow this configuration, that way he can serve double duty. To be fair,he hasn't been a wraithknight since I created this variant
I'm not sure I'm understanding, because flickerfields are a Codex-specific Dark Eldar wargear and Harlequins don't get those either.
The Wrathknight is cool. I've been vaguely working on rules for mine, though she is (or they are, though the angry twin is dominant - it's complicated) a special character who can punch Titans to death. I'll be more inclined to give her actual rules when I actually have the model finished (for an idea of how long I take to do anything, consider that I've had her since the Wraithknight was released but so far have only done so much as to take her off sprue, despite having a lot of conversion plans).
Frozen Ocean wrote: I'm not sure I'm understanding, because flickerfields are a Codex-specific Dark Eldar wargear and Harlequins don't get those either.
The Wrathknight is cool. I've been vaguely working on rules for mine, though she is (or they are, though the angry twin is dominant - it's complicated) a special character who can punch Titans to death. I'll be more inclined to give her actual rules when I actually have the model finished (for an idea of how long I take to do anything, consider that I've had her since the Wraithknight was released but so far have only done so much as to take her off sprue, despite having a lot of conversion plans).
The harlequins have their own holofields(they grant a 5+ invuln save unless immobilized) that's what that particular upgrade is. Also, flicker fields aren't purchasable in a list of wargear in the dark eldar codex, they only go on the venom. I added it as a purchasable upgrade in my V.D.R. so people can build variant versions of the venom. I have a few old school warwalkers that I'm turning into "wardancers" for my Harlequin army, as well as a nightscythe that will be a "storm weaver" flyer for the same army. That stats for those are in the custom unit for 40k thread
Yes, but I'm not talking about Harlequin holofields, just the regular ones. What if I, say, wanted to put holofields on the Crimson Hunter? Would the Codex vehicle upgrade list pricing work? I just find it strange that there are Dark Eldar flickerfields and Harlequin holofields (which come with mirage launchers) but no CWE holofields except Titan ones.
Frozen Ocean wrote: Yes, but I'm not talking about Harlequin holofields, just the regular ones. What if I, say, wanted to put holofields on the Crimson Hunter? Would the Codex vehicle upgrade list pricing work? I just find it strange that there are Dark Eldar flickerfields and Harlequin holofields (which come with mirage launchers) but no CWE holofields except Titan ones.
Yes, if you wanted to add the normal holofields to a flyer you created using these rules, and the cost listed in the vehicle upgrades section of the codex, you can. The wraith based flyer has spirit stones, so there's a precedent. However, if you built an exact replica of the crimson hunter to just slap the holofields rule onto it, it would be going against the thought behind the V.D.R. the purpose is for modeling new and interesting vehicles, not just buffing current ones.
Big shootas and Rockets are 5 pts codex wide now to put on any vehicle or model (refering to orks more so than grots) . Why is it listed as 6? Maybe I'm missing something but I'm confused.
Yaavaragefinkinman wrote: Big shootas and Rockets are 5 pts codex wide now to put on any vehicle or model (refering to orks more so than grots) . Why is it listed as 6? Maybe I'm missing something but I'm confused.
The points values in the VDR are based on math and not the cost of codex upgrades. Also, they are purposely slightly higher to discourage min-maxing cheaper versions of codex units.
They are 5 to add to things, but when adding them you may be limited as to whether or not you can shoot with them. Making them a point more keeps people from wanting to slap a pile of them on a walker to shred infantry.
Also, what he said ^
What do you guys think of the massive sized vehicles?
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: They are 5 to add to things, but when adding them you may be limited as to whether or not you can shoot with them. Making them a point more keeps people from wanting to slap a pile of them on a walker to shred infantry.
Also, what he said ^
What do you guys think of the massive sized vehicles?
It is great and fills the gap that was there. People can now make overpriced uber Spartan Assault tanks, though I don't know how they can get any more uber lol. But seriously it filled the gap that was there. Keep up the excellent work.
Thanks! Looking forward to the admech skitarii, I'll be able to add their rules and weapons once they are released.
I have a friend who does graphics design, I'm going to have her make this thing pretty so you can print out a legit looking document. Going to be awesome!
Edit for autocorrect.
Automatically Appended Next Post: So, I've had two people ask me so far, and I wanted to throw it out into the universe. If you purchase the flyer speed, and the jump upgrade for a walker, would it be overpowered to run it as a walker with flying monstrous creature rules? Including the caveat that if it takes a glancing or penetrating hit, it takes a grounding test.
Nope. The fire points have never really made an impact in cost as far as I can tell. Mainly because they vary so wildly in effectiveness based on the unit inside. If the vehicle is empty, why am I paying points for fire points?
Now I had considered that when I decided points for open topped, but with the ability to give the unit inside the option to assault from it or fire all their weapons from the relative safety of the transport, it should cost a little extra.
When modeling the vehicles, if you are basing it off of a current design, use the fire and access points the vehicle already has. It will help tie your creation into the rest of the armies menagerie.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Nope. The fire points have never really made an impact in cost as far as I can tell. Mainly because they vary so wildly in effectiveness based on the unit inside. If the vehicle is empty, why am I paying points for fire points?
Now I had considered that when I decided points for open topped, but with the ability to give the unit inside the option to assault from it or fire all their weapons from the relative safety of the transport, it should cost a little extra.
When modeling the vehicles, if you are basing it off of a current design, use the fire and access points the vehicle already has. It will help tie your creation into the rest of the armies menagerie.
That's kinda what I figured, but I figured I better ask to make sure. Have you considered making a second vehicle design chart using true values purely for those who wish to balance the current vehicles like say the often discussed wave serpent for instance. The goal obviously being to achieve better game balance not to build new stuff. New/custom stuff should have a higher points cost for the reasons you mentioned earlier.
I realize the numbers are only off by 5 -15 points and about 40 for super heavies, but getting a true total would make things a little more accurate.
Thanks for the quick reply btw.
On a side note I am working on a razorback variant with a twin-linked conversion beamer. I like conversion beamers a lot lol.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Okay, after trying to recreate the space marine vehicles (vanilla marines) I have run into some issues. Some or all could be user error lol.
Firstly, I am having difficulties recreating the Cerberus Launcher, Conversion Beamer, Icarus Stormcannon Array, and the Skyspear Missile Launcher.
Second I am getting a lot of crazy values on the stock vehicles. Either I am doing something wrong, or GW has really screwy pricing. I am assuming your math and formula are right since it seems to work correctly on most everything (accounting for the intentional price increase)
Here are the values I have gotten and for what vehicles (stock loadouts no upgrades): Rhino 40, Razorback 54, Predator 70, Whirlwind 55, Dreadnought 110, Ironclad Dreadnought 172, Vindicator 95, Land Raider 254, Land Raider Crusader 237, Land Raider Redeemer 241, Land Speeder 60, Land Speeder Storm 70 (Cerberus Launcher not figured in), Storm Talon 146, Storm Raven 240, Stalker 40 (no gun), and Hunter (no gun).
Some fall within the the margin of error like the rhino, dreadnought, and land raider. Others come in at or about their current price. And some come in way over or way under their current cost.
If the formula is set up to to create slightly more expensive vehicles shouldn't they all fall into the 5 - 15 over category?
If that is so then either my calculations are wrong (ie I'm doing something wrong somewhere) or Space Marine vehicles are WAY out of whack.
Sorry if I am being a pain, but I thought it was better to bring it up and make sure everything is working correctly. If my calculations are wrong, then no worries. It will just mean I am an idiot, and need to go back to school and relearn my math lol. Unless of course, I am missing something obvious and being a bonehead.
I might go crazy with custom vehicles for the Skitarii. If anyone would have wildly different vehicles it would be the forces of the Adeptus Mechanicus.
@norsesig, the marine vehicles were a huge pain in the ass when I was trying to math everything out! After spending almost a month trying to get them all right, I realized that G.W. has so many marine based codecies that they HAVE to play test them more. So the marine vehicles got a lot more attention and price tweaking than anyone else. The Orks have a similar problem, but not nearly as noticeable.
To answer your question, you are doing the math right. Games workshop prices the marine stuff with a much broader stroke than anyone else.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: @norsesig, the marine vehicles were a huge pain in the ass when I was trying to math everything out! After spending almost a month trying to get them all right, I realized that G.W. has so many marine based codecies that they HAVE to play test them more. So the marine vehicles got a lot more attention and price tweaking than anyone else. The Orks have a similar problem, but not nearly as noticeable.
To answer your question, you are doing the math right. Games workshop prices the marine stuff with a much broader stroke than anyone else.
I am tempted to try playing a few games using your values for vehicles (and account for price increase on the pricier ones). Just to see if it makes them too good, or possibly too poor. I have a feeling that the flyers will be too expensive even though they conform with the formula. I had to guesstimate the Stormraven due to the extra dreadnought transport capacity. Purely as a transport the stormraven might be alright at 225 - 240 points.
Stll kinda stumped on the cerberus launcher, conversion beamer, icarus stormcannon array, and skyspear missile launcher. Their profiles are so unique they are hard to duplicate. The Hyperios Air Defense Missile Laucher I can just use a missile launcher and add on the 3 abilities (Interceptor, Skyfire, and Heat Seeker).
Now that I know that it isn't me I'll start pricing the Forgeworld stuff as best as I can. I want to see if they are a little better at pricing or if their builds just produce better results. I think Forgeworld tends to do better than GW when it comes to designing vehicles lol.
Using your rules I came up with the ATAT from Star Wars. I think I got the price right, but I dont know.
Superheavy Tank:
Av 14 all around: 100
12HP in total = +300)
400 points base.
(Lascannon base cost bs4: 25+ supercharged100% + overpenetration 10% + primary weapon50%+ + twin link50%+ long barrel 50% rapid reload 100%)
+372 points
2 x multi laser 15 + twinlinked50%
46
Ceramite plating +30
Enclosed+ 0
Transport capacity 25 + assault vehicle =+50
DoomShakaLaka wrote: Using your rules I came up with the ATAT from Star Wars. I think I got the price right, but I dont know.
Superheavy Tank:
Av 14 all around: 100
12HP in total = +300)
400 points base.
(Lascannon base cost bs4: 25+ supercharged100% + overpenetration 10% + primary weapon50%+ + twin link50%+ long barrel 50% rapid reload 100%)
+372 points
2 x multi laser 15 + twinlinked50%
46
Ceramite plating +30
Enclosed+ 0
Transport capacity 25 + assault vehicle =+50
Total =984 points.
I can't check right now, but it would be interesting to see this get the stomp rule instead of blitz. Kind of the opposite of the lord of skulls for chaos. Awesome idea BTW!
Maybe something like this: Instead of having the blitz rule the ATAT Superheavy tank may make D3 stomp attacks at initiative 2 as described in the super heavy walker rules when in assault with a unit. However, neither the unit nor the ATAT are locked in combat the following turn and the ATAT may not charge enemy enemy unit during the assault phase.
Well it is like 13" tall and pretty long too so I think size wise it does merit 12hp.
You make a good point about it not being an assault vehicle really. Not that stormtroopers would likely be assaulting out of anyways( which is what it would carry, guess I got come up with what their stats would be too now. Sigh) Oh, and I wrote the cost 984 points on accident. It's supposed to be 894.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (it merits 12hp in universe wise too)
So I went ahead and made the ATST to go with its big brother:
Fast Attack slot.
May be taken in squadrons with a 1-3 limit.
ATST: Medium light vehicle
Av12 all around:
40 base cost
Enclosed +5 points
fast speed +15
Scout + 20
Move Through Cover+10
(Lascannon base cost bs3 20 + twinlinked50%) = 30
120 points
May purchase a pintle mounted heavy multilaser for 20 points ( multilaser bs3 + supercharged) OR a pintle mounted twinlinked missile launcher with all missile variants for 45( missile launcher bs3 30+ twin-linked50%)
A walker in the star wars sense yes, but its not 40k walker material.
The very idea of an atst charging a space marine in hand to hand combat is actually kinda funny
Ok well since you take normal speed for walkers and its 5 points more expensive to have av12 walker then it equals out back to 120 points. But now it has s6 a1 i3 and the walker special rule.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'm sorry S4 not S6
So, my buddy made an armorbane punisher cannon, and I'm thinking that the price on that upgrade should be based on shots fired, instead of a base percentage.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: So, my buddy made an armorbane punisher cannon, and I'm thinking that the price on that upgrade should be based on shots fired, instead of a base percentage.
What do you guys think?
Edit: autocorrect
That may or may not work better. A lot depends on the weapon that is getting more shots. Certain weapons with more shots are scarier than others. As long as the points total is fair I think a per shot cost might be better since it would make it easier to reconstruct weapons with strange profiles.
On a side note if someone could help me reconstruct the conversion beamer, and the weapons on the hunter and stalker it would be appreciated. I think I am missing something somewhere...
With one off weapons, just make the calculations for the base vehicle, then subtract those points from the normal vehicle cost. Add about 5 points to that and you should be cool.
The cost I am thinking about is shots fired times strength. Then you would add that to the weapons base cost. So the armorbane punisher cannon would total out to 130 points. That sounds reasonable for the bane of all medium armor, as long as it's within 2 feet anyway.
Got bored the other day, so I reworked the Dark Angels' Land Speeder Vengeance (mainly the plasma storm battery) to be, you know, worth bringing while keeping the same point cost.
The new speeder costs 142 points total. The only thing I really changed was the plasma storm battery, which is now an executioner plasma cannon with the blind, cooling system, and pinning upgrades with the speed loader addition. I also added Power of the Machine Spirit so it can jink and still shoot its plasma storm battery (seeing that it's an AV 10, 2 HP vehicle, I'd be jinking a lot), but I would honestly be fine with dropping PotMS and calling it an even 140 points for simplicity's sake.
On another note, any idea on what the point costs for independent targeting on weapons would be, like on the fire raptor's turrets or the necron gauss flayer arrays?
Honestly, I'd give it away for free, but go ahead and add 5 points to it. You're still under the maximum number of guns fired, but get to spread the fire around. Potms is good, but honestly the only reason I assigned points to it at all was the ability to fire an extra gun on the move. Had nothing to do with the ability to shoot another target.
I hadn't even thought of firing at different targets when I added PotMS. The thought that jumped into my head when I made that was paying 140 points for a speeder that has to jink bolter fire, although the 36" range should help you stay in cover more often than you could with the old one. Thanks for the reply.
"I had to jink, so I'll just fire the burst mode. ... "
In the next update, armorbane will be costed at str of the weapon times number of shots, and POTMS will become split fire for walkers. I realized with the former, you could full ballistic skill overwatch, and that is nonsense!
Any other suggestions for improvements/ modifications?
Page 2. Under flyer "flyers may carry at least 4 weapons" should probably read "up to"
Page 9. Under Forces of Chaos there is no option for the 4 Marks of Chaos (Khorne, Nurgle, Slaanesh, Tzeentch) Should be restricted to only models with Daemon trait
Page 13. Under Necrons, there is no option for Scarab Hive (I'd set it at 50pts, and restrict it to heavy choices)
Page 13. Under Necrons, there is no option for Nebuloscope (Ignore Cover) I know this effect is covered in the weapons section, but I would point that out in the Necron Section "Nebuloscope: See Ignore Cover in Weapons Upgrade Section)
There are a lot of flyers with more than that, and several small and medium flyers with more than their allotment.
The nebuloscope only exists on the jetbike, iirc. So I didn't add that option to their vehicles. Making an entire vehicle ignore cover(especially with Necron level firepower) is pretty ridiculous. I forget, what vehicle has scarab hive?
I'd have to look at the marks, don't remember vehicles being able to take them. The daemon of rules would automatically have to go on daemons.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: There are a lot of flyers with more than that, and several small and medium flyers with more than their allotment.
Necron Flyers have 1. I assumed it was a typo. There probably shouldn't be a minimum number of weapons.
The nebuloscope only exists on the jetbike, iirc. So I didn't add that option to their vehicles. Making an entire vehicle ignore cover(especially with Necron level firepower) is pretty ridiculous
I agree. What I was saying that since the nebuloscope is a named peice of Necron wargear, people might look for it.
My suggestion was to add a note that the nebulocope can be achieved by adding ignores cover it to the weapon itself.
I forget, what vehicle has scarab hive?
The Necron Tomb Citadel, from Forgeworld, and the Canoptek Sypder Monstrous Creature. I just thought it would be a great option to add to a vehicle. If something the size of a Canoptek Spyder can manage it, a larger vehicle could as well.
I'd have to look at the marks, don't remember vehicles being able to take them. The daemon of rules would automatically have to go on daemons.
The walkers can take marks. I know, off the top of my head, that the Soulgrinder has to take a mark.
I see what you're saying now. I was trying to convey that a flyer can have more than the weapons allowed by its size, with 4 being a standard. I'll look at the current flyers again and see if there is a ratio pertaining to their hull points and the weapons available. Also, the doom scythe has two guns.
The scarab hive could be an option to add, just not sure how to cost it. The spiders start with it, and the tomb has so many special rules that it is really hard to figure out how much they spent on it. We can give it a go though!
The soul grinder has to be a "daemon of..." That isn't a mark. In order to get that rule, you have to be a daemon. That's why I didn't add that stipulation. Are the walkers from the chaos spacemarine codex allowed to get the "mark of..." rules?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Maybe cost the scarab hive at 15 points. It can injure the vehicle, has a limited range, and can only create scarabs if there are scarabs nearby anyway. I don't own that book, if you activate that ability during your movement phase, then I wouldn't allow the vehicle to move more than combat speed before or after it spawns. The main limitation for the two units that already have it is they cannot match the scarab's speed. Any vehicle can (without that limitation)
The soul grinder has to be a "daemon of..." That isn't a mark. In order to get that rule, you have to be a daemon. That's why I didn't add that stipulation. Are the walkers from the chaos spacemarine codex allowed to get the "mark of..." rules?
Every time I see "Decimator" written out, in my head I say "you mean Devastator," even though it's just a name for the unit, and not someone who doesn't understand what "decimated" means.
Sorry about the hiatus, the next update will be right after the eldar book drops, as it may change point totals for them.
Also included will be admech weapons and a points drop for ws5 melee weapons. I will also add split fire to the available vehicle upgrades and remove the option for power of the machine spirit for walkers.
I am also going to include the all new type, flying walker! They will move like flying MC's, they are a little harder to take down, but have a much more limited firing arc. Should be fun
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Sorry about the hiatus, the next update will be right after the eldar book drops, as it may change point totals for them.
Also included will be admech weapons and a points drop for ws5 melee weapons. I will also add split fire to the available vehicle upgrades and remove the option for power of the machine spirit for walkers.
I am also going to include the all new type, flying walker! They will move like flying MC's, they are a little harder to take down, but have a much more limited firing arc. Should be fun
Anything else you want me to add?
Hmm.. off the top of my head:
Grav-guns
Grav-cannons
Venerable (the rule)
15 points for Psychic Pilot seems wonky for vehicles, especially the artillery ones you expect to keep backfield. Perhaps a "max ML 2" restriction, combined with an appropriate set of limits regarding what Disciplines could be used? I would love to have a Leman Russ with in-built Divination for example, that could be combined with Perfect Timing, and being able to reroll to-hit/wound/save...
I'll see what I can do with that. Every mastery level after the first seems to be a set 25 point upgrade now, so that should limit expenditure on that. I think I'll limit the power selection to one table in the BRB also to help keep shenanigans to a minimum.
Codex-specific powers should be allowed too, if only to represent stuff like Librarian Dreads or Silver Towers of Tzeentch (much less other potentially entertaining contraptions like a Plague Wagon of Nurgle, etc).
Perhaps a point cost for ML 1 based on accessible disciplines, with Divination and Telepathy costing the most, and Biomancy/Pyromancy costing the least?
I wouldn't go that far with it. A librarian is the same price in all the marine books, all with slightly different choices of powers. In my mind there aren't any vastly superior power trees, just some that have a more generalist approach. Then again, I do love me some pyromancy on occasion
I've determined that the toughness of MCs is about equal to an armor value 4.5 higher than it. So a toughness 8 mc is somewhere in between the survivability of av 12 and av 13 depending on the armor save it is packing. I have started a pricing algorithm, and have thus far successfully created the wraithlord and almost finished a carnifex. Shouldn't be long now
That's an interesting theory. I look forward to seeing how it works out.
Change log for V.D.R. 6.0
● Added racial stats for Skitarii
● New Weapons for the Imperium
● Adjusted melee weapon prices & added new melee weapons
● Added new weapon and vehicle upgrades
● A “fun and new” section for things capable of being done with the rules that games workshop hasn’t done yet.
Just a small request on the next version, please remove the colored highlighting on the change notes. It wastes color ink, and makes it difficult to read at all if printed in black and white.
I have a question that I couldn't figure out since the table doesn't work on Mega Dreads at all. How many points do you think it would be to give a Mega Dread an additional hull point from 3 to 4. To me based on model size and armor alone there is no way it should have the same number as a Deff Dread that is less than half its size and when it is only marginally smaller than a Gorkanaut which has 5 hull points.
Also I wanted to know. For the Gorkanaut would you just add the 15 points to its cost for Ramshackle Monster?
And one last thing. Your table doesn't account for the armor values of the Mork/Gorkanaut or the Mega Dread Large and Normal respectively who's armor facings add up to 51 and 50 respectively
Please let me know and thanks for the awesome table it works great with everything else!
One thing I made sure of, when i made this update, was that I recognized the existence of vehicles that break the rules. The 'noughts and mega dredd do this, the same way the phantom titan does.
Adding ramshackle monster to the 'naughts should be pretty straight forward, the system allows you to just add things to vehicles if you want to. My personal favorite is trading the points for speed, and +2str ap2 melee weapon for making it a 6hullpoint superheavy with strD melee for an extra 122 points. Making them 367 for the gorkanaught, 352 for the morkanaught.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: One thing I made sure of, when i made this update, was that I recognized the existence of vehicles that break the rules. The 'noughts and mega dredd do this, the same way the phantom titan does.
Adding ramshackle monster to the 'naughts should be pretty straight forward, the system allows you to just add things to vehicles if you want to. My personal favorite is trading the points for speed, and +2str ap2 melee weapon for making it a 6hullpoint superheavy with strD melee for an extra 122 points. Making them 367 for the gorkanaught, 352 for the morkanaught.
Sorry if I came across as rude or insensitive I just wanted to make sure I wasn't crazy. Also that custom build is smexy.
That aside I still would really like to know how much an extra hull point on that Mega Dread might cost points wise. Please if you have an estimate let me know!
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: One thing I made sure of, when i made this update, was that I recognized the existence of vehicles that break the rules. The 'noughts and mega dredd do this, the same way the phantom titan does.
Adding ramshackle monster to the 'naughts should be pretty straight forward, the system allows you to just add things to vehicles if you want to. My personal favorite is trading the points for speed, and +2str ap2 melee weapon for making it a 6hullpoint superheavy with strD melee for an extra 122 points. Making them 367 for the gorkanaught, 352 for the morkanaught.
Sorry if I came across as rude or insensitive I just wanted to make sure I wasn't crazy. Also that custom build is smexy.
That aside I still would really like to know how much an extra hull point on that Mega Dread might cost points wise. Please if you have an estimate let me know!
Oops, my bad! You weren't rude, i was just explaining the reason. In answer to the question, you would add the difference in points between the "normal" speed category for medium and large vehicles. Probably around 5-10 points. Defense (how hard something is to hurt) is costed seperatly from survivability (how much damage something can take while getting around the battlefield)
In short, your answer is in the speed table
Automatically Appended Next Post: Just looked, it's 5 points
OK guys, update comming this weekend. Going to add a couple usr's that I somehow missed and update some weapons point totals.
Here's a thing I just discovered! I built the gorkanaught and morkanaught as superheavy vehicles just now, (I also added assault transport to the profile) and it ended up being a straight 40 point upgrade. The reason I found this interesting is when I updated this thing, I made the math as such that building a superheavy would cost an extra 30-40 points. There is a distinct possibility that games workshop costed the 'naughts as superheavies, then decided to drop their status for reasons unknown to most sane people.
This may be the reason these two wonderful vehicles are considered sub par, they are priced as superheavy with none of the perks!
Edit: another thing I noticed, Ork transports pay for assault vehicle. Even with 'are case upgrade they should still be assault!
Thanks! Been thinking about sending this to them to help out
I've been thinking about adding in some of the superheavy weapons in the next update.
Also, the design work for monstrous creatures has hit a serious bump. There is a discrepancy between units that were originally vehicles and ones that were always monsters, and I have found that that delineation has continued on to other newer units as well. The math is incalculable for me at this time because the variables are different between codexex.
That aside, the math is the same for ALL gargantuan creatures! I will have the points up for those in the "just for fun" section, enjoy
That aside, the math is the same for ALL gargantuan creatures! I will have the points up for those in the "just for fun" section, enjoy
Including the new version of the Eldar Wraithknight ?
I only ask because people on dakka have been complaining about it being undercosted for what it does, since it the first time it was leaked.
If the math plays out for all GC to be the same, that would suggest on the price being deliberate and not just poorly thought out.
I've been through that particular wringer here. The wraithknight is only undercosted because it is a jump gargantuan creature that doesn't actually pay the points for it. If it didn't have that ability, or payed the points for it (brining its total to 355 points) nobody would actually have a complaint.
The reason it seems so cheap is because it specializes in something, no matter what you build it as. Compare it to the new knight gallant in its melee form (@355 where it should be) and you'll see a very similar capability to point ratio. The wraithknight is better because of movement and 1 higher initiative, the gallant has a little pea shooter and the ability to throw monstrous creatures and vehicles it kills. They are damn close at that point value.
Automatically Appended Next Post: So, while matching out the phantom titan, I had an epiphany. Games workshop made the pulsars On him way more powerful than the other two options by eliminating their old special rules. The phantom D-cannon used to ignore void shields, which would definitely make it worth taking to a superheavy fight. And the sword used to add 3 extra attacks, now it doesn't. For those familiar with my math, that knocked of about 150 points from where it iis at now. Shame to see those kinds of special options get dropped :/
I like this quite a bit. I've always liked this sort of crunchy "make your own" thing, so this is awesome and I've already lost quite a bit of time to it.
I did notice a couple trademark things that seem to be missing for the Necrons;
* Transport abilities; Necron transport abilities lean pretty heavily to the "weird." You've got the Eternity Gate (monolith) and Invasion Beams (Night Scythe) on one hand and then the "regular" transport (ghost ark) also comes with the Repair Barge ability. None of these appear.
* I did not see the Gauss Flux Arc (the new Monolith corner weapon).
A few more questions;
* Are Tesla Spheres supposed to be the Death Spheres from the Nightshroud?
* I did not see the "independent targeting" ability that is critical to the gauss flayers or flux arcs (and the frequency of fixed weapons on Necron vehicles). I assume that ability should be considered included with the price on those weapons, should there be a cost to add it to others?
Anyway, thanks for putting all the work into this. It's pretty awesome.
silentone2k wrote: I like this quite a bit. I've always liked this sort of crunchy "make your own" thing, so this is awesome and I've already lost quite a bit of time to it.
I did notice a couple trademark things that seem to be missing for the Necrons;
* Transport abilities; Necron transport abilities lean pretty heavily to the "weird." You've got the Eternity Gate (monolith) and Invasion Beams (Night Scythe) on one hand and then the "regular" transport (ghost ark) also comes with the Repair Barge ability. None of these appear.
* I did not see the Gauss Flux Arc (the new Monolith corner weapon).
A few more questions;
* Are Tesla Spheres supposed to be the Death Spheres from the Nightshroud?
* I did not see the "independent targeting" ability that is critical to the gauss flayers or flux arcs (and the frequency of fixed weapons on Necron vehicles). I assume that ability should be considered included with the price on those weapons, should there be a cost to add it to others?
Anyway, thanks for putting all the work into this. It's pretty awesome.
Thanks! Those particular abilities are included in the weapon profile, so I didn't add them. As for the Tesla spheres, those can be found on the two superheavies in the Necron codex. The necrons get a lot of rules for free due to their restricted nature in regards to vehicle construction. The repair, teleportation beams, and infinity gate are actually free for those units, so I didn't add points for them. If you want them, take them
I am also hesitant to see these being free as a good idea. In the context of the vehicles that currently have them they're pretty benign. But they are all abuseable in the wrong context. A cheap unit with Eternity Gates allows perfect management of your infantry and jump infantry in a way that a comms rely can only dream, providing effectively infinite transport capacity. The invasion beams may be the least dangerous, they serve mostly as an excuse not to need to park a flyer that can't hover to load it up. But it also is something that makes access points unnecessary and also perfectly protect models using that ride.
I don't like the idea of a minimum point cost for the unit. For one thing that sort of thing tends to gum up otherwise elegant units with a bunch of unrelated extras, simply transferring the cost.
I think the point cost for the Invasion Beams should be relative to the transport capacity. Perhaps 1 pt/5 models (rounding up). It's also worth noting that, technically, invasion beams *could* make a vehicle effectively larger on the inside, allowing it more capacity than it would otherwise have.
Meanwhile the Eternity Gate should be... something. I don't even know how to adjust the potential cost of that power.
The repair ability should definitely be a flat cost. As a possible point of reference, a similar ability in that codex is priced at 5 pts.
And question I forgot earlier;
Why no Fortifications for Advanced races? I get the other vehicle-type limitations, but, contrary to GW's efforts, it seems like the galaxy should be lousy with effective bits of Necron Tombs and Eldar monuments.
Automatically Appended Next Post: As I'm thinking about balance and these powers I think the key phrase there is "because they are so limited in vehicle selection." The problem with something like the VDR is exactly its awesomeness; by its nature it destroys that limitation.
So, not sure how to represent this with mathhammer without letting these otherwise trivial Necron shenanigans run rampant.
Automatically Appended Next Post: What if the constant is wrong..? unless I'm missing something, every necron vehicle has living metal. What if you've over-costed that? Assuming, for the moment, the value is actually 0 (it's a giveaway), or even that its actual value is the 5 listed for superheavies, that provides more than enough points to pay for varying shenanigans on vehicles but making them costly enough that dumping a bunch on one vehicle or trying to make a bunch of cheap knockoffs to spam an ability is unlikely.
The invasion beams cost would be directly proportional to the size of the vehicle, while the eternity gate would be inversely proportional to speed. Repair barge, Command wave, and Targeting relay should probably be flat cost...
Well, the teleportation beamers are there because they didnt want to give the flyers hover. The repair feature doesn't work without warriors present, and the infinity gate is there because the monolith is too slow to worry about as a transport, and deep striking it is dangerous. They gave it a little bump in versatility was all. The reason I costed living metal the way I did was it was slightly better than the spirit stones from the eldar.
The limits placed in Necron vehicles is pretty significant. The have to at LEAST be armor 11 all around, anything higher MUST be heavy or superheavy, and they are an "advanced" race, meaning they MUST make walkers or skimmers. That is a lot of limitations, and I've found the more restrictive your hull options are, the cheaper everything becomes. I think it has to do with how easy it is to plan against Necron vehicles on the table, the are slow, and you never need to worry about them throwing the kind of curve balls an Ork mech list, or spacemarine armored spearhead list could throw your way.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, the vdr allows you to make your own fortifications, just use race specific weapons and upgrades! Don't forget, fortifications don't have a faction, therefore don't have to follow the normal race restrictions listed to the right side of the chart
I'm glad people are using this, it makes me feel like I didn't waste my time
Thanks! I'll be uploading the next update once the rugrats are in bed, should be a fun one!
Oof, was a late night. The update is complete, I'll post it up first thing in the morning. Gonna go eat a bit of crow in the general discussion area, and then iit is off to bed.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: Well, the teleportation beamers are there because they didnt want to give the flyers hover. The repair feature doesn't work without warriors present, and the infinity gate is there because the monolith is too slow to worry about as a transport, and deep striking it is dangerous. They gave it a little bump in versatility was all. The reason I costed living metal the way I did was it was slightly better than the spirit stones from the eldar.
The limits placed in Necron vehicles is pretty significant. The have to at LEAST be armor 11 all around, anything higher MUST be heavy or superheavy, and they are an "advanced" race, meaning they MUST make walkers or skimmers. That is a lot of limitations, and I've found the more restrictive your hull options are, the cheaper everything becomes. I think it has to do with how easy it is to plan against Necron vehicles on the table, the are slow, and you never need to worry about them throwing the kind of curve balls an Ork mech list, or spacemarine armored spearhead list could throw your way.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, the vdr allows you to make your own fortifications, just use race specific weapons and upgrades! Don't forget, fortifications don't have a faction, therefore don't have to follow the normal race restrictions listed to the right side of the chart
I'm glad people are using this, it makes me feel like I didn't waste my time
I hope that my comments in no way give the impression that I don't appreciate the work you put into this. Obviously I'm enjoying spending time with it, and I find it to be very well done.
I get what you're saying about these things individually giving small bumps to the vehicles they're attached to, especially as they tend to work against type or cover glaring rules oversights (ie; invasion beams being a kludge to un-break the night-scythe when fliers were created). My concern is that a purpose-built vehicle isn't forced to conform to that unless there's a cost or limitation that's structured to force it (thus, tying eternity gate to speed and invasion beams to size). I also get why you costed the Living Metal the way you did, and it's significantly bigger than, say, free searchlights and smoke. I'm just trying to find a way to both allow and limit the shenanigans necron vehicles seem to proliferate. Anyway, I've made my suggestions and will leave this alone.
Fortifications; That's awesome, but I did not understand that from the text. You may want to make it explicit at some point.
Semi-related; Immobile vehicles and advanced races. RAW, these still have to be skimmers/walkers. That doesn't really make sense and slashes the Immobile point break. Also, I'm assuming the required Deep Strike does not need to be purchased separately, and is included.
Anyway, *checks to see if it posted while typing this up* looking forward to the update.
Mrs. Biehrellian here. I attempted to condense how many pages the V.D.R. takes up, but it's going to be an ongoing task. If anyone wants to PM me what they'd like to see in terms of ascetic, page count, font size, et cetera I'll try to take in into account as the V.D.R. gets fancied up.
The advanced races do still have to be skimmers when making immobile vehicles, the reason being that their weapon systems are usually cheaper than say imperial weapons of similar statline. If they could shave off 30 points on the platform to get two pulse lasers for dirt cheap, some people would. So, they get no discount and have the added fluff that even their stationary weapons platforms hover high above the battlefield. Even high enough that sky fire weapons don't take a penalty to fire at them.
In regards to fortifications, I'll be more explicit in the next update. Thanks for the feedback everyone! This thing is shaping up to be pretty epic
Spent some time stating out things I've had in my head for a bit. Posting for comment/math check/general discussion.
Sentinel Stone (Fortification) 165 Points
Spoiler:
These redoubts were erected to watch over otherwise exposed portions of the Necron infrastructure. Their arcano-tech surfaces are made of flowing metal which can open to allow units to shelter inside or fire out. The surface is designed, however, to provide maximum protection and cover to the horrifying weapon hidden within, opening to expose it as it issues forth waves of death.
Small Building (AV 12)
Special Rules; It Will Not Die, Flowing Firing Point
Flowing Firing Point; When firing, the surface of this bunker flows to open whichever way the turret inside points.This allows not only the Gauss Eradicator to fire out in that direction but up to four other models.
Weapons: Gauss Eradicator
Gauss Eradicator
Designed to annihilate expeditionary forces that might stumble across the Sentinel, one of these devices can easily vaporize most vehicles or entire scouting parties. These terrifying weapons have two modes of fire; a set of concentrated pulses or an uncontrolled spray of Gauss energy.
Concentrated Fire; 36", S9, AP2, Hvy 3, Gauss, Hyper Advanced Targeting
Spray Fire; 24", S5, AP3, Heavy 10, Gauss
Hyper Advanced Targeting; This fire mode benefits from the Cognis and Twin Linked abilities.
The Gauss Eradicator's spray fire mode is a set of 5 Gauss Cannons. Concentrated fire is a set of 3 Heavy Gauss Cannons (priced as a Gauss Cannon plus the cost of upgrading a destroyer to a heavy destroyer) given the Cognis and Twin Linked abilities.
Menhir; 90 points
Spoiler:
Menhirs were designed to create beachheads and improve transport into areas of tight quarters. Eerie, floating pillars of flowing metal that contain unearthly doorways, these structures appear silently from hyperspace, often heralding the first waves of troops.
BS 4, F12, S12, R12, HP3 Vehicle (Heavy, Immobile, Open Topped, Skimmer)
Special Rules;
Living Metal
Deep Strike
Eternity Gate
Weapon;
Transdimensional Beamer (cost per Wraith upgrade)
Ancient Menhir; Fortification 40 points
Spoiler:
Abandoned after long ago battles or left in place in anticipation of future need, these ancient war machines have slowly become features of the landscape. Easily mistaken for part of the terrain or architecture of the tomb worlds where they are common, these immobile guardians of their corner of the galaxy wait as silent beacons for their creators. More frequently found within the Dynasty's Tomb worlds, these uncanny watchers can be used to deploy and redeploy defenders, effectively multiplying defending forces until they seem like uncountable throngs.
Small Building (AV 12)
Special Rules;
It Will Not Die
Eternity Gate
Weapon;
Transdimensional Beamer
Storm Shroud; 225 points
Spoiler:
While Necron aircraft are generally known for their stunning speed, the Storm Shroud redirects that power along additional control surfaces to generate surprisingly deft maneuvers for its size and velocity. This terrifying shadow settles above a battlefield to rain down lightning upon the dynasty's foes.
http://imgur.com/gallery/hVi8ey1 BS 4, F11, S11, R11, HP4 Vehicle (Flyer, Transport)
Special Rules
Living Metal, It Will Not Die, Vector Dancer
Wargear; Death Ray, 2x Twin Linked Tesla Destructors
Transport;
Transport Capacity: Fifteen models.
Fire Points: None.
Access Points: Invasion Beams
Options;
- May trade transport capacity for a turret mounted flayer array for free.
- May trade the Death Ray for a pair of Tesla Spheres or a forward mounted Gatling gauss flayer array for free.
edit; cleanup
edit; realized I omitted adding Living Metal from the listed abilities on the vehicles.
Those look sweet! I'll do the math for them later, don't have the stuff with me at work. Also, ignore the superheavy grade weapons for the eldar! I accidentally added the wrong set of stats to their chart.
In other news, occasionally I re-work units I had mathed out before to see where they stand in the current version of my V.D.R. and wouldn't you know it, the revenant is around 1000 points WITHOUT the ability to jet around. I would say it was to compensate for weaknesses in melee, but of the rumored changes to "titans" from forge world hold true that won't be an issue. The phantom still adds up fine.
Some thoughts looking at what I posted last night;
Several necron weapons are still missing (I used 2 above, another key one that's missing is the Flux Arc)
Technically, the Ancient Menhir is illegal, as it's "Immobile"/Fortification rather than Heavy.
I'm not seeing the Impassable trait as being available.
Also, may want to make explicit rules for "dual fire weapons" where one of the weapons is an ability. I used the TDBs to represent the old-school Eternity Gate with the Dimensional Corridor (current ability) and the Portal of Exile, only one of which could be used in a turn. This is also part of what lead me back to the following...
Even though I said I'd leave it alone, this made me believe even more that Living Metal should be a lower cost and the mcl abilities should be upped by 5-10 pts. Living metal is (mostly) is comparable to Extra Armor except in Heavies and Superheavies, where it adds IWND... so I'd price it where both of those are; 5. Even 5 points seems high given that there is no such thing as a Necron vehicle that does not have Living Metal. But, at 15 points, I was looking at this necron trademark as the pricing out an entire additional weapon system,..
Meanwhile, it's both disappointing and brilliant that you still can't get Living Metal with Extra Armor. Ignore both shaken and stirred? That'd be amazing...
The Night Shroud Bomber has AV 12, so you may want to bump the max not-heavy AV to that. (woo-hoo, 2 point range to pick from! ;-))
Meanwhile, you might consider a price break for Quantum Shields on Fortifications. There's no precedent for it (given that no one but Imperium has fortifications), but it's a super flavorful Necron thing that's currently just not worth the points with the fortifications cost for AV.
Speaking of, I assume that fortifications still purchase AV in all 3 columns (at half price). It's a little confusing and might be slightly more elegant to just add another column labeled "fortification" with the total calculation pre-completed.
On an entirely other line, and this is pure writing style, but I would put the weapons upgrades examples after the weapon upgrades list (using things that haven't been introduced yet is confusing). I'd also put the restriction on Upgrades and Additions in the block currently headed "Weapon Modification Options," as it's right by the relevant table (easy to find). Finally, you might stick to "Weapon Modifications" as the overall header, because you also talk about Weapon Upgrades which are broken down into Upgrades and Additions. All of which is nitpicking.
Anyway, as always, my $.02. Still loving this and will probably have more madness to share later...
koooaei wrote: How come opentopped for vehicles is a point drop? Many assaulters would have killed for an open-topped vehicle.
BTW, codex grots are ini2 - not 3.
My bad on the grots, and the open topped is a points drop, but if you look at the top of that particular chart you'll see that transports actually ADD points to be open topped (5 for the most part)
Several necron weapons are still missing (I used 2 above, another key one that's missing is the Flux Arc)
Technically, the Ancient Menhir is illegal, as it's "Immobile"/Fortification rather than Heavy.
I'm not seeing the Impassable trait as being available.
Also, may want to make explicit rules for "dual fire weapons" where one of the weapons is an ability. I used the TDBs to represent the old-school Eternity Gate with the Dimensional Corridor (current ability) and the Portal of Exile, only one of which could be used in a turn. This is also part of what lead me back to the following...
Even though I said I'd leave it alone, this made me believe even more that Living Metal should be a lower cost and the mcl abilities should be upped by 5-10 pts. Living metal is (mostly) is comparable to Extra Armor except in Heavies and Superheavies, where it adds IWND... so I'd price it where both of those are; 5. Even 5 points seems high given that there is no such thing as a Necron vehicle that does not have Living Metal. But, at 15 points, I was looking at this necron trademark as the pricing out an entire additional weapon system,..
Meanwhile, it's both disappointing and brilliant that you still can't get Living Metal with Extra Armor. Ignore both shaken and stirred? That'd be amazing...
The Night Shroud Bomber has AV 12, so you may want to bump the max not-heavy AV to that. (woo-hoo, 2 point range to pick from! ;-))
Meanwhile, you might consider a price break for Quantum Shields on Fortifications. There's no precedent for it (given that no one but Imperium has fortifications), but it's a super flavorful Necron thing that's currently just not worth the points with the fortifications cost for AV.
Speaking of, I assume that fortifications still purchase AV in all 3 columns (at half price). It's a little confusing and might be slightly more elegant to just add another column labeled "fortification" with the total calculation pre-completed.
On an entirely other line, and this is pure writing style, but I would put the weapons upgrades examples after the weapon upgrades list (using things that haven't been introduced yet is confusing). I'd also put the restriction on Upgrades and Additions in the block currently headed "Weapon Modification Options," as it's right by the relevant table (easy to find). Finally, you might stick to "Weapon Modifications" as the overall header, because you also talk about Weapon Upgrades which are broken down into Upgrades and Additions. All of which is nitpicking.
Anyway, as always, my $.02. Still loving this and will probably have more madness to share later...
OK, the living metal rule is exactly the same wording as the spirit stone upgrade to the eldar, with the addition of healing hull points on heavy/superheavy vehicles. The eldar upgrade is 10 points. If I dropped living metal to 5, it would be half the piints , but undeniably better.
Any fortifications in the game that do not have a transport capacity are impassable, and if you want quantum shielding on fortifications, just cut the points in half. Maybe add 5 to the total to give protection to the rear arc. In regards to the night shroud, there will be units (especially forge world ones) that break norms in regards to racial designs. I don't want to allow people to armor up other units that way. Maybe limit it to flyers because they can't be slow...I'll add that caveat to the next update, they can't have an armor value below 11, and any unit OTHER than flyers with an av above 11 must be heavy, superheavy, or immobile/ fortifications. What do you think?
OK, the living metal rule is exactly the same wording as the spirit stone upgrade to the eldar, with the addition of healing hull points on heavy/superheavy vehicles. The eldar upgrade is 10 points. If I dropped living metal to 5, it would be half the piints , but undeniably better.
Any fortifications in the game that do not have a transport capacity are impassable, and if you want quantum shielding on fortifications, just cut the points in half. Maybe add 5 to the total to give protection to the rear arc. In regards to the night shroud, there will be units (especially forge world ones) that break norms in regards to racial designs. I don't want to allow people to armor up other units that way. Maybe limit it to flyers because they can't be slow...I'll add that caveat to the next update, they can't have an armor value below 11, and any unit OTHER than flyers with an av above 11 must be heavy, superheavy, or immobile/ fortifications. What do you think?
I totally get your point on Living Metal v Spirit Stones. Does it make sense in the framework of "this is better than that?" no, not at all. However, there shouldn't ever be a point where the living metal v spirit stones cost difference is a consideration. Neither one are on a general availability table, so a point difference is entirely in character to emphasize the difference in racial focus. I'm not nearly as familiar with the Eldar, but my understanding is that spirit stones aren't terribly common. It certainly isn't what the Eldar vehicles are "known for." My understanding of Eldar is fast, long range, and (relatively) fragile. Whereas the key for necrons is and always will be durability and dirty tricks. Reuse, Recycle, Reanimate. If it's not a freebie, Living Metal should be mandatory on all Necron vehicles (though, not fortifications because it doesn't do anything, thus I added IWND to those). Necrons are not going to move from here to there fast, but they may teleport across the distance and then just sit there soaking up hate. As was said earlier, it's racial context; the difference between adding some survivability to a glass cannon versus more survivability to a brick. It's just that's a relatively large investment of points for something that appears on every necron vehicle. Looking at the rules on vehicles it seems like those points should be going to cover higher costs on the various shenanigans they get.
Anyway, I'm sorry. I'm sure I'm coming across as argumentative, which is not my intent.
There's a big all-caps line that says Fortifications don't buy transport, which I took to mean they got it for free. Whether impassable is an even exchange, price break, or price hike there should be some comment. It should probably cost, because it keeps things from getting claimed. That's unimportant on something like the Void Shield, and probably necessary on something like my Ancient Menhir, but on anything with serious guns and armor starts dancing the line of (unreasonably) cheap immobile vehicle rather than fortification. Just compare the Menhir and the Ancient Menhir. I created the Ancient because I wanted a way to get that ability on the table first turn (ie; drop pod assault), but the fact it's half the price for identical stats is a problem. It suggests that Impassable should not be available with weapons (which is most likely), that it should cost something like 200% of weapons cost (preventing anything too ugly), or that it should return armor values to normal costs (which is the big cost break). The Void Shield is the only impassable fortification I know of; it has no weapons and its benefit is side-agnostic, so...
let me run some numbers on the quantum shielding, but that sounds like a reasonable ballpark.
I figured that the Forge World thing was part of the problem for the Night Shroud/AV11+, but that seems like a solid solution all around as the variables involved (size v max armor/speed) should keep things reasonable.
I'm not nearly as familiar with the Eldar, but my understanding is that spirit stones aren't terribly common.
Maybe as a vehicle upgrade/rule, but fluffwise all Craft World Eldar and "wraith" units have/wear spirit stones. They capture the Eldar's sould upon death. All the Wraith units are piloted by the soulds of departed Eldar.
Quantum Shields I'd go with 15 pts base, plus a 5 point full round upgrade. (a little less than half the cost of the current upgrade, a little more than half the cost of buying the actual armor.)
I'm not nearly as familiar with the Eldar, but my understanding is that spirit stones aren't terribly common.
Maybe as a vehicle upgrade/rule, but fluffwise all Craft World Eldar and "wraith" units have/wear spirit stones. They capture the Eldar's sould upon death. All the Wraith units are piloted by the soulds of departed Eldar.
Went and dug up the Eldar book. For the fluff, while you're right that eldar craft have spirit stones, the ones described in the Spirit Stones upgrade are "large spirit stones with a captive animus which can control the vehicle should it be disabled," which don't sound like the typical "every eldar has one" spirit stones.
Meanwhile, purely mechanical; looking at the benefit it grants I wouldn't say Living Metal is at all better on non-heavy/superheavy vehicles. Living metal guarantees the least penetration effect never happens. The percentage of the time that the Spirit Stones allow that effect (~17%) is less than half the percentage it gets to ignore the next value on the penetration table (~50%). Then, on heavy and superheavy it adds a weakened version of IWND (~17% chance v normal 33% chance).
Meanwhile, back to the "price breaks for limited options" Necrons do not (and should not) have anything similar to Vectored Engines, Star Engines, or the Crystal Targeting Matrix, let alone the sheer reach of weapons (a substantial number of which out-range all but the biggest Necron guns), or move speed. All of these things substantially increase the threat range of the Eldar compared to Necrons, who then need to compensate.
OK, I see you guys' points on these. Dropping it to 5 points shouldn't be too big a deal. And, ignore my post above about revenants. I realized today that I used the same overpriced superheavy weapons I accidentally added to the list.
I really need to throw out old worksheets
PS, totally derped out on the gauss flux arc. I'll add it to the list later, possibly this weekend.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh yeah, you can still claim any building with battlements. The only buildings that are unclaimable are the vengeance weapons batteries. Maybe make any impassable building without battlements have to use the rules for those, in regards to its guns. What do you think?
I don't have the rules handy, but the only concern I have about claiming by battlements is whether that requires a jump/jump pack to access... (ie; aren't battlements normally only accessible from "inside?") If not, that works perfectly.
I'd also make Living Metal mandatory on all Necron Vehicles (and, for similar reasons though there's no precedent, IWND on Necron Fortifications).
On a "not reducing costs for things note," I think you shorted the Flayer Array by 5-10 points on cost. It currently costs 4 Flayers rather than the 5 it has.
edit; apparently I really like to end posts with a "meanwhile" sentence.
Automatically Appended Next Post: The impassable/battlements for claiming thing would be very dependent on size; a fortification more than 6" tall would prevent moving straight to the battlements preventing claiming in that manner. How about an Impassable Fortification which has weapons must be a Small building and may not be modeled more than 5" tall.
I didn't expect people to want me to INCREASE the gauss flayer array! I'm also thinking about including the living metal for free, but adjusting points for their weapons. When I first started rolling the points around for necrons, it didn't occurs to me that the system may be free, but the weapons more expensive. I had just assumed the weapons would be cheaper and the upgrades were where the points were made up.
Also, I don't want to limit modeling limits any more than I already have. If your opponent didn't bother to bring anything with the jump pack, jetpack, jetbike, skimmer, infiltrate, or deep strike rules (which all could be used to claim the building) or don't have any heavy weapons to simply destroy it, that really is their problem. Don't forget that these rules are even MORE dependent on enemy approval than normal 40k rules. If they really have no answer for your creation, add an access point, let them get up there despite height limitations, any number of workarounds on the fly or added beforehand can make your game more fun.
Don't forget the rule of cool, that should always be the number one rule for these models. Being cool also should include how people describe how the model operated in game
Realizing that the array, with an additional ability, cost less than just buying the flayers gave me an OCD twitch you would not believe. Every time I look at the codex gauss weapons list and see blasters that are rapid fire and the flux arc that's heavy I die a little.
I still think that, rather than the weapons, it's the extra abilities that are being underpriced. As much as I've pushed the Living Metal price drop, the Eternity Gate should cost at least what a Comms Relay does. There are more vehicles with strategy-altering goofy rules than pure shooty ones in the Necron force. Even the big gun is, essentially, a type of strategy shaping gimmick because it's so different than everything else in the codex, and I think that's by design.
Random aside, it does make me sad that you limited invasion beams to non-hovering fliers. Instead I'd make its cost equal to the vehicle's listed max transport size, but also give it the extra rule that there is no limitation on transport capacity that can be purchased for the vehicle (night scythe exceeds the listed by-size limitation).
Of course, then making a little blue box with unreasonably high transport capacity might be too fun... (immobile, heavy, deep strike, give it the night shroud "return to reserves" ability for the shroud's price...)
I totally get what you're saying about not making modeling limitations, this is all about the rule of cool. I just like rules sets to not have loopholes, and that feels like a loophole. I'll have to ponder that some.
edit; removing automatically appended double post.
Like I was saying before about impassable buildings without battlements, there is only one in the game currently, it can't be fired manually, only has one gun, and HAS to shoot at the nearest enemy unit. I will be putting those limitations in place with the next update.
I actually appreciate you guys picking this thing apart, that's why I have a thread for it instead of simply dropping it here and walking away. Keep the feedback comming!
PS. When I next update this thing, you will see a lot of changes to the titan grade weapons. I am costing them based on their ability instead of their cost on the model. (If I followed that, the revenant pulsar would be 25 points more expensive than the double barrel turbo laser destroyer. Which has a three foot longer range with the exact same statline besides!
I thought so. I plan to add the games workshop price in parenthesis next to it if there is a discrepancy of more than 20 points. Don't want people to think my math is off when they are attempting to debunk my work.
There are a few minor tweaks I'd like to see, but I really like what you have here.
Skitarii shouldn't be advanced in my opinion - they do emphasize walkers and skimmers, but if you think about the Ordinatus, FW Mechanicum tanks or the fact they supposedly use Land Raiders in the fluff it makes sense that they should have tracked/wheeled ground vehicles as well.
Super-heavy fliers with 16+ HP should gain the AA Fire rule the Manta has (so they're hit on normal BS despite being a flier) but up the maximum AV to 13. (Or possibly 14, given that the Stormbird has AV14 on the front - you're the balance guy)
I'd like to see Vector Strike added to the vehicle special rules, and I'd also like to see some kind of general invulnerable save to represent various rules like the Manta's energy field or the Warlord's reinforced superstructure.
SHV maximum transport capacity should scale with # of hull points - 7 per HP seems relatively close to what you see from existing models, so I'd probably go with that. It puts the Manta at max 210 models vs the 200 model capacity it actually has.
I also think you should make the SHV cost per hull point 33 (rather than 100 for 3) because there are vehicles that don't have a multiple of three HP. The tiny number of points you'd save is inconsequential.
All superheavy vehicles have multiple of three hull points, they translated over the structure points system from the older books.
I was deliberately trying to keep clear of too many abilities that only singular vehicles get (such as vector strike and the manta ability) because it is really hard to extrapolate the points for those abilities due to lack of cross reference.
I'll try to add the Option for invulnerable saves. They seem to be +5 points per point of invul save, max 4+. Shouldn't be too hard actually!
You're probably right on the admech, I'll drop that in the next update.
Anything else? I just finished up everything you guys mentioned before the last post, loving the feed back!
I added in the ability to buy singular hull points for superheavies, and increased the limit for transport capacity on superheavy vehicles above 21 hull points. I added in vector strike and a generic invulnerable save, and added the giant flyers being easier to hit while also being allowed heavier armor. I should.be able to post the latest version up tomorrow morning, do you guys have anything else for me?
Ok guys, this will be the last update for a while. I'm going to take a hiatus for about a month an let this thing get some serious play testing in.
In regards to the title, I've discovered that games workshop isn't as disjointed in its costing as it at first appears. The most flagrant violators of the algorithm are
The wraithknight: no excuse for this one, they didn't seem to think becoming a gargantuan gave it that much for some reason.
Ork vehicles: they didn't specify that giving the 'are case upgrade didn't remove the assault transport rule from the vehicles.they also built the gork/ morkanaught as superheavies, then decided to weaken them. Perhaps they didn't want it competing with the stompa, or were afraid of it being a threat to the imperial knight, we can't know for sure. If they had done these things, I think Orks would be an upper mid tier codex at the very least!
Titans: I decided to use the volcano cannon to figure out the pricing of all the other large blast or higher strD instead of creating them from scratch to get my numbers closer to what games workshop was throwing around, and the results were quite interesting! The eldar titans appeared the most overpowered originally, but as it turns out they were the closest to balance of the whole bunch. The revenant sits at a weird point in its power because its weapons are long enough range to cover the board without going to excessive levels. In Apocalypse it would have to use its speed to counter the 3'+ range advantage of every other titan on the table. The imperial titans were undercosted for the most part, their weapons are so rediculously disparate in ability that I can't understand how they thought they should all be interchangeable for free.
Those are MY findings, what have you guys noticed that I didn't? Have you found any real head scratchers out there?
I won't be able to test this myself, but I wanted to put some ideas down that I had people might like to try out and to give Lythrandire a few more examples to examine if he wants them.
Dark Eldar
Spoiler:
Raven Mk2 - (This thing has a super old model and really overcosted rules, so I think it deserves an update. Technically not a completely new vehicle, though)
BS4 10/10/10 2HP Flyer
Vector Dancer
Strafing Run
2x Dark Lance
Speed-Loading Splinter Cannon
135 Points (That's 80 points less than the official rules, and this version shoots better. Perhaps the most overcosted unit in the game?)
Virulence Heavy Bomber A heavy ground-attack bomber, the Virulence is designed to engage massed infantry with numerous potent toxin-based weapon systems. Those enemies unfortunate enough to survive the attack are judge prime stock and selected as a high-priority target for abduction. The Virulence also carries two void mines to ensure it is not helpless in the face of armoured targets.
BS4 10/10/10 4HP Flyer
Strafing Run
3x Speed-Loading Splinter Cannon
2x Void Mine
215 Points
Ravenclaw Support Walker The Ravenclaw is a compact four-legged walker used primarily when the Dark Eldar are forced to fight in confined areas where the normal support skimmers they would rely on are unsuitable but heavy firepower is still deemed important. The pilot hangs spreadeagle underneath the walker from psychoactive barbed hooks that also serve as a pilot interface. The Ravenclaw is armed primarily with a single Dark Scythe, supplemented by a rack of Necrotoxin Missiles. In the close-quarters environment of a Zone Mortalis this is a terrifying armament indeed.
BS4 10/10/10 2HP Fast Open-Topped Walker
Crawler
Dark Scythe
3x Necrotoxin Missile
46 Points
Barbtalon Heavy Interceptor The Barbtalon is the largest Dark Eldar attack craft yet encountered, a superheavy aircraft deployed extremely rarely and always to engage targets with both formidable armour and considerable speed. The ordinary Dark Eldar response to the deployment of enemy titan-class war machines is one of manoeuvre - using sleek, fast skimmers to be where the enemy is not, or where forced to engage striking suddenly and with overwhelming force. However, certain enemies defy these tactics - particularly heavy aircraft such as the Marauder, Tiger Shark and Thunderhawk. When supported by interceptors able to engage and disrupt Razorwing cover, these aircraft can wreak havoc upon Dark Eldar formations with considerable firepower and just enough raw speed to intercept escaping skimmers. To those cabals without the ability to field a Barbtalon such a raid might have to be abandoned, but it is in this exact circumstance that the Barbtalon excels. Protected by considerable armour (at least compared to ordinary Dark Eldar vehicles) and heavily armed, it's able to engage and rapidly destroy even aircraft as large as the Manta.
OK guys, you've had a month to throw this thing around. I've got a points adjustment for jump and jet packs for walkers and shuffled some things around, what else is missing from my list?
Also, how are the things you've made balancing out? Any major complaints?
Edit: just looked at the super gargant, it should cost 3080 points. Each mega skorcha is 200, the multi mega lobby is 289, and the suped up deffstorm megashoota is 106. The hull points are 800, the armor is 80, 50 Ork assault transport is 100 and the two base melee attacks are 6. I rounded down one point because reasons
I just found this. I'll be tooling around with this. I remember the 3rd ed VDR when they came out. crazy stuff. I may have the chapter approved laying around somewhere.
Fallenbourne wrote: I just found this. I'll be tooling around with this. I remember the 3rd ed VDR when they came out. crazy stuff. I may have the chapter approved laying around somewhere.
Time to build a throne for my Dark Apostle.
Spread the word my friend! The more people see this thing, the better it will get. Let me know if you see any glaring imbalances or discrepancies not listed here
Edit: just as a heads up, I am going to build a monstrous creature section of this thing. I am going to ignore the apparently separate ways games workshop utilises to make them and go with a straight vehicle to monster translation. Tyranid monsters should see an increase in capability with the new system, daemons will be a crapshoot, every other monster should line up pretty well though.
Yeah I have a bit of a weird request. Could you translate the durability of vehicles into MC form?
I'm considering removing the hull point system from 40k entirely and just moving to a straight Toughness based system with vehicles just having special rules (like Vehicle letting them ignore poison, but weapons with the armorbane or melta rule working like a poison 3+ against them)
Like what Toughness and armor save would a rhino be? A Land Raider?
You will be able to math it out with my new system, the answer to the two mentioned is
Rhino: toughness 6, 3+ armor
Land raider: toughness 9, 2+ armor
And dreadnaught (because why not) toughness 7, 3+armor.
It isn't a monstrous creature, it has no attacks in melee, no smash special rule, only a single storm bolter for offense. You can't look at them as monstrous creatures if all you're doing is translating survivability.
If you look at the points for a rhino for survivability, the armor value is only making up 10 points of the vehicles total. Look at how things are going to damage it, bolt guns and lasguns will wound it now on a 6+, it will ignore 2/3 of those, but was immune to them on front and side before. Now ap 1-3 are all a problem for it also. When you look at the actual math, it works out pretty well
Vehicle- Models with this rule ignore the effects of poison.
Armorbane- Weapons with this rule always successfully wound on a 3+ when rolling to wound against models with the Vehicle special rule.
Melta- As with Armorbane, but only when within the weapon is firing within half range.
Lance- Treats models with T7 or higher as being T6 and reduces their armor save to a 4+ for one turn.
Gauss- Rolls of six to wound always wound regardless of toughness.
AP1- The same affects as AP2 except that it also ignores cover saves and reduces invul saves by 1.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh. Sorry I didn't see you posted already
The issue with that chart is your survivability drops too far.
The durability of a creature is between +4 and +5 in regards to comparing it to armor value. So a toughness 8 creature is between av12 and 13. The better the saving throw, the closer to the upper number. When you run that in reverse, you look at the highest armor value on the vehicle. Subtract 5 from that, that is your toughness. Then the more sides that are equal to that, the better the saving throw.
So, with the rhino, 11-5 equals 6 for baseline toughness. Three sides are shared, and your base saving throw is 6+(because it is closed topped) now you subtract the number of shared sides from the base save (6+ minus 3 sides equals 3+) that makes a rhino a toughness 6 3+ creature.
Does that make sense to anyone but me? I've been looking at this math for too long
I see your formula, but I don't know if it translates completely over to Toughness. I think some play-testing will be in order, but I think its a bit too much.
But just to show I know what your talking about.
Space Marine Land-Speeder
AV10-5= T5
Open topped so base save is 7+ and shares 4 sides so it would be a 3+ save?
Yes, with two wounds. Now you can kill it with lasguns, strength 6 wounds on a 3+, instead of glancing on a 4. It will be more susceptible to small arms fire, and heavy weapons will still shred it. A railcannon will guarantee it is destroyed on a 2+ instead of only having a 1/3 chance. I've been play testing and doing the math for this conversion for 2 months, that's how I was able to respond so quickly before
Edit, also, armorbane and melta should be shred at their normal 2d6 range, and ordinance should roll twice for wounding, pick the highest for models with the vehicle keyword. Haywire wounds vehicles on a 2+ no matter the toughness, and a roll of 6 becomes ap2. Ap1 weapons are instant death vehicles on a to wound roll of 6. If you added the vehicle keyword to every giant robot monstrous creature with this system, you would have a serious balancing factor across the board!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Looking at it two charts, it seems their are a couple instances of points equality for lower av vehicles. An Ork trukk can be either toughness 5, 5+ or toughness 6 6+. Your land speeder would actually choose between toughness 5 4+ or toughness 6 5+ and I was wrong earlier with the dreadnaught, it would be toughness 7 4+
You'll see when the update comes out, you can just add up the points spent on armor and whether or not it is open topped, then just look for the corresponding point total in the toughness/save chart. If there's more than one that works, use your best judgement
OK, some other things I discovered. The daemon prince in chaos daemons is the only monster in there that pays for deep strike. Which is why it seems weaker comparatively to other choices than the counterpart in chaos space marines.
I also found an entirely new way to decide point totals for melee attacks. When testing out things like the avatar of khaine and the keeper of secrets, the points per attack system broke. (HARD) so, I went back to the cutting board. I realized the reason everything pays the same for melee weapons in the game, they already pay for the higher stats.
The reason power fists cost the same for spacemarines as it does for a guard sargent is the marine is now a 39 point model, the guardsman is a 31 point model. The weapon doesn't need to scale. So, I figured out what the totals would end up at.
Monstrous creatures get a discount, because they already have ap2 (which they do pay for) so things like powers words or even power fists mean less to them than the walkers.
Did anyone else have a request? Should be done by this weekend
OK guys, something else I discovered. The monstrous creatures in imperial armor warmachines of the lost and the damned are absolute garbage points wise. None of them are worth putting on the table, the gargantuan ones are so overpriced it is preposterous.
I've always liked forgeworld rules, but there is a REASON these things never see the table.
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: I took a month, mathed it out, and built vehicles from every codex from land speeders to phantom titans. My math is dead on, and now I wanna share
Wow. I doubt that.
Evidence?
I looked at this and immediatly thought all your assumptions are flawed and your conclusions biased and you are on a ego trip. Every post has a "I discovered" or "My findings". Says it all.
Perhaps you need to hear a few "No you didn't" "no they aren't"
OK then, show me where my point totals are way off the mark. I have asked from the start for people to break my system, there have been 9 versions of the rules so far due to just that.
Also, I didn't come up with this thing on the fly. I updated the 4th edition one that games workshop released. I went with the assumption that the one they used in house would have to be similar to the chapter approved one because why would they create an ENTIRELY new system instead of just tweaking theirs.
So go ahead, tell me how wrong I am. Point out mathematical mistakes and let me continue fine tuning the system. My ego trip of answering questions by stating from the start that all of the information I put forth is from my work with the system, and not from some higher source, while busting my hump getting ahold of every resource available and fixing the issues I ask people to find is the strangest one I've heard of.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
adamsouza wrote: I honestly thin kit's better when they are a bit overcosted.
The whining about under costed FW units can take the fun out of a gaming session.
Being a bit overcosted is one thing, but anggrath is over 300 point overcosted! The spined chaos beast is 40 over. That is really unacceptable...
Why are Missile Launchers 30 points? That is way too much for what you get out of them. They should be the same price as an Autocannon. A krak Missile is one better strength and AP, but you only get one extra shot, the Frag missile is a blast but one less strength. Overall around equal to an autocannon, not twice as better.
OK, so my next goal with the vdr is to start adjusting points for ranged weapons where appropriate. There are a lot of guns in this game that are strapped onto vehicles and monstrous creatures that are seriously out of alignment. I am going to try and get those discrepancies in order like I started to with superheavy level guns.
For example, the ork killkannon is 30 points. That gives you bs2, a 24" range, strength of 7 armor piercing 3, and a large blast.
For twenty five points (total, not more) the imperial battle cannon has 4 foot longer range, 1 better ballistic skill, one better strength, and ordinance. So a vastly superior weapon, fired by a slightly more capable crew, is somehow the cheaper alternative...
Seems a bit off to me. I will be using weapons that I haven't seen complaints about how over powered they are (battle cannon, heavy bolter, las cannon, autocannon, and missile launchers) and adjust points discrepancies where I see them for similar guns in places where I've noticed complaints.
Do you guys have any suggestions where to start besides what was said above?
Although I would want to know how you would price Strength D if you used my house rules for how they work in the fix Strength D thread.
]
Here's what I would do:
Strength D
Ignores cover and armor.
Invuls and FNP can be taken as normal.
Against Vehicles:
1-nothing
2-5- lose 3hp
6- lose 3hp and roll on the penetration table with a +2 modifier
( per model affected)
Everything else
1-nothing
2- 5- unit suffers 3 wounds
6- unit suffers 3 wounds with the instant death special rule.
OK, with the changes you made there the strength D weapons become automatic death to almost every single model in the game instead of just being scary.
There are few things in the game that have more than three wounds or hullpoints, so it would kill everything that is lower than a land raider in size and less wounds than a carnifex.
Allowing feel no pain to work against it is strange because strD was one of the two ways to actually negate it.
Giving it ignore cover maxes it a guaranteed death sentence for almost every vehicle in the game.
My fix for strD is don allow it to roll on the pen chart unless the target is superheavy, and a 6 on the chart does d3+3 instead of d6+6 to allow for smaller superheavies and gargantuan creatures to have a chance to survive an encounter long enough to attempt to strike back.
Automatically Appended Next Post: To answer your question, it would actually make strength D more expensive than the current version because you aren't hoping for good rolls to do the work for you. Your version just gives it a more clear target list. Probably another 5-10 points per shot...
So, I decide to re calculate the ork walkers using my system to see how off they are from my math. The two 'orkanaughts are both literally priced out as superheavies! They would be the cheapest superheavy walkers in the game, and that makes sense because the stompa is the cheapest titan level walker in the game as well. You can safely run the gorkanaught and morkanaught as superheavy walkers with 6 hullpoints and it wouldn't be unbalanced in the slightest. Deff dredds are fine where they are in points, but fall under the same issues as other walkers. Killa kans should be 40 points each. GW didn't give them any points discount for the "cowardly grots" rule.
Dreadknights are 10 points too cheap, most everything else I checked remained where I thought it was.
Should be done this weekend, will upload the update Sunday afternoon. You guys have anything else for me?
I have fully quantified survivability, as near as I can tell. So when building your own creations, or checking how other units are balanced for one another, their only differences should be weapons systems. My personal balancing act for weapons is pretty close to finished, here is hoping you guys enjoy it
Made up this one for the fun of it.
( Think Mad Max)
Human War Rig- 290pts.
BS 3 AV 14/13/12 HP4
Fast, Tank, Ramshackle (stole this from the orks section sorry)
Wargear: Smoke Launcher, Searchlight, Flames of Gloreh’, Infantry Mulcha’, Overkilla’
Flames of Gloreh’ - S7 ap3 template, torrent
Infantry Mulcha’- Range 36” S5 ap4 Heavy 10
Overkilla’- Range 24” S6 ap4 Heavy 4 Rending, Armor bane
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote:That looks like an awesome vehicle! Tell me you have a model for it...
Not yet, but I have been wanting to make a Mad Max themed army for a while now. I am thinking of going all orky with it, and just converting everything up. But to start things off I need to find a model kit for the 1973 Ford XB Falcon GT351 that fits GW's scale.
Matthew wrote:Don't forget the Thunderpoons!
Ok. The War rig may take up to 2 Thunderpoon launchers( Missile launcher with all options) for 10pts each. Sound good?
Slaaneshi knight hunter.
Av 13-12-12
6 HP Str10
Init5 ws5 bs4 A4
Double vanquisher cannon
Two heavy stubber
I strength D melee weapon
Agile
Fleet
Daemon of slaanesh
Knight ion shield
Total 430 points
So I have (I think) 127 pts. The only thing I'm not sure on is if I screwed up Wounds (is it 25 pts per Wound, or 25 pts for all 3 Wounds?) and Attacks (is it 3 pts for each attack, including the base 1, or is it 3 pts for each attack after the base?)
Depending, I am looking at 124-177 pts for the model (I think).
. Why is it listed as 6? Maybe I'm missing something but I'm confused.
"
