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.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Hahahaha, I know, right.
The thing is these SM players seem to think that their Rhinos should be advancing alone towards the enemy without cover and then get all confused and/or butthurt when said lightly armoured APC's detonate/are knocked out. Why, when you have Vindicators and Predators do you choose to advance your lightly armoured APC on is own? Why not throw a Vindicator in there and boost it towards the enemy line?

Well, yes, even dreadfully terrible units like Maleceptors survive well if you provide the enemy with better units to shoot at.

I am not sure how that makes the Rhino any tougher, though...

If the enemy decides to ignore those Predators (single autocannons really are not that scary) then the Rhinos are dead meat.

Why not deploy several Vindicators/Predators in a line and advance the APC's behind them?

So that when they are wrecked, they block the Rhinos' path?

Why are such basic tactics as armoured assaults and DISTRACTION CARNIFEX so difficult to comprehend?

Given your constant assertions that the Rhino is fine for its points and everyone else just sucks, I am not sure if you read the OP. The problem wasn't that Rhinos are bad for their cost - they are not. They are dirt cheap.
The problem was simply that they are too fragile in general, independent of points cost (which does mean paying for it is appropriate, and before you once more go 'okay I want rear armour 14 on my Russes for 5 points', it is not the topic of the thread. Go make a Russ thread if you want to buff them. Although, there is one....)

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
Well la-di-dah, good for you.

Some of us have to make do without drop pods for the moment. The Rhino is fine.

I don't know what you're complaining about, Ashi, of course I'm using tactics and other units to protect my Rhinos. That's how tactics work.

Honestly, that's the real problem with this game. So many armies have toys that let you ignore tactics that when someone does have to use tactics to make up for "codex shortcomings", everyone tells them they're beign stupid and/or unrealistic and playing in a "noncompetitive environment".

Hahahaha, I know, right.
The thing is these SM players seem to think that their Rhinos should be advancing alone towards the enemy without cover and then get all confused and/or butthurt when said lightly armoured APC's detonate/are knocked out. Why, when you have Vindicators and Predators do you choose to advance your lightly armoured APC on is own? Why not throw a Vindicator in there and boost it towards the enemy line? Why not deploy several Vindicators/Predators in a line and advance the APC's behind them?
Why are such basic tactics as armoured assaults and DISTRACTION CARNIFEX so difficult to comprehend?

No offense, but the way it went for you the last time you shared a battle report during a discussion, I wouldn't be so quick to board the elite gamer train.

Let's go over some of your suggestions.
1) I don't think anyone is suggesting you advance 1 rhino on its own. Frankly I don't take Rhinos in any of my armies, but this is mainly due to the fact I'm better off with pods (which do their job automatically), and because the units that can fit in rhinos tend to be bad. But yes, if you're going to take rhinos or razorbacks, you take a ton of tanks or not at all. The problem with this strategy for marines, is their tanks are, relative to other codex choices, inferior. This makes armor saturation a concept that weakens your army just by selecting it.

2) You can advance behind cover, or pop smoke, but that's just a 5+ save on a tank that has 3HP and 11 AV. For the record, scat bikers do 4 shots, 2/3 hit, 1/3 HP, 2/3 get through for 16/27 HP per scat biker. A squad costing just over 120 points will eliminate a rhino in cover. Without cover it does become worse (8/9), so it takes about one additional biker to do the job. Bikers aren't dedicated anti tank...units that are will remove a rhino without trying. Other transports are tougher, faster, or are more killy.

3) Predators and Vindicators have terrible side armor. Against a force that is even slightly mobile (like say Tau or Eldar), you are exposing your more expensive, and more threatening, tanks to enemy fire to protect a unit that most likely isn't as good. For a vindicator, true, you have to move forward. Your goal with a vindicator against a good player is to get 2 shots against a high valued target and earn your points back. Predators tend to hug the back of the field and fire down lanes though. Rarely do you want them advancing. They'll also slow the rhinos down, or not fire. A bad move, IMO. In addition to this, against necrons, your better more expensive tanks are basically rhinos with one additional HP. You don't want them taking shots at all at vindis or preds. You're better off screening these choices with empty rhinos.

4) Rhinos and the troops they tend to carry aren't scary. Most units from competitive dexes can afford to ignore your transports and terrible marines will targetting cents, bikers, stern guard, or other units that are actually able to do some damage. This is radically different from a wave serpent, which is scary in its own right regardless of what it carries, or a chimera, which can at least do some damage. Granted, against IG, I still wouldn't target a chimera first, but I would target it before I'd target a rhino.


This is why people are saying that those that make rhinos work probably don't play in competitive metas. Eldar, Tau, Necrons, AdMech, Daemons, Nids FMC, and Marines don't care about rhinos. Less competitive choices like marines built differently, horde nids, orks, IG, sisters are a little more frightened of marines or have issues removing mass AV 11 (DE especially fall into this latter category).

What is a distraction fex? Is that when you take a very expensive MC who does nothing until turn 4 because he's slow? Or is this from the era when fexes were actually good choices?

The only problem with buffing the rhino right now, even if you adjusted the point cost to match, is that us Space Marine players still get them for free in a Gladius double-demi company.

Then again that is more of an issue with the formation then it is with the rhino right now.

The Rhino has weak armour because it isn't meant to be a heavily armoured transport. It's meant to transport Marines around while keeping them safe from small arms fire and other anti-infantry weapons. It has no firepower because it relies on its passengers for firepower i.e. two shooting out the top hatch. The most firepower you will get goes to the Chaos Rhino, which can take a combi-melta and havoc launcher for less than a razorback and have two melta/plasmaguns firing out the top.

The problem is the amount of S6/7 and AP3/2 that permeates the current game. It's a lot easier these days to kill metal boxes. However, all of those same weapons kill Marines even faster. Keep the Rhino in cover and remember to use smoke, and it could make it to the objective. If you want speed, take a Drop Pod. If you want protection, invest in a Land Raider. If you just want to get from point A to point B while keeping MEQ alive and doing it on the cheap, the Rhino is your best bet.

The secret to keeping Rhinos alive, as others have pointed out, is to use cover and have something scarier for your opponent to shoot at. A Vindicator or Maulerfiend is much more dangerous than a simple metal box. Why shoot the metal box when there are bigger priority targets to shoot?

Well, there you have it folks, you try to advise the use of actual tactics and they just cannot take it.

So, I expect to see plenty of unsupported Rhinos (or should that be RH1N0?) advancing in the open in the future

 master of ordinance wrote:
Well, there you have it folks, you try to advise the use of actual tactics and they just cannot take it.

So, I expect to see plenty of unsupported Rhinos (or should that be RH1N0?) advancing in the open in the future

I'll be sure to use the 'tactics' excuse the next time I see someone say Ogryns or Rough Riders are terrible.

Rough Riders for example are really tough for their price - the enemy shoots at your more threatening Chimeras instead and look, not a single Rough Rider died! Amazing!

Seriously though, 'L2P' is and will continue to be a flawed argument.

Rough riders are just human soldiers on horses. Of course they aren't supposed to be out on the battlefield further than your tanks.

The thing is these butt hurt Imperial Guard players think their mounted assault troops are supposed to advancing towards the enemy without using cover and/or butthurt when their cardboard armored troops are blown to hell. Why, when you have Baneblades and Leman Russes, do you choose to advance your Calvary on their own? Why not throw a Baneblade out there and put it in front of the Rough Riders?

Why are such basic tactics as Calvary charges and distraction carnifex so hard to understand?

 Ashiraya wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Well, there you have it folks, you try to advise the use of actual tactics and they just cannot take it.

So, I expect to see plenty of unsupported Rhinos (or should that be RH1N0?) advancing in the open in the future

I'll be sure to use the 'tactics' excuse the next time I see someone say Ogryns or Rough Riders are terrible.

Rough Riders for example are really tough for their price - the enemy shoots at your more threatening Chimeras instead and look, not a single Rough Rider died! Amazing!

Seriously though, 'L2P' is and will continue to be a flawed argument.

Difference:

The Rough Riders re an overpriced CC unit without the rules or gear to let them get close enough to use their one shot CC weapon and are universally regarded as terribly gak.

The Rhino is an amazingly well priced Armoured Personal Carrier which does its job extremely well but for some reason some people expect it to be packing the kind of survivability and firepower commonly seen on a Main Battle Tank.

So no, in this case the L2P attitude is needed. I would gladly trade my Chimeras for Rhino's. I might be able to withstand the enemies dirt cheap basic infantry on the flanks for a start and my transports would no longer cost more than they where worth.

 master of ordinance wrote:
The Rhino is an amazingly well priced Armoured Personal Carrier which does its job extremely well but for some reason some people expect it to be packing the kind of survivability and firepower commonly seen on a Main Battle Tank.

I dunno, from your IG thread you seem to want 14/13/12 with 4 HP as your main battle tank, and I do not think anyone has argued for a 14/13/12 4 HP Rhino!

So no, in this case the L2P attitude is needed.

The L2P attitude is never needed.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
The Rhino is an amazingly well priced Armoured Personal Carrier which does its job extremely well but for some reason some people expect it to be packing the kind of survivability and firepower commonly seen on a Main Battle Tank.

I dunno, from your IG thread you seem to want 14/13/12 with 4 HP as your main battle tank, and I do not think anyone has argued for a 14/13/12 4 HP Rhino!

Gee, that could be something to do with the Leman Russ being a (underperforming) Main Battle Tank (note the difference) that currently has the exact same HP as your light APC (not a main battle tank) and a slight issue of being destroyed when the enemy even looks at it.
Anyway, the current leaning is for AV 14/13/11 actually though the suggestions for RAV 12 on the close quarters variants is justefied by the way you Marines and the other xenos forces out there spam Krak and Melta Bombs. I mean, even if we castle do you know how easy it is to get close and just assault those tanks.... Assuming they where not graved/glanced to death first!

And there was a call a few pages back for Rhinos and indeed all SM vehicles to have an option to gain more armour... Capping out at 14 I believe.

Let's consider our language and it's appropriateness for a family friendly forum, thanks, motyak

I think an element of what distinguishes Rhinos from Chimeras is that Rhinos and their derivatives can be carried by Thunderhawk transports; that requires them to have certain design elements that the Chimera don't have. The reduced armor and the use of more exotic materials when loaded with marines is probably lighter than a Chimera comparably loaded even if it could some how be loaded on a Thunderhawk transporter. Rhino's are also air tight and can travel through a vacuum, which means having one loaded with troops for atmospheric entry isn't as problematic; even though marines power armor is similarly capable a vehicle unsuitable to atmospheric entry would be many many times more prone to catastrophic failure.

Its important to consider that a space marine in power armor, depending on the mark of armor, can weigh as much as 2000lbs. So without consideration to their weapons you're talking about needing a transport that is stripped down enough to carry 20,000lbs of marines. To give that perspective the real life vehicles that are most similar to a Rhino weigh about 24,000lbs and can only carry an additional 3000lbs of troops and weapons. That said the Chimera being more conventional probably can't carry the weight of a full squad of space marines.

Between the Rhino and Land raider you have two extremes... A rhino being the most stripped down vehicle capable of moving that kind of weight and then you have the Land Raider as a design that doesn't compromise on armor or weight to achieve that capability but instead relies on an engine that much larger.

Anyone who finds rhinos too fragile needs to spend a few games playing with trukks and DE raiders. When half your mobile force ends up wrecked mid field, your going to wish you had the AV11 and closed top.

Now try going second.... Now half your force is walking from your table edge.

My chaos still loves their rhinos. Yeah warp amps help with the assault, and for some reason nobody ignores my Lucius + noise champion toting rhino the second game in a row.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Rough riders are just human soldiers on horses. Of course they aren't supposed to be out on the battlefield further than your tanks.

The thing is these butt hurt Imperial Guard players think their mounted assault troops are supposed to advancing towards the enemy without using cover and/or butthurt when their cardboard armored troops are blown to hell. Why, when you have Baneblades and Leman Russes, do you choose to advance your Calvary on their own? Why not throw a Baneblade out there and put it in front of the Rough Riders?

Why are such basic tactics as Calvary charges and distraction carnifex so hard to understand?

Baneblades are just baneblades. Of course they're aren't supposed to be out on the battle field unsupported.

The thing is these butt hurt baneblade players think their baneblades are meant to be advancing towards the enemy without using cover and/or butthurt when their baneblade armoured baneblades are blown to hell. Why, when you have warhounds and warlords, do you choose to advance your baneblades on their own? Why not throw a warlord out there and put it in front of the baneblades?

Why are such tactics as baneblades and distraction titans so hard to understand?

 Jayden63 wrote:
Anyone who finds rhinos too fragile needs to spend a few games playing with trukks and DE raiders. When half your mobile force ends up wrecked mid field, your going to wish you had the AV11 and closed top.

Now try going second.... Now half your force is walking from your table edge.

My chaos still loves their rhinos. Yeah warp amps help with the assault, and for some reason nobody ignores my Lucius + noise champion toting rhino the second game in a row.

Except... that is exactly what happens to Rhinos... because they are AV11 and closed top...

I remember in 4th and early 5th when rhinos were 50 points and worth every point. I think that hull points have really killed the use of lightly armored transports especially when coupled with the increased proliferation of mid strength high rate of fire weapons.

I say blame the edition, not the vehicle. They used to do exactly what people currently wish they could do. And its not like their stats have changed.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
The Rhino is an amazingly well priced Armoured Personal Carrier which does its job extremely well but for some reason some people expect it to be packing the kind of survivability and firepower commonly seen on a Main Battle Tank.

I dunno, from your IG thread you seem to want 14/13/12 with 4 HP as your main battle tank, and I do not think anyone has argued for a 14/13/12 4 HP Rhino!

Gee, that could be something to do with the Leman Russ being a (underperforming) Main Battle Tank (note the difference) that currently has the exact same HP as your light APC (not a main battle tank) and a slight issue of being destroyed when the enemy even looks at it.

I fail to see how front armor 14 is being destroyed when someone looks at it. It's the highest armor in the game, and with their long range guns, you can deploy them in cover. I don't see how you can call the rhino usable but can't keep the Russ alive...are you moving it forward, like you suggested with the predator? Because that's a bad idea, as was stated when you suggested doing so with Marines.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Anyway, the current leaning is for AV 14/13/11 actually though the suggestions for RAV 12 on the close quarters variants is justefied by the way you Marines and the other xenos forces out there spam Krak and Melta Bombs. I mean, even if we castle do you know how easy it is to get close and just assault those tanks.... Assuming they where not graved/glanced to death first!

Current leaning? From whom?
It's not easy to get close and assault IG unless you are a flyer. The IG flyer nerfs really hurt their ability to deal with FMCs, but otherwise IG still put out a good volume of anti infantry shots. I could see you having problems against a wraith based cron army, but well, welcome to the game? Every faction has that issue.
How is an enemy reaching CC? I can see grav weapons, D weapons, and gauss weapons being an issue, but CC marines? Are they using the BA deep striking formation? Because your counter punch should be strong enough to wipe them unless you are deploying oddly.




For the record, ignoring someone's counter points with what is essentially "I CANT EVEN" doesn't help your argument. At all.

Jayden63,
Agreed, Hull Points are crippling Vehicles more then anything else.

I don't even think the high-Strength Weapon spam is that much to blame, though it definitely compounds the problem. Hull Points ensuring Vehicles do not even get a slither of a chance all by their lonesome. If the Vehicle is not immune to Strength 6 or Below, the only roll it will serve is to taxi Units to the front line as fast as possible, before distracting a few shots away from said Unit for a Turn or two if it is lucky enough to have Hull Points left by then. This isn't about the Rhino's either, it is just the most common Transport Vehicle so it stands to reason that law-of-averages makes it seem the worse off.

I go as far as to say the inclusion of Hull Points has also weakened Anti-Tank Weapons, though the effect is not as heavily seen.

No longer do we need to even look at the Armour Piercing value on a Weapon to determine if it would be good at taking out Vehicles. An increased chance destroy the Vehicle, a weapon or its mobility is simply not required if we can ensure it is wrecked within a handful of shots anyway. All we need to ensure is the Weapon has enough Strength to Glance or Penetrate most Vehicles, then look to see if it has enough Shots to ensure the odds no longer matter. After all, I know which one I would take to destroy a Vehicle if I needed to choose between a single S:9 AP:2 shot, or two S:8 AP:4 shots.

If we would remove hull points, vehicles would be good again.

No, the real problem is they didn't give vehicles enough hull points.

They should really double all hull points on all vehicles to make it work better.

Because space marines are the undesputed masters of aerial/orbital insertion.

Once, long ago GW imagined that SMs all made it to the battlefield rapidly via drop pod or thunderbird. A Dpod is the fastest, but denys you conventional transportation later. To get a squad of marines into battle with a transport requires a thunderhawk. However even the mighty thunderhawk cant drop a av 13-13-13 vehicle from space full of SMs at the speeds necessary to avoid anti air threats. And so it is that a thunderhawk carrys (in the old fluff at least) 2 rhinos full of marines. Light, dependable Rhinos.

This is in fact why SM vehicles are so lightly armoured. The need for rapid, aerial transport requires a lighter vehicle. SMs full auto, in your face style of warfare allows for this...in the fluff. When you are amidst the enemy they are reluctant to fire their heaviest weapons for fear of hitting their own.

These fearsome, shock & awe style deployments were NEVER backed up on the table. The thunderhawk was never produced, outside of FW & a whimsical all metal version for a one off run. The low av of Rhinos is now a comical relic of the early 1990's. They tried to make it a real thing with the 5th edition BAs book by giving LRs deep strike. It was supposed to be a representation of rapid, orbital insertion of a LR via the heavy lifter version of the thunderhawk. You can see the FW model of it on their web site. Other than that i cant remember any attempt to represent the orbital deployment of SM transports.

P.S. Sorry if this had already been said. I couldn't be bothered to read all 6 pages.

 n0t_u wrote:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
Rough riders are just human soldiers on horses. Of course they aren't supposed to be out on the battlefield further than your tanks.

The thing is these butt hurt Imperial Guard players think their mounted assault troops are supposed to advancing towards the enemy without using cover and/or butthurt when their cardboard armored troops are blown to hell. Why, when you have Baneblades and Leman Russes, do you choose to advance your Calvary on their own? Why not throw a Baneblade out there and put it in front of the Rough Riders?

Why are such basic tactics as Calvary charges and distraction carnifex so hard to understand?

Baneblades are just baneblades. Of course they're aren't supposed to be out on the battle field unsupported.

The thing is these butt hurt baneblade players think their baneblades are meant to be advancing towards the enemy without using cover and/or butthurt when their baneblade armoured baneblades are blown to hell. Why, when you have warhounds and warlords, do you choose to advance your baneblades on their own? Why not throw a warlord out there and put it in front of the baneblades?

Why are such tactics as baneblades and distraction titans so hard to understand?

Well, yes, even dreadfully terrible units like Baneblades survive well if you provide the enemy with better units to shoot at.

I am not sure how that makes the Baneblade any tougher, though...

If the enemy decides to ignore those Warhound Titans (single Turbo Lasersreally are not that scary) then the Baneblades are dead meat.

Why not throw a warlord out there and put it in front of the baneblades?

So that when they are destroyed, they blow up the Baneblade?

Why are such tactics as baneblades and distraction titans so hard to understand?

Given your constant assertions that the Baneblade is fine for its points and everyone else just sucks, I am not sure if you read the OP. The problem wasnt that Baneblades are bad for their cost-they are not. They are dirt cheap.

The problem was simply that they are too fragile in general, independent of points costs. (which does mean paying for it is appropriate, and before you once more go 'okay I want rear armour 14 on my Rhinos for 5 points. It is not the tpic of thread. Go make a Rhino thread if you want to buff them. Although, there is one...)

My point that I am trying to make here is that the Master of Ordinance's argument is silly because you can swap out "Rhino" for any unit that is perceived to be underperforming. Sure, you can make Rhinos last longer by putting your tanks out in front of it. But that isn't the job of the APC or the MBT. Rhinos should be able to get a Marine squad reliably where they need to go in a expedient manner.

Akiasura wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
The Rhino is an amazingly well priced Armoured Personal Carrier which does its job extremely well but for some reason some people expect it to be packing the kind of survivability and firepower commonly seen on a Main Battle Tank.

I dunno, from your IG thread you seem to want 14/13/12 with 4 HP as your main battle tank, and I do not think anyone has argued for a 14/13/12 4 HP Rhino!

Gee, that could be something to do with the Leman Russ being a (underperforming) Main Battle Tank (note the difference) that currently has the exact same HP as your light APC (not a main battle tank) and a slight issue of being destroyed when the enemy even looks at it.

I fail to see how front armor 14 is being destroyed when someone looks at it. It's the highest armor in the game, and with their long range guns, you can deploy them in cover. I don't see how you can call the rhino usable but can't keep the Russ alive...are you moving it forward, like you suggested with the predator? Because that's a bad idea, as was stated when you suggested doing so with Marines.

Maybe but there are things such as Drop Pods and Deep Strike, all of which can result in nasty things happening, especially when your flank armour 13 and rear armour 10.
Besides advancing with a Leman Russ is rarely ever something that you want to do. It is big, it is expensive and even un upgraded it is somewhere in the region of 8% of your points.
The Predator, un upgraded, is twice as fast, can boost and costs only 5% of your points. Dont want to use one? Use a Vindicator.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Anyway, the current leaning is for AV 14/13/11 actually though the suggestions for RAV 12 on the close quarters variants is justefied by the way you Marines and the other xenos forces out there spam Krak and Melta Bombs. I mean, even if we castle do you know how easy it is to get close and just assault those tanks.... Assuming they where not graved/glanced to death first!

Current leaning? From whom?
It's not easy to get close and assault IG unless you are a flyer. The IG flyer nerfs really hurt their ability to deal with FMCs, but otherwise IG still put out a good volume of anti infantry shots. I could see you having problems against a wraith based cron army, but well, welcome to the game? Every faction has that issue.
How is an enemy reaching CC? I can see grav weapons, D weapons, and gauss weapons being an issue, but CC marines? Are they using the BA deep striking formation? Because your counter punch should be strong enough to wipe them unless you are deploying oddly.


For the record, ignoring someone's counter points with what is essentially "I CANT EVEN" doesn't help your argument. At all.

Deepstrike. Drop Pod. Fast moving transports. Use of cover.

All of these things can get you close to an IG army very fast, especially since we dont actually put out as much firepower as we used too.

 TheCustomLime wrote:
My point that I am trying to make here is that the Master of Ordinance's argument is silly because you can swap out "Rhino" for any unit that is perceived to be underperforming. Sure, you can make Rhinos last longer by putting your tanks out in front of it. But that isn't the job of the APC or the MBT. Rhinos should be able to get a Marine squad reliably where they need to go in a expedient manner.

Up to the point where I read this, I was completely unsure of just who you were making fun of.

 Red Marine wrote:

These fearsome, shock & awe style deployments were NEVER backed up on the table. The thunderhawk was never produced, outside of FW & a whimsical all metal version for a one off run.

Why does the thunderhawk have to be a model? I assume sometimes it just drops off its marines and then flies away. A good argument for giving rhinos the ability to deep strike, but I'm still not convinced that rhinos need better armor. Especially when they don't cost points anymore.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Akiasura wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
The Rhino is an amazingly well priced Armoured Personal Carrier which does its job extremely well but for some reason some people expect it to be packing the kind of survivability and firepower commonly seen on a Main Battle Tank.

I dunno, from your IG thread you seem to want 14/13/12 with 4 HP as your main battle tank, and I do not think anyone has argued for a 14/13/12 4 HP Rhino!

Gee, that could be something to do with the Leman Russ being a (underperforming) Main Battle Tank (note the difference) that currently has the exact same HP as your light APC (not a main battle tank) and a slight issue of being destroyed when the enemy even looks at it.

I fail to see how front armor 14 is being destroyed when someone looks at it. It's the highest armor in the game, and with their long range guns, you can deploy them in cover. I don't see how you can call the rhino usable but can't keep the Russ alive...are you moving it forward, like you suggested with the predator? Because that's a bad idea, as was stated when you suggested doing so with Marines.

Maybe but there are things such as Drop Pods and Deep Strike, all of which can result in nasty things happening, especially when your flank armour 13 and rear armour 10.

True, but units that can deep strike are more expensive then most of the tanks you can take in IG (10 marines with all the trimmings for anti-tank are ~200 points). So, you should outnumber them squad for squad. Most marine players will only be dropping 2-3 pods in on the first turn regardless.
In addition to this, if facing against a drop pod/deep strike list, you can deploy so reaching your rear armor in double tap range is extremely difficult for the marine player. You say flank armor 13 like its a bad thing. It's not. 6 plasma shots will not cause enough HP's to kill a tank against side armor 13.

 master of ordinance wrote:

Besides advancing with a Leman Russ is rarely ever something that you want to do. It is big, it is expensive and even un upgraded it is somewhere in the region of 8% of your points.
The Predator, un upgraded, is twice as fast, can boost and costs only 5% of your points. Dont want to use one? Use a Vindicator.

I was not the one suggesting advancing your long range armed tanks, you did that. A predator is roughly the same size as the LBRT (slightly smaller) but this doesn't make a big deal. If they are doing to flank via deep strike, drop pod, or insane speed a slightly larger tank doesn't matter.
The Predator isn't twice as fast unless you are talking about Blood Angels. The other...4?...factions that can take them have them at roughly the same speed. Their point cost relative to the LBRT is dependent on the weapons picked.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:

Anyway, the current leaning is for AV 14/13/11 actually though the suggestions for RAV 12 on the close quarters variants is justefied by the way you Marines and the other xenos forces out there spam Krak and Melta Bombs. I mean, even if we castle do you know how easy it is to get close and just assault those tanks.... Assuming they where not graved/glanced to death first!

Current leaning? From whom?
It's not easy to get close and assault IG unless you are a flyer. The IG flyer nerfs really hurt their ability to deal with FMCs, but otherwise IG still put out a good volume of anti infantry shots. I could see you having problems against a wraith based cron army, but well, welcome to the game? Every faction has that issue.
How is an enemy reaching CC? I can see grav weapons, D weapons, and gauss weapons being an issue, but CC marines? Are they using the BA deep striking formation? Because your counter punch should be strong enough to wipe them unless you are deploying oddly.


For the record, ignoring someone's counter points with what is essentially "I CANT EVEN" doesn't help your argument. At all.

Deepstrike. Drop Pod. Fast moving transports. Use of cover.

All of these things can get you close to an IG army very fast, especially since we dont actually put out as much firepower as we used too.

None of those things allow you to assault an IG army, which is what you suggested was killing your tanks.
IG puts out about the same firepower as always. Their troops cost the same, the cost of (most) of their tanks stayed the same. They have div now. Everyone else got stronger, which means relatively IG are no longer as good, but I'm not aware of any major nerfs to their firepower.

If deepstriking/podding is wiping out tanks left and right I'm thinking you are deploying poorly.

Man, whenever I used Deep Strike to get into an IG player's lines, my squads were killed to a man before assault could happen.

I really wish I was playing Master of Ordinance during that time, because they seem to give the courtesy of letting an army survive long enough to assault.

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 master of ordinance wrote:
Well, there you have it folks, you try to advise the use of actual tactics and they just cannot take it.

So, I expect to see plenty of unsupported Rhinos (or should that be RH1N0?) advancing in the open in the future

I'll be sure to use the 'tactics' excuse the next time I see someone say Ogryns or Rough Riders are terrible.

Rough Riders for example are really tough for their price - the enemy shoots at your more threatening Chimeras instead and look, not a single Rough Rider died! Amazing!

Seriously though, 'L2P' is and will continue to be a flawed argument.

Difference:

The Rough Riders re an overpriced CC unit without the rules or gear to let them get close enough to use their one shot CC weapon and are universally regarded as terribly gak.

The Rhino is an amazingly well priced Armoured Personal Carrier which does its job extremely well but for some reason some people expect it to be packing the kind of survivability and firepower commonly seen on a Main Battle Tank.

So no, in this case the L2P attitude is needed. I would gladly trade my Chimeras for Rhino's. I might be able to withstand the enemies dirt cheap basic infantry on the flanks for a start and my transports would no longer cost more than they where worth.

Well I got good news for you: You can ally in a Flesh Tearers detachment for 6 Rhinos.
Except nobody is doing that and they're buying Drop Pods. If Rhinos were REALLY that good that their job, that wouldn't happen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Jayden63 wrote:
Anyone who finds rhinos too fragile needs to spend a few games playing with trukks and DE raiders. When half your mobile force ends up wrecked mid field, your going to wish you had the AV11 and closed top.

Now try going second.... Now half your force is walking from your table edge.

My chaos still loves their rhinos. Yeah warp amps help with the assault, and for some reason nobody ignores my Lucius + noise champion toting rhino the second game in a row.

I know nothing of Trukks, but I'd gladly take the Raider over a Rhino. A few more points grants me Open Topped and a skimmer, and I can buy upgrades to make it slightly more durable.
The benefits of open topped far outweigh the negatives.

As long as skyhammer is a thing, there is no way rhinos will ever be desirable. You could buff them by reducing the points cost and making them fast assault vehicles, but pods would still be the way to go. Skyhammer simply bypasses all of the fundamental drawbacks of using transports and deep striking.

Armor is irrelevant. The rhino could be indestructible and it still wouldn't be worth taking because it puts your squad out of action for an entire turn. They get out, they can't shoot at full potential, they can't charge, and they're standing around in the breeze while the enemy gets to shoot at them. When you can have skyhammer pods and free gladius razorbacks, does the rhino serve any purpose at all?

Killsmith wrote:

 Red Marine wrote:

These fearsome, shock & awe style deployments were NEVER backed up on the table. The thunderhawk was never produced, outside of FW & a whimsical all metal version for a one off run.

Why does the thunderhawk have to be a model? I assume sometimes it just drops off its marines and then flies away. A good argument for giving rhinos the ability to deep strike, but I'm still not convinced that rhinos need better armor. Especially when they don't cost points anymore.

It doesnt necessarily need a model to have the effect of the model alone represented on the table. But it does go to your 2nd sentence. The thunderhawk is supossed to stay on site providing close air support. And a thunderhawk has tons of heavy weapons & missiles, which means the SMs didn't really need the heavy armor.

I don't think the rhino needs more armor either, except maybe 1 more in the rear (thats what she said!). Its super cheap & so are its upgrades. It does its job, especially with the squads grav cannon shooting out the side.

Wakka wakka wakka

Given your constant assertions that the Rhino is fine for its points and everyone else just sucks, I am not sure if you read the OP. The problem wasn't that Rhinos are bad for their cost - they are not. They are dirt cheap.
The problem was simply that they are too fragile in general, independent of points cost (which does mean paying for it is appropriate, and before you once more go 'okay I want rear armour 14 on my Russes for 5 points', it is not the topic of the thread. Go make a Russ thread if you want to buff them. Although, there is one....)

@Ashiraya, thanks for helping me clearing my thoughts out . I say it again, I was not here to suggest Rhino buffs or to argue about the IG armour. Master Of Ordnance seems to be ^pretty hot about this but he/she's the one who bring it to this thread.... with no kind of any relevance at all IMO.

That being said :

What are you on about? The Rhino is amazing for what it costs. 35 points is buying you a safe metal box to put your Marines in and scoot them forwards in a way that prevents them from being targeted by all the nasty things out there. If you want them to survive then dont try to use them as assault vehicles. Stick them behind your tanks and advance in an armoured column.
If you want bad then try the Chimera. 65 points buys you a BS3 IFV which can be glanced to death by basic infantry shooting its flank. And no those two heavy weapons do not make up for this. At least your Rhino is immune to flank attacks for the most part.
Besides, only one army has S5 on its basic small arms and that is that Tau.

@MasterOf Ordinance. What I was about was 1/ understand from a fluff perspective why Rhino armour is what it is and 2/ understand better the true value of Rhino according to the community. I'm not here to start a war between need buff/don't need buff or Chimera vs Rhino. I used this IFV because I play it since quite a bit of time.

Yes, only Tau have S5 standard guns but given the cost and the high availability of weapons like Scatlas, multilasers, HB, big shootas and stuff like these, your beloved Rhinos have lost some usefulness, like it or not. Many SM tools are now better to avoid the aforementioned weapons, and people keep pointing them to you.

I hope your response will not be censored by mods this time