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.

I 'm more with p5freak, and this is not a math issue, but more a fluff and logical one.

Say that low AP weapons are needed to pen armored units is perfectly logical and make much more sense that a Dread being destroyed by a handful of orks armed with fists and knife. After all, an armor is there to make you safe from light fire.

Maybe vehicles are a little more durable than in 7ed, but the illogical taste of these new rules remain.

Ork boyz have 2 attacks, 3 if they don't take a shoota. To get 4 attacks you either need Ghazghkull nearby when they charge (215 points) or a Weirdboy casting Warpath (62 points and has to successfully cast while being alive and in range). Considering that Orks have pretty much no efficient anti-vehicle shooting ability this edition it seems reasonable that a large unit of Orks that cost about the same as the Dread might be able to kill it in 2 turns provided they reach it intact and the aren't shot off the board after the Dread Falls Back. I really don't see the issue at all.

Rules are there to make the game more balanced and to let people have fun. I'd rather take a game which isn't extremely realistic but it works in terms of fun and balance than a super realistic game which is completely unbalanced and boring to play.

With armors vehicles ARE safe from light fire which can't casue that much damage on average rolls.

The new system seems to work. Everything else doesn't matter.

p5freak wrote:

fresus wrote:
And again, why is it such a problem?

Because they are using basic Melee Weapons, no AP. A Dread, or a Tank, is an armored Unit. AP Weapons are for wounding armored Units, non AP Weapons shouldnt be able to do so.

 Blackie wrote:

I did and my vehicles are way tougher now, while it's not that usual that my boyz destroyed a vehicle with a bunch of S4 hits. You need to consider the game overall, not a specific (and illogic) case.

The game overall has become highly illogical and unrealistic. The Orc Boyz killing armored vehicle is just one of many things wrong with 8th ed.

Im sorry... did you just argue for logic and realism while discussing a scenario in which humanoid fungal animals (notice how thats a thing that doesn't exist) whos technology only works because they believe it does can, over the course of half the game, kill a genetically modified cybernetically enhanced super human encased inside of a metal box with legs and arms?

Logic and realism have no place in 40k. Never has. It's about over the top insanity. A dread being mobbed by orks and hacked to pieces is as 40k as anything else.

The Deer Hunter wrote:
I 'm more with p5freak, and this is not a math issue, but more a fluff and logical one.

Say that low AP weapons are needed to pen armored units is perfectly logical and make much more sense that a Dread being destroyed by a handful of orks armed with fists and knife. After all, an armor is there to make you safe from light fire.

Maybe vehicles are a little more durable than in 7ed, but the illogical taste of these new rules remain.

Why does AP matter now when it didn't before? Are you ok with powerswords on IG destroying vehicles (S3 Ap -3) but not ok with a battle wagon crashing into them at S8 Ap 0 doing anything? There have been S 10 guns in the past few with low AP
Values as well. AP has never been the defining factor in vehicle killing. I also don't see what is "unrealistic" about super humanly strong 8' tall fungus creatures ripping tanks apart eventually, tearing the hatches open killing the crew etc. Even if you feel it is it is better for balance because it eliminate scenarios where one army cannot deal with the other because it brings all armor. You idea only works if tanks are widely limited in what people are allowed to take. Meaning armies get like transports with no guns, and 1-2 other armored vehicles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also by realism dreads should be terrible in close combat they have stubby legs, and one arm that isn't a gun in most cases.

Breng77 wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
I 'm more with p5freak, and this is not a math issue, but more a fluff and logical one.

Say that low AP weapons are needed to pen armored units is perfectly logical and make much more sense that a Dread being destroyed by a handful of orks armed with fists and knife. After all, an armor is there to make you safe from light fire.

Maybe vehicles are a little more durable than in 7ed, but the illogical taste of these new rules remain.

Why does AP matter now when it didn't before? Are you ok with powerswords on IG destroying vehicles (S3 Ap -3) but not ok with a battle wagon crashing into them at S8 Ap 0 doing anything? There have been S 10 guns in the past few with low AP
Values as well. AP has never been the defining factor in vehicle killing. I also don't see what is "unrealistic" about super humanly strong 8' tall fungus creatures ripping tanks apart eventually, tearing the hatches open killing the crew etc. Even if you feel it is it is better for balance because it eliminate scenarios where one army cannot deal with the other because it brings all armor. You idea only works if tanks are widely limited in what people are allowed to take. Meaning armies get like transports with no guns, and 1-2 other armored vehicles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also by realism dreads should be terrible in close combat they have stubby legs, and one arm that isn't a gun in most cases.

That AP did not matter in the past, it was one of the reason a lot of people complains about how fragile vehicles were in 7ed.
Now, 8th was the opportunity to fix this issue, but it was missed, it seems.
In a different way but nothing changed, vehicles have not been fixed, they remain too vulnerable to a vast array of weapons that should not be able to harm armour.

I mean I think that the orks being able to kill vehicles is incredibly fluffy and makes them feel like what they actually are. Honestly the whole idea of anything can hurt anything is the very real fact that lucky shots do happen. Could anybody see a horde of 20 orks literally piling onto a dreadnought, forcing it to fall over and using all of there strength to rip the thing apart, or perhaps they don't even do that. Perhaps a few choppers of the orks literally break in the joints of the dreadnought and forces it to cease up. This case can be applied anywhere, perhaps the lucky lasgun shot finds the vision slit in a rhino, or happens to find its way into the exhaust of the tank. 8th is so far the most fluffy edition I've ever played and quite frankly the anything wounding anything helps balance as well as theme the game.

I got into this discussion yesterday.

8th edition has made vehicles way more resilient. A single lascannon shot can't blow up most vehicles (Are there any 6 wound vehicles?)

The problem is small arms nibbling down vehicles. Astra Militarum lasguns wound on 6s, but st 4 weapons like bolters and ork shootas wound toughness 7 vehicles on 5-6.

I like the fact that any unit has a chance of wounding something. How many games did I play that ended because my opponent shot all my lascannons and my entire army couldn't hurt his anymore? I lost count.

I think raising the toughness by 1 point on vehicles would be a good fix. st3 lasguns and st4 bolters would wound toughness 8 on 6 then. Even a st 9 lascannon wounds a leman russ (now toughtness 9) on 4+ then.

The Deer Hunter wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

The Deer Hunter wrote:
I 'm more with p5freak, and this is not a math issue, but more a fluff and logical one.

Say that low AP weapons are needed to pen armored units is perfectly logical and make much more sense that a Dread being destroyed by a handful of orks armed with fists and knife. After all, an armor is there to make you safe from light fire.

Maybe vehicles are a little more durable than in 7ed, but the illogical taste of these new rules remain.

Why does AP matter now when it didn't before? Are you ok with powerswords on IG destroying vehicles (S3 Ap -3) but not ok with a battle wagon crashing into them at S8 Ap 0 doing anything? There have been S 10 guns in the past few with low AP
Values as well. AP has never been the defining factor in vehicle killing. I also don't see what is "unrealistic" about super humanly strong 8' tall fungus creatures ripping tanks apart eventually, tearing the hatches open killing the crew etc. Even if you feel it is it is better for balance because it eliminate scenarios where one army cannot deal with the other because it brings all armor. You idea only works if tanks are widely limited in what people are allowed to take. Meaning armies get like transports with no guns, and 1-2 other armored vehicles.

Especially because having all 20 models able to swing is a large assumption.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also by realism dreads should be terrible in close combat they have stubby legs, and one arm that isn't a gun in most cases.

That AP did not matter in the past, it was one of the reason a lot of people complains about how fragile vehicles were in 7ed.
Now, 8th was the opportunity to fix this issue, but it was missed, it seems.
In a different way but nothing changed, vehicles have not been fixed, they remain too vulnerable to a vast array of weapons that should not be able to harm armour.

The issue in 7th is that mid S no AP weapons were the way to go against vehicles, now that is not the case. Now I would have liked more use of T8-10 or more but that is a unit design issue not a core rules issue. I mean the complaint that 20 orks can chew through a dread in 2 turns isn't a problem when one 4 lascannon dev squad does it in a single shooting phase. High S high Ap, high damage weapons are the go to against vehicles as it should be.

Vehicles aren't really tissue paper though. If anything the opposite. Far more durable. No one-shotted Leman Russes anymore. We're enjoying vehicles a lot.

Martel732 wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
The 2D6 system was not a dumpster fire. But, you're Martel so...carry on.

It absolutely was, because it encouraged weapons that rendered "normal" armor useless. Unless you want 5 pt marines, 2D6 saves can't be in the game.

2d6 saves are not and have never been a dumpster fire, so long as we are talking 2d6 pick one, added together i dont want.

The other thing is that the dread will be doing multiple wounds per hit on the ork unit so its 4 attacks = 2 hits = 6 wounds so 5 orks dead ...remember the dread combat weapon does 3 wounds per hit ..to the unit ...if it does not have a dread cc weapon why did it let slow orks catch it ..instead of mowing them down at range with its 4 autocannons or its assualt cannon ..and other ranged weapon long before the ork boyz ever got close..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In 30 years and 8 sets of rules vehicles are no longer tissue paper ..or damn near invulnerable..(remember when a single rhino could change the course of a battle) ..one 5 man group of beakies with stormbolters can no longer remove 5 buggies in a single round of long range fire..They may kill one of the 5 now but not all 5 in a single volley

morfydd wrote:
The other thing is that the dread will be doing multiple wounds per hit on the ork unit so its 4 attacks = 2 hits = 6 wounds so 5 orks dead ...remember the dread combat weapon does 3 wounds per hit ..to the unit ...if it does not have a dread cc weapon why did it let slow orks catch it ..instead of mowing them down at range with its 4 autocannons or its assualt cannon ..and other ranged weapon long before the ork boyz ever got close..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In 30 years and 8 sets of rules vehicles are no longer tissue paper ..or damn near invulnerable..(remember when a single rhino could change the course of a battle) ..one 5 man group of beakies with stormbolters can no longer remove 5 buggies in a single round of long range fire..They may kill one of the 5 now but not all 5 in a single volley

Think you're misunderstanding the mechanic. You can't kill more models then you hit. If you only hit 2 guys, you only kill 2 guys. The multiple damage is inflicted on multi-wound models.

Ahh I see where I missed that the dread CC weapon no longer hits the unit but specific models ..still i would never allow a walker into cc with a group of boyz back off and whittle them down to nothing quickly ...walkers should all look out for getting tarpitted

 Formosa wrote:

Martel732 wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
The 2D6 system was not a dumpster fire. But, you're Martel so...carry on.

It absolutely was, because it encouraged weapons that rendered "normal" armor useless. Unless you want 5 pt marines, 2D6 saves can't be in the game.

2d6 saves are not and have never been a dumpster fire, so long as we are talking 2d6 pick one, added together i dont want.

I'm talking about the adding them together rule from 2nd. 2D6 pick one is just a reroll built in.

Considering one autocannon can't kill a Dreadnought by itself in one turn anymore - nor, for that matter, can a single meltagun or lascannon, no. Vehicles are not 'tissue paper'. As others have already pointed out, they are much more resilient this edition.

Even thematically 20 Ork boys eventually tearing a Dreadnought apart works; nothing is 100% armor and nothing armored is 100% invulnerable. There are access panels, weak points, sensors, joints, openings in the armor, vents, etc., that given time and opportunity an attacker could exploit to destroy it. Twenty+ Orks literally swamping a Dreadnought and smashing it apart even as it whirls, smashes, crushes, and kills the handful it can reach with its fist seems very 40k.

Thank you, you've encapsulated the sillyness of the argument in a single point.

A lascannon can only drop a handful of vehicles in a single shot now.

Somehow they are all paper tigers though...

 djones520 wrote:
Thank you, you've encapsulated the sillyness of the argument in a single point.

A lascannon can only drop a handful of vehicles in a single shot now.

Somehow they are all paper tigers though...

I think you misread him. A Lascannon can kill 0 vehicles in single shot.

Lets not forget that this thread was started by someone who never played the game.

 Lance845 wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Thank you, you've encapsulated the sillyness of the argument in a single point.

A lascannon can only drop a handful of vehicles in a single shot now.

Somehow they are all paper tigers though...

I think you misread him. A Lascannon can kill 0 vehicles in single shot.

Lets not forget that this thread was started by someone who never played the game.

Actually, there are some out there that only have 6 wounds. Like the War Walker and Vyper for example. So yes, a Lascannon can, but only the "weakest" vehicles.

 djones520 wrote:

 Lance845 wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Thank you, you've encapsulated the sillyness of the argument in a single point.

A lascannon can only drop a handful of vehicles in a single shot now.

Somehow they are all paper tigers though...

I think you misread him. A Lascannon can kill 0 vehicles in single shot.

Lets not forget that this thread was started by someone who never played the game.

Actually, there are some out there that only have 6 wounds. Like the War Walker and Vyper for example. So yes, a Lascannon can, but only the "weakest" vehicles.

And venoms, and Skyweavers. A handful of tanks that used to be AV10 open-topped, 2HP in most cases.
But they're still much more resilient to bolter fire (or boyz in melee) than they used to. So overall more durable.

 Blackie wrote:
I disagree, ork boyz are 1W dudes with 5'' movement and 6+ save. It's not that easy to charge with 20 boyz into a dread and kill it. Before turn 3 it's even impossible.

Da Jump says hello.

xlDuke wrote:Ork boyz have 2 attacks, 3 if they don't take a shoota. To get 4 attacks you either need Ghazghkull nearby when they charge (215 points) or a Weirdboy casting Warpath (62 points and has to successfully cast while being alive and in range). Considering that Orks have pretty much no efficient anti-vehicle shooting ability this edition it seems reasonable that a large unit of Orks that cost about the same as the Dread might be able to kill it in 2 turns provided they reach it intact and the aren't shot off the board after the Dread Falls Back. I really don't see the issue at all.

You are wrong. A Boy has 2 Attacks, 3 with Choppa. Green Tide gives them +1 Attack when there are 20+ Boyz in that Unit, thats 4 Attacks. With Ghazghkull its 5 Attacks, when they charge, and with Warpath its 6 Attacks.

Breng77 wrote:I also don't see what is "unrealistic" about super humanly strong 8' tall fungus creatures ripping tanks apart eventually, tearing the hatches open killing the crew etc.

What super Human Strength ? A Space Marine has S4 as well.

I wasn't wrong, I did however forget the Green Tide rule. A human is S3, a superhuman Space Marine is S4. Ergo superhuman strength starts at S4.

p5freak wrote:


You are wrong. A Boy has 2 Attacks, 3 with Choppa. Green Tide gives them +1 Attack when there are 20+ Boyz in that Unit, thats 4 Attacks. With Ghazghkull its 5 Attacks, when they charge, and with Warpath its 6 Attacks.

And that makes 397 points of orks. Not exactly cheap for 20 t-shirt save models and 2 footslogging characters.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
I disagree, ork boyz are 1W dudes with 5'' movement and 6+ save. It's not that easy to charge with 20 boyz into a dread and kill it. Before turn 3 it's even impossible.

Da Jump says hello.

Right, but you have to play that specific tactic. And succeding a charge from deepstrike isn't automatic, there more odds to fail that charge, even with the re-rolls. You fail and you'll have a juicy target for the enemy's anti infantry weapons which are now in rapid fire range, hello bolters!

The possibility of killing a vehicle due to choppa hits it's real, but it won't happen in every game, it's nothing like hordes of ork boyz are going to wreck a lot of vehicles thanks to their S4 attacks.

p5freak wrote:

What super Human Strength ? A Space Marine has S4 as well.

*face palm*

For a dread to be destroyed by S4 AP0 BS5+ attacks you only need 216 of them. Half that for WS3+ in cc. Piece of cake.

Vehicles are so much more durable than before that the higher costs soon appear to be reasonable for most of them. I am still on the fence about LS though. Needs more games to tell.

p5freak wrote:

Breng77 wrote:I also don't see what is "unrealistic" about super humanly strong 8' tall fungus creatures ripping tanks apart eventually, tearing the hatches open killing the crew etc.

What super Human Strength ? A Space Marine has S4 as well.

ummmm....Space Marines are super humans. So proving my point for me, thanks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
I disagree, ork boyz are 1W dudes with 5'' movement and 6+ save. It's not that easy to charge with 20 boyz into a dread and kill it. Before turn 3 it's even impossible.

Da Jump says hello.

Even with Da jump it is not a guarantee that 20 boyz will actually get to attack. Some die in overwatch, some end up out of engagement after they have moved, and suddenly all 20 don't get to attack. Now it is true that an undefended dread can be charged turn 1, but if that happens you have allowed it to happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
It is also amusing that the only example that keeps getting used is a dread. One of the only examples where the Orks were hitting on front armor. What about a Wave Serpent, or Chimera.

7th Edition

20 orks charge, no overwatch from vehicles = 80 attacks, 53 hits, 8.89 hull points of damage. So kills it with room to spare in 1 round of combat. They almost kill it 3 times over. This is what happened for any AV 10 rear vehicle.

8th Edition

20 orks charge, likely 1 dies in overwatch, so no bonus attack, they get 57 attacks = 38 hits = 12.67 wounds = 4.22 unsaved wounds. Chimera is still alive with 6 wounds remaining.

Even if we assume 20 get to combat, that only goes up to 5.9 wounds, and the chimera is still alive.


Tell me again how vehicles are so much less durable this edition.

The vehicles that are slightly less durable this edition are ones that had Rear armor 11+, and then only against low strength attacks.

Uh... In 7th 20 Boyz could kill almost any vehicle other than a Walker in one round of combat since they hit the rear armor and could hit automatically. Plus they could actually get there after disembarking after their ride moved (which they can't now) unless their wagon got blown up (which was easier to do in the last edition).

p5freak wrote:

Breng77 wrote:I also don't see what is "unrealistic" about super humanly strong 8' tall fungus creatures ripping tanks apart eventually, tearing the hatches open killing the crew etc.

What super Human Strength ? A Space Marine has S4 as well.

That's a joke, right? Right?

I love that moment when it is revealed how useless arguing with someone is. Such freedom!

Y'know, I almost agree that it's unrealistic and unfluffy to have a horde of Boyz ripping apart a dread, but here's the snag: with the diversity of units that 40k is trying to represent, you get realism XOR fun gameplay.

Yes, it's realistic for vehicles to ignore small arms fire entirely, and for them to die to a single lucky penetrating hit. It's also maddeningly obnoxious from a gameplay perspective. Remember playing against Knights in 7e, using an army that didn't spam anti-knight weapons? That sucked. I'm glad that's gone. If we get better, less messy, less maddening gameplay by sacrificing realism, then sacrifice the bloody realism. It's not like 40k was ever a detailed simulationist ruleset, anyway.