Aimed shooting against vehicles

[bot]

all troops may choose to shot at chosen location, they pick up the location from the datafax and roll to hit with an extra save modifier. taking extra care with aiming. this rule may be used as:
- once per battle per every model on the table
- accessible for everyone, all the time
- Strategy card that lasts for entire battle and for one side, during competitive battle

...

[Adoni-Zedek]

Ooh..I don't know about that. That's awfully powerful, especially against, say, a White Scars army. With a -1 or -2 to-hit mod, you can negate the 4+ save against light weapons that a bike normally provides. Plus, most characters don't even blink at a -2 to hit. A terminiator Captain has a BS of 8 (including targeter) Even with a -4 to hit, he still hits on a 3+, or 2+ at short range. This rule benefits high BS armies much better than low BS armies.

[tturen]

As a wargear card or one shot strat card that might be fine but otherwise I think the aiming impact is to powerful and as mentioned clearly helps high BS armies more than low BS armies.

[James 40K Champ ***]

Isnt that what 'crack shot' is for?

And even then thats one of the best strat cards going. Vehicles get punished enough as it is.

[Yarlen Fireblade]

The completely random outcome of weapon location impacts is really the only thing that makes 2nd edition vehicles.... remotely survivable, if anyone on the table could pickout locations on vehicles then everyone is automatically going to either shoot the sponsons OR tracks.

AV of 16 to 18 is pretty much automatically penetrated with most genuine anti armour weapons.
After (easy) penetration most results over 4 are generally fatal to the vehicle and everyone inside & closeby.

I'm sure most IG players just laugh when a lascannon or assault cannon hits the turret front.
In other words, not a viable rule forget about it.

[James 40K Champ ***]

yeah.. if you want to choose your location.. get into hand to hand with it.. say with an assault squad with melta bombs.. that will do the trick, you get to choose location, just takes (a little) more effort.

On a side note, we have modded the rules for exploding vehicles killing all passengers to give them an armour save. Rhino's (and similar transports) were death traps before meaning one HW shot not only took out your tank, but a whole squad too, nasty. So now youl prob lose a good proportion of the squad, but some will survive being allowed to exit the destroyed vehicle at the start of their next turn.

Makes it all a lil more fun, and Id say pretty realistic too

[tturen]

An armour save is a good rule change for passengers. Do you apply it to the crew?

What about terminators as this change would make them far for dangerous?

[James 40K Champ ***]

As far as I remember the crew dont get it, they just get killed.. in most cases the tank is blown up anyay at this point.

As far as Terms are concerned, I agree they become too strong.

Perhaps a slightly different approach would be better, say any model on board only dies on a 1 or 2.. this way terms will still die, and also lower armoured armies with transports dont suffer too much.

[Adoni-Zedek]

We play the "explosion tears through vehicle" results in each "selected" model being hit by a frag missile (S4, -1 save mod, blast, so Flak still gets a 6+ save. An exploding motor administers a S5 -2 sv hit to each model on board, and if the fuel tank explodes, each model takes a hit from a heavy flamer. If the ammo explodes, each model on board takes the same hit as any units nearby. That goes for the crew, as well as any transported models. We also allow the crew to "bail out" if it survives the destruction of the vehicle, forming a new unit of infantry.

[Yarlen Fireblade]

As a default rule in our system we allow targetting of vehicle locations with modifiers based on criteria (generally size but vehicles speed modifiers still play a very imporant part) but we've fundamentally altered the way vehicles act offensively and when taking damage.

Depending on race and equipment, there is a fairly good chance that vehicle crews (and by connection passengers) will survive the 'destruction' of their vehicle, of course destruction is a relative term ;D

Targetting of soft components like i mentioned above like tracks and sponsons arn't an issue in our rules simply because we removed the 'vehicles flips like a pancake and murders everyone inside and in close proximity' results
I'm no vehicle expert but i can't possibly see how a 30+ ton tank can flip when you destroy maybe 1 kilogram of track linkage.

I think i can comfortably say that this situation in the actual world has never happened and will continue to have never happened for the future of heavy medium and light armoured vehicles.
If you murder a vehicles tracks or wheels in our game the vehicle is simply immobilised, all remaining damage is transfered to the closest connecting location (the hull) as the energy of the attack overpenetrates the propulsion system and strikes the hull.

[James 40K Champ ***]

'removed the 'vehicles flips like a pancake and murders everyone inside and in close proximity' results'

thats a shame.. maybe slightly unrealistic.. but very very fun So long as pasengers get some kind of protection.

[tturen]

I'm frankly OK with vehicle crews being destroyed with the vehicle in most cases. Given what the vehicles cost this is fine.

I must say I like Adoni's strength of hit determined by fax location result. As a general though I think a fixed roll save would balance all the transported troops (terminators included) rather nicely though even if it is not as realistic.

Yarlens system and complaints regarding the current system are both valid. The rules changes though are considerable and I know our group would not accept the complete revision they entail.

I know I've always hated the 'flip' results myself but there is no doubt that they do help balance the power of heavy vehicles. Change those results and you need to make other changes as well to compensate for the effects. I suppose such 'flip' hits could be treated as hull penetrations and track destroyed.

[Yarlen Fireblade]

I know I've always hated the 'flip' results myself but there is no doubt that they do help balance the power of heavy vehicles. Change those results and you need to make other changes as well to compensate for the effects. I suppose such 'flip' hits could be treated as hull penetrations and track destroyed.

It would make an awful lot more sense if the vehicle was just immobilised and went out of control (if it was moving) then the attacker got to roll for an additional hit against the hull, with modifiers if they were appropriate.

The biggest problem is that quite a few armour values, a few that particularly come to mind are the turret fronts on the Leman Russ & Demolisher are too high, or comparatively the vehicle cost is too low.
The Leman Russ is no doubt the ultimate tank simply because it's almost impossible to destroy & it's awfuly cheap for what you get.
Even the difference in Turret front compared to hull front doesn't make a whole lot of sense, yes the turret mantle is the most heavily armoured part of the tank, but not so much so that the hull pales in comparison.
The majority of Leman Russ tanks that are taken out are due to.... questionable rules & abilities of particular units.

A few that come to mind are teleporting Terminators & flying high, or flying low Swooping Hawks with meltabombs, or tooled Exarchs and crazy ass table after table shokk attack guns, or D-cannons (provided you can hit it)
It takes away from the game when you have to use cheese just to reliably takeout one of your enemies assets.

[James 40K Champ ***]

Le mans can be taken out, you just have to focus heavy weapon fire rather than expecting 1 or 2 lascannons to destroy it.

Assault squads with melta bombs (stuck to the hull) are a very viable option and a good choice for destroying any tank, just takes a lil more effort to pull off.

And dont forget Le mans are the guards main asset.. look at their troops.. they are obviously a tank army, so it SHOULD take some considerable effort to destroy them.

Also consider other options, the tanks are slow, meaning you can out manouver them and limit their targets.. you dont have to destroy a tank to take it out the battle.

[tturen]

I agree that the turret values are to high for the Russ. When Ive fought them I've focused my attacks on their flanks and limited my possible data fax hit locations when possible just to knock off the ablative and cripple the beasts. Certainly a tough tank that helps balance the IG's poor infantry as Bots mentioned.

On the issue of allowing a track hit of a 6 to also penetrate the hull it makes perfect sense. This way that stupid 'flip' result can be ignored and the vehicle will be crippled or destroyed to help preserve the game balance of the lost 'flip' result. Balance requires that more than a simple immobilization result from a track hit takes place.

[James 40K Champ ***]

The russ has heavy front armour because it is designed to plow straight forward destroying everything in its path, if you want to take it out, its not hard to engage it with melta bombs which can be placed on weaker armour, and also due to its low speeds, just go round the back of it and hit its weaker armour.. just because something is giving you a hard time straight on, does not mean its too good, just means you should rethink how you play against it.

[bot]

-2 modifier seems all right. most of the troops won't be able to use it.
sm dreads gain a lot, but characters don't have the much access to heavy weapons anyway. exarches can take this missle launcher, but the weapon struggles to beat 18 armour really. have u noticed that?
the real issue comes with bs5 hvy wpns wolves but it's not the problem of 'choosing the location' but their low point cost vs. bs5+heavy weapons.
bike shouldn't cost more than 5 points anyway. i've mentioned that before.

[Yarlen Fireblade]

also due to its low speeds, just go round the back of it and hit its weaker armour.. just because something is giving you a hard time straight on, does not mean its too good, just means you should rethink how you play against it.

Sounds like your IG opponent needs to rethink how he uses tanks, noone moves tanks unless they have to.
2 heavy bolter sponsons a lascannon and a battle cannon can cover anything and everything on the battlefield, moving a tank towards the enemy is asking for it to get raped by close combat units with Meltabombs/Krak grenades/powerfists.

The Russes Turret front AV is too high that's the only beef i have with it, i'd suggest AV 23, 1 point above the hull front.
Not frigging 25!, 25 is almost lascannon proof and therefore way to high.
No SM tank has an AV value over 22.

[James 40K Champ ***]

'bike shouldn't cost more than 5 points anyway'

Heres what you get when you buy a bike:
-You become immune to psycology
-You gain huge speeds that can be accelerate to at any point
-You gain the ability to hit and run attack
-You gain extra armour that is pretty much a 4+ save against all light arms fire.
-You can always rappid fire, no matter how fast you are going.
-You get a targeter
-You are very likely to keep the enemy in close range, compounding the targeter.

Are you seriously trying to tell me all that is worth only 5 points.?

When you buy a jump pack what do you get?
-18" movement
.. thats it.

The two modes of transport are not comparable what so ever.

If you think bikes are not your thing, or dont suit how you play, then thats all fair play, that doesnt warrant a decease in price however.

On the other hand, I DO think I can get great results with a bike army with the codex prices.. so why would they need a decrease.

Imagine a bike army where a bike costs 35 points.. say you spend your full armour allowance, youd still have around 30 bikes! 30 bikes which could sit in your deployment zone, firing 60 bolt gun shots a turn.. with targeters, and the extra armour provided by the bike itself to protect the 'immune to psycology' marien.. that is completly INSANE.

[James 40K Champ ***]

Sorry to go off topic there.

'noone moves tanks unless they have to.'

Sounds like your tables need more scenery, if an oponents tank sits there not moving, it should be really easy to negate it from the game using cover..
Only time a tank should be stationary is if it has really good arcs, or it is watching an important part of the table.

'moving a tank towards the enemy is asking for it to get raped'

Perhaps it is? which is why tanks are meant to be backed up by infantry, it should be a combined attack.

I dont think having a turret armour value that high is a bad thing.. it just means that from the wrong angles its got an invulnerable location.. so shoot more heavy weapons at it..!

You cant compare Guard and SM tanks, would you compare their infantry?

I stand by my point that you can out manouver Le man russ, I know they are hard opponents to fight, Ive been there and felt the pain, but you are fighting a tank army, what do you expect..

If your really really having trouble against them, gear your army towards them, Im pretty sure a landspeeder or two (or equivelant) up the ass of a Leman russ is going to fuck it up a bit.. going at that speed, guard will struggle to hit it, and you can come out of nowhere and blow the tank in one fell swoop.

40K is like any strat game.. if something is beating you, figure out how to combat it and change, dont just keep doin the same shit and blaming the units.