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.

 Galas wrote:
I have found that the offensive output of tactical squads is just not worth the cost when marines have much better offensive options.


In return, they die way to fast to volume of low quality fire. Intercessors are much better at that. The enemy needs to put a little more effort into killing them (They are gonna kill them ,of course, but in 8th everything dies... with the exception of an IH Leviathan), and that effort is not shooting at the rest of my list.

A lot of people opt for Scorpius when the TFC is an option. Why? D2.

When shooting marines in cover from Heavy Doc - TFC kills 2.2 mini (26.4 points) and 1.1 primaris (18.8 points). The Scorpius kills 1.8 mini (21 points) and 1.8 primaris (30 points).

In one scenario mini marines 40% more points. In the other Primaris lose 42% more points. Of course this applies up until you start pulling the PG models off the table, but then you'll lean more into damage the primaris will lean more into defense.

I just get the sense that people have an aversion to losing models.

Christ. DA mini-marines are 30" guns making the grav-guns 24" or 30" plasma with innate reroll 1s. Such a squad can sit like Intercessors, double tap, and toss a PG shot in for good measure. And I bet you won't miss the AP1 when stealers or sisters ignore it.

 Stux wrote:

 aphyon wrote:

 NurglesR0T wrote:

 aphyon wrote:
From a lore perspective i think i would feel dirty using primaris in any DA force. the unforgiven do not take lightly to outsiders.


That being said i only play deathwing/ravenwing (since 3rd ed) so the primaris question never became a thing for me.

The DA untrusting of Primaris has been pretty much all but removed from fluff - with the introduction of Lazarus becoming the first primaris inner circle we should pretty much accept it.. unless this is a mace windu type deal "you are in the inner circle, but you do not have the rank of Master"

you assume i accept the retcon fluff.

If you dont, you're essentially following your own fanfic.

Which is fine, just a statement of fact. I have my own head canon about a bunch of things!

I don't need any head cannon to explain my (current) lack of DA Primaris.
Any battle my DA are in just happens to be on a slice of the battlefield where there are no DA Primaris operating atm.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I have found that the offensive output of tactical squads is just not worth the cost when marines have much better offensive options.


In return, they die way to fast to volume of low quality fire. Intercessors are much better at that. The enemy needs to put a little more effort into killing them (They are gonna kill them ,of course, but in 8th everything dies... with the exception of an IH Leviathan), and that effort is not shooting at the rest of my list.

A lot of people opt for Scorpius when the TFC is an option. Why? D2.

When shooting marines in cover from Heavy Doc - TFC kills 2.2 mini (26.4 points) and 1.1 primaris (18.8 points). The Scorpius kills 1.8 mini (21 points) and 1.8 primaris (30 points).

In one scenario mini marines 40% more points. In the other Primaris lose 42% more points. Of course this applies up until you start pulling the PG models off the table, but then you'll lean more into damage the primaris will lean more into defense.

I just get the sense that people have an aversion to losing models.

Christ. DA mini-marines are 30" guns making the grav-guns 24" or 30" plasma with innate reroll 1s. Such a squad can sit like Intercessors, double tap, and toss a PG shot in for good measure. And I bet you won't miss the AP1 when stealers or sisters ignore it.

That Plasma Gun is precisely the problem though. Those weapons add up very quick. Also I've seen a couple of lists take both the Scorpius and TFC in tandem (I gotta find those lists though). Regardless, the D2 profile isn't wasted as long as you keep adding stuff to make squads the same amount of points, which is kinda shocking with Primaris and other W2 models being THE preferred target.

Yea, perhaps.

I just sit in a weird place as W1 infantry that hates D2 weapons and I notice them more distinctly. So maybe i'm unwittingly creating a narrative to get more D1 on the table.

I do not play intercessors but I played against it, as probably almost every 40k player nowadays... imao intercessors S4 -2 AP bolt rifles with a decent rof is way too good. Especially the combination of S4 and -2 AP means that you pretty much do not need any other tool to deal with anything with less than T8 which is everything but the heaviest of the heaviest (imperial knighs, replusors, landriders and a few more).

-2AP and 2D are just too much, basically, it virtually behaves like plasma gun and takes out of the equation almost all the armor saves. Only terminators in cover are relatively safe from it. The rest will fall in large numbers.

You just need to bring a couple of LC to deal with the rest. Perhaps in some vehicles or spread across a few tac units, but mostly to cover you against T8.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Yea, perhaps.

I just sit in a weird place as W1 infantry that hates D2 weapons and I notice them more distinctly. So maybe i'm unwittingly creating a narrative to get more D1 on the table.

Depends how many points you add to them. For example, my Liasbomb list uses ×3 10 Sternguard with 2 Grav Cannons. That's 180 a squad or, simply put, 18 points a model. Without Lias providing any safety that would bleed points. With the better Bolters and/or better weapon saturation from Devs, why would Lias choose to teleport Tacticals with him when you just need the offense to clear the opponent's objectives? Dead units don't hold objectives, Objective Secured or not. I simply think of Intercessors + Scouts as the best source of CP. I can count on both Hands the amount of times I wish I had Objective Secured for some reason in the totality of 8th, and I can kinda say the same for 7th not gonna lie.

psipso wrote:
I do not play intercessors but I played against it, as probably almost every 40k player nowadays... imao intercessors S4 -2 AP bolt rifles with a decent rof is way too good. Especially the combination of S4 and -2 AP means that you pretty much do not need any other tool to deal with anything with less than T8 which is everything but the heaviest of the heaviest (imperial knighs, replusors, landriders and a few more).

-2AP and 2D are just too much, basically, it virtually behaves like plasma gun and takes out of the equation almost all the armor saves. Only terminators in cover are relatively safe from it. The rest will fall in large numbers.

You just need to bring a couple of LC to deal with the rest. Perhaps in some vehicles or spread across a few tac units, but mostly to cover you against T8.

It seems like you're mixing Stalkers and Bolt Rifles? A Stalker is low volume and you need more models and reroll wounds to keep them effective.

All this talk about tacs VS intercessor job and performance... this is why i love what FW did with HH-every troop option is good and a fire support tac squad can focus to kill hordes or tanks ( i much prefer the old system where you can't wound a leman russ with a las gun simillar to shooting an AK 47 at an abrams and expecting to do damage ) with equal effectiveness

Primaris are the new codex creep from GW the same way they nerfed carnifex's back when they wanted people to buy the new plastic trygon models. It is a marketing move to make them look and perform better so you will want to buy them. and now that primaris have a flying rhino the transport thing isn't an issue anymore...not like it really was with 30" range rifles.

 aphyon wrote:
All this talk about tacs VS intercessor job and performance... this is why i love what FW did with HH-every troop option is good and a fire support tac squad can focus to kill hordes or tanks ( i much prefer the old system where you can't wound a leman russ with a las gun simillar to shooting an AK 47 at an abrams and expecting to do damage ) with equal effectiveness

Primaris are the new codex creep from GW the same way they nerfed carnifex's back when they wanted people to buy the new plastic trygon models. It is a marketing move to make them look and perform better so you will want to buy them. and now that primaris have a flying rhino the transport thing isn't an issue anymore...not like it really was with 30" range rifles.

First off, it takes 36 Lasgun shots to on average ping a single wound off a Russ. I really cannot understand how this is an issue for people.

Second, while they undoubtedly gave Intercessors a big boost in the new Codex, the idea that GW intentionally make new lines more powerful to boost sales is a total fallacy. They have released loads of new kits in the last couple of years that are struggling due to power level. Honestly, it just looks random more than anything.

Grav tacticals might be better against t8 than intercessors but when its only t7 and the stalkers wounds on 5+ the difference isnt that big. Intercessors are great against almost everything in the game except perhaps t8. But even then, if you are playing imperial fists close to a chapter master and LT, even knights are starting to sweat.

What really makes them so good is that all 3 weapon options are good so if you are Imperial Fists with exploding 6s, ignores cover and a good super doctrine you can load up your intercessors with stalker bolt rifles and kill anything with ease. Loss of number of shots on your troops are compensated by quality of each shot and lots of dakka from other units. Same with Iron Hands. Those 2 chapters do not want tacticals at all since they want units that take full benefit from being in devastator doctrine.

In other chapters in which you have good anti tank from melee you might just need the intercessors to clear screens and then both the other options are really good and both superior to what tacticals bring.

Tacts might be better point for point against some targets and matchups but unless you are tailoring a list against a certain opponent the intercessors will just be better overall. If I know my opponent only have t8 and d2 or better weapons then tacticals might be better but how often do you actually play against something like that.

 Stux wrote:

 aphyon wrote:
All this talk about tacs VS intercessor job and performance... this is why i love what FW did with HH-every troop option is good and a fire support tac squad can focus to kill hordes or tanks ( i much prefer the old system where you can't wound a leman russ with a las gun simillar to shooting an AK 47 at an abrams and expecting to do damage ) with equal effectiveness

Primaris are the new codex creep from GW the same way they nerfed carnifex's back when they wanted people to buy the new plastic trygon models. It is a marketing move to make them look and perform better so you will want to buy them. and now that primaris have a flying rhino the transport thing isn't an issue anymore...not like it really was with 30" range rifles.

First off, it takes 36 Lasgun shots to on average ping a single wound off a Russ. I really cannot understand how this is an issue for people.

Second, while they undoubtedly gave Intercessors a big boost in the new Codex, the idea that GW intentionally make new lines more powerful to boost sales is a total fallacy. They have released loads of new kits in the last couple of years that are struggling due to power level. Honestly, it just looks random more than anything.

It does not matter how many shots it takes, the entire point is IT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN. thats why it is an issue. i play nearly a dozen different game systems and none of them have jumped that rubicon to the level that 8th has where everything is a monster with varying levels of toughness to represent armor but can always be hurt on a roll of a 6.

you wanna kill a tank you bring an anti-tank weapon., you do not bring an anti-infantry small arm. even DUST that used a wound system similar to 8th, before it became a thing in 40K, reflects that by armor class for vehicles. small arms can hurt light vehicles but heavy armor like tanks you get no shots because it is not designed to hurt them. they also retain weapon facing/LOS to maintain immersion so that things like strike aircraft are not firing fixed forward weapons out their butt.

In infinity they do have a crit system that represents the "lucky" hit but generally when you are facing the heaviest of power armor (TAGs) you use armor piercing and high explosive ammunition. or have a hacker take over the computer system.

Second, if you have been around 40K/GW as long as some of us you do know they in fact did in the past specifically change rules on older models to sell new kits. the anecdotal reference you make to current sales figures doesn't change the fact that they have a history of doing just that in the past if not so at present.

Remember the GW company line was-"were are not a game company, we are a model company that has a game attached to our models"

 aphyon wrote:

 Stux wrote:

 aphyon wrote:

Spoiler:

All this talk about tacs VS intercessor job and performance... this is why i love what FW did with HH-every troop option is good and a fire support tac squad can focus to kill hordes or tanks ( i much prefer the old system where you can't wound a leman russ with a las gun simillar to shooting an AK 47 at an abrams and expecting to do damage ) with equal effectiveness

Primaris are the new codex creep from GW the same way they nerfed carnifex's back when they wanted people to buy the new plastic trygon models. It is a marketing move to make them look and perform better so you will want to buy them. and now that primaris have a flying rhino the transport thing isn't an issue anymore...not like it really was with 30" range rifles.

First off, it takes 36 Lasgun shots to on average ping a single wound off a Russ. I really cannot understand how this is an issue for people.

Second, while they undoubtedly gave Intercessors a big boost in the new Codex, the idea that GW intentionally make new lines more powerful to boost sales is a total fallacy. They have released loads of new kits in the last couple of years that are struggling due to power level. Honestly, it just looks random more than anything.

It does not matter how many shots it takes, the entire point is IT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN. thats why it is an issue. i play nearly a dozen different game systems and none of them have jumped that rubicon to the level that 8th has where everything is a monster with varying levels of toughness to represent armor but can always be hurt on a roll of a 6.

you wanna kill a tank you bring an anti-tank weapon., you do not bring an anti-infantry small arm. even DUST that used a wound system similar to 8th, before it became a thing in 40K, reflects that by armor class for vehicles. small arms can hurt light vehicles but heavy armor like tanks you get no shots because it is not designed to hurt them. they also retain weapon facing/LOS to maintain immersion so that things like strike aircraft are not firing fixed forward weapons out their butt.

In infinity they do have a crit system that represents the "lucky" hit but generally when you are facing the heaviest of power armor (TAGs) you use armor piercing and high explosive ammunition. or have a hacker take over the computer system.

Second, if you have been around 40K/GW as long as some of us you do know they in fact did in the past specifically change rules on older models to sell new kits. the anecdotal reference you make to current sales figures doesn't change the fact that they have a history of doing just that in the past if not so at present.

Remember the GW company line was-"were are not a game company, we are a model company that has a game attached to our models"

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

 aphyon wrote:

 Stux wrote:

 aphyon wrote:

Spoiler:

All this talk about tacs VS intercessor job and performance... this is why i love what FW did with HH-every troop option is good and a fire support tac squad can focus to kill hordes or tanks ( i much prefer the old system where you can't wound a leman russ with a las gun simillar to shooting an AK 47 at an abrams and expecting to do damage ) with equal effectiveness

Primaris are the new codex creep from GW the same way they nerfed carnifex's back when they wanted people to buy the new plastic trygon models. It is a marketing move to make them look and perform better so you will want to buy them. and now that primaris have a flying rhino the transport thing isn't an issue anymore...not like it really was with 30" range rifles.

First off, it takes 36 Lasgun shots to on average ping a single wound off a Russ. I really cannot understand how this is an issue for people.

Second, while they undoubtedly gave Intercessors a big boost in the new Codex, the idea that GW intentionally make new lines more powerful to boost sales is a total fallacy. They have released loads of new kits in the last couple of years that are struggling due to power level. Honestly, it just looks random more than anything.

It does not matter how many shots it takes, the entire point is IT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN. thats why it is an issue. i play nearly a dozen different game systems and none of them have jumped that rubicon to the level that 8th has where everything is a monster with varying levels of toughness to represent armor but can always be hurt on a roll of a 6.

you wanna kill a tank you bring an anti-tank weapon., you do not bring an anti-infantry small arm. even DUST that used a wound system similar to 8th, before it became a thing in 40K, reflects that by armor class for vehicles. small arms can hurt light vehicles but heavy armor like tanks you get no shots because it is not designed to hurt them. they also retain weapon facing/LOS to maintain immersion so that things like strike aircraft are not firing fixed forward weapons out their butt.

In infinity they do have a crit system that represents the "lucky" hit but generally when you are facing the heaviest of power armor (TAGs) you use armor piercing and high explosive ammunition. or have a hacker take over the computer system.

Second, if you have been around 40K/GW as long as some of us you do know they in fact did in the past specifically change rules on older models to sell new kits. the anecdotal reference you make to current sales figures doesn't change the fact that they have a history of doing just that in the past if not so at present.

Remember the GW company line was-"were are not a game company, we are a model company that has a game attached to our models"

 SeanDavid1991 wrote:

Spoiler:

 aphyon wrote:

 Stux wrote:

 aphyon wrote:
[spoiler]All this talk about tacs VS intercessor job and performance... this is why i love what FW did with HH-every troop option is good and a fire support tac squad can focus to kill hordes or tanks ( i much prefer the old system where you can't wound a leman russ with a las gun simillar to shooting an AK 47 at an abrams and expecting to do damage ) with equal effectiveness

Primaris are the new codex creep from GW the same way they nerfed carnifex's back when they wanted people to buy the new plastic trygon models. It is a marketing move to make them look and perform better so you will want to buy them. and now that primaris have a flying rhino the transport thing isn't an issue anymore...not like it really was with 30" range rifles.

First off, it takes 36 Lasgun shots to on average ping a single wound off a Russ. I really cannot understand how this is an issue for people.

Second, while they undoubtedly gave Intercessors a big boost in the new Codex, the idea that GW intentionally make new lines more powerful to boost sales is a total fallacy. They have released loads of new kits in the last couple of years that are struggling due to power level. Honestly, it just looks random more than anything.

It does not matter how many shots it takes, the entire point is IT SHOULD NOT HAPPEN. thats why it is an issue. i play nearly a dozen different game systems and none of them have jumped that rubicon to the level that 8th has where everything is a monster with varying levels of toughness to represent armor but can always be hurt on a roll of a 6.

you wanna kill a tank you bring an anti-tank weapon., you do not bring an anti-infantry small arm. even DUST that used a wound system similar to 8th, before it became a thing in 40K, reflects that by armor class for vehicles. small arms can hurt light vehicles but heavy armor like tanks you get no shots because it is not designed to hurt them. they also retain weapon facing/LOS to maintain immersion so that things like strike aircraft are not firing fixed forward weapons out their butt.

In infinity they do have a crit system that represents the "lucky" hit but generally when you are facing the heaviest of power armor (TAGs) you use armor piercing and high explosive ammunition. or have a hacker take over the computer system.

Second, if you have been around 40K/GW as long as some of us you do know they in fact did in the past specifically change rules on older models to sell new kits. the anecdotal reference you make to current sales figures doesn't change the fact that they have a history of doing just that in the past if not so at present.

Remember the GW company line was-"were are not a game company, we are a model company that has a game attached to our models"

Empty 10 machine guns into the same sheet of metal used for the hull of a tank. Then go look at the state of the metal afterwards. stuff that is incredibly resilient, is just that. Resilient.

Lasgun's are a meme yes but they aren't exactly throwing pebbles, they still do damage. Given enough shots and time they can work their way through.

Got some real world measurements for that?

I mean, the Grand Canyon is water plunking away at stone, too. . . it just took millions of years.

And all of that is irrelevant to the fact that it is statistically so unlikely that Guardsmen will kill a Russ within the context of a real game that honestly no one should care that its technically possible.

And if it DOES happen, personally I'd see that as an awesome once in a lifetime event for your army that represents getting an extremely lucky shot into a fuel line or ammo hopper or something that causes an unlikely chain reaction to go off etc. Would it happen in real life? Maybe not. But frankly it's such a minor thing to get annoyed about.

 Stux wrote:
And all of that is irrelevant to the fact that it is statistically so unlikely that Guardsmen will kill a Russ within the context of a real game that honestly no one should care that its technically possible.

And if it DOES happen, personally I'd see that as an awesome once in a lifetime event for your army that represents getting an extremely lucky shot into a fuel line or ammo hopper or something that causes an unlikely chain reaction to go off etc. Would it happen in real life? Maybe not. But frankly it's such a minor thing to get annoyed about.

Weeeeellllll. . . . I disagree now. For example, in the older paradigm, them Bolt Rifles wouldn't even be able to hurt a Rhino, because they would be S4+D6 armor penetration for 10 max to a Rhinos 11.

This is why I call them Starcraft marines. Just like Starcraft, their solution to everything is to just hurl more bullets at a target, as opposed to deploying actual anti-armor weapons. The feeling is quite different.

Eh, no less different than a lasgun being able to kill a Riptide or Terminator in my eyes. The difference between a Riptide and a walker is negligible IMO, which is why I'm glad they were given the same sort of profile, and considering that Terminators are supposed to be mini-tanks in their own right, wearing armour that can withstand plasma generators, shouldn't you also "need" anti-tank weaponry to kill them too?

Maybe they hit a weak spot in the armour/tracks/fuel source/weapon magazine/vision slit/manufacturing defect, maybe they're shooting through an existing hole blown through by another squad.

There's plenty of ways to rationalise it beyond just "shoot enough lasguns and it rolls over dead".

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Eh, no less different than a lasgun being able to kill a Riptide or Terminator in my eyes. The difference between a Riptide and a walker is negligible IMO, which is why I'm glad they were given the same sort of profile, and considering that Terminators are supposed to be mini-tanks in their own right, wearing armour that can withstand plasma generators, shouldn't you also "need" anti-tank weaponry to kill them too?

Maybe they hit a weak spot in the armour/tracks/fuel source/weapon magazine/vision slit/manufacturing defect, maybe they're shooting through an existing hole blown through by another squad.

There's plenty of ways to rationalise it beyond just "shoot enough lasguns and it rolls over dead".

Absolutely.

It was entirely arbitrary in 7e that a Lasgun couldn't hurt a Rhino but could hurt a Riptide, just because one has AV and the other Toughness. That makes way less sense to me than the current system.

 Stux wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Eh, no less different than a lasgun being able to kill a Riptide or Terminator in my eyes. The difference between a Riptide and a walker is negligible IMO, which is why I'm glad they were given the same sort of profile, and considering that Terminators are supposed to be mini-tanks in their own right, wearing armour that can withstand plasma generators, shouldn't you also "need" anti-tank weaponry to kill them too?

Maybe they hit a weak spot in the armour/tracks/fuel source/weapon magazine/vision slit/manufacturing defect, maybe they're shooting through an existing hole blown through by another squad.

There's plenty of ways to rationalise it beyond just "shoot enough lasguns and it rolls over dead".

Absolutely.

It was entirely arbitrary in 7e that a Lasgun couldn't hurt a Rhino but could hurt a Riptide, just because one has AV and the other Toughness. That makes way less sense to me than the current system.

Couldn't hurt a Carnifex either. Once you got over 3 T values above the S, target was immune. Makes sense enough to me.

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Stux wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Eh, no less different than a lasgun being able to kill a Riptide or Terminator in my eyes. The difference between a Riptide and a walker is negligible IMO, which is why I'm glad they were given the same sort of profile, and considering that Terminators are supposed to be mini-tanks in their own right, wearing armour that can withstand plasma generators, shouldn't you also "need" anti-tank weaponry to kill them too?

Maybe they hit a weak spot in the armour/tracks/fuel source/weapon magazine/vision slit/manufacturing defect, maybe they're shooting through an existing hole blown through by another squad.

There's plenty of ways to rationalise it beyond just "shoot enough lasguns and it rolls over dead".

Absolutely.

It was entirely arbitrary in 7e that a Lasgun couldn't hurt a Rhino but could hurt a Riptide, just because one has AV and the other Toughness. That makes way less sense to me than the current system.

Couldn't hurt a Carnifex either. Once you got over 3 T values above the S, target was immune. Makes sense enough to me.

So why was a Riptide weaker than a Trukk?

And similarly, for the "walking tank" Terminators, why should they have been vulnerable to lasguns?

^More to the point, how do troops engage tanks? By firing 1000s of rounds of 5.56 at them?

To be fair, marines don't last long vs siege tanks in starcraft. But 40K has removed blast weapons, so...

Martel732 wrote:
To be fair, marines don't last long vs siege tanks in starcraft. But 40K has removed blast weapons, so...

Seems like double-firing Earthshakers have more or less the same effect.

Except for some reason, they don't do more damage if you bunch up...I"m glad GW didn't code banelings in Starcraft.

Martel732 wrote:
Except for some reason, they don't do more damage if you bunch up...

Aye, true. I do miss some aspects of blast markers for sure.

As BA, melta being pure garbage is such a kick on the balls. Vanilla park and shoot is so much better than BA even after PA, its disgusting. It's like 2nd ed all over again for BA.

Martel732 wrote:
As BA, melta being pure garbage is such a kick on the balls. Vanilla park and shoot is so much better than BA even after PA, its disgusting. It's like 2nd ed all over again for BA.

I was hoping before the edition came out that Melta would get it's blast back. Too bad :/

I was also hoping that every model could use it's grenades in CC against vehicles, etc. again. Also too bad. :/

I don't know exactly what you are bringing, but the fact that they heaped a shitton of new rules on BA without actually improving them much is just amazing to me. It goes back to fallback, cheap models, and marines still being glass cannons. And things like melta being dysfunctional. This all adds up to BA, and every melee-focused marine army having the same old problems.

I can bring one wound or two wound marines, but at the end of the day, the gun lines will still beat me.

 Stux wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Eh, no less different than a lasgun being able to kill a Riptide or Terminator in my eyes. The difference between a Riptide and a walker is negligible IMO, which is why I'm glad they were given the same sort of profile, and considering that Terminators are supposed to be mini-tanks in their own right, wearing armour that can withstand plasma generators, shouldn't you also "need" anti-tank weaponry to kill them too?

Maybe they hit a weak spot in the armour/tracks/fuel source/weapon magazine/vision slit/manufacturing defect, maybe they're shooting through an existing hole blown through by another squad.

There's plenty of ways to rationalise it beyond just "shoot enough lasguns and it rolls over dead".

Absolutely.

It was entirely arbitrary in 7e that a Lasgun couldn't hurt a Rhino but could hurt a Riptide, just because one has AV and the other Toughness. That makes way less sense to me than the current system.

Riptides not being treated as vehicles was a mistake from day 1 and should never have happened.

No, monstrous creatures being 10X better than vehicles was the mistake from day 1.