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.

The entire point of the thread is that "Mech seems too dominant. So dominant that for my Marine army, it's way better to just stay in my transports and not get out. Most competitive armies I read about online or see at tournies has tons and tons of vehicles." So far you have tried to argue otherwise. Or present other scenarios that aren't representative of the competitive game-environment (ie. Tournaments) where it may not be the best choice.

Titankiller17 wrote:

So you completley missed the point about everything that i have posted. you need to find a new tactic to beat it. if you think that mariens can't beat mech then you need to go have a serious sit down and read your codex some more. all youa re trying to do is beat your head agisnt a brick wall and say to yourself "man these brick walls should be softer i can't break it and my forhead hurts", you need to adapt and change. i ahev had no problme with ym mariens in 5th ed agasint mech. NOT A SINGLE ONE. i know how to play my army. What i am saying is that this thread is based ona select few who think thhat "omg, tansk are so hard to kill now why should we even play if we dont have a gazillion tanks." you have plenty of options at your disposal, but se dude gets luky and makes an amazing number of saves and you cry that the sky is falling.

Incorrecto!

Lets quote what I said again:

The entire point of the thread is that "Mech seems too dominant. So dominant that for my Marine army, it's way better to just stay in my transports and not get out. Most competitive armies I read about online or see at tournies has tons and tons of vehicles." So far you have tried to argue otherwise. Or present other scenarios that aren't representative of the competitive game-environment (ie. Tournaments) where it may not be the best choice.

Did I say my Marines can't beat mech? No, I didn't. I said "it's better for my marines to not get out of their transport" and "Most competitive armies I read about online or see at tournies has tons and tons of vehicles." Not a word about "I can't beat it". I've been testing a Mech Marine army, it's won, it's lost. That's not the point I've been making.

My weaponry is still jsut as effective as it was, the damage table for penetrating hits has not changed WHATSOEVER, from what it was in 3rd, 1-2 can't shoot 3 wepaosn gone 4 immobile, 5-6 toast. yes they changed the glancing hit table, good i'm glad. i'm tired of losing land raiders to missle spam turn one. you need to focus your fire power more yoour jsut mad that your las cannon wont alwasy blow that transport and everyone inside to hell the first shot every game. Adapt, change, overcome. its what marines do.

Incorrecto! x2

The damage table for penetrating hits changed. 4th Ed Penetrating Hit Damage Table:

1 - Crew Stunned
2 - Armament Destroyed & Crew Stunned
3 - Immobilized & Crew Stunned
4 - Vehicle Destroyed
5 - Vehicle Destroyed
6 - Vehicle Explodes

In 5th Ed, once you get a Penetrating hit your chances of destroying a Vehicle went from 1/2 to 1/3. Oh and in 5th Ed you can make it so your vehicles get a 4+ Cover Save from taking any ranged Penetrating or Glancing Hits.

So to re-cap: Vehicles did get harder to kill in 5th. Skimmers got much easier to kill, and AP1 weapons got better at killing Tanks.

Furthermore - I did adapt, change, and overcome when it came to running my Marines for 5th Ed: I went Mech!

SO what is the point of this thread? I'M MAD BCUZ I WANT MAH SUPA SOLDIERS TO PUNCH FAIC!?

Gwar had it right on the first page.

5th ed + new codecies made transport armies viable, instead of stupid. People like treads, and, with the option to play them viably, they became popular. It was a pretty short jump from popularity to people believing in transports as if if were a religious faith.

The fact is that transport armies are not somehow inherently stronger than non-transport armies just because the army doesn't have transports. Spout religious jargon about codex creep, lack of terrain, and the "inevitable meta" all you want, but if you look at the cold, hard numbers, it's just not there.

5th ed and new transports give you the option to do mech at a fair price. That the people in your store ONLY play mech armies and are TERRIFIED of dismounting, and seem to treat the passengers of transports like they're not even there is a product of the PLAYERS, not the rules.

There are several ways to beat mech armies with non-mech armies. Break the mould and play one of them and horribly destroy your opponents, and you'll see how little mech madness is founded upon.

Ailaros wrote:
The fact is that transport armies are not somehow inherently stronger than non-transport armies just because the army doesn't have transports.

0_o

Well we're going to have to just agree to disagree on that. A lot.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:Your lascannon may tear through armor just the same as it did in 3rd Ed, except now in 5th Ed the rolls on the damage chart are far, far more forgiving to the tank. Glancing hits are even more forgiving than they were previously.

That and your opponent has the opportunity to use Cover (or bring their own) in order to cut the number of successful penetrating hits you get per turn in half.

Vehicles became much harder to kill with the 5th Ed rules change; while at the same time, the ability to negate Penetrating or Glancing hits via Cover (and via Wargear).

Of course this goes out the window once you can guarantee the ability to get a lot of Meltaguns close enough to said tanks, which is easier said than done for many armies.

Honestly, GW should have done one or the other. Either kept the older hull down rules (so an obscured vehicle only took glancing hits) and changed the damage tables, or allowed vehicles to get cover saves and left the damage tables as they were. Vehicles needed a boost, but not this much.

SumYungGui wrote:

Ailaros wrote:
The fact is that transport armies are not somehow inherently stronger than non-transport armies just because the army doesn't have transports.

0_o

Well we're going to have to just agree to disagree on that. A lot.

I agree what? if there was no inherent strength to taking transport armies over not taking them then who would be complaining?


I look forward to 6th or 7th or 8th edition when the pendulum swings the other way.

Shaman wrote:if there was no inherent strength to taking transport armies over not taking them then who would be complaining?

Trade the words "inherent" with "apparent" and I will agree with you. Because what people take depends on what they perceive is good/strong, not what actually is.

Once more for the peanut: if you are reliant on vehicles to get you to the destination, terrain has a higher risk for vehicles than troops. Vehicles can get immobilised on a 1/6th chance, troops cant. OR, you know, use buildings that tanks cant get through, and have to get around, but troops can go inside (and often gain distance doing so) . Or actually have ruins that arent akin to the 4th ed default of "area terrain" and have impassable walls. Again, vehicles have to go around, not through.

Of course, this lacks the hysteria of "vehicles are broken!!!!" that you are a fan of.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:

The damage table for penetrating hits changed. 4th Ed Penetrating Hit Damage Table:

1 - Crew Stunned
2 - Armament Destroyed & Crew Stunned
3 - Immobilized & Crew Stunned
4 - Vehicle Destroyed
5 - Vehicle Destroyed
6 - Vehicle Explodes

In 5th Ed, once you get a Penetrating hit your chances of destroying a Vehicle went from 1/2 to 1/3. Oh and in 5th Ed you can make it so your vehicles get a 4+ Cover Save from taking any ranged Penetrating or Glancing Hits.

So to re-cap: Vehicles did get harder to kill in 5th. Skimmers got much easier to kill, and AP1 weapons got better at killing Tanks.

Furthermore - I did adapt, change, and overcome when it came to running my Marines for 5th Ed: I went Mech!

The firslty i appologize, i skipped 4th and didn't relaize it had changed.

However, if your not haivng a problem winning or with it then why comlain? So vehicles got harder to kill ar you the bleeding heart of the nids and DoC players now becasue you have tnaks they have a tough time killng, casue last time i checked nnids got Tyranifexes with St 10 weaponry. eats land raiders for breakfast. If nids players dont find them effective enough for the points then oh well thats your loss. Gw gave them ways to deal with transport mech armies, if they dont want to spend the oints to have acounter to deal with it its their problem then. And Shamans got a good point wait till later on when the wind blows to hard your vehicle explodes.

I missed 4th, too, and was surprised about how good vehicles were now.

But, instead of whining, I went and bought some vehicles. You've basically got to re-arm every new codex and game edition anyways, that's nothing new.

well, honestly, I like fifth much more than fourth, I don't like vehicles I enjoy having an infantry heavy army, and because I am in no way a competetive player, I just have had more fun playing fifth, simple as that...granted I only had been playing for about a year before fifth came out, but still I don't care about winning or losing, I just care that loads of things die (is it unsurprising I have a khorn chaos marine army?) and this seems to happen more readily in fifth edition

Titankiller17 wrote:
last time i checked nnids got Tyranifexes with St 10 weaponry. eats land raiders for breakfast.

BS 3, 50% chance to hit. Str 10, 33% chance to penetrate. 5 or 6 to destroy, 33% chance. 4.95% chance per shot is not 'eating for breakfast' at 265 points plus synapse baby sitter cost.

Tyranofex may not eat landraiders for breakfast but he will eat transports for breakfast forcing landraiders to charge into your hoard with MC's sprinkled in unsupported. Tyranids can do anti tank fine but they can't sit on the board and trade shots with a mech army and expect to win.

Edit meant can't sorry.

Do you mean "can" or "can't".

Regarding terrain, this table would be heaven to play on.



Limited fire lanes due to the closed in trench nature of the table, though the ability to climb and get better LOS.

Trenches are fun. A couple of years I tried to build a trench system and ended up with a pile of foam and popsicle stick dykes that I had primed. I'm not feeling inclined to finish them because the sheer lack of design and forethought put into them, but using them to break up of table, form a series of tunnels, or constructing actual trenches is fun. Thow in some block-houses, and you have a nice fortified battlefield to play on.

SumYungGui wrote:

Titankiller17 wrote:
last time i checked nnids got Tyranifexes with St 10 weaponry. eats land raiders for breakfast.

BS 3, 50% chance to hit. Str 10, 33% chance to penetrate. 5 or 6 to destroy, 33% chance. 4.95% chance per shot is not 'eating for breakfast' at 265 points plus synapse baby sitter cost.

Indeed, because 5-6 are the only worthwhile things to do to a vehicle. And who cares about glances? It's not like you could stun, immobilize or blow a weapon off of it.

Wait...

Monster Rain wrote:

SumYungGui wrote:

Titankiller17 wrote:
last time i checked nnids got Tyranifexes with St 10 weaponry. eats land raiders for breakfast.

BS 3, 50% chance to hit. Str 10, 33% chance to penetrate. 5 or 6 to destroy, 33% chance. 4.95% chance per shot is not 'eating for breakfast' at 265 points plus synapse baby sitter cost.

Indeed, because 5-6 are the only worthwhile things to do to a vehicle. And who cares about glances? It's not like you could stun, immobilize or blow a weapon off of it.

Wait...

If a Land Raider is loaded with TH/SS terminators and is heading for your Shooty TMC's, then the only thing that a Glancing hit could do that the 'Nid player cares about is Immobilize the thing. I know I don't leave home without Extra Armor on a Land Raider I plan on using to deliver bodies into assault or an objective.

Voodoo Boyz wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

SumYungGui wrote:

Titankiller17 wrote:
last time i checked nnids got Tyranifexes with St 10 weaponry. eats land raiders for breakfast.

BS 3, 50% chance to hit. Str 10, 33% chance to penetrate. 5 or 6 to destroy, 33% chance. 4.95% chance per shot is not 'eating for breakfast' at 265 points plus synapse baby sitter cost.

Indeed, because 5-6 are the only worthwhile things to do to a vehicle. And who cares about glances? It's not like you could stun, immobilize or blow a weapon off of it.

Wait...

If a Land Raider is loaded with TH/SS terminators and is heading for your Shooty TMC's, then the only thing that a Glancing hit could do that the 'Nid player cares about is Immobilize the thing. I know I don't leave home without Extra Armor on a Land Raider I plan on using to deliver bodies into assault or an objective.

I don't either, but not everyone is as smart as us, my man.

Also, immobilize is good! And don't act like knocking a Flamestorm Cannon or Assault Cannon isn't a bonus either.

Neither of them being 'eat for breakfast' level, especially at 265 points plus synapse baby sitter cost.

Like I said the first time.

Oh, I didn't realize we were parsing words and arguing semantics.

How about "could be considered effective" then?

Monster Rain wrote:Oh, I didn't realize we were parsing words and arguing semantics.

You didn't realize you were on Dakka!?!

Disclaimer: I have no idea what the quote is pertaining to, I didn't read most of the thread(I thought this one was long-dead); nor do I care to. I was moving my cursor down to another topic and this caught my eye. I felt the need to comment on this 1 phrase alone.

Voodoo boys: You're not wrong in your assertion that mechanization leads to the generally strongest builds. Transports are cheap, relatively durable for their cost, and give a lot of benefits to the squad inside (durability, movement, and footprint for objective grabbing).

I'm not certain the problem is inherent in the basic rules, although they may have swung the pendulum a bit too far towards vehicles being great (in 3rd transports were broken, in 4th pointless). The problem really is only in a small handful of builds and a few unit types, things like Wolf razorback spam and the like. Even for space wolves, their best unit are long fangs, a non-mechanized unit.

I guess I concede your point, but don't see a problem with it. It's sci-fi combat, shouldn't vehicles be really good?

Kommissar Kel wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:Oh, I didn't realize we were parsing words and arguing semantics.

You didn't realize you were on Dakka!?!

I know, I know.

My expectations that statements could be made without immediately reverting to talking about how we are talking about what we are talking were apparently too high.

Polonius wrote:Voodoo boys: You're not wrong in your assertion that mechanization leads to the generally strongest builds. Transports are cheap, relatively durable for their cost, and give a lot of benefits to the squad inside (durability, movement, and footprint for objective grabbing).

I'm not certain the problem is inherent in the basic rules, although they may have swung the pendulum a bit too far towards vehicles being great (in 3rd transports were broken, in 4th pointless). The problem really is only in a small handful of builds and a few unit types, things like Wolf razorback spam and the like. Even for space wolves, their best unit are long fangs, a non-mechanized unit.

I guess I concede your point, but don't see a problem with it. It's sci-fi combat, shouldn't vehicles be really good?

Making vehicles a cool part of the game is all kosher, it is sci-fi not Warhammer Fantasy. The problem comes in circumventing more basic parts of game design and balance. Risk vs. reward is a good one. As you say there's plenty of rewards for vehicles, what are the risks? Cost/benefit is another. How much of an army needs to be devoted to meching up, and what does it reduce elsewhere? Now compare that to, say, tooling up an army to have a bunch of special characters for cool rules, or to have lots of heavy weapons, or to be as hard to kill as possible. Any sort of theme you like. What are the costs for those?

Here's a simple risk for vehicles that hasn't really changed: Vehicles can still be killed in a single shot, while it's MUCH harder to wipe out infantry in a single shot.

A single 'Shot' or shot, as in, yes a whole unit needs to shoot at the same thing, but if any mathhammer entusiasts would take up the challenge...

Say, a Long fans squad shooting at a battle wagon+KFF , comparied to say 12 boys with nob + boss pole. Or some others... If they don't have ATSKNF then maybe if one considers "Falling back" we may indeed be able to refute your assertion Melissa!

Any time an AP1 glances, or any shot penetrates, there's a chance for a single shot to destroy each vehicle. I've destroyed a Land Raider on turn one with an exorcist missile after rolling to only get a single shot out of its d6 shots per turn (S8 AP1, so 1/36 chance of that happening).

Even if the Exorcist got all six shots, and all six shots hit and wounded, that would still only kill six of ten Marines, leaving the sergeant, special and heavy weapon, and an ablative wound. Even an S8 AP3 large blast wouldn't wipe out a twenty or even just a ten strong Battle Sister Squad that's properly spread out, certainly not a thirty strong Ork mob. Would it hurt the squad? Indubitably. But would it destroy it in a single shot? No.

Monster Rain wrote:

SumYungGui wrote:

Titankiller17 wrote:
last time i checked nnids got Tyranifexes with St 10 weaponry. eats land raiders for breakfast.

BS 3, 50% chance to hit. Str 10, 33% chance to penetrate. 5 or 6 to destroy, 33% chance. 4.95% chance per shot is not 'eating for breakfast' at 265 points plus synapse baby sitter cost.

Indeed, because 5-6 are the only worthwhile things to do to a vehicle. And who cares about glances? It's not like you could stun, immobilize or blow a weapon off of it.

Wait...

Zoanthropes are good against Land Raiders, if they can get within 18 inches range.