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.

Hull mounted grenade launcher... IG should get a full auto grenade launcher like the Mk19 the US marines have.

Heavy stubber counts as defensive, that way you can move 6" and fire everything.

and I view the multi-las as superior to the HB.
Looking at the rulebook, most saves are going to be 3+ (HB still gives a save) or 6+ (ML cuts through anyway)
So why not wound easier?

I like the heavy bolter against anything less than MEQs. Example: Orks are really bad axed right now and the HB would cut through the 4+ of heavy armor that ard boyz and nobz that have choosen that upgrade all have. You could concentrate stubber fire on lesser units, but those could also be handled by lasguns.

thalor

aka_mythos wrote:I think the solution to the side armor is one that people have proposed before: a vehicle upgrade, pay 10-20pts for the extra side armor.

I think the 45pts is fair. The game breaker is what the different weapon upgrades cost.

I think there should be a command version of the chimera, something like the chimedon, but trading off the unnecessary transport space for a bigger turret weapon. Maybe not a battle cannon, but maybe something lighter like a Conqueror cannon, or twin-linked autocannons. A twin-linked autocannon should be 1.5 times the the single autocannon. I think if we went the route of something like the conqueror it'd be in the 15-20pt range. It should also come with improved comms.

At 10-20 pts, you overprice side armor - if you charge 20 pts, for the price of 2 up-armored Chimeras, you can get another Chimera, which transports a 3rd unit, has 2 more guns, etc. so the cost of AV11 side should be +5 pts per Chimera. The only caveat is that you must buy the upgrade for *all* Chimeras. No shell games of guessing which Chimera has base armor on sides vs improved armor!

With Razorbacks weighing in at 40 pts, 45 pts is as high as one can reasonably charge for a Chimera that includes basic hull and turret HB/HF-class guns.

Command Chimera makes good sense and is a good differentiator, with Transport 6 and enhanced weapons options. A (single, BS4) Autocannon, ML, or twin HB would be good choices for +5 pts.

Conqueror would be an interesting choice, but definitely cost more, maybe +25 pts.

aka_mythos wrote:chimedon had a battle cannon and the full 10 transport;

Chimerax would also be neat with quad autocannons, that would class in at the same as the chimedon.

Full Battlecannon today isn't justifiable.

Twin or quad autocannon starts to intrude on the Pred or Hydra, respectively, so should be avoided.

aka_mythos wrote:I still think a +1 armor to sides should be a vehicle upgrade.

Realistically, let's not bother with the AV11 step. It's kind of like charging +2 pts per model for Lasguns to be AP5. It's such a minor change, and does so little of what you *really* want, don't bother. If we're charging for improved side armor to support enhanced mobility, then go all the way to AV12 sides (like a Hellhound) for +10 pts per Chimera, recognizing that the Chimera gives up at least half of its shooting when moving to use its AV12 sides. Make the change significant and clearly playable at a points cost that makes sense.

aka_mythos wrote:Armor 11 makes it a heavy IFV, while armor 10 makes it light. My sentiment is it should be somewhere in between.

Armor 11 is light - that's why SM use it on their dropshippable Rhino-class vehicles. It's the lightest armor that is proof against bog standard S4 infantry weapons. Armor 12 is where you start to reach "Heavy", like a Dreadnought.

aka_mythos wrote:Ihow about the hull weapon, is there some way that could be improved? Allow a heavy stubber maybe?

Heavy Stubber in hull and turret make sense, with 3rd PMHS for a few points. This kind of thing strongly exploits the S4 Defensive Weapon rule, as it is armed mostly with Defensive Weapons.

aka_mythos wrote:how about a multi-melta or something...

IMO, this breaks IG tech, which focuses on simple stuff like HB, HF, Multi-Laser. It's a huge capability upgrade to a R24" S8 AP1 gun. Design-wise, such a Chimera intrudes on the role of the Troops within.

It shouldn't be an upgrade. It should just be. AV12/11/10. Easy. Solved. 45 points each, with guns. +5 points for AC or TL-HB turret. And that's it.

BYE

the only thing wrong is the av for its price

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:chimedon had a battle cannon and the full 10 transport;

Chimerax would also be neat with quad autocannons, that would class in at the same as the chimedon.

Full Battlecannon today isn't justifiable.

Twin or quad autocannon starts to intrude on the Pred or Hydra, respectively, so should be avoided.

I was only using them as examples of what existed in the past. I wasn't seriously proposing them, just trying to make the point that with past existance of more powerful weapons, that it wouldn't be to far fetched to see a smaller cannon such as the Conqueror cannon on a chimera and that sacrificing half the transport seats on the chimera would only make it easier to justify. I think the price of a conqueror cannon really comes down to what the price of autocannons and the price of a battle cannon in general are. A conqueror cannon is only about as effective as two autocannons, so something in that price bracket would be reasonable. I agree on the fact it treads on other tanks domain and should be avoided, thats one reason I do like the conqueror cannon as an option, it brings equivalent fire power without being twin or quad autocannons.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:I still think a +1 armor to sides should be a vehicle upgrade.

Realistically, let's not bother with the AV11 step. It's kind of like charging +2 pts per model for Lasguns to be AP5. It's such a minor change, and does so little of what you *really* want, don't bother. If we're charging for improved side armor to support enhanced mobility, then go all the way to AV12 sides (like a Hellhound) for +10 pts per Chimera, recognizing that the Chimera gives up at least half of its shooting when moving to use its AV12 sides. Make the change significant and clearly playable at a points cost that makes sense.

I'm not going to be surprised in the hellhound is nerfed down to AV10 or AV11. The hellhound being one of our good units, currently, is likely to be on the nerf chopping block for that reason. GW never fails to do that to some unit, I think its the hellhound.

JohnHwangDD wrote:

aka_mythos wrote:Armor 11 makes it a heavy IFV, while armor 10 makes it light. My sentiment is it should be somewhere in between.

Armor 11 is light - that's why SM use it on their dropshippable Rhino-class vehicles. It's the lightest armor that is proof against bog standard S4 infantry weapons. Armor 12 is where you start to reach "Heavy", like a Dreadnought.

Well when we were discussin IFV's we were making a parallel to the real world. That a majority of modern IFV's can not repel modern munitions of the same size as a bolter shell. If it doesn't work today, 40K years of improved armor and improved munition technology would end up with similar results to today. There are a few IFV's capable of withstanding larger munitions, and if you went by those heavy IFV's you could justify upto AV12 on the side. I was just distinguishing between differnet IFV armors and showing how varied they can be.

I always thought of the Chimera as an equivalent to the Russian IFV the BMPs. And as such their current 12/10/10 armor always made since to me. The BMPs had thick slooped armor on front but almost nothing in the side or rear. Even worse, in the BMP2s the back door had fuel lines running through it so any hit from anything >50 cal would cover all the occupants in burning fuel!

Frankly real world is not applicable. In a agaming context AV 10 side means this is generally not a vehicle worth having and doesn't parallel its fluff application of an IFV following with the Lemans. AV10 means its not an IFV in the 40K world but a light vehicle.

Most IFV's don't have significant armor. They're hulls are composed of a hardend aluminum and aluminum is the lowest choice for vehicle armor. Humvees come with a hardened aluminum, albeit a thiner shell. Only a few IFV's have steel or ceramic armor. I think a real world comparison is fair to make especially if some one is going to draw parallels to it. IFV's are pulling double duty for two types of light vehicles, troop taxis and light tanks and most are medium only by size. My point was not to say Chimeras should be a particular armor value as much as I was saying there is wide number of things that are called IFV's such that if you draw that parallel you need to be more specific as to the type of IFV you're compairing a Chimera to.

@Aka:

Um, I *agreed* that the Battlecannon was a bad idea, and that the Conqueror would be possible.

I think the Veterans are more likely to be nerfed than the Hellhound. However, I expect the Hellhound to be converted to a 5" Blast following standard Blast rules - much simpler.

Modern RL IFVs generally repel the heaviest firepower carried by modern infantry (AK-47s). 38,000 years from now, they will repel standard infantry-carried Bolter-class weapons. Also, consider the IDF Namera / Achzerit APCs. These tank-based APCs are the RL analogues of what I'd expect the IG to use in a 40k environment. And that Achzerit HAPC is currently in service with the IDF. I'd rate it as AV12/12/10.

I do think there is some room to interpret an IFV as AV12/12/10 in 40k, that would probably be equivalent to the toughest IFV. In reality most IFV's are rated to protect nearing the .50cal range, the Humvee is an example of an aluminum armored vehicle that is meant to lightly take 7.62x39. My main issue with interpreting Chimeras that heavily armored is that it bumps them into the realm of medium battle tank, instead of a squad support vehicle. If you think that ok, you probably like AV12 sides, if you don't you don't.

@aka: I already pointed you to the IDF IFVs / APCs that currently exist in the real world. Given that Israel deals with resisting enemy fire all the time, I think their approach is a good one and a valid starting point.

If you slap a mini-turret from a LAV or BMP onto the Achzerit, that isn't going to turn it into a medium battle tank. It won't even class as a light battle tank, because the firepower will be too light. It'll just be a regular IFV. Even if you put a 40mm Bofors gun like the Swedish CV-90, you're still well undergunned compared to the 100+mm cannon on a MBT.

The Humvee isn't an IFV - it's an armored car. AV 10/10/10 Open Topped. In 40k-terms, it's a Centaur.

The LAV / Stryker is an IFV, with a focus on urban mobility, rather than survivability. I see the LAV / Stryker as more like Rhino, with the MGS as akin to a Pred. So the LAV / Stryker is your RL analouge for an AV 11/11/10 light IFV / APC.

So when you get back to a "heavy" AV12/12/10 IFV / APC like what Israel actually fields, then yeah, it's solid and real. Moving ahead with the emphasis on IED-proofing in urban environments, I think HAPCs like the Achzerit and BMP-T will be the norm for crew protection.

I hear a lot of "is an equivilant of" stuff. Remember, the Leman Russ has a cannon bigger than that on modern battleship! The Chimera has six hull mounted SAE rifles! The list of oddities goes on. Remember, this is WH40k, things are what they are; themselves. Granted, if one person's arguement is "this is impossible!" a good counter-point would be it already being done! "Containing thousands of small explosions in a block of metal next to a bottle of explosive fluids is stupid and highly improbable to work!" counter-point; "They have been doing that for over a hundred years with hundreds of millions (maybe even over a billion?) examples. They are called 'combustion engines' and they are in every liquid fueled car."

@ DD : I'm guessing you know rather little about tanks. You should know by research that the Stryker is nearly impermiable to even .50cal rounds from all sides (even anti-armor missile have difficulty penetrating on a hull strike in certain places).

In my heirarchy of weapons of WH40k, Bolters are more akin to M14's than anything else, with lasguns related to M16's. Remember, lasguns can actually blow people open rather easily, with Bolters blowing people apart! The step up is considerable, but not out of the stadium, more like just from the infield to the outfield (yes, for you Brits and otherwise, this is a baseball reference).

@Skinnitar: Odds are pretty good I know more than you...

If you're saying me that a Stryker has the same level of protection as an MBT-based HAPC like the IDF Merkava 1 or 2 (the basis of the Namera), I wanna know what you're smokin' because that's some strong stuff!

Yeah, a Stryker isn't that tough. One RPG can take it out, sustained fire from a .50 cal can take it out.

Stop watching the military channel, they're nothing but liars who generally have no understanding of Hoploligy

To be fair, a Stryker / LAV is tougher than the un-armored Humvees that were previously used...

quite true.

Actually I know from second hand experience. I happen to be in the US Armed forces. We talk to eachother a lot. I have heard several stories from crewman talking about the Stryker's performance and what they have been through that their previous vehicles, uparmored HMMWV's, Bradleys, M113s, and even one Abrams driver. I have never seen the military channel, nor any TV shows about it. What I know is from working with the thing.

EDITED by Modquisition

Ok so no more modern parallels. To me the 12/10/10 armor on a Chimera was always a statement on its purpose and the idealolgy of the Imperial Guard. The strong forward facing armor meant to repel attacks as it plows towards it enemies, along with a hundred of its friends... And I think thats the assumption the guard works off of when they deploy chimeras. Massed armored advancement or with massed troops running alongside, both situations that make attacks from the flanks and rear unlikely.

And who says armor 10 makes a vehicle not work taking?! If I believed that I would have to leave my Dark Eldar locked away in storage somewhere.

gardeth wrote:

And who says armor 10 makes a vehicle not work taking?! If I believed that I would have to leave my Dark Eldar locked away in storage somewhere.

Its the cost. How much does a fully kitted raider cost? What is the BS they are shooting with? How fast does it move?
Chimeras are a poor choice currently because of their cost vs. functionality. because fo the meta game its quite easy o get a side shot. With the change in area terrain methods of protecting side armor from shots have fallen by the wayside. A 4+ save is meh if every army in the game sans guard and gaunts can at minimum glance with their standard troop range weapon.

Skinnattittar wrote:Actually I know from second hand experience.

Before this gets stupid, however, I'm going to stop talking about this subject, as it is not the purpose of this thread. DD has a tendancy to make things ridiculous, I know better than that.

First off, your personal attacks are not acceptable.

Secondly, none of the military people that you have interacted with have experience with heavy APCs. Now if you were ex-Soviet / Russian Military having served in Afghanistan, then your experience might have some bearing. The Russkies developed the BMP-T heavy APC specifically in response to urban threats, using the T-55 tank chassis. A BMP-T weighs nearly 45 tons and a lot of that is armor. That BMP-T is going to shrug off a lot of firepower that would easily smoke a lightweight Stryker-class vehicle.

And the Israeli experience with similar urban / LIC environments led them to a similar result with their T-55-based Achzerit. This is another 40+ ton heavy APC that will easily shrug off things that would obliterate a Stryker.

If you look at modern APC / IFV procurement and development, *none* of the new designs weigh less than 30 tons. They are all moving towards heavy APC / IFV designs. The uparmored Marder A3 is over 30 tons, and the coming Puma is even heavier with its planned Extra Armor.

Personally, I'm not so much impressed by the US direction here. Use lightweight vehicles so they can get into trouble faster? Riiight... That's a good use of my tax dollars.

But obviously, your secondhand information about Stryker survivablity is directly comparable to what I'm talking about? Nope. This is apples and oranges. Or more like feathers and bricks.

And for the record, I wasn't the one who started on the RL stuff.

Frazzled wrote:

gardeth wrote:

And who says armor 10 makes a vehicle not work taking?! If I believed that I would have to leave my Dark Eldar locked away in storage somewhere.

Its the cost. How much does a fully kitted raider cost? What is the BS they are shooting with? How fast does it move?
Chimeras are a poor choice currently because of their cost vs. functionality. because fo the meta game its quite easy o get a side shot. With the change in area terrain methods of protecting side armor from shots have fallen by the wayside. A 4+ save is meh if every army in the game sans guard and gaunts can at minimum glance with their standard troop range weapon.

70pt fully kitted (nightshields+horrofex) and I'm not saying chimeras are a great buy now, but if they keep the armor the same and go down to the rumored 45pts weapons included, then I would see no reason to change their stats.

If the stats are the same, but the cost is 45 pts, they just become a static, anti-infantry pillbox.

Meh.

That does nothing to address the need for Guard to have useful mobility as a Mech force.

Modquisition on:

Lets keep it polite people. Please argue the points and not lean into personal attacks.

Modquisition off.

I don't think its unreasonable to see Chimeras as (semi-) static pill boxes. I think with the new Codex the emphasis will be if you want mobility you have to take Valkyries. I use chimeras and when the model gets its update I'll probably get some more. The fact that it has to make a decision to move or shoot is just the rules of the game; when you consider that alot of those restrictions on mobility and shooting are limits that are intended to impact imperium units the most its no surprise that they do. It also becomes a bit wishful to want that sort of limitation removed. Also I don't really see how making it AV12 side really helps with mobility, it helps with survivability and doesn't that just make it a bigger pill box?

Every army has some short coming, the IG just have the most. Its important in our attempt to find solutions to patching the excess inherent disadvantages we don't over zealously alter the army by removing all disadvantages or else we become "HURRR! MARINES."

Asking for an AV 11 side is not removing all disadvantages. Asking that the guard's primary vehicle has the same side armor or less as pretty much every transport outside of DE is not a major leap of faith here.

If GW wants to ship more product, which is really all they are concerned about, they need to tweek the chimera or substantially reduce its costs.

AV12/10/10 means you need to arrange things so that the enemy can only see the Front. That pretty much forces the Chimera at the back of your DZ to control LOS. So it is static, meaning you can't use it to Transport dudes as a APC, IFV, or MICV. Pointless.

AV12/12/10 means you simply need to ensure that the enemy can't see the Rear. In this case, it's survivable enough that you can have it trundle about all over, carrying Guardsmen to whereever they need to be, in relative security. Thus, you have decent odds that they will actually get to where you need them. That's useful.

Valkyries will be on Storms, and perhaps HQ squads. But I doubt we'd see full Platoons of Aircav. It seems that'd be far too modern for Guard...

Also, I don't think we need a Chimera model update. It's OK, whereas the Russ is in dire need of revision.

I think 12/12/10 would represent a substantial change of GW’s plan for the way the tank and the army work. It’s not a grav tank, and I don’t think any of us want it priced anywhere near what a Wave Serpent costs. As noted, we already have very solid word that there will be plastic Valkries, and so those are likely going to fill the role of moving your guys around the table quickly.

I agree that within the current metagame, Chimeras need to get cheaper or better. Based on everything we’ve seen in the last few codices, my money’s on cheaper. As previously noted, if they dropped to 45pts with guns included, they’d be pretty solid.

AV11 sides wouldn’t be out of line, but I don’t think the AV10 side armor is unbearably awful, either. It’s certainly weak, but vehicles in general got more durable with the 5th ed damage charts, and if you have a few, you *can* reliably get a couple of moves out of them.

My only real issue with the model is the lasguns. Those things are annoying. They either need to revise the model or give a clear explanation so players understand exactly where the darn things can shoot.

Back in 3E, for most intents and purposes, a Chimera was AV12/12/12. You could very strongly control which side the enemy was forced to shoot at or otherwise engage.

In 5E, a Chimera is effectively AV10/10/10. Enemies can shoot at a sliver of a side, or assault the Rear. That is a *huge* drop in armor effectiveness.

Yes, 5E vehicles got tougher, provided that they had decent AV to begin with. The higher the AV, the relatively tougher the vehicle got. But for low AVs, the benefit is much less.

Moving the Chimera to AV12/12/10 simply returns it pretty much to where it was before the recent changes.
___

WRT Wave Sperpent and Falcon, those are Fast Skimmers with much heavier (and more accurate) weapon options. They are far more mobile by being Fast Skimmers, more survivable by due to SMF, more accurate due to twin-link, and hit harder due to access of all Eldar Heavy Weapons. The Valkyrie is much more comparable here, and if it's an AV12/12/10 Fast Skimmer, I can see it being priced similar to a Wave Serpent.