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'm not sure what's know-it-all about questioning the niceness of Rhinos.

Alcibiades wrote:
Man Martel, could you cut down on the know-it-all attitude? It's really irritating.

You've got to sympathize. When you play marines and know that rhinos are terrible (cause they are terrible) and people call the "fine vehicles" and stuff like that it gets rather annoying. Rhinos aren't fine. Rhinos are worthless piles of junk. Imperial ones anyways. Interestingly enough choas rhinos aren't that bad - mostly because they can take real/decentish weapons and upgrades - even with that chaos rhinos are still bad. Make rhinos assault vehicles and now they are "fine vehicles."

Except adding upgrades to a Rhino defeats the purpose of having a cheap transport.

Or, you play SM with Rhinos, and they feel useful, and worth their points.

Then, when looking at a similar option, that costs more than twice as much, but is a little better in a number of ways, except for being in a force that generally doesn't want to use them, and so comment that Rhinos aren't complete garbage.

And then the response is, implicitly, that I'm wrong and should feel bad.

Arguing the point is one thing. Posting to make it clear that you know I'm wrong, but expressing why I'm wrong isn't worthy of your time, is something else altogether.

I see nothing to change my mind on the whole 'Rhinos are fine for 35pts' concept.

I wasn't offended. I'm used to running afowl of Martel. But Alec wasn't wrong.

There's a difference between saying they are "nice" vs "fine". At least to me. I don't see anything great about them, especially in the era of hull points. So I guess I agree with you more than Xeno, even though I still kinda don't like them.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Alcibiades wrote:
Man Martel, could you cut down on the know-it-all attitude? It's really irritating.

You've got to sympathize. When you play marines and know that rhinos are terrible (cause they are terrible) and people call the "fine vehicles" and stuff like that it gets rather annoying. Rhinos aren't fine. Rhinos are worthless piles of junk. Imperial ones anyways. Interestingly enough choas rhinos aren't that bad - mostly because they can take real/decentish weapons and upgrades - even with that chaos rhinos are still bad. Make rhinos assault vehicles and now they are "fine vehicles."

Not really so much on the Chaos Rhino's, adding things just makes it worth more to kill and defeats it's purpose as a "get these units there now" option, they'll die quick regardless.

 welshhoppo wrote:
Except adding upgrades to a Rhino defeats the purpose of having a cheap transport.

Disagree - adding a cheap combi melta or a havoc launcher to a rhino is well worth the points, imo.

Rhinos are great but they're no drop pods.

I can't recall the last time I had a Rhino last the entire game. They sometimes get my marines near where I need them to be. However, Drop Pods get gak done.

Kronk - would you say Rhino's aren't fine, or are you just saying Pods are better?

I agree that pods are generally better. But there are things Rhinos do that Pods don't. Such as:
-Squad can't be shot until it leaves or the Rhino dies
-Squad can redeploy relatively cheaply
-Even after transporting, Rhinos can still move around
-Every other squad is on the table first turn, isn't dependant on a Reserves roll
-Sometimes, you don't want to get there too early
-Sometimes, you don't know right away where you want to be.

Pods are, generally, better in my opinion (although CSM - the OP of the thread - can't take them), but there are times a Rhino really is a better option.

They might die relatively easily, at AV11/11/10 3HP, but at 35 points, shouldn't it?

Pozy,
[Edit - comment this part called out was removed via edit, so could be seen as inflammatory. Therefore, I removed it.]

"Pozy,
Do you really need to troll Martel? If you really want to rehash what constitutes Majority, start a thread? If you want to rehash who-pods-best, perhaps do so in that thread? I fail to see his that sort of comment helps this thread."

Please don't call me a troll, that is extremely offensive.
I'm the one who brought drop pods up which you and Kronk expanded on so please don't be offensive.

Bharring's logic is exactly why my standard TAC list has two razors, one rhino and one drop pod for a dreadnought. Maybe my list would run better with all pods. I'd have to get two more pods to find out.

this is how "good" imperial stuff is. Chimera 65pts. wave serpent 130pts. 4 times the fire power, twice as fast, cover ignoring, skimer jinking boosted by shield protection on turn one.

Imperial good is always bad, unless it is something FW or a drop pod.

Makumba wrote:
this is how "good" imperial stuff is. Chimera 65pts. wave serpent 130pts. 4 times the fire power, twice as fast, cover ignoring, skimer jinking boosted by shield protection on turn one.

Imperial good is always bad, unless it is something FW or a drop pod.

No, that's just Eldar being too good.

I could say the same about a Devilfish.

That it's good or bad?

Makumba wrote:
this is how "good" imperial stuff is. Chimera 65pts. wave serpent 130pts. 4 times the fire power, twice as fast, cover ignoring, skimer jinking boosted by shield protection on turn one.

Imperial good is always bad, unless it is something FW or a drop pod.

But it's half the price! It should be 4-5 times less effective! (Xenos logic)

Bike Marines?
Grav?
Fearless blobs?
SoT scout spam, apparently?
Dreadknights?

Saying a vehicle is bad because a Wave Serpent is better is like saying Assault Marines are good because Storm Guardians are worse.

Makumba wrote:
this is how "good" imperial stuff is. Chimera 65pts. wave serpent 130pts. 4 times the fire power, twice as fast, cover ignoring, skimer jinking boosted by shield protection on turn one.

Imperial good is always bad, unless it is something FW or a drop pod.

The Chimera got a highly unnecessary nerf.

A nearly 20% price hike on top of changing its fire points really didn't do it any favors.

:(

How does the Chimera compare to the Devilfish?

Honestly, not that familiar. Doesn't it have a Heavy Stubber or something? And some fire points?

Bharring wrote:
How does the Chimera compare to the Devilfish?

Honestly, not that familiar. Doesn't it have a Heavy Stubber or something? And some fire points?

The Chimera starts at 15pts less than a Devilfish, has 2 fire points and Lasgun arrays, but no side hatches, no Skimmer bonuses (the critical one being Jink) and weaker side armor of AV10. The Chimera has similar BS and weapon Strength relative to the Devilfish, but fewer shots from each weapons system, and nothing that's Twin Linked or ignores LoS. Same Transport Capacity.

Chimera can buy a heavy stubber, but doesn't come with one. If using FW rules, it can take buy an Autocannon or TL heavy bolter for the turret, but those haven't been updated since the new AM book came out.

12/10/10. 12cap. Firepoint that 2 can use. 3 lasguns on either side that can engage different targets. 2 heavy bolters or 1 multilaser + heavy bolter or heavy flamer + heavybolter/multilaser. Bs3. 65pts. IA:1 allows autocannon as turret for 5pts.

Used to have a firepoint that 5 could use. And 10pts cheaper I think.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ninjad.

So, for dakka, stock:
Chimera:
6x S5ap4 @ 36", BS3
2 Fire Points
Up to 6 Lasguns as well, like fire points, but worse

Devilfish:
4xS5ap5 @ 18" bs3
In place of firepoints, drones. Each are 2xS5ap5 @ 18", bs2 TL.

Looks like Chimera has twice the range, and one better AP. 2 less shots, with nothing embarked, but much better shooting overall.
Much, much more shooting when guys are inside.

Mobility:
Chimera is amphibious (lol), but Fish ignores any intervening models/terrain.
Neither are fast, so moving more than 6 hurts both.
But the Chimera doesn't need to be anywhere close, the Devilfish does.

Survivability:
The AV10 sides is pretty big, and jinking is a good thing. So Fish wins. But being within 18" often means a dead vehicle.

I definitely wouldn't say the Devilfish is any better than the Chimera. Even before factoring in cost.

I'd personally say, by stats alone, they are about on par, other than cost. Although the devilfish is bigger, which may or may not be a good thing.

The Devilfish and Chimera both got unnecessary nerfs, imo. The Rhino got an indirect nerf when they made it so you can't assault out of a non-assault vehicle, even if it doesn't move. Of course, the Wave Serpent got the same nerf, but got buffed out of this universe as well. One thing is for certain: vehicles are mostly gak compared to MCs this edition. This phenomenon is not unique to Imperials.

The ability to Jink alone is worth the cost difference. Yeah the Chimera has better AP, but that matters against a very narrow range of enemies, and only if they're not getting cover really. The Lasguns are largely pointless unfortunately, the Chimeras fire-points are nice, but even if Tau had them they wouldn't have the same value just because of the difference in the nature of the infantry weapons (Fire Warriors don't have organic special weapons). The side armor 11 and ability to Jink are just huge survivability boosts (especially because the Chimera has to turn its *only* non-av10 facing away from the enemy to disembark troops).

As noted, the Rhino's biggest issue is the lack of any ability to assault out of it. Even with 5E's relatively draconian restrictions, it allowed Tac marines to be the flexible unit that they are intended to be, but with the changes in 6E and 7E's transport rules, it hamstrings such units far more often than it should, while units like Berzerkers have only one functional transport, the Land Raider, which is more than 7x the cost of a Rhino.

It's pretty sad that the only transport I'd consider really good, ie the WS, is only good because of its firepower, not its transport scheme.

 Vaktathi wrote:
The ability to Jink alone is worth the cost difference. Yeah the Chimera has better AP, but that matters against a very narrow range of enemies, and only if they're not getting cover really. The Lasguns are largely pointless unfortunately, the Chimeras fire-points are nice, but even if Tau had them they wouldn't have the same value just because of the difference in the nature of the infantry weapons (Fire Warriors don't have organic special weapons). The side armor 11 and ability to Jink are just huge survivability boosts (especially because the Chimera has to turn its *only* non-av10 facing away from the enemy to disembark troops).

As noted, the Rhino's biggest issue is the lack of any ability to assault out of it. Even with 5E's relatively draconian restrictions, it allowed Tac marines to be the flexible unit that they are intended to be, but with the changes in 6E and 7E's transport rules, it hamstrings such units far more often than it should, while units like Berzerkers have only one functional transport, the Land Raider, which is more than 7x the cost of a Rhino.

You have a very strange method of disembarking in that case. Why would you ever do that?

I think a lot of it is costing issues.

-- A 5-Man Tac squad in a Rhino, with a Sarge and a Lascannon, costs as much as a Sicaran tank.
-- A 6-Man FW squad in a Fish (EMP, Sarge, 2x ML Drones, SMS) costs as much as a Riptide.
-- A stock Chimera with 3x Plasma Vets and Dozer Blades, costs the same as an Executioner tank with 2x Sponson Multimeltas.

Equal value? I think not. So basically, good HS is too cheap, or troops are too expensive/limited. There needs to be a global look at the game to align costs, on an ongoing basis. Piecemealing it codex-by-codex, while the rules change underneath you, isn't going to result in good internal or external balance.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
The ability to Jink alone is worth the cost difference. Yeah the Chimera has better AP, but that matters against a very narrow range of enemies, and only if they're not getting cover really. The Lasguns are largely pointless unfortunately, the Chimeras fire-points are nice, but even if Tau had them they wouldn't have the same value just because of the difference in the nature of the infantry weapons (Fire Warriors don't have organic special weapons). The side armor 11 and ability to Jink are just huge survivability boosts (especially because the Chimera has to turn its *only* non-av10 facing away from the enemy to disembark troops).

As noted, the Rhino's biggest issue is the lack of any ability to assault out of it. Even with 5E's relatively draconian restrictions, it allowed Tac marines to be the flexible unit that they are intended to be, but with the changes in 6E and 7E's transport rules, it hamstrings such units far more often than it should, while units like Berzerkers have only one functional transport, the Land Raider, which is more than 7x the cost of a Rhino.

You have a very strange method of disembarking in that case. Why would you ever do that?

Usually because the difference in disembarking from the rear and switching the rear towards the foe an disembarking from there gets you an extra 5" of distance.

 Kajaki War Pig wrote:
I'm just really delving into CSM's, my first love is orks. I kind of disagree with the overall opinion of "CSM crappiness". I grant the Codex isn't the easiest roster, but once you add IA:13 I feel as if it's a decent army.

The biggest problem is that Chaos vehicles seem to be very specialized, and they aren't quite the one stop shop that wave serpents and other multi-purpopse vehicles are, nor do I think they're supposed to be.

Chaos transports are transports. The Rhino and Dreadclaw do their job for relatively decent points values. One could argue that the Dreadclaw is over priced, but those folks are thinking it's just a drop pod, instead of a hovering, fast moving assault transport.

The tanks and air support all become very specialized in their uses. They excel at anti-infantry, or anti-vehicle, but never really both. I think it's just the relatively unforgiving nature of being a CSM.

Kinda like playing orks, only you can't take as many casualties if you screw up

The problem is most other armies don't say "Buy another codex/ FW book and it becomes decent." C:SM, Necrons, Eldar, Tau, ect have competitive builds out of one book. For CSM you need a second, more expensive book, more expensive FW models, and still can't compete with any high tier armies out there. I can't say we are the bottom, as I don't know all the armies out there that well, but saying all you need is to spend double the money to be any use is not a good army. Now don't get me wrong, I love my CSMs, but I think they need a major overhaul. And the Dreadclaw has a bad habit of eating guys that ride in it, so it is kinda scary to put anything important into one. Why all the legions lost thier drop pods and artificer armor, ect when they turned(some recently) has never been satisfactorily been explained.