I also disagree with the statemnt of armies having troubles against vehciles. i have played for a very long time. there are many anti-armor options in every codex, its up to the players to choose to utalise them or not.
OP, you have no clue. While tanks became more fragile individually, a group of tanks is now much more resilient. You can't just put a glance on each of 3 tanks every turn to effectively neuter them all game long. You have to put all 3 hits on one tank to get rid of it, leaving the other two unharmed and ready to return fire.
Of all the threads in all the forums in all the world you had to post into this one.
I think your problem is you brought a mech list to 6th edition.. Obviously people were upset with mech spam in 5th, therefore GW added the hull point idea. I personally love the hull point idea the most about 6th edition, but I play Necrons so I cant complain
The way I see it is this. Last edition I could pen a land raider 4+ times and would not roll a 5+ on the chart?. I just find hull points to make the game more systematic, and less reliance on the roll of the dice. Its time for a change, its clear that GW wants the game to go towards a infantry core, with flyers and vehicles as support. This is for the best.
Vehicle heavy armies will have to get used to using terrain. Sitting in the open and getting shot by every weapon on the table is not the best method for saving hull points. increased vehicle mobilty in the new rules should allow vehicles to dart from cover to cover whilst destroying what units they expose themselves to.
hurrah for the death of the parking lot/ rhino wall!
So, lets see now, taking a ton of glancing hits (glancing do NOT mean paint scratching, it means that the vehicle got penetrated throu and throu, without hitting crew or vital parts of the tank, it can mean a shattered gun sight, it can mean a treadwheel going out of alignment, not fully immobilizing the vehicle, but still makes it harder to drive the thing. etc etc etc.. ) failing to glance or penetrate is paint scratching.
Imho, the new rules actually makes vehicles behave more like their real world counterparts, they are VERY easy to hit in CC, cause you do not go 50kpm in battle conditions, atleast not if you want to shoot something, unless your on a highway with no cover what so ever. Crew do get scared when bullets and anti tank missiles comes flying and allmost penetrates the vehicles, so think of it that when the tank looses all of its hullpoints, the crew abandons the tank cause they really really do not want to stay in it when it finally blows up. General rule when I was in the army, is that you needed 3-4 hand held anti tanks (60mm ish ones) to safley take out a tank (cause not all of them will hit the optimal place.) and no I dont tank about hitting a MBT in the front, rather APC or AFV.
So all in all hullpoints is good for me. (but then again, 28mm should not have air plane models, nor should they have actual artillery pieces on the board other than in specific scenarios, or in a direct fire mode)
Basically vehicle spam will not do you as much good this edition. It can still be powerful from a gun line perspective but it is not a brainless haha tactic anymore. Vehicles will still have their uses and will still be powerful in their own right but will not completely dominate the battlefield. Even today vehicles have to have infantry and air support. If they go into a city during a war all by themselves they are asking to be set on fire, imoblized, trapped etc. Look at the gun on the warthog. It actually does not always pierce a tank but that 30mm gatlin cannon will glance it to death by destroying the tracks, wheels, engine, guns etc. and turn it into a torn up wreck.
It is better to have a gun and not need it rather than need a gun and not have it.
I think the fact that blast markers do full strength damage will also hurt the parking lot list. (which is good)
From the view point of someone who loves his monolith, I'm not too fussed about Hull point.
For one its not that easy to glance them to death Consider the number of str 8 weapons an army has, divide it by 6, and thats the threat. Haywire will be one to look out for.
The thing is, it may even help the Monolith if the meta moves away from mass vehicles and mass Melta. Though I guess we will have to wait for the dust to settle on that.
I have to sort of side with the OP here, yes Mech spam had become much more dominant on the battlefield - the reason for this? GW dropped the points costs of vehicles massively in 5th edition Codexes and people could take them in large numbers. If GW wanted to stop people taking tanks maybe a better option than Hull Points would have been raising the price again?
Something (from a game point of view) did have to be done about vehicles, as it stood they were very powerful and could be hard to kill (Unless you had railguns! lol) - I think with Hull Points they have gone to far, 4 Glances on a Landraider? With Tau I can do that in a turn (2 at the most), a unit of Deathrains will be able to kill 1 AV 11/12 model a turn without breaking a sweat....
Tanks are TANKS, but with the Hullpoint system they may as well have well been constructed with papermache armour.
We will see a massive reduction on the number of tanks on the Battlefield now, and thats very good for those armies that struggled to deal with Tanks. The few Tanks that do turn up will be dead all the quicker as all those anti tank weapons and fliers will have fewer targets to fire at. The problem lies for those Armies that "Relied" on tanks to be successful, Eldar for example are screwed now, the vehicles fall over if you sneeze on them and Footdar options are limited in the extreme. Tau have battlesuits to fall back on, and I think all Battlesuit Armies will be back in vogue, Ork Kanz lists are dead etc etc. Imperial Guard have some hope as they are one of the few Races that can currently have "Big" tanks in a squadron (so if a tanks survives a turn they can move it to the back of the queue) - Not many other races have this ability with main battletanks (Although I suspect Imperial Guard will be going full Air Cav anyway now).
In the spirit of fairness, its good for the chaps that used to struggle with armour, its awful for the guys that rely on it (and spare some sympathy for the people that have spent a few hundred quid on Tanks over the last few years).
The big winners are armies that can take bikes/jetbikes/jet packs and fliers - people used to complain about the tank wall? By the end of this edition I think people will be crying out for a nerf on these guys, fighting Bloodangels now for example is just going to be Assualt Marine (troops) and Psyker Spam. Expect Dark Angels when they come out will be Bike Spam (Go go Raven Wing!).....
Something did have to be done, but I have to agree with the OP, Hullpoints just arent scaleable with the amount of weapons out there that can glance a tank with ease.
GW has made a mistake here though I think, Tank sales are going to plummet, and most Armies can have a maximum 3 fliers - Less sale of vehicles is going to hurt their profit margin (I predict as the new Codexes come out either more Flier Squadrons will be available or new Tanks with some sort of Hull Point modifier will be released - in a way they already have, quantum shielding anyone?)
Seems to me that a lot of folks arguing that tanks suck now haven't actually played any games yet.
Of all the threads in all the forums in all the world you had to post into this one.
You also forgot that GW just recenly raised the prices on tanks about 1 month ago. This already hurt their prices seeing that my group refuses to spend 80$ for a LR.
I dont think vehicles will be completely gone. Maybe LRs will sit this edition out, however rhinos,razorbacks,ect are extremely cheap. They have a simple job and that job is to transport infantry.
Annoyance through mass firepower WORKS.
Second, if you're not taking a Melta weapon or a high strength weapon of some sort in outflanking squads that have that have that option, you're doing it wrong. Ork Kommandos with two Rokkits are a dirty sentence to a Steel Legion player. So is Tau Stealth Suits with a Fusion Blaster.
Last edited by AlphariusOmegon20; 01-07-2012 at 22:59.
"From the fires of betrayal, Unto the blood of revenge, We bring the word of Lorgar, The Bearer of the Word, The favored son of Chaos; All praise be given unto him, For those that would not heed, We offer praise to those that do, That they might turn their gaze our way, And gift us with the boon of pain, To turn the galaxy red with blood, and feed the hunger of the Gods." - Excerpt of the 341st book of the Epistles of Lorgar.
Waaagh! Gutzag - my first 40K Plog
I quite enjoy hullpoints myself. Vehicles may die a but quicker, but during that time they will likely actually be doing something. The meta in the last several editions rewarded throwing just enough shots at a vehicle to make sure it wouldn't be firing anything. If you did that then the enemy vehicle was a rolling paperweight next turn. Your best chance to fire was to get a shot off in the first turn, if the enemy let you shoot after that then they were doing it wrong.
Hull points still allow you to destroy a vehicle by applying a lot of firepower to it over time (or by actually hitting it with proper anti-tank weapons to try to pop it in one shot) but if they only aim for glancing hits then it is going to keep firing for the duration of its life. So even if it ends up blowing up it likely did more in the end then a vehicle in the previous edition. And just as a personal preference I like units that interact with the game rather than sit around being bullet sponges. Also, keep in mind that the new wound allocation rules mean that a great way to prevent anti-tank fire is to flank units and hit them from the sides or rear to score kills on anti-vehicle weapons tucked away in a unit. The days of near-invincible heavy weapons is largely over and it is superior maneuver and positioning that killed it. I can see flankers, deep strikers and fast units becoming great assets for supporting vehicles.
As a Dark Angels player I know what my Ravenwing flankers and Deathwing deep strikers are going to get tasked with in the early game. Now that denial and disruption are valid tactics the game has a lot more interesting in-game tactical potential than it did before. GW finally put a new tactical tool in our kits, let's use it.
Last edited by Ronin_eX; 01-07-2012 at 23:03.
Your first point in the list above is wrong though - AP1/2 is functionally the same as before when penetrating except that if you destroy the vehicle via the damage table it will always explode. There is also no chance of destroying it outright through a glancing hit, which you could do with an AP1 weapon before.
As to the second, holofields were silly good before so I don't mourn this change. Plus all skimmers now get the advantage of getting a jink save if they move.
Do you think your experience might owe something to playing 6th ed with 5th ed armies? If tanks are easier to kill you'll likely see people taking less of them and more infantry. That combined with other rules changes will likely mean people pack less anti tank into their armies. Rather than every squad maxing out on melta guns you are likely to see far more plasma guns and flamers for instance. That could lead to a new "meta" with fewer vehicles but also less threats to them. At the moment you have weaker vehicles with exactly the same ammount of anti tank as before so they would seem to die far quicker.
Played a few games against our local mech spamming ig player today with my crons, and after months of suffering at the hands of leafblower in my local meta it was sweet,sweet justice to see my nice balanced army blow him off the table. The rage induced was almost table flip worthy. That said he was a good sport in the end and is now redesigning his lsits, as 6th has made many units that were not viable... viable! Only problem I see for some armies is terminator spam lists, some dex's just dont have the firepower or low ap weapons to deal with it. Thunder hammer/storm shield dudes are still going to be a massive pain in the neck though.
On hull points, I think the system is fine, it means you can't just steamroll up the board with av 14 anymore or try choke it with mass chimera, and given that it's easier to get a cover save with them now they are not quite as vulnerable as the OP makes out, I feel it better simulates that tanks still need infantry support against enemy infantry that get to close while also encouraging the use of cover against AV weapons.
I actually think that's is a good rule, In most of the games your Transports, Tanks, etc.. end destroyed or completly useless, but that's some kind of game luck. What is completly sure is that there is not even 1 player of 40k that haven't been scrwed up with a 4 turns glancing hit that doesn't destroy your tank but makes it useless with stun, at least now you will be dead in 3 turns, but all those turns of glancing hits you will still be able to do something with that vehicle.
Necrons will be the bane of all tanks and vehicles this edition, as all they need is a few sixes, and pop goes the tank.
I don't think that vehicles are now useless, but will require more thoughtful deployment.