What ONE change would you make to make walker types more in line with monstrous creatures?

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.

**Slayer le boucher**

jeffersonian000 wrote:
Just a note, not to derail the discussion, but Tau battle suits are not neural linked to the pilot, they are in fact drones wrapped around their supervisor. Tau AI technology makes their drones affectively living creatures, which is why up-scaling the the humaniod versions has them as MCs and GMCs.

The same can be said for current Eldar Wraith constructs, even though in RT they were neural linked to the pilot, currently they are sentient plastic dolls that move and react like living creatures.

As to the other walkers, they are still machines, able to be dismantled piece by piece while relying on hits bouncing off instead of punching through. They do not act like living things, even when the pilot is neurally linked.

A better solution is to change glance so it no longer removes a hull point, and make penetrating hits the only way to harm a vehicle. A glance by definition is a hit that does no damage, after all.

SJ

Dreadnoughts are machines with a pilote linked AND a Machine Spirit ( IA) in it...

Where the feth is my GMC Dreadnought with 4 arms and 6 legs?...

The Why GW decided that some robots are MC/GMC's and some are walkers has always been bullcrap.

Riptide= 90% machine 10% pilote/flesh= MC

Maulerfiend= 50% machine+50% flesh= Walker...

Admech Castelans= 95% machine +5% flesh( there is only the brain left)= MC's...

The why GW did give some robots/mechs MC and not other is to sell them, but then again apparently they don't care if Mauler/Forgefiends sells apparently...

**insaniak**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
SpookyRuben wrote:
Martel you hit the nail on the head!

Walkers should become MC's. Simple, no need to come up with a whole new list of rules.

Except walkers are vehicles, and as such they should be subject to rules that affect vehicles.

Indeed they should.

And vehicles should be MCs.

The game has moved way beyond the scale where having separate rules for vehicles makes any real sense. Just make them all MCs and move on.

If walkers are MC, then that means you can poison them. That's pretty silly.

Not really. Back in the day when Wraithlords were dreadnoughts, it was explained that 'poison' rounds included things like high-powered acids and the like that would have an effect on vehicles as well as troops.

Alternatively, you just make vehicles MCs that are immune to poison or the Fleshbane rule.

**MechaEmperor7000**

Alternatively, might I suggest changing MCs?

Have their Strength, Toughness and Attacks tied to their remaining wounds. So say a Carnifex's strength would instead be 5+remaining Wounds and Toughness be 2+remaining Wounds, while the Attack is = to wounds. This would let it start at the current S9, but as it starts taking wounds it starts losing it's strength. Same goes for it's toughness; at 1 wound it'd effectively be T3, which would represent a creature near it's deathbed.

**insaniak**

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Alternatively, might I suggest changing MCs?

Have their Strength, Toughness and Attacks tied to their remaining wounds. So say a Carnifex's strength would instead be 5+remaining Wounds and Toughness be 2+remaining Wounds, while the Attack is = to wounds. This would let it start at the current S9, but as it starts taking wounds it starts losing it's strength. Same goes for it's toughness; at 1 wound it'd effectively be T3, which would represent a creature near it's deathbed.

That sort of complexity is fine for a skirmish game, but is getting a bit fiddly for a game that potentially has a couple of hundred models on the board.

**Tactical_Spam**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Give vehicles a special type of save, called a vehicle plating save.

It would be dependent on facing

The formula to determine the save would be something like this:

16-x, where x is the facing's AV

In addition, apply this modifiers where applicable. 2+ is the best possible save.
If the vehicle's save exceed's 2+, then it gains a resiliant save. This works like FNP, in that it can be taken after a failed plating save, but it only works on a 5+.
This save can only be negated by weapons with the melta rule and haywire.

+ 1 is the vehicle is a tank (due to heavier construction / additional armor)
- 1 if the vehicle is a skimmer (NOT a heavy skimmer.it is assumed they can handle the weight of armor plating. It is assumed standard skimmers have to be a bit light to work)
-1 if the vehicle is a flyer (same reasoning as the skimmers)
+1 if the vehicle is a walker (due to heavier construction / additional armor)

Modifiers may cancel each other out, of course.

Haywire weapons always ignore vehicle plating saves, as they do not work by piercing armor.

If the vehicle's AV value has been modified due to a special rule, then use the modified value.

This save cannot be ignored by AP, except on a penetrating hit. Glancing hits can always be saved against.

Hopefully, S6-S7 spam would no longer be as effective with this rule.

This is the best Idea. Mail this to GW on the double.

**LockeWatts**

Tactical_Spam wrote:

This is the best Idea. Mail this to GW on the double.

This idea is one of the worst in the thread. Knights now have a 2+ armor on every facing? That right there should tell you how stupid this is. This is just wishlisting bs, not any real attempt at designing a more streamlined system.

Congratulations, you've made the game, which is already hyper-dependent on melta, haywire, and D to kill knights, even MORE dependent on melta and haywire and D to kill knights. Land Raiders are AV14 with a 2+ and feel no pain. Let's not even get into FW vehicles (Revenant titan now has a 4+ armor in addition to its 4+ holofield). You've made the entire thing worse.

**Tactical_Spam**

LockeWatts wrote:
Tactical_Spam wrote:

This is the best Idea. Mail this to GW on the double.

This idea is one of the worst in the thread. Knights now have a 2+ armor on every facing? That right there should tell you how stupid this is. This is just wishlisting bs, not any real attempt at designing a more streamlined system.

Congratulations, you've made the game, which is already hyper-dependent on melta, haywire, and D to kill knights, even MORE dependent on melta and haywire and D to kill knights. Land Raiders are AV14 with a 2+ and feel no pain. Let's not even get into FW vehicles (Revenant titan now has a 4+ armor in addition to its 4+ holofield). You've made the entire thing worse.

They only get an armour save against glancing hits, bud.

No need to get all fussy. You have to rely on one-shot weapons.

**DarthDiggler**

Here is how you fix walkers. First all dreadnought frames need to have equal stats. Helbrutes and defilers and mauler fiends, etc.. all double their attacks. Next knock 50pts off of Defilers.

Here is the change.

All walkers get an invulnerable save.

Armor 11 = 6++
Armor 12 = 5++
Armor 13 = 4++

Daemon walkers and venerable walkers add 1 to save. So does smoke. Open top walkers subtract 1 from save.

Also weapon destroyed halves the range of shooting weapons or -2 str to ccw and an immobilized result halves the walkers movement and charge range.

That's more than one thing, but I got on a roll.

**Unit1126PLL**

Tactical_Spam wrote:
LockeWatts wrote:
Tactical_Spam wrote:

This is the best Idea. Mail this to GW on the double.

This idea is one of the worst in the thread. Knights now have a 2+ armor on every facing? That right there should tell you how stupid this is. This is just wishlisting bs, not any real attempt at designing a more streamlined system.

Congratulations, you've made the game, which is already hyper-dependent on melta, haywire, and D to kill knights, even MORE dependent on melta and haywire and D to kill knights. Land Raiders are AV14 with a 2+ and feel no pain. Let's not even get into FW vehicles (Revenant titan now has a 4+ armor in addition to its 4+ holofield). You've made the entire thing worse.

They only get an armour save against glancing hits, bud. No need to get all fussy. You have to rely on one-shot weapons.

Wait wait wait. So you need dedicated antitank weapons to kill tanks and not heavy machine guns? What sort of nonsense is this!

Everyone knows that the Americans consider the 25mm cannon on the Bradley to be the premier antitank weapon in the world.

**NorseSig**

Unit1126PLL wrote:
Tactical_Spam wrote:
LockeWatts wrote:
Tactical_Spam wrote:

This is the best Idea. Mail this to GW on the double.

This idea is one of the worst in the thread. Knights now have a 2+ armor on every facing? That right there should tell you how stupid this is. This is just wishlisting bs, not any real attempt at designing a more streamlined system.

Congratulations, you've made the game, which is already hyper-dependent on melta, haywire, and D to kill knights, even MORE dependent on melta and haywire and D to kill knights. Land Raiders are AV14 with a 2+ and feel no pain. Let's not even get into FW vehicles (Revenant titan now has a 4+ armor in addition to its 4+ holofield). You've made the entire thing worse.

They only get an armour save against glancing hits, bud. No need to get all fussy. You have to rely on one-shot weapons.

Wait wait wait. So you need dedicated antitank weapons to kill tanks and not heavy machine guns? What sort of nonsense is this!

Everyone knows that the Americans consider the 25mm cannon on the Bradley to be the premier antitank weapon in the world.

Not all Americans think like that. I think having to rely on dedicated anti-tank weapons to kill tanks or other heavily armored vehicles should be how it works. Instead of how it is now where everyone takes "heavy machine guns" to kill vehicles and everything else. Don't know how I like the particular rule this chap is calling bad, but it is more of for personal reasons than anything.

**Unit1126PLL**

NorseSig wrote:
Unit1126PLL wrote:
Tactical_Spam wrote:
LockeWatts wrote:
Tactical_Spam wrote:

This is the best Idea. Mail this to GW on the double.

This idea is one of the worst in the thread. Knights now have a 2+ armor on every facing? That right there should tell you how stupid this is. This is just wishlisting bs, not any real attempt at designing a more streamlined system.

Congratulations, you've made the game, which is already hyper-dependent on melta, haywire, and D to kill knights, even MORE dependent on melta and haywire and D to kill knights. Land Raiders are AV14 with a 2+ and feel no pain. Let's not even get into FW vehicles (Revenant titan now has a 4+ armor in addition to its 4+ holofield). You've made the entire thing worse.

They only get an armour save against glancing hits, bud. No need to get all fussy. You have to rely on one-shot weapons.

Wait wait wait. So you need dedicated antitank weapons to kill tanks and not heavy machine guns? What sort of nonsense is this!

Everyone knows that the Americans consider the 25mm cannon on the Bradley to be the premier antitank weapon in the world.

Not all Americans think like that. I think having to rely on dedicated anti-tank weapons to kill tanks or other heavily armored vehicles should be how it works. Instead of how it is now where everyone takes "heavy machine guns" to kill vehicles and everything else. Don't know how I like the particular rule this chap is calling bad, but it is more of for personal reasons than anything.

I was being bitterly sarcastic. Sorry, the internet needs sarcasm tags. XD

**NorseSig**

I was being bitterly sarcastic. Sorry, the internet needs sarcasm tags. XD

I knew in part it was sarcasm, but at the same time I have met too many people who actually THINK this that I didn't want to disregard it entirely.

**CthuluIsSpy**

LockeWatts wrote:
Tactical_Spam wrote:

This is the best Idea. Mail this to GW on the double.

This idea is one of the worst in the thread. Knights now have a 2+ armor on every facing? That right there should tell you how stupid this is. This is just wishlisting bs, not any real attempt at designing a more streamlined system.

Congratulations, you've made the game, which is already hyper-dependent on melta, haywire, and D to kill knights, even MORE dependent on melta and haywire and D to kill knights. Land Raiders are AV14 with a 2+ and feel no pain. Let's not even get into FW vehicles (Revenant titan now has a 4+ armor in addition to its 4+ holofield). You've made the entire thing worse.

Why yes, the idea was to make anti-tank weapons required to destroy vehicles, as opposed to spam S7 and S6 all the time.
Also wishlisting bs? Much construction, such rage. Why so angry? Are you afraid your anti-vehicle weight of fire build is going to be taken away?

Land Raiders, and monoliths for that matter have been pretty lackluster over the last few editions. No one takes monoliths, and I haven't seen a land raider on the table since 2005.
Revenant titans will not get the save if, you shoot with an actual AT weapon. Same with knights.

I will concede that my suggestion is more complex than the current vehicle rules, but the current vehicles are so laughably pathetic and simplistic that any alternative would be better.
As it stands, vehicles are just MC with a toughness of between 5-10, with no armor saves, only 4 wounds max, and an added chance of dying in one hit.

I suppose one could just make vehicles MC, but to me that is a pretty lame fix, as one isn't actually fixing it, one is just avoiding the problem by removing a separate unit type, as opposed to resolving any issues.
That's not good game design. That's just lazy.

**Martel732**

It's the kind of fix a GW game deserves.

**Hunam0001**

I say we go at it from the other direction, and make MCs into vehicles with a USR that makes them immune to haywire, and susceptible to poison.

As well, give all vehicles a 3+ armor save, and make Krak grenades AP3.

**oldzoggy**

Give monsters their own Critical dmg table just like vehicles have. You would have to roll on it when you rolled 1 point over the to wound value or if you hitted with a sniper or something like that.
The table would involved things like "stunned", "Loses arm", "loses leg" and "decapitation" on a 7+
I would give some weapons bonuses on this table. ( most likely the ones who now insta kill)
Ethernall wariiror would protect you somehow agains this table (give minusses on the roll)

This would be the best way to close the gab I think between monsters and walking vehicles.

If I could change 2 things I would kick all vehicles hiding who are hiding in the mosnter section back to where they belonged.
If it doesn't bleed and does have a pilot it should be treated as a vehicle and have the correct crit table.

**chrispy1991**

I don't know if this would fix vehicles completely, but a great start would be to remove the LoS rules for vehicle weapons. There's no reason a riptide can shoot all its guns at me when all it can see me with is its head, but my vehicle (or walker for that matter) can't fire back with everything because not all guns on it have LoS. It would remove an unnecessary mechanic as well as make it far easier to get cover saves on vehicles through. One could simply argue it as though the vehicle pilots are at all times maneuvering their vehicles for greatest effect of shooting their weapons. it's either this, or they need to give every vehicle the split fire rule, not just super heavies.

**Tactical_Spam**

chrispy1991 wrote:
I don't know if this would fix vehicles completely, but a great start would be to remove the LoS rules for vehicle weapons. There's no reason a riptide can shoot all its guns at me when all it can see me with is its head, but my vehicle (or walker for that matter) can't fire back with everything because not all guns on it have LoS. It would remove an unnecessary mechanic as well as make it far easier to get cover saves on vehicles through. One could simply argue it as though the vehicle pilots are at all times maneuvering their vehicles for greatest effect of shooting their weapons. it's either this, or they need to give every vehicle the split fire rule, not just super heavies.

That's not fixing the problem... a Riptide is still an MC and it shouldn't be

**gwarsh41**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Give vehicles a special type of save, called a vehicle plating save.

I can dig it.

Considering the only walkers that ever live long enough to do something are my ++3 space wolf ones, and my soul grinders (Thanks to a +5 invul, daemonic resilience and silly high armor) If Dreadnoughts had a +3 save, it would be pretty nice. Protect them from bring glanced to death, as that is the bane of most of them. I really wish some walkers got baby stomp attacks too, but that is just wishlisting.

**CthuluIsSpy**

gwarsh41 wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Give vehicles a special type of save, called a vehicle plating save.

I can dig it.

Considering the only walkers that ever live long enough to do something are my ++3 space wolf ones, and my soul grinders (Thanks to a +5 invul, daemonic resilience and silly high armor) If Dreadnoughts had a +3 save, it would be pretty nice. Protect them from bring glanced to death, as that is the bane of most of them. I really wish some walkers got baby stomp attacks too, but that is just wishlisting.

A mini stomp would be quite reasonable, actually.
Could just be S6 small blast, or a single extra S6 attack or something like that.

In WHFB you had thunderstomps and stomps. Monstrous Infantry could do a stomp, and Monsters could do a thunderstomp, which were D6 stomps.

**jeffersonian000**

Tactical_Spam wrote:
chrispy1991 wrote:
I don't know if this would fix vehicles completely, but a great start would be to remove the LoS rules for vehicle weapons. There's no reason a riptide can shoot all its guns at me when all it can see me with is its head, but my vehicle (or walker for that matter) can't fire back with everything because not all guns on it have LoS. It would remove an unnecessary mechanic as well as make it far easier to get cover saves on vehicles through. One could simply argue it as though the vehicle pilots are at all times maneuvering their vehicles for greatest effect of shooting their weapons. it's either this, or they need to give every vehicle the split fire rule, not just super heavies.

That's not fixing the problem... a Riptide is still an MC and it shouldn't be

Riptides are robots, and robots are MCs. It's a theme with GW. Even Kight Titans work more like MCs than vehicles. Maybe all vehicles should get the mild Superheavy treatment, at least the walkers should.

SJ

**CthuluIsSpy**

If robots were vehicles, then necrons would be AV8 mini-walkers.

Which I kind of find hilarious. Finally, EMP works!

**SickSix**

Prevent instant death for vehicles. Change the mechanics so that you have to peel off the hull points before a vehicle can be destroyed. And only D weapons have a chance to outright kill a vahicle.

Also increase HP for most tanks.

**master of ordinance**

Just get rid of HP's entirely.

**casvalremdeikun**

master of ordinance wrote:
Just get rid of HP's entirely.

I would much rather see the Vehicle Damage table go and hull points of all vehicles increased by one or two. Penetrating hits would take two hull points off instead of one. That or remove the concept of glancing altogether and make penetrating hits required to remove a single hull point.

**conker249**

Possible idea. For walkers, Make them MC's with a special ability like"Armored hull, Poison weapons do not affect" If Eldar Avatar of Kaine gets immunity to flamers,ect. this rule is already in the rulebooks, so they can make a rule for walkers similar, and not be completely out of place.

**Nomeny**

I'd give Monstrous Creatures and basically any multi-wound stuff a roll on the Damage Table for every wound they take, with Unstoppable Behemoths rolling once for every three wounds/hull points.

**Unit1126PLL**

I would make Mechanical a unit subtype.

Unit Type (Monstrous Creature, Mechanical) or Unit Type (Infantry, Mechanical) or whatever.

Then, I would add: "Mechanical : Units of this type are unaffected by the Poison and Fleshbane special rules; such weapons wound based on their strength, normally."

I would subsequently rewrite Haywire to exactly match poison, except it only works on mechanical units, and Armourbane to match Fleshbane, except it only works on mechanical units.

That's more than one change, however.

Oh, and all current vehicles would become Unit Type (Monstrous Creature, Mechanical).

**ColdSadHungry**

I've been thinking about this kind of thing for a while but not just for walkers - for all vehicles. I'd like to see a rule called 'immune to small arms'. This rule could state that all shots strength 6 or below cannot hurt anything with an armour value.

It would then force players to take more dedicated anti tank and thus create more varied lists. I don't think that hull points are necessarily bad nor do i think that glancing something down is bad but the threshold is too low. Why should something that is strength 4 be able to down a vehicle, it seems silly.

I realise that making s6 unable to hurt vehicles would really skew things and make vehicles such as venoms so, so much more durable but at the same time we would see much more varied lists - nobody would spam lascannons or melta for example because troops would still need to be dealt with.

Whilst I'm at it, giving the 'immune to small arms' rule would fix terminators too...

**gwarsh41**

CthuluIsSpy wrote:
gwarsh41 wrote:
CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Give vehicles a special type of save, called a vehicle plating save.

I can dig it.

Considering the only walkers that ever live long enough to do something are my ++3 space wolf ones, and my soul grinders (Thanks to a +5 invul, daemonic resilience and silly high armor) If Dreadnoughts had a +3 save, it would be pretty nice. Protect them from bring glanced to death, as that is the bane of most of them. I really wish some walkers got baby stomp attacks too, but that is just wishlisting.

A mini stomp would be quite reasonable, actually.
Could just be S6 small blast, or a single extra S6 attack or something like that.

In WHFB you had thunderstomps and stomps. Monstrous Infantry could do a stomp, and Monsters could do a thunderstomp, which were D6 stomps.

WHFB stomps and thunderstomps is what makes me want them for 40k. Lore wise a dreadnought shouldn't have any issues walking through (literally walking, not slaughtering, just not being slowed down) 20 or so gaunts or guard, but on the tabletop, they can be held up all game.