Switch Theme:

How to make tanks better  [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 us
Boosting Black Templar Biker






 H.B.M.C. wrote:
It's stupid that that a Reaver Titan has the same Toughness as a Wraithlord.

100% agreed with this. I've never known anyone to buy, own or play a Titan but it's absolutely silly that a massive creature is only toughness 8. At least in their case the 70 wounds means they won't crumble after a round of having their toes being bombarded by melta guns. I'm shocked that GW has applied this ceiling on Titan toughness, I remember an article from a couple years ago about S30 weapons, now they're dropping the toughness of Titan's down to make sure Meltas & Lascannons can still plink them? Bizarre.

For solutions:

+1 T to MBT and Super Heavies would help a lot on the immersion front. 2+ Armor Save on top would be wonderful.

Increased Wounds would help on both the immersion and gameplay front. Bumping a Leman Russ from 16 - 24 would be perfectly fine. Bumping a monolith to 30 or 40 wounds isn't going to suddenly make it a must take either. Perhaps a +50% increase in Wounds across the board for vehicles as a simple fix?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/23 14:56:51


 
   
Made in gb
Ship's Officer





Bristol (UK)

There's zero downside to the special rule, correct.
But that's like saying there's no advantage to being a Bike because all it does it mean you can't climb a building.
It completely ignores the changes hidden in the statline.

   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 kirotheavenger wrote:
1st didn't have official female space marines, that was written by a 3rd party magazine.
That was back when companies didn't mind other companies doing stuff for them. I think Necromunda did a lot set in the Judge Dredd universe? Hence Arbites.

In general I agree with Orks being a tough 'horde', rather than a true horde.

Space marines don't have males ether. They were once male because they only chose the largest and strongest to make space marines (females don't fit this description as 99% of males to meet that description ether). Marines have no sex. Sex organs removed because they don't help you be a killing machine.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in gb
Stalwart Tribune





What about this fairly simple solution: All <VEHICLES> ignore 1 damage weapons. i.e. bolters and the like would not hurt them, but stuff like standard Autocannons with flat damage of 2 would still cause 2 damage if a hit goes through. (this would not stack with damage reducing abilities like Nurgle DR with -1D, causing autocannon shots to drop to 1 Damage then ignoring it though, the vehicle wounds would just drop by 1 instead of 2).

Also doubling the amount of wounds on vehicles would also be neat (everything seems too fragile at the moment)

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/23 15:36:12


Praise the Omnissiah

About 4k of .

Imperial Knights (Valiant, Warden & Armigers)

Some Misc. Imperium units etc. Assassins...

About 2k of  
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran



London

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

I would be quite happy with the toughness system changing to:-


So my only concern with this is that things like Primarchs, Telemons, and DPs would be auto-wound everything in the game on melee strikes and a single Telemon for 300 points would drop units twice the cost with zero risk.



Note its an increase from 5/6th or 83% to 100%. Not that big a change for a small minority of situations and those units points can reflect that.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Eldenfirefly wrote:
As it stand right now. Opened topped only has advantages and no disadvantages is what I can see. The obvious advantage of open topped vehicles is that the troops inside are free to shoot despite being embarked in it. And there is zero downside to it compared to a transport that is not open topped.

Disembark and embark rules are exactly the same. Everything else is the same. Does having an open topped rule
make a vehicle more expensive? Because it is outright better as a transport compared to one which does not have that rule. It doesn't seem to be the case. Since a raider is as expensive as a Rhino.

The whole idea of staying safely inside a LR or a Rhino as opposed to being in an open topped vehicle is that the troops inside are more safely protected. That is currently not reflected at all. The troops inside an open topped vehicle are just as protected as those in a normal transport, because in both cases, they cannot be targeted until the transport is destroyed. Yet, the troops inside an open topped vehicle get to shoot out.


Uhm, you did notice that orks literally lose a point of toughness for being open topped, in addition to being 4+ armor instead of 3+ like all the other vehicles?

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





 Jidmah wrote:
Eldenfirefly wrote:
As it stand right now. Opened topped only has advantages and no disadvantages is what I can see. The obvious advantage of open topped vehicles is that the troops inside are free to shoot despite being embarked in it. And there is zero downside to it compared to a transport that is not open topped.

Disembark and embark rules are exactly the same. Everything else is the same. Does having an open topped rule
make a vehicle more expensive? Because it is outright better as a transport compared to one which does not have that rule. It doesn't seem to be the case. Since a raider is as expensive as a Rhino.

The whole idea of staying safely inside a LR or a Rhino as opposed to being in an open topped vehicle is that the troops inside are more safely protected. That is currently not reflected at all. The troops inside an open topped vehicle are just as protected as those in a normal transport, because in both cases, they cannot be targeted until the transport is destroyed. Yet, the troops inside an open topped vehicle get to shoot out.


Uhm, you did notice that orks literally lose a point of toughness for being open topped, in addition to being 4+ armor instead of 3+ like all the other vehicles?


Are you referring to trukks? I would agree if a trukk was the same point cost as a rhino. Because then we are saying that this open topped rule literally is equal to losing 1 point of toughness and 1 point of armor save. But Trukks are less expensive than a Rhino. So, we could say that this lessor stats is reflected in the cheaper point cost. This means they got open topped as a rule absolutely free. And given that open topped literally allows your troops inside to fire out from the transport, its hardly a rule that should be free ...

The same is said for raiders. We can say that they have "lower stats", but they also have a powerful darklance, they fly, they have invul save, and they have open topped. All those extras can't possibly be free...
   
Made in us
Tunneling Trygon




Mexico

You are framing it in the wrong way.

The problem isn't that open topped transports are good, the problem is that the Rhino is just bad.
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




And? Unless the rhino was either technically or totaly free, you would not take it or the impulsor over a unit. When a unit you take costs 140-180pts, you are not going to take a 120pts transport to drive it around, specially when being instide the transport means the unit is doing nothing.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

If you could take a 20 point Rhino for every unit, you’d see tables flooded with them.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 The Forgemaster wrote:
What about this fairly simple solution: All <VEHICLES> ignore 1 damage weapons. i.e. bolters and the like would not hurt them, but stuff like standard Autocannons with flat damage of 2 would still cause 2 damage if a hit goes through. (this would not stack with damage reducing abilities like Nurgle DR with -1D, causing autocannon shots to drop to 1 Damage then ignoring it though, the vehicle wounds would just drop by 1 instead of 2).

Also doubling the amount of wounds on vehicles would also be neat (everything seems too fragile at the moment)


That would be kind of a bad for armies which basic weapons are D1. This combined with doubling of wounds would make vehicles practicaly unkillable. I mean all our heavy weapon on squads like psycanons are all D1. If my opponent were to destroy my two dreadnoughts, then everything inside a transport would suddenly become unkillable to me. Including stuff like low T ork or DE or Harli vehicles. To make matters worse, because of the open toped rule passangers of those vehicles would be able to still shot at my stuff.

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

 Tyran wrote:
... the problem is that the Rhino is just bad.
Still more durable than a Carnifex.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in pl
Fixture of Dakka




 JNAProductions wrote:
If you could take a 20 point Rhino for every unit, you’d see tables flooded with them.


And? Because they are neither 20pts, nor free. So this is argument in favour of what?

If you have to kill, then kill in the best manner. If you slaughter, then slaughter in the best manner. Let one of you sharpen his knife so his animal feels no pain. 
   
Made in ca
Deranged Necron Destroyer






If it's just a straight doubling of wounds, no point changes, right?

Girl Gamers are the best! 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





You can't make vehicles too cheap. They would get spammed simply because on a per point basis, they are too cheap and it still takes a fair amount of firepower to get through them.

Take for example Rhinos. Now, maybe you can argue for a point drop. I honestly wouldn't mind. But how much of a point drop. But as it is right now, even at 80 points, its 8 points for 1W which is T7 with a 3+ save. Drop it even 20 points to 60, and we are now paying 6 points for 1W which is a T7 3+ save. Would you pay 6 points for such a wound?

Even a 60 points Rhino would start to make Rhinos appealing to spam, just for those T7 wounds you can put on objectives. And this is without making tanks like Rhinos any tougher, which so much of this thread is already proposing.

But wasn't a lot of this thread about how easy tanks were to kill? The problem is you can spam vehicles like rhinos, and then add other vehicles on top of that. And then you start to have so many vehicles that the other side simply don't have that many anti tank to kill you even though anti tank is 3+d3. The problem isn't if I run one or two rhinos. The problems is if I run 6 rhinos because they are too cheap, and then I run an additional 3 or more dreadnaughts and 3 more tanks. And now you have 12 or more vehicles to kill while I still have enough points to run lots of infantry besides that.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/24 02:07:16


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Dysartes wrote:
I'm intrigued, Blackie - what sort of TAC list is packing 20+ AT shots, while still bringing sufficient anti-elite and anti-horde firepower?


Most recent tournament lists? A single MM is 2 shots, the SOB are taking anywhere from 8-16 of them per list alone. Most Marine lists are taking 3-6 Attack bikes with MM, the recent maryland GT winner had 6 MM attack bikes and 4 Plasma inceptors which is 12 Melta shots and an average of 16 Plasma Shots a turn.

Karol wrote:

Yet every multi melta is played in a white scar or a ultramarine army? And open topped vehicles do need more nerfs, then break the core rule of the game that stuff not on the table can't interact with other stuff on it. They buff the resiliance and speed of units they carry, and for some strange reason GW decided that with those buffs, they should somehow be cheaper then non open topped vehicles , which are worse.


Why oh why do ALL open topped vehicles need a nerf? Show me on the doll where the Trukk hurt you? A Rhino is T7, 10 wounds and 3+ save for 80pts. Comes bog standard with basically a 4 shot Bolter
A trukk is T6 10 wounds and 4+ save for 65pts and comes with a Big shoota (3 shots S5 no ap 1dmg). So 15pts cheaper, but significantly less durable vs basically everything except melta. The only "Gimmick" it has is that it can provide a bit of cover to a unit of shooty orkz, but realistically it will melt when any firepower is directed at it. Plus, its so damn competitive/good that I haven't used mine in 8th or 9th edition.

Eldenfirefly wrote:
As it stand right now. Opened topped only has advantages and no disadvantages is what I can see. The obvious advantage of open topped vehicles is that the troops inside are free to shoot despite being embarked in it. And there is zero downside to it compared to a transport that is not open topped.

Disembark and embark rules are exactly the same. Everything else is the same. Does having an open topped rule
make a vehicle more expensive? Because it is outright better as a transport compared to one which does not have that rule. It doesn't seem to be the case. Since a raider is as expensive as a Rhino.

The whole idea of staying safely inside a LR or a Rhino as opposed to being in an open topped vehicle is that the troops inside are more safely protected. That is currently not reflected at all. The troops inside an open topped vehicle are just as protected as those in a normal transport, because in both cases, they cannot be targeted until the transport is destroyed. Yet, the troops inside an open topped vehicle get to shoot out.


Disadvantage, the unit inside can't benefit from stratagems/auras. So if you are using it as a gun boat, you are paying points to be an extra layer of protection for whatever is inside it and that is about it. Congrats, you paid 65pts for a brick.

 Xenomancers wrote:
It is utterly idiotic...like 8.5 ironhands idiotic to include this rule. I can assure you within 1 month it will be nerfed too...to only be DA characters...which is fine for a free rule that no other marines get...

Just cant stand these snow flake marines anymore.
 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





How can it be a disadvantage compared to another transport that has no open topped rule?

Compared to paying 80 or 85 points for a Rhino who does the same exact thing of transporting troops and that does not allow troops to shoot out from it?

Like you are complaining about a 65 point brick. So, then a Rhino is a 80/85 point brick?
   
Made in us
Calculating Commissar




pontiac, michigan; usa

I dunno if we should make tanks even tankier. I get it in some instances but the anti tank suicide squads can't do their job if tanks tank too much. Honestly they probably should have it back to where melta was stupid strong but long range anti tank was more finicky. Sadly they don't and blasters have a crap profile while dark lances are superior in reliable damage.

I'm not kidding either. For some armies that get a few tanks maybe that makes sense but the number of tanks imperial guard can take I'd better have some reliable anti tank or at least something to hold them up.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/24 02:22:22


Join skavenblight today!

http://the-under-empire.proboards.com/ (my skaven forum) 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Eldenfirefly wrote:
How can it be a disadvantage compared to another transport that has no open topped rule?

Compared to paying 80 or 85 points for a Rhino who does the same exact thing of transporting troops and that does not allow troops to shoot out from it?

Like you are complaining about a 65 point brick. So, then a Rhino is a 80/85 point brick?

Because they do separate things. If i'm shooting out of a Trukk that means I took a unit of Lootas, tankbustas or possibly Flashgitz and paid a 65pt tax to give them some durability because God knows GW didn't give them any. A loota is a 20pt model that is T4 and has a 6+ save. if I take 10 and put them in a Trukk that means I'm effectively paying 6.5ppm to make them at least have a chance of surviving longer than 1 turn.

On the reverse, the Marine is paying 80pts for an actual transport to move his unit to its desired location and act as a tougher brick to hold an objective or deliver its payload. Don't get me wrong, all transports need a buff, but you are literally complaining about a model that is so bad right now that I haven't unpacked mine since 7th edition.

 Xenomancers wrote:
It is utterly idiotic...like 8.5 ironhands idiotic to include this rule. I can assure you within 1 month it will be nerfed too...to only be DA characters...which is fine for a free rule that no other marines get...

Just cant stand these snow flake marines anymore.
 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





I don't see how you see open top as a disadvantage... Using your exact same words but in a space marine context. (If a Rhino was open topped).

"If I am shooting out of a Rhino, that means I took a unit of Devastators, or a unit of vanguard vets and paid a 80 point tax to make them more durable ... that means I effectively am paying 8ppm to make them at least have a chance of surviving longer than 1 turn."

See what I did there? And btw, Rhinos don't even HAVE the open topped rule. So, if we put a shooty unit into a Rhino. It doesn't even get to shoot until it gets out of that Rhino. And yet would you believe it, I have seen lots of lists which actually do put shooty units into a rhino just for pay that "8ppm to make them at least have a chance of surviving longer than 1 turn".
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Eldenfirefly wrote:
I don't see how you see open top as a disadvantage... Using your exact same words but in a space marine context. (If a Rhino was open topped).

"If I am shooting out of a Rhino, that means I took a unit of Devastators, or a unit of vanguard vets and paid a 80 point tax to make them more durable ... that means I effectively am paying 8ppm to make them at least have a chance of surviving longer than 1 turn."

See what I did there? And btw, Rhinos don't even HAVE the open topped rule. So, if we put a shooty unit into a Rhino. It doesn't even get to shoot until it gets out of that Rhino. And yet would you believe it, I have seen lots of lists which actually do put shooty units into a rhino just for pay that "8ppm to make them at least have a chance of surviving longer than 1 turn".


And I wouldn't have a problem with that In fact, I readily welcome you to ask GW to make that a thing for your Space Marines. I'll laugh my ass off when you realize you just diluted your ranged firepower by taking an 80pt stationary brick and you no longer benefit from all the strats and reroll auras you normally would get. Also, i'm assuming you have no problem losing your T7 and 3+ save at the same time. Open topped isn't OP, open topped doesn't need a nerf, you Marine players just really need to stop complaining that other factions sometimes get stuff you don't have huge access to. Because guess what? You have access to Land Speeder storms those are open topped, why aren't you using them? You just said OT is OP and needs to be nerfed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/24 03:14:37


 Xenomancers wrote:
It is utterly idiotic...like 8.5 ironhands idiotic to include this rule. I can assure you within 1 month it will be nerfed too...to only be DA characters...which is fine for a free rule that no other marines get...

Just cant stand these snow flake marines anymore.
 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Open-Topped used to have advantages and disadvantages, back when disembarking didn't magically happen from any surface of a vehicle, and when units didn't cease to exist whilst embarked.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





"you Marine players just really need to stop complaining that other factions sometimes get stuff you don't have huge access to. Because guess what? You have access to Land Speeder storms those are open topped, why aren't you using them? You just said OT is OP and needs to be nerfed."

Because there are factions that do not have land speeder storms. Sisters of battles and every single CSM legion does not have land speeder storms and can only use Rhinos, which are not open topped.

I got nothing against open topped. I just think it needs to be correctly pointed, or come with some sort of disadvantage over non-open topped transports if GW is not going to give them a point cost. Right now, there is literally zero disadvantage an open topped transport have over a non- open topped transport. Points, stats can all be adjusted. Those sometimes don't even make sense.

Take a Drukhari raider and compare it to a Rhino. So, 15 more points gets me :

1) A dark lance instead of a combi bolter
2) 1 less T
3) 1 less Armor
4) An invul !!
5) Flying keyword !!
6) 2 more movement
7) Open topped.

All this is worth 15 more points?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/24 03:30:20


 
   
Made in au
Owns Whole Set of Skullz Techpriests






Versteckt in den Schatten deines Geistes.

Faster, a better gun, an invul save and the ability to fly over everything? Yeah that sounds like 15 points worth of bonuses to me.

Industrial Insanity - My Terrain Blog
"GW really needs to understand 'Less is more' when it comes to AoS." - Wha-Mu-077

 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




Considering I think all Transports are heavily over priced? yeah it does sound about right.

 Xenomancers wrote:
It is utterly idiotic...like 8.5 ironhands idiotic to include this rule. I can assure you within 1 month it will be nerfed too...to only be DA characters...which is fine for a free rule that no other marines get...

Just cant stand these snow flake marines anymore.
 
   
Made in ca
Legendary Master of the Chapter





Karol wrote:
 The Forgemaster wrote:
What about this fairly simple solution: All <VEHICLES> ignore 1 damage weapons. i.e. bolters and the like would not hurt them, but stuff like standard Autocannons with flat damage of 2 would still cause 2 damage if a hit goes through. (this would not stack with damage reducing abilities like Nurgle DR with -1D, causing autocannon shots to drop to 1 Damage then ignoring it though, the vehicle wounds would just drop by 1 instead of 2).

Also doubling the amount of wounds on vehicles would also be neat (everything seems too fragile at the moment)


That would be kind of a bad for armies which basic weapons are D1. This combined with doubling of wounds would make vehicles practicaly unkillable. I mean all our heavy weapon on squads like psycanons are all D1. If my opponent were to destroy my two dreadnoughts, then everything inside a transport would suddenly become unkillable to me. Including stuff like low T ork or DE or Harli vehicles. To make matters worse, because of the open toped rule passangers of those vehicles would be able to still shot at my stuff.


ok 1: We know grey Knights suck and DESPIRATELY need some form of anti-tank.
2: do you not pack deamon hammers into your squads?

Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Faster, a better gun, an invul save and the ability to fly over everything? Yeah that sounds like 15 points worth of bonuses to me.


And what about open topped? That is worth zero points? What about all the splinter rifles, blastor guns, plasma grenades, pistols, and liquifier guns that can fire out of raiders just because of open topped. And that is worth zero points?
   
Made in us
Gore-Soaked Lunatic Witchhunter







Eldenfirefly wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Faster, a better gun, an invul save and the ability to fly over everything? Yeah that sounds like 15 points worth of bonuses to me.


And what about open topped? That is worth zero points? What about all the splinter rifles, blastor guns, plasma grenades, pistols, and liquifier guns that can fire out of raiders just because of open topped. And that is worth zero points?


Do you not have to pay for the squad you put in the Raider anymore?

Balanced Game: Noun. A game in which all options and choices are worth using.
Homebrew oldhammer project: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/790996.page#10896267
Meridian: Necromunda-based 40k skirmish: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/795374.page 
   
Made in hk
Longtime Dakkanaut





 AnomanderRake wrote:
Eldenfirefly wrote:
 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Faster, a better gun, an invul save and the ability to fly over everything? Yeah that sounds like 15 points worth of bonuses to me.


And what about open topped? That is worth zero points? What about all the splinter rifles, blastor guns, plasma grenades, pistols, and liquifier guns that can fire out of raiders just because of open topped. And that is worth zero points?


Do you not have to pay for the squad you put in the Raider anymore?


Sigh, what are we discussing about here. open topped allows these units to fire while embarked in these units. We have to pay for all our units. Just like space marines, sisters and every other faction without having open topped transports have to pay for their units in transports too. But they don't get an open topped rule that lets their units shoot out. So, open topped rule doesn't matter? Its definitely gives an advantage over a non open topped vehicle and should be worth something.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/24 04:30:02


 
   
Made in us
Calculating Commissar




pontiac, michigan; usa

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
Faster, a better gun, an invul save and the ability to fly over everything? Yeah that sounds like 15 points worth of bonuses to me.


Well welcome to arms-race hammer. Back before this new codex dark eldar had a hard time shifting enemies off objectives, our bikes were costly (still are), our anti tank wasnt so good, much of our melee was garbage, disintegrators were one of our best weapons (which competed against the updated damage 2 heavy bolter) and lack any improvements even in the current codex, we had no updates for probably the longest of all codexes and in general were just terrible. We weren't the worst but we were far from the best.

Ofc marine players just complain. I'm sure space marines will be top dog again with some points changes or a psychic awakening equivalent book that makes them as broken as the tau, eldar, space marine meta of 7th edition. Gw wouldn't let their posterboys out of the spotlight for too long....

----

Also keep in mind moving fast and hitting hard is dark eldars schtick (along with being transport heavy) and we used to lack the hitting hard part. We were glass cannons without the cannons but emphasis on the glass part.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/06/24 04:34:02


Join skavenblight today!

http://the-under-empire.proboards.com/ (my skaven forum) 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: