Does anyone else hope Extra Armor gets reworked?

[trigger]

+1 armor saves? For reals? People want to see AV13 Dreads, AV14 Ironclads, and AV15 Land Raiders/Leman Russ? You gotta be kidding me

A save against glancing hits or shaken/stunned results could be an option, I suppose, but realistically I don't see them making a drastic change like that, which would impact at least a half dozen books. I think the slightly more expensive transports with slightly cheaper options (the old 50+5 recipe) made sense, the current price model not so much. But hey, transports are a good money sink so why not keep them cheap in 6th...

I totally agree the +1 idea is silly and not well thought of

but....
3rd ed transports good
4th ed transports bad
5th ed transports good

I'm going with 6th they will be naff again.

[Poncho160]

Im of the opiion that EA should be a one time only effect of ignoring the first glancing / penetrating hit. Thats how the extra armour should work.

+1 to armour levels would be too much, without an accompanying price rise.

[Theocracity]

I definitely do not share this perspective. Especially when Thunderhammer/Stormshield Terminators have a greater survivability than a Land Raider when hit with a melta shot at close range. Especially when someone drop pods in a group of guys with combi-meltas and turns your "high resilience" tank into a pile of slag, while a unit of the aforementioned Terminators would just kind of laugh it off 2/3's of the time. If anything I think vehicles are too easy to pop, rather than too difficult.

I don't mean to be (too) snarky, but do you have advice for armies that don't have drop pod combi-meltas and terminator armor?

One key difference between Terminators and Land Raiders is that it's not statistically impossible for a Gretchin to kill a Terminator. Melta can kill either. Therefore, if you use weapons that can't kill vehicles you're screwed; you're better off taking a weapon that could kill vehicles well and kills heavy infantry sort of okay.

Making vehicles tougher incentivizes using only anti-vehicle weapons even more, because now you need more redundancy to get the same effect.

[Chapters Unwritten]

A save that is lost the first time it's failed could work, too.

[Monospot]

Ask Ork Battlewagons with Deffrollas how important extra armor is....darn near vital.

[Szalik]

Ignoring the first penetrating hit would be ok in my opinion.

[big squig]

extra armor is a must if your playing with vehicles. It allows you to still move and units that move win games.

[Chem-Dog]

Downgrading Stunned to Shaken is extremely useful in quite a number of situations:
- Countering first turn traffic jams
- Tank Shock!
- Getting out of assault [range]
- Making sure that your transport can actually transport it's contents rather than sitting unable to move all game

All the reasons I routinely take EA on every single Tank I use in my Steel Legion army, getting prevented from shooting sucks bad enough but it's nothing compared to Johnny Chainfist's tender caress while you've been fumbling with the keys in the ignition.

but....
3rd ed transports good
4th ed transports bad
5th ed transports good

Same as Chaos Codexes.....Coincidence?!

The simplest fix I can think for Extra Armour would be to allow the owning player to decide which effect Shaken has on his Vehicle, Being able to scoot is fine for transports and vehicles that benefit from staying mobile but it of precious little use to Captain Basilisk (or Brother Sergeant Whirlwind). Discount Can't Move or Can't Shoot.

Now, do you run away from that lone Obliterator or do you hose him?

[Theocracity]

The simplest fix I can think for Extra Armour would be to allow the owning player to decide which effect Shaken has on his Vehicle, Being able to scoot is fine for transports and vehicles that benefit from staying mobile but it of precious little use to Captain Basilisk (or Brother Sergeant Whirlwind). Discount Can't Move or Can't Shoot.

I like the idea! Though I wouldn't give the choice to the unit that's getting shot - its not like you rationally choose which systems still function when you're taking hits. I'd give the choice to the shooting player, as that way he can have some degree of control over what he's firing at - stop that transport, or silence that tank.

[Chem-Dog]

its not like you rationally choose which systems still function when you're taking hits.

No, but as an experienced tank crew with years/decades/centuries of practical experience, you'd know where to put those extra plates to make sure the most vital systems are best protected.
If a bad jolt is likely to screw a system, you make sure that that system is backed up or better protected than it would be in the factory default.

Slat armour, for example, perfect example of additional stuff bolted on to fighting vehicles to mitigate certain weaknesses in a particular set of circumstances.

[ehlijen]

Extra armour doesn't need a fix. It used to be a no brainer, but now you actually need a reason to take it, which is as it should be.

What it does is allow you to try avoid the second shot of whatever just managed to stun you. That's a big deal, especially in CC. Or you know, keep up the reckless race for the enemy lines with a transport.

[meltedwing]

I don't mean to be (too) snarky, but do you have advice for armies that don't have drop pod combi-meltas and terminator armor?

One key difference between Terminators and Land Raiders is that it's not statistically impossible for a Gretchin to kill a Terminator. Melta can kill either. Therefore, if you use weapons that can't kill vehicles you're screwed; you're better off taking a weapon that could kill vehicles well and kills heavy infantry sort of okay.

Making vehicles tougher incentivizes using only anti-vehicle weapons even more, because now you need more redundancy to get the same effect.

Well, let's see. Tau have railguns. Eldar and Dark Eldar both have fairly long range tank popping weapons...

Is there even a single army out there that can't throw a strength 8, 9 or 10 shot across the board? Even Nids have those barrage weapons, not that I remember what their strength is.

Not that I'm committed to the idea of +1 armor (as thats pretty hoopty) or -1 on the chart (as that is also pretty hoopty), but the current iteration of extra armor is just lame. When you get shot, you have a 1 in 6 chance of rolling exactly the thing that it affects, and all it does is change it to "can't shoot". That's a very situationally desirable item that statistically doesn't kick in all that much and could very well create a situation you absolutely don't want. Like if you have a long range weapon toting vehicle that doesn't need to move in the given situation and got tagged from 48+ inches away and now can't shoot. Lame.

I think there are much better things that EA could be doing, like others mentioned, negating the first pen/glance would be cool. At least you're guaranteed that it will do something during the battle (assuming you get damaged at all, and if you aren't then hey, no complaints!).

[ehlijen]

That's a very situationally desirable item that statistically doesn't kick in all that much and could very well create a situation you absolutely don't want. Like if you have a long range weapon toting vehicle that doesn't need to move in the given situation and got tagged from 48+ inches away and now can't shoot. Lame.

Extra armour never makes things worse. All it does it lift a restriction in some cases. If you get stunned but didn't want to move, EA did nothing bad to you. If you don't think you'll need it, don't take it.
If you wish to sit there and take a second hit from the gun that just stunned you and not even try to move into cover, don't take EA.

And for there being a 1/6 chance of it actually being useful: so what, many things you buy without knowing you'll need them. Power weapons cost similar points and might not actually help (target could have an invul save or might have failed the armour save anyway) or you might buy an invul save and never get hit with an armour ignoring attack. And as EA tends to cost less than one sixth of the vehicle + cargo it goes on, I don't see the big deal.

[Aliarzathanil]

Vehicles, especially cheap transports are good enough without ignoring pens and getting improved armor.

[Bergen Beerbelly]

Having EA ignore the first glancing/penetrating hit is rediculous. Imperial vehicles already get awesome things to help them basically ignore the core rules of the game, like Power of the Machine Spirit, and you guys want even more? Sometimes that one penetrating hit on an imperial vehicle is a xenos's only chance at destroying something, like say, a Land Raider. Which is hard enough for xenos like Orks to penetrate anyway. Basically what your asking is for something like a land raider to be impervious to everything long enough to get your deathstar unit to exactly where you want it without any kind of danger to the tank before it's too late.

It usually only takes 2 turns to get a Land Raider to where it needs to be with it's cargo. on the way in, it can already ignore every single hit with smoke launchers on a 4+ in one turn, still fire a weapon system even if it's stunned, and keep on moving due to EA. Making it ignore the first glancing/penetrating hit would just make people spend way too much firepower to take it out.

I'm sure some people are thinking that isn't so bad, but what if there are 4 of them on the field?...now almost your entire army can make it across the table in total safety.....how in any way is that considered fair for any non imperial army?

[Oppressor]

I think that extra armor's affect is fine. It's extra armor's points cost that is too high. Drop it down to 10points at the least.

[Theocracity]

Well, let's see. Tau have railguns. Eldar and Dark Eldar both have fairly long range tank popping weapons...

Is there even a single army out there that can't throw a strength 8, 9 or 10 shot across the board? Even Nids have those barrage weapons, not that I remember what their strength is.

Not that I'm committed to the idea of +1 armor (as thats pretty hoopty) or -1 on the chart (as that is also pretty hoopty), but the current iteration of extra armor is just lame. When you get shot, you have a 1 in 6 chance of rolling exactly the thing that it affects, and all it does is change it to "can't shoot". That's a very situationally desirable item that statistically doesn't kick in all that much and could very well create a situation you absolutely don't want. Like if you have a long range weapon toting vehicle that doesn't need to move in the given situation and got tagged from 48+ inches away and now can't shoot. Lame.

I think there are much better things that EA could be doing, like others mentioned, negating the first pen/glance would be cool. At least you're guaranteed that it will do something during the battle (assuming you get damaged at all, and if you aren't then hey, no complaints!).

Discussing xenos anti-tank options is kind of off topic so I won't dwell on it, except to say that having a few S8 shots doesn't fill most armies with confidence - especially if the dreaded vehicle damage chart can negate even more than it already does.

Beyond that, I think Ehlijen said it well. Extra armor is a useful and not too expensive option for the vehicles that utilize its benefits, and unnessecary on vehicles who don't.

No, but as an experienced tank crew with years/decades/centuries of practical experience, you'd know where to put those extra plates to make sure the most vital systems are best protected.
If a bad jolt is likely to screw a system, you make sure that that system is backed up or better protected than it would be in the factory default.

Slat armour, for example, perfect example of additional stuff bolted on to fighting vehicles to mitigate certain weaknesses in a particular set of circumstances.

Right, but this is 40K... you wouldn't want to anger the machine spirit by distrusting its holy form in ways that are not blessed by its holy STC.

On a more serious note, for that rationale to make sense you'd have to choose which system you're protecting at game start. Otherwise multiple stun results could affect different systems, which wouldn't make sense - are they shifting armor plating mid battle? From a game point of view I also prefer the shooting player keeping control in his turn - I think it could provoke more interesting tactical decisions.

[Johnnyb]

I actually find that shaken and stunned results are mostly pointless....... But then again I play Templars and have extra armour and machine spirit on everything!!

On a serious note I would only ever consider taking EA on Rhino's and Razors, probably the same for every other PA player out there

[insectum7]

extra armor is a must if your playing with vehicles. It allows you to still move and units that move win games.

Agree 100% on that. The only Vehicle I don't put the EA on is the Whirlwind. And honestly, for Rhino's I think of it as pretty much free since the Cost of Rhinos dropped to 35 in this edition.

If anything, make Rhino's cost more and EA cheaper


That said, I put it on my LR's mostly because it looks the nutz. Sometimes it comes in handy though. Think of it as reducing the chance of not being able to move by half.

[blurrymadness]

Mostly useful right now on dreads and things; still too spendy. I would like them to change it to modify the damage table, chance pens to glances on a d6 roll of 1 or 2, or similar.

On that note, I want AP1 do go back to Glances become Pens instead of Instant Explode Result Forever Ever.