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.

FNP should be harder to come by or cost a lot more on units with T6 or even T5 as well. It's basically a stacking invuln save for those units.

I think I'd broadly agree with that. It helps durability a lot.

Also, units that are hard to kill shouldn't have super-outstanding firepower, and vice versa, broadly speaking, or should at least be forced to get close to use what firepower they have, thus putting them at risk from short-ranged guns and assault.

Incidentally, that's why I think the ion accelerator is a stupid, ridiculous piece of crap that's way too good for what you pay, because it lets an already durable model dance around out of range of almost everything while still having enough firepower to be scary.

GMCs being immune to poison was unnecessary as well. The armor save plus FNP was already enough defense. Same reason why poison is worthless vs the Riptide.

Martel732 wrote:
GMCs being immune to poison was unnecessary as well. The armor save plus FNP was already enough defense. Same reason why poison is worthless vs the Riptide.

Well that's down to purely mechanics and a hold-over from 4th Ed Apocalypse supplement. A Gargantuan Creature like a Heirophant is supposed to be insanely hard to kill. That idea is broken by a Drop Pod squad of Sternguard pumping 2 Hellfire Rounds into it, which after armour saves was around 1.8 wounds easy. At the time, and remember this was the most popular unit out of the most popular codex as well, this meant for the price of 1 Hierodule you could just those 4 Sternguard in a Drop Pod, add in Lysander Bolter Drill (or just go IF these days) and knock off half its wounds, average, per turn. Plus you'd then have another half-dozen weapons shoot at it and bring to 1 or 0 wounds instantly. So Poison and similar "always wound on X+" were changed to a 6+ so that you actually had to shoot your big guns at it, people actually bought the £400 model because it wouldn't die turn 1.

But yes, these days its silly to have FNP and saves aND Immune to Poison. Immunity to poison is still a decent rule, but not when combined like this, as the scenario written above is still a fairly likely scenario otherwise.

Incidentally, that "forced to get close" angle is the reason that - at least in my meta - Ghostkeels don't get much rage directed at them. Their longest ranged gun is 24", and it's AP4 (but S7 and Heavy 6, so still dangerous) - so they have to get close, where they actually start taking damage from short-range weapons like meltas, double-tapping plasma and bolters. (Plasma is better than grav without amps against the Ghostkeel because of drones making its majority Sv 4+)

Sure, you'll never kill it with lascannons, but bolters kill it about as fast as they do Plague Marines (who are tough, but not stupidly so).

That's what's wrong with the Riptide - too much range together with its durability. (Think about how much less rage-inducing the HBC+fusion blaster combo is, relative to IA+SMS... And it's not because the HBC and FB suck, because mostly they don't.)

And I'll mostly agree about GCs not needing the poison boost. Maybe the Tyranid ones specifically, but honestly, if extensive playtesting still has them dying too often to Sternies and splinter cannons, give them +1W or something, or maybe IWND. (And again, only the giant bugs. Wraithknights don't need that, and probably the big daemons don't either.)

I've always found that while most vehicles are where they need to be now, Walkers are still kind of under-powered. It's good that loyalist Dreadnoughts finally got some love in the area of extra attacks.

I think one of the major problems is that GW really doesn't have a defined role for what a walker should be there for. If we look at why various modern military groups are looking into walker systems for vehicles, and in most cases its for rough terrain that other vehicles have difficulty navigating or simply can't pass though.

My suggestion for improving Walkers:
* Give all Walkers the Move Through Cover special rule, or at least allow them to auto-pass most dangerous terrain tests. (( The whole purpose of a walker is for rough terrain, silly that they don't have this rule. ))
* Allow them to ignore the first Immobilized result they suffer each game, treating it as Crew Stunned instead. (( Represents them being walkers and not being crippled by having one of their legs damaged. ))
* Enemy units can't attack Rear Armour when a Walker is Immobilized so long as the Walker has at least one functioning Melee weapon left. (( I find it strange that Walkers with equipped Melee weapons can't properly defend themselves when Immobilized, even though they can usually still move their torso around. ))
* Grenade attacks made during the Assault Phase against Walkers which are not Immobilized only ever hit on a To Hit roll of 6. (( Always stuck me as odd that it was usually pretty easy to stick a grenade to something that can essentially crush people, even if it doesn't hit you with the brunt of its CCW it can still probably generate enough force from one of its limbs to knock away people trying to plant grenades on it. ))

 Marik Law wrote:
I've always found that while most vehicles are where they need to be now, Walkers are still kind of under-powered. It's good that loyalist Dreadnoughts finally got some love in the area of extra attacks.

I think one of the major problems is that GW really doesn't have a defined role for what a walker should be there for. If we look at why various modern military groups are looking into walker systems for vehicles, and in most cases its for rough terrain that other vehicles have difficulty navigating or simply can't pass though.

My suggestion for improving Walkers:
* Give all Walkers the Move Through Cover special rule, or at least allow them to auto-pass most dangerous terrain tests. (( The whole purpose of a walker is for rough terrain, silly that they don't have this rule. ))
* Allow them to ignore the first Immobilized result they suffer each game, treating it as Crew Stunned instead. (( Represents them being walkers and not being crippled by having one of their legs damaged. ))
* Enemy units can't attack Rear Armour when a Walker is Immobilized so long as the Walker has at least one functioning Melee weapon left. (( I find it strange that Walkers with equipped Melee weapons can't properly defend themselves when Immobilized, even though they can usually still move their torso around. ))
* Grenade attacks made during the Assault Phase against Walkers which are not Immobilized only ever hit on a To Hit roll of 6. (( Always stuck me as odd that it was usually pretty easy to stick a grenade to something that can essentially crush people, even if it doesn't hit you with the brunt of its CCW it can still probably generate enough force from one of its limbs to knock away people trying to plant grenades on it. ))

Tanks are pure crap. I don't know what you are talking about.

Martel732 wrote:

 Marik Law wrote:
I've always found that while most vehicles are where they need to be now, Walkers are still kind of under-powered. It's good that loyalist Dreadnoughts finally got some love in the area of extra attacks.

I think one of the major problems is that GW really doesn't have a defined role for what a walker should be there for. If we look at why various modern military groups are looking into walker systems for vehicles, and in most cases its for rough terrain that other vehicles have difficulty navigating or simply can't pass though.

My suggestion for improving Walkers:
* Give all Walkers the Move Through Cover special rule, or at least allow them to auto-pass most dangerous terrain tests. (( The whole purpose of a walker is for rough terrain, silly that they don't have this rule. ))
* Allow them to ignore the first Immobilized result they suffer each game, treating it as Crew Stunned instead. (( Represents them being walkers and not being crippled by having one of their legs damaged. ))
* Enemy units can't attack Rear Armour when a Walker is Immobilized so long as the Walker has at least one functioning Melee weapon left. (( I find it strange that Walkers with equipped Melee weapons can't properly defend themselves when Immobilized, even though they can usually still move their torso around. ))
* Grenade attacks made during the Assault Phase against Walkers which are not Immobilized only ever hit on a To Hit roll of 6. (( Always stuck me as odd that it was usually pretty easy to stick a grenade to something that can essentially crush people, even if it doesn't hit you with the brunt of its CCW it can still probably generate enough force from one of its limbs to knock away people trying to plant grenades on it. ))

Tanks are pure crap. I don't know what you are talking about.

Tanks are just tanks. Tanks are the "base" vehicle with all other units being a derivitive of the class with additional rules. Tanks have nothing to add aside from the occassional Tank Shock or Ram. They usually have higher armour thannon-tanks though.

I do get what you are saying though, so maybe giving all tanks a 5+ save vs glancing hits? Just something to add resiliency.

All tanks have hull points, and can only fire all weapons if they are stationary. (Unless they are fast) That makes them pretty crappy right there.

The first thing I'd try is 4+ armor for most tanks/vehicles. Playtest that.

Martel732 wrote:
All tanks have hull points, and can only fire all weapons if they are stationary. (Unless they are fast) That makes them pretty crappy right there.

The first thing I'd try is 4+ armor for most tanks/vehicles. Playtest that.

As I said earlier, tanks are the base unit. Tanks aren't bad, other vehicles have additional rules to make them better. Such as fast; more movement and weapons. Skimmers ignore terrain. Flyers all above. Heavy more guns. Open Topped and Transport as a new feature. Superheavy as better. Walkers in assault.

They are better, not because tanks are worse, but because they have more than base vehicle rules

Tanks are garbage. I know I like them and play them as an IH player, but they are still garbage. There are some special snowflake tanks that are good (usually forgeworld models) that are good, but can be only taken by themselves and never part of a detachment or formation.

Tanks are garbage for two reasons. They can't effectively move and shoot and they are easy to destroy. Even av14 Land raiders aren't that hard to kill. If tanks had a built in power of the machine spirit esq ability that stacked with PotMS maybe. maybe something that gave a bonus of some kind for being stationary or if they only have one gun and potms already. And of course some you know, durability. I can't figure out how a living creature is somehow more durable than a reinforced metal structure designed to be resistant to damage.

A lot of it seems to be that they're pricing the components fairly seperately.

A weapon on a vehicle has a different value (sometimes more, sometimes less) than on infantry, or even an MC.

Platforms just aren't paying their price much of the time.

Bharring wrote:
A lot of it seems to be that they're pricing the components fairly seperately.

A weapon on a vehicle has a different value (sometimes more, sometimes less) than on infantry, or even an MC.

Platforms just aren't paying their price much of the time.

Or they overpay. One of the two it seems. I hope when they finally do an 8th edition they get rid of universal upgrade costs and base the cost on how effective it will be on a given unit and how effective a given unit is with said upgrade. Then balance codecies internally and externally as much as possible. And bring back the whole rock paper scissors dynamic which seems mostly gone. I know already I am wishing for the impossible but if only lol.

I think that comparing the Dreadnaught and the Wraithlord is a great comparison. One is an MC, the other is a Walker. Yet with their rules, they areven so close to each other in value (per pojnt).

Then you look at the Dread vs a Riptide or NDK, and cry.

Broader ideas to fix vehicles:

TANKS
* Glancing Hits against Front and Side Armour do not result in a Hull Point loss. Instead, if a vehicle's Side Armour has taken a Glancing Hit, roll a D6. On a roll of 1-4, the vehicle suffers Crew Shaken. On a roll of 5 or 6, the vehicle suffers Crew Stunned.
* Things like ramming and tank shock need to be refined and improved. Running infantry units down with vehicles just doesn't seem worth it with the rules how they are.
(( Design Concept: Tanks are designed to have front armour that slopes, allowing glancing shots to just slide off without doing any kind of meaningful damage. Side armour is also made to resist attacks, though is typically less angled. I see this as making Tanks fit their combat role a bit more as armoured conveyance and fire support. ))

WALKERS
* Give Move Through Cover.
* Walkers ignore the first Immobilized result they receive each game. They still lose a Hull Point as normal.
* Enemy units attack Front Armour against immobilized Walkers in close combat, so long as that Walker still has a Melee weapon. If it doesn't, attacks are made against Rear Armour as normal.

CHARIOTS
* Ignores Weapon Destroyed results. They still lose a Hull Point as normal.
* Ignores first Immobilized result they receive each game. They still lose a Hull Point as normal.

FAST VEHICLES
* May move up to an additional 6" during the Movement Phase.

My personal fix to vehicles is to make it so glancing hits can never take the last hull point off a vehicle. Add in a little something for geting resistance to the vehicle damage chart the more hull points you have andit starts working pretty well..

A good start to balance MC is to make them like AoS in regards to wounds, where they lose efficiency as they suffer more damage.