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 don't think most vehicles are an issue as they are restricted by the FOC. The problem comes from dedicated transports. I personally think they should be restricted by an updated FOC. Maybe 3 (like heavy support). Also changing the rules so they have to be out of their transport to capture objectives might help.

I have a simple solution for all the whining ....go play warhammer( or another game) 40k is all about vehicles period...

The Nids might argue with you on that.

Say MC's and vehicles and i'd probably agree

Big impressive and tough stuff that romps through the other side until killed by something equally badass..

several armies would be rather screwed without vehicles, especially with restricted transports. Eldar, Tau and Dark Eldar especially. Vehicles are a part of Warhammer 40,000, and armies are designed around their inclusion. Restricting them in the way that is proposed would lead for a far greater imbalance than the purported problem that is trying to be solved, and result in far less fun games than one would think once the whole "oh yay no vehicles" mentality wears off.

I understand the hatred here for vehicles because of that IG list, but I've got a simple solution.

Stop playing Warhammer 40k, that's what I did. The most recent codex's have turned 40k a very unbalanced game.

Avrik_Shasla wrote:I understand the hatred here for vehicles because of that IG list, but I've got a simple solution.

Stop playing Warhammer 40k, that's what I did. The most recent codex's have turned 40k a very unbalanced game.

40k is no more imbalanced now than it has been in the past, in fact it's probably better now than in previous editions (though that's not saying much). It's just that different armies are on top now than were on top 2/3/4/5 years ago. We certainly don't have anything like the ridiculousness of 4E Eldar, 3E Blood Angels or anything as abuseable as CSM 3.5 was during its time, and nothing like 2E Eldar and Space Wolves (though admittedly the current SW book is a wee bit overboard).

Maybe to lessen vehicles an idea would be to limit an army to a certain armour value rating.

This idea is used in some local tournaments I've seen.

personally, I've never cared how many vehicles are brought onto the field by my opponents. I play crons and my heavy destroyers tend to chew them up pretty good. I also have (soon will be had) a Monolith but I rarely play it.

It's definitely a tough point to call really...

I'm not a vehicle spammer with Tau but with my Sisters I NEED to spam Rhinos as much as possible to get my darlings in to the face of the op. Without them I would be pretty much screwed.

However I have seen battles in Warhammer World were on a standard table the amount of tanks taken by some armies just looks too cluttered and even end up getting in the way of each other.

I play Tau and Sisters so anti-tank isn't really a problem. It's always funny shooting Rhinos with a Railgun (Yes, I know that's what missile pods are for but sometimes you don't have anything else to shoot at!)

Eyesedragon wrote:I have a simple solution for all the whining ....go play warhammer( or another game) 40k is all about vehicles period...

I would disagree that 40k should be "all about vehicles" I think it should be integral in the strategy of the game. I also think that perhaps making them costly to use either in risk or in points would render more armies that don't have EVERYTHING in a transport.

The problem is purely with IoM. Surely a Tau or Eldar can mech up but at 100+ points per vehicle, plus 100+ per troop you are at most going to be facing 9 vehicles in 1850. IoM on the other hand can spam razorbacks or rhinos or even chimeras to put anyone else to shame. It is the 35 pt rhino or the 75 pt razorback that is the core problem.

Vaktathi wrote:

Avrik_Shasla wrote:I understand the hatred here for vehicles because of that IG list, but I've got a simple solution.

Stop playing Warhammer 40k, that's what I did. The most recent codex's have turned 40k a very unbalanced game.

40k is no more imbalanced now than it has been in the past, in fact it's probably better now than in previous editions (though that's not saying much). It's just that different armies are on top now than were on top 2/3/4/5 years ago. We certainly don't have anything like the ridiculousness of 4E Eldar, 3E Blood Angels or anything as abuseable as CSM 3.5 was during its time, and nothing like 2E Eldar and Space Wolves (though admittedly the current SW book is a wee bit overboard).

Surely balance should mean that no codex is on top.

DakkaDakka wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Avrik_Shasla wrote:I understand the hatred here for vehicles because of that IG list, but I've got a simple solution.

Stop playing Warhammer 40k, that's what I did. The most recent codex's have turned 40k a very unbalanced game.

40k is no more imbalanced now than it has been in the past, in fact it's probably better now than in previous editions (though that's not saying much). It's just that different armies are on top now than were on top 2/3/4/5 years ago. We certainly don't have anything like the ridiculousness of 4E Eldar, 3E Blood Angels or anything as abuseable as CSM 3.5 was during its time, and nothing like 2E Eldar and Space Wolves (though admittedly the current SW book is a wee bit overboard).

Surely balance should mean that no codex is on top.

I agree, and I wasn't saying it is anything near perfectly balanced, only that it isn't any worse than it has been in the past and is probably actually a little better.

Vaktathi wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:

Vaktathi wrote:

Avrik_Shasla wrote:I understand the hatred here for vehicles because of that IG list, but I've got a simple solution.

Stop playing Warhammer 40k, that's what I did. The most recent codex's have turned 40k a very unbalanced game.

40k is no more imbalanced now than it has been in the past, in fact it's probably better now than in previous editions (though that's not saying much). It's just that different armies are on top now than were on top 2/3/4/5 years ago. We certainly don't have anything like the ridiculousness of 4E Eldar, 3E Blood Angels or anything as abuseable as CSM 3.5 was during its time, and nothing like 2E Eldar and Space Wolves (though admittedly the current SW book is a wee bit overboard).

Surely balance should mean that no codex is on top.

I agree, and I wasn't saying it is anything near perfectly balanced, only that it isn't any worse than it has been in the past and is probably actually a little better.

The perceived imbalance is a combination of three things:

1. Reduced codex cost of dedicated transports. (e.g. Rhino from 50 to 35 - power razorbacks from 90 to 75)
2. Improved survivability of all vehicles due to the 5th edition charts. (With the exception of skimmers who lost the auto glance if moving.)
3. Reduced rammifications of being in a penetrated vehicle.

All 3 of these changes have made vehicle-based armies superior to on foot despite the fact that it is a reduction in firepower. And even that is a fallacy when you look at the cost of a full 10 man Tac squad versus a 5-man squad and a razorback. People are not stupid and realize that a cheap survivable box that also can block LOS is more valuable than 2 or 3 marines for the same cost.