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.

Ok am just seeing if any one else has shelved there armor. i have come to relize that with all the flyer spam it best not to any armor. just foot slog it to objectives .

I like my AB and Ghost Arks a lot, thank you very much

And flyer spams are just wrong.

frogy27 wrote:
Ok am just seeing if any one else has shelved there armor. i have come to relize that with all the flyer spam it best not to any armor. just foot slog it to objectives .

Anything but the heaviest tanks have a ridiculously short lifespan in 6E, in the last couple tournaments and league's I've played in, tanks have been relatively rare aside from heavier vehicles.

Hull Points just ruin vehicle lifespan. For a 3HP vehicle, against non AP1/2 fire, it typically requires less than half the number of shots to kill than they did under 5E, and defensive measures like Smoke Launchers being less effective. For 2HP vehicles, well, not much needs to be said.

To match 5E vehicle survivability *in the open* in most cases, you'd always need at least a 4+, more usually 3+ cover save, to say nothing of matching vehicles with cover saves in 5E.

Add to this that it's easier to kill a moving Leman Russ tank or a flat out screeching holo-field Falcon in CC with krak grenades (available as standard or a purchaseable option on more than half the basic troops in the game) than it is for say, a Tactical marine squad to kill 2 basic marines, and it gets even worse.

On top of that, vehicles cannot overwatch, cannot claim objectives with embarked troops or even *contest* objectives, and their usefulness as transports for anything that might even think about wanting to get into assault has been radically reduced as you can't assault out of even a stationary vehicle.


Now granted, it's easier to get cover, and often there are ways to enhance cover saves, but these are highly situational and usually do not come close to covering the gap in survivability between editions.

Much as been made of being able to fire after getting glanced and Flat Out moves, but these benefits really pale in comparison to the drastic reduction in vehicle survivability and battlefield utility. The "no damage roll" if stunned thing only really matters if all you're taking is a single glancing hit and nothing else, as anything more than that will see the vehicle dead or set up for a ridiculously easy kill shot. Additional vehicle speed is nice but pointless on many vehicles and has much less utility with not being able to interact with objectives.


Vehicles and tanks very definitely are getting shelved in this edition. They aren't extinct, but they certainly don't usually pull their weight and are seeing less table time even than tracked medium AV tanks did in 4th edition.

 TheDraconicLord wrote:
I like my AB and Ghost Arks a lot, thank you very much

And flyer spams are just wrong.

To be fair, Necrons are probably the army best adapted to 6th edition, even moreso than the actual 6E codex books.

They've got great flyers, their non-flyer ground vehicles get an AV13 shield that eliminates harm from multi-shot anti-medium vehicle weapons and only goes away after a penetrating hit (and with AV13, that's usually something that stands a good chance to kill it on the damage chart). They've got tons of ways to strip hull points with Gauss weapons, and no other army is as well adapted to Snapshots the way Necrons are with Tesla weapons. Annihilation Barges firing Snapshots are averaging a hit rate equivalent to that of a BS8 4 shot S7 AP4 weapon, while firing normally their 4 shot weapon is averaging 5.33 hits. Then they've got lots of mechanics to deal with stuff like Nightfight (now in every mission) and challenges (mindshackle scarabs), etc.

When it comes to the core 6E mechanics, no army does it better than necrons do, especially when it comes to tanks and vehicles.

I think armor is just as viable as it was in the last edition. I think the mistake people make is thinking that you can play your armor in the same way. I think that new tactics are required, especially for vehicle heavy armies, in order to adapt to the new rules.

You might want to ask this wise person about their experiences with armor in 6th edition: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/505207.page

 Jimsolo wrote:
I think armor is just as viable as it was in the last edition. I think the mistake people make is thinking that you can play your armor in the same way. I think that new tactics are required, especially for vehicle heavy armies, in order to adapt to the new rules.

By new tactics...you mean? Because honestly, they don't have anything near the utility they did before and die a lot faster, and there's not much that's going to make up for that.

Transports can now move faster, and can't be immobilized or stunned by glances. Tanks can no longer be stun locked. Ap3 and worse weapons are now half as likely to wreck a vehicle outright.

HP may have hurt vehicles but other stuff made them better. At worst, it's a wash.

Foot squads, meanwhile, lost by-unit cover, hidden weapon upgrades, and were seriously impuned by the new wound allocation system. And if they were close-combat-oriented, forget about it.

Mech lists lost a little and gained a little. Foot lists lost a lot and got nothing in return.

Have fun trying to learn how to play a foot list during this rules edition.

I think, just like the Dreds, that the reason a lot of people are having trouble isn't just because the HP system is a little wonky (by wonky I simply mean glancing hits which should just glance off causing actual damage and/or to few HP), but also because of outdated tactics. It's all still really new (especially to me!), and people still want to use things the same way they were used in 5th.

Utilizing cover allowed my Las/Plas RB to do some good damage and last almost the entire game. Don't shelve the armor, armor are one of the most awesome parts. Just find different ways to use them, and reevaluate your expectations.

I feel foot list are the way to go. as armor has been way nerfd and just seem a point sink now as flyers spam is the way to go. Meq list will go away. So my 15ig tanks , arty and 6sentinels will be shelfd. alongside my sm armor

frogy27 wrote:
I feel foot list are the way to go. as armor has been way nerfd and just seem a point sink now as flyers spam is the way to go. Meq list will go away imop

But GW doesn't make any flyer models so you're not allowed to use those items in your codex.

Ther is a lot flyers. that gw make. that's spamd ig a big one 6Flyers nasty

 Ailaros wrote:
Transports can now move faster, and can't be immobilized or stunned by glances.

They can be faster *if* tracked vehicles (skimmers aren't any faster), but only if they trade off their only real defensive mechanism (smoke launchers). Glances won't stun or immobilize them but they're far more likely to just be dead instead.

Tanks can no longer be stun locked.

Completely untrue. They just need to be penetrated. The bigger difference is that instead of being stunned and able to try again later, they're just dead usually.

Ap3 and worse weapons are now half as likely to wreck a vehicle outright.

But typically require less than half the shots they needed before to average a kill. Not anywhere near a decent trade-off.

HP may have hurt vehicles but other stuff made them better. At worst, it's a wash.

Higher speed if sacrificing all utility, less than half the average lifespan against most weapons while simply avoiding the damage table on 1/6 hits, and complete inability to interact with mission objectives, and major loss to transport utility with regards to assaults and objective scoring. Able to fire weapons needing 6's to hit if they move now but also practically auto-killed in CC. That's hard to call anything but a loss.

Foot squads, meanwhile, lost by-unit cover, hidden weapon upgrades, and were seriously impuned by the new wound allocation system. And if they were close-combat-oriented, forget about it.

Infantry units in general are overall hardier than most equivalently priced vehicles, and often with greater amounts of firepower. They can still hide their weapons, it's just a matter of positioning. You can move the unit now while keeping the heavy weapon in place and rapid-fire became far more useful.

Assault units are a different story, unless inherently very fast like jetbikes or the like, they got as wrecked as tanks did, but shooting oriented infantry certainly aren't any worse off now than they were before.

Have fun trying to learn how to play a foot list during this rules edition.

I have, my gunline infantry list has consistently been very hardy, in fact, the only game I've lost with my IG in my last two leagues+tournament was when I tried to run mech again, whereas my "sit in cover and behind aegis line" carapace horde has at worst drawn every game.

 Badger_Bhoy wrote:
I think, just like the Dreds, that the reason a lot of people are having trouble isn't just because the HP system is a little wonky (by wonky I simply mean glancing hits which should just glance off causing actual damage and/or to few HP), but also because of outdated tactics. It's all still really new (especially to me!), and people still want to use things the same way they were used in 5th.

Utilizing cover allowed my Las/Plas RB to do some good damage and last almost the entire game. Don't shelve the armor, armor are one of the most awesome parts. Just find different ways to use them, and reevaluate your expectations.

Other than "sit behind an aegis line and hope they don't come close" what exactly do you mean by utilize different tactics? That's not any different than a standard IG gunline that they've been doing forever, they're just flat out less capable.

frogy27 wrote:
Ther is a lot flyers. that gw make. that's spamd ig a big one 6Flyers nasty

No there aren't. Those are models made by Citadel which is not GW, therefore by your own argument you can't use them.

(In fact you can't use any models at all, so you should just quit 40k.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
They can be faster *if* tracked vehicles (skimmers aren't any faster)

Not true. Fast skimmers didn't get much benefit (they do get the ability to let a unit shoot and then move in front of them to block LOS), but not all skimmers are fast. Tau players are really happy now that their transports gained 6" of movement and a 2+ cover save from outside 12".

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Badger_Bhoy wrote:
I think, just like the Dreds, that the reason a lot of people are having trouble isn't just because the HP system is a little wonky (by wonky I simply mean glancing hits which should just glance off causing actual damage and/or to few HP), but also because of outdated tactics. It's all still really new (especially to me!), and people still want to use things the same way they were used in 5th.

Utilizing cover allowed my Las/Plas RB to do some good damage and last almost the entire game. Don't shelve the armor, armor are one of the most awesome parts. Just find different ways to use them, and reevaluate your expectations.

Other than "sit behind an aegis line and hope they don't come close" what exactly do you mean by utilize different tactics? That's not any different than a standard IG gunline that they've been doing forever, they're just flat out less capable.

Sure, that's one way to do it, but not very creatively. You can be mobile moving from cover to cover, just have to be smart and creative about it. I also made sure to make higher power units my primary targets. Play it safe, even if it's not as thrilling, and neutralize primary threats. I didn't expect my RB to last long, so modified it's roll accordingly. When it finally did pop, HP had nothing to do with it. People don't like the system, I don't. but that's no reason to give up. Having fun in a game like this is about finding new and unusual ways to do things. I'm sure there are other ways armor can be re-utilized that more experienced players will be able to come up with if they take that initiative. It wouldn't be fun if not a challenge. Again, I'm just trying to be optimistic about a system that clearly shouldn't have made it past beta testing as is, but we're unfortunately stuck with for now.

I've seen people find new roles for Dreadnoughts as support rather than bee-lining into CC. It may be hard, and yes the system is not the best. They may not be as powerful or as efficient in the roles that traditionally come easiest. I still think they're far from pointless.

Badger_Bhoy wrote:

Sure, that's one way to do it, but not very creatively. You can be mobile moving from cover to cover, just have to be smart and creative about it.

Stuff like that has always been standard unit procedure, that's not anything new. If you could do it in 5th/4th/3rd etc you did. It's just that you don't have any other options in 6th if you want your tanks to live and it's still generally less effective.

I also made sure to make higher power units my primary targets. Play it safe, even if it's not as thrilling, and neutralize primary threats.

Again however, this isn't anything you wouldn't do in previous editions. The units are just less effective now when doing so.

I didn't expect my RB to last long, so modified it's roll accordingly. When it finally did pop, HP had nothing to do with it.

What popped it? In the majority of cases, vehicles will die to HP and not the damage table. It's been a full month since I played a game where a vehicle died to a damage roll that wouldn't have also died from HP loss, aside from taking railgun and melta hits.

To look at an average, just for kicks lets take an autocannon against AV11. This is a common anti-medium vehicle weapon against a common medium vehicle.

The AC needs 6 hits to average killing the AV11 through HP destruction. It needs to average 18 hits to kill it through an "Explodes" result, 3 times as many as HP's would require. Given that these are overlapping and not mutually exclusive, our average really is only 5.4 AC hits to kill the AV11 vehicle, or ~11 with a 4+ cover save, whereas in 5th edition you needed an average of 12 hits in the open.

People don't like the system, I don't. but that's no reason to give up.

The problem is that functionally HP's make the damage table irrelevant against most weapons, and turn tanks into MC's that don't get armor saves and are crippled or suffer ID on any hit that exceeds the minimum required to wound them.

I've seen people find new roles for Dreadnoughts as support rather than bee-lining into CC.

Dreadnoughts were never just CC units, the problem is they pay a lot for that capability and it's a huge part of their role and they can no longer effectively engage in it. Additionally, as shooting platforms, they're generally overcosted as they're still paying for WS4 I4 and S6 attacks as opposed to say a Hydra that costs 40% less in the same role or a Predator Annihilator that does the job of a TLLC/ML dread but for 5pts more gets two lascannons where the Dread just gets and ML and better armor.

Peregrine wrote:

Not true. Fast skimmers didn't get much benefit (they do get the ability to let a unit shoot and then move in front of them to block LOS), but not all skimmers are fast. Tau players are really happy now that their transports gained 6" of movement and a 2+ cover save from outside 12".

Ok, most skimmers then. Tau are an exception as they've got a relatively underpriced piece of wargear that's two editions old and functions completely different from its original rules, while Necrons made out ahead of largely everyone else as I pointed out above.

In my standard 2000pt sisters army I run 4 immolators,2 rhinos and 3 exorcist/9 tanks and love the fact that they all get an invulnerable save.

if your opponent focuses on your tanks your infantry is free to do what ever you want. So you just have to think or rethink how to use your tanks, perhaps some cheap meat shields.

As for air spam,its like any other spam,usually has a glass jaw and can still be glanced to death.

The only time I've ever dropped vehicles from my list was one game I went against Necrons and we'd agreed beforehand that it would be amusing.

Turns out two thousand points of Sisters infantry is a lot of AP4 and Melta. Heh.

My vehicles are otherwise doing just fine - Exorcists at the back of the field rarely get killed before their time, and outflanking Repressors and Scouting Immolators seem to do their jobs just fine. I certainly don't think armour is dead, and not just because we have a rather unreliable 6++ on most of our vehicles (The Repressor still lacks it).

The tanks get my sisters where they want to go, and in the case of the Exorcists, kill lots of juicy super-heavy infantry while they're at it.

I dislike armor in 6th, but as an ork im kinda forced to bring it.

Under AV13 its just too damn easy to kill the vehicle, even AV13 has issues but not nearly as much since Str7+ weapons arent typically spammed in an army (except Lootas, but bad aiming kinda counters that)

AV14 on the other hand is just plain dumb. I still think its a bit easier than 6th but only by half a hair because now Str8/9 can glance it down (str9 having the off chance of a pen as well) but in 5th only a 9 could do anything to it other than make it get stuck.

I dislike ork vehicles because none of our side armors are at this good number. 12 is pretty damn easy to take out, and its a HUGE target on our BWs vs the 14 front. Yea, it means our AV10 arse is just as small but usually the vehicle is getting charged at if you can see its butt anyway.

Personally i think they should have made it 4HP on all vehicles (except tiny ones that are spammed like Buggies/Kans, make them 3HP) and either give EVERY vehicle a 5+ save for their armor magically working despite the weapon being used against it unless its AP1 - or - make it so only AP1/2 weapons can cause Wrecked or Exploded results when theres still HP left.
Nothing irritates me more than random upgraded troop gets a shot at my AV12 side BW, rolls a 6, rolls a 5+ and it explodes....first shot to cause any damage mind you. And without a KFF i cant do anything to avoid it, and face it KFF is good n all but he does NOTHING except that 5+ cover...rather have a boss that can fight.

 Peregrine wrote:

frogy27 wrote:
Ther is a lot flyers. that gw make. that's spamd ig a big one 6Flyers nasty

No there aren't. Those are models made by Citadel which is not GW, therefore by your own argument you can't use them.

(In fact you can't use any models at all, so you should just quit 40k.).

LOL. If you keep track of laugh points, take one for that - that was pretty good.

Yeah, if only the 40k rulebook allowed you to use citadel miniatures.

... oh, wait...

 Jimsolo wrote:
I think armor is just as viable as it was in the last edition. I think the mistake people make is thinking that you can play your armor in the same way. I think that new tactics are required, especially for vehicle heavy armies, in order to adapt to the new rules.

Man this hit it on the head. I use 2 rhino's in my marine army and they have been lasting longer than they did in 5th easily. In 5th everyone was tooled up for tank killing and I felt like they died faster. Now that everyone is on the plasma train you can really take advantage with strategic uses of transports and mech in general.

Artillery is still good, because you can hide it. Landraider's, and other av14 is still good, because people have a hard time damaging it by comparison.

Chancetragedy wrote:

 Jimsolo wrote:
I think armor is just as viable as it was in the last edition. I think the mistake people make is thinking that you can play your armor in the same way. I think that new tactics are required, especially for vehicle heavy armies, in order to adapt to the new rules.

Man this hit it on the head. I use 2 rhino's in my marine army and they have been lasting longer than they did in 5th easily. In 5th everyone was tooled up for tank killing and I felt like they died faster. Now that everyone is on the plasma train you can really take advantage with strategic uses of transports and mech in general.

Bingo. This is what I'm saying. I think much of the time, people let themselves get worked up and over exaggerate the extent to which vehicles have been nerfed. It happened, but they're not useless. I do think Dreds got the short end of the stick. If Wraithlords are treated as MC, they should be too!

As someone said, didn't want to quote just in case he thought I was picking on him, witch I am not, said people just need to adapt.

I find it funny how a lot of people need the "easy button" to play. Now that the "easy button" has been changed/nerfed a bit, people complain because they play the same way.

Why not try play an army like Tyranids or Chaos Deamons (before new codex not sure how it's like now). They had to adapt a lot of times to play, espically against armour.

So when things change for Tyranids and CD lernt to adapt and try new tactics instead of saying it's broken and it's not that good.

Other wise, it just goes to show, how many people needed the "easy button" to play last edition.

That's a pretty good point. Now that people can't just sit in their tanks and roll dice they think tanks are useless. Don't get me wrong, I don't think tanks are as good as last edition. But is that a bad thing? I don't think that either. I actually really really like how tanks play in this edition. AV13/14 vehicles are super durable. Gun boats became more powerful in that they cannot be stopped unless you can pen it or glance it out totally so no more stun locks. Same thing for transports, they are so much faster this edition it's crazy.

 Ailaros wrote:
Yeah, if only the 40k rulebook allowed you to use citadel miniatures.

... oh, wait...

Since when has what the rulebook says ever mattered to the OP?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
Yeah, if only the 40k rulebook allowed you to use citadel miniatures.

... oh, wait...

Since when has what the rulebook says ever mattered to the OP?

No no, Ailaros thinks you're making another forgeworld argument, so he's instinctively responding in turn.

At least, that's my impression of the situation.

Yeh mech isnt great now and since there are loads of necrons about a few necrons can take out a land raider (In theory)

Chancetragedy wrote:

Man this hit it on the head. I use 2 rhino's in my marine army and they have been lasting longer than they did in 5th easily. In 5th everyone was tooled up for tank killing and I felt like they died faster. Now that everyone is on the plasma train you can really take advantage with strategic uses of transports and mech in general.

With the changes to rapid fire making plasma more useful and its extended range over melta weapons, you shouldn't really be seeing much of a difference, with the Plasma's longer range roughly balancing out the meltas greater killyness by being able to hit your rhinos at longer range and with multiple shots, with HP's being the primary kill method. Between HP's and outright kills you'll need ~3 turns of fire with a single plasma gun to average a kill against AV11, but so will a meltagun.

You don't *need* AT guns as much because everything else will do the same job nearly as effectively, or in many cases, they keep those AT guns because they're also super useful against ubiquitous heavy infantry and against monstrous creatures.

Chancetragedy wrote:
That's a pretty good point. Now that people can't just sit in their tanks and roll dice they think tanks are useless. Don't get me wrong, I don't think tanks are as good as last edition. But is that a bad thing? I don't think that either. I actually really really like how tanks play in this edition. AV13/14 vehicles are super durable. Gun boats became more powerful in that they cannot be stopped unless you can pen it or glance it out totally so no more stun locks. Same thing for transports, they are so much faster this edition it's crazy.

AV13/14 is still less durable on average than it was in 5E, just not as outright bad as medium armor. Stunlocks are still possible, you just need to pen, and if your tanks are being hit that consistently, they're just dead instead of stunned. Transports are faster, that's it. Their assault utility, scoring utility, shielding utility, and lifespan are all notably worse or have been outright removed entirely.

Davor wrote:
As someone said, didn't want to quote just in case he thought I was picking on him, witch I am not, said people just need to adapt.

People keep saying "adapt". Care to actually explain that? Because everything put forth so far has just been "use cover", which you did in 5th anyway.

I find it funny how a lot of people need the "easy button" to play. Now that the "easy button" has been changed/nerfed a bit, people complain because they play the same way.

Why not try play an army like Tyranids or Chaos Deamons (before new codex not sure how it's like now). They had to adapt a lot of times to play, espically against armour.

So when things change for Tyranids and CD lernt to adapt and try new tactics instead of saying it's broken and it's not that good.

Other wise, it just goes to show, how many people needed the "easy button" to play last edition.

So, besides spite, is there anything actually relevant or constructive to the use and performance of armor in 6th edition in here? Nope.