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.

Instead of using what type of unit can get in a transport the wound number should be used, as this number roughly scales with the size of the model(s). Characters number of wounds should be halved for the purpose of this rule. This would also solve the ridiculous limitation of primaris models not being able to embark on a rhino/razorback.

Example : This transport can carry a maximum of 10 wounds of <CHAPTER> INFANTRY models.

This would be 5 primaris marines, or 3 centurions, or 10 regular marines.

This makes sense, though there are a few units which this will hurt, examples being Ork Nobs and Meganobs, which will both take up 1 more capacity than they do now.

That said, it has been an historical thing that rhinos cannot carry terminators, you had to buy a land raider for that. but, perhaps terminators would be less crap if they had a cheap option for transport.

I think it could work, but it might be ruined by a few specific units.

 some bloke wrote:
This makes sense, though there are a few units which this will hurt, examples being Ork Nobs and Meganobs, which will both take up 1 more capacity than they do now.

This could be compensated by giving their transport a higher wound number.

 some bloke wrote:

That said, it has been an historical thing that rhinos cannot carry terminators, you had to buy a land raider for that. but, perhaps terminators would be less crap if they had a cheap option for transport.

I think it could work, but it might be ruined by a few specific units.

Termis surely need help to make them viable. As for hurting some units, you will never find a perfect rule that fits all.

 p5freak wrote:

 some bloke wrote:
This makes sense, though there are a few units which this will hurt, examples being Ork Nobs and Meganobs, which will both take up 1 more capacity than they do now.

This could be compensated by giving their transport a higher wound number.

 some bloke wrote:

That said, it has been an historical thing that rhinos cannot carry terminators, you had to buy a land raider for that. but, perhaps terminators would be less crap if they had a cheap option for transport.

I think it could work, but it might be ruined by a few specific units.

Termis surely need help to make them viable. As for hurting some units, you will never find a perfect rule that fits all.

the thing is that a trukk can currently carry 10 nobs and a megamek with KFF, or 12 boys.

if you gave the trukk a capacity of 22 (assuming half wounds on characters) then suddenly it can carry 22 boys.

If this is mainly based around giving primaris a ride, I might suggest a "primaris rhino" would be a better option? Because regular rhinos do have more of a constraint than the size of their hold - the size of their doors!

 some bloke wrote:

If this is mainly based around giving primaris a ride, I might suggest a "primaris rhino" would be a better option? Because regular rhinos do have more of a constraint than the size of their hold - the size of their doors!

You'd need a different name, because the Rhino Primaris already exists. It is Index Only, meaning GW pretends it doesn't exist and offers no real rules support, but it exists.

 p5freak wrote:
Instead of using what type of unit can get in a transport the wound number should be used, as this number roughly scales with the size of the model(s). Characters number of wounds should be halved for the purpose of this rule. This would also solve the ridiculous limitation of primaris models not being able to embark on a rhino/razorback.

Example : This transport can carry a maximum of 10 wounds of <CHAPTER> INFANTRY models.

This would be 5 primaris marines, or 3 centurions, or 10 regular marines.

It's not ridiculous since it's intentional. You think they wouldn't put restrictions? Haha. They want you to buy repulsors.

So a Razorback can transport 6 wounds worth. So it can transport 6 Marines, but cannot transport 5 Marines + 1 Captain (all non-primaris in power armour).
I do not think this idea will work well.

tneva82 wrote:
It's not ridiculous since it's intentional. You think they wouldn't put restrictions? Haha. They want you to buy repulsors.

I know why they do it. And because i disagree i dont buy repulsors, i dont even buy primaris troops.

Tygre wrote:So a Razorback can transport 6 wounds worth. So it can transport 6 Marines, but cannot transport 5 Marines + 1 Captain (all non-primaris in power armour).
I do not think this idea will work well.

I didnt say a razorback can transport 6 wounds.

 p5freak wrote:


I didnt say a razorback can transport 6 wounds.

so how many would they carry?

the problem is that characters throw this out of whack. it's sensible for a razorback to carry 6 wounds worth of models, and as you say, it scales well with the size of bulky models.

An easy fix is to give a little footnote in all characters saying "This character counts as "X" wounds for calculating transport capacity". EG a captain still counts as 1. termy captain counts as 2, and so on.

However, this does entirely seem to be based around getting primaris marines into rhinos, in which case, such an overhaul isn't necessary.

new upgrade for Rhinos:

Primaris Harnesses:
The rhino can only carry primaris marines, and has a transport capacity of 5.

so choose which type of marine you want it to carry, and it can only carry them this game. The wording will need tweaking to fit the sentiment, but essentially make rhinos pick marines or primaris during army construction. Then GW can release a conversion kit for a primaris rhino and make more money, and people can happily play "counts as" to not spend any, and primaris marines get a ride.

This is to simplify how many, and what units can get into a transport. Characters could be excluded from this, e.g. one INFANTRY CHARACTER doesnt count towards the total number of wounds.

 p5freak wrote:
This is to simplify how many, and what units can get into a transport. Characters could be excluded from this, e.g. one INFANTRY CHARACTER doesnt count towards the total number of wounds.

ok, but now you're suggesting ghazkull doesn't take up any space in a transport, which he's more or less the same size as.

if characters are free then you'll end up with a horde of characters in the fastest transport they can buy. if you limit it to only one character is free and the rest use wounds, then any unit which uses 2 characters will suffer a lot.

At this point it's already quite simple how many models can embark in a transport, and there are a few units with special rules saying they take up more space. The main change which it looks like you're trying to steer this towards is letting primaris and centurions get into normal transports. For most armies, the existing rules work well, so the easiest change is one which directly addresses the problem, which is that primaris have to pay through the nose just to not walk. and for that, the "primaris harnesses" upgrade would be a viable option, and keep the level of restriction which GW has clearly deemed necessary. Perhaps 5 primaris rolling around in a rhino was too cheap for how good it was, and if they added points to the rhino, it wold be too pricy for tac's.

The proof of the pudding would be in playtesting this - but there's already quite a few issues raising their heads here. your solution only works for armies which have high wound count models who currently cannot embark. Going back to orks, a battlewagon has a capacity of 20. increase it and it'll be OP full of boys. leave it the same, and it's not big enough to carry meganobs any more.

a "Size" stat would fix all this. Make marines size 3, guard size 2, grots size 1, primaris size 4, 'nid warriors size 5, and size 6+ is going into the bigger stuff territory. then you can integrate size with both cover and transport, and make the game a little bit more immersive to boot.

A size stat would fix a whole lot in 40k, but that's too complicated apparently.

 p5freak wrote:
This is to simplify how many, and what units can get into a transport. Characters could be excluded from this, e.g. one INFANTRY CHARACTER doesnt count towards the total number of wounds.

So you're suggesting we simplify the current rules while simultaneously suggesting a new rule that requires a bunch of caveats and special exemptions? That seems counter-productive. I'm not really sure what the problem is with the current transport rules that your rule solves. It seems to just be exchanging one set of semi-arbitrary restrictions for another.

 p5freak wrote:
This is to simplify how many, and what units can get into a transport. Characters could be excluded from this, e.g. one INFANTRY CHARACTER doesnt count towards the total number of wounds.

Playing devil's advocate here - does this mean that you can put infinite number of infantry characters in a transport?

some bloke wrote:
ok, but now you're suggesting ghazkull doesn't take up any space in a transport, which he's more or less the same size as.

40k is not about true scale. Transports in general are way to small.

some bloke wrote:
if characters are free then you'll end up with a horde of characters in the fastest transport they can buy. if you limit it to only one character is free and the rest use wounds, then any unit which uses 2 characters will suffer a lot.

I said one character could be excluded from this wound number rule. Not two, not ten, one character.

some bloke wrote:
The main change which it looks like you're trying to steer this towards is letting primaris and centurions get into normal transports.

Yes, thats what i want. One metal box fits all. Count the wounds, add one free character, and you are good to go.

BaconCatBug wrote:A size stat would fix a whole lot in 40k, but that's too complicated apparently.

Its adding another stat, which is not necessary.

skchsan wrote:Playing devil's advocate here - does this mean that you can put infinite number of infantry characters in a transport?

No, you cant. The maximum point limit of a game prevents you from using an infinite number of infantry characters.

 p5freak wrote:

skchsan wrote:Playing devil's advocate here - does this mean that you can put infinite number of infantry characters in a transport?

No, you cant. The maximum point limit of a game prevents you from using an infinite number of infantry characters.

But point limit is a player generated agreed amount, not a set number as per rules.

If I were to tickle your fancy, under your proposal to not count INFANTRY CHARACTER to the wound count limit, what's stopping someone from spending 72 points on a barebone rhino and putting 1928 points worth INFANTRY CHARACTERS embarked in it?

This could render gorgons as useless. I'd have to oppose such a change.

 p5freak wrote:

some bloke wrote:
ok, but now you're suggesting ghazkull doesn't take up any space in a transport, which he's more or less the same size as.

40k is not about true scale. Transports in general are way to small.

some bloke wrote:
if characters are free then you'll end up with a horde of characters in the fastest transport they can buy. if you limit it to only one character is free and the rest use wounds, then any unit which uses 2 characters will suffer a lot.

I said one character could be excluded from this wound number rule. Not two, not ten, one character.

some bloke wrote:
The main change which it looks like you're trying to steer this towards is letting primaris and centurions get into normal transports.

Yes, thats what i want. One metal box fits all. Count the wounds, add one free character, and you are good to go.

BaconCatBug wrote:A size stat would fix a whole lot in 40k, but that's too complicated apparently.

Its adding another stat, which is not necessary.

skchsan wrote:Playing devil's advocate here - does this mean that you can put infinite number of infantry characters in a transport?

No, you cant. The maximum point limit of a game prevents you from using an infinite number of infantry characters.

If you only make one character free, then a second character will more or less fill a transport. people who use units with a minor character plus a normal character (EG a mek and a warboss) will be stung a lot.

You also haven't answered how to work this around the fact that, currently, you can fit 10 meganobs in a battlewagon. with your proposed rules, it will be only 6. But if you increase the capacity, then you will open it up to huge amounts of boys.

A size stat will not slow the game down at all, particularly if it's introduced for the sole purpose of transport capacity, and then gets introduced into more rules as time goes on.

As your sole aim is to allow primaris and centurions into rhinos, then perhaps the best option is to add some extra rules to the transports in question rather than cause such upheaval for all the other races in the game.

It's also worth noting that a centurion almost certainly couldn't get in and out of a rhino without the rhino having some serious modifications to its doors. I think that not only would a "Primaris Harness" and "Centurion Harness" be awesome conversion potential, it would also give you this result which you are angling for.

As it is, I think that this idea has some merit when used in the closed-box of space marines, but as soon as you apply it to other races, it doesn't work. I also can't see why a chimera can only carry 12 guardsmen, but could somehow carry 12 guardsmen plus Nork Deddog, the bloody-great bullgryn bodyguard. surely the space yielded by not carrying Nork would allow for another 4 guardsmen or so.

All in all, I think the better option is to allow players to choose before a game what their rhino can carry, pay the relevant points for the upgrade, and then they're stuck with it for the whole game. making transports carry a number of wounds only scales in the world of space marines. Plus, there are units which have specifically been designed to not be transported, and costed accordingly. allowing such units access to transports will mean they are where they need to be on turn 2, not turn 4, and so get more turns of efficient use, and this will have to be costed accordingly. In GW Style, this means that Rhinos will be re-costed based on always carrying the most expensive units they can.

It's a neat idea, but it introduces a bunch of problems elsewhere, especially with xenos armies and characters. If the main goal is just to let certain marines sit inside certain transports, it's probably wiser to write rules that do that rather than painting with a broad brush and causing lots of wonky interactions elsewhere.

Unless there's some objective to this change other than putting certain marines into certain marine transports?