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.

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

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

No one wants a 100% real simulation, but its possible to simplify the game without throwing sense, and a bit of realism, out of the window. I am not saying Orc Boyz shouldnt be able to kill an armored Vehicle in Melee. They shouldnt be able to do it without AP Weapons.

p5freak wrote:

They shouldnt be able to do it without AP Weapons.

Ok, just make choppas AP-3 then Just write on their background that ork choppas are blessed by weirdboyz and became magical anti tank tools

Or double the nobz/meganobz/warbosses attacks. Otherwise even S12 AP-3 power klaws are not be able to destroy a vehicle without the support of S4 choppas.

Seriously the new system with a lot of wounds is based on balance, vehicles and some characters have a lot of wounds also because there are some armies, like orks, that can't spam anti tank. Ork shooting hits on 5s with the majority of their units, they mostly rely on the number of S4 shots. If you make them useless, they won't be able to win a single game. And even with choppas that can hurt vehicles, they are among the worst armies.

I don't care if a savage with a fist or an axe can wreck a tank, it's not the point. The point is making every army viable without modifying their style. Vehicles, especially the SM ones, are even too resilient now.

p5freak wrote:

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

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

No one wants a 100% real simulation, but its possible to simplify the game without throwing sense, and a bit of realism, out of the window. I am not saying Orc Boyz shouldnt be able to kill an armored Vehicle in Melee. They shouldnt be able to do it without AP Weapons.

So you're saying Ork Boyz shouldn't be able to kill an armored vehicle in melee as they have no option for weapons with an AP value. They were also able to kill most armored vehicles in melee in the last 4 editions as well, so no change for most things, except they used to do it quicker. I don't get the obsession with AP and tanks, AP has literally never been the important stat for killing tanks, and in fact matters more now than ever before. And if you say "well ork Boyz should have options for AP weapons", that would either make them over costed trash, or horribly broken against everything else. So the current system is better than the previous one, as your vehicle likely survives the charge, then walks away and the orks get shot by other things.

Breng77 wrote:

So you're saying Ork Boyz shouldn't be able to kill an armored vehicle in melee as they have no option for weapons with an AP value. They were also able to kill most armored vehicles in melee in the last 4 editions as well, so no change for most things, except they used to do it quicker. I don't get the obsession with AP and tanks, AP has literally never been the important stat for killing tanks, and in fact matters more now than ever before. And if you say "well ork Boyz should have options for AP weapons", that would either make them over costed trash, or horribly broken against everything else. So the current system is better than the previous one, as your vehicle likely survives the charge, then walks away and the orks get shot by other things.

I started playing with 7th edition, no idea how it was before. Yes, i'm saying Ork Boyz (or any other unit) shouldnt be able to wound armored vehicles without AP weapons, or only on 6+. The Purpose of AP Weapons is to penetrate Armor. GW could change the rules to give Boyz Big Choppas, which have -1 AP, i think. I dont have the Orc Index, to look it up. Orcs do have AP melee weapons, dont they ?

They have p.klaws/killsaws but only a few units or sargents can have them, and they're very expensive. A unit with 5-6 models equipped with those weapons costs too much and can be wipe out quite easily.

GW has desinged orks to rely on their AP0 hits, because they can have a lot of them. With the system that you propose the ork codex should be completely re-written.

And currently S4 hits are just a supporting (but necessary) backup for AP melee weapons, they don't do the job alone.

Even flamers are only D3 instead of D6 like any other imperium flamer. Orks trukks are weaker than rhinos but cost 10 points more....

The purpose of AP weapon is to hurt armors with a few shots, they're not designed to be the only weapons that can wreck armored vehicles. Even in the previous editions basic weapons with no AP were able to damage AV. The only difference is that now every vehicle can suffer wounds from S4 hits, but since they have a save and way more wounds than before they are much more resilient than they've ever been.

p5freak wrote:

Breng77 wrote:

So you're saying Ork Boyz shouldn't be able to kill an armored vehicle in melee as they have no option for weapons with an AP value. They were also able to kill most armored vehicles in melee in the last 4 editions as well, so no change for most things, except they used to do it quicker. I don't get the obsession with AP and tanks, AP has literally never been the important stat for killing tanks, and in fact matters more now than ever before. And if you say "well ork Boyz should have options for AP weapons", that would either make them over costed trash, or horribly broken against everything else. So the current system is better than the previous one, as your vehicle likely survives the charge, then walks away and the orks get shot by other things.

I started playing with 7th edition, no idea how it was before. Yes, i'm saying Ork Boyz (or any other unit) shouldnt be able to wound armored vehicles without AP weapons, or only on 6+. The Purpose of AP Weapons is to penetrate Armor. GW could change the rules to give Boyz Big Choppas, which have -1 AP, i think. I dont have the Orc Index, to look it up. Orcs do have AP melee weapons, dont they ?

Orks do have melee AP weapons. But Big Choppas on a squad of boyz would be somewhat cost prohibitive at current (boyz would be 15 points per model), but lets say that turns out to be good. Do you really want Orks able to take squads with 90 S6 Ap -1 D2 attacks? If so say good bye to multi wound infantry, any vehicles you would want to take as they would dish out on average 20 wounds per turn to any vehicle. Worse if you buff them with characters (up to 42 wounds from one squad.) So either this option (currently 450 points) is way too good, or it is way over costed due to its durability. Well maybe you could limit how many they could take, which is what we have now, but then you end up with squads getting tied up where only 1 or 2 models can do anything. This is bad game design.

Given that you started in an edition where AP against vehicles was super meaningless I'm surprised with your obsession with AP. In 7th Ork boyz were more effective at killing most vehicles with their non-ap weapons than they are now, the exceptions were the rare-Rear armor 11+, or Walkers. Only 2 AP values mattered in 7th 1 and 2, and for the most part Vehicles just got glanced to death, by weapons with little to no AP at all.

I just don't get the big difference between needing AP -1 (old AP 4 which did nothing in 7th to vehicles), and allowing AP 0 to hurt things. Further if you designed a system where AP -1 was needed to even scratch the paint, chances are those weapons would be super terrible at hurting vehicles. But in reality AP matters so much more in this edition than it ever did before for killing vehicles (especially in 6th and 7th), because vehicles actually have armor saves.

What your complaint really seems to be is that S4 wounds lots of vehicles on 5s, which is more a failure of GW making most vehicles T7 or lower, not anything to do with AP. Even then though with the rare exception, all those vehicles took more "wounds" and died faster to S4 (in close combat) in 7th than in 8th, as I have already shown.

Also all armored vehicles? They shouldn't be able to wounds say land speeders, or ork buggies?

Really you just need to make sure 30 orks don't charge your vehicle at full strength, which is not hard to do.

Breng77 wrote:

Orks do have melee AP weapons. But Big Choppas on a squad of boyz would be somewhat cost prohibitive at current (boyz would be 15 points per model), but lets say that turns out to be good. Do you really want Orks able to take squads with 90 S6 Ap -1 D2 attacks?

I dont have the Orc Index, i dont know the exact Stats for the Big Choppa. I played against Orcs, and one Unit had Big Choppaz, with AP-1. Of course S6 and D2 would be to much.

Breng77 wrote:

Given that you started in an edition where AP against vehicles was super meaningless I'm surprised with your obsession with AP. In 7th Ork boyz were more effective at killing most vehicles with their non-ap weapons than they are now, the exceptions were the rare-Rear armor 11+, or Walkers. Only 2 AP values mattered in 7th 1 and 2, and for the most part Vehicles just got glanced to death, by weapons with little to no AP at all.

AP in 7th was not super meaningless. AP1 gave +2 on the damage chart, and AP2 gave +1 on the damage chart. It wasnt easy to get a pen, hitting the side, or the rear was the key.

Breng77 wrote:

I just don't get the big difference between needing AP -1 (old AP 4 which did nothing in 7th to vehicles), and allowing AP 0 to hurt things. Further if you designed a system where AP -1 was needed to even scratch the paint, chances are those weapons would be super terrible at hurting vehicles.

AP-1 is the smallest number which should be able to hurt armor. Therefore the chance should be small. But since Boyz have lots of attacks they would be quite good at killing armored Vehicles. I wouldnt mind Vehicles having an automatic AP-1 in the back, because thats their weak spot.

Breng77 wrote:

But in reality AP matters so much more in this edition than it ever did before for killing vehicles (especially in 6th and 7th), because vehicles actually have armor saves.

Thats right. And because AP is so much important in this edition, non AP shouldnt be able to wound armor.

What your complaint really seems to be is that S4 wounds lots of vehicles on 5s, which is more a failure of GW making most vehicles T7 or lower, not anything to do with AP. Even then though with the rare exception, all those vehicles took more "wounds" and died faster to S4 (in close combat) in 7th than in 8th, as I have already shown.

No, i dont mind S4 wounding T7 Vehicles at 5+. One way around that would be to give the Vehicle two dice armor save, if the wounding weapon has no AP. Although the wound chart is somewhat screwed. Its not fair that it makes no Difference that the Chance of wounding at T8 is the same for S5-7.

Breng77 wrote:

Also all armored vehicles? They shouldn't be able to wounds say land speeders, or ork buggies?

I would call anything T7+ armored, below its not armored. Boyz could easily kill a Land Speeder, wounding it on 5+, because its only T6, not armored.

p5freak wrote:


AP in 7th was not super meaningless. AP1 gave +2 on the damage chart, and AP2 gave +1 on the damage chart. It wasnt easy to get a pen, hitting the side, or the rear was the key.

No AP was pretty meaningless, because most vehicles dies from loss of all HP, so things like Scat bikes with no AP just ate vehicles that were Av 12 and below. AP3 did not matter at all nor did AP 4. Strength was the big determining factor for hurting vehicles, followed by number of shots. Ap was a nice bonus

AP-1 is the smallest number which should be able to hurt armor. Therefore the chance should be small. But since Boyz have lots of attacks they would be quite good at killing armored Vehicles. I wouldnt mind Vehicles having an automatic AP-1 in the back, because thats their weak spot.

Having AP -1 have a small chance of hurting vehicles, means that many armies have little chance of hurting vehicles (Orks have few high AP weapons), you say, well they get lots of attacks, but if those attacks now all have AP -1 they murder all infantry, which is dumb. Going back to facings for vehicles is arbitrary, why is that the weak point, it makes no sense, for that always to be the case.

Thats right. And because AP is so much important in this edition, non AP shouldnt be able to wound armor.

AP matters against vehicles because it makes them easier to wound, not capable of being wounded, Ork boyz are not a go to anti-vehicle unit, they can grind through a vehicle, but against most things that just isn't worth it, they have better targets.

No, i dont mind S4 wounding T7 Vehicles at 5+. One way around that would be to give the Vehicle two dice armor save, if the wounding weapon has no AP. Although the wound chart is somewhat screwed. Its not fair that it makes no Difference that the Chance of wounding at T8 is the same for S5-7.

2 Dice armor save makes most vehicles basically invincible, super dumb, makes AP - useless by and large in the game. If you make AP the defining thing for killing vehicles, it leads to the extreme of that being all anyone takes, especially if it comes on high attack units at affordable price. Either you price some armies out of the game because they need expensive upgrades to compete, or those armies are too strong against everything that is not a vehicle. Like my Big choppa example. If orks get that say good bye to all terminators, marines, or anything else they hit.

I would call anything T7+ armored, below its not armored. Boyz could easily kill a Land Speeder, wounding it on 5+, because its only T6, not armored.

That is arbitrary there are plenty of vehicles that have T5 and 6. Why should it be easy to kill a land speeder but not a Rhino when they were basically the same last edition? Why are Ork Trukks not needing AP, but Rhinos are when they are similarly costed. This edition has done a better job than the last several of making heavy weapons the go to for vehicle killing, while at the same time making Skew lists where one side is literally incapable of hurting the enemy, not as big a deal.