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.

RegulusBlack wrote:One guy said something earlier, why not make everyone take an armor savable wound.

no strength hit, you just get an armor save for an exploded vehicle.

GEK lose 2/3
MEQ lose 1/3
TEQ lose 1/6

sounds pretty simple

So I have a 2/3 chance of losing my sargent, and will probably lose two of my special weapons, as well as most of the rest of my squad, then take a pinning test (probably at Ld 7), then a morale test (also at Ld 7).
I should keep a tally of all these "yo let's knock mech guard out of the game" suggestions

I play mech guard, so im not trying to knock it out of the game, however when a vehicle, you know, kinda explodes, the results should be pretty catastrophic to any and all individuals inside.

but that was just me lending a suggestion.

Hearing a few ideas that are making me think here.

Each model suffers a wound on a 3+ (4+ if open topped) and must reroll successful armor saves. Invulnerable saves, FNP, etc count as normal.

So while the better armoured units come out ahead, but it still is pretty punishing to them (i.e. You will lose about 16/27 Guard in a Chimera, 10/27 Marines in a Rhino, 11/54 Terminators in a Raider, 1/2 the Avengers in a Wave Serpant or Firewarriors in a Devilfish, 35/54 Boyz in a Trukk). But also as each model has to roll to see if it takes a wound there is a real possibility of losing a special weapon or attached character.

I also think that Stunned and Shaken should affect the crew and passengers. Passangers that disembark while the vehicle is suffering one of these effects should immediately have to take a pinning test.

So is that enough of a downside to transports to make mechspam players give it another thought?

Why on earth have you guys accepted the basic premise that armored infantry should survive exploding transports "better" than unarmored infantry from a points cost basis?

Yes, armored units are generally more expensive. That means when they're receiving the benefits from transports (mobilitiy, extra "phase" of defense while popping the vehicle, etc) you, as a player, are benefitting from an effectiveness multiplier applied to that expensive unit. For the same price transport the guardsmen ride in. From a balance perspective, you're receiving a bigger benefit than the low price units.

Make the cost of using a transport proportional to the benefit. It's a multiplier, so make the cost a constant factor - pick some mechanism that results in a fixed percentage of the passenger unit dying. How you justify it's irrelevant.

TL;DR - kill one third of the embarked unit, regardless of type.

I think everybody is overthinking this. I say leave it as it is. There are armies out there who don't need to make it any worse. I feel that both Eldar and Sisters both would suffer greatly from any changes to these rules. Sisters already have enough of a handicap that we don't need to take away one of their strengths.

Orks lose 5/6

Please keep in mind all armies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As is, we have a couple of profiles to think about:

Orks: T4 6+
GEQ: T3 5+
Eldar: T3 3+/4+
MEQ: T4 3+
TEQ: T4 2+

Any new rule should work out for all of those, no exception. If you do that, odd ones like scouts or plague marines would fit in all by themselves.

Okay, how about all models suffer a wound if they fail a Toughness check with a -1 modifier on the roll for open topped transports. This wound may be saved against as normal but if an armor save is used it must be rerolled.

+1, toughness is equal to or under - otherwise you made open topped worse....

Yeah, problem is that we want a rule that is slight nerf towards MEQ but doesn't hurt others.

AP2 damage is bad idea, it throws balance out of window. Terminators pay dearly for that 2+/5++ and the 3+ is costed for marines and aspect warriors. AP3/4/5/6 is also bad from balance point.

Re-roll succesfull saves is wonky mechanic, the amount it changes probabilities depends so much on origal target number. It does hurt TEQ and MEQ lot more than Orks, that I give.

Fixed to-wound number of 3+ (4+ in open-topped) would hurt MEQ, TEQ and Orks while keeping everyone else on same level.

Even something as small as requiring troops to disembark to score would have large effect in relative value of mech.

Or they could just change how shaken/stunned affect troops inside vehicles or revamp vehicle damage system some other way.
But GW being GW, I'm afraid 6th will be another edition of "Transports are deathtraps" just like 2nd and 4th were.

Edit: Jeffar you do realise that Toughness check or wound is S3 hit for all practical purposes? T3 take wound on 4+, T4 take wound on 5+ etc.

nosferatu1001 wrote:+1, toughness is equal to or under - otherwise you made open topped worse....

No a -1 modifier on the roll. So if that Ork in an open topped Transport rolls a 5 it gets reduced to 4 and he is safe.

Or, a Dangerous terrain test. roll a dice for each model in the transport and on a '1' they die.
Not only does it remove the unfair advantage that MEQ has in terms of armour saves over GEQ, but it would make sense, in terms of trying to get out of an exploding vehicle.

Having said that, im supprised that no one has suggested it. Its fair as its a standard roll for EVERYONE and is logical as the (now exploded) vehicle is dangerous

Having a better armour save is hardly unfair, MEQ pay for it. If anything your solution would be the unfair one as it'd make a 40 point terminator as resilient as a 3 point grot.

Again, the point is that DE, Elder, IG and Orks in transports really aren't a problem. They already either A) pay a reasonably expensive price for their transport, B) have open-topped transports which are easier to kill, and.or C) eat flaming death when their transport blows up as it is. It's the durable SM hiding in durable transports who are particularly out of whack at the present. So any tweak should hit the SM harder if balance is our goal.

Mannahnin wrote: It's the durable SM hiding in durable transports who are particularly out of whack at the present. So any tweak should hit the SM harder if balance is our goal.

Right, and besides this...

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Having a better armour save is hardly unfair, MEQ pay for it. If anything your solution would be the unfair one as it'd make a 40 point terminator as resilient as a 3 point grot.

...misses the point. Transports are a *multiplier*. They have a fixed cost (the price of the transport itself) and then they *multiply* the effectiveness of their passengers.

If a more expensive unit is riding in a transport, he's providing that player with more of an advantage than a less expensive unit in a transport. It's moving a more powerful unit faster, or protecting a more expensive unit from small arms fire, or providing a "free turn" of defense while the transport gets popped. The advantage is proportional to the cost of the passenger. So, the risk should be proportional to the cost of the passenger.

A dangerous terrain test is fine. Pinning the unit is fine. Some mix of these or other effects is fine. As long as it affects all passengers equally.

Or make the transports cost an appropriate amount of points.

Randall Turner wrote:

Mannahnin wrote: It's the durable SM hiding in durable transports who are particularly out of whack at the present. So any tweak should hit the SM harder if balance is our goal.

Right, and besides this...

AlmightyWalrus wrote:Having a better armour save is hardly unfair, MEQ pay for it. If anything your solution would be the unfair one as it'd make a 40 point terminator as resilient as a 3 point grot.

...misses the point. Transports are a *multiplier*. They have a fixed cost (the price of the transport itself) and then they *multiply* the effectiveness of their passengers.

If a more expensive unit is riding in a transport, he's providing that player with more of an advantage than a less expensive unit in a transport. It's moving a more powerful unit faster, or protecting a more expensive unit from small arms fire, or providing a "free turn" of defense while the transport gets popped. The advantage is proportional to the cost of the passenger. So, the risk should be proportional to the cost of the passenger.

A dangerous terrain test is fine. Pinning the unit is fine. Some mix of these or other effects is fine. As long as it affects all passengers equally.

Seeing as the force multiplier is not a generic one size fits all multiplier due in part of all the various different types of vehicles, let's point out a few of them shall we?

Rhino: It's only use is getting from point A to point B, there's no use for them otherwise.

Chimera: More powerful gun platform, gives veterans a chance to fire all of it's special weapons out of the hatches.

Venoms: Provides a far more potent poison gun platform, that can carry 1-3 blaster wielders inside it, being both anti-infantry and Anti-tank.

Land Raider: Expensive gun platform that's main use is getting its crew from point A to point B.

The "Force multiplier" for marines is rather laughable, as all the vehicles for each of the GEQ units makes units with special weapons far better than standard marine equivalents, and the only real counter for this is the Razorback, and even than that's just using it's weapons over it.

You're joking, right? Rhinos have a lot more uses than just getting from point A to point B (though that's quite good), and the most obvious one is shielding them from enemy shooting and assault until they're disembarked.

Or make the transports cost an appropriate amount of points.

Sure. How many years does that take again? A lot? And leaves the problem extant until EVERY individual codex has been fixed. Not nearly as effective or efficient an approach, purely for logistical reasons.

You're joking, right? Rhinos have a lot more uses than just getting from point A to point B (though that's quite good), and the most obvious one is shielding them from enemy shooting and assault until they're disembarked.

Which is...Getting them from Point A to Point B.

Nope. It's shielding them from damage and giving them the charge if they want it, whether they're moving from point A to point B or not. The mobility is a separate advantage.

Indeed, the rhino could sit still and the Marines could fire their heavy weapons out of it.

They're much much better protected than the same unit of Marines on foot, even if neither unit is moving.

Therefore, better protection is different from mobility.

Indeed, the rhino could sit still and the Marines could fire their heavy weapons out of it.

Yes I'd be quite fearful of say, one tac heavy weapon fire, or two sternguard wasting their very good bolter shots while shooting with heavy weapons from inside a rhino, compared to a moving chimera chassis filled with meltavets.

And of course one glancing means they aint shooting at all either..

Therefore, better protection is different from mobility.

Yes, but there's not much one can do from inside a rhino, sure one to two missle/lascannon can be good, but anti vehicle will at least stun/shake the weak chassis, preventing that, and thus the movement to get them in prime position in order to use their mainstay weapons, or to head to an objective is a better use.

It's kinda why despite having things like battlewagons, the orks don't stuff loota's in it, and simply fire away from inside of it, because a single glance and you are not firing heavy weapons anymore, and now you just have a useless squad sitting off doing nothing.

Sure it's good help for objective sitting, but that's it, don't expect it's damage output to be anything but dismal unless the enemy cannot devote even a single glancing shot at it.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Indeed, the rhino could sit still and the Marines could fire their heavy weapons out of it.

Yes I'd be quite fearful of say, one tac heavy weapon fire, or two sternguard wasting their very good bolter shots while shooting with heavy weapons from inside a rhino, compared to a moving chimera chassis filled with meltavets.

And of course one glancing means they aint shooting at all either..

Therefore, better protection is different from mobility.

Yes, but there's not much one can do from inside a rhino, sure one to two missle/lascannon can be good, but anti vehicle will at least stun/shake the weak chassis, preventing that, and thus the movement to get them in prime position in order to use their mainstay weapons, or to head to an objective is a better use.

It's kinda why despite having things like battlewagons, the orks don't stuff loota's in it, and simply fire away from inside of it, because a single glance and you are not firing heavy weapons anymore, and now you just have a useless squad sitting off doing nothing.

Sure it's good help for objective sitting, but that's it, don't expect it's damage output to be anything but dismal unless the enemy cannot devote even a single glancing shot at it.

When the enemy charges into CC with TH/SS Terminators against your transport full of Sternguard, you'll be thankful you have it - because now you can combi-plasma/melta/hellfire round them just one more time, since they had to explode your transport before you can even be hurt.

Unit1126PLL wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Indeed, the rhino could sit still and the Marines could fire their heavy weapons out of it.

Yes I'd be quite fearful of say, one tac heavy weapon fire, or two sternguard wasting their very good bolter shots while shooting with heavy weapons from inside a rhino, compared to a moving chimera chassis filled with meltavets.

And of course one glancing means they aint shooting at all either..

Therefore, better protection is different from mobility.

Yes, but there's not much one can do from inside a rhino, sure one to two missle/lascannon can be good, but anti vehicle will at least stun/shake the weak chassis, preventing that, and thus the movement to get them in prime position in order to use their mainstay weapons, or to head to an objective is a better use.

It's kinda why despite having things like battlewagons, the orks don't stuff loota's in it, and simply fire away from inside of it, because a single glance and you are not firing heavy weapons anymore, and now you just have a useless squad sitting off doing nothing.

Sure it's good help for objective sitting, but that's it, don't expect it's damage output to be anything but dismal unless the enemy cannot devote even a single glancing shot at it.

When the enemy charges into CC with TH/SS Terminators against your transport full of Sternguard, you'll be thankful you have it - because now you can combi-plasma/melta/hellfire round them just one more time, since they had to explode your transport before you can even be hurt.

Or they just penetrate it with the raider's multi-melta shot with POTMS, and charge the troops at the now vulnerable sternguard, do you expect the enemy to be footslogging his TH/SS to your rhino, or maybe he'll just fire off a few lascannon shots from a standard landraider, his own anti-vehicle weapons, and the plethora of other options besides attempting a charge with TH/SS on a transport vehicle? Not to mention if you are sitting back with combi-plasma/melta just waiting for a chance like this, you aren't exactly using your sternguard to the fullest.

Not to mention that unlucky chance your sternguard are pinned, in which case they can't even shoot at all.

And even considering all this..It's just bolters against Terminator Armor, you'll likely kill 1-2, and than the hammers get you.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Unit1126PLL wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Indeed, the rhino could sit still and the Marines could fire their heavy weapons out of it.

Yes I'd be quite fearful of say, one tac heavy weapon fire, or two sternguard wasting their very good bolter shots while shooting with heavy weapons from inside a rhino, compared to a moving chimera chassis filled with meltavets.

And of course one glancing means they aint shooting at all either..

Therefore, better protection is different from mobility.

Yes, but there's not much one can do from inside a rhino, sure one to two missle/lascannon can be good, but anti vehicle will at least stun/shake the weak chassis, preventing that, and thus the movement to get them in prime position in order to use their mainstay weapons, or to head to an objective is a better use.

It's kinda why despite having things like battlewagons, the orks don't stuff loota's in it, and simply fire away from inside of it, because a single glance and you are not firing heavy weapons anymore, and now you just have a useless squad sitting off doing nothing.

Sure it's good help for objective sitting, but that's it, don't expect it's damage output to be anything but dismal unless the enemy cannot devote even a single glancing shot at it.

When the enemy charges into CC with TH/SS Terminators against your transport full of Sternguard, you'll be thankful you have it - because now you can combi-plasma/melta/hellfire round them just one more time, since they had to explode your transport before you can even be hurt.

Or they just penetrate it with the raider's multi-melta shot with POTMS, and charge the troops at the now vulnerable sternguard, do you expect the enemy to be footslogging his TH/SS to your rhino, or maybe he'll just fire off a few lascannon shots from a standard landraider, his own anti-vehicle weapons, and the plethora of other options besides attempting a charge with TH/SS on a transport vehicle? Not to mention if you are sitting back with combi-plasma/melta just waiting for a chance like this, you aren't exactly using your sternguard to the fullest.

Not to mention that unlucky chance your sternguard are pinned, in which case they can't even shoot at all.

And even considering all this..It's just bolters against Terminator Armor, you'll likely kill 1-2, and than the hammers get you.

Hey, if they want to spend their 250-point transport to kill my 35 point one, or any other of their plethora of AT options (all of which are expensive relative to the Rhino) then be my guest.

The point stands: A unit with a Rhino is more resilient than one without, especially if it forces the enemy to divert the firepower of an entire battletank to destroy the transport without perturbing the men inside. (Imagine what that crusader could do if the Sternguard DIDN'T have a rhino!)

What about you throw a dice for every unit in the transport exploding; on a 5 or 6 that units receives a wound without an armor save; This would affect MEQ and GEQ equally, while still providing an invul save to the heavy guys (such as termi/ HQ/ even nobs will feel it less due to their 2 wounds).

Plus, to this rule, if a unit is forced to get out of a transport in the enemy turn (so due to an explosion/wreck etc... made by an enemy fire/cc), all enemy units being at 2 inches of the former vehicle can decide to move till 6 inches to engage the outcomming unit in CC, even if the unit is out of LOS (due to a wreck blocking LOS of the outcomming unit, to prevent every exploit).

If there are no enemy units willing to engage the outcomming unit, or this happens outside the enemy turn, the outcomming unit can move to 3 inches wich after that is considered to be "to the ground" till the end of the upcomming turn (or same turn if it happens during your turn).

Those 3 rules would solve the transport problem while still making them attractive.

Might also help if Rhino's actually became open topped when they... I dunno... opened their top. Granted, that would only make RB's the even more obvious choice, but that's a matter of points disparity than anything.

Wouldn't mind a combination of 4th and 5th ed vehicle rules, myself. Reintroduce some of the 4th ed charts, leave the saves for cover, but in cases where the majority of the vehicle is covered, return the "Glances only" version of Hull Down. It always seemed odd to me that if one Heavy Bolter sponson or a Aether Sail tip was all that was visible on a vehilce the best I could hope for was a 4+ save to avoid a massive explosion from a direct hit. Make the vehicles more deadly to ride in, but mitigate that through use of terrain.

Then, perhaps have others have suggested, allow a "dig in" order" which is a move that allows you to "go to Ground" except that you can shoot from that location. Since you count as moving when you issue the order, only RF and Assault weapons may be fired the turn it happens. We may also rule that if you moved before hand, you may sacrifice your shooting phase to ding in instead, in much the same way that you can sacrifice shooting to run. It has the same negatives against charging as GTG does (IE, you lose the benefits of cover when charged by an enemy without grenades) and might even strike last against any charging enemy that has grenades, due to the disadvantaged position within a hole or other cover (and to reflect the traditional advantage of an assault in modern warfare: to dislodge dug in enemy troops) We could also perhaps add the benefit of a +1 to hit with ranged attacks for infantry models who have Dug In, to reflect the additional stability of being in a foxhole or the prone firing position. Only Infantry models on 25mm bases may use the "Dig In!" rule. Jump Infantry, due to their cumbersome jetpacks, gravity fields, wings, and other sources of short ranged flight are unable to dig in, using cover as temporary advantages only. Beasts lack the restraint needed to dig in, or are too large to take advantage of improved cover in a short amount of time.

ZebioLizard2 wrote:
Yes I'd be quite fearful of say, one tac heavy weapon fire, or two sternguard wasting their very good bolter shots while shooting with heavy weapons from inside a rhino, compared to a moving chimera chassis filled with meltavets.

Pop a chimera and the guys inside will a)die, b)take a pinning test, c)take a morale test, in that order. Unless the guard player gets lucky, those guys are out of the option.
Pop a rhino and the marines are completely fine (especially if they have FNP).
Having every single MEQ squad in a rhino means all that MEQ killing stuff you bought is pointless, making a huge chunk of your army obsolete until you manage to pop a Rhino.
3 Russes? Useful for popping rhinos, won't cause a scratch on the MEQ inside.
Plasma guns? Again, useful for popping Rhinos, but then you need something else to kill the guys who get out...assuming the 2/3 chance that you DON'T destroy it, of course.
Bottom line is, there are too many/too cheap transports for MEQ armies.

Pop a chimera and the guys inside will a)die, b)take a pinning test, c)take a morale test, in that order. Unless the guard player gets lucky, those guys are out of the option.

For 5+ points vs 15+ respectively, I'd say there's a good chance that explains it, along with the higher T and better armor save, people don't complain that SoB get the same save rate as space marines, even if they wound higher.

Having every single MEQ squad in a rhino means all that MEQ killing stuff you bought is pointless, making a huge chunk of your army obsolete until you manage to pop a Rhino.

Kinda the same for MEQ armies trying to pop vehicles on the other side with their weapons so their anti-infantry can fire at the innards.. I'm sorry but this is simple basic tactics.

3 Russes? Useful for popping rhinos, won't cause a scratch on the MEQ inside.

I miss the Ordnance chart too, but I dunno if they are bringing back separate charts or not.

Plasma guns? Again, useful for popping Rhinos, but then you need something else to kill the guys who get out...assuming the 2/3 chance that you DON'T destroy it, of course.

Buh? Plasma guns aren't good at killing MEQ? What?

Bottom line is, there are too many/too cheap transports for MEQ armies.

A chimera is 50+ points, it comes with multilaser, av12/10/10 frontal, and HB or HF sponsons, about 4 people can fire out of it.

A rhino is about 35 points, it comes with a stormbolter, av11/11/10, two people can fire out of it.

So why is the rhino undercosted again? Just because Space marines and Sisters of Battle can take it?

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Bottom line is, there are too many/too cheap transports for MEQ armies.

A chimera is 50+ points, it comes with multilaser, av12/10/10 frontal, and HB or HF sponsons, about 4 people can fire out of it.

A rhino is about 35 points, it comes with a stormbolter, av11/11/10, two people can fire out of it.

So why is the rhino undercosted again? Just because Space marines and Sisters of Battle can take it?

A Devilfish is 80 points, it comes with a burst cannon and two gun drones, AV12/11/10, nobody can fire out of it.

How are either of those two not undercosted?

A Town Called Malus wrote:

ZebioLizard2 wrote:

Bottom line is, there are too many/too cheap transports for MEQ armies.

A chimera is 50+ points, it comes with multilaser, av12/10/10 frontal, and HB or HF sponsons, about 4 people can fire out of it.

A rhino is about 35 points, it comes with a stormbolter, av11/11/10, two people can fire out of it.

So why is the rhino undercosted again? Just because Space marines and Sisters of Battle can take it?

A Devilfish is 80 points, it comes with a burst cannon and two gun drones, AV12/11/10, nobody can fire out of it.

How are either of those two not undercosted?

I'm not gonna apologize for that one, those and the Eldar Skimmers were made in an era when Skimmers were vastly more powerful than they were today. (Look up Tri-falcon Spam, alongside Fish of Fury, you'd never know Firewarriors were actually used to shoot things to good effect!)

That one's just edition changes showing that an army can be brought down with changes to certain rules.