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.

GMCs would be fixed if these three changes were made

1 - Remove FNP
2 - Change '6' on the stomp table to a STR 8, AP2 hit
3 - Remove the sniper and poisoned to wounding on a 6+

Well, if you think that MCs are the living version of vehicles, you'll see they're much more powerful than vehicles per se. Most of them have 5+ wounds, while the majority of vehicles have 3, at most. Walkers should get smash (at least those with melee weapons)

MCs shouldn't get any kind of auto-cover like terrain gave them back in 6th. the same rule of vehicles and cover should apply.

Other thing is the lack of damage table like vehicles. They should have one, similar to this:
1-3: Fire Snap Shots/Hit on a 5+ in melee
4: Same as above, and swooping FMCs with same restrictions of flyers
5: Lose a weapon
6: Can't move anymore during the game, falling down if swooping FMC on a 3+
7: Outright dies.

If be fine if any weapon with ap1 does d3 wounds. If it's strength 9 or higher and you roll a 6 to wound it's instant death. If an MC takes 3 or more wounds in a single shooting phase it can't fire it's primary weapon next turn or smash for the rest of the turn (recovery time).

Oh look, this topic again.

Looks like people already brought up the fact that, by OP, they really only mean Eldar and Tau MCs/GMCs, not the dozens of others from every other codex. Oh and the only reason Eldar and Tau MCs/GMCs are considered so strong, is because they're under-priced for what they are.

Honestly if you took a poll of what anti-MC people play, you'd probably get the Imperium as the majority.

You know, the ones with Grav, innumerable ally options, mass bikes, IKs, and deathstars for days.

Annoyed you're vehicles have gotten worse over the editions? Blame the high strength, high VOF shots that are plaguing the game.Hell vehicles have been worthless since before drop podding sternguard with combi meltas were big.

Add a MC damage chart, allow walkers to have toe in cover, equalise what weapons can be fired for both platforms.

Alleviates some problems.

Datastream wrote:
Oh look, this topic again.

Looks like people already brought up the fact that, by OP, they really only mean Eldar and Tau MCs/GMCs, not the dozens of others from every other codex. Oh and the only reason Eldar and Tau MCs/GMCs are considered so strong, is because they're under-priced for what they are.

Honestly if you took a poll of what anti-MC people play, you'd probably get the Imperium as the majority.

You know, the ones with Grav, innumerable ally options, mass bikes, IKs, and deathstars for days.

Annoyed you're vehicles have gotten worse over the editions? Blame the high strength, high VOF shots that are plaguing the game.Hell vehicles have been worthless since before drop podding sternguard with combi meltas were big.

So the faction with the most players... Would have the most voters.... Wow, shock that, so if say tau had the most players, can we assume that they would be biased as you claim all imperial players are? Or is it your anti imperial bias that's tainting your comments OR is it possible that objectively, certain mc should not be mc based on the fluff and pre existing precedent on similar units?

So the faction with the most players... Would have the most voters.... Wow, shock that, so if say tau had the most players, can we assume that they would be biased as you claim all imperial players are? Or is it your anti imperial bias that's tainting your comments OR is it possible that objectively, certain mc should not be mc based on the fluff and pre existing precedent on similar units?

You're right, didn't make it clear enough. The ratio of anti-MC to MC neutral players is probably skewed most to the former within the Imperium faction. Clear enough for you?

Makes sense. The big offenders, Tau and Eldar will only have passing annoyance at most at MCs/GMCs, since they have access to these main power MCs/GMCs. Chaos and Nids have reasonable MCs and GMCs, making them understand they are not the true problem. Whose left? Orks, Necron and Imperium come to mind.

I'd be surprised if any Ork player thought MCs were too strong, instead of their codex in general needing a reboot.
Necron I could see complaining. Their firepower is only ok and no access to ignore cover. Not to mention their ace in the hole reavers with 3++ and 4+RP can get stomped out.
Imperium used to not have access to ignore cover (Hurray new Geo powers!). No real MCs to their name, with Tau and Eldar MCs being pretty good against most things in a SM army.. Of course they'll complain.

Logic enough for you?

Sounds like logic with a heavy anti-SM bias. The MC/GMC rules as opposed to walkers come with very powerful bonuses. Already OP and underpriced models that are by any sensible logic, WALKERS have no business being classified as MCs/GMCs. Simple as that. Notice how nobody has a problem with Demon Princrs, Tyranofexes, or Carnifexes? Ya know? Actual MCs, not big anime fan robots classified as MCs.


Lol a anime fan? Seriously? I understand being PC on a message board , but that's just sad.

 Xerics wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
Giant mechanical suits are by definition NOT creatures. If Wraith Knights and Riptides were walkers, no one would complain about them.

Meanwhile instead of making SM Dreads monstrous creatures they just give them 4 attacks and call it good. They can still be destroyed with one dice roll.

The wraithknight is not mechanical. Please read the fluff before you call it a walker. It's a giant wraithlord with an eldar in it to help enhance its agility. Its made of wraithbone and has dead eldar souls in it just like the wraithguard and the wraithlord.

No, they are wraithbone constructs, which means they are machines made of wraithbone. You know what else is made of wraithbone, pretty much everything else in the Eldar army, including their vehicles. Its their primary construction material.

GW seems to treat pure robots (ie, walkers without a living organic component) as MC. I'm fine with that, at least they are largely consistent with that approach. However, WK have a living organic component, unlike Wraithlords and Wraithguard. A WK is as much a walker as a SM dreadnaught is. Just because its made of wraithbone doesn't make it non-mechanical.

I voted that 'MCs are the problem', but really it's a combination of the two. There are certain rules whuch simply don't need to be included in the MC package, such as Smash and Fear. It's this sort of thing which means that Riptides and the like are over-powered. That and the fact that they make no sense in the context.

The comparison with Walkers is a fair one. Make it so that Monstrous Creatures and Walkers both just get Relentless, MTC, HoW and Fearless. Any other rules can be added separately to the units that need them. It'll make things like Carnifexes feel that bit more special if fewer units have Smash, for example.

Edit: meant to say that the Monstrous Creatures rule is just dated. When it was basically just Greater Daemons, C'tan and Carnifexes then it kind of made sense to have the rule encompass all that, but now the category has been expanded, so the rule should evolve.

Datastream wrote:
Oh look, this topic again.

Looks like people already brought up the fact that, by OP, they really only mean Eldar and Tau MCs/GMCs, not the dozens of others from every other codex. Oh and the only reason Eldar and Tau MCs/GMCs are considered so strong, is because they're under-priced for what they are.

Points cost really fixes none of the issues I listed in my earlier post. It is less about cost-effectiveness of these units, and more about how they are modelled in unintuitive and nonsensical fashion.

 Spineyguy wrote:
I voted that 'MCs are the problem', but really it's a combination of the two. There are certain rules whuch simply don't need to be included in the MC package, such as Smash and Fear. It's this sort of thing which means that Riptides and the like are over-powered. That and the fact that they make no sense in the context.

The comparison with Walkers is a fair one. Make it so that Monstrous Creatures and Walkers both just get Relentless, MTC, HoW and Fearless. Any other rules can be added separately to the units that need them. It'll make things like Carnifexes feel that bit more special if fewer units have Smash, for example.

Edit: meant to say that the Monstrous Creatures rule is just dated. When it was basically just Greater Daemons, C'tan and Carnifexes then it kind of made sense to have the rule encompass all that, but now the category has been expanded, so the rule should evolve.

Fear and Smash are not what put MCs over Walkers at all. Fear is largely a useless USR, while Smash is rarely used unless its one of those rare scenarios where the base Strength of the MC can't hurt the target. Both USRs make sense that a large, monstrous beast would have versus a piloted robot with legs. The single biggest problem is with durability. Walkers can be killed with a single non-D shot and have the problem of diminished capability while taking damage, while MCs don't have that problem.

Smash grants AP2 at all times, which all MCs should NOT have.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Smash grants AP2 at all times, which all MCs should NOT have.

Smash should be an entirely separate rule, thus allowing for MC's to have their basic attacks dialed back to ap3.

Riptides definitely look quite capable of turning a basic power armoured marine into a little red smear. A Terminator how ever is designed specifically to survives those kinds of hits.

Experiment 626 wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:
Smash grants AP2 at all times, which all MCs should NOT have.

Smash should be an entirely separate rule, thus allowing for MC's to have their basic attacks dialed back to ap3.

Riptides definitely look quite capable of turning a basic power armoured marine into a little red smear. A Terminator how ever is designed specifically to survives those kinds of hits.

Yes, and a Contemptor looks capable of pasting a Marine as well even when armed with two Kheres assault cannons, but is AP- because reasons.

I'd definitely not be apposed to walkers getting a similar rule. It makes sense.

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I'd definitely not be apposed to walkers getting a similar rule. It makes sense.

They'd still get glanced out by your hymp before they could ever use it. That's a non-fix.

Martel732 wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
I'd definitely not be apposed to walkers getting a similar rule. It makes sense.

They'd still get glanced out by your hymp before they could ever use it. That's a non-fix.

Well, no, as I'm not a big fan of missilesides, or broadsides in genera since they don't have railguns anymore. I much prefer sniper drones.

Secondly, it's not a "fix" it's just a thing that might help a bit.

Maybe. But it further devalues 2+ infantry units that are already basically useless.

The point was making it ap 3.

I could get behind that.