New Kratos Tank in 40K - how to make a marine tank not suck?

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.

**chaos0xomega**

The conclusion would quickly be that two fractionally better lascannons (S10, AP-3, D3+3 damage) is kind of a joke at this point in the edition.

The problem with lascannons and their derivatives in 40k is that they are still built around an outdated concept of anti-tank weapons from older editions of the game when a single high strength shot could destroy a tank outright. A single S9 high AP shot back then could produce real results for you, now that same weapon does a mighty d6 damage - at best that knocks a few wounds off a tank, but not much more. Lascannons either need a dramatic points cut, or to have their rate of fire improved or their damage output improved - if they are meant to be a single high impact shot, then they probably should be doing 2d6 damage (or better), if not, they really should be considered a free weapon or a 5 point weapon rather than a 20 point weapon as they seem to be, otherwise they need to fire 2-3 shots each rather than a single shot.

Dudeface wrote:
Interesting thought I had, the spartan is a LoW in 40k, the Kratos is a similar size to the Spartan, so Kratos is maybe a LoW in 40k making it borderline useless again?

Thats my expectation.

**Daedalus81**

Tyel wrote:
I don't think Tanks have special issues. The problem is just comparable points and synergies.

Compare a Gladiator Lancer to say a Rupture Cannon Tyrannofex, a Hammerhead or a Fire Prism. (Maybe unkind to pick the Gladiator generally considered dead on arrival - but still.)

The conclusion would quickly be that two fractionally better lascannons (S10, AP-3, D3+3 damage) is kind of a joke at this point in the edition.

Compare them to:
Rupture Cannon: 3 shots, S14, AP-4 D6+4 damage.
Prism Cannon: 2 shots, S14 AP-5 3D3 damage (or 3D3 shots, S6 AP-2 2 damage).
Railgun: 1 Shot, S14, AP-6 (no invuls), D3+6 damage and 3 mortal wounds on successful wound.
(Could do Exocrine's here, but its kind of a different profile. But an average of 8 S8 AP-4 3 damage shots is also superior by some distance.)

There are some points variances here, that cover some differences - but still, the gap is incredible. The fact an Exocrine or Tyrannofex get a small number of high S AP-1 2 damage attacks really isn't bothering anyone. Sure it might beat your tank almost never doing anything - but so what? The issue is that 2+ save - combined with the fact Tyranids have ways to throw things like Transhuman and 4++ on to these monsters. Who have 15 or 17 wounds compare to 12 for the Gladiator. The fact the Hammerhead and Fire Prism have fly is a perk for them - but its more that their damage is much more significant for their points.

When GW inevitably do marines 4.0, they'll massively soup up these stats. The Lancer will probably be 2 shots, S14, AP-4, D6+3 that ignore invuls because "Marines is Best" or something equally silly.

And its entirely possible they could do so with the Kratos. Or they can make it say 350-400 points while only having the firepower of a 250~ point unit. In which case it will be weak.

The Lancer needs a boost, but the Tfex should be like 300 points instead of ~200 ( probably mostly via Rupture Cannon ).

Tyranids aside I think the marine tanks are largely playable. At some point I wouldn't be surprised to see some land raiders hit tables.

**Karol**

It would have to be the non lascanons versions. d6 dmg for that many points is just not worth taking.

**VladimirHerzog**

Land Raiders got much more tanky with AoC but they still feel like overpriced pillboxes that do less damage than wet paper. The only one i'd consider is the Achilles with full melta.

**chaos0xomega**

VladimirHerzog wrote:
Land Raiders got much more tanky with AoC but they still feel like overpriced pillboxes that do less damage than wet paper. The only one i'd consider is the Achilles with full melta.

Yep the potential damage output of the Achilles is monstrous, the problem is - you really do pay for it over the cost of a standard land raider. I am still not sure the Achilles is actually worth its points, or if it just seems that way because its simply a better use of the points vs a traditional land raider configuration.

**Tyel**

I guess it depends on your bar for playable. Predators are awful. The points of a vehicle with just 2 lascannons is about 85~ points. Not 130. Most of these vehicles are not good really - due to either having terrible damage output for the points (Land Raiders), or paper thin defenses (just about everything else).

I mean a Repulsor Executioner can be 345 points. Its got far too many guns, I can't be bothered to math out how it stacks up against much more sensible vehicles. But with 16 wounds T8 3+ and AOC its... probably still easier to kill than an Exocrine, Tyrranofex or Maleceptor who weigh in at about half that.

I think I remember reading that some GK player did alright in a tournament 2-3 weeks ago with a Land Raider, so I'm not going to say never, but I doubt you'll be seeing all of these.

**Daedalus81**

Lascannons are just MM that haven't gotten into range yet.

They're not the sexiest thing out there, but people sell the potential of D6 a little short. A Hammerhead drops 10 to 12. My vindicator dropped 8 to 10 multiple times in a row.

YMMV, of course as the dice were clearly with me that day ( on top of spell assistance ).

A min 3 damage would be a good half way measure.

**Gadzilla666**

chaos0xomega wrote:
VladimirHerzog wrote:
Land Raiders got much more tanky with AoC but they still feel like overpriced pillboxes that do less damage than wet paper. The only one i'd consider is the Achilles with full melta.

Yep the potential damage output of the Achilles is monstrous, the problem is - you really do pay for it over the cost of a standard land raider. I am still not sure the Achilles is actually worth its points, or if it just seems that way because its simply a better use of the points vs a traditional land raider configuration.

Yeah, it's definitely overpriced in the current game. I had some fun with mine in early 9th when the multi-meltas first got their stats boost, but once I realized that I could just slap two melta lances on my Leviathan, and get roughly the same damage output and durability for less points, it lost a lot of its luster.

I think the biggest problem with Astartes tanks is that most of their 9th edition rules were written with early 9th in mind, and they've fallen behind since then. Most of the fw units were designed to be "in line" with those early 9th edition codexes, and it shows. The Achilles, for example, had it's invul dropped from a 4++ to a 5++, because in early 9th 16 T8, 2+, 4++ wounds seemed excessive. Two years later, and a Stormsurge comes in at 22 T8, 2+, 4++ wounds for I think, 5 PPM more than the Achilles? And with the firepower to match. If gw isn't going to readjust the rules for Astartes tanks beyond adding AoC, then they need points adjustments.

**Dysartes**

Daedalus81 wrote:
They're not the sexiest thing out there, but people sell the potential of D6 a little short. A Hammerhead drops 10 to 12. My vindicator dropped 8 to 10 multiple times in a row.

...can you translate those last two bits into English, please?

**chaos0xomega**

I think hes trying to say that people underestimate how good D6 damage is, and hes trying to justify that by pointing out that Hammerheads can do 10-12 damage while vindicators can consistently put out 8-10 damage per turn.

The problem with that argument though is that Hammerheads don't do d6 damage, they do 6+d3 damage +3 auto MW, which is not even remotely comparable to d6 damage (and is objectively far and away superior). Likewise, while Vindicators do d6 damage, they are doing that on the back of d6 shots rather than just 1 shot as is the case with the lascannon.

In short, its a very poor defense of lascannons/single-shot d6 damage weapons. The comparison to multimeltas in the prior sentence is also sus, as multimeltas are at least 2 shots each.

**VladimirHerzog**

feth variable damage weapons.

Make lascannons do flat 4 damage
Make melta do flat 4 (6 if within half range)

**Dysartes**

VladimirHerzog wrote:
feth variable damage weapons.

Make lascannons do flat 4 damage
Make melta do flat 4 (6 if within half range)

Thing is... they make sense, intuitively. There would be variance in the amount of damage a wounding-hit-that-has-gotten-past-armour-and-other-saves actually does to a target.

What makes less sense is the weapons with fixed damage profiles, where that damage is higher than 1.

**VladimirHerzog**

Dysartes wrote:
VladimirHerzog wrote:
feth variable damage weapons.

Make lascannons do flat 4 damage
Make melta do flat 4 (6 if within half range)

Thing is... they make sense, intuitively. There would be variance in the amount of damage a wounding-hit-that-has-gotten-past-armour-and-other-saves actually does to a target.

What makes less sense is the weapons with fixed damage profiles, where that damage is higher than 1.

feth "making sense", make the gameplay more enjoyable.

Playing CSM/SM/Necrons and being stuck with mostly dD6 anti-tank is a terrible feelbad

**Karol**

The spread is too big though. a d6 dmg on a high cost platform that shots one time and has to deal with wounding, hiting and potential saves or invs is just bad. Specially when the targets have between 9 to 17 wounds.

Look at the good guns in the game right now. All do flat dmg, often are multi shot or have different modes of fire, and have extra rules on top of that. A regular lascanon just doesn't cut it in the game. And GW knows it, because their changed how other factions lascanons work or roll dmg.

now if random weapons and their platforms were cheaper then those with guns that do flat dmg, then we could talk about balancing factors. The thing with lascanons is, that they are mostly on over priced platforms and cost an arm and a leg.

**Dysartes**

I'm not going to sit here and claim that a partial design paradigm shift part-way through an edition is a good thing - I completely agree with you on that.

Equally, though, I'd look to change any flat high D weapons to something with a degree of variability, as well as changing the Dd6 AT weapons to be a bit more reliable- Dd3+3 or Dd6 (min. 3), for example, if you didn't want to change the maximum, though I suspect the max damage for some weapons from the early books should be reviewed as well.

**Daedalus81**

chaos0xomega wrote:
I think hes trying to say that people underestimate how good D6 damage is, and hes trying to justify that by pointing out that Hammerheads can do 10-12 damage while vindicators can consistently put out 8-10 damage per turn.

The problem with that argument though is that Hammerheads don't do d6 damage, they do 6+d3 damage +3 auto MW, which is not even remotely comparable to d6 damage (and is objectively far and away superior). Likewise, while Vindicators do d6 damage, they are doing that on the back of d6 shots rather than just 1 shot as is the case with the lascannon.

In short, its a very poor defense of lascannons/single-shot d6 damage weapons. The comparison to multimeltas in the prior sentence is also sus, as multimeltas are at least 2 shots each.

Note that I'm not saying the weapons are equivalent or that LC are the best thing ever. D6 weapons could do with a min 3 rule. HH have one shot to get that 12 damage whereas you'll have multiple D6 weapons in opposition. You couldn't just make LC D3+3, because they're so widely available unlike the railgun.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

VladimirHerzog wrote:
feth variable damage weapons.

Make lascannons do flat 4 damage
Make melta do flat 4 (6 if within half range)

Too much. Marines can push tons of LC into a list without breaking a sweat, which would break any unit that is W3/4/8 ( Spawn, Grots, Gravis, Terminators, Crisis, Broadsides, Cents ). It's exactly why Voidweavers were so brutal and why Bananas were able to weather that at W5. I don't think there are any units at W4 that have a spoiler FNP or -1D.

**VladimirHerzog**

Daedalus81 wrote:

Too much. Marines can push tons of LC into a list without breaking a sweat, which would break any unit that is W3/4/8 ( Spawn, Grots, Gravis, Terminators, Crisis, Broadsides, Cents ). It's exactly why Voidweavers were so brutal and why Bananas were able to weather that at W5. I don't think there are any units at W4 that have a spoiler FNP or -1D.

Brightlances and Darklances are more easily spammed than lascannons AND are better weapons (4 is their minimum damage) and theyre not exactly breaking the game apart

And its not a problem if they start spamming anti-tank weapons, they'll just get punished by someone bringing lots of chaff

**EviscerationPlague**

Daedalus81 wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:
I think hes trying to say that people underestimate how good D6 damage is, and hes trying to justify that by pointing out that Hammerheads can do 10-12 damage while vindicators can consistently put out 8-10 damage per turn.

The problem with that argument though is that Hammerheads don't do d6 damage, they do 6+d3 damage +3 auto MW, which is not even remotely comparable to d6 damage (and is objectively far and away superior). Likewise, while Vindicators do d6 damage, they are doing that on the back of d6 shots rather than just 1 shot as is the case with the lascannon.

In short, its a very poor defense of lascannons/single-shot d6 damage weapons. The comparison to multimeltas in the prior sentence is also sus, as multimeltas are at least 2 shots each.

Note that I'm not saying the weapons are equivalent or that LC are the best thing ever. D6 weapons could do with a min 3 rule. HH have one shot to get that 12 damage whereas you'll have multiple D6 weapons in opposition. You couldn't just make LC D3+3, because they're so widely available unlike the railgun.

Okay so whats the excuse you're giving the Dark Lance and Bright Lance?

**Gadzilla666**

Daedalus81 wrote:
VladimirHerzog wrote:
feth variable damage weapons.

Make lascannons do flat 4 damage
Make melta do flat 4 (6 if within half range)

Too much. Marines can push tons of LC into a list without breaking a sweat, which would break any unit that is W3/4/8 ( Spawn, Grots, Gravis, Terminators, Crisis, Broadsides, Cents ). It's exactly why Voidweavers were so brutal and why Bananas were able to weather that at W5. I don't think there are any units at W4 that have a spoiler FNP or -1D.

Errrmm......you just listed "Grots", which I assume refers to "Grotesques", which have a 5+++. Also, Paragon Warsuits have -1 damage. That's off the top of my head.

**chaos0xomega**

VladimirHerzog wrote:
feth variable damage weapons.

Make lascannons do flat 4 damage
Make melta do flat 4 (6 if within half range)

That still doesn't fix anything. Lascannons and meltas went from being able to destroy any non-superheavy vehicle in the game in a single hit to needing an average of 4-6 hit to destroy the typical vehicle. The problem is lascannons are still priced as though they are one-hit killers that are able to actually accomplish something. Making them flat damage 4 doesn't change that, it just cements the fact that they will need an average of 4-6 hits to kill their primary targets instead of allowing for hot dice getting you there in 2-3 hits. They still need a points adjustment. If we are to believe that lascannons are the premier anti-tank weapon platform for certain factions, then their abilities need to reflect that. If they are just a heavy hitter, but one which doesn't necessarily destroy targets on its own, then it needs a points adjustment to reflect that.

Note that I'm not saying the weapons are equivalent or that LC are the best thing ever. D6 weapons could do with a min 3 rule. HH have one shot to get that 12 damage whereas you'll have multiple D6 weapons in opposition. You couldn't just make LC D3+3, because they're so widely available unlike the railgun.

I don't particularly want Lascannons to be as powerful as a Hammerhead, but as it stands, as "widely available" as lascannons are, they don't get fielded all that much because they are too expensive for what they actually do - even in armies that don't have a lot f other good AT options available lascannon based AT systems are generally the last worst choice. Go ask Thousand Sons players why they never field quad-las predators despite ranged AT being considered the factions #1 weakness.

This is a pretty big indicator that lascannons are not in a good place and need to be adjusted somehow, and making them D3+3 is a perfectly legitimate way of accomplishing that.

Too much. Marines can push tons of LC into a list without breaking a sweat

They can... but they don't.

**nekooni**

chaos0xomega wrote:

Too much. Marines can push tons of LC into a list without breaking a sweat

They can... but they don't.

Yeah, because lascans suck being D6. Duh.

Playing salamanders obviously scews things for me, but ignoring the +1 towound I'd still go with MMs all day right now.
D6 is not reliable, melta solves the issue at closer ranges. Lascans need something to fix it at full range, maybe 2d3 is the answer? average 4 damage, no 1 damage hits, but not too consistent.

**Insectum7**

Melta doesn't even need the close range bonus to compete because it already has double the shots of the Lascannon.

**EviscerationPlague**

Insectum7 wrote:
Melta doesn't even need the close range bonus to compete because it already has double the shots of the Lascannon.

Which leads to the age old question of how valuable range is. Unfortunately, not too much

**Daedalus81**

VladimirHerzog wrote:
Daedalus81 wrote:

Too much. Marines can push tons of LC into a list without breaking a sweat, which would break any unit that is W3/4/8 ( Spawn, Grots, Gravis, Terminators, Crisis, Broadsides, Cents ). It's exactly why Voidweavers were so brutal and why Bananas were able to weather that at W5. I don't think there are any units at W4 that have a spoiler FNP or -1D.

Brightlances and Darklances are more easily spammed than lascannons AND are better weapons (4 is their minimum damage) and theyre not exactly breaking the game apart

And its not a problem if they start spamming anti-tank weapons, they'll just get punished by someone bringing lots of chaff

I mean you could fill up on scourges/ravagers and war walkers, but that's kind of the extent of it. Marines have dreads, razorbacks, predators, tacs, drop pod devs, quad las relics, sternguard, etc.

It's not like saying Kabalites can stand in cover like a marine and blast away and expect to live as easily. They're paying 95 for 1 shot. Marines pay 105 for the same wounds with better armor and AoC. They'd save LC on 4s in cover.

Ravagers get you 9 where predators get you 12. War Walkers get you 18, but for like 800 points. So, yea, I suppose you could go really hard, but I'm betting the edge will be on marines with Iron Hands extra AP, RR1s, and move and shoot and pods. They would win the trade game.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Gadzilla666 wrote:
Errrmm......you just listed "Grots", which I assume refers to "Grotesques", which have a 5+++. Also, Paragon Warsuits have -1 damage. That's off the top of my head.

Good point - forgot about that and Paragons.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Go ask Thousand Sons players why they never field quad-las predators despite ranged AT being considered the factions #1 weakness.

Well, I will ask myself why I don't...

And primarily it's because I like the Vindicator a lot more with S10 giving me that edge on battesuits et al. A vindicator is essentially a quadlas pred ( average 3.5, anyway ), but just tougher. I could see myself running a predator again some day if I can ever get around to painting it properly.

They can... but they don't.

Right and I will agree they're not fantastic, but they're not necessarily anemic either. Occasionally I'll reroll damage on the demolisher, but that's not practical for massed D6.

**Insectum7**

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
Melta doesn't even need the close range bonus to compete because it already has double the shots of the Lascannon.

Which leads to the age old question of how valuable range is. Unfortunately, not too much

I disagree there. Range is hugely important, because you can't do any damage at all if something is out of range, and having good range means you can keep the platform in a more defensible position. Boards are smaller these days, and the LOS blocking terrain is more effective, so leveraging range is a little harder. . . But any situation where you can shoot at something that can't shoot because it lacks the range is good times.

**Gadzilla666**

EviscerationPlague wrote:
Insectum7 wrote:
Melta doesn't even need the close range bonus to compete because it already has double the shots of the Lascannon.

Which leads to the age old question of how valuable range is. Unfortunately, not too much

And also leads to the question: What the

are Heretic Astartes supposed to use for ranged AT? We only get multi-meltas on: Hellbrutes, the Death Guard only MBH, and various fw units.

@Daedalus: Like, seriously Daed, I don't have problems killing tanks/monsters at range, but everything that I use for that purpose is made out of resin. So, what's your answer? "Just use fw"? "Punch them to death"? "Bring a Knight"? Because any of those answers are going to be problematic for some people.

**DominayTrix**

GW could always add something that interacts with the number of wounds, kind of like how grav interacts with the save. For example, "If the target has a wounds characteristic of 6 or more, a successful hit roll does an additional 1-2 automatic hits (these do not generate further hits)."

**Niiai**

Nazrak wrote:
Feel to me like a big part of the tank problem in 40K is there's no real disincentive to charging them with infantry. As if a tank's gonna stop politely while you chuck grenades down its pipes. Getting up close to a fully-functional tank, whether you're running towards it or it's driving towards you, should be a borderline suicidal move for all but the heaviest, toughest infantry.

Tyranid exocrines have only blast shooting weapons. A great reason to charge it. Good design. (8th edition bad touch.)

**Daedalus81**

Gadzilla666 wrote:
@Daedalus: Like, seriously Daed, I don't have problems killing tanks/monsters at range, but everything that I use for that purpose is made out of resin. So, what's your answer? "Just use fw"? "Punch them to death"? "Bring a Knight"? Because any of those answers are going to be problematic for some people.

Well, CSM is lacking the updates still.

Helbrute Plasma is D3 S8 AP3 D3 ( available on Contemptor, too of course ). Slap a missile launcher for 115 on and go to town. A contemptor can shoot twice as much for 50 more points, which seems fair.

I don't recall all the rumors, but the other viable options would be VC, Oblits, and melta Termies. Obliterators will ride a knife's edge depending on points with double shooting going away.

**chaos0xomega**

nekooni wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:

Too much. Marines can push tons of LC into a list without breaking a sweat

They can... but they don't.

Yeah, because lascans suck being D6. Duh.

Yes, this is quite literally the point that I have been making, thank you.

Well, I will ask myself why I don't...

And primarily it's because I like the Vindicator a lot more with S10 giving me that edge on battesuits et al. A vindicator is essentially a quadlas pred ( average 3.5, anyway ), but just tougher. I could see myself running a predator again some day if I can ever get around to painting it properly.

I too will ask myself. I said: "because lascannons suck. Thats why I opted to get 2 vindicator laser destroyers and a land raider achilles (I don't run both the vindis and the achilles in the same list) - because either option is infinitely better than running 3 laspreds. I'll probably be replacing those with a trio of War Dog Executioners though."