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
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Because Terminators (a unit with a 2+/5++ or 1+/4++) don't exist in Marine lists. Nor do Bladeguard Veterans, with a 2+/4++. Nope, Marines just completely lack invulnerable saves, absolutely no way to gain them! Whereas you got armies like Orks, who get... A 5++ against ranged attacks only if they are wholly within 9" of an HQ unit. And either Ghaz or a 1/army CP upgrade to give a single model a 4++.
Terminators are utter garbage - but I suppose they fit the profile. Matters not though. I am speaking about the meq profile. It is an inherently risky profile because it has 2 very easy to ignore stats a 3+ save and 2 wounds and it just so happens - if you are able to ignore those stats...you are doing pretty well vs anything you are shooting...tanks/elites/and even chaff. Cause even chaff can be expected to be rolling 5+ or 4+ armor saves without AP.
38 points gets you...
3 T4 2+/5++ wounds
4 Bolter shots
2 WS4+ S8 AP-3 D2 attacks (3 on the first turn of combat)

33 points gets you...
3 T4 2+/5++ wounds
4 WS3+ S4 AP-2 D1 attacks that reroll wounds (5 on the first turn of combat)

43 points gets you...
3 T4 1+/4++ wounds
2 WS4+ S8 AP-2 D3 attacks (3 on the first turn of combat)

They can deepstrike too, which means their somewhat slow 5" move doesn't matter a ton.

Care to name a unit, from a different Codex, that compares favorably?

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Because Terminators (a unit with a 2+/5++ or 1+/4++) don't exist in Marine lists. Nor do Bladeguard Veterans, with a 2+/4++. Nope, Marines just completely lack invulnerable saves, absolutely no way to gain them! Whereas you got armies like Orks, who get... A 5++ against ranged attacks only if they are wholly within 9" of an HQ unit. And either Ghaz or a 1/army CP upgrade to give a single model a 4++.
Terminators are utter garbage - but I suppose they fit the profile. Matters not though. I am speaking about the meq profile. It is an inherently risky profile because it has 2 very easy to ignore stats a 3+ save and 2 wounds and it just so happens - if you are able to ignore those stats...you are doing pretty well vs anything you are shooting...tanks/elites/and even chaff. Cause even chaff can be expected to be rolling 5+ or 4+ armor saves without AP.


How about Bladeguard? Or vanguard vets? I'm always amazed at you xeno. Your entire army basically doubled its wounds and you still find a way to complain about it.

They gave most troops in the space marine codex +1 W for about 6 points each increase. It was not for free. I am not really complaining ether. Just explaining the problem. Invune saves being handed out like candy is a huge problem. Because at some point non of the other stats matter.

Armor saves - get ignored with high efficacy.
Wounds can get diminished or ignored by multi damage.
Toughness only cares about breakpoints.
Hitting is practically automatic in the competitive world.
Mortal wounds are a novelty item and even still are usually not targetable and or only effective vs certain unit types.

Invune saves are about the only reliable defensive mechanic/along with FNP.

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 us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 JNAProductions wrote:

38 points gets you...
3 T4 2+/5++ wounds
4 Bolter shots
2 WS4+ S8 AP-3 D2 attacks (3 on the first turn of combat)

33 points gets you...
3 T4 2+/5++ wounds
4 WS3+ S4 AP-2 D1 attacks that reroll wounds (5 on the first turn of combat)

43 points gets you...
3 T4 1+/4++ wounds
2 WS4+ S8 AP-2 D3 attacks (3 on the first turn of combat)

They can deepstrike too, which means their somewhat slow 5" move doesn't matter a ton.Care to name a unit, from a different Codex, that compares favorably?


My Meganobz compare very favorably to them atm.

38pts gets you ...
3 T4 2+ wounds
4 shoota shots
3 WS4+ S10 AP-3 D3 attacks

Oh, and they also DONT have deep strike in their profile and have Movement 4. Wait..that isn't a favorable comparison....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Xenomancers wrote:

They gave most troops in the space marine codex +1 W for about 6 points each increase. It was not for free.
except it wasn't 6pts each Tac Marines, like everyone elses models got a price increase at the start of 9th to 15ppm. Than, the codex dropped and poof, all Marines went to 2wounds and were bumped to 18ppm which is literally 9pts for each T4 3+ save wound. And yes, you are complaining about this because you think its a bad stat line. no, its an amazing statline, the problem is you play the most popular faction in the game and therefore people build lists to beat you as opposed to my 90+ boyz.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/25 18:10:29


 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 us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 JNAProductions wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Because Terminators (a unit with a 2+/5++ or 1+/4++) don't exist in Marine lists. Nor do Bladeguard Veterans, with a 2+/4++. Nope, Marines just completely lack invulnerable saves, absolutely no way to gain them! Whereas you got armies like Orks, who get... A 5++ against ranged attacks only if they are wholly within 9" of an HQ unit. And either Ghaz or a 1/army CP upgrade to give a single model a 4++.
Terminators are utter garbage - but I suppose they fit the profile. Matters not though. I am speaking about the meq profile. It is an inherently risky profile because it has 2 very easy to ignore stats a 3+ save and 2 wounds and it just so happens - if you are able to ignore those stats...you are doing pretty well vs anything you are shooting...tanks/elites/and even chaff. Cause even chaff can be expected to be rolling 5+ or 4+ armor saves without AP.
38 points gets you...
3 T4 2+/5++ wounds
4 Bolter shots
2 WS4+ S8 AP-3 D2 attacks (3 on the first turn of combat)

33 points gets you...
3 T4 2+/5++ wounds
4 WS3+ S4 AP-2 D1 attacks that reroll wounds (5 on the first turn of combat)

43 points gets you...
3 T4 1+/4++ wounds
2 WS4+ S8 AP-2 D3 attacks (3 on the first turn of combat)

They can deepstrike too, which means their somewhat slow 5" move doesn't matter a ton.

Care to name a unit, from a different Codex, that compares favorably?

Uhhh...DG terminators? Massively better than any of that crap. -1 damage...wow....look how useless BGV and terminator melee becomes. They are also far more durable to shooting attacks of any kind.
Have you seen Harlequin troops? Will probably kill 2 termainotrs with pistols before they wipe the whole unit and or block 2/3 attacks with their totally balanced 3++ save.
How about Incubi...Good chance they are fighting first and do 3 damage on 6 to wound and drop you to invunes.

BGV are not even for fighting dude. Every Game I have seen them used they just sit on an objective all game until an opponent decided to delete them. They are a slow melee unit with no reliable way to make combat. They are basically Custodian gaurd light...that aren't troops with a 4++ and T4 instead of a 3++ and T5. Nothing special...For sure they are durable. Why? They have a 4++. That is rare for marines units. Literally every unit in a custodian army has that minus a few dreads.

Terminaotrs are even worse because they aren't primaris (no 4+ to wound stratagem)...cost more...and are slower.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/25 18:18:08


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 us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

So your answers to what's better than Terminators include other Terminators?

And notably, your other options are from some of the best Codecs currently out there. Terminators not being cutting-edge competitive doesn't mean they're bad.

You're also assuming CP usage or other units assisting.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 JNAProductions wrote:
So your answers to what's better than Terminators include other Terminators?

And notably, your other options are from some of the best Codecs currently out there. Terminators not being cutting-edge competitive doesn't mean they're bad.

You're also assuming CP usage or other units assisting.

The main issue here is I am not talking about BGV or Terms. I am talking about MEQ.

Meq don't have invune saves and claim to be durable with 2 wounds but 2 wounds is a liability. For the same reason tanks don't feel durable...nether does meq. Most tanks rely on a 3+ save to survive and it is not effective and multi damage weapons being extremely numerous makes their wounds totals feel like a liability / aim here sign.

CP is a huge part of the game - stratagems units can use does - qualify/ disqualify units from playability.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/25 18:36:46


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 us
Regular Dakkanaut




Terminators are an absolutely fantastic unit (as they should be, quintessential super heavy infantry for the heavy infantry faction archetype).

But that's off topic. To fix tanks I would go one of the two following changes:

1) All tanks without fly get +1 armor save. It's simple and doesn't add any additional rules to the mix

OR

2) Allow for a maximum of -2 modifiers to hit. -1 coming from the controlling player of the shooting unit (IE moving and firing heavy) and the other -1 coming from either terrain or the other player (IE dense terrain, innate -1 to hit abilities, or -1 to hit maluses targeting the shooting unit). In addition add back the Ordinance weapon type. Essentially heavy weapons for vehicles. These are the BIG guns that are mounted on vehicles. The purpose of these changes is to mitigate infantry based AV like MM and the heavier vehicle/monster based AV. But this option requires tweaking the core rules.
   
Made in us
Insect-Infested Nurgle Chaos Lord





In My Lab

Then why would you say terminators are “utter garbage”? That’s a direct quote from you.

And if you want to bring in outside buffs, Marines have more. A 5-man squad of Terminators can, with buffs, wipe 9 of a 10-man Quin squad in one shooting phase.

Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! 
   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 JNAProductions wrote:
Then why would you say terminators are “utter garbage”? That’s a direct quote from you.

And if you want to bring in outside buffs, Marines have more. A 5-man squad of Terminators can, with buffs, wipe 9 of a 10-man Quin squad in one shooting phase.

I was responding to you bringing up terminators in the first place. Terminators are bad - All slow melee units are bad. No one would take custodian gaurd if they didn't have to take a troop ether. Thats neether here nor there. The quinns will be in a -1 to wound -1 to hit -6 inch range t5 transport. That the terminators would be lucky to deal 1 wound to which is also behind a wall you can't shoot through.

The most important thing in the game is mobility and reliability.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Vilehydra wrote:
Terminators are an absolutely fantastic unit (as they should be, quintessential super heavy infantry for the heavy infantry faction archetype).

But that's off topic. To fix tanks I would go one of the two following changes:

1) All tanks without fly get +1 armor save. It's simple and doesn't add any additional rules to the mix

OR

2) Allow for a maximum of -2 modifiers to hit. -1 coming from the controlling player of the shooting unit (IE moving and firing heavy) and the other -1 coming from either terrain or the other player (IE dense terrain, innate -1 to hit abilities, or -1 to hit maluses targeting the shooting unit). In addition add back the Ordinance weapon type. Essentially heavy weapons for vehicles. These are the BIG guns that are mounted on vehicles. The purpose of these changes is to mitigate infantry based AV like MM and the heavier vehicle/monster based AV. But this option requires tweaking the core rules.

Stopped reading at -2 modifiers Shoulda stopped reading at terminators are fantastic. LOL. DA terms perhaps...but they come with free transhuman every turn for the cost of 0 - plus can get a 4++ easy.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/25 19:03:56


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 de
Mighty Chosen Warrior of Chaos






I think we don't need better tanks i think we need a big nerf to multi-meltas and such. And an over all nerf to damage getting tabled needs to be a rare thing IMO.
   
Made in us
Hardened Veteran Guardsman





This would be more for lighter vehicles, but I wonder if having some sort of "over-penetration"/"semi-penetration" mechanic might help as well - something where if you, say, roll a certain number to-wound you do less damage with an AT shot (to-wound as an example - a proper system for this would likely need to be a bit more complicated and probably based on the tank in question). It would introduce some more RNG to the game and make the math on AT effectiveness a bit rougher, but it would also mean that you cant look at your multi-melta and know that if you wound you're going to automatically bracket your target.
   
Made in es
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain




Vigo. Spain.

Is Xenomancers really saying that slow meele units are bad in the edition of deathguard, custodian guard spam lists and bladeguard spam lists being meta?

And terminators are bad? Werent Deathwing terminators the most OP thing since 8.5 iron hands?

 Crimson Devil wrote:

Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.

ERJAK wrote:
Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.

 
   
Made in us
Did Fulgrim Just Behead Ferrus?




Noctis Labyrinthus

Black Templar, Space Wolf, and Dark Angel lists have used terminators in all of their top four lists since April as far as I can tell. Same with every CSM majority list since then, always as Emperor's Children (probably for the nearly guaranteed charge strat I imagine). Death Guard probably hasn't had them in every list but I hope no one would seriously argue that their terminators are bad. The sole placing Thousand Sons list since April also had a ten man brick of Scarab Occult Terminators.

Terminators are not omnipresent in even loyalist Marine lists, but utter garbage? Evidently not.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Galas wrote:
Is Xenomancers really saying that slow meele units are bad in the edition of deathguard, custodian guard spam lists and bladeguard spam lists being meta?

And terminators are bad? Werent Deathwing terminators the most OP thing since 8.5 iron hands?


I don't know what you are talking about *Glances at signature line

 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 it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

 Void__Dragon wrote:


Terminators are not omnipresent in even loyalist Marine lists, but utter garbage? Evidently not.


Terminators are extremely good now, if not flat out OP.

And general SM infantry models got a 2nd for 6 points, which may sound a lot, but 12-13ppm for MEQ was a joke, they were extremely undercosted before. At 18ppm they're still quite cheap the firstborn for what they do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 nordsturmking wrote:
I think we don't need better tanks i think we need a big nerf to multi-meltas and such. And an over all nerf to damage getting tabled needs to be a rare thing IMO.


I think we need both. Vehicles/monsters should be more durable and some anti tank weapons/combos need to be less effective points wise. About meltas a simple price hike will fix them, but they need to cost twice their current price. And I bet they'll still be present since 35-40ppm for a multi melta isn't unreasonable at all, especially if tanks get more durable.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2021/06/26 10:45:26



 
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 Xenomancers wrote:
SemperMortis wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 JNAProductions wrote:
Because Terminators (a unit with a 2+/5++ or 1+/4++) don't exist in Marine lists. Nor do Bladeguard Veterans, with a 2+/4++. Nope, Marines just completely lack invulnerable saves, absolutely no way to gain them! Whereas you got armies like Orks, who get... A 5++ against ranged attacks only if they are wholly within 9" of an HQ unit. And either Ghaz or a 1/army CP upgrade to give a single model a 4++.
Terminators are utter garbage - but I suppose they fit the profile. Matters not though. I am speaking about the meq profile. It is an inherently risky profile because it has 2 very easy to ignore stats a 3+ save and 2 wounds and it just so happens - if you are able to ignore those stats...you are doing pretty well vs anything you are shooting...tanks/elites/and even chaff. Cause even chaff can be expected to be rolling 5+ or 4+ armor saves without AP.


How about Bladeguard? Or vanguard vets? I'm always amazed at you xeno. Your entire army basically doubled its wounds and you still find a way to complain about it.

They gave most troops in the space marine codex +1 W for about 6 points each increase. It was not for free.

You forgot the free AP. And the free extra attack in your first round of combat. And the free extra shots when standing still. And the free super-doctrine. And the free choice of two additional lists of secondaries that are much easier to score than most generalist ones.

And you're flat out lying about the height of the point increase.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 nordsturmking wrote:
I think we don't need better tanks i think we need a big nerf to multi-meltas and such. And an over all nerf to damage getting tabled needs to be a rare thing IMO.


Tanks are performing badly in games armies that don't even have anything comparable to multi-meltas or dark lances though. I think there are two problems that both need to be addressed.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/26 13:45:55


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 us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Blackie wrote:
 Void__Dragon wrote:


Terminators are not omnipresent in even loyalist Marine lists, but utter garbage? Evidently not.


Terminators are extremely good now, if not flat out OP.

And general SM infantry models got a 2nd for 6 points, which may sound a lot, but 12-13ppm for MEQ was a joke, they were extremely undercosted before. At 18ppm they're still quite cheap the firstborn for what they do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 nordsturmking wrote:
I think we don't need better tanks i think we need a big nerf to multi-meltas and such. And an over all nerf to damage getting tabled needs to be a rare thing IMO.


I think we need both. Vehicles/monsters should be more durable and some anti tank weapons/combos need to be less effective points wise. About meltas a simple price hike will fix them, but they need to cost twice their current price. And I bet they'll still be present since 35-40ppm for a multi melta isn't unreasonable at all, especially if tanks get more durable.

12-13 PPM for 1W MEQ undercosted? On behalf of all CSM players may I just say:




But fully agreed on your second point. The simplest and most immediate fix for the current state of tanks is an increase in the price of multi-meltas and similar AT to match their increased lethality to tanks. Nothing should get the kind of returns that cheap AT infantry and bike units get against tanks.
   
Made in it
Gargantuan Gargant




Italy

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

12-13 PPM for 1W MEQ undercosted?


Absolutely. TACs definitely needed to be between 2x and 2.5x the cost of an ork boy, as always, but 12ppm power armour dudes are definitely undercosted when boyz are 7ppm. 15-16ppm was the appropriate point cost. I'm talking about those ones with combat doctrines, bolter discipline and shock assault (among other things); all rules that were introduced when marines were 12ppm for firstborn and 17ppm for intercessors.

Can't say about Chaos, I haven't faced anything chaos related that isn't either 1KSons or Deathguard in ages. I know they didn't and don't have the same layers of buffs of their loyal counterparts which means they could certainly be cheaper than them. But sisters were also very undercosted at 9ppm, and they were basically cheaper tacs without doctrines and -1T but still tons of free or cheap buffs available to enhance them.


 
   
Made in us
Daemonic Dreadnought




The dark hollows of Kentucky

 Blackie wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

12-13 PPM for 1W MEQ undercosted?


Absolutely. TACs definitely needed to be between 2x and 2.5x the cost of an ork boy, as always, but 12ppm power armour dudes are definitely undercosted when boyz are 7ppm. 15-16ppm was the appropriate point cost. I'm talking about those ones with combat doctrines, bolter discipline and shock assault (among other things); all rules that were introduced when marines were 12ppm for firstborn and 17ppm for intercessors.

Can't say about Chaos, I haven't faced anything chaos related that isn't either 1KSons or Deathguard in ages. I know they didn't and don't have the same layers of buffs of their loyal counterparts which means they could certainly be cheaper than them. But sisters were also very undercosted at 9ppm, and they were basically cheaper tacs without doctrines and -1T but still tons of free or cheap buffs available to enhance them.

Well, most CSM players start writing a list by figuring out how few actual CSM'S they can get by with, if that tells you anything. And for a long time a squad of T3, 1W, 6+ cultists have been considered the better option. So yeah, not very good at 12-14 PPM (14 PPM being the current price).

But this thread isn't about MEQ, it's about tanks, so let's stick with tanks. I still think that increasing the price of multi-meltas and similar AT weapons is the most realistic solution for the durability problems of tanks. The ability to delete a MBT, much less a SHT, should be expensive.
   
Made in us
Dive-Bombin' Fighta-Bomba Pilot






on the "nobody would take custodian guard if they didn't have to" ... my custodian list is almost entirley custodian guard. 1 valoris, 1 shield captain on a jetbike, 2 squads of 3 jet bikes, and 6 4 man custodian squads with 3 spears and one shield/sword in each. (1997 points) and the bog standard custodians do very well in the list.

on topic though when i try to make it work with land raiders the raiders blow up and it feels like i am better off walking them up the board.

10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Hmmm.
It sort of goes round in circles but while points increases on MMs etc would help a bit, I still think the issue is partly just imbalance within vehicles themselves.

I seem to have become "hate on DE" guy (which is weird) - but you compare a Ravager (not even seemingly a meta choice these days) to say a Predator. The Ravager is cheaper, can fly, and has a 5++. Its a similar story with say a Plagueburst Crawler which gets T8 and a 5++.

I'm sure at some point a Lascannon will gain the Ad Mech rules - but right now the Predator is just *bad* in a pool of vehicles. You shouldn't pay 170-180 points for 11 T7 3+ save wounds. As a result its a glass cannon without that much cannon

You look at something like a Gladiator Valiant. I think 4 Lascannons and 2 MMs for 230 points is very reasonable (with yet more guns for a few more points). I don't think it should go any lower based on the offensive stats. But 230 points for just 12 T8 3+ wounds isn't reasonable. You are paying the same per wound (more in some cases) as a Knight but not getting that 5++.

Basically the MM/Dark Lance/new Las is too good versus T7/T8 3+ save models. But it can't become much worse otherwise what do you have against the T8/3+/5++ models? You can either meta that out - by making it *bad* versus other sorts of models (some sort of designated "light vehicle" class of units perhaps) so forcing variety, or everyone needs some protection against it (like a 5++).
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






The funny thing about your post is that the PBC isn't usable because of its 3+/5++/T8/DR, but because it can hide out of sight and shell things with its mortar.

If it had to shoot directly at its targets like the predator, it would be just as useless. So not even 5++, T8 and -1 to damage are enough to make a tank durable these days.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/06/29 13:46:35


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 us
Dive-Bombin' Fighta-Bomba Pilot






 Jidmah wrote:
The funny thing about your post is that the PBC isn't usable because of its 3+/5++/T8/DR, but because it can hide out of sight and shell things with its mortar.

If it had to shoot directly at its targets like the predator, it would be just as useless. So not even 5++, T8 and -1 to damage are enough to make a tank durable these days.


i feel like not requiring line of sight is just a bandaid for a few units that keep some fixes from happening and is borderline overpowered for some cheap units like guard heavy mortar teams. though at least on vehicles it does make some actually useable like you said

10000 points 7000
6000
5000
5000
2000
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Jidmah wrote:
The funny thing about your post is that the PBC isn't usable because of its 3+/5++/T8/DR, but because it can hide out of sight and shell things with its mortar.

If it had to shoot directly at its targets like the predator, it would be just as useless. So not even 5++, T8 and -1 to damage are enough to make a tank durable these days.


How far would you go with useless? The_Scotsman's brought this up - but something has to die in a game of 40k. If 3 attack bikes jump on a PBC they've got a significantly lower chance of killing it than a Predator.
Its undoubtedly an advantage though that the PBC can stay behind LOS until your opponent moves out so you can contribute and then get that first volley off with your entropy cannons.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






I consider a unit useless if it has little to no chance of ever causing enough damage to matter, has not utility otherwise and its defensive profile isn't cheap enough to add to target saturation.
Yes, everything dies, but why would I bring tanks that my opponent can kill almost twice as fast as the same points invested in infantry?

Since a PBC is often the only vehicle/monster in the list, once it moves out of its hiding place, it dies the very same turn unless you have cleared out all the enemies' anti-tank. They can take slightly more punishment than a predator, but not that much more. In the end a 5++ is just chance of shrugging off deadly shots, and you don't get that many rolls to get a reliable damage reduction out of it.

Back when they still hat 5+ FNP it could take a heavy beating and still keep going. Nowadays putting spitters on them is essentially a joke config, as they will die before getting within 12" of an enemy.

This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2021/06/29 16:22:18


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 ca
Deranged Necron Destroyer






By that logic, why not always bring as many objective secured infantry as possible?

Girl Gamers are the best! 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Jidmah wrote:
I consider a unit useless if it has little to no chance of ever causing enough damage to matter, has not utility otherwise and its defensive profile isn't cheap enough to add to target saturation.
Yes, everything dies, but why would I bring tanks that my opponent can kill almost twice as fast as the same points invested in infantry?

Since a PBC is often the only vehicle/monster in the list, once it moves out of its hiding place, it dies the very same turn unless you have cleared out all the enemies' anti-tank. They can take slightly more punishment than a predator, but not that much more. In the end a 5++ is just chance of shrugging off deadly shots, and you don't get that many rolls to get a reliable damage reduction out of it.

Back when they still hat 5+ FNP it could take a heavy beating and still keep going. Nowadays putting spitters on them is essentially a joke config, as they will die before getting within 12" of an enemy.


I guess if you only take one - but don't a lot of DG lists bring 3? Alongside say 3 units of DS, 1 unit of BL and then characters + 3 units of poxwalkers to sit on rear objectives.

I just think if you could say swap the mortar for another 2 Entropy Cannons (agree on the spitters) would you really say "its useless, never take this?" I can see the argument for it not being as good as the mortar because you sacrifice that first shot advantage, and certainly imagine some DG lists you wouldn't run it in. But I feel "useless" is a high bar.
   
Made in de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






 Blndmage wrote:
By that logic, why not always bring as many objective secured infantry as possible?


Because objective secured infantry tends to be bad at killing stuff. No army can survive by just standing around.

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 us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 Blackie wrote:
 Gadzilla666 wrote:

12-13 PPM for 1W MEQ undercosted?


Absolutely. TACs definitely needed to be between 2x and 2.5x the cost of an ork boy, as always, but 12ppm power armour dudes are definitely undercosted when boyz are 7ppm. 15-16ppm was the appropriate point cost. I'm talking about those ones with combat doctrines, bolter discipline and shock assault (among other things); all rules that were introduced when marines were 12ppm for firstborn and 17ppm for intercessors.

Can't say about Chaos, I haven't faced anything chaos related that isn't either 1KSons or Deathguard in ages. I know they didn't and don't have the same layers of buffs of their loyal counterparts which means they could certainly be cheaper than them. But sisters were also very undercosted at 9ppm, and they were basically cheaper tacs without doctrines and -1T but still tons of free or cheap buffs available to enhance them.

2x and 2.5 x is a pretty big points area. You are talking between 14-21 points back when orks were 7 points. LOL. I can tell you - you are off by a pretty big margin here. In order to even consider at tactical marine. It has to be less than 2x than an ork and even when it was...they were 12/13 points at one point in 8.5 with 1 wound...still no one ever took them. Yet...ork boys were spammed...what does that tell you?

Back to tanks though. After playing some Ironhands with the new drops on gladiators and storm speeders. Even these 3+ save no invune units are pulling their weight. You can always just drop the points on bad units and they start to shine. Not the way I'd like to do it. However - GW approach right now seems to be. Make tanks cost more than a comparable unit of infantry...remove the ability to accept auras/strats - still susceptible to mass str 5 firepower whilst having an extra threat of anti tank firepower. Yet gets to be mobile with it's firepower and can shoot into combat at a -1...Right now the trade off for not accepting auras/strats is to high. However if you are able to get buffs some other way..."chapter traits" you can get by just fine with mass mech. Trust me...you'd rather dance in multi meltas with armor than deal with admech with infantry right now.

I think the best hotfix they could make right now would be. Tank every moster or tank that doesn't get core and increase it's wounds by 1/3 or drop it's points by like 15-25% depending on how bad the unit is. In addition no core infantry should probably also get a 10%% drop depending on how bad they are also.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/29 20:13:50


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 de
Ork Admiral Kroozin Da Kosmos on Da Hulk






Tyel wrote:
I guess if you only take one - but don't a lot of DG lists bring 3? Alongside say 3 units of DS, 1 unit of BL and then characters + 3 units of poxwalkers to sit on rear objectives.

It doesn't really matter a whole lot to our discussion - you can easily lose 2 PBC to a TAC list in a single turn unless you opponent is heavily relying on 2 damage weapons. You mostly need them for redundancy because DG don't really have any ranged heavy weapons that aren't on vehicles.

I just think if you could say swap the mortar for another 2 Entropy Cannons (agree on the spitters) would you really say "its useless, never take this?"

Yes, probably. A vindicator laser destroyer is pretty much a better version of the imaginary tank you are suggesting and no one would think that it's a great tank. Neither are a pair of MBH or a defiler who would have a similar output and durability.
Also, let's not split hairs on the word "useless", I specifically referred to it being "just as useless as a predator".

I can see the argument for it not being as good as the mortar because you sacrifice that first shot advantage, and certainly imagine some DG lists you wouldn't run it in. But I feel "useless" is a high bar.

The reason why the PBC works is not its durability or its entropy cannons. Land raiders, defilers and MBH can all take similar amounts of punishment and deal similar amounts of damage. The one thing that sets them apart is that unlike them, PBC they can just sit behind obscuring/los blocking terrain for multiple turns, deal significant damage (especially with its stratagem) from there and then come out when most your opponent's anti-tank is dead, tied up or not in range. When my predator destroyer with lascannon sponsons drives out of hiding in turn 4, there is no chance of it dealing enough damage to be a worthwhile Investment.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2021/06/29 21:05:39


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!
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: