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.

I've been out of the game for a bit so forgive me if I'm being ignorant...

Is there any difference in the model price (or any advantage) to bringing a unit on board via transport vs. deep striking a unit?

Do you think there should be?

From what's been revealed in 10th, is there an advantage to using transports over deep striking?

10th remains to be seen overall. But, it seems the transport can now move before the contents disembark, which is a significant change to “everyone out, then I’ll go park up”.

Both allow you to get a unit somewhere relatively/entirely unscathed

Advantage of teleportation is you can turn up wherever is best at the time. Disadvantage is it’s a One and Done. Once you’re down, you’re down.

Advantage of transports is they can provide mobile line of sight block, and pick you up if somethings gone wrong - it’s not a one and done. Main disadvantages? They’re additional points, and your opponent can literally see then coming and react accordingly (not just blocking movement, but pulling back or blowing it up).

Overall, transports for me will be determined whether they’re Mobile Coffins. I’ve been transport adverse ever since 2nd Ed, where you lost the tank and you pretty much lost the unit too.

In 8th/9th I don't find transports as useful as deep strike if you have the option. The board is too small and the games too short for getting back in the transport and redirecting somewhere else to be especially viable, and deep strike can put a unit exactly where you need it without any risk of it getting shot on the way. Sure, it can be screened out, but 9" isn't a lot, and having to disembark before movement limits your transported unit's threat range anyways.

In prior editions the huge downside to deep strike was that you didn't know exactly when your troops would be available, and once called in you didn't know exactly where they'd scatter to, or if they'd make it at all. Transports were the alternative that let you control where your unit ended up and when, at the disadvantage of being on the board and consequently vulnerable. I liked that distinction.

Now with deep strike being perfectly reliable in 8th/9th, it's pretty rare that I'd actually want to deploy a DS-capable unit by transport instead, particularly since I've already paid for the unit's innate deep strike capability. DS is just a better delivery method for most things.

The more common uses for transports I find are things like:
-Providing mobility for a unit that doesn't have the option to DS.
-Keeping some mobility while allowing the embarked unit to count as starting on the table (eg for meeting the 50% threshold).
-Exploiting special rules provided to the transport (eg assault ramps).

That last point seems to be what GW is leaning into with 10th. They've shown that every transport has some kind of ability, giving them utility beyond just having a higher movement value. As well, the change to allowing units to disembark after movement will enable them to extend a short-range shooting unit's threat range a bit. Plus most of them have firing ports (everything old is new again!) that allow onboard troops to fire out, so a unit may not strictly have to disembark to be useful. And this ties in with the stated goal of making vehicles more durable too.

So it seems to me like DS will continue to be a reliable delivery system (unless the rules for DS have changed, which is very possible) while transports will be more of a hybrid delivery system/force augmentation/direct combatant, depending on the transport in question.

I don't think there should be different points for a unit based on how you bring them on board. That's just added complexity for no real benefit.

If the unit has some sort of DS like deployment option native to it (like termies)? Then any pts increase should just be built into the unit.

If you want a transport? Then just pay the extra pts for said transport.

As for the usefulness of each method?
That depends upon what you want that unit to be doing. And how.
For example:
In my Grot army I have the ability to pay CP, put a grot squad on a Tellyporta Pad, & DS them.
●This has rarely proven effective enough. (I almost always have better things to tellyport)
A squad of grots ported across the board somewhere is likely just 40pts & 2cp of dead unit.
●Giving those Grots a truck on the other hand HAS been effective. Very effective. A truck full of grots can hold an objective just fine, dismounting if they need to preform an action, or speed across the board if necessary. The truck is also waaay tougher than the grots its carrying. My trucks have absorbed firepower that wouldve simply erased the grots had they been on foot. (One of my trucks, with a KFF, has survived being stomped on by a Warlord Titan) But because the enemy had to chew through the truck 1st? The grots survived to do thier job.
AND modeling each grot teams truck adds character to my force.

 Stormonu wrote:
I've been out of the game for a bit so forgive me if I'm being ignorant...

Is there any difference in the model price (or any advantage) to bringing a unit on board via transport vs. deep striking a unit?

Do you think there should be?

From what's been revealed in 10th, is there an advantage to using transports over deep striking?

Edit for more detail/clarity:
Transporting is generally bad. The things you want to transport (Slow short range and/or melee units) will likely have to give up a turn of doing what you want them to (punching things in the face) after they get out of the metal bawkses (because GW makes it very difficult if not impossible to charge after disembarking and./or deep striking. Most of the things that don't care about getting out of the transport didn't need to be in it in the first place. Deepstriking isn't much better than transporting, except you can't really blow up in the deep strike before you get out of the deep strike.

Breton wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
I've been out of the game for a bit so forgive me if I'm being ignorant...

Is there any difference in the model price (or any advantage) to bringing a unit on board via transport vs. deep striking a unit?

Do you think there should be?

From what's been revealed in 10th, is there an advantage to using transports over deep striking?

Edit for more detail/clarity:
Transporting is generally bad. The things you want to transport (Slow short range and/or melee units) will likely have to give up a turn of doing what you want them to (punching things in the face) after they get out of the metal bawkses (because GW makes it very difficult if not impossible to charge after disembarking and./or deep striking. Most of the things that don't care about getting out of the transport didn't need to be in it in the first place. Deepstriking isn't much better than transporting, except you can't really blow up in the deep strike before you get out of the deep strike.

If transporting/Deep Striking is bad for you that's generally because you've built, or are playing, your army poorly.
These are tools/options. And each has a time & place/proper use.

10th looks friendly to transports so far. Might be similar to 6th which was very mech heavy.

In 9th I find both forms useful although I lean towards transports more for certain factions like drukhari and guard. If you play marines then they're less appealing barring black templars who can make fairly efficient mechanized infantry.

ccs wrote:
I don't think there should be different points for a unit based on how you bring them on board. That's just added complexity for no real benefit.

If the unit has some sort of DS like deployment option native to it (like termies)? Then any pts increase should just be built into the unit.

If you want a transport? Then just pay the extra pts for said transport.

As for the usefulness of each method?
That depends upon what you want that unit to be doing. And how.
For example:
In my Grot army I have the ability to pay CP, put a grot squad on a Tellyporta Pad, & DS them.
●This has rarely proven effective enough. (I almost always have better things to tellyport)
A squad of grots ported across the board somewhere is likely just 40pts & 2cp of dead unit.
●Giving those Grots a truck on the other hand HAS been effective. Very effective. A truck full of grots can hold an objective just fine, dismounting if they need to preform an action, or speed across the board if necessary. The truck is also waaay tougher than the grots its carrying. My trucks have absorbed firepower that wouldve simply erased the grots had they been on foot. (One of my trucks, with a KFF, has survived being stomped on by a Warlord Titan) But because the enemy had to chew through the truck 1st? The grots survived to do thier job.
AND modeling each grot teams truck adds character to my force.

Do you think Terminators in a Land Raider should be viable? If so how do you make it so without making Land Raiders OP for melee units without the option of DS?

@vict those are not mutually exclusive. Points are not that critical

ccs wrote:

Breton wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
I've been out of the game for a bit so forgive me if I'm being ignorant...

Is there any difference in the model price (or any advantage) to bringing a unit on board via transport vs. deep striking a unit?

Do you think there should be?

From what's been revealed in 10th, is there an advantage to using transports over deep striking?

Edit for more detail/clarity:
Transporting is generally bad. The things you want to transport (Slow short range and/or melee units) will likely have to give up a turn of doing what you want them to (punching things in the face) after they get out of the metal bawkses (because GW makes it very difficult if not impossible to charge after disembarking and./or deep striking. Most of the things that don't care about getting out of the transport didn't need to be in it in the first place. Deepstriking isn't much better than transporting, except you can't really blow up in the deep strike before you get out of the deep strike.

If transporting/Deep Striking is bad for you that's generally because you've built, or are playing, your army poorly.
These are tools/options. And each has a time & place/proper use.

No, its because - as I mentioned - the units you want to transport/Deep Strike are likely to miss an extra turn beyond the one(s) they spend inside the transport or off the table (because of how much more limited charging is from those openings) and most units that don't care about that didn't need to be transported or deep struck. And if you had a better counter argument than "Learn to play, newb" you would have led with that. Now it's entirely possible you could reply with some version of a Sternguard Drop Pod bomb, but we all know that's a one-trick pony, and not a "generally speaking" commentary on transporting and to a lesser extent Deep Striking so I'll be hoping for better.

The SM Faction Focus did spill that Assault Ramp USR's are coming back allowing SOME transports to allow units to charge when disembarking. I wouldn't be surprised to see Open Topped return with the Assault Ramp with similar/same rules - think Trukks/Scout Landspeeders/ Drukhari Space Boats etc.

Plenty of units benefit from transports. Especially with the latest arms race of indirect fire which I personally don't enjoy. Tau, GSC, guard, orks,drukhari hell even marines are recently showing up with rhinos which was a bit of a shock to me.

@OP- the advantages to transports I value are protection of more fragile units like the Grots example or anything t3 really. Also helps to survive and flip alpha strikes and dodge indirect fire until your ready to deploy the contents. On that note I do agree with Breton on the assault unit disadvantage to an extent. So those are units not typically transported unless they are either incredibly fragile or just plain cheap and obsec.. incubi and BT assault intercessors for two examples.
But a lot comes down to the transport itself and then the unit. For example cadian shock troops inside a chimera is 135 pts. This is one of the most efficient mechanized troops units due to cost and firepower. And the unit can't be marker lit or other corner case benefits like that. So if your opponent drops in and smokes a LR for example that area could be cleared. In this case they leave behind a scoring units with guns. Incremental advantages like that add up.
BT do a good version of mech due to multi melta and invuln access on flying rhinos plus ability to disembark after moving meaning they basically have no real drawback and add legitimate guns and armour saturation.

I see less use cases for meq but pretty much all xenos factions have had many good showings featuring transports. Your a returning player getting a bead on things no? Idk how long you've been gone or how far back you go but 9th is actually very well balanced compared to earlier editions. You can definitely play all infantry. Mech doesn't dominate but isn't trash either so there is a very broad meta with many viable builds depending on what faction you shop from ranging from skew lists to tool boxes. As an early hater of 9th I've come to enjoy it.

I think 10th is going to be a lot more friendly to transports. Being able to fire from inside again, and disembark after moving are huge boons.

Deepstrike has always been front loading all your mobility in one shot. Which is good in some situations.
Transports give less mobility, but spread over the whole game, and can change and react.

Both protect you from alpha strikes.

Board size looks to be the same, so mobility is not as huge as it was on larger tables. You still need some (and this is very unit/army dependent) It does look like some ranges might be dropping, but we don’t have the whole picture yet. Terrain has always been very house/table dependent. and how much LoS issues you need to drive around impact the usefulness of transports/DS in general.

dominuschao wrote:
Plenty of units benefit from transports. Especially with the latest arms race of indirect fire which I personally don't enjoy. Tau, GSC, guard, orks,drukhari hell even marines are recently showing up with rhinos which was a bit of a shock to me.

@OP- the advantages to transports I value are protection of more fragile units like the Grots example or anything t3 really. Also helps to survive and flip alpha strikes and dodge indirect fire until your ready to deploy the contents. On that note I do agree with Breton on the assault unit disadvantage to an extent. So those are units not typically transported unless they are either incredibly fragile or just plain cheap and obsec.. incubi and BT assault intercessors for two examples.
But a lot comes down to the transport itself and then the unit. For example cadian shock troops inside a chimera is 135 pts. This is one of the most efficient mechanized troops units due to cost and firepower. And the unit can't be marker lit or other corner case benefits like that. So if your opponent drops in and smokes a LR for example that area could be cleared. In this case they leave behind a scoring units with guns. Incremental advantages like that add up.
BT do a good version of mech due to multi melta and invuln access on flying rhinos plus ability to disembark after moving meaning they basically have no real drawback and add legitimate guns and armour saturation.

I see less use cases for meq but pretty much all xenos factions have had many good showings featuring transports. Your a returning player getting a bead on things no? Idk how long you've been gone or how far back you go but 9th is actually very well balanced compared to earlier editions. You can definitely play all infantry. Mech doesn't dominate but isn't trash either so there is a very broad meta with many viable builds depending on what faction you shop from ranging from skew lists to tool boxes. As an early hater of 9th I've come to enjoy it.

Lets also separate out the Transports, and the extra crew for a vehicle shooting more guns thing - usually the open topped guys. But generally speaking transporting/deepstriking will cost you at least 20% of the value of the unit being so moved. If it's a melee unit, that could easily turn into 40%

The games lost 1+ turn going from what was it, 6 turns + extras on a 4+/5+/6+ whatever? Add to that losing a turn (or more) when you climb in and then out (because you've lost at least one turn of shooting/melee) - and if you're melee you're (currently it appears this may be changing on at least a small scale) losing a second turn if you had to move to deploy in charge range. Currently many of those transport vehicles are fragile - until relatively recently they were also marked up for having a transport capacity that actually cost you turns of work out of what was being transported too.