No Vehicles

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.

**Melissia**

Ascalam wrote:If you're wearing armour they pretty much are, doubly so if you are T 4- 10 marines in a rhino, half are wounded by the explosion, 2 in six fail the armour save on average (rough an nasty math) = 1, possibly 2 deaths from their enclosed metal box becoming a fireball. Terminators are damn near immune.

Wait, you mean someone that's basically wearing a walking tank battlesuit while riding in a more traditional tracked tank APC has a roughly 1/5 chance of dying from the outer tank exploding? That's pretty bad odds for the double tank rider!

**Noisy_Marine**

Turn all vehicles into monstrous creatures. They are durable but still killable.

That or make it easier to kill vehicles. Having to roll a 5 or 6 on a pen sucks.

**DAaddict**

Take 1 manticore and a rhino with 10 troops inside or 1 manticore with 10 marines standing in cover. Chances are when targeted by the average two S10 templates a rhino will survive while the troops will suffer the consequenses. Even if the rhino does blow up, the chances of actually killing a marine is low.
The truly cheap transport is reserved for marines and to a lesser extent the IG and dark eldar. Dark eldar pay for theirs with paper thin armor and open topped +1 to the result goodness. A rhino at 35 points is a total joke when you even look at a minimum 5-man troop squad. You could go the survival route with 6 troops of 5 men in rhinoes - all capable of holding an objective and still have over 1000 points of killiness spread throughout your army to pound them into submission.

The Tau and Eldar pay (or overpay in relation to IG & SM) for their transports.

Now I am on the you cannot restrict transports as some armies need them but the regret I have is that they have made it an idiot's choice to not field marines in rhinos.

**loota boy**

I didn't vote beacuse this thread is silly. tanks are part of war. Getting rid of them would be very silly. Transports just need a slght cost increase, and wrecks and explosions just need to be more taxing. That is all.

**Ascalam**

Melissia wrote:
Ascalam wrote:If you're wearing armour they pretty much are, doubly so if you are T 4- 10 marines in a rhino, half are wounded by the explosion, 2 in six fail the armour save on average (rough an nasty math) = 1, possibly 2 deaths from their enclosed metal box becoming a fireball. Terminators are damn near immune.
Wait, you mean someone that's basically wearing a walking tank battlesuit while riding in a more traditional tracked tank APC has a roughly 1/5 chance of dying from the outer tank exploding? That's pretty bad odds for the double tank rider!

Actually it's ridiculously good odds. What you are failing to take into account is that the enemy weapons keep pace with the walking battlesuits for penetrating power.

The fluff on the tau railgun, for example describes it as punching a pist-sized hole through the tank, and then everyone inside being sucked through the hole as slurry. Not so much in game.

If a tank gets obliterated by a leman russ ( the plasma cannon one) the crew (who would normally get no armour save) walk out of the plasmaball unharmed?

If a trygon comes up under a rhino and eats it they open a door in it's gut and walk out when ?

If a Carnifex punched it's scythes through the hull like butter and does it's impression of a mixmaster no-one gets cut in half?

Power armour isn't a tank. It's futuristic plate armour that boosts your strength and has some nifty computer/hud support. It is very protective, but less than a tank's armour plating? I don't think so. A power armoured guy with T4 has a 50/50 chance of being wounded, then a 33% chance of taking that wound (approximately)

Terminator armour is a walking tank (to a degree- the armour's thinner than most imperial tanks) but it has a rather better than 1 in 5 chance of surviving.

50/50 it gets wounded, if it does then a 1 in 6 chance of it actually taking that wound.

Damn good odds for sitting in a crater that just melted adamantium and shattered ceramite

**Melissia**

No it's not. The guy is wearing enough armor to stop a cannon round. A bit of fire isn't gonna penetrate that reliably.

Just because a land raider explodes doesn't mean that the fire's hot enough to melt the metal. Vehicles aren't designed to take explosive stress from the inside.

**Ascalam**

How about a bit of plasma? Hypervelocity sharp-edged hunks of adamantium? 30 odd tons of hull structure collapsing on them? By comparison a cannon round is pretty small beer.

While we're on the subject of explosions Hydrostatic shock, kinetic torsion, enough brissance to punt you into confetti heading for outer orbit ? :0) If something is meant to move or rotate (like the joints in a set of power armour, say, then it can be rotated clean off by an explosion. If something is meant to tilt or slide it will (such as triggers - ricochets are a kicker) and if something is meant to pull free (like pins on grenades- thus kablowie, thus death) they will.

Land raiders (judging from the disassembled one on my desk, noting the structural lines and weld/seam points) would be more likely to focus the blast inwards. The doors are side-sliders, so would likely not blow out. The assault hatch might, but it's on some huge hydraulics. The roof,walls and floor are thick and sturdy enough that if the explosion wasn't enough to melt them the force would reflect. Whoever is inside would be chunky salsa.

Assuming that the raider wasn't ripped apart by the explosion (and the force inside the tank to do this would be extreme enough to pulp anyone inside) the force would reflect back from the buckled hull, further pressurizing the hull.

Armour plating does you jack when surrounded by enough pressure, especially if it hasn't been designed to take an even, massive and sudden pressure without warning. Deep sea submersibles have issues with going below a certain depth, and it's not that terribly deep (and they are actually designed for it)..

Even assuming that the explosion flung you all miraculously clear, with totally undamaged armour and equipment stull hung on your body rather than all over the battlefield, and without your ammunition cooking off fire is no joke.

A bit of fire won't penetrate armour plating. A LOT of very hot fire (like from a reactor cookoff or ammuntion going up) will. The explosion would also include said ammo (if it went, which seems likely), and a concussive shockwave that does unpleasant things to gear and bones alike.

However in the interests of fluid gaming this is reduced to 'tin box go boom!'. My objection is when the sardines in the tin box are barely affected by it

I used to blow things up for a living. Great pay, but the long term health plan sucks..

**Melissia**

Ascalam wrote:How about a bit of plasma? Hypervelocity sharp-edged hunks of adamantium? 30 odd tons of hull structure collapsing on them?

1: Unlikely, as the vehicles have safeguards to prevent that. It's why vehicles can fire plasma weapons without danger unlike infantry.

2: While dangerous sure, it's still really only worth an S3, at most an S4.

3: Please, power armor has been stepped on by far heavier than merely THAT and survived to tell the tale. Nevermind terminator armor.

All in all, your suggestion is still rather inane.

**Ascalam**

1/. Until the plasma container is breached. Then you're sharing storage space with a small sun. Plasma weaponry has been heavily touted in the fluff as being unstable as hell anyway. The reason vehicles don't get hot is that hey can mount heat sinks, unlike infantry. It does jack if the canisters breach.

2/. S4 is an ork running up to you and punching you in the face. Powerful, sure, but hardly exploding-vehicle powerful.
Unless that ork is going at about mach 15 (stormboy?) that's a good bit more than S4.

3/. When? Barring the rabid marine fanwank that is most of the BL books? I can only think of one occasion where someone in power armour was under 30 tons (of a shifting material, not a solid wall) and that was Mephiston getting buried under buildings so often he made it a hobby

.

Even if the marines survived being trapped under 30+ tons of bulkhead they're going nowhere, as even ward wouldn't argue that a marine can deadlift 30 tons....at least so far.

And your grasp of explosive theory is negligible

If you don't like my suggestion feel free (i really don't mind

) , but don't try to argue that stepping calmly out of a detonating vehicle mainly unwounded is realistic.

40K isn't realistic. It's fantasy. I know this.

I like mine to be a bit grittier (like having physics work, when the situation calls for it

) than you apparently do.

**Norade**

Ascalam wrote:1/. Until the plasma container is breached. Then you're sharing storage space with a small sun. Plasma weaponry has been heavily touted in the fluff as being unstable as hell anyway. The reason vehicles don't get hot is that hey can mount heat sinks, unlike infantry. It does jack if the canisters breach.

Except that even termies shrug off plasma from time to time and that is without the extra armor that a vehicle would have between them and an exploding plasma canister. You also seem to assume that these plasma containers aren't designed to vent their load even after taking horrific damage. This is the way modern tanks work with blowout panels that help channel the pressure wave from explosives up and out the top of the tank to aid the crew's survival.

2/. S4 is an ork running up to you and punching you in the face. Powerful, sure, but hardly exploding-vehicle powerful.
Unless that ork is going at about mach 15 (stormboy?) that's a good bit more than S4.

S4 is also a fully automatic RPG launcher, aka. a bolter so you have a fair bit fitting under the S4 heading.

3/. When? Barring the rabid marine fanwank that is most of the BL books? I can only think of one occasion where someone in power armour was under 30 tons (of a shifting material, not a solid wall) and that was Mephiston getting buried under buildings so often he made it a hobby .

Even if the marines survived being trapped under 30+ tons of bulkhead they're going nowhere, as even ward wouldn't argue that a marine can deadlift 30 tons....at least so far.

Ignoring the bits where space marines get stepped on by Dreadnoughts and aren't instantly killed, or where Grimaldus survives a church falling on him, or any of the other fluff examples that you're willfully ignoring to make this point.

And your grasp of explosive theory is negligible

If you don't like my suggestion feel free (i really don't mind ) , but don't try to argue that stepping calmly out of a detonating vehicle mainly unwounded is realistic.

40K isn't realistic. It's fantasy. I know this.

I like mine to be a bit grittier (like having physics work, when the situation calls for it ) than you apparently do.

You're ignoring the fact that SM armor is made of the same stuff as they build their tanks out of and that TDA is even tougher still. You also ignore the fact that modern forces have survived exploding vehicles before, mainly by getting out before the vehicle goes up, and that not every exploded result means that the crew was inside when the explosion happened. If you really wanted to make the rules better you could replace the current system with an initiative test with +2 for open topped and +1 for assault vehicles. Models that fail take a hit equal to the weapon that nailed the vehicle. This would open the game up to buying safety systems to improve your passengers survival odds.

**Ascalam**

Norade wrote:
Ascalam wrote:1/. Until the plasma container is breached. Then you're sharing storage space with a small sun. Plasma weaponry has been heavily touted in the fluff as being unstable as hell anyway. The reason vehicles don't get hot is that hey can mount heat sinks, unlike infantry. It does jack if the canisters breach.

Except that even termies shrug off plasma from time to time and that is without the extra armor that a vehicle would have between them and an exploding plasma canister. You also seem to assume that these plasma containers aren't designed to vent their load even after taking horrific damage. This is the way modern tanks work with blowout panels that help channel the pressure wave from explosives up and out the top of the tank to aid the crew's survival.

The only reason Termies get to is the forcefield generators in their armour (5+ inv). The regular armour does jack against plasma. Plasma is literally as hot as the sun, which is why it punches through terminator armour like a hot cliche through butter. The tanks are not designed to survive solar temperatures, so they will melt.

Judging from the way they tend to vent boiling coolant all over their operators in the man-carried versions i'd imagine crew safety is not among the imperium's concerns. Plasma is held in a magnetic field box, generated by a power source. If this box is breached (even slightly) the plasma explodes out wherever the breach happens and reacts catastrophically with the environment outside the 'box'. If they 'vent their load' thus kablowie, thus death. The get's hot rule represents a coolant overheat, not a true plasma vent. If the vehicle gets blown up there is no coolant (it needs pumps and pumps need energy) and no magnetic field containment (no power) thus boom. Plasma is not something anyone sane wants to be anywhere near.

2/. S4 is an ork running up to you and punching you in the face. Powerful, sure, but hardly exploding-vehicle powerful.
Unless that ork is going at about mach 15 (stormboy?) that's a good bit more than S4.

S4 is also a fully automatic RPG launcher, aka. a bolter so you have a fair bit fitting under the S4 heading.

Firing a relatively small bullet (minirocket) that can be stopped by relatively light armour. Not really in the same class.

3/. When? Barring the rabid marine fanwank that is most of the BL books? I can only think of one occasion where someone in power armour was under 30 tons (of a shifting material, not a solid wall) and that was Mephiston getting buried under buildings so often he made it a hobby .

Even if the marines survived being trapped under 30+ tons of bulkhead they're going nowhere, as even ward wouldn't argue that a marine can deadlift 30 tons....at least so far.

Ignoring the bits where space marines get stepped on by Dreadnoughts and aren't instantly killed, or where Grimaldus survives a church falling on him, or any of the other fluff examples that you're willfully ignoring to make this point.

Or haven't read yet I'm not a fluff encyclopedia (yet). Dreads probably weigh a tad less than a land raider (or even half of one). When does someone get stepped on by a dread? I'm curious now

Church falling- = heavy pile o bricks, not a solid 30 ton block. (30 ton is not a defiitive weight.. likely Landraiders are far heavier ) Getting out from a pile of bricks is easier than from under a solid slab. There are vanilla humans in this world who have survived having buildings fall on them, so the feat isn't THAT impressive.

And your grasp of explosive theory is negligible

If you don't like my suggestion feel free (i really don't mind ) , but don't try to argue that stepping calmly out of a detonating vehicle mainly unwounded is realistic.

40K isn't realistic. It's fantasy. I know this.

I like mine to be a bit grittier (like having physics work, when the situation calls for it ) than you apparently do.

You're ignoring the fact that SM armor is made of the same stuff as they build their tanks out of and that TDA is even tougher still. You also ignore the fact that modern forces have survived exploding vehicles before, mainly by getting out before the vehicle goes up, and that not every exploded result means that the crew was inside when the explosion happened. If you really wanted to make the rules better you could replace the current system with an initiative test with +2 for open topped and +1 for assault vehicles. Models that fail take a hit equal to the weapon that nailed the vehicle. This would open the game up to buying safety systems to improve your passengers survival odds.

But both are far thinner than the tank armour in question. I'm not ignoring it.

True. However we are assuming the situation that a missile comes streaking across a battlefield while they are en route to somewhere (as they haven't disembarked) and hits before they have a chance to throw themselves clear. If we allow for them to have seen the supersonic missile launch, and bail out the current rules fit a bit better, but that is making a pretty huge assumption that everyone in a vehicle is hopped up on speed and precognitive.

Interesting idea on the initiative test. Might playtest that a bit. It will leave my orks being even slower to exit a vehicle than Master Chief, but hey..

**crocodoom**

Every Race needs vehicles
Eg.
SM, lots, but mainly rhino
Orks, Looted tank, stompa, things like that. ( Dont forget da fighta bombas!!

Eldar, Fire Prism
CSM, Rhinos are essential
IG, Vehicles make up half their army
Tau, Barracuda, Drone Harminger
Necron, Destroyer, monolith
DE, ( Sorry dont know much about them, edit this soon )
SoB, Excorcist
Tyranid, Carnifex I guess, but its more of a monstrous

**Norade**

The only reason Termies get to is the forcefield generators in their armour (5+ inv). The regular armour does jack against plasma. Plasma is literally as hot as the sun, which is why it punches through terminator armour like a hot cliche through butter. The tanks are not designed to survive solar temperatures, so they will melt.

Judging from the way they tend to vent boiling coolant all over their operators in the man-carried versions i'd imagine crew safety is not among the imperium's concerns. Plasma is held in a magnetic field box, generated by a power source. If this box is breached (even slightly) the plasma explodes out wherever the breach happens and reacts catastrophically with the environment outside the 'box'. If they 'vent their load' thus kablowie, thus death. The get's hot rule represents a coolant overheat, not a true plasma vent. If the vehicle gets blown up there is no coolant (it needs pumps and pumps need energy) and no magnetic field containment (no power) thus boom. Plasma is not something anyone sane wants to be anywhere near.

Yes, so explain why that save doesn't work when the vehicle explodes when it even works versus Strength D weapons? You also ignore the fact that you can make sure that when power is shut off plasma vents out whichever side you want by simply making one side with a hatch atop it that will vent it straight up. You also seem to assume that you have a large volume of plasma ready to explode when it's far better to create plasma on demand by feeding gas or liquid into an intense heat source. Not to mention that without a containment method the Plasma will be incredibly diffuse and you'll be seeing less dense steam.

Firing a relatively small bullet (minirocket) that can be stopped by relatively light armour. Not really in the same class.

I assume you have the math to show the power of a bolter right? Well, thankfully I have and to get an average based on explosive power and not purely off of fluff.

Calculation wrote:Bolter: This weapons is unique and unlike with the AK-47 we have little to go by for real life comparisons so we must turn to the books and see what feats they have done to determine what data to use for them. What we do know is that they commonly blow head sized holes in unarmored people and have depleted uranium tips to aid in penetration, they are fired in 4 round bursts, and based on the cross section sections seen in 'Imperial Armour Volume 2: Space Marines and Forces of the Inquisition 2nd edition' can hold between 10 and 25 grams of explosive. Using a high explosive such as ONC, the best we can currently produce, that would give us a value of between 113,000 - 283,000 joules per round and 452,000 and 1,132,000 joules for a full burst. However we know that 40k has much more powerful explosives as evidenced by coin sized hand grenades being used by space marines in some fluff. Thus we must up our numbers by the average of 7.26 grams (coin sized explosive) and 180 grams (modern hand grenade) meaning that bolter shells are going to be between 2 and 24 times more powerful than modern explosives. This leaves us with a final value per bolt of 226,000 joules at the low end and 6,792,000 joules at the high end, averaging again to be fair, this leaves us with 3,500,000 joules per bolt meaning they are able to vaporize 110 mL of water and cause a fair bit more explosive damage.

For comparison to the bolter shell math a modern hand grenade releases 740,000 joules of explosive force.

So saying that shrugging a bolter round is trivial isn't really on the mark. We also know from fluff that bolter rounds do punch through and kill people in carapace armor just as they do on the tabletop.

Or haven't read yet I'm not a fluff encyclopedia (yet). Dreads probably weigh a tad less than a land raider (or even half of one). When does someone get stepped on by a dread? I'm curious now

Church falling- = heavy pile o bricks, not a solid 30 ton block. (30 ton is not a defiitive weight.. likely Landraiders are far heavier ) Getting out from a pile of bricks is easier than from under a solid slab. There are vanilla humans in this world who have survived having buildings fall on them, so the feat isn't THAT impressive.

I'm drawing a blank on the name of the book, so I'll get back to you when I can find it.

But both are far thinner than the tank armour in question. I'm not ignoring it.

True. However we are assuming the situation that a missile comes streaking across a battlefield while they are en route to somewhere (as they haven't disembarked) and hits before they have a chance to throw themselves clear. If we allow for them to have seen the supersonic missile launch, and bail out the current rules fit a bit better, but that is making a pretty huge assumption that everyone in a vehicle is hopped up on speed and precognitive.

Interesting idea on the initiative test. Might playtest that a bit. It will leave my orks being even slower to exit a vehicle than Master Chief, but hey..

You're ignoring early warning systems that even modern tanks have and the fact that at least in some cases the forces in question are precognitive and likely on speed. Also, don't bring MC up, I have many posts proving that he's not all that versus modern weapons let alone 40k doom guns.

**Lord Magnus**

A discussion about whether or not we should use vehicles on the tabletop has turned into a debate on the safety of the passengers in an exploding transport. We are also trying to apply REAL LIFE to 40K which is not practical. Don't compare 40k to today, its a whole different animal.

**Ascalam**

Norade wrote:
The only reason Termies get to is the forcefield generators in their armour (5+ inv). The regular armour does jack against plasma. Plasma is literally as hot as the sun, which is why it punches through terminator armour like a hot cliche through butter. The tanks are not designed to survive solar temperatures, so they will melt.

Judging from the way they tend to vent boiling coolant all over their operators in the man-carried versions i'd imagine crew safety is not among the imperium's concerns. Plasma is held in a magnetic field box, generated by a power source. If this box is breached (even slightly) the plasma explodes out wherever the breach happens and reacts catastrophically with the environment outside the 'box'. If they 'vent their load' thus kablowie, thus death. The get's hot rule represents a coolant overheat, not a true plasma vent. If the vehicle gets blown up there is no coolant (it needs pumps and pumps need energy) and no magnetic field containment (no power) thus boom. Plasma is not something anyone sane wants to be anywhere near.

Yes, so explain why that save doesn't work when the vehicle explodes when it even works versus Strength D weapons? You also ignore the fact that you can make sure that when power is shut off plasma vents out whichever side you want by simply making one side with a hatch atop it that will vent it straight up. You also seem to assume that you have a large volume of plasma ready to explode when it's far better to create plasma on demand by feeding gas or liquid into an intense heat source. Not to mention that without a containment method the Plasma will be incredibly diffuse and you'll be seeing less dense steam.

*shrug* Not fussed. You could allow inv saves if present. Mind you that said i think a man portable forcefield working agaisnt titan/oribital weponry is a bit silly.

I assume the volume of plasma based on fluff about the plasma canisters exploding like small suns (without necessarily being exposed to massive heat on impact. Da Rippa fires them as ammo from an ogryn ripper gun, which is effectively a rotary grenade launcher that normally fires solids.

Firing a relatively small bullet (minirocket) that can be stopped by relatively light armour. Not really in the same class.

I assume you have the math to show the power of a bolter right? Well, thankfully I have and to get an average based on explosive power and not purely off of fluff.

Calculation wrote:Bolter: This weapons is unique and unlike with the AK-47 we have little to go by for real life comparisons so we must turn to the books and see what feats they have done to determine what data to use for them. What we do know is that they commonly blow head sized holes in unarmored people and have depleted uranium tips to aid in penetration, they are fired in 4 round bursts, and based on the cross section sections seen in 'Imperial Armour Volume 2: Space Marines and Forces of the Inquisition 2nd edition' can hold between 10 and 25 grams of explosive. Using a high explosive such as ONC, the best we can currently produce, that would give us a value of between 113,000 - 283,000 joules per round and 452,000 and 1,132,000 joules for a full burst. However we know that 40k has much more powerful explosives as evidenced by coin sized hand grenades being used by space marines in some fluff. Thus we must up our numbers by the average of 7.26 grams (coin sized explosive) and 180 grams (modern hand grenade) meaning that bolter shells are going to be between 2 and 24 times more powerful than modern explosives. This leaves us with a final value per bolt of 226,000 joules at the low end and 6,792,000 joules at the high end, averaging again to be fair, this leaves us with 3,500,000 joules per bolt meaning they are able to vaporize 110 mL of water and cause a fair bit more explosive damage.

For comparison to the bolter shell math a modern hand grenade releases 740,000 joules of explosive force.

So saying that shrugging a bolter round is trivial isn't really on the mark. We also know from fluff that bolter rounds do punch through and kill people in carapace armor just as they do on the tabletop.

That they do. It can be stopped by carapace though, and often will (50/50). Also bear in mind that rockets don't deliver all their energy at the barrel. They need time to build speed. (also that i doubt GW actually maths real explosives for their fluff effects. An charging ork fist (same strength) should be autokilling guard too by your math, hitting like tnt. It doesn't, in the fluff. Tau rifles should be hitting so hard that people are blasted off their feet by the energy exchange, as they're even higher strength. The guy who gets used as a footrug by a dread ought to be dead, but as a SM he's plot armoured.

Or haven't read yet I'm not a fluff encyclopedia (yet). Dreads probably weigh a tad less than a land raider (or even half of one). When does someone get stepped on by a dread? I'm curious now

Church falling- = heavy pile o bricks, not a solid 30 ton block. (30 ton is not a defiitive weight.. likely Landraiders are far heavier ) Getting out from a pile of bricks is easier than from under a solid slab. There are vanilla humans in this world who have survived having buildings fall on them, so the feat isn't THAT impressive.

I'm drawing a blank on the name of the book, so I'll get back to you when I can find it.

Cool. Sounds interesting.

But both are far thinner than the tank armour in question. I'm not ignoring it.

True. However we are assuming the situation that a missile comes streaking across a battlefield while they are en route to somewhere (as they haven't disembarked) and hits before they have a chance to throw themselves clear. If we allow for them to have seen the supersonic missile launch, and bail out the current rules fit a bit better, but that is making a pretty huge assumption that everyone in a vehicle is hopped up on speed and precognitive.

Interesting idea on the initiative test. Might playtest that a bit. It will leave my orks being even slower to exit a vehicle than Master Chief, but hey..

You're ignoring early warning systems that even modern tanks have and the fact that at least in some cases the forces in question are precognitive and likely on speed. Also, don't bring MC up, I have many posts proving that he's not all that versus modern weapons let alone 40k doom guns.

I'm aware of the 'panic button' that denotes a lockon. Trust me, an APC that has been locked and is moving at speed (ie not stationary) would not have time to bail troops. They would stay in, and hope for the armour to save them, or try to bail, but likely not make it.

True.. The Dark Eldar come to mind on that...

I mentioned MC for his lamentable inability to throw himself from a vehicle before a missile hits from the other end of a map. His fluff/books/action figure matter little to me

**Your Friend Doctor Robert**

Norade wrote:

3/. When? Barring the rabid marine fanwank that is most of the BL books? I can only think of one occasion where someone in power armour was under 30 tons (of a shifting material, not a solid wall) and that was Mephiston getting buried under buildings so often he made it a hobby .

Even if the marines survived being trapped under 30+ tons of bulkhead they're going nowhere, as even ward wouldn't argue that a marine can deadlift 30 tons....at least so far.

Ignoring the bits where space marines get stepped on by Dreadnoughts and aren't instantly killed, or where Grimaldus survives a church falling on him, or any of the other fluff examples that you're willfully ignoring to make this point.

People survive being buried by tons of stuff all the time. Every major earthquake they spend the first few days just digging people up.

In any case we're off topic.

I do like the idea of problems with vehicle mounted Plasma weapons.

Coolant Breach: Whenever a weapon with Gets Hot is removed from a vehicle by a Weapon Destroyed result(or similar) the vehicle automatically takes a single hit against Rear armor from that weapon.

**Kilkrazy**

Norade wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:Let us be honest with each other.

The game wasn't designed for vehicles in the numbers that SM and IG armies can put on tabletop because they are so cheap, and effective at letting the troops shoot from inside.

Care to back that statement up with some actual facts?

The IG Codex.
The SM Codexes.
Everyone else's codexes.
The number of SM and IG codex armies seen at tournaments in vehicles.
Everyones' complaints about vehicles.

**Norade**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Norade wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:Let us be honest with each other.

The game wasn't designed for vehicles in the numbers that SM and IG armies can put on tabletop because they are so cheap, and effective at letting the troops shoot from inside.

Care to back that statement up with some actual facts?

The IG Codex.
The SM Codexes.
Everyone else's codexes.
The number of SM and IG codex armies seen at tournaments in vehicles.
Everyones' complaints about vehicles.

None of this proves that the game wasn't designed around a large number of transports and it in fact goes to show that the designers likely wanted people to use transports more often by making them so cost effective. You'll also notice that not everybody has complaints about vehicles, some are just louder than others. The fact of the matter is, people buying rhinos for armies that in previous editions played on foot makes GW a ton of money and they enjoy it. Next edition they may go back to foot hordes being great and force people to buy more models that way.

**DAaddict**

Norade wrote: None of this proves that the game wasn't designed around a large number of transports and it in fact goes to show that the designers likely wanted people to use transports more often by making them so cost effective. You'll also notice that not everybody has complaints about vehicles, some are just louder than others. The fact of the matter is, people buying rhinos for armies that in previous editions played on foot makes GW a ton of money and they enjoy it. Next edition they may go back to foot hordes being great and force people to buy more models that way.

It just hits some of us as very ham-handed to lower the cost of vehicles @ 33 %, modify the vehicle charts to make vehicles about 50% more survivable and then remove the minuses of being in a penetrated vehicle. It is just a big change from 4th edition.

Agreed it is primarily a sales ploy as every marine can afford to field at least one more rhino and squad inside so it improves sales by about $60 per marine player. I am just wincing thinking of the tau codex dropping the cost of fish by about 30 points and eldar etc to bring them in line with the reduced costs of rhinos, chimera and predators.

**Kilkrazy**

The cost of vehicles was only reduced for some vehicles and armies, mainly the IoM army transports.

It certainly didn't change Ork, Tau, Eldar, and Necron vehicle costs because these were all assigned under earlier edition rules, while Tyranids don't have vehicles at all.

The game is also supposedly designed around points costs providing balance, and this clearly isn't true. So it's wrong to claim the game is correctly designed.

**Norade**

Kilkrazy wrote:The cost of vehicles was only reduced for some vehicles and armies, mainly the IoM army transports.

It certainly didn't change Ork, Tau, Eldar, and Necron vehicle costs because these were all assigned under earlier edition rules, while Tyranids don't have vehicles at all.

The game is also supposedly designed around points costs providing balance, and this clearly isn't true. So it's wrong to claim the game is correctly designed.

It's wrong to say that a new codex is balanced versus the old when old ones will be updated in due time (or not for Necrons).

**Melissia**

Actually, Necrons are next.

**Norade**

Melissia wrote:Actually, Necrons are next.

I know, I was referring to the timely part.

**DAaddict**

Kilkrazy wrote:The cost of vehicles was only reduced for some vehicles and armies, mainly the IoM army transports.

It certainly didn't change Ork, Tau, Eldar, and Necron vehicle costs because these were all assigned under earlier edition rules, while Tyranids don't have vehicles at all.

The game is also supposedly designed around points costs providing balance, and this clearly isn't true. So it's wrong to claim the game is correctly designed.

Agreed it is IoM. I don't know about you but the opponents I see are at least 50% IoM. Also the reason none of the races have seen a reduction in cost... as I recall
it has been Deamons and Tyrannid to go with BA, SW, and GK so the fact that they have seen no decrease is a moot point.

**Kilkrazy**

Norade wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:The cost of vehicles was only reduced for some vehicles and armies, mainly the IoM army transports.

It certainly didn't change Ork, Tau, Eldar, and Necron vehicle costs because these were all assigned under earlier edition rules, while Tyranids don't have vehicles at all.

The game is also supposedly designed around points costs providing balance, and this clearly isn't true. So it's wrong to claim the game is correctly designed.

It's wrong to say that a new codex is balanced versus the old when old ones will be updated in due time (or not for Necrons).

The game rules state early on that forces are balanced by points costs. That clearly isn't true.

Various codexes are now years out of date. It's very noticeable that Imperial codexes published in 5th edition have cheap, effective transport vehicles. It's no use if the out of date Xeno books get updated shortly before a new edition outdates them.

Why should users accept that situation as right and proper?

**Norade**

Kilkrazy wrote:
Norade wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:The cost of vehicles was only reduced for some vehicles and armies, mainly the IoM army transports.

It certainly didn't change Ork, Tau, Eldar, and Necron vehicle costs because these were all assigned under earlier edition rules, while Tyranids don't have vehicles at all.

The game is also supposedly designed around points costs providing balance, and this clearly isn't true. So it's wrong to claim the game is correctly designed.

It's wrong to say that a new codex is balanced versus the old when old ones will be updated in due time (or not for Necrons).

The game rules state early on that forces are balanced by points costs. That clearly isn't true.

Various codexes are now years out of date. It's very noticeable that Imperial codexes published in 5th edition have cheap, effective transport vehicles. It's no use if the out of date Xeno books get updated shortly before a new edition outdates them.

Why should users accept that situation as right and proper?

That's always been the way of things and a blanket ban on vehicles is frankly not the way to go about fixing things. While some lists have worse vehicle costs than others things like the Monolith may not be cheaper but they require S9 or higher to kill now and the Eldar and Tau still got the vehicle toughness upgrade.

**Kilkrazy**

I don't advocate a blanket ban on vehicles.

Also, it wasn't always the way of things in first to third editions, or in other SF games. The lack of timely and balanced Codex updates started with GW during 3rd edition.

**Norade**

Kilkrazy wrote:I don't advocate a blanket ban on vehicles.

Also, it wasn't always the way of things in first to third editions, or in other SF games. The lack of timely and balanced Codex updates started with GW during 3rd edition.

I'd totally agree that they should have balanced Codex updates that ensure that all armies are updated at least once an edition just to keep things fair.

**Ysclyth**

I know that transports are quite cheap and I do believe they could use some tweaking, especially for some of those high toughness armies. But as a DE player, I consider making explosions more deadly to hurt to no end. Considering transports are open topped skimmers, the relative ease with which you can destroy the vehicle, the low toughness, and armor save values on most of the units in the vehicle. I can expect making explosions very costly to DE.

But, I have no problem with restricting vehicles that have armor that add up to over 33, or turning vehicles into MCs. Both those options make me very happy.

**Norade**

Why does everybody think this stupid idea of limiting armor values for transports is such a great idea? Necrons would be even worse with it and if the idea is to balance older with new then you already fail with this change. Not to mention that while I'm sure a DE player would love the enemy to have vehicles that are only marginally more powerful than they have forcing the enemy not to have predators or dreadnoughts is frankly slowed in anything resembling a fair game. It also does nothing to stop the main issue which is transport spam.

The best idea to make transports more risky is to have a simple initiative test on a D6 for explodes results; with bonuses for open topped and assault transports. Anything that fails gets nothing but an invulnerable save and multiwound models are just considered tough enough to pull themselves from the wreckage. Wrecked results are treated the same as they are now with 1d6 4 wounds inflicted on the squad bailing out. Transports are still good, but not so powerful as before.