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.

Rumbleguts wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 patrickekirby wrote:
Go to rulebook in 40k pg.75 he has to be atlest 25% obscured to get the save.

That's for vehicles. He's not a vehicle.
MCs don't have the same restriction.

Why isn't he a vehicle? Looks like a giant walker/dreadnought to me. Besides, even vehicles get a cover save on area terrain regardless of % coverage, pg 91, bottom of page in boldface.

So does the Dreadknight. So does the Riptide. Oh wait...
All rumors point to MC.

 grendel083 wrote:

Rumbleguts wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 patrickekirby wrote:
Go to rulebook in 40k pg.75 he has to be atlest 25% obscured to get the save.

That's for vehicles. He's not a vehicle.
MCs don't have the same restriction.

Why isn't he a vehicle? Looks like a giant walker/dreadnought to me. Besides, even vehicles get a cover save on area terrain regardless of % coverage, pg 91, bottom of page in boldface.

Have a read of page 75 top left, first bullet point there.

Ah, hmm. Ok. I was looking at pg 91 which said to ignore the 25% cover rule. Forgot about that bullet point you mention (I mostly play tyranids). Wish they had put a reminder in the rule on pg 91 in the bold faced since it really should be there. Thank for the reminder.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

rigeld2 wrote:

Rumbleguts wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 patrickekirby wrote:
Go to rulebook in 40k pg.75 he has to be atlest 25% obscured to get the save.

That's for vehicles. He's not a vehicle.
MCs don't have the same restriction.

Why isn't he a vehicle? Looks like a giant walker/dreadnought to me. Besides, even vehicles get a cover save on area terrain regardless of % coverage, pg 91, bottom of page in boldface.

So does the Dreadknight. So does the Riptide. Oh wait...
All rumors point to MC.

I don't disagree with you. Just don't want to assume its going to be an MC.

I think it is stupid either are MC. But if they make that new eldar an MC then they need to go back and throw out the walker rules and just make anything that walks an MC and get it over with.

Oh I have to agree with you Rumbleguts, they do look like they would better fit the walker vehicle category.

However I can see a good reason for making them monstrous creatures. It all comes down to armor save over armor value. It is far easier to overcome an armor save then it is to over come an armor value, technically making them far more vulnerable to all forms of fire. This does ensure they can be brought down, in theory, by any weapon that has been placed on the field and not just specialized anti-tank weapons.

You can overwhelm them with dakka dakka worthy levels of standard infantry fire, and let statistics sort them out. Hit them with low-ap weapons to get around their armor save, just like you would with any other heavy infantry. Hell I've lost monstrous creatures to a lucky las-pistol shot, though one shouldn't try and bet on their luck unless your going against a jinx.

Vehicles, on the other hand, are completely immune if you can't bring a weapon strong enough to dint it on the face you are striking. True, the rear is something that you might be able to strike at easier, but even then it could still be immune to damage. Besides, vehicle players are doing all sorts of things wrong if they are showing you their rear armor.

JWhex wrote:


So the radiation and smoke provide a cover for something the size of a skyscraper, but not a rhino. This is why 40k rules are often mocked as stupidly written and conceived.

Yea, like that great rule in Warmahordes where I get knocked down, am now prone on my butt, and people are now able to shoot me BETTER?! Yah,...

All game rules have some bad spots. 6E wanted to nerf vehicles and buff MC (or at least that's the result, intention otherwise).

EDIT: Rumbleguts, I agree. Walkers should be Monstrous Creatures. You want to kit one out for CC, but they are only kinda good against infantry. Now throw 'em against an MC, and that Walker is probably going to be toast before it can do anything because of smashing.

Walkers shouldn't be vehicles anymore, IMO. I have pretty much seen walkers all but disappear in the local area.

Walkers with AV (and only being hit from the front) either are immortal against infantry (no grenades) or easily toast.

MC are much more reliable (both surviving and being killed). The rules fit them much better.

I'm wondering (with regards to the new eldar) how they're gonna make the wraithknight even harder to kill than the wraithlord... That was T8 IIRC which means bolters do nothing to it... So what's this gonna be S10 T10 W8 or something ridiculous like that???


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and it's obvious why they nerfed vehicles... So people go out and buy those shiny new riptides or whatever it is to replace what they have already... Same reason railsides were nerfed in the new tau dex... GW is a business, first and foremost.

 Shandara wrote:
Walkers with AV (and only being hit from the front) either are immortal against infantry (no grenades) or easily toast.

MC are much more reliable (both surviving and being killed). The rules fit them much better.

Hmm, I really don't have a problem with dreadnoughts being invulnerable to troops that aren't equipped to take them out. That seems realistic. They are walking sheets of battle steel. I do think GW went a little light on hull points for the nonflyers though. Tanks and walkers die a bit too easily to glancing atm.

Maybe my hatred of Dreadknights just comes from the GK ones an me being a Tyranid player. Every stat they have is better then a Carnifex and if they have that sword they are still 5 points cheaper.

But I really think it gets down to, if its an organic guy wrapped in armor much bigger then him it should have an AV value. A guy wearing a large suit of powered armor (terminators as example) are still roughly marine sized, not 5 times larger. There is no good reason to have AV if your not going to apply it to the models that should have it. Just make tanks and other vehicles high toughness and get it over with.

Rumbleguts wrote:

 Shandara wrote:
Walkers with AV (and only being hit from the front) either are immortal against infantry (no grenades) or easily toast.

MC are much more reliable (both surviving and being killed). The rules fit them much better.

Hmm, I really don't have a problem with dreadnoughts being invulnerable to troops that aren't equipped to take them out. That seems realistic. They are walking sheets of battle steel. I do think GW went a little light on hull points for the nonflyers though. Tanks and walkers die a bit too easily to glancing atm.

Maybe my hatred of Dreadknights just comes from the GK ones an me being a Tyranid player. Every stat they have is better then a Carnifex and if they have that sword they are still 5 points cheaper.

But I really think it gets down to, if its an organic guy wrapped in armor much bigger then him it should have an AV value. A guy wearing a large suit of powered armor (terminators as example) are still roughly marine sized, not 5 times larger. There is no good reason to have AV if your not going to apply it to the models that should have it. Just make tanks and other vehicles high toughness and get it over with.

Well I just don't like the rule that you hit walkers on the front only. If the walker is fighting 10-20 dudes, why can't some hit the back? Jamming a grenade or whatnot. But no, AV13 walkers are immune to krak grenades. Having a Toughness value and a Save makes units far more predictable, while still offering the possibility of making them very tough.

As to the OPs question, I believe MCs still get cover saves from area terrain because they are more mobile. Sure you see the model standing there but in "reality" it would be moving around, crouching and generally trying to be a more difficult target to hit. A vehicle on the other hand cant really crouch, can it? Its profile stays the same thus not as easily gaining the cover benefits of area terrain.

Accept for walkers who can totally crouch, well some of them others are just fridges on stumps.

At least one person will try it...

..

foolishmortal wrote:
At least one person will try it...

Spoiler:

..

Except they have to be end-to-end, so you would have to stack them up.

because in a real battle he may run and dive into a prone postion once he enters the crater ffs its simple infantry can duck and hide behind mounds of rubble etc. in area terrain a vehivle in real life cannot duck behind a mound of dirt or jump into a hole at the bottom of a crater (except transformers but they auto win)

Rumbleguts wrote:
Hmm, I really don't have a problem with dreadnoughts being invulnerable to troops that aren't equipped to take them out. That seems realistic.

Sure it's realistic... but it's crappy game design. Even if the odds are extremely long, there should always be some way for models to hurt enemy units. I had a game just recently that I won by default by simple virtue of my opponent not having anything left on the board that could hurt my land raider. That's not fun for anybody involved. It's like playing Monopoly against someone who gets to use their limitless American Express.