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.

To preface this, I've not run the maths on this and I've seen threads on here that have already done an admirable job of taking on the number crunching.

Short and sweet: What if the Vanquisher cannon ignored invulnerable saves if the target was a vehicle/monstrous creature? That would give it some enhanced performance in certain situations against priority targets while leaving it just as effective (or ineffective) versus vehicles without invulnerables and infantry.

Steiner wrote:
To preface this, I've not run the maths on this and I've seen threads on here that have already done an admirable job of taking on the number crunching.

Short and sweet: What if the Vanquisher cannon ignored invulnerable saves if the target was a vehicle/monstrous creature? That would give it some enhanced performance in certain situations against priority targets while leaving it just as effective (or ineffective) versus vehicles without invulnerables and infantry.

Against a 3+/4++ Knight (the main vehicle with an Invuln you'll see) the damage increases by 2/3rds.

But, it'd still be worse than a Battlecannon against the Knight.

I feel it would be weird for a vanquisher to be especially good at negating the invul save on harlequin and drukhari vehicles given that they represent holograms and such.

I think the solution would be for the Vanquisher Cannons and Railcannon to both get:
bonuses to wound vehicles
increased damage to be comparable with a single shot to the output of multi-shot weapons.

Perhaps, also reflecting the fact that the Vanquisher Cannon was better at penetrating a target [S8 Armorbane is 60% penetration versus S10 being 33%] but the Railcannon had +1 to actually get a wrecked/explodes after penetrating:
Vanquisher Cannon: S8, AP-4, D3d6, this weapon always wounds VEHICLE and MONSTER targets on an unmodified die roll of a 2+.
Railcannon: S10, AP-4, D6+2d6 [or maybe even higher]
This gives the Vanquisher cannon a slightly higher chance to actually inflict damage, but causes it to inflict slightly less damage [and somewhat significantly, averaging short of D12 while the Railcannon averages just over D12]

3d6 damage isn't actually egregious for them, compared to a Battle Cannon "shot" it would share the same high [18], but have a slightly higher single-target average [10.5 vs 7.5], which would be, I think, fair for a single-target weapon and required to make it "viable" versus taking the more generally capable weapon.

And, it doesn't actually step on the toes of Titanic units. A Shadowsword does 2d6 6 times on average, that's twice as much as these Vanquisher/Hammerhead proposals would be for a tank about 2.5 times the price.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Vanquisher Cannon: S8, AP-4, D3d6, this weapon always wounds VEHICLE and MONSTER targets on an unmodified die roll of a 2+.

Now that stats can go above 10, why not just give it a really high strength? Like 16 or 18 if you want it to wound T8 and T9 on 2+.