Switch Theme:

Very simple fixes for Astra Militarum tank lists  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in gb
Lord of the Fleet






London

I don't get the constant emphasis on having to speed up the game. FRFSRF is fine as it is, no need to change it just to save a couple of mins.

   
Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

 Valkyrie wrote:
I don't get the constant emphasis on having to speed up the game. FRFSRF is fine as it is, no need to change it just to save a couple of mins.
Most people don’t enjoy rolling over 50 dice to kill one model. Or do a single wound, if they’re in cover.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block




I missed the "rather than", I thought you were going double shots that auto-hit.

But auto-hitting on 9 shots would make TA! and BID! meaningless, as 9 auto-hits is (1W against MEQ) better than 9 shots on 4s w/RR1s (.58W). It's also better than +1 to Hit and +1 to wound combined (.89W).





   
Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

If those are rendered meaningless by auto-hitting, they also rendered meaningless by current mechanics.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block




I was watching Tabletop Titans last night, and Bridgar's idea I think was a missing key to the puzzle.

Change orders to the command phase, and rules as follows:
- Take Aim! (Bridgar): +1 to hit
- Bring It Down (Bridgar): +1 to wound
- MMM! Auto-advance 6"
- Get Back in the Fight / Back Pedal (for vehicles, idea from Jarms48): Unit that fell back can still shoot this turn
- Fix Bayonets! Fight immediately, if charged the charging unit loses bonuses for charging. guard squad can shoot overwatch
- Forwards for the Emperor: unit can shoot even if it advanced this turn (e.g. roll normally for advancing). Units do not suffer the -1 to hit penalty for advancing & shooting assault weapons.
- drop FRFSRF

Now, there a several changes to enable these orders
-Lasguns are Assault 3 (with +1 to hit, this is 2W, with +1 to W it's 2.2W against MEQ for a 9-man squad)
-troops are taken in platoons, LR's, Hellhounds and Sentinels are taken in squadrons and orders affect the whole platoon/squadron. You can do the same thing for Artillery & Hydras, using Master of Ordinance & Officer of the fleet
-being within 6" of the Lt/Squadron leader provides RR1s to Wound

This presents a choice in the orders, as TA! is pretty close to BID!, but each is situationally better. TA! brings normal LRs up to a TC level, which is plenty lethal. This also boosts Hellhounds and Sentinels where they might actually do something.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/10/02 15:19:37


 
   
Made in us
Tough-as-Nails Ork Boy




Honestly Tanks need buffs in two of these three categories, firepower, price and durability. I also feel that the use of ordinance weapons allows for more utility in shell types, particularly for Leman Russ Eradicators. I personally dislike double shoot mechanics, just buff the main gun its quicker to resolve and doesn't require odd movement rules.

Personally I'd work my way up from the bottom, starting with the humble Chimera IFV. I'd buff its iconic gun, the multilaser, if it was say, heavy 5 it may see more use and have a niche as the anti horde gun, now that the heavy bolter is more of an MEQ buster.

I'd change up the various turret weapons of the tanks in general. But most importantly, the main gun of each Leman Russ should hit on a either a 2+ or a 3+ depending upon which variant you are using.

A Leman Russ Vanquisher with a single shot variant of the gun on a Macharius Vanquisher is a beast. It would lol one shots most Dreadnoughts and this is one of the guns I'd had set up to hit on 2s. I'd stat it at Strength 14, AP-5 and Damage 9, make it a gun that takes a chunk out of what it hits, but make it risky as it could bounce off an invuln or what have you. This is one that I think should hit on a 2, capable of chunking most things with a single shot, and able to be tooled into a potent AT weapon.

The Battlecannon on a regular russ should be the generic weapon, it should be strong, don't get me wrong, but it should be a jack of all trades weapon, able to use the appropriate shell for particular situation, I propose a Frag/Krak Shell type deal. Have the Krak Shell be something akin to a strength 10 AP-3 d3+3 damage shot and a 2d6 Blast, Strength 6, AP-1 D2 (basically 2 heavy mortar shots) Biggest thing for this Russ is to probably make it by far the cheapest tank in its weight class, they're 195 points rn for the classic, BC, Lascannon, two heavy bolter set up, I'd say, drop the base cost of the Russ Chassis to 120. That 20 point drop IMO would help Guard Armor a LOT

Have the Eradicator just have a variety of shells, one which plays into its radiation niche, but tweak the effects depending upon which one is chosen. Perhaps a shell which ignores cover with similar effects to the one currently, then another which reduces enemy movement and advance rolls, and another which is a -1 T effect provided it hits (not stackable) Have those two utility shells be weaker then the regular shell.

The Executioner should have a weapon similar to the heavy plasma cannon on a Dreadnought, starting at Strength 7 AP-3 D2 and overcharging to Stength 8 AP-3 D3. I'm almost tempted to go a similar route to the Morkanaut's gun, have it be 3d3 shots instead of d6.

The Leman Russ Exterminator, I'd just give it more shots, more in line with the output of the Ironstrider, perhaps 12 shots with AP-2 but otherwise unaltered.

For the Demo Cannon Russ, I'd mostly leave as is, but I'd create a second shell type, call the current one a Shatter Shell and add a frag shell option, with an option for splash damage, IE if this hits a unit, if there's another unit near it, they'd take much reduced damage, but damage still. I just don't know what would be a good profile for its frag shell, it would need to be more potent then a Leman Russ Battle Cannon shot.

For The Russ Punisher, I'd just bump its ROF to 40, drop the double shoot and have it be a light infantry blender. Simple solution, just a bucket of strength 5 shots.
   
Made in us
Regular Dakkanaut






I've been having fun with a seven tank spearhead and a battalion of lamda lions that drop wherever needed. Smart use of line of sight blocking and the ability to drop plasma squads in when needed to kill a looming threat makes it reasonably survivable/killy when there's terrain. When the terrain isn't favorable I run into challenges with updated armies
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block




panzerfront14 wrote:
Honestly Tanks need buffs in two of these three categories, firepower, price and durability. I also feel that the use of ordinance weapons allows for more utility in shell types, particularly for Leman Russ Eradicators. I personally dislike double shoot mechanics, just buff the main gun its quicker to resolve and doesn't require odd movement rules.


I totally agree on the firepower/durability/points and double-shoot, we're way overcosted for too little output. Looking at the AdMech Onager Dunecrawler, the DuneCrawler has D6 S8 AP-3 D2 shots at BS3, but is only T7 with a 5++. That's roughly comparable to a Tank Commander with a battle cannon, yet the Dunecrawler is 115 points, the TC is 205. I don't think the extra D6 shots for moving < 6" is worth 90 points. Even with -1D and a 2+ armor, we're still (IMHO) not near 200 points for a TC (though getting closer)

I'm not sure I agree with the different types of shells. We have enough options with the main gun on a LR, we just need a reason to take something besides the DC. Honestly, I'd just move the Exterminator into Legends. The autocannon just sucks so badly, and it's in high competition for a slot, why deal with it. So go with:
-Vanquisher: d6 shots, S12, AP-4, D6+d3 damage, target gets no bonuses for cover
-Demo Cannon: 2d6 shots, S10, AP-3, D3+d3
-Battle Cannon: 3d6 shots, S8, AP-2, D2 (or 1+d3)
-Punisher: 40 shots, S5, AP-1 D1

They all have about the same output, but each fills a different role. Vanquisher for squashing Monsterous Creatures, tanks, knights, etc. DC for terminators and other hard targets, The Punisher for hordes and the BC for general purpose mayhem. We can do the same for artillery:
-Basilisk: 2d6 S9 AP-3 D3 shots (auto-include suppression rule)
-Manticore 3d6 S10 AP-2 D2 shots
-Wyvern: 4d6 S5 AP-1 D1 shots.

Now you're taking them to fill a role in your army, not just because "it's the best" or "it's the only thing can can kill anything"






   
Made in us
Tough-as-Nails Ork Boy




brainpsyk wrote:
panzerfront14 wrote:
Honestly Tanks need buffs in two of these three categories, firepower, price and durability. I also feel that the use of ordinance weapons allows for more utility in shell types, particularly for Leman Russ Eradicators. I personally dislike double shoot mechanics, just buff the main gun its quicker to resolve and doesn't require odd movement rules.


I totally agree on the firepower/durability/points and double-shoot, we're way overcosted for too little output. Looking at the AdMech Onager Dunecrawler, the DuneCrawler has D6 S8 AP-3 D2 shots at BS3, but is only T7 with a 5++. That's roughly comparable to a Tank Commander with a battle cannon, yet the Dunecrawler is 115 points, the TC is 205. I don't think the extra D6 shots for moving < 6" is worth 90 points. Even with -1D and a 2+ armor, we're still (IMHO) not near 200 points for a TC (though getting closer)

I'm not sure I agree with the different types of shells. We have enough options with the main gun on a LR, we just need a reason to take something besides the DC. Honestly, I'd just move the Exterminator into Legends. The autocannon just sucks so badly, and it's in high competition for a slot, why deal with it. So go with:
-Vanquisher: d6 shots, S12, AP-4, D6+d3 damage, target gets no bonuses for cover
-Demo Cannon: 2d6 shots, S10, AP-3, D3+d3
-Battle Cannon: 3d6 shots, S8, AP-2, D2 (or 1+d3)
-Punisher: 40 shots, S5, AP-1 D1

They all have about the same output, but each fills a different role. Vanquisher for squashing Monsterous Creatures, tanks, knights, etc. DC for terminators and other hard targets, The Punisher for hordes and the BC for general purpose mayhem. We can do the same for artillery:
-Basilisk: 2d6 S9 AP-3 D3 shots (auto-include suppression rule)
-Manticore 3d6 S10 AP-2 D2 shots
-Wyvern: 4d6 S5 AP-1 D1 shots.

Now you're taking them to fill a role in your army, not just because "it's the best" or "it's the only thing can can kill anything"








My only issue with those proposed rules is that the whole reason why Leman Russ Executioners exist to shoot MEQ and TEQ, that is a huge part of its niche.
I also think that the Exterminator is salvageable, just up its shoot output with its Autocannons. It is a Tank it must have much larger magazines then light vehicles and infantry mobile autocannons. It honestly astounds me that autocannons which should be among the most diverse weapons in game are so homogenized, plus with the changes to heavy bolters, they almost seem to lack a niche, perhaps if you needed more then 36 inches of range to shoot aircraft, or something where their greater range was useful.
   
Made in us
Been Around the Block




panzerfront14 wrote:

My only issue with those proposed rules is that the whole reason why Leman Russ Executioners exist to shoot MEQ and TEQ, that is a huge part of its niche.
I also think that the Exterminator is salvageable, just up its shoot output with its Autocannons. It is a Tank it must have much larger magazines then light vehicles and infantry mobile autocannons. It honestly astounds me that autocannons which should be among the most diverse weapons in game are so homogenized, plus with the changes to heavy bolters, they almost seem to lack a niche, perhaps if you needed more then 36 inches of range to shoot aircraft, or something where their greater range was useful.


The Executioner still has it's place, S7, AP-3 D2, Overcharging to S8 AP-3 D3. However, it will only fill a 'coolness' niche because it's in competition against the DC at AP-3, the BC at D2. It would be a bit cheaper, as it lacks the damage output of the DC.

There are other threads about the ACs. basically the AC is either worthless (being priced out of it's slot), or it makes the HB worthless:
- 3 shots @D2: no need for a HB, or at 5 points more than a HB it's too expensive
- 2 shots @D3: not enough accuracy in guard to make the 2 shots meaningful, as it's still wounding most targets on 3s, or we have other weapons for harder targets.
- 3 shots @D3: now we're talking (this means 6 shots on a LR exterminator). But comparatively, what purpose does it fill in the army list compared to the BC, DC, Vanquisher or Exterminator cannon? It would have to be dang cheap, and then we'd be wasting a LR chassis.

For AC teams, Sentinels, Chimeras, etc., the AC kinda fits best at 3 shots at S7, AP-2 D2 for ~5 more points than a HB. This presents us with a choice in our army list, but also limits spots where we can take the ACs so it doesn't remove the HBs from our list entirely. but you'll notice those stats are almost the same as the Executioner on the LR.
   
Made in us
Fresh-Faced New User




A large part of the tank problem is how poorly they scale with guns/weapons made for MEQ/TEQ extermination.

A volley of D3 damage wounds is even MORE efficient against a tank than MEQ due to full catch of spillover.

Add that MEQ/TEQ killing weapons are required to have very high volume and/or AP to force invulns they just eat through tank wounds.

I would say tanks should get a FNP on small arms (3 or less damage hits). So you have to use AT weapons to kill them. Maybe even a 4+++.
This would work for both small guns, anti-infantry weapons as well as removing the blender-melee squads from the "tank threat" list.
A FNP instead of an invuln because FNP stacks with armor saves. This would make it more efficient to hit with AP weapons as they would skip the armor and typically have more damage. And make it very difficult to damage with low-AP-low-damage hits.

AT weapons overkill on GEQ. But anti-infantry weapons do not "underkill" on guard tanks.

It makes sense that you cannot chop up a tank with a chainsword. It makes sense that a squad of melee specialists can blend a squad of guardsmen or boyz in a turn. But even an armored personel carrier should be able to just run through them.

This would fix guard tanks. I feel more "agile" tanks need something that makes them harder to hit and more "techy" tanks need invulns due to force fields and stuff. Hey... that is sort of how it works.
   
Made in au
Dakka Veteran




 JNAProductions wrote:


Executioner does 5/9ths of a dead MEQ per hit., without Overcharging.
Battle Cannon does 5/9ths of a dead MEQ per hit.

It's not any more effective against MEQ unless it Overcharges.


That's the point. Overcharging will give you 2+ to wound on T4 marines, and/or D3 to one-hit-kill terminators.

Executioner is also cheaper. It's only 5 points less, but that's also a factor.

Those profiles I suggested is just my ideas for the datasheet. I'd make a lot of changes to Tank Orders, Doctrines, Stratagems, etc.

Like the Jury-Rigging Stratagem. That should repair flat 3 wounds rather than 1. Just look at Iron Warriors Unholy Vigour it's 1 CP has no drawbacks and gives 3 wounds. So, making Jury-Rigging give back flat 3 wounds seems pretty reasonable.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/10/20 00:32:01


 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K Proposed Rules
Go to: