Are vehicles tougher in 8th

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.

**vaurapung**

So i was just pondering the number of hits it takes to destroy a vehical in 8th vs 7th. I used a lascannon vs land raider, let me know if any of my percentages need fixed.

Lascannon 7th vs land raider

To hit 66%
To wound 33% of hit
To pen 50% of wound
To explode 17% of pen

Wounding = 21.78%
One hit kill = 1.85% chance
20 shots to destroy

Lascannon 8th vs land raider

To hit 66%
To wound 66% of hit
Damages 43.56% of hit
17% chance result of 1,2,3,4,5 or 6

6 damage = 7.41% chance
5+ damage = 14.52%
4+ damage = 21.78%
3+ damage = 29.04%
2+ damage = 36.3%
1+ damage = 43.56%

All said there is a 25% chance of 3.5 damage into 16 wounds
18 shots to destroy

Land raiders are easier to kill in 8th

**Mr Morden**

And you can't kill an undamaged Land Raider (or any other vehicle) with a single lascannon shot in 8th.

Partial anylasis can be misleading.

**Lord Perversor**

true Raw overall damage maybe.

Just keep in consideration now vehicles can get saves, can't be one shooted or suffer big performance downgrades with a single lucky shoot (inmobilize/weapon destroyed) So in the long run some things make them behave different.

**Lance845**

vaurapung wrote:
So i was just pondering the number of hits it takes to destroy a vehical in 8th vs 7th. I used a lascannon vs land raider, let me know if any of my percentages need fixed.

Lascannon 7th vs land raider

To hit 66%
To wound 33% of hit
To pen 50% of wound
To explode 17% of pen

Wounding = 21.78%
One hit kill = 1.85% chance
20 shots to destroy

Lascannon 8th vs land raider

To hit 66%
To wound 66% of hit
Damages 43.56% of hit
17% chance result of 1,2,3,4,5 or 6

6 damage = 7.41% chance
5+ damage = 14.52%
4+ damage = 21.78%
3+ damage = 29.04%
2+ damage = 36.3%
1+ damage = 43.56%

All said there is a 25% chance of 3.5 damage into 16 wounds
18 shots to destroy

Land raiders are easier to kill in 8th

This fails to take into account a lot of things.

1) I could completely cripple a vehicle in 7th with a single haywire shot that pens and immobilized it.

2) not everything is being shot with las cannons and the removal of rear armor has made most vehicles significantly more durable.

3) no vehicle is loosing weapons or turns or being immobilized or simply blowing up any more. You actually have to widdle them down and while they do degrade they degrade steadily and stay active.

4) Most land raiders in 7th didn't take 20 shots to kill. Most armies in 8th are not firing off 18 lascannons in 3 turns compared to the 1 or 2 turns it took to kill a land raider in 7th.

5) vehicles get saves now.

You math may or may not be correct for the very narrow equation you have worked out. But your equation isn't representative of the whole picture and your conclusion is false.

**Amishprn86**

CLICK BAIT!

**vipoid**

I believe that it's a lot harder to one-shot vehicles in 8th. It's also impossible to cripple them with one shot (you can't immobilise a transport on turn 1 or destroy the main gun on a Vindicator or such).

However, it's a lot easier to get damage on them - both with anti-vehicle weapons and also with small arms fire.

Basically, I'd say that vehicle damage has been made a lot more consistent. They're less resilient to general damage but are much harder to kill/cripple with just a few shots.

**Dionysodorus**

I didn't play 7th so I'm not sure how wounding vehicles worked back then -- when I played back in 4th or 5th it was all-or-nothing even with Land Raiders -- but it seems to me that it's possible that Land Raiders in particular came out poorly in the transition. Clearly a lot of what made them less durable in 8th is that lascannons went from wounding them on a 5+ to wounding them on a 3+. But meanwhile a Razorback went from AV11 or something like that to T7, so it didn't lose nearly as much there.

**Grotrebel**

Overall they are more durable but also the weapons deal more damage.
If you consider the loss of glory one-shots and the fact that there is no more immobilised or weapon destroyed for vehicles like vindicators i would say vecicles can do longer what they have to do.

Basically, I'd say that vehicle damage has been made a lot more consistent. They're less resilient to general damage but are much harder to kill/cripple with just a few shots.

Absolutely. On the one hand it was fun to get 1 lucky shot and kill a land raider or monolith, on the other hand now you can rely on your tanks to at least survive a hand full of hits.

**Gunzhard**

Screw the math, but from playing a good bit I've found vehicle way more durable.

That said, they are also WAY easier to neutralize with assault.

**vipoid**

Actually, there are a couple of other aspects to consider:

- Vehicles no longer have arcs (so many no longer have weaker armour on one or more sides that can be exploited).

- A lot of precision deep-striking has been removed. Sure, you can no longer mishap, but nor can you land within melta-range of your target.

**Slayer-Fan123**

I think you forgot the save in the OP, champ.

Also keep in mind how gak Lascannons were in 6/7th, and how everyone just used Haywire, Grav, and spammed S6/7 shots in the rear. What you're complaining about is that the Lascannon is finally doing its job.

**ProwlerPC**

There's no wound roll followed by pen roll in 7th. It went from hit to pen roll. Vehicles didn't have toughness. They also didn't have saves.

**Yarium**

Vehicles more significantly interact with the game now. They can be more easily harmed than before, but are harder to actually take down. They actually suffer damage that matters as they go, but never become useless. They move more quickly than they used to, but there's more places that they can't go. They can fight in close combat now, and charging means they're fantastic for getting there, but they also can't just back away like before either. They can shoot all their guns at different targets, but are penalized more for moving around too.

So yeah, they're different. Tougher? Yes, but also not as tough. They're fantastic and I love them now more than ever before.

**JinxDragon**

Sorry, everything else shows Vehicles to be more durable in this edition then 6th or 7th... misrepresenting a single situation using a weapon redesigned to be the anti-vehicle weapon it always was meant to be will not change that.

For the rest reading this, just keep that fact in mind:
The Las-Cannon is the go to anti-vehicle weapon of the humans, sure they have better but this is the standard issue weapon when the hummies want to fight vehicles.
In previous editions, a single Las-Cannon had to be insanely lucky to take out a single vehicle during the entire game!
Let that sink in - A weapon designed to take out vehicles would find it very hard to take out a single vehicle during the course of an entire game... even a battery of them had trouble.
All the designers did was to removing yet another random element that was not just slowing down their game, but had become so vital to calculating how anti-vehicle weapons function that it had crippled said functionality!

If the Opening Posters math is correct, and people have it in doubt because it did not account for 8th edition Armour Saves and incorrectly applied Wounding Saves to 7th edition vehicles:
Going from 20 shots to 18 shots would have actually showed that the Authors balanced the damage output to account for the loss of random 'one shots' quite well, not the opposite!

**Scott-S6**

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
I think you forgot the save in the OP, champ.

Also keep in mind how gak Lascannons were in 6/7th, and how everyone just used Haywire, Grav, and spammed S6/7 shots in the rear. What you're complaining about is that the Lascannon is finally doing its job.

Exactly. The traditional anti-tank weapons were rubbish last edition - mid-S multi-shot weapons were king. Comparing a highly inefficient anti-tank weapon in 7th to a pretty efficient one in 8th is going to skew those results.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

vaurapung wrote:

7th edition mathammer with wounding vehicles
8th edition mathammer with no save

I have no idea what you're doing there.

To hit - 66%
To pen or glance - 33%
18 shots to get 4 HPs and kill (ignoring the chance of death via damage table - it's slighly lower because you might kill it via the damage table with fewer shots although it is unlikely, see below)

To hit - 66%
To pen - 16%
To kill via damage table - 16%
59 shots needed to kill via damage table - effectively irrelevant since fewer shots would kill via HPs more reliably. Hence the problem with traditional AT weapons.

8th

To hit - 66%
To wound - 66%
To fail save - 66%
Average damage - 3.5
1.01 wounds per shot on average
16 shots needed.

Of course, the landraider is an edge case since the weapons that were killing most vehicles in 7th can't hurt it.

If we compare scatter-lasers vs. Rhinos you'll see something completely different.

7th

To hit - 66%
To pen/glance - 33%
89% chance of a HP from a shooting attack (4 shots)
3.4 attacks needed

8th

To hit - 66%
To wound - 33%
To fail save - 33%
0.30 wounds per attack (4 shots)
34 attacks needed

Rhinos are 10x tougher vs. scatter lasers

So proper anti-vehicle weapons are now better against vehicles and weapons that shouldn't be great against vehicles aren't.

**koooaei**

My experience with vehicles so far is that in general they are more fragile per point than in 7-th but more reliable and have a changed role. They can now effectively charge and tarpit but generally can't benefit from cover and most importantly can't grant cover. They are no longer immune to low str weapons. For example, when i ran a bunch of killa kanz and deff dreads, they took serious damage from s4 and s5 ap-1 and ap0 weapons. In fact, much more than from lazcannon-equivalents. When i fielded a landraider, it got one-shot with plazma scions in a 1k pt game. A battlewagon was killed by massed s4-6 fire and smites. It took 3-4 times more points than it costs but it still got obliterated by anti-infantry weaponry from across the board.

As i'm playing orks, some of our vehicles have lost a lot of durability per point and usefulness in general because main transports have 4+ armor and generally can't benefit from cover and cost a lot more than what they transport making them questionable at best. On the other hand, some vehicles like razorbacks have underpriced t-l asscannons with easy access to buffs that skyrocket their effectiveness. But they mainly focus as battletanks for gunlines and not as transports. So, it's a mixed bag.

In general, the idea behind changes was ok but the result was spoilt by below average balance once again. But the system is more flexible. There is no need to invent walk-arounds for damage table - the thing that crippled expensive vehicles from the get go.

**Blackie**

They cannot be instant killed by a single lucky shot though, like in 7th edition. Only venoms can die from a single lascannon shot but it's just because they have only 6W.

**lolman1c**

I remember in 7th I ruined a game when I exploded every one of their vehicles turn 1. I conceded because I felt bad for the guy.

**angelofvengeance**

I much prefer 8th ed's vehicle rules to 7th. Means armies with pre-dominantly light vehicles stand a better chance of getting stuck in. Had a game of 40k yesterday, and my Raiders lasted a good while.

**pm713**

lolman1c wrote:
I remember in 7th I ruined a game when I exploded every one of their vehicles turn 1. I conceded because I felt bad for the guy.

Been the vehicle guy. Boy did it suck having half my army dead turn 1.

**SemperMortis**

Some vehicles became tougher, some became weaker.

The Stompa for example because less durable across the board except versus Melta where it got a bump in durability. OF course all of its weapons got nerfed, its price went up drastically and it basically got nerfed so hard in general that they aren't seen anymore, even in friendly games.

SO really it depends

**wuestenfux**

It depends.
The anti-tank weapons like lascannons and melta-type weapons can cause a lot of damage in a single volley.
At Saturday, I battled AdMech with my BA at the 3000 pt level. The enemy had an Imperial Knight and I played a Stormsword with a vulcan cannon. This weapon is an absolute beast. The knight went down in round two with ease.

**JohnnyHell**

Yeah that maths in the OP... it's not the whole picture, and it misses out saves etc.

Vehicles last longer in 8th.

**koooaei**

JohnnyHell wrote:
Yeah that maths in the OP... it's not the whole picture, and it misses out saves etc.

Vehicles last longer in 8th.

Not true in many cases. Trukks were tougher for points in 7-th. Mostly because cover actually worked.

**JohnnyHell**

koooaei wrote:
JohnnyHell wrote:
Yeah that maths in the OP... it's not the whole picture, and it misses out saves etc.

Vehicles last longer in 8th.

Not true in many cases. Trukks were tougher for points in 7-th. Mostly because cover actually worked.

Always gonna be an exception. I haven't had a single Russ blow up to one shot. In my experience they're tougher to kill, YMMV.

**kingleir**

JohnnyHell wrote:
Yeah that maths in the OP... it's not the whole picture, and it misses out saves etc.

Vehicles last longer in 8th.

It also misses out on points cost, that landraider is 100 points more expensive, less target saturation and easier target priority make it less durable. Also units can split fire their weapons at appropriate targets, meaning tanks are going to be eating more shots.

**JohnnyHell**

wuestenfux wrote:
It depends.
The anti-tank weapons like lascannons and melta-type weapons can cause a lot of damage in a single volley.
At Saturday, I battled AdMech with my BA at the 3000 pt level. The enemy had an Imperial Knight and I played a Stormsword with a vulcan cannon. This weapon is an absolute beast. The knight went down in round two with ease.

Do you mean Shadowsword with a Volcano Cannon? Or a Stormlord with a Vulcan Mega Bolter? You've mixed your variants!

**wuestenfux**

JohnnyHell wrote:
wuestenfux wrote:
It depends.
The anti-tank weapons like lascannons and melta-type weapons can cause a lot of damage in a single volley.
At Saturday, I battled AdMech with my BA at the 3000 pt level. The enemy had an Imperial Knight and I played a Stormsword with a vulcan cannon. This weapon is an absolute beast. The knight went down in round two with ease.

Do you mean Shadowsword with a Volcano Cannon? Or a Stormlord with a Vulcan Mega Bolter? You've mixed your variants!

Okay. Shadowsword with volcano cannon. As said, this thing is a beast. Its ideal for dealing with superheavies.

**Inquisitor Lord Katherine**

What you're missing is the distribution.

Last edition, a given lascannon hit had a:
66.67% chance of doing nothing at all
30.55% chance of doing 25% damage
2.78% chance of dealing 100% damage

Now, there's a:
44.44% chance of doing nothing at all
7.41% chance of doing 6.25% damage
7.41% chance of doing 12.50% damage
7.41% chance of doing 18.75% damage
7.41% chance of doing 25.00% damage
7.41% chance of doing 31.25% damage
7.41% chance of doing 37.50% damage

That's without considering that there was a non-negligible chance of the vehicle either being unable to move, unable to shoot with its full firepower, or both in the next turn on a 25% damage result last edition.

**Galas**

Vehicles are toughter agaisn't small and medium arms fire. And are much more flexible and usefull.

The Lass-canon comparison is a missleading one because in 7th it was a useless weapon, and now it works as intended, as one of the best anti-armour weapons.