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.

It would need heavier armor ... during the fall from orbit
once on the ground, the outer hull is face on the ground and the machinery open to enemy abuse ...

 6^ wrote:

paidinfull wrote:


@6^ - You don't feel that it would require heavier armor to fall from orbit and then survive the impact than it would to transport troops around the battlefield?

No.

Armour doesn't affect your ability to fall from orbit successfully... its the thrusters you use to slow yourself down. No amount of armour in the world will save you falling from space unpowered!

 Somedude593 wrote:

 6^ wrote:

paidinfull wrote:


@6^ - You don't feel that it would require heavier armor to fall from orbit and then survive the impact than it would to transport troops around the battlefield?

No.

Armour doesn't affect your ability to fall from orbit successfully... its the thrusters you use to slow yourself down. No amount of armour in the world will save you falling from space unpowered!

Correct.

 6^ wrote:

 Somedude593 wrote:

 6^ wrote:

paidinfull wrote:


@6^ - You don't feel that it would require heavier armor to fall from orbit and then survive the impact than it would to transport troops around the battlefield?

No.

Armour doesn't affect your ability to fall from orbit successfully... its the thrusters you use to slow yourself down. No amount of armour in the world will save you falling from space unpowered!

Correct.

Incorrect.

Enough crash pads (albeit at a bit better than current tech) would successfully slow ones decent to the point of survivable.

Thrusters, depending on how broad of a term you are using, haven't been used at all during a planetary landing. Moon landings have used thrusters, all other space to land landings have been flight, parachute, parachute & crash pad, space-crane, and balloon based.

Thrusters are what drop pods use according to fluff... and No crash pads would not save you from a DROP FROM SPACE, the gravity would accelerate you to terminal velocity and without any means of slowing yourself down before impact the mere G forces involved in that crash would kill you, not to mention your craft crumpling like a tin can

I'll let Rhinos be AV 12 in my houserules when DE vehicles are all 14 all round and can target two units at the same time

Rhinos are light APC's designed to get Marines from point A to point B, not MBTs

They're fine as they are. At 35 points, I could care less if they survive the battle as long as I get 1 18" move with it.

 Ascalam wrote:
I'll let Rhinos be AV 12 in my houserules when DE vehicles are all 14 all round and can target two units at the same time

Rhinos are light APC's designed to get Marines from point A to point B, not MBTs

LMAO AV12 MBT, the new Russ demolished.

That aside, they are APCs, not AFVs. AV12 Razorbacks yes please (with a cost increase), AV12 Rhinos no.

I am also fine with them being AV:11 11 10

But I think it's sad to see it's direct competitor, a non tank, with higher AV, can land anywhere without misshaping, and is not crewed by space marines, yet still benefits from a strong BS as if it where. And theyre equal in points cost.

In other words I would rather see the drop pods AV reduced to 10 10 10 BS2, (with reduced cost upgrades), Than the Rhino increased to 12 11 10

 Bausk wrote:

 Ascalam wrote:
I'll let Rhinos be AV 12 in my houserules when DE vehicles are all 14 all round and can target two units at the same time

Rhinos are light APC's designed to get Marines from point A to point B, not MBTs

LMAO AV12 MBT, the new Russ demolished.

That aside, they are APCs, not AFVs. AV12 Razorbacks yes please (with a cost increase), AV12 Rhinos no.

AV 12 is more that some armies get for their best vehicles

Just sayin'

Eldar tanks are AV 12. You could argue the Falcon as an IFV, since it does have a tiny troop capacity, but it strikes me more as a MBT, given it's loadout.

Somedude wrote:

Armour doesn't affect your ability to fall from orbit successfully... its the thrusters you use to slow yourself down. No amount of armour in the world will save you falling from space unpowered!

Armour won't help much with the landing without good thrusters, to be sure. But it will help with the heat of re-entry and any hits by those Icarus Lascannons on the way down.

Also the AV in part represents a general resillience on the craft, not just armour. It takes a tough craft to do what the Drop Pod does (a barely controlled crash, not a gentle landing) and keep itself (and it's superhumanly tough contents) intact.

I honestly think the AV 12 and BS 4 is just there to justify an immobile, open topped vehicle costing as much as a fully enclosed APC.

Jefffar wrote:

Somedude wrote:

Armour doesn't affect your ability to fall from orbit successfully... its the thrusters you use to slow yourself down. No amount of armour in the world will save you falling from space unpowered!

Armour won't help much with the landing without good thrusters, to be sure. But it will help with the heat of re-entry and any hits by those Icarus Lascannons on the way down.

Also the AV in part represents a general resillience on the craft, not just armour. It takes a tough craft to do what the Drop Pod does (a barely controlled crash, not a gentle landing) and keep itself (and it's superhumanly tough contents) intact.

I honestly think the AV 12 and BS 4 is just there to justify an immobile, open topped vehicle costing as much as a fully enclosed APC.

^^This.

Yeah but it's just as useful, it's just a tradeoff. Do you want to land on the board exactly where you want, or do you want to have a little more mobility throughout the game.

Rhinos are just fine at AV11.

The only change I'd make would be to include repairing Hull Points as well as Immobilised results for the Rhino's "Repair" rule.

As long as you up the price to reflect that

Right now they are riding a touch cheap as is. Not grotesquely so like the Valk, but still cheap for what you get.

 Happygrunt wrote:

 ph34r wrote:

 Testify wrote:
Anyone else think rhinos should get front armour 12?

No.

My thoughts exactly.

QFT

Actually ill tell you what-if my chimera can be side armour 11/12 then sure.
Look at the rhino. It is armed with a light/general purpose MG it is cheap and light. It can be upgraded to have a second MG, a bit of reinforced armour and a 1 shot average AT weapon.
It is NOT designed to be used as an assault transport but more of a way to transport infantry around the battlefeild to where there needed-essentially allowing you to rapidly re-deploy your squads. After this there meant to back off and let the infantry do there job. Those guns are only there for defensive purposes against infantry asaults. If your rhinos are seeing any serious engagements or find themselves being used to assault enemy positions then something has gone seriously wrong.
If you wish to use them in assaults then i suggest you merely form them into a flying column headed by a couple of predators. But this isnt advised unless you have to capture an objective quickly.

Now take chimeras(what you want your rhinos to essentialy be). They have a high front armour but they lack any real side armour. They are armed with a combination of heavy AP weapons and can be upgraded the same as the rhino except they can take a HMG in place of the LMG/GPMG
They are meant to transport a squad to a given point on the battlefeild and, have them disembark and then support them in their assault on the enemys position. They are equipped to do this with their higher frontal armour and they have lighter side armour as a result-they are not meant to present their side armour to the foe.

Rhinos are "battle buses" designed for the rapid redeployment of troops to allow the SMs their signiture flexibility on the battlefeild-their armour is desighned to deflect stray shots and their weapons to dissuade infantry assaults and maybe give them the chance to deal with any enemy armour that has broken through the lines. Nothing more

The Chimeras are more desighned as a solid assault APC to allow IG to rapidly take their objectives. They reflect this with higher frontal armour and amazing firepower for an APC but pathetic side armour and a complete lack of AT weaponry-they are not designed to engage enemy armour just the infantry that may be guarding the objective.

I support all that is said above^

Rhinos are basically designed at this point to transport troops to the front lines, draw bullets, then die. That's about it.

Plus, Space Marines are armored to be able to take that kinda fire.

Chimeras are designed to transport troops to the front lines, then stay around and support them with high strength weapons and armor. That's because Guardsmen don't have that kinda strength and armor on them, so they need a vehicle to support them. Space Marines....fluff wise, are really different.

Unless my Chimera gets an Autocannon for an upgrade, 13 front armor and 11 side/rear..... Then no.

No AV 12 for the METAL BAWKES!!

 Alpharius wrote:
GW certainly seems to have overreacted to Vehicles in 5th - the all too familiar Design Studio pendulum effect strikes again.quote]

Yeah, I cant disagree with the pendulum reaction. Its been like that since 2nd ed. But this time around I think they are finally on the right track. Light vehicles ( AV 10 ) just went down too easily to str 4 weapons. Now, its not to sell the Bolter or Shuriken Catapult short, its just that the Points per model expenditure just wasnt there for light models. Now though my Vypers can at least take a hit before getting wiped out. Same with my Warwalkers. They are just a little bit better this time around than last. But to answer the question...No Rhinos should not have Armor 12 in the front. The Chimera is rated at AV 12 and mine stick around for a while ( barring any really lucky dice throws ). I think for the points, they are just fine. Now if you want to make some cool stuff, try using the Vehicle Design Rules that were released back at the tail end of 3rd ed. With a little point adjustment for new weapons and the addition of Chariots, you could easily use those rules to make an Armor 12 Rhino.

Jefffar wrote:

Somedude wrote:

Armour doesn't affect your ability to fall from orbit successfully... its the thrusters you use to slow yourself down. No amount of armour in the world will save you falling from space unpowered!

Armour won't help much with the landing without good thrusters, to be sure. But it will help with the heat of re-entry and any hits by those Icarus Lascannons on the way down.

Also the AV in part represents a general resillience on the craft, not just armour. It takes a tough craft to do what the Drop Pod does (a barely controlled crash, not a gentle landing) and keep itself (and it's superhumanly tough contents) intact.

I honestly think the AV 12 and BS 4 is just there to justify an immobile, open topped vehicle costing as much as a fully enclosed APC.

I'm thinking that the same armor that helps against the heat from a fall from orbit also helps against lascannons, plasmaguns and meltaguns.
Remember, it's 40K, we can't use real physics.
Rentry is hot.
Plasma gun is hot.
So clearly the drop pod should shrug off some plasma.

Honestly, I think the whole drop pod mechanic needs help.
I'd like to see them all drop turn 1 with the doors closed and AV12 (or even 13).
Turn 2 the doors blow and marines disembark, pod becomes AV10 and opened topped.
So you're opponent would get a single turn to try and shoot them down, which would force the marines to disembark and be unable to assault.
If they aren't destroyed, they become open-topped so marines could disembark and assault.

I would much rather play, and play against that type of Pod Rule. Not only that, but giving opponents a single turn to react to a drop pod assault means that drop pod suicide isn't as effective, and a combined force of pods and rhinos would be better.

-Matt

Perhaps giving them the ceremetite but lowerign the AV would be simpler.

ceramite av11 drop pods. kinda neat, but still not a great defense - makes them more vulnerable in the long run, as most people don't bring meltaguns against drop pods - or at least I don't.

I don't really get the option.

Orks have no melta beyond a very unreliable Pyschicn power.

DE only have the Heat Lance, and it's hardly in widespread use (scourges, reavers and Cronos only i think)

If i'm trashing a pod, it'll be in close combat

I would love for Rhinos to have the option to either be able to take a Siege Shield ( +2 Front AV, Move Through Cover) OR take an Assault Ramp (making the Rhino an Assault Vehicle). Both at a points increase, mind you and not being able to be taken together.

 Bausk wrote:

Attomsk wrote:
Perhaps dedicated transports AV11 and less should not count as separate killpoints.

This might actually bring rhinos back to the table. You'd also have to make it that it can't contest objectives for it to fly with most people. Flaw for a merit and all that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Farseer Mael Dannan wrote:
I would say no. Even for my 50 point Rhinos in the BT I would still not want AV 12 armor. When I compare it to many other races, one of the only things that SM lack is a transport with high front armor that is cheap. This is made up for by resilient troops. My Eldar would be a bit upset if a 40 point Rhino was as durable from a head on attack as my best Tanks. That small little gap in AV is fine in this situation for balancing purposes. If anything, a Chimera should be AV11.

The distinction should be APC and AFV. Reduction in AV is its a skimer (unless its a heavy skimmer) because heavy things tend not to be so maneuverable. Skimmers all get jink now IIRC so less armour doe not mean more vulnerable in a round about way. I agree that Rhinos should definatly not be altered at all but a Razorback is an AFV and should have an increased survivability, increasing the cost would be a given and they would fit in that mid range AV12 slot that isn't a tank but is still a combat vehicle. Its not an assault vehicle and doesn't have the armour or firepower options to compete with a predator as a tank. I'd like to see a razor back style AFV added to chaos too but hey.

I can accept that, with the price balanced.

 evildrspock wrote:
ceramite av11 drop pods. kinda neat, but still not a great defense - makes them more vulnerable in the long run, as most people don't bring meltaguns against drop pods - or at least I don't.

Me neither, but it's a case of making rules fit the fluff.

TanKoL wrote:
There could be a commonly available upgrade to vehicles called "ablative armor" a bit like the necron thingy
+1 AV (up to a maximum of 13)

Thats what i meant.

 Testify wrote:
Anyone else think rhinos should get front armour 12?

Sure just let my Leman Russes be AV15 all-around, deal?

 6^ wrote:

paidinfull wrote:


@6^ - You don't feel that it would require heavier armor to fall from orbit and then survive the impact than it would to transport troops around the battlefield?

No.

gravity and interceptor fire is a beyatch then.

The av 11 rhino is fine, but if you wanna talk about transport upgrades from 35 pts, what does a ork got to do to make its trukk better? i feel the trukk, while fast, with av 10 all around is to much points for 35..

 cormadepanda wrote:

The AV 11 Rhino is fine, but if you want to talk about transport upgrades for 35 point vehicles, what does an Ork have to do to make its' Trukk better? I feel that the Trukk, while fast and AV 10 all around, is overpriced at 35 points.

Don't forget that being open-topped means you can shoot and charge from the vehicle, which is extremely important (and fluffy) for a horde melee army like Orks. Rhinos are meant to be transport delivery units, not mobile charging bases.

Both vehicles are picked up REALLLLY cheap. It's almost worthwhile bringing them just for mobile terrain...