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.

 vipoid wrote:

ForeverARookie wrote:

For a point of Reference, the Space Marine Lascannon is 20 points, while the Psycannon is 15 points for PAGK, and 20 points for Terminators. They should have the 36" range for that same cost.

Why?

When stationary (or Relentless) the Psycannon fires 4 times as many shots as the Lascannon - all with rending and at high strength.

Also, whilst the range is short, the Psycannon can fire 2 shots after moving - whilst moving with a lascannon allows you only a single snap-fire shot.

4 times the shots, at half the range, not a good trade off when everyone except us has 36" weapons or better on infantry.
2 shots after moving at short range... 12" is charging distance, and firing it prevents them from charging, making them literally (not figuratively) useless for the army DESIGNED to get into close combat as quickly as they can.

The cost for the Psycannon went up for PAGK in spite of becoming useless. The cost did however drop slightly for Terminators, whose use of the weapon didn't change. My proposed 12" range extension would justify the cost increase already applied to PAGK. I'd even accept the Terminator cost of them going back up to 25 points each.

Even with an extra foot of range, the Psycannon has:

12" shorter range than the Lascannon.
-2 Strength from the Lascannon
Only counts as AP2 on To-wound/AP rolls of 6, opposed to the Lasannon which is always AP2.
Only has Instant Death on T3 models to the Lascannon's ID for T4.
Only takes a hull point off of AV13 on a 6+, opposed to the Lascannon which succeeds on a 4+

Not to mention it would be the only non-vehicle weapon in the Grey Knights' arsenal with better than a 24" range, and that would be limited to Relentless or stationary models.

ForeverARookie wrote:
The Razorback should have an option for a Heavy Psycannon for its main weapon.

Forge World has you covered.

I'm pretty sure it's still in the IA book too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ForeverARookie wrote:
4 times the shots, at half the range, not a good trade off when everyone except us has 36" weapons or better on infantry.

Seriously though, not everyone has long ranged basic infantry. Some can't even take long range options (Dire Avengers, Necron Warriors, Hormagaunts, ect). Yes, some (Tactical Marines, Guard, Guardians with a Weapon Platform, Battle Sisters with a Heavy Bolter, ect) can take scoring Infantry with long ranged weapons, but many can not.

EDIT: Corrected an error.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 StarTrotter wrote:
I know people have talked it over but I'd still put Thousand Sons here. Or hell, just the mark of tzeentch in general. Only reason is because I just really don't know what to do. Both are dramatically underpowered options. KSons suffer from costing far too much, having a psyker table that really only has one worth-wile spell and being forced to roll on it twice, and being forced to basically be anti 3+ armor and that's it.

Agreed, Thousand Sons do need to be cheaper. And they need an AP3 Heavy Bolter option to rock in their squads too (1 for every 10? Or maybe 1 for every 5?) just to give them some more range and give them a perk for being SnP. It's not like they get to Overwatch anyways with it. Oh and maybe make them Relentless when the Sorc is alive so that way he has more of a purpose in the squad than generating Warp Charges.

I've always pondered how it would function if the unit relied upon the sorcerer in a more significant manner than currently. Basically, the sorcerer is the buffer to the unit. Sometimes they would take something specialized to be AT (doombolt) but usually, as is standard of tzeentch, being more oriented to assisting the unit in a way. The relentless idea was a fun one as well. It'd also make an interesting dynamic of the leader of the squad actually being very important to the squad and might even merit having the sorcerer be high priced still. But yeah, it's one option I've always liked to think of because it basically requires an entire renovation to function properly.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ForeverARookie wrote:
The Razorback should have an option for a Heavy Psycannon for its main weapon.

Forge World has you covered.

I'm pretty sure it's still in the IA book too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ForeverARookie wrote:
4 times the shots, at half the range, not a good trade off when everyone except us has 36" weapons or better on infantry.

Seriously though, not everyone has long ranged basic infantry. Some can't even take long range options (Dire Avengers, Necron Warriors, Hormagaunts, ect). Yes, some (Tactical Marines, Guard, Guardians with a Weapon Platform, Battle Sisters with a Heavy Bolter, ect) can take scoring Infantry with long ranged weapons, but many can not.

EDIT: Corrected an error.

Everything is scoring now, and that's not the issue. Purifiers (Elites), Infiltrators (Fast), and Purgation Squads (Heavy) have no access to anything with a greater range than a Bolter.

Other Factions have Lascannons, Missile Launchers, Plasma Cannons, Heavy Bolters, and more on Infantry. Apart from the Dreadknight, the Grey Knights are practically a non-factor in the shooting phase. Only the Dreadknight can simulate a 36" range due to a 12" movement compounding the 24" range.

The Purgation squad is designed to be a ranged unit, and they can't do that. 24" from a stationary position in their deployment zone won't kill anything if the opponent plays tactically, They can't do their job without a weapon with decent range.

ForeverARookie wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ForeverARookie wrote:
The Razorback should have an option for a Heavy Psycannon for its main weapon.

Forge World has you covered.

I'm pretty sure it's still in the IA book too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ForeverARookie wrote:
4 times the shots, at half the range, not a good trade off when everyone except us has 36" weapons or better on infantry.

Seriously though, not everyone has long ranged basic infantry. Some can't even take long range options (Dire Avengers, Necron Warriors, Hormagaunts, ect). Yes, some (Tactical Marines, Guard, Guardians with a Weapon Platform, Battle Sisters with a Heavy Bolter, ect) can take scoring Infantry with long ranged weapons, but many can not.

EDIT: Corrected an error.

Everything is scoring now, and that's not the issue. Purifiers (Elites), Infiltrators (Fast), and Purgation Squads (Heavy) have no access to anything with a greater range than a Bolter.

Other Factions have Lascannons, Missile Launchers, Plasma Cannons, Heavy Bolters, and more on Infantry. Apart from the Dreadknight, the Grey Knights are practically a non-factor in the shooting phase. Only the Dreadknight can simulate a 36" range due to a 12" movement compounding the 24" range.

The Purgation squad is designed to be a ranged unit, and they can't do that. 24" from a stationary position in their deployment zone won't kill anything if the opponent plays tactically, They can't do their job without a weapon with decent range.

How is 24" not ranged? It's still a bit of time before enemies smack into you. Keep in mind this is coming from a CD player that's used to having almost no shooting and relying on crummy unreliable tzeentchian 24" might give the enemy FNP if they don't just deny it in its entirity. It's more than likely just a theme. My biggest concern for GK would be questioning how much access they have to anti av14?

ForeverARookie wrote:
Everything is scoring now, and that's not the issue.

Only Troops get Objective Secured though (granted that's through the CAD but the point stands).

ForeverARookie wrote:
Purifiers (Elites), Infiltrators (Fast), and Purgation Squads (Heavy) have no access to anything with a greater range than a Bolter.

Neither do Skyclaws, Warp Spiders, Deathwing Terminators, ect. Not every unit in every book needs greater than 24" range. Outside of some very adaptable units (namely Tactical Marines and the Guard Squad) most units don't have long range unless they're also a vehicle (Sentinels, Dreadnoughts, some Tanks, ect) or are Heavy Support choices. And even that doesn't mean they have long range options (Grav-Centurions have a 24" range for example).

ForeverARookie wrote:
Other Factions have Lascannons, Missile Launchers, Plasma Cannons, Heavy Bolters, and more on Infantry. Apart from the Dreadknight, the Grey Knights are practically a non-factor in the shooting phase. Only the Dreadknight can simulate a 36" range due to a 12" movement compounding the 24" range.

Speaking from experience, the Heavy Bolter is less effective than the Psycannon in terms of dealing wounds. S5, AP4 just does not trump the Psycannon.

And yes, other factions DO have other options, but in limited numbers. Like at most 1 per squad, or 1 per 10. You get 1 per 5 or better for Grey Knights on their special and heavy weapons.

ForeverARookie wrote:
The Purgation squad is designed to be a ranged unit, and they can't do that. 24" from a stationary position in their deployment zone won't kill anything if the opponent plays tactically, They can't do their job without a weapon with decent range.

Then don't play them statically? A turn spent running up to an objective and then establishing a 24" bubble of death would be more effective than sitting on a hill somewhere. Heck, stick them in a Bastion and use their power on the emplaced weapons, or on an Emplaced Weapon on a Defense Line. Not everything needs to be solved by buffing the stats of a unit, especially when you have other options to play with to try and make things work.

Take it from someone who also has a short engagement range for 95% in their codex (the exceptions being the Heavy Bolter and the Exorcist): find other ways to make things work before running off to buff statlines to weapons. And if it still doesn't work then find ways to adjust the unit (like giving the Purgation squad a power that makes them Relentless, or allow them to Deep Strike) rather than trying to make the weapon so good that we just start another wave of "everyone plays Grey Knights because they're too good to not play".

 StarTrotter wrote:

ForeverARookie wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ForeverARookie wrote:
The Razorback should have an option for a Heavy Psycannon for its main weapon.

Forge World has you covered.

I'm pretty sure it's still in the IA book too.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

ForeverARookie wrote:
4 times the shots, at half the range, not a good trade off when everyone except us has 36" weapons or better on infantry.

Seriously though, not everyone has long ranged basic infantry. Some can't even take long range options (Dire Avengers, Necron Warriors, Hormagaunts, ect). Yes, some (Tactical Marines, Guard, Guardians with a Weapon Platform, Battle Sisters with a Heavy Bolter, ect) can take scoring Infantry with long ranged weapons, but many can not.

EDIT: Corrected an error.

Everything is scoring now, and that's not the issue. Purifiers (Elites), Infiltrators (Fast), and Purgation Squads (Heavy) have no access to anything with a greater range than a Bolter.

Other Factions have Lascannons, Missile Launchers, Plasma Cannons, Heavy Bolters, and more on Infantry. Apart from the Dreadknight, the Grey Knights are practically a non-factor in the shooting phase. Only the Dreadknight can simulate a 36" range due to a 12" movement compounding the 24" range.

The Purgation squad is designed to be a ranged unit, and they can't do that. 24" from a stationary position in their deployment zone won't kill anything if the opponent plays tactically, They can't do their job without a weapon with decent range.

How is 24" not ranged? It's still a bit of time before enemies smack into you. Keep in mind this is coming from a CD player that's used to having almost no shooting and relying on crummy unreliable tzeentchian 24" might give the enemy FNP if they don't just deny it in its entirity. It's more than likely just a theme. My biggest concern for GK would be questioning how much access they have to anti av14?

The Psycannon is our only man-portable anti AV14, and it only takes a hull point on an AP roll of 6.

24" is not ranged when it's your best and everyone else has infantry with 36+" ranged weapons.

ForeverARookie wrote:
24" is not ranged when it's your best and everyone else has infantry with 36+" ranged weapons.

24" is fine when you consider that not all of that 36"+ stuff can even scratch AV14 (Sisters only chance of that is with a tank for example).

And considering that Grey Knights are optimized for killing Daemons it makes sense they wouldn't be geared up to deal with AV14 at range unlike forces who do have to regularly contend with heavy tanks. Unless you know of a lot of AV14 Daemon stuff running around that I don't. Because all I can come up with off the top of my head is a Daemonically Possessed CSM Godhammer Land Raider.

When people argue against changing the Psycannon for the better, most of you seem to be ignoring that apart from Terminators, it is a mobile 12" bubble, not 24".

As for better than 1 special weapon per 5 models, the only two who get that are Paladins and Purifiers (Elite Choices).

Paladins are too costly with the plethora of Instant Death out there which often ignores their Armor and FNP.

Purifiers only get the short 12" profile if they aren't static, making the Psycannon worthless.

Honestly, all of the arguments for why the Psycannon is fine the way it is seem to be from 6th edition before it got nerfed to pieces.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ForeverARookie wrote:
24" is not ranged when it's your best and everyone else has infantry with 36+" ranged weapons.

24" is fine when you consider that not all of that 36"+ stuff can even scratch AV14 (Sisters only chance of that is with a tank for example).

And considering that Grey Knights are optimized for killing Daemons it makes sense they wouldn't be geared up to deal with AV14 at range unlike forces who do have to regularly contend with heavy tanks. Unless you know of a lot of AV14 Daemon stuff running around that I don't. Because all I can come up with off the top of my head is a Daemonically Possessed CSM Godhammer Land Raider.

Sisters aren't the best example of a competative army as they are the most ignored faction GW currently has.

You're going to at least have to put your foot into your mouth on that note. You keep on going on about everyone else having infantry with 36+" ranged weapons. Orks, if any, have a crummy one and unlikely even that long ranged, I believe DE long ranged guns are all on transports, Eldar I can't remember naturally having anything that long ranged, Daemons have nothing that long ranged, Nids at best might have it on Tyranid Warriors (that aren't considered good), and so on. There's actually not that many factions that can tote around long range guns.

That said, a dilemma could be the lack of anti-av14.

Psycannons are fine, if slightly worse for power armor.

The real issue is that our heavy weapons team suffers hardest from that, and we have a lack of high str low AP weapons outside of rending

Purgation squad - Slight point increase, gains Perfect Timing that only works on their squad as a power, and Slow and Purposeful.

That way 4 psycannons in that squad would be something worth it

2nd for the Dreadnought ideas about, allowed to take a weapon on both arms (double las)

 StarTrotter wrote:
You're going to at least have to put your foot into your mouth on that note. You keep on going on about everyone else having infantry with 36+" ranged weapons. Orks, if any, have a crummy one and unlikely even that long ranged, I believe DE long ranged guns are all on transports, Eldar I can't remember naturally having anything that long ranged, Daemons have nothing that long ranged, Nids at best might have it on Tyranid Warriors (that aren't considered good), and so on. There's actually not that many factions that can tote around long range guns.

That said, a dilemma could be the lack of anti-av14.

It must just be all the people at my local gaming store then.

ForeverARookie wrote:
When people argue against changing the Psycannon for the better, most of you seem to be ignoring that apart from Terminators, it is a mobile 12" bubble, not 24".

As for better than 1 special weapon per 5 models, the only two who get that are Paladins and Purifiers (Elite Choices).

Paladins are too costly with the plethora of Instant Death out there which often ignores their Armor and FNP.

Purifiers only get the short 12" profile if they aren't static, making the Psycannon worthless.

Honestly, all of the arguments for why the Psycannon is fine the way it is seem to be from 6th edition before it got nerfed to pieces.

Yes, the Salvo change hurt, but you're lugging around basically a sawed off Autocannon. I think it's not exactly unreasonable considering they could have made it a Heavy Weapon instead.

Paladins got cheaper too. Especially Paladins with an Apothecary. And yes they are Elite choices, which your Codex's detachment heavily leans towards. You can take more Elites with it while only needing a single Troops choice.

If it's "worthless" then perhaps you need to rethink how you approach building the unit and what you're using it for.

And it's only "nerfs" were the removal of Psyammo (which affected a LOT more than that), and the Salvo which fits the profile it already had with a more appropriate rule set.

ForeverARookie wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

ForeverARookie wrote:
24" is not ranged when it's your best and everyone else has infantry with 36+" ranged weapons.

Sisters aren't the best example of a competative army as they are the most ignored faction GW currently has.

Ignored or not, they do get played competitively, to some degree of success, and have the most similar limitations to the GK do in terms of the army's overall threat bubble range. And despite these limits people make them work.

Yes Grey Knights got nerfed in some areas, and in others they got buffs. A new codex that fits the same power level of the others released so far this edition and you're asking for a buff to be put on a pedestal over them. The game doesn't need that. We don't need drastically different power levels, we need armies that have strengths and weaknesses and are designed to match their fluff, not designed to beat face.

And Grey Knights fit that bill now. They make sense for an army that fights Daemons (who are also primarily a close ranged army, who don't have much in the way of AV14 and whose strengths are balanced by their weaknesses) to have what they have and do what they do. You know what Grey Knights do when they need to crack heavy tanks in the fluff? They get allies to do it for them while they deal with the daemonic threat or they melee the sucker to death. Guess what the game lets you do. Get allies and punch tanks. If you want reliable ranged tank cracking, ally a small Guard force in with Autocannons or Lascannons, or an Inquisitor with some Servitors and maybe Jokareo. Or hell, take some Sisters for an Exorcist and Scouting Dominion Meltas.

ForeverARookie wrote:

4 times the shots, at half the range, not a good trade off when everyone except us has 36" weapons or better on infantry.

Really? Everyone?

I find that most of my armies have 24" range max on their infantry.

Perhaps if you're willing to sacrifice number of shots in exchange for range, but this seems like wanting to eat your cake and still have it.

ForeverARookie wrote:

2 shots after moving at short range... 12" is charging distance, and firing it prevents them from charging, making them literally (not figuratively) useless for the army DESIGNED to get into close combat as quickly as they can.

1) 12" without snapshotting is still 12" without snapshotting - and far more than lascannons get.

2) Many of the platforms for Psycannons are Relentless - meaning you can fire it to full effect, at maximum range and still assault afterwards.

3) GK are a mid-range shooting army with some good CC ability. i.e. their combat abilities are meant more for mopping up than as their primary attack source.

ForeverARookie wrote:

The cost for the Psycannon went up for PAGK in spite of becoming useless.

Useless seems like a massive overstatement. It's a S7 assault cannon that can be taken on standard infantry and still fired to lesser effect on the move. Even if you have to remain stationary now to get the maximum use out of it, it's still a good weapon.

ForeverARookie wrote:

Even with an extra foot of range, the Psycannon has:

12" shorter range than the Lascannon.
-2 Strength from the Lascannon
Only counts as AP2 on To-wound/AP rolls of 6, opposed to the Lasannon which is always AP2.
Only has Instant Death on T3 models to the Lascannon's ID for T4.
Only takes a hull point off of AV13 on a 6+, opposed to the Lascannon which succeeds on a 4+

But it's also 4 S7 Rending shots - which are good against a huge variety of targets, and are excellent for stripping Hull Points. Lascannons have a much narrower range of targets, and rely on exploding vehicles - which has become much harder to do in 7th.

Also, whilst a psycannon only removes a hull point from AV13 on a 6+, it still averages more hull points (4/9) than a lascannon (3/9) because it has 4x the shots.

In addition, bear in mind that GKs is an army with a considerable amount of teleportation and deep-striking - which can make shorter-ranged weapons a lot less problematic.


Something I will say is that I agree the lack of weapons that can reliably take down AV14 could be a problem. I just don't think buffing Psycannons is the solution.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Psycannons are fine, if slightly worse for power armor.

The real issue is that our heavy weapons team suffers hardest from that, and we have a lack of high str low AP weapons outside of rending

Purgation squad - Slight point increase, gains Perfect Timing that only works on their squad as a power, and Slow and Purposeful.

That way 4 psycannons in that squad would be something worth it

2nd for the Dreadnought ideas about, allowed to take a weapon on both arms (double las)

I can agree with these ideas. It doesn't turn the Psycannon into an unreasonable God Weapon and ups the usefulness of the Grey Knight Dreadnought.

Unit allowances where you can only field a certain number of certain models. Would fix a lot.

 Vash108 wrote:
Unit allowances where you can only field a certain number of certain models. Would fix a lot.

Do you mean bringing back the ol' 0-1 and then add in some others like 0-2 and 0-3? Or are you talking about how many models in a unit you can take. Because most units have minimum and maximum unit sizes.

Id say the Perfect Timing they would get would replace Hammerhand. Purgation squads arent meant to get into melee.

Only thing else really...I'd let Techmarnies take Servo-Skulls

Self Timing and Banishment, lets say fluff wise, Purgation squads are specalized Nurgle daemon exterminators. Haha

 Vash108 wrote:
Unit allowances where you can only field a certain number of certain models. Would fix a lot.

I think this would be a good idea - especially since the FoC has become all but worthless.

 WrentheFaceless wrote:
Id say the Perfect Timing they would get would replace Hammerhand. Purgation squads arent meant to get into melee.

That'd be pretty fair too.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Vash108 wrote:
Unit allowances where you can only field a certain number of certain models. Would fix a lot.

Do you mean bringing back the ol' 0-1 and then add in some others like 0-2 and 0-3? Or are you talking about how many models in a unit you can take. Because most units have minimum and maximum unit sizes.

I mean put a cap on how many of certain units you can have in an army. Much like Warmachine does.

 Vash108 wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Vash108 wrote:
Unit allowances where you can only field a certain number of certain models. Would fix a lot.

Do you mean bringing back the ol' 0-1 and then add in some others like 0-2 and 0-3? Or are you talking about how many models in a unit you can take. Because most units have minimum and maximum unit sizes.

I mean put a cap on how many of certain units you can have in an army. Much like Warmachine does.

It used to exist, and outside of the Unbound Army, there are still limits on the kinds of units fit in an army. Even beyond that, the reason the caps were lifted were to allow more varied and different armies, and ones that fit the fluff better since they can be very different than the limits that were put on the players. Basically fluff trumped limitations in the long run.

Give my Leman Russes Lumbering Behemoth back, it's change is stupid.

Also, as a game-whole make power weapons ignore armor, this ap2/3/4 nonsense is also stupid.

Glancing hits confer no hullpoint loss, the fact that this is a thing is, yet again, stupid.

 Frankenberry wrote:
Give my Leman Russes Lumbering Behemoth back, it's change is stupid.

Also, as a game-whole make power weapons ignore armor, this ap2/3/4 nonsense is also stupid.

Glancing hits confer no hullpoint loss, the fact that this is a thing is, yet again, stupid.

Soooooooo, basically you want 5th edition back where Terminators were less feasible because of the way the Power Weapons worked despite the fact that a framework for AP values already existed. And to go back to the "nigh-invincible" Rhinos and Razorbacks? Especially the Razorback spam that was run? Because parking lots were so fun to play with/against. :/

The change to the Leman Russ is a bit hit and miss, but frankly I'm not really against the change to Heavy to streamline the glut of special rules in codexes.

Space marines are mostly balanced, but i would change a few units.

Landspeeders- Need the option to swap heavy bolter for assault cannon and need them to be 5 points cheaper.

Dreadnoughts- Need the option to take Grav cannon/w amp. Also need to be able to have 2 of any gun, not just autocannons.

Predator- Autocannon needs 1 more shot and rending standard. Needs the option to take grav cannons (no amp) as sponsons.

Devestators- flakk missles should only cost 5 points. Signum should grant all heavy weapons in the unit +1 BS instead of flat BS5 on one model.

Attack bikes- squads should be able to take up to 5 models.

Tactical Terminators- Should be 37 points base. Should be able to purchase a heavy weapon per 3 guys (not counting the serg).

Assault Termies- Should be 35 points base. Same options.

Vanguard vets- should be able to purchase pistols for 7 points each. Should have a banner that gives +1 WS.

Sternguard- should be able to use special ammo on stormbolters. should be able to take melta bombs on whole unit.

I would put Space Wolves on par with Tau and Eldar, so that we finally have a top tier IOM army aside from 4 knight titans... BS List that is. I'm TIRED of IOM codexes getting nuked to hell.

Give Njal his tempest effects back. Let Wolf Guard be troops again with Logan. Let us take 15-20 man Grey Hunter squads, with a special wep for every 5. Give Skyclaws and Bikers WS/BS 4 instead of 3.

GIVE US SOME DECENT PSYCHIC POWERS!!!

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:
Give my Leman Russes Lumbering Behemoth back, it's change is stupid.

Also, as a game-whole make power weapons ignore armor, this ap2/3/4 nonsense is also stupid.

Glancing hits confer no hullpoint loss, the fact that this is a thing is, yet again, stupid.

Soooooooo, basically you want 5th edition back where Terminators were less feasible because of the way the Power Weapons worked despite the fact that a framework for AP values already existed. And to go back to the "nigh-invincible" Rhinos and Razorbacks? Especially the Razorback spam that was run? Because parking lots were so fun to play with/against. :/

The change to the Leman Russ is a bit hit and miss, but frankly I'm not really against the change to Heavy to streamline the glut of special rules in codexes.

Funny how that's not what my quoted post says at all. But whatever.

 Frankenberry wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:
Give my Leman Russes Lumbering Behemoth back, it's change is stupid.

Also, as a game-whole make power weapons ignore armor, this ap2/3/4 nonsense is also stupid.

Glancing hits confer no hullpoint loss, the fact that this is a thing is, yet again, stupid.

Soooooooo, basically you want 5th edition back where Terminators were less feasible because of the way the Power Weapons worked despite the fact that a framework for AP values already existed. And to go back to the "nigh-invincible" Rhinos and Razorbacks? Especially the Razorback spam that was run? Because parking lots were so fun to play with/against. :/

The change to the Leman Russ is a bit hit and miss, but frankly I'm not really against the change to Heavy to streamline the glut of special rules in codexes.

Funny how that's not what my quoted post says at all. But whatever.

It's not what it says, but that's exactly what it does: it takes us back to 5th and allows what we saw as problems then to come back.

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:

 ClockworkZion wrote:

 Frankenberry wrote:
Give my Leman Russes Lumbering Behemoth back, it's change is stupid.

Also, as a game-whole make power weapons ignore armor, this ap2/3/4 nonsense is also stupid.

Glancing hits confer no hullpoint loss, the fact that this is a thing is, yet again, stupid.

Soooooooo, basically you want 5th edition back where Terminators were less feasible because of the way the Power Weapons worked despite the fact that a framework for AP values already existed. And to go back to the "nigh-invincible" Rhinos and Razorbacks? Especially the Razorback spam that was run? Because parking lots were so fun to play with/against. :/

The change to the Leman Russ is a bit hit and miss, but frankly I'm not really against the change to Heavy to streamline the glut of special rules in codexes.

Funny how that's not what my quoted post says at all. But whatever.

It's not what it says, but that's exactly what it does: it takes us back to 5th and allows what we saw as problems then to come back.

Armor being treated as though it's made out of paper is idiotic; the tank rules are stupid, period. I can go on to list what's actually wrong, but that'll take longer than this thread.

Everything is about points, power weapons aren't worth them; they're suppose to even the odds and/or make something deadly. They don't do that.

No one would build a tank that can mount multiple weapons only to have them completely disabled by the firing of the main gun, not in the year 40000 anyhow.

My point is, I would ask that glaring mistakes be rectified, not 'go back to 5th' like you so eloquently put it. Besides the OP asked what I would change and I'm entitled to state exactly that, so leave me alone.

 Frankenberry wrote:
Armor being treated as though it's made out of paper is idiotic; the tank rules are stupid, period. I can go on to list what's actually wrong, but that'll take longer than this thread.

"Stupid" is not a reason, it's an opinion given to avoid stating the facts. Yes, the vehicles are ultimately more fragile, but when the possibility is to go back to them being only really effectively kill-able by great effort, such great effort mind you, that you could end up using three to four times the points in models just to kill a Rhino, that is not a solution to the problem that actually cures what the new rules were made to fix, that is a desire to go back to the old and comfortable because it is old and comfortable. You want a means to make glances less deadly, I've got an idea: armor saves. AV10 gets nothing and for each point higher on the facing you improve it by one (AV11 gets a 6+, 12 a 5+, 13 a 4+, 14 a 3+ and 15, for the rare things that might sport it, a 2+). It'd still be AP'd out by anti-tank weapons, but it'd not invalidate the ability of glances to make a difference, or weight of fire to help bring something down.

 Frankenberry wrote:
Everything is about points, power weapons aren't worth them; they're suppose to even the odds and/or make something deadly. They don't do that.

"They aren't worth them"? Are you implying that they should be cheaper? Because 10 points on Marines would start to be unreasonable (on S3 models perhaps because it's harder for them to get through T4+ models to make those wounds effect, but not on Marines). The thing is they are better than fighting with your basic equipment, offering ways to ignore armor, and (save for the sword which could use another trick to balance it a bit more since the mace/maul/staff out performs it against everything that isn't a 3+. Maybe a kind of parry save or something even if it's just in a challenge) increase a model's strength. Yes, everything is about points, and in some situations the points aren't aligned quite right to what the model's stats let it do, but the thing is that they aren't bad just because the points are off. Less desirable perhaps, but not automatically bad.

 Frankenberry wrote:
No one would build a tank that can mount multiple weapons only to have them completely disabled by the firing of the main gun, not in the year 40000 anyhow.

You claim that but technically it's a tractor that was converted into a tank. Furthermore, considering that the Imperium is fast losing their ability to create new technology, along with maintain the old (as well as recreate the old) do you really thing the Leman Russ can objectively be said to be the pinnacle of engineering? Additionally if you stop and think about things logically, the reason the ordnance makes other weapons snap fire is because of recoil. Ordnance weapons are very powerful and the recoil from firing them would actually cause the tank to shake. That shaking throws off the aim of the (in the case of the Leman Russ, very human) gunners on those other weapons, thus snap firing. It's a practical carry over from real world physics if you really stop and think about it. I know, it's a fantasy space opera in space but the idea makes sense and just because it nerfed your favorite tank a little doesn't mean you're the only one facing this rule. All Ordnance weapons have this rule. It was only the Leman Russ that ignored it before and considering it got a points drop on almost every version, it's already been compensated for being removed.

 Frankenberry wrote:
My point is, I would ask that glaring mistakes be rectified, not 'go back to 5th' like you so eloquently put it. Besides the OP asked what I would change and I'm entitled to state exactly that, so leave me alone.

The proposed changes did not solve the reasons the first two were implemented, and seeing as this is a public discussion on a public forum I believe that I, as well as anyone and everyone else has a right to post a disagreement with any post in this thread, as we have. with other ideas. This is a discussion, which means ideas are discussed, not blindly agreed with and left to never be examined or contemplated and if you honestly don't like that then perhaps you should consider not sharing your opinions in such public venues.