Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm writing this in response to frustration with skimmers.  I believe that as of right now their rules make them much harder to kill than standard fighting vehicles.  Something is wrong when a Land Raider can be destroyed much more easily than a Falcon or a Hammerhead.  Skimmers are supposed to be lighter vehicles (excepting the Monolith), that use speed to compensate for their lack of armor.  As a result they are nearly imposible to kill in hand to hand.  This makes sense, but i believe that they currently can be used too aggressively.  A skimmer that flies out in front of a wall of guns shouldn't be able to escape with only a shaken result (unless it is very lucky).  This isn't a huge issue with Dark Eldar or marine skimmers as they don't have wargear that prevents a crash when immobilised.  My gripe is that a skimmer can suffer three or four shaken results and zip off next turn with perhaps only the loss of a gun drone or shurikan catapult.  I think that if any vehicle is shaken more than once it should count as stunned.  After all if your flying vehicle is hit violently several times it would not only prevent accurate shooting but also affect the pilots ability to affect evasive actions.  This rule would not be unfair because it would affect all vehicles equally.  Skimmers would simply need to think twice before exposing themselves to stupid volumes of enemy fire (as Falcons can now do with ease).

Given the nerfing that Eldar skimmers received in the new codex, I don't think that this is that necessary. Yes, under the old rules, Falcons could take a ridiculous amount of fire and still shoot you and move around, but now they simply can't shoot. Falcons are now no more than glorified transports (unless you get the first turn or the game is already all but over). Even when they do get to shoot, Starcannons are obsolete and none of the other guns are terribly damaging. I don't think that there's a huge problem with Hammerheads either, since they don't get Holofields.

Essentially, if two Shaken results Stunned a Falcon, there would be no reason whatsoever to take one. As is, you take them to get your Harlequins or Fire Dragons to where they're going, but you'd propose that they not be able to get close enough. They'd have to be used as suicide transports, taking Star Engines and turboboosting right up into the enemy's face (on the assumption that they'll be Stunned on the next turn and dead thereafter). That'll get old really quick.

Regardless, I disagree with your take on the background. Of course a Falcon should be harder to destroy than a Land Raider. It's hundreds of times faster, is far more maneuverable, and is made of self-repairing Wraithbone. It has Holofields that baffle even the most advanced targeting systems. It's the product of a society that strongly believes in getting the most out of every soldier (they'll equip them well) and that is far more advanced than the Imperium (is capable of equipping soldiers far better). While its survivability is poorly implemented (realistically, we're looking at an invulnerable save and to-hit modifiers), the end result is about right in terms of the frequency of vehicle destroyed results.

I can't beleive you think that eldar skimmers got nerfed by the new codex.  If a falcon has a holofield, spirit stones, vectored engines and a full loadout of heavy weapons.  It is a tough, mobile unit that is nearly impossible to destroy and can put out a solid amount of fire.  Formerly it was possible to stun it, but even then it was really hard to destroy.  Now that it is impossible to stun, nothing can stop an Eldar player from dumping a Phoenix Lord with supporting troops anywhere they like, except maybe a stupidly large volume of fire.  Perhaps it won't be able to shoot, but it will still be able to take objectives which equals winning games.  If an Eldar player has three units that are nearly unkillable, and are filled with expensive squads they can get all of those victory points counted for the eldar player in a lot of missions (like recon, take and hold) plus it makes it easy to grab, or at least contest objectives without much risk.

It may be a glorified transport in the new codex, but it almost guarantees that an Eldar player can prevent most enemies from winning a game on objectives by making up to about 900pts untouchable and super-mobile.  All I'm saying is that a skimmer shouldn't be impossible to stun or kill through immobilisation.  For it to be a balanced unit in the game, it should have vulnerabilities.  The cumulative shaken rule would make it so that people would need to be careful with their skimmers.  Devilfish and Dark Eldar Raiders are not throwaway transports, they just need to be shielded from intense enemy fire.  The Falcon would be no different. 

Wouldn't it be easier just to errata all landing gear-type vehicle uprades out of their respective Codices? Make up some frail fluff justification like: "the quality of landing gear had improved for several decades up until galactic tactical thinking shifted suddenly. Facing a labour and a capital crunch respectively, the Eldar and Tau took to ejector seats and simply omitting the hardware."

I like the idea of increasing levels of damage, though. This rule and the reason given for it make me think that maybe the auto-smoke skimmers currently get should be replaced perhaps - if they would ever do this - with a "to hit" penalty equal to the distance in feet the skimmer has moved, distance in feet measured according to the same criteria as in the rulebook. The worst to which the modifier would reduce a roll would be to 6+. A Raider, for instance, would be hit only on a 5 or a 6 if it was closing with a Razorback. This might also give some point to the twin-linking option monstrous creatures seem to be getting.

When I originally read the title I thought this was going to be about multiple stunning hits inflicting that many turns worth of inability to fire, and immediately thought that it might make an interesting twin rule for the same effects from pinning. You could use the same counters to mark both...(fades away off-topic)

I think a simple fix would be to change the 'always glance' to 'downgrade penetrating hits to glancing on a roll of 4+' when moving fast. Or even 3+. Just have a *chance* for a penetrating hit.

Also, smoke launchers should give an equivalent 'always glance', and/or be allowed to be used mulitple times during a game (considering you can't shoot at all when you use them).

I suppose the single-use always-glance smoke launcher would be best - otherwise, transports would smoke their way around the board all game long.

Make the reduction displacement-based; that way, the more you move (and sacrifice shooting), the better chance you have of reducing it.

6.1" to 12" - 4+
12.1" to 18" - 3+
18.1" and beyond - 2+

There's going to be a difference in someone's ability to effectively target a skimmer that is farting around, angling for a shot, and a skimmer that is just a blur of color shooting across the battlefield.

I like the invulnerable speed/save approach.  Because technically a speeder that moves 12" isn't going any faster/farther than a ground vehicle that moves 12".  The adjustable  invulneable save rule makes it so that if a skimmer slows down to angle for a shot or drops off a squad of troops, it itself becomes more vulnerable.  Right on.

I still have balance concerns. Hammerheads are already just about right, and this would decrease their durability significantly. The same is true for various light skimmers. The SMF advantage, as it applies to gunships, is intended to offset the disadvantage of lighter armor. If you reduce it to Hull Down without compensating for the lighter armor, you're removing the advantages of skimming. You might have something if you simply gave all skimmers the equivalent of 'Vectored Engines' for free, but skimmer tanks would still require higher armor values to be competitive. The Hammerhead is the Tau equivalent of the Leman Russ, but, with Hull Down instead of SMF, it's nowhere near as durable.

And yes, I think it's obvious that Eldar skimmers got nerfed in the new codex. The only new upgrade is Vectored Engines, and Spirit Stones are worse. Spirit Stones mildly increases the durability of a Holofielded Falcon by making it immune to Crew Stunned results, but you should keep in mind that you were only making a Crew Stunned result stick 9.7% of the time. You actually had a better chance of simply killing it outright! Vectored Engines doesn't really add anything to the durability of the skimmer; it adds to the durability of the models inside. This is of no help to Prisms or Vypers, obviously, and, given the expense of Serpents, it was needed. It's generally a waste on a Holofielded vehicle, as it only matters on 8.3% of Glancing hits and is tremendously expensive. If you Immobilize the vehicle, you can penetrate it next turn for an easy kill.

I agree that Falcons are too cheap for their durability, but this isn't how I'd fix it, as it has adverse effects on every other skimmer too. The problem with Falcons is that a price higher than 170 or so for a decently equipped one simply can't be justified, as it's not really worth much beyond being a Scoring unit and a transport. It has no firepower to speak of, so, while being as durable as a Land Raider, it can't cost anything like as much, since the Land Raider puts out much, much more firepower. The easy fix for Falcons is to pump up their offensive power - BS4 with some ability to ignore Shaken results (like the old Stones, say) and some better weapons (like the old Starcannon) would easily justify 220-250, and, at that cost, its durability would be a lot easier to stomach.

Alternately, the problem is Holofields. An easy fix for them (and for the offensive abilities of Eldar vehicles) would be to have them provide a simple 4+ save against all hits. They would be much easier to destroy, but would be able to shoot more often.

However, I don't think that the real problem here is the SMF rule.

Unbelievible,, absolutly unbelievible

After all the nurfings and price increases marine players are still whining about the Eldar.

Spirit Stones no longer have the ability to ignore Crew Shaken or Crew Stunned Results and they got a price hike. Holo Fields got a price hike. Star Cannons got a nurfing and a price hike.

Warith Lords got a nurfing and a price hike.

Farseers got a nurfing.

And still the marine players continue to whine.

I cant believe the snivelling of marine players.

I understand that Falcons get expensive and the holofield usually guarantees that the unit doesnt get to shoot, but if you give a Falcon a Scatter Laser, Starcannon, and Shuriken Cannon, it can move 12" and shoot 9 strength six shots.  Thats a bunch of firepower.  Because this Falcon would be so expensive (with all the defensive upgrades) , it practically guarantees that it and the unit inside will both survive and probably end the game hovering over something important, killing two birds with one stone.

It seems most of us agree that the holofield is problematic and i can't believe that GW didn't feel the need to fix it.  By jacking up the price on the vehicle it just makes it better at flying around without accomplishing much and then winning the game.

All in all I think the Eldar codex is balanced, this is just a small problem that I know has been and is going to be exploited by a certain type of player.

Before marine players start whinning they should look at their own upgrades first.

Extra Armour: Works the same as Spirit Stones. So why are marine players complaining????? 

Machine Spirit: Allows a vehicle to shoot even with a Crew Stunned and moved over 12". Albeit at BS2 its a whole lot better than nothing which everyone else gets. So why are marine players complaining?????

Bulldozer Blades: Works the same as vectored engines. So why are marine players complaining????? 

A decked out Falcon costs 190 points with BS3. Rather pricey all things considered. While a Landraider might be more expensive it will win in a shoot out, and the much cheaper Predator is more than a match for the Falcon. And I'd really like to know how you can expolit a vehicle upgrade, and would that also include marine upgrades as well eg Machine Spirit?!?!?!?!

As it stands marines have no cause to complain.

Posted By Gotchaye on 11/05/2006 12:30 PM

 It's the product of a society that strongly believes in getting the most out of every soldier (they'll equip them well)

with troop choices cheaper than orks.

I am not a marine player. I play Guard, Nids and Death Guard.

Skimmers are too hard to kill. The 'always glance' combined with upgrades to allow shooting while moving >6" is too much!

I think it's mostly a frustration with the survivability of non-skimmer tanks though. There are enough Railguns, Warp Blasts, Multimelta bikes out there that exposing an AV14 ground tank is very risky. Also, most ground tanks have to remain stationary to effectively use their weaponry (triple-las predator, battle cannon).

If the damage tables were altered then it would solve a lot of problems. It would be more fun to have greater chances of losing secondary weapons and speed from glancing results. I would also get rid of the glancing 6=destroyed.

Something I'd like to see would be:

Glancing
1-2 Crew shaken - next turn can only fire defensive weapons and move maximum 50% top speed
3-4 Defensive weapon destroyed (if no defensive weapons left, then main weapon destroyed)
5-6 Top speed reduced by 6"

Penetrating
1-2 Main weapon destroyed and crew shaken
3-4 Immobilized and crew shaken
5-6 Vehicle Destroyed *

* on a Vehicle Destroyed result, roll a die - on a 5+, vehicle will explode.
Modifiers to this roll:
+1 if vehicle mounts any Ordnance weapons (destroyed or not)
+1 if vehicle mounts any heavy flamers(destroyed or not)
+2 if vehicle mounts any Inferno Cannons(destroyed or not)

If you can't apply a result on the table (ie no defensive weapons left, or already immobilize) then move up to the next (more serious) result.

Extra Armour, Spirit Stones and equivalent would allow the vehicle to ignore the "50% maximum speed" part of a Crew Shaken result.

Maybe allow the holofield to apply a -1 on the damage table roll, with '0' on either table = no effect.  Or instead, just a save (4+ or 5+) vs any effect.

This way, you'd see skimmers gradually taken down by lots of glancing hits as their top speed falls and their weapons get shot off, but you wouldn't be able to destroy tanks on a lucky glance.