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.

I know quite a few people have talked about doing this but I thought I would throw my version out there and get feed back. Dreads would change to Monstrous Creatures with the following stats.

WS 4, BS 4, S 5, T 5, W 4, I 4, A 3, LD 10, Armor 2+
*Chapter Tactics
*Fearless
Starts out with Standard Dreadnought close combat weapon with storm bolter and Multi Melta.

All this starting at 100 points. Then you can add your optional weapon upgrades from there. Still able to ride in a Drop Pod.

Would that be something people would play and make a Dread a good option again?

T5

I stopped reading there to be honest.

av12 -4=T8

Remove walkers completely from the game and make all those models the same unit type would be a solution.

But making Dreadnoughts just different looking Centurions is not the way to go.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
T5

I stopped reading there to be honest.

It could be toughness six or even higher but I was trying to keep them around the same points value. Make it higher than 5 and a points increase would have to ensue.

 bomtek80 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
T5

I stopped reading there to be honest.

It could be toughness six or even higher but I was trying to keep them around the same points value. Make it higher than 5 and a points increase would have to ensue.

The problem with dreadnaughts is that they are over priced. If anything the bump in toughness will bring them up to their current price.

SM Dreadnoughts are fine as-is - 100 points for BS4 Multi-Melta and 4 S10 AP2 I4 CC attacks is more than fair.

We just need everyone else's codexes to catch up.

The Helbrute, mauler fiend, forge fiend, drake, soul grinder and even defiler should be MC.

I actually was going over this with a BA friend earlier. I felt they should be T6 with a 3+ armor save, 2+ for venerables. Reason they shouldnt be higher is because being immune to small arm weapons AND having an armor save is way too powerful - AV12 just gives you one of those.

Also 4W not 3HP. I dont like the idea that Tau MCs are the only ones with insane durability. And before anyone gives me crap about Riptides im also for nerfing their gun (since to me their gun being AP2 without nova is the problem since they basically get 2 free wounds compared to the bursttide and no risk)

I think you would want them at least T6, str6 for Toughness and strength test purposes. Also to keep enfeeble from hurting them really badly. If they were T5, I feel I would have a way easier time dealing with them. I think it would be better to keep them from being potentially one shot killed too, which T6 will deny.

I honestly don't really think the dreadnought is in a very bad place right now, though. I may be biased though, as daemons don't have much anti-tank capability outside of cc where a dreadnought can hurt things just as bad as they hurt him.

 bomtek80 wrote:
I know quite a few people have talked about doing this but I thought I would throw my version out there and get feed back. Dreads would change to Monstrous Creatures with the following stats.

WS 4, BS 4, S 5, T 5, W 4, I 4, A 3, LD 10, Armor 2+
*Chapter Tactics
*Fearless
Starts out with Standard Dreadnought close combat weapon with storm bolter and Multi Melta.

All this starting at 100 points. Then you can add your optional weapon upgrades from there. Still able to ride in a Drop Pod.

Would that be something people would play and make a Dread a good option again?

WS 4, BS 4, S 6, T 6, W 5, I 4, A 3, LD 10, Armor 3+ (Ven. Dreads WS/BS5 and armor 2+)

I'd take Dreads all day with that statline.

Eh, imo Venerables should get a 5++ or 4++ and stat boost while Ironclads get the 2+.

Here's my suggestion:

Dreadnought
WS4, BS4, S6, T6, W4, I4, A4, Ld 10, Sv 3+
Fearless
Chapter Tactics

Venerable Dreadnought
WS5, BS5, S6, T7, W4, I4, A4, Ld 10, Sv 3+
Fearless
Chapter Tactics
Feel No Pain

Ironclad Dreadnought
WS4, BS4, S8, T8, W4, I4, A4, Ld 10, Sv 3+/5++
Fearless
Chapter Tactics

No IWND on any of them (well, Iron Hands ones should, probably, but...), but something could be added to Techmarines allowing them to restore lost wounds to Dreadnoughts (and maybe Dreadknights).

 raverrn wrote:
SM Dreadnoughts are fine as-is - 100 points for BS4 Multi-Melta and 4 S10 AP2 I4 CC attacks is more than fair.

We just need everyone else's codexes to catch up.

No, because AV 12 HP 3 still sucks. Even if BA dreads had 4 attacks, I still wouldn't use them, because the will be glanced out before they can assault.

And krak grenaded when it gets to assault

The still will be - you can use krak grenades on monsters.

well, when dreadnoughts did have a toughness and wounds value way back when (1st edition) I believe they were T6 with 6 damage capacity (wounds), and a 3,4,5 or 6 save.

Of course, marines were T3 with a 4+ save, so don't read too much into that...

I've always thought that if the Space Marine Dreadnoughts were going to remain vehicles, that the Helbrutes should be Monstrous Creatures to differentiate them from their loyalist version.

Walkers need to have Move Through Cover by default and makes runs automatically a 6. Stunned and Immobalized results should force difficult terrain movement and you lose the automatic 6 on the run. Immobilized is permanent (unless repaired) and takes your difficult terrain rolls down from rolling 3d6 to 2d6.

All vehicles need armor saves of a 3+ except for vehicles with Jink having 4+ instead. I could see a rule for rear armor hits bypassing the vehicle armor to make krak grenades in CC from not being made 3x as bad vs standard vehicles. Grav still works as listed vs vehicles with 6s damaging (6s stunning would be more fair than immobilized IMO).

So completely negate the purpose for vehicles having jink by giving every vehicle a 3+ save if they dont have it?

Yeah, cause that makes sense. Lets make skimmers pointless in comparison because they not only have a weaker save, but have to snapfire in order to use it.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
So completely negate the purpose for vehicles having jink by giving every vehicle a 3+ save if they dont have it?

Yeah, cause that makes sense. Lets make skimmers pointless in comparison because they not only have a weaker save, but have to snapfire in order to use it.

He meant a 4+ in addition to Jink.
Basically they'd be worse against AP4 of worse, but better against AP3 or better.

 Vineheart01 wrote:
So completely negate the purpose for vehicles having jink by giving every vehicle a 3+ save if they dont have it?

Yeah, cause that makes sense. Lets make skimmers pointless in comparison because they not only have a weaker save, but have to snapfire in order to use it.

A big issue of vehicles when compared to MCs is the "glance to death" style of spamming the high strength with high volume of fire but meh AP (auto cannons, gauss, scatter lasers, HYMP, etc) while against an MC they usually have good armor save keeping them safe. The true dedicated anti vehicle weapons are almost entirely AP3 or better (krak missiles, lascannons, melta, railguns, etc) so a vehicle armor save would have zero effect on those weapons (which are often single shot and expensive) but have a massive impact on the effectiveness on other weapon types (which are plentiful and versatile). Skimmers would be vulnerable to the AP 4 weapons so they have to jink (while your rhinos for example would have a nice armor save against) but they still have their protection against the AP3 or better guns that your standard ground vehicles don't have. Its designed to help close the gap between skimmers/flyers and your standard ground vehicles. This type of change would greatly benefit walkers who tend to find themselves getting chewed up by volume of fire str 6/7 and it also helps them from getting krak grenade spammed to death in close combat.

Martel732 wrote:

 raverrn wrote:
SM Dreadnoughts are fine as-is - 100 points for BS4 Multi-Melta and 4 S10 AP2 I4 CC attacks is more than fair.

We just need everyone else's codexes to catch up.

No, because AV 12 HP 3 still sucks. Even if BA dreads had 4 attacks, I still wouldn't use them, because the will be glanced out before they can assault.

Does not work better when you put them into a drop pod. But of course, if you just drop pod one or two units in front of an enemy army, they will be quickly shot down no matter what units you have. Perhaps you should be open to the possibility that it is just your strategy that is wrong.

There is no strategy that makes dreadnoughts good because they are easy to kill to no matter where you put them.

I've run a squadron of 5 helbrutes with pretty good results. People tend to underestimate tham and than BAM. A wall of steel with shrowded or invisivility. Sorcs make them better - that's for sure.

Even without buffs, they did amazing against flyrant + pod spam nids. Squadrons are good.

Martel732 wrote:
There is no strategy that makes dreadnoughts good because they are easy to kill to no matter where you put them.

I have had some decent results with Ironclad spam, but I am an Iron Hands/Raukaan player...

I have had some decent luck with other dreads too, but nowhere near as much as what I have had with Ironclads. Thing is though you really want at least 4 dreads for them to be successful, and you really want them to be in pods. Having several other threats (ideally in pods) helps too. I think there is still a problem with dreads being too pricey for what they do imo (considering what their durability is), but that is the problem pretty much every vehicle shares. The disparity between vehicles and mcs is absolutely ridiculous. Not saying the mc rules are op (except for how cover works for them), the vehicle rules are just plain bad.

Walkers need specific weapons to get AP values. MCs just come out of the box AP2. That seems just a bit OP to me.

Martel732 wrote:
Walkers need specific weapons to get AP values. MCs just come out of the box AP2. That seems just a bit OP to me.

That is a good point.

A new vehicle type to combine MCs wnd walkers would be good- there is no difference between, say, a dreadnaught and a broadside suit.

As someone who is just learning the latest 40K rules, what exactly is it that makes walkers suck so hard?

And yeah, a T5 Dreadnought that gets killed by lasguns, I guess in real life enough basic weapons fire could destroy or disable one, but the Tyranids would be building Hive Guards that are tougher than one of the Imperium's most devastating heroes, it doesn't really work.

Walkers are slow and can be easily destroyed by glancing hits from cheap and plentiful weapons like autocannons or scatterlasers. And their shooting is usually lackluster as well, even though they can fire all weapons on the move. If the Imperium (or anyone else) had an AV 14 walker with say four assault cannons like they should (because engineers try to build things that are actually good), no one would bitch. I say Imperium because the special snowflake Tau got their walkers turned into MCs.