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.

Vaktathi wrote:Hrm, I'd argue that dreadnoughts look perfectly capable of stuff like that, and have been shown to do such things in games like Dawn of War. Maulerfiends certainly look like they're capable of biting off heads, bear hugs, etc. Decimators and Contemptor dreads look every bit as flexible as most MC's. The Helbrute models don't look particularly inarticulate, certainly not any less so than something like a Carnifex.

I mean, Sentinels and War Walkers and Reaver Titans don't look particularly capable in that regard, but many other walkers look very articulate.

How does that look like it can bear hug? Heck it couldn't manage more than a bumping.

If you were thinking of this. Then it is Str10 AP2 due to that extra articulated arm...called a dreadnought close combat weapon.


Again Maulerfiends have Str10 AP2 attacks. In fact everyone of those examples you give has Str10 AP2 attacks when they have the ability to bite or grab.

Notice the carnifex either has the ability to scissor, grab and rip, or bite in all of it's forms...some of the MC can even constrict.

Notice the forgefiend lost it's ability to bite.


Though I do admit I am not sure why the CSM dinobots are not MC. I assume much more of them is just well sculpted machine than is obvious at first sight.

 ansacs wrote:

Though I do admit I am not sure why the CSM dinobots are not MC. I assume much more of them is just well sculpted machine than is obvious at first sight.

Well, they're >90% mechanical iirc. Helbrute's closer to MC than a maulerfiend cause of the ammount of daemon flesh.

Yeah, but dread knights and riptides are also mostly mechanical, and are mcs. Canonic spyders as well.

I agree with the guy who said fantasy has a better system, where strength goes up against armor, and modifies it. In fantasy if I remember correctly s4 is -1 to armor save, s5 -2 and so on. You would probably need to raise up the modifying number in 40k as s 4 is very common, or improve all saves by 1, but it is a better system, than the full save or no save we have now.

Again, this comes down to one of the elephants in the room with 40k's rules - the distinction between vehicles and monstrous creatures makes no sense. Arbitrarily different toughness/armor systems, arbitrary differences in how they behave in close combat, lopsided in MCs' favor, such that clearly mechanical walkers like Riptides and Dreadknights get called MCs purely so they function better. A Riptide kicking someone is AP2, while a Contemptor dreadnought kicking someone doesn't scratch the paint on their armor. It's a jumbled mess.

Some people are talking about the Dreadknight here. I am not sure what your point is, because the Dreadknight has Powerfist, Greatsword or Thunder Hammer, all of which are AP2 to start. Even without Smash, the Dreadknight will still murder anything with high armor.

I referenced the dreadknight as an example of something clearly mechanical that is an MC in reference to a maulerfiend being mostly mechnical and that making it a walker.

If anything to me an organic robot like the maulerfiend is much more an MC than a dreadknight which is armor piloted by a person, which is essentially no different from a sentinel, or warwalker. IT was the start of when GW began to blur the difference between a walker and an MC.

As for smash, it should definitely stay AP 2, most MCs have a relatively low quantity of attacks for their cost, at moderately high strength, but given how WS works, they usually are only doing 1 or 2 wounds. Smash got the needed change in 7th so it wasn't a bunch of S10 attacks. Other than that MCs are good at killing Elite units, but relatively poor at killing large units.

 CalgarsPimpHand wrote:
Again, this comes down to one of the elephants in the room with 40k's rules - the distinction between vehicles and monstrous creatures makes no sense. Arbitrarily different toughness/armor systems, arbitrary differences in how they behave in close combat, lopsided in MCs' favor, such that clearly mechanical walkers like Riptides and Dreadknights get called MCs purely so they function better. A Riptide kicking someone is AP2, while a Contemptor dreadnought kicking someone doesn't scratch the paint on their armor. It's a jumbled mess.

Its not arbitrary. they are different. so they have duifferent rules. How is that arbitrary?

I think the existence of the rules are not abitrary, but how they are applied is very abritrary.

In so far as something is a walker vs MC, a dreadnaught and a dreadknight are not all that different in composition (one is a mechanical construct crewed by a near dead space marine, the other is a mechanical construct crewed by a fully functioning space marine.) Same holds true for a riptide, it is a suit of armor piloted by a Tau pilot, in that case it probably comes back to other suits being infantry, and so making it a MC is closer to infantry than a walker.

In general eliminating walkers (or changing them to represent the more walking tank type walkers like warwalkers and senitnels) would be better than having abitrary lines between MCs and Walkers as to what qualifies a unit to be a walker vs an MC.