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.

So the Hammerhead is one of the most feared tanks in the 40k universe, with almost unstoppable vehicle smashing rail rounds. Until you get on the tabletop, when it whiffs almost every time.

It's a cool model, with cool fluff and an awesome history and I would love to be in a position where putting one down in deployment strikes the fear of God into my opponent.

There has always been suggestions of making it a line attack, but that makes it an auto hit weapon, which I think is too much. So I was just wondering if it used the scatter mechanics from blast weapons, whether that would be more balanced?

So you pick a point on the enemy vehicle (for example). You then roll for scatter as per blast rules, subtracting BS etc. Then you draw a line, up to the maximum range of the weapon, that goes from the end of your barrel through the point at which the scatter ended up. The attack hits every unit under that line, but stops when it hits a vehicle, fortification or monstrous or gargantuan creature.

Possible additional rule for it continuing past the vehicle/fortification/creature if it gets an explodes result or kills the creature outright. I'd imagine this to be at lower strength/ap (6/4 maybe)

That's not bad, though quite possible to cheese badly. Also, it would probably whiff even more than it already does: there's a reason why most people think single-shot small blast weapons stink, and a narrow line isn't any better for that.

My thought is this: Create multiple profiles, as follows.

Solid Shot: Range 72" Strength: D AP: 1 Primary Weapon 1
Tandem Shot: Range 60" Strength: 10 AP: 1 Primary Weapon 2
Guided Shot: Range 60" Strength: 9 AP: 1 Primary Weapon 1 Twin-linked, Tank Hunter, Monster Hunter, Lance, Lock-On Required

Lock-On Required: In order to fire the Railgun in Guided Shot mode, you must expend a markerlight token. This is in addition to any marker tokens expended to boost ballistic skill, ignore cover or fire seeker missiles.

I think giving it the haywire burst mechanic would be nice.

I also like the idea jade_angel proposed and I like the idea of a rail beam hurting anything in it's path but I think jade is right it would probably still miss just as often if not more. It's just not predictable enough - nor is it reliable enough as it is now to be a go-to unit.

Make it STR D, AP 0. (+3 to the results) Done.

Ordinance might help?

I could see D3 wounds/HP.

Another interesting idea is to make it a beam attack, although then we're getting into some crazy ideas.

Actually what do you think of this:

S10 AP1 Ord1 Beam 60"

That might work but why not strength D?

Martel732 wrote:
That might work but why not strength D?

Because then my Eldar won't be "special".

More because D should be very, very rare.

I could see the argument to make the Railgun D, but then we implicitly accept Distort weapons as D.

I suppose adding D3 Wounds/HP would be semi a introducing D without actually using it. Which shouldn't be done.

So some alternate thoughts:
-Solid Shot becomes D, goes up in price accordingly (probably not a ton)

Or

-Make Ordinance, otherwise the same

Or

-profile: S10 AP1 Ord1 Beam 60"

If a gun the size of the hammerhead railgun doesn't have Str D, then nothing in the game should.

Distort weapons are already Str D.

You guys know there's already a sD variant of the railgun right?

Bharring wrote:
More because D should be very, very rare.

BullGak

Tell that to eldar.

It really should be a D weapon at best tau will only ever get out 3.

Its also already a very bad weapon for a 1 shot weapon in todays game of invisibility, deep striking alpha strike isms.

Its not like people are asking for the submunitions to be D.

bcm2100 wrote:
You guys know there's already a sD variant of the railgun right?

No, didn't know that.

The problem isn't with the railgun itself, it has the maximum strength and lowest AP available in the game. (excluding D)

The problem is that people want a gun that destroys big expensive vehicles in a single shot - the newer rules are steering away from that type of effect and quite rightly so.

Vehicles are already far easier to destroy than similarly priced monstrous creatures, having no saves and usually less hull points than the equivalent have wounds. Add in the fact that they can be one shot-ed by any gun with AP:2 or less and it becomes pointless.

Saying you want a gun with table range S:10, AP:1 tankhunter, lance, twinlink, +1 extra on the chart....... is just plain silly. For the moderate amount of points a hammerhead costs it's perfectly killy, compare it to a lascannon predator or a Lemonruss vanquisher. If you make the railgun even more likely to destroy a vehicle in a single shot then you need to make it cost an appropriate amount of points, removing landraider/monoliths should be hard.

Martel732 wrote:

bcm2100 wrote:
You guys know there's already a sD variant of the railgun right?

No, didn't know that.

Its also on the flying super heavy flier. and only gets 1 shot....still..

I will tell that to Eldar. My Wraithguard actually haven't hit the table since the new Dex came out. And I've seen other people play theirs with the old 'Dex's rules.

That said, the Railgun is still a conventional directed energy weapon. It doesn't transcend physics. So wouldn't the maximum traditional stats be sufficient? Not that GW is as consistent in the rules anyways.

Long story short, I could see it being S D (although at a moderate price hike), but still think Ordinance would be enough.

Now, I'd argue that the ion cannon should be the default, and the multi-profile version should be 55 points. Also, possibly reduce the Hammerhead to 12/11/10 armor since it can Jink for a 3+. Leave the Skyray at 13/12/10, or even 13/13/11, because its main value is as a durable markerlight platform.

As for Ordnance, the only reason I don't like that is that it makes all other weapons snap-shoot - that's why I went with Primary Weapon instead on my variant.

I'm less interested in having the Hammerhead be able to reliably one-shot a tank and more in having it able to reliably remove a hull point or two with a risk of destroying it. Having the one railgun shot miss, or just bounce off is rather infuriating.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The Leman Russ Vanquisher has similar problems, only worse since it's BS3 and has no markerlights, though at least it has Armorbane, so if it does connect, it's gonna do something unless you're quite unlucky. Having a railgun shot get a 6 to hit then bounce off the front armor of a Night Spinner is frustrating, and with only one shot, if that happens, you're stymied for a turn.

Maybe some kind of special rule where the railgun has something like Haywire, where it will almost always (on a 2+) cause a glance, but also cause a pen if the die roll is sufficient?

" So wouldn't the maximum traditional stats be sufficient?"

No, they aren't. Look at the kill rate on modern armor and then look at the Hammerhead. It's disgraceful.

" My Wraithguard actually haven't hit the table since the new Dex came out. And I've seen other people play theirs with the old 'Dex's rules. "

Good for you. Doesn't help the rest of us who get no mercy and no breaks from Eldar players. All you are saying to be is that my BA would win against you 15% of the time instead of 10% of the time. Yippee. You are still using units way better than what the BA can field.

"- the newer rules are steering away from that type of effect and quite rightly so. "

Not rightly so. Vehicles are aced with one shot all the time with 21st century tech. The Tau should function like a modern army, not a retro-future lameass army of religious zealots with WWI tank hulls.

Won't Ordinance/Primary Weapon help out with ensuring if it connects it does something? What are the odds of it hitting but not hurting a tank that way?

Part of why like the Ordinance solution is the secondary effects. The Railgun is so much of a heavy weapon that aiming it is what they focus on. Any other weapons they fire at the same time aren't important, relatively, so they snapshot while the pilot focuses on using the Railgun optimally.

Besides, do you really need to fire a couple S5 missiles at the tank you just pumped a Railgun round into?

Needing a 5+ to explode a vehicle for a railgun the size of an MC is ridiculous. Hurting tanks in 7th ed is trivial. Just look at S6 spam. A single shot weapon needs to be devastating to be viable in 7th.

Wasnt the last serious Armor-heavy campaign the Israel/Hezbollah limited war a number of years ago?

The one where a tank would get disabled from the antitank firepower, and the problem was retrieving it when it was damaged but not destroyed?

Bharring wrote:
Wasnt the last serious Armor-heavy campaign the Israel/Hezbollah limited war a number of years ago?

The one where a tank would get disabled from the antitank firepower, and the problem was retrieving it when it was damaged but not destroyed?

I'm talking about the kill rate of the Abrams, Challenger and Leopard II. You normally can't salvage after getting hit with one of their main guns.

Are you applying real life situations to a scifi game?

 Desubot wrote:
Are you applying real life situations to a scifi game?

Only is as much as I think the Tau should function MORE like a real military. The Hammerhead should be lights out as an anti-tank weapon. Not lame like it currently is. And I wouldn't call 40K scifi, it's more retro-future. A genre which I normally abhor.

I also like the idea of giving it Ordnance and I'm not trying to say the costs have to be fixed (haven't figured out that bit yet). Fundamentally I wouldn't mind paying more for the tank if it's got a very good chance of erasing something from the board every turn. At the moment it just feels like you get maybe one successful hit per game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I also second the idea that Tau should feel like a modern force; the way they use technology and combined arms tactics is much closer to our real world than anything else in 40k.

Ok, all things considered, Ordnance is probably fine then, combined with the ability to use markerlights to ignore cover or boost BS. Given that, it'd probably be fine at its present cost - and Longstrike would be really, seriously nasty.

I don't mind the ability to take out tanks in one shot, and if anything can reliably do it, the Hammerhead is a pretty good candidate (as is the Vanquisher). On the other hand, I don't want a tool so effective that I'm likely to be cursed out for using one (like a Riptide with Ion Accelerator and EWO, which I won't play, even after being repeatedly stomped by drop pods).

The solid shot should be either Armorbane or Lance to give it that superior armor penetration the fluff states. The thing about destroyer is that it obliterates the target while the railgun generally just puts a hole through anything it hits.

There should be a HEAT style round that is still Str 10 but AP2 and inflicts D3 wounds or hull points per unsaved wound/armor penetration. Would be more reliable at killing MCs and medium/light armor targets but its more risky at penetrating AV13/14. Its really dumb that a Railgun has decent chance of blowing up a battlewagon but it can only take off 1 wound from a dreadknight.

Submunition should stay the way it is but just include it in the base loadout.

Str10 ap1 heavy 1 is good enough, if you want to improve it then give it ordnance, so you must snap everything else, gutted, thems the breaks.

But if we're talking gw here, I'm flat telling everyone that it's gonna be str d, that's just what's going to happen, we can all.see it coming.

How about bring back the Multi-tracker & Target Lock vehicle upgrades from the 3rd & 4th codicil and allow them to be brought in squadrons, with a special rule like oh; 'for each weapon targeting a target the squadron gets +1 BS against that target.'

Whilst the multi-tracker would be nice, it doesn't really improve kill rate, more survivability.

I fully expect a 3-tank formation that gives twin link and armour and flesh bane or something. I don't know that this is the best way, but anything to help would be useful.

If we're making the Hammerhead reliably knock out Land Raiders from across the board it's going to need one heck of a price rise unless we want it to be the vehicle-equivalent of a Riptide.