I'm gone for how long and we get a rules preview for some of what's going on for the new AdMech transport. Why does GW hate Skitarii so much?
1. We already know GW will price it high because it's an Imperial Transport with Fly
2. It can't shoot much
3. I can bring a drill instead
Hey at least it looks awesome I'll give them that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and it's apparently not Open Topped either.

FW option better than new codex option? Not surprised. The tank seems pretty good though. That mortar is NIIIICe.

I don't think GW takes forgeworld things into account when they design. So the drill might be better but they aren't expecting most people to know about the drill.

Why do ya'll whine so much?

I'm pretty sure most transports "suck". Not really anything new there. In a game where you NEED a good answer to Knights, Transports are always gonna be lackluster.

 flandarz wrote:
I'm pretty sure most transports "suck". Not really anything new there. In a game where you NEED a good answer to Knights, Transports are always gonna be lackluster.

Yeah, pretty much this. There's a few outliers, but by and large most transports are just too cost-inefficient compared to the infantry they actually transport. The few exceptions being Wave Serpents, Venoms and Razorbacks, and those three are almost unanimously based on the firepower they can pack for their cost, rather than their ability to ferry troops.

Wayniac wrote:
I don't think GW takes forgeworld things into account when they design. So the drill might be better but they aren't expecting most people to know about the drill.

That would be under the assumption the Drill was amazing in the first place. It's just kinda good. That's about it.

Gordoape wrote:
Why do ya'll whine so much?

It's part of how some people enjoy the hobby.

Has the point cost been leaked yet for it?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm gone for how long and we get a rules preview for some of what's going on for the new AdMech transport. Why does GW hate Skitarii so much?
1. We already know GW will price it high because it's an Imperial Transport with Fly
2. It can't shoot much
3. I can bring a drill instead
Hey at least it looks awesome I'll give them that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and it's apparently not Open Topped either.

No points cost, no judgement.

I think the points cost will be PRETTY low, which will make it viable. If its stats are even weaker than a Rhino's, then I can see it being maybe 60 points, which makes it incredibly good for just slotting into a list.

Yeah we can't really say it sucks yet until we see a point cost. If it was 40pts then it'd be nuts. So wait and see the points before calling it anything I'd say

 vaklor4 wrote:
I think the points cost will be PRETTY low, which will make it viable. If its stats are even weaker than a Rhino's, then I can see it being maybe 60 points, which makes it incredibly good for just slotting into a list.

I can't imagine any transport being cheaper then a rhino. a rhino is literally a box on wheels you put your guys in. and it's 70 points.

Orkz have two cheaper than that. Trukk is 62 pts (or so) and the Chinork is something like 68 pts (I think). And it can Fly. I'd expect the Admech transport to be somewhere in the high 60s to mid 70s. Which ain't awful.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm gone for how long and we get a rules preview for some of what's going on for the new AdMech transport. Why does GW hate Skitarii so much?
1. We already know GW will price it high because it's an Imperial Transport with Fly
2. It can't shoot much
3. I can bring a drill instead
Hey at least it looks awesome I'll give them that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and it's apparently not Open Topped either.

Jokes on you it doesn't actually have fly, so instead it's gonna be stupid expensive pts wise just because it's a transport It gets a rule to ignore penalties for heavy weapons and that's it. Check the apocalypse rules, nothing even remotely resembling fly. And again, I wanted to hope it would be open topped, but looking at it for 2 seconds would tell you it wasn't getting open topped. No firing ports, no firing steps, and they can't see over the edge. We do get the toughness debuff though, so I guess we get part of it.

And to be fair transports with lots of guns are awful transports, in that aspect GW did a smart thing. Every bit of crap you strap to a transport the more you ruin it for doing its job, moving dudes. It's why the primaris have probably the worst transports in the game. Yeah they're respectable tanks but they often cost double what they're carrying. And if you're moving them full out to, you know, transport stuff places, usually your firepower suffers as a result. This thing has 4 stubbers, and a data tether. Dirt cheap upgrades and that's enough stubbers to actually kill some guardsmen but will only add 8pts to the model's price. I'd rather they just gave us firing ports so I could shoot plasma out, but nobody really gets that anymore so no shocker there. That part I think they got right, I was terrified we were going to get a Repulsor knockoff and have a 200pt tank carrying 5 rangers or something stupid like that.

And at least it's cheaper than the drill, but that's only because FW prices have become ludicrous with the new currency conversions. I don't care how good and cool the drill is, $117 is ridiculous and I'm American, I'm getting off relatively easy.

But to answer your question this is our punishment for consistently pointing out to GW that our book was awfully written and we want it fixed. They're trying, gotta give them that, but I'd imagine they're getting sick of every time they think they've given us what we want we point out another issue they missed. Here's hoping that V2 codex is real and has some serious changes so we're not using FW traits that affect only 3 things in the codex and relics/WLT's that are so bad we can't even figure out what they were meant to do.

While I know we have been begging, the price just seems a bit exploitative. If it really ends up t6 without fly and open topped it will probably be around 60 pts. Which at $75 for the model is insane. To be fair Admech has some really strong infantry that are gutted by lack of mobility (skitarii are not guardsmen, but they are pretty good, and I have a soft spot for electropriests), so they can do more with it than marines can.

If its 70pts that's honestly not terrible, though not exciting. It will likely have an invuln over a rhino, and forgeworld traits, so -1 to hit as Stygies. It also will have around twice the number of pea shooter shots as a stormbolter with 3 cognos stubbers.

The mortar is a big deal. Indirect fire is gold, and Admech can struggle vs. gaurd mortars which wreck electropriests (units that can do well vs. guard). The gun has the perfect mortar killing statline.

 Valentine009 wrote:
While I know we have been begging, the price just seems a bit exploitative. If it really ends up t6 without fly and open topped it will probably be around 60 pts. Which at $75 for the model is insane. To be fair Admech has some really strong infantry that are gutted by lack of mobility (skitarii are not guardsmen, but they are pretty good, and I have a soft spot for electropriests), so they can do more with it than marines can.

If its 70pts that's honestly not terrible, though not exciting. It will likely have an invuln over a rhino, and forgeworld traits, so -1 to hit as Stygies. It also will have around twice the number of pea shooter shots as a stormbolter with 3 cognos stubbers.

The mortar is a big deal. Indirect fire is gold, and Admech can struggle vs. gaurd mortars which wreck electropriests (units that can do well vs. guard). The gun has the perfect mortar killing statline.

I suspect it'll be a case of the tank will be insanely good, and you'll be paying for the good tank, for the basic transport.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm gone for how long and we get a rules preview for some of what's going on for the new AdMech transport. Why does GW hate Skitarii so much?
1. We already know GW will price it high because it's an Imperial Transport with Fly
2. It can't shoot much
3. I can bring a drill instead

There. I fixed it for you wrote:I'm gone for how long and we get moaning for the new AdMech transport. Why do Warhammer fans rage so much?
1. We don't know GW will price it high because it's not out yet.
2. It can't shoot much because it's not supposed to; it's a transport.
3. I can bring a drill instead, and probably should seeing as I have that option.

 Ginjitzu wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm gone for how long and we get a rules preview for some of what's going on for the new AdMech transport. Why does GW hate Skitarii so much?
1. We already know GW will price it high because it's an Imperial Transport with Fly
2. It can't shoot much
3. I can bring a drill instead

There. I fixed it for you wrote:I'm gone for how long and we get moaning for the new AdMech transport. Why do Warhammer fans rage so much?
1. We don't know GW will price it high because it's not out yet.
2. It can't shoot much because it's not supposed to; it's a transport.
3. I can bring a drill instead, and probably should seeing as I have that option.

Edit: i 'd be really carefull what you wish for, the landing bark or whatevs it's called might aswell be the best or worst transport.

Overall though having a bad transport so far is more common then black bread in russia. So nobody cares and chances are they get fixed sometime. Except if you are eldar, then your transport for wahtever reason is better then the rest of your vehicle choices out of principle.

So we've not seen the cost or the full rules yet TC is complaining.

Something must be wrong in his personal life

 Ishagu wrote:
So we've not seen the cost or the full rules yet TC is complaining.

Something must be wrong in his personal life

...or it's a day ending in "y" - your call.

OP got one other thing wrong too....it doesn't look cool so that would be strike 4.

On a serious note, transports are only as good as the occupants they carry. Saying all transports suck is incorrect, especially when you directly relate to the knight meta. If the occupants start on foot, the Avenger will decimate them, at least in a transport they have a turn to survive (or at least exhaust a lot of the enemy firepower). The thing is, what's in the box (Seven pun completely intended) is what really matters. Ten tactical marines? yeah, not worth it.

 bullyboy wrote:
OP got one other thing wrong too....it doesn't look cool so that would be strike 4.

On a serious note, transports are only as good as the occupants they carry. Saying all transports suck is incorrect, especially when you directly relate to the knight meta. If the occupants start on foot, the Avenger will decimate them, at least in a transport they have a turn to survive (or at least exhaust a lot of the enemy firepower). The thing is, what's in the box (Seven pun completely intended) is what really matters. Ten tactical marines? yeah, not worth it.

preach!

Admech infantry isnt bad, most of them are already playable and giving them access to a GW transport (some places/people dont allow FW) means that units like Fulgurites, Corpuscarii, Ruststalkers and even just big squads of vanguards with plasma will see more play. To me a model doesnt have to be knight-level to be a good addition, it has to open up new play options. Admech will most likely stay a gunline army, but the transport means that we might be able to run a more assault oriented army.

And as other people have said, we dont have the full rules/pts costs for 40k so its all up in the air as to how good/bad its going to be.

I love the its bad before we know what it will cost or any of the rules take.

I mean if it turns out to be bad I guess that will mean you can say "I told you so" but its like in 6th I remember a thread on how overcostd the waveserpant was. then it proceeded to be one of the best units in the game.

I am not saying this will be the next 6th ed wave serpant... but i am also not saying it will not be.

 G00fySmiley wrote:
I love the its bad before we know what it will cost or any of the rules take.

I mean if it turns out to be bad I guess that will mean you can say "I told you so" but its like in 6th I remember a thread on how overcostd the waveserpant was. then it proceeded to be one of the best units in the game.

I am not saying this will be the next 6th ed wave serpant... but i am also not saying it will not be.

Literally nobody outside the one Eldar playing troll (the name is long lost to me) said the Serpent would've been overcosted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 bullyboy wrote:
OP got one other thing wrong too....it doesn't look cool so that would be strike 4.

On a serious note, transports are only as good as the occupants they carry. Saying all transports suck is incorrect, especially when you directly relate to the knight meta. If the occupants start on foot, the Avenger will decimate them, at least in a transport they have a turn to survive (or at least exhaust a lot of the enemy firepower). The thing is, what's in the box (Seven pun completely intended) is what really matters. Ten tactical marines? yeah, not worth it.

Not all transports suck, but most of them do. The only good ones:
1. Razorbacks, but only with Assault Cannons and to be honest they're not actually good at transporting, just shooting.
2. Wave Serpents, which are in the same boat.
3. Venoms and Raiders, which let their occupants shoot from the vehicle.
You could argue on the mediocrity of the Ghost Ark, which just has shooting going for it and doing so better than Warriors themselves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Insectum7 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I'm gone for how long and we get a rules preview for some of what's going on for the new AdMech transport. Why does GW hate Skitarii so much?
1. We already know GW will price it high because it's an Imperial Transport with Fly
2. It can't shoot much
3. I can bring a drill instead
Hey at least it looks awesome I'll give them that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and it's apparently not Open Topped either.

No points cost, no judgement.

You really don't think we can wager a guess from previous units GW released?

A wager, sure. But not with a high degree of confidence. GW might be more stable than they've been in the past in that regard, but they're still too highly variable.

$$$ will be the big decider for me; at $80+ I doubt I’ll pick one up. The closer it is to a rhino in price, the more I’ll buy for my collection - up to about three.

The good news is that I had been scratch building a transport before this was announced; I’d paused because I didn’t have a good method to stat it out and assign it a point value. Now that we’re getting an “official” model, I can finish a few details on my existing model (mainly armament), and use my scratchbuild model.

 flandarz wrote:
I'm pretty sure most transports "suck". Not really anything new there. In a game where you NEED a good answer to Knights, Transports are always gonna be lackluster.

Are you sure? Since the Knight Codex dropped over a year ago, I've seen exactly 1 knight on the table. Maybe it depends on your meta?

Hmmm.

 Stormonu wrote:
$$$ will be the big decider for me; at $80+ I doubt I’ll pick one up. The closer it is to a rhino in price, the more I’ll buy for my collection - up to about three.

The good news is that I had been scratch building a transport before this was announced; I’d paused because I didn’t have a good method to stat it out and assign it a point value. Now that we’re getting an “official” model, I can finish a few details on my existing model (mainly armament), and use my scratchbuild model.

the counts as files are already on thingierse to 3d print, on an FDM printed they cost maybe a buck to print. it is not the same as the gw one but takes the overall elements to its close enough to easily recognizable

I will probably by few from GW if they cost around what a rhino does, but it they cost $80 then I'll be printing the counts as model

We know they will cost $75, the preorder list has leaked.

 Valentine009 wrote:
We know they will cost $75, the preorder list has leaked.

I guess I shall pick up a Kilo of grey esun PLA+ then cause that is redic for a transport. $20 in plastic can make around 10 counts as if recall from slicing the file. (sill only need 3, but always good to have more gray around for later)

Admech Players: We want a transport!!!
GW: Ok, here.
Admech Players: We -meant- that we want a -really good- transport!!!

Seriously, there's no winning. Y'all have multiple options for transports, one plastic through GW and one resin through FW if you want to spring for that one. You also got a new tank out of the deal despite already having one of the best anti-tank weapons in the game on the Onager.

Time to let other factions complain, like, y'know, Eldar with still not having new Aspect Warriors or Avatar of Khaine.

drbored wrote:
Admech Players: We want a transport!!!
GW: Ok, here.
Admech Players: We -meant- that we want a -really good- transport!!!

Seriously, there's no winning. Y'all have multiple options for transports, one plastic through GW and one resin through FW if you want to spring for that one. You also got a new tank out of the deal despite already having one of the best anti-tank weapons in the game on the Onager.

Time to let other factions complain, like, y'know, Eldar with still not having new Aspect Warriors or Avatar of Khaine.

I think sometimes it is more frustrating to be acknowledged but not truly acknowledged, than it is to be ignored. It hits morale higher because it 'fixes' the problem without really fixing the problem.

I can live with the state of the Admech army. My other army is Raven Guard which has it way worse. There are just a few super frustrating aspects.

 Valentine009 wrote:

drbored wrote:
Admech Players: We want a transport!!!
GW: Ok, here.
Admech Players: We -meant- that we want a -really good- transport!!!

Seriously, there's no winning. Y'all have multiple options for transports, one plastic through GW and one resin through FW if you want to spring for that one. You also got a new tank out of the deal despite already having one of the best anti-tank weapons in the game on the Onager.

Time to let other factions complain, like, y'know, Eldar with still not having new Aspect Warriors or Avatar of Khaine.

I think sometimes it is more frustrating to be acknowledged but not truly acknowledged, than it is to be ignored. It hits morale higher because it 'fixes' the problem without really fixing the problem. I can live with the state of the Admech army.

Frankly, there's more pressing issues with AdMech than a transport. It's an army that I'm surprised has been working as well as it has been considering the hodgepodge nature of the army thanks to them cramming Canticles in and hoping it worked.

My other army is Raven Guard which has it way worse. There are just a few super frustrating aspects.

Ehhh...Raven Guard are in a good place but you have to be willing to play a mixed Primaris and Oldmarine force. At least that's my RG experience. The new Vanguard stuff coupled with Vanguard Veterans and Assaults plus Shrike can be slightly brutal once you start shutting down overwatch.

It's really only suffered (again, in my experience) vs tanks/knights--and now we know Eliminators are getting a weapon to address that issue.

 G00fySmiley wrote:

 Valentine009 wrote:
We know they will cost $75, the preorder list has leaked.

I guess I shall pick up a Kilo of grey esun PLA+ then cause that is redic for a transport. $20 in plastic can make around 10 counts as if recall from slicing the file. (sill only need 3, but always good to have more gray around for later)

Looks like they priced it for the tank option, not the transport option.

Ah well, back to plasticard and cardboard for me, I guess.

 Stormonu wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

 Valentine009 wrote:
We know they will cost $75, the preorder list has leaked.

I guess I shall pick up a Kilo of grey esun PLA+ then cause that is redic for a transport. $20 in plastic can make around 10 counts as if recall from slicing the file. (sill only need 3, but always good to have more gray around for later)

Looks like they priced it for the tank option, not the transport option.

Ah well, back to plasticard and cardboard for me, I guess.

the printer I use is an Ender 3 and can be had when it goe son sale on amazon for $180ish and if you know somebody with a good 3d printer they can probably pritn you the counts as for a few bucks if interested

I am partial to this one which has spider legs

https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:3684347

there are ones closer to the GW ones, bbut some are to close to the GW ones for my liking that personally I think infringe on GW models so choose nto to use

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:You really don't think we can wager a guess from previous units GW released?

One can of course wager a guess on the cost of something, but you've gone ahead and started a thread spewing rage at your own guess. Maybe it will be over costed, but until you know the cost, can't you see that you're literally just getting mad at your own imagination?

 flandarz wrote:
I'm pretty sure most transports "suck". Not really anything new there. In a game where you NEED a good answer to Knights, Transports are always gonna be lackluster.

Not always. Just until GW figures out there are ways to split off the transports from the giant tanks/walkers so fast/light/small transports are harder to hit, allowing them to be more survivable - give Rhinos, Razorbacks but not stuff like Land Raiders a -2 to hit (No thought to that other than pulling a number out of thin air for an example) because they're racing around transporting not grinding around tanking or stomping around Knighting. The down side is this will make more people demand a Rhino/Primaris vehicle even louder and more often, because I would not give the Repulsor's this -2 (Or whatever playtested solution is settled on) - at least not while they've got 6,000 hull and turret mounted weapons. The other potential downside is over-correcting. Rhinos at -3 to hit turn 1, -2 to hit turn 2, -1 to hit turn 3 sounds like a good idea, but would absolutely flood the board with Rhinos as people try and use them as alpha strike defense. I'd be tempted to start with splitting the difference. On the models you want to protect in this way, their smoke launchers turn into smoke generators. So the big tanks still have a one turn launcher, the transports have a generator that can be either on or off: -2 to hit (going both ways the transport's shooting, and shooting at the transports) outside 12 inches or some such. And again this is just seat of the pants concept work- not any sort of mathematically generated or tested numbers.

One thing I'd like to see added to the game is range modifiers.

Let's take a Boltgun. It has a 24 inch range.

A range of 20-24 would be long range and taken at a -2 penalty.

15-20 would be medium range at a -1 penalty.

14 inches and less would be short range, no penalty. (I choose half cause of rapid fire I admit)

this would add a bit more depth to the game and allow GW to diversify small arms a bit, making some work better

BrianDavion wrote:
One thing I'd like to see added to the game is range modifiers.

Let's take a Boltgun. It has a 24 inch range.

A range of 20-24 would be long range and taken at a -2 penalty.

15-20 would be medium range at a -1 penalty.

14 inches and less would be short range, no penalty. (I choose half cause of rapid fire I admit)

this would add a bit more depth to the game and allow GW to diversify small arms a bit, making some work better

- To hit penalties are bad and you should feel bad for suggesting even more of them.

I agree. There's enough to-hit penalties around without adding more. For instance, that bolter example would mean that at "max range", against a Aeldari Flyer Spam list, you could be seeing -4 or -5 to hit. You might as well just pack away your minis at that point, cuz you already lost.

 flandarz wrote:
I agree. There's enough to-hit penalties around without adding more. For instance, that bolter example would mean that at "max range", against a Aeldari Flyer Spam list, you could be seeing -4 or -5 to hit. You might as well just pack away your minis at that point, cuz you already lost.

In addition the range penalty is already built into the boltgun and other rapid fire weapons by the rapid fire rule.

I find it odd the video story we'd be getting an ad mech transport seemed to have more thought placed into it than the vehicle itself.

Long story short, transport looks pants, but we won't know for sure until we see points cost. Will probably still be pants, but cheap paints, which will eventually get upped in cost to be crap pants once more if so. Could just be straight pants, over costed and pointless.

The mortar tank looks cool, and it feels like as said the kit was priced for the tank, and the transport is just a victim of that.

Though was nice to give it hover so we don't actually get fly on it. Thanks GW, you the best.

As well I'd have to say, ad mech players always said they wanted a good transport, or at least about as good as a transport can be. Not and overly expensive, rules barren crap trap pair of bell bottom pants. As is the kits is overly costly money wise, probably point wise, and lacks fly, but is sure to hover so we won't lose any precious stubber shots, amazing, while having an open top for a low toughness but yet not having ability to shoot from it for the negatives, amazing.

It's like they really went beyond the call to make it meh, while also being sure to at least give one option you'd by the kit for. I'd be more mad if it wasn't so expected.

Oh and for who put the 3D spider tank transport counts as, that vehicle looks awesome. Very cool, but if GW put it out I'd bet it would have been around the cost of the new marine tank. Silly GW.

Not Online!!! wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
One thing I'd like to see added to the game is range modifiers.

Let's take a Boltgun. It has a 24 inch range.

A range of 20-24 would be long range and taken at a -2 penalty.

15-20 would be medium range at a -1 penalty.

14 inches and less would be short range, no penalty. (I choose half cause of rapid fire I admit)

this would add a bit more depth to the game and allow GW to diversify small arms a bit, making some work better

- To hit penalties are bad and you should feel bad for suggesting even more of them.

obviously if we did this I'd remove the CTs that provide to hit penalties. IMHO stuff like that should be a factor of range and cover not some magical special rule bs.

Breton wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
I'm pretty sure most transports "suck". Not really anything new there. In a game where you NEED a good answer to Knights, Transports are always gonna be lackluster.

Not always. Just until GW figures out there are ways to split off the transports from the giant tanks/walkers so fast/light/small transports are harder to hit, allowing them to be more survivable - give Rhinos, Razorbacks but not stuff like Land Raiders a -2 to hit (No thought to that other than pulling a number out of thin air for an example) because they're racing around transporting not grinding around tanking or stomping around Knighting. The down side is this will make more people demand a Rhino/Primaris vehicle even louder and more often, because I would not give the Repulsor's this -2 (Or whatever playtested solution is settled on) - at least not while they've got 6,000 hull and turret mounted weapons. The other potential downside is over-correcting. Rhinos at -3 to hit turn 1, -2 to hit turn 2, -1 to hit turn 3 sounds like a good idea, but would absolutely flood the board with Rhinos as people try and use them as alpha strike defense. I'd be tempted to start with splitting the difference. On the models you want to protect in this way, their smoke launchers turn into smoke generators. So the big tanks still have a one turn launcher, the transports have a generator that can be either on or off: -2 to hit (going both ways the transport's shooting, and shooting at the transports) outside 12 inches or some such. And again this is just seat of the pants concept work- not any sort of mathematically generated or tested numbers.

could not disagree more, there are to many minus to hit as it is. additionally the idea that a tank is hard to hit would be ridiculous, rhinos are capable of holding 10 power armored 7-10 foots (depending n who is wirting it) power armored super humans plus crew, engine and weapons. these are not going to be small, probably at least on scale with a large dump truck maybe bigger. that is not going to be difficult to hit at at in game turns 2x running speed. from a game balance perspective even a minus 1 to hit would mean its back to 5th edition rhino/razerback rush being the main list. I do agree most transports need to go down in points to reflect thier use (though the razerback and wave serpant are actually in about the right place) so rhinos, trukks, devilfish, drop pods, ghost arcs, and chimera should all get a nice little cut in points. making them basically invulnerable it not the answer.

BrianDavion wrote:
One thing I'd like to see added to the game is range modifiers.

Let's take a Boltgun. It has a 24 inch range.

A range of 20-24 would be long range and taken at a -2 penalty.

15-20 would be medium range at a -1 penalty.

14 inches and less would be short range, no penalty. (I choose half cause of rapid fire I admit)

this would add a bit more depth to the game and allow GW to diversify small arms a bit, making some work better

If the game were played with a D10 or D12, sure. D6? Nope.

Transports “suck” because they aren’t allowed to do what they are built for. Long range transport to the battlefield. As long as that isn’t accounted for, and Deep Strike is cheap and easy, transports will continue to languish.

BrianDavion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
One thing I'd like to see added to the game is range modifiers.

Let's take a Boltgun. It has a 24 inch range.

A range of 20-24 would be long range and taken at a -2 penalty.

15-20 would be medium range at a -1 penalty.

14 inches and less would be short range, no penalty. (I choose half cause of rapid fire I admit)

this would add a bit more depth to the game and allow GW to diversify small arms a bit, making some work better

- To hit penalties are bad and you should feel bad for suggesting even more of them.

obviously if we did this I'd remove the CTs that provide to hit penalties. IMHO stuff like that should be a factor of range and cover not some magical special rule bs.

We would also have to reduce the movement for everything to keep melee from just wiping everyone out.

40K did start with models on foot having a 4” move, instead of 6” - I think it changed in 3rd?

I’m for range modifiers, but not sure if I’d like to see unit speed reduced.

 vaklor4 wrote:
I think the points cost will be PRETTY low, which will make it viable. If its stats are even weaker than a Rhino's, then I can see it being maybe 60 points, which makes it incredibly good for just slotting into a list.

It's T6 with what...12 wounds and MAYBE 6+ invul? If it's open topped I'd say maybe 65-75 pts if not I'd say less than 50.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrianDavion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
One thing I'd like to see added to the game is range modifiers.

Let's take a Boltgun. It has a 24 inch range.

A range of 20-24 would be long range and taken at a -2 penalty.

15-20 would be medium range at a -1 penalty.

14 inches and less would be short range, no penalty. (I choose half cause of rapid fire I admit)

this would add a bit more depth to the game and allow GW to diversify small arms a bit, making some work better

- To hit penalties are bad and you should feel bad for suggesting even more of them.

obviously if we did this I'd remove the CTs that provide to hit penalties. IMHO stuff like that should be a factor of range and cover not some magical special rule bs.

So does range and cover not affect orks or eliminqte them from the game entirely?

 Mmmpi wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
One thing I'd like to see added to the game is range modifiers.

Let's take a Boltgun. It has a 24 inch range.

A range of 20-24 would be long range and taken at a -2 penalty.

15-20 would be medium range at a -1 penalty.

14 inches and less would be short range, no penalty. (I choose half cause of rapid fire I admit)

this would add a bit more depth to the game and allow GW to diversify small arms a bit, making some work better

- To hit penalties are bad and you should feel bad for suggesting even more of them.

obviously if we did this I'd remove the CTs that provide to hit penalties. IMHO stuff like that should be a factor of range and cover not some magical special rule bs.

We would also have to reduce the movement for everything to keep melee from just wiping everyone out.

depends how it's done, admittingly I'm thinking of battletech when I referance this, a game whose movement and range modifiers make manuver CRUCIAL but each individual unit in that game can also take a real pounding so..

ERJAK wrote:


So does range and cover not affect orks or eliminqte them from the game entirely?

My Kill Team experience which has both range and cover modifiers, says that it doesn't eliminate Orks completely, but it does make shoota/big shoota boys even with the Bad Moons subfaction trait not really worth fielding over choppa boys. Well, unless you like rolling lots of dice that ultimately don't do anything. There is also something to be said that subfactions in full 40k that add a -1 to hit over 12" only count as obscured in Kill Team. Even the designers noted that would be way too many hit penalties.

I think that 40k can either have range or cover/obscured penalties. I think having them on cover makes more sense and typically like the idea of the Cities of Death terrain rules which is usually more than pain placed on shooty armies.

Well as it sits the transport is 73pts all things added up, the tank is 111pts for the mortar and 116 for the anti tank gun.

Pretty good points costs, just wish the model was cheaper.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Well as it sits the transport is 73pts all things added up, the tank is 111pts for the mortar and 116 for the anti tank gun.

Pretty good points costs, just wish the model was cheaper.

73 points for the transport is p[retty solid all told. and less then 120 points for the tank makes it damn near autotake.

Both the transport and the Tank are very good, and costed competitively. Both can have a 2+ save on turn 1, and likely on other turns also.

Cheap enough to run in multiples without taking away from a list theme, and they open up some new ways to play AdMech.

A triumphant release!

 Ishagu wrote:
Both the transport and the Tank are very good, and costed competitively. Both can have a 2+ save on turn 1, and likely on other turns also.

Cheap enough to run in multiples without taking away from a list theme, and they open up some new ways to play AdMech.

A triumphant release!

Now if only the price wouldn't be such a buzz kill..


Anyways we should be happy that it is correctly prized.

The tank is alright, his biggest issue is having to compete in the Heavy Support role along with Dunecrawlers and Murderbots. It would have been much better as as Fast Attack.

The transport however is underwhelming, even at 73 points. Only T6 despite not being open-topped, no fly keyword despite being some kind of antigrave, no Invulnerable like every other unit in the codex (besides Servitors), not able to transport Kataphrons, can only transort 10 models so no Tehpriest support or big squad of electropriest.

And it cost *twice* the price of similar transports.

 krakjen wrote:
The tank is alright, his biggest issue is having to compete in the Heavy Support role along with Dunecrawlers and Murderbots. It would have been much better as as Fast Attack.

The transport however is underwhelming, even at 73 points. Only T6 despite not being open-topped, no fly keyword despite being some kind of antigrave, no Invulnerable like every other unit in the codex (besides Servitors), not able to transport Kataphrons, can only transort 10 models so no Tehpriest support or big squad of electropriest.

And it cost *twice* the price of similar transports.

It has stubbers galore though and you pay similarly for rhinos though.

AdMech have access to cheap-ish infantry that can take lots of special weapons, as well as interesting cc and close range units. It's going to work well.

And opponents will have choices to make too. If you target the transports it means those Kastellan and Kataphrons will be unscathed.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 krakjen wrote:
The tank is alright, his biggest issue is having to compete in the Heavy Support role along with Dunecrawlers and Murderbots. It would have been much better as as Fast Attack.

The transport however is underwhelming, even at 73 points. Only T6 despite not being open-topped, no fly keyword despite being some kind of antigrave, no Invulnerable like every other unit in the codex (besides Servitors), not able to transport Kataphrons, can only transort 10 models so no Tehpriest support or big squad of electropriest.

And it cost *twice* the price of similar transports.

It has stubbers galore though and you pay similarly for rhinos though.

Stubbers are crap though. What you get with the transport is the same firepower as 4 devilgaunts.
The only purpose of that transport is to carry only 10 guys and die, and even there it might not make it with Toughness 6 (Autocannon and Plasma rejoice).

And the best part is having to cough up $75 / 60€ for a worst Rhino.

Lol in one topic people complain about transports costing too much because they have too much Firepower.

In this topic we have complaints about a transport being cheap and lightly armed.

Ahh the internet

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol in one topic people complain about transports costing too much because they have too much Firepower.

In this topic we have complaints about a transport being cheap and lightly armed.

Ahh the internet

Except the transport isn't good. 73 points is NOT cheap in 8th for a transport. Rhinos are only a point more and are much more durable.

Units can be bad for different reasons.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol in one topic people complain about transports costing too much because they have too much Firepower.

In this topic we have complaints about a transport being cheap and lightly armed.

Ahh the internet

Except the transport isn't good. 73 points is NOT cheap in 8th for a transport. Rhinos are only a point more and are much more durable.

Wrong. 73 points is cheap for a 12 wound vehicle with 12 shots at 30"+ range that can transport reasonably priced infantry. It will also have a 2+ save in the early game rounds due to Canticles.

Don't like it? Don't take it

It's open topped, right? Doesn't that mean that anyone inside can shoot?

SG

It is NOT open topped. I think that's part of the complaint.

Anyone who expected AdMech to get Raiders had exquisitely unrealistic expectations.

Because only a few factions can have usable transports?

Martel732 wrote:
Because only a few factions can have usable transports?

"Useable transport" and "free moving gunship spewing shots across the whole map while doing donuts in the parking lot" are not remotely identical milestones.

Sterling191 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Because only a few factions can have usable transports?

"Useable transport" and "free moving gunship spewing shots across the whole map while doing donuts in the parking lot" are not remotely identical milestones.

In 8th, they kinda are. The other option is being indestructible like a Wave Serpent. If you aren't indestructible or open topped, you probably suck as a transport.

 Ishagu wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol in one topic people complain about transports costing too much because they have too much Firepower.

In this topic we have complaints about a transport being cheap and lightly armed.

Ahh the internet

Except the transport isn't good. 73 points is NOT cheap in 8th for a transport. Rhinos are only a point more and are much more durable.

Wrong. 73 points is cheap for a 12 wound vehicle with 12 shots at 30"+ range that can transport reasonably priced infantry. It will also have a 2+ save in the early game rounds due to Canticles.

Don't like it? Don't take it

You failed to mention that those 12 wounds are on a T6 chassis and that it can only carry 10 models which is not enough to have a real impact with the cheap infrantry AdMech has access to, and doesn't allow to bring a much needed HQ.
You also mention the 12 shots but not that they are S4 AP0 and as such kinda crap. Not that I want giant guns on my transport but this is nothing that make the transport worthwhile.
And the 2+ save is not a strength of the transport, it's a strength of the army. Anything 3+ can get this bonus if you can get the canticle.

And don't forget 60€ for 73 points. This must be the worst price/point ratio in the game, despite the AdMech already having the overexpensive chickenbots.

A Smasha is $46 for 35 points, so I think it has the Admech Transport beat. A Trukk is T6, W10, with 3 BS5+, S5, AP0 shots and a 4+ Save. It holds exactly 2 more models than this Transport and costs about 10 pts less. Honestly, I think a 3+ Save (that can be improved to a 2+ pretty easily), +2W, and 9 more shots with a better BS (if worse Strength) is worth 10 points, even if I have to give up a couple seats for it. I'd be pretty stoked to have a Transport that can survive long enough to get its crew where I want them to be.

 flandarz wrote:
A Smasha is $46 for 35 points, so I think it has the Admech Transport beat. A Trukk is T6, W10, with 3 BS5+, S5, AP0 shots and a 4+ Save. It holds exactly 2 more models than this Transport and costs about 10 pts less. Honestly, I think a 3+ Save (that can be improved to a 2+ pretty easily), +2W, and 9 more shots with a better BS (if worse Strength) is worth 10 points, even if I have to give up a couple seats for it. I'd be pretty stoked to have a Transport that can survive long enough to get its crew where I want them to be.

isn't the Trukk Open-topped though?

 krakjen wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
A Smasha is $46 for 35 points, so I think it has the Admech Transport beat. A Trukk is T6, W10, with 3 BS5+, S5, AP0 shots and a 4+ Save. It holds exactly 2 more models than this Transport and costs about 10 pts less. Honestly, I think a 3+ Save (that can be improved to a 2+ pretty easily), +2W, and 9 more shots with a better BS (if worse Strength) is worth 10 points, even if I have to give up a couple seats for it. I'd be pretty stoked to have a Transport that can survive long enough to get its crew where I want them to be.

isn't the Trukk Open-topped though?

\

It is, but there's few units that can take advantage of its open topped nature, namely only Tankbustas and Flash Gitz, both of who are expensive to begin with and the trukk's value is extremely limited since you can't use stratagems on them while embarked, and for Flash Gitz they still get the -1 to hit penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons. If the trukk actually had firepower worth its current points or if it was cheaper so we could take more to ensure armour saturation, it wouldn't be bad. As is though, trukks are middling at best.

 Grimskul wrote:

 krakjen wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
A Smasha is $46 for 35 points, so I think it has the Admech Transport beat. A Trukk is T6, W10, with 3 BS5+, S5, AP0 shots and a 4+ Save. It holds exactly 2 more models than this Transport and costs about 10 pts less. Honestly, I think a 3+ Save (that can be improved to a 2+ pretty easily), +2W, and 9 more shots with a better BS (if worse Strength) is worth 10 points, even if I have to give up a couple seats for it. I'd be pretty stoked to have a Transport that can survive long enough to get its crew where I want them to be.

isn't the Trukk Open-topped though?

\

It is, but there's few units that can take advantage of its open topped nature, namely only Tankbustas and Flash Gitz, both of who are expensive to begin with and the trukk's value is extremely limited since you can't use stratagems on them while embarked, and for Flash Gitz they still get the -1 to hit penalty for moving and firing heavy weapons. If the trukk actually had firepower worth its current points or if it was cheaper so we could take more to ensure armour saturation, it wouldn't be bad. As is though, trukks are middling at best.

So the Trukk has 2 more carry capacity, is Open-topped and is cheaper than the Dunerider. His drawback is 2 less wounds and worse shooting power.
I'm not sure you are getting the worst deal here.

But my guess is that, like the Trukk, the Dunerider will end up being a meh transport.

But you gain the shooting of all the boyz inside. That's why the rhino sucks as a transport: it turns off the shooting of 10 expensive ass marines inside.

Martel732 wrote:
But you gain the shooting of all the boyz inside. That's why the rhino sucks as a transport: it turns off the shooting of 10 expensive ass marines inside.

I would agree with you if Ork players could fit in marine-level accuracy units inside it with matching firepower to boot. As is, 12 some odd shoota boyz isn't exactly scaring the pants off anything, with only 18" range and BS5+. Similarly, tankbustas are honestly better taken in via tellyporta, since you plop them guaranteed for at least one round of shooting in range of their desired target and can use stratagems like Moar Dakka! whereas tankbustas in trukks are liable to be alpha striked or stranded before they can get to their ideal targets. Flash Gitz are the only ones that really get any decent mileage, which is undercut from them having Heavy weapons and again being unable to benefit from stratagems. Rhinos suck yes, but so do trukks within the context of the army its in. Trukks are something marines would actually want to have, its just not in the right codex.

Rhinos need to get their firing points back. Being able to shoot out the top with a combi and special/heavy would do a long way to making them not terrible. Either that or a massive point drop.

Marines pay through the nose for that accuracy. I think id rather have the trukk of orks.

A trukk of Orkz is 146 pts. The Trukk will pop to pretty much any stiff breeze (T6, W10, Sv4+). The Boyz inside will die even more easily, even if you use Loot It to give them a 5+ Save.

Sure, it's "cheap". But cheap ain't everything. Otherwise the top ITC lists would just be 300 Grots and Weirdboyz.

Cheap means a lot in a game where nothing lives. W 10 t6v4+ is not appreciably weaker than a rhino in my experience. The key stat is the wound count on low end vehicles (usually). Anything that kills your trukk will probably kill the rhino too. Thats why open topped is so good. The -1 t is a tiny price.

Martel732 wrote:
Cheap means a lot in a game where nothing lives. W 10 t6v4+ is not appreciably weaker than a rhino in my experience. The key stat is the wound count on low end vehicles (usually). Anything that kills your trukk will probably kill the rhino too. Thats why open topped is so good. The -1 t is a tiny price.

Martel, I know you pretty think MEQ are complete garbage (and to an extent they are), so bolters by extension must be in your opinion be pretty bad as well. In that instance, how are shootas, functionally assault 2 18" bolters, with BS5+, any good? Orks really don't need any more help with anti-infantry in our army, and 24 bolter shots isn't great, at best it can clear a screen if your rolling is decent. But with dakkajets exisiting, why bother? Even marines have more efficient methods of screen clearing, with aggressors and twin-ass cannon razorbacks.

I didn't say it was fantastic. I said it was better than a rhino full of marines. Open topped is just a slap in the face to those of use without open topped transports.

I think it's just an army thing. For Orkz, Open-Topped is like: "Meh." It's nice, but you don't need it. And it's because we have generally poor shooting. Most to all of our good shooting wants to stay put in one spot, because they carry heavy weapons. However, hard-topped vehicles with good T and W are a godsend for Orkz, because they can more reliably get our melee units to the front lines. Throw a squad of BC/C Nobz into a Rhino and suddenly it don't seem so bad. That's because Ork armies have different priorities and strategies than Marines do.

And then there's Drukhari.

Shhhhh. We don't speak of them here.

Martel732 wrote:
And then there's Drukhari.

admit it Martel, it's a Drukhari who makes you play space marines, it's how they torture you.

I would never call my wife that. Indirectly, she's part of the cause. I would get the evil eye for sure getting a new army.

Martel732 wrote:
I would never call my wife that. Indirectly, she's part of the cause. I would get the evil eye for sure getting a new army.

No chance you can hook her into the game and give her your old army then?

 krakjen wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Ishagu wrote:
Lol in one topic people complain about transports costing too much because they have too much Firepower.

In this topic we have complaints about a transport being cheap and lightly armed.

Ahh the internet

Except the transport isn't good. 73 points is NOT cheap in 8th for a transport. Rhinos are only a point more and are much more durable.

Wrong. 73 points is cheap for a 12 wound vehicle with 12 shots at 30"+ range that can transport reasonably priced infantry. It will also have a 2+ save in the early game rounds due to Canticles.

Don't like it? Don't take it

You failed to mention that those 12 wounds are on a T6 chassis and that it can only carry 10 models which is not enough to have a real impact with the cheap infrantry AdMech has access to, and doesn't allow to bring a much needed HQ.
You also mention the 12 shots but not that they are S4 AP0 and as such kinda crap. Not that I want giant guns on my transport but this is nothing that make the transport worthwhile.
And the 2+ save is not a strength of the transport, it's a strength of the army. Anything 3+ can get this bonus if you can get the canticle.

And don't forget 60€ for 73 points. This must be the worst price/point ratio in the game, despite the AdMech already having the overexpensive chickenbots.

Also forgot to mention that it doesn't do anything to avoid another pitfall of transports, and that's the whole "can't move then disembark". Knock it down two pegs (you don't even need to kill it) and you might as well have footslogged the Skitarii.
If I wanted to wait two turns again, the Drill exists.

I DO think that's kind of a bad rule. I could understand "you can't move, shoot, or charge with a unit the turn it disembarks", if they would allow us to Disembark after moving.

Do we really want to be adding a dozen inches to the charge range of half the units in the game? Berzerkers? DE covens?

Ive got my guardsmen, what do i care?

Well, that IS why I suggested that Disembarking denies the unit the ability to Move, Shoot, or Charge that turn. No Move so you can't use Transports to add a dozen or so inches to your movement. No Shoot so you can't get around Open-Topped. No Charge for the reason you just mentioned.

The problem of the transports come directly from the movement rules. As long as an infantry model can keep up with them, there will be no incentive to field them. We will be better off spending those points in more infantry models.

IMHO, a lot could be solved in favor of their usability if the advance rule would be changed to "add half the movement of the model" (instead of + 1d6"). No dice rolled, faster games. No dice rolled, deployment more critical ergo more strategical. An ork walking down the road of death could move 5"+2.5" while a trukk 12"+6".

Maybe those 10.5" extra inches would make them more valuable.

An alternative would be to have a double braket movement profile, but that requires a lot f editing and FAQing.

Orkimedez_Atalaya wrote:
The problem of the transports come directly from the movement rules. As long as an infantry model can keep up with them, there will be no incentive to field them. We will be better off spending those points in more infantry models.

IMHO, a lot could be solved in favor of their usability if the advance rule would be changed to "add half the movement of the model" (instead of + 1d6"). No dice rolled, faster games. No dice rolled, deployment more critical ergo more strategical. An ork walking down the road of death could move 5"+2.5" while a trukk 12"+6".

Maybe those 10.5" extra inches would make them more valuable.

An alternative would be to have a double braket movement profile, but that requires a lot f editing and FAQing.

Removing the randomized advance for evrything would strongly impact balance.
Why not instead have all dedicated transport have a rule increasing their advance? (like 2D6 or a fixed 6" for example)

 krakjen wrote:

Orkimedez_Atalaya wrote:
The problem of the transports come directly from the movement rules. As long as an infantry model can keep up with them, there will be no incentive to field them. We will be better off spending those points in more infantry models.

IMHO, a lot could be solved in favor of their usability if the advance rule would be changed to "add half the movement of the model" (instead of + 1d6"). No dice rolled, faster games. No dice rolled, deployment more critical ergo more strategical. An ork walking down the road of death could move 5"+2.5" while a trukk 12"+6".

Maybe those 10.5" extra inches would make them more valuable.

An alternative would be to have a double braket movement profile, but that requires a lot f editing and FAQing.

Removing the randomized advance for evrything would strongly impact balance.
Why not instead have all dedicated transport have a rule increasing their advance? (like 2D6 or a fixed 6" for example)

How does taking out the randomness affect balance? I can't think of any other serious wargame that does random "run" rolls, at least not that I've played. Heck even the new apocalypse went to that. It's a pretty standard fare that your "run" style action gets you 1.5-2x your movement as a flat value.

 flandarz wrote:
Well, that IS why I suggested that Disembarking denies the unit the ability to Move, Shoot, or Charge that turn. No Move so you can't use Transports to add a dozen or so inches to your movement. No Shoot so you can't get around Open-Topped. No Charge for the reason you just mentioned.

But then they'd be getting out of the relative safety of the transport only to be shot at for a turn.

True. I guess you could just wait for it to get exploded instead though. And it's not much different from now. Either get out before it moves and get shot, or stay in and hope it doesn't get exploded before you can Disembark next turn.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 krakjen wrote:

Orkimedez_Atalaya wrote:
The problem of the transports come directly from the movement rules. As long as an infantry model can keep up with them, there will be no incentive to field them. We will be better off spending those points in more infantry models.

IMHO, a lot could be solved in favor of their usability if the advance rule would be changed to "add half the movement of the model" (instead of + 1d6"). No dice rolled, faster games. No dice rolled, deployment more critical ergo more strategical. An ork walking down the road of death could move 5"+2.5" while a trukk 12"+6".

Maybe those 10.5" extra inches would make them more valuable.

An alternative would be to have a double braket movement profile, but that requires a lot f editing and FAQing.

Removing the randomized advance for evrything would strongly impact balance.
Why not instead have all dedicated transport have a rule increasing their advance? (like 2D6 or a fixed 6" for example)

How does taking out the randomness affect balance? I can't think of any other serious wargame that does random "run" rolls, at least not that I've played. Heck even the new apocalypse went to that. It's a pretty standard fare that your "run" style action gets you 1.5-2x your movement as a flat value.

It makes things predictable.
A couple of examples from the top of my headL
The advance roll is pretty important when you are trying for a first turn charge with Genestealers. With a fixed value, you have a more restrained but almost certain (you still need to pull off the charge roll) tactic.
Another example is advancing with a Neurothrope to get into position to pull off a targeted Smite. With a fixed value you'll know beforehand if you can do it or not, hence removing risk/reward.
Instead of working with average and potential when planning something, you'll have certainty whether it will work or not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And to get back on topic, I'd advise fellow AdMech players to NOT look at the Genestealer Cult Goliath Truck.
It's depressing how it's similar as our new Transport, but better.
And actually slightly cheaper at 72 points.
Also let's not even talk about the kit price.

Yeah, as much as I would like to grab one, I think I’ll have to wait until it gets bundled with something else to make the price more palatable. Maybe replacing the Onager in the SC set (transport + troops to fill it, yes please).

I guess this battle has been fought out over the last couple of weeks, but the weird thing about this is this idea that because its T6, it will fold like tissue paper, whereas T7 Rhinos are STRONK.

Playing with Ravagers.. T6 is a blessing most of the time. Okay this transport doesn't have a 5++, but its going to have a 5+ save except versus AP-3 shots. You want to sink a lot of D1 plasma into me to enjoy that no risk S7 shooting? Go right ahead. Its hardly efficient. At the same time those AP-1 autocannons are not exactly bringing the apocalypse as I still have a 4+ save.

As mentioned you can potentially a 2+ save for two turns with shroudpsalm/prepared positions. You can get -1 to hit with Stygies.

You can say 12 S4/AP- shots are not good - but it quite clearly beats having just 2, 3 or 4 such shots. I mean if you were to bring 6 rangers that would knock you back 42 points. 12 would cost you 84. Okay you don't get AP-1 on 6s, but you do get 36" range, a higher toughness, armour save and movement.

I think its very good, and a list with a lot of them in which focused on winning the objective could be interesting, especially as you bring target saturation with other must kill units.

With all that said I can agree with people saying GW asking for both your kidneys is a bit much but that doesn't impact their value on the table.

12 S4 AP - shots is IMHO about right for a transport, it's eneugh to help clear out infantry as you move your infantry into position, but it's not going to set you back points wise too much, nor is it going to make your transport a priority target

Honestly I think the only thing that sucks about this transport is the price point. I would never pay that price. I will gladly wait till it gets bundled with something else. Thanks for deciding for me GW

 fraser1191 wrote:
Honestly I think the only thing that sucks about this transport is the price point. I would never pay that price. I will gladly wait till it gets bundled with something else. Thanks for deciding for me GW

pretty much this. I think I'll just get the termite.

Unfortunately this doesnt bode well for the grav-rhino, it'll probably be $65 which is mothafunkin ridiculous for a troop transport.

at the same time, this explains why we see stuff like the repulsor exist, GW's discovered that we're more likely to pay the big bucks for a transport that can do double duty as a MBT