Brother RedAxe Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I have noticed that rhinos against tau even in 5th never make it past turn 2 or 3.The fact that even their most basic gun is str 5 with most being str 6, 7 or 10 the AV 11 of a rhino just doesn't hold up. While using Tau it was even possible to glance rhinos to death in 5th (weapon destroyed immobile and another of those = dead rhino) Firewarriors are able to that in one turn with one 12 man unit. now in 6th it is much easier for tau to destroy tanks but they are almost necessary against any rapid firing gun line, Our Dirge casters even giving a small chance of taking away over watch is worth the points to me. I was able to witness 12 firewarriors take out a 10 man squad of GH on overwatch just the other day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minigun762 Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I realized that with the increase of nightfighting rules, dropping rhinos means we decrease access to cheap and disposable spotlights for that first turn. Just something to consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the jeske Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 I was able to witness 12 firewarriors take out a 10 man squad of GH on overwatch just the other day. ok thats 24 shots hiting on +6 wounding on +3 then the SW saving on +3 and lets say he didnt pop totem. that is some very very lucky rolls on the tau side and very unlucky rolling on the SW side. tau would have to roll 10 x6' out of 24 rolls , then wound with all of them and then the SW would have to roll 10x1-2's . now am not going to say it cant happen , but basing the viability or need for rhinos or dirge casters on something like that isnt much an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julgolax Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Since when did a TANK become so pointless? Â You'd think a moving box of adamantium and ceramite would be more useful than THIS these days... Â Stupid move on GW's part, looks like I wont be buying any Rhinos anymore. ;) Â Good for me though, I wont have to spend $37.25 (as much as a 10 man squad of chaos marines) needlessly. :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khestra the Unbeheld Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Since when did a TANK become so pointless? You'd think a moving box of adamantium and ceramite would be more useful than THIS these days...  Stupid move on GW's part, looks like I wont be buying any Rhinos anymore. :)  Good for me though, I wont have to spend $37.25 (as much as a 10 man squad of chaos marines) needlessly. :)  Strictly speaking, a Rhino isn't a tank, nor should it be expected to be one. It's more like a station wagon: useful for getting the soccer team from point A to point B faster than their little legs can carry them, but not meant to survive doing so successfully while being fired on by the National Guard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr Shepard Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 I realized that with the increase of nightfighting rules, dropping rhinos means we decrease access to cheap and disposable spotlights for that first turn. Just something to consider. Â That's a very good point. Does the vehicle need to actually "hit" the target with one of its weapons in order to enlight it? If I'm not mistaken the rule book says a vehicle with a spotlight can use it after it fired its weapons. Does it mean the vehicle fire its weapon then it decide to enlight any visible unit or does it enlight the unit it hit? Â In that case the range of the rhinos standard weapons will limit the spotlight effectiveness since the vehicle has to move 6" to fire with 24" weapon. It's not a terrible range but the other option is fare more useful... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julgolax Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Since when did a TANK become so pointless? You'd think a moving box of adamantium and ceramite would be more useful than THIS these days...  Stupid move on GW's part, looks like I wont be buying any Rhinos anymore. ;)  Good for me though, I wont have to spend $37.25 (as much as a 10 man squad of chaos marines) needlessly. :(  Strictly speaking, a Rhino isn't a tank, nor should it be expected to be one. It's more like a station wagon: useful for getting the soccer team from point A to point B faster than their little legs can carry them, but not meant to survive doing so successfully while being fired on by the National Guard.  That's rediculous...  It's a tank, it has armor and tracks, it has an engine and weaponry.  The problem is it's not treated as such and as I said, has become pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
--eFTy--> Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Think the point is it's not a tank, it's an APC. Like the Bradley, sorta. You can't expect it to perform like an Abrams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minigun762 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 I realized that with the increase of nightfighting rules, dropping rhinos means we decrease access to cheap and disposable spotlights for that first turn. Just something to consider. Â That's a very good point. Does the vehicle need to actually "hit" the target with one of its weapons in order to enlight it? If I'm not mistaken the rule book says a vehicle with a spotlight can use it after it fired its weapons. Does it mean the vehicle fire its weapon then it decide to enlight any visible unit or does it enlight the unit it hit? Â In that case the range of the rhinos standard weapons will limit the spotlight effectiveness since the vehicle has to move 6" to fire with 24" weapon. It's not a terrible range but the other option is fare more useful... Â That's a good question. The rule doesn't mention hitting the target and it's not even clear that you need to spot the same target you fired at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julgolax Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Think the point is it's not a tank, it's an APC. Like the Bradley, sorta. You can't expect it to perform like an Abrams. Â I do not expect a Rhino APC to kill swathes of foes but I do expect it to be heavily armored considering it's valuable cargo. Â I just hope in 7th edition APC's will get 4 12 12 11 5 as they should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khestra the Unbeheld Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 That's rediculous... It's a tank, it has armor and tracks, it has an engine and weaponry.  The problem is it's not treated as such and as I said, has become pointless.  By your definition, a bulldozer with a rifle rack is a 'tank'.  I see I'll need to explain what a tank is. A tank is a combat-specific armored fighting vehicle designed around the express purpose of engaging and destroying other armored fighting vehicles, armed with a weapon system capable of defeating an enemy vehicle of equivalent combat capability and tonnage to itself. A Rhino is an armored personnel carrier, meant to move troops from one place to another, and is not expressly designed to engage and destroy things like itself. It isn't meant to be a tank, it isn't meant to act like one, function like one, or survive like one, unlike it's 'valuable cargo' which is, in fact, more valuable than the vehicle itself is in the same sense that the eggs inside an egg carrier are more valuable than the carrier itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circus Nurgling Posted October 29, 2012 Author Share Posted October 29, 2012 Think the point is it's not a tank, it's an APC. Like the Bradley, sorta. You can't expect it to perform like an Abrams. Â More like a M113. Bradleys are like predators <_<. Whether or not a bradley/predator is a tank is a point of contention, as it does have both a cannon and machine gun armaments, as well as a turret and crew. Going further, by both Oxford and Webster's definition: a tank is "a heavy armoured fighting vehicle carrying guns and moving on a continuous articulated metal track", so yes, a bulldozer with a rifle rack could be considered a tank, oddly enough, though I would think those guns would have to at least be mounted to a pintle of some sort. To counter your tanks are anti-armor argument, tanks were originally (and still are) purposed into anti-infantry and light vehicle roles, such as running trenches, destroying bunkers, machine-gun nests, and other infantry fortifications. Still, we're arguing semantics and if we're using the M113 analogy, it's an APC, a transport, first and foremost. That said, it can still mount a .50 cal which, by your own assessment is "armed with a weapon system capable of defeating an enemy vehicle of equivalent combat capability and tonnage to itself". Rhinos do as well, if you count the havoc launcher and even combi-bolter (though you'd have to roll a 6 on rear armor). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lepaca Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 I realized that with the increase of nightfighting rules, dropping rhinos means we decrease access to cheap and disposable spotlights for that first turn. Just something to consider. Â That's a very good point. Does the vehicle need to actually "hit" the target with one of its weapons in order to enlight it? If I'm not mistaken the rule book says a vehicle with a spotlight can use it after it fired its weapons. Does it mean the vehicle fire its weapon then it decide to enlight any visible unit or does it enlight the unit it hit? Â In that case the range of the rhinos standard weapons will limit the spotlight effectiveness since the vehicle has to move 6" to fire with 24" weapon. It's not a terrible range but the other option is fare more useful... Â Â No, that rule ensures that the shots fired by the vehicle using the searchlight do not profit from the searchlight. Also you can only illuminate a target that you can see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cmdr Shepard Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 I realized that with the increase of nightfighting rules, dropping rhinos means we decrease access to cheap and disposable spotlights for that first turn. Just something to consider. Â That's a very good point. Does the vehicle need to actually "hit" the target with one of its weapons in order to enlight it? If I'm not mistaken the rule book says a vehicle with a spotlight can use it after it fired its weapons. Does it mean the vehicle fire its weapon then it decide to enlight any visible unit or does it enlight the unit it hit? Â In that case the range of the rhinos standard weapons will limit the spotlight effectiveness since the vehicle has to move 6" to fire with 24" weapon. It's not a terrible range but the other option is fare more useful... Â Â No, that rule ensures that the shots fired by the vehicle using the searchlight do not profit from the searchlight. Also you can only illuminate a target that you can see. Â My question was not: Do the shots fired by the vehicle using the searchlight profit from it? but Do we have to illuminated ONLY the target the vehicle hit or can we choose to illuminate another unit or even the same unit if we didn't hit? It obviously the shots fired by the vehicle cannot benefit from the searchlight since we can activate it after the shots have produced their effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Urauloth Posted October 30, 2012 Share Posted October 30, 2012 A tank is a combat-specific armored fighting vehicle designed around the express purpose of engaging and destroying other armored fighting vehicles, armed with a weapon system capable of defeating an enemy vehicle of equivalent combat capability and tonnage to itself. That's way too narrow a definition. Maybe if you're solely defining a main battle tank (although this would equally well describe a tank destroyer, which is arguably not a tank) Â Engaging enemy armour didn't become the main purpose of tank design until the second world war, and even then it never eclipsed other battlefield roles (even some late-war heavy tanks were designed to engage infantry and fortifications, like the Churchill) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Father Ferrum Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 A tank is a combat-specific armored fighting vehicle designed around the express purpose of engaging and destroying other armored fighting vehicles, armed with a weapon system capable of defeating an enemy vehicle of equivalent combat capability and tonnage to itself. That's way too narrow a definition. Maybe if you're solely defining a main battle tank (although this would equally well describe a tank destroyer, which is arguably not a tank) Â Engaging enemy armour didn't become the main purpose of tank design until the second world war, and even then it never eclipsed other battlefield roles (even some late-war heavy tanks were designed to engage infantry and fortifications, like the Churchill) Â OT, but not really. Early Churchills had the standard 2 and 6 pdrs in their turrets, neither of which fired HE rounds. The Crocodile and NA75 variants were the only ones which were really capable of engaging infantry successfully. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minigun762 Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I realized that with the increase of nightfighting rules, dropping rhinos means we decrease access to cheap and disposable spotlights for that first turn. Just something to consider. Â That's a very good point. Does the vehicle need to actually "hit" the target with one of its weapons in order to enlight it? If I'm not mistaken the rule book says a vehicle with a spotlight can use it after it fired its weapons. Does it mean the vehicle fire its weapon then it decide to enlight any visible unit or does it enlight the unit it hit? Â In that case the range of the rhinos standard weapons will limit the spotlight effectiveness since the vehicle has to move 6" to fire with 24" weapon. It's not a terrible range but the other option is fare more useful... Â Â No, that rule ensures that the shots fired by the vehicle using the searchlight do not profit from the searchlight. Also you can only illuminate a target that you can see. Â My question was not: Do the shots fired by the vehicle using the searchlight profit from it? but Do we have to illuminated ONLY the target the vehicle hit or can we choose to illuminate another unit or even the same unit if we didn't hit? It obviously the shots fired by the vehicle cannot benefit from the searchlight since we can activate it after the shots have produced their effect. Â Commander, with your permission I might toss this question over to the rules section. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
techsoldaten Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 OT, but not really. Early Churchills had the standard 2 and 6 pdrs in their turrets, neither of which fired HE rounds. The Crocodile and NA75 variants were the only ones which were really capable of engaging infantry successfully. The fact you know this blows me away. I live near Aberdeen Proving Grounds in the US and have been up close to a Churchill. Those tanks are amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Father Ferrum Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 OT, but not really. Early Churchills had the standard 2 and 6 pdrs in their turrets, neither of which fired HE rounds. The Crocodile and NA75 variants were the only ones which were really capable of engaging infantry successfully. The fact you know this blows me away. I live near Aberdeen Proving Grounds in the US and have been up close to a Churchill. Those tanks are amazing. Â Â A decade in the military intelligence community combined with a fascination of all things military from an extremely young age tacked on to five years of Flames of War gaming as a pure mid-war British player. Â My favorite Churchill variant -- and definitely the sort of thing I would convert as a Fellblade if I ever found a model of the appropriate size -- was the Black Prince. Never went beyond prototype, but a tank armored like a Tiger and carrying a 17 pdr would have been an extremely scary proposition for "zee Jermens." Â And now, back to your regularly scheduled 40K discussion topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Willy Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Armour saturation is really the best way to use them. I ran 4 in an 1850 list with 2 drakes it worked wonders against guard and meq I did lose two or three in every game but they were always up against the enemy deployment. Charge they would rather get the easy kill forgetting that I could easily table them over two turns or take there objectives it was even nicer wen my havocs would get first blood smashing apart flanking units. Â As for the marine tank discussion the predator is more of an ifv with a very modular design, vindis a siege tanks easy and rhinos a light apcs designed for easy of use and manufacture raiders a the proper tank in my opinion This is just the way it seems when you take into account the purpose of the space marines as a military force Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_f Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Well, the rhino is only 35 points so if you are running plague marines at 24p /head then the added value in protection is probably worth it. You are basically buying a heavy weapon that is not firing on your troops or your heavy support. Plus there are some added bonus features such as greater mobility, smoke launchers and such.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Circus Nurgling Posted October 31, 2012 Author Share Posted October 31, 2012 Well, the rhino is only 35 points so if you are running plague marines at 24p /head then the added value in protection is probably worth it. You are basically buying a heavy weapon that is not firing on your troops or your heavy support. Plus there are some added bonus features such as greater mobility, smoke launchers and such.. Â 35 points plus an almost guaranteed victory point for the opponent. That's the real kicker for me, especially considering how squishy they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_f Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 Well, the rhino is only 35 points so if you are running plague marines at 24p /head then the added value in protection is probably worth it. You are basically buying a heavy weapon that is not firing on your troops or your heavy support. Plus there are some added bonus features such as greater mobility, smoke launchers and such.. Â 35 points plus an almost guaranteed victory point for the opponent. That's the real kicker for me, especially considering how squishy they are. Â Yeah, that is a good point :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lepaca Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 I realized that with the increase of nightfighting rules, dropping rhinos means we decrease access to cheap and disposable spotlights for that first turn. Just something to consider. Â That's a very good point. Does the vehicle need to actually "hit" the target with one of its weapons in order to enlight it? If I'm not mistaken the rule book says a vehicle with a spotlight can use it after it fired its weapons. Does it mean the vehicle fire its weapon then it decide to enlight any visible unit or does it enlight the unit it hit? Â In that case the range of the rhinos standard weapons will limit the spotlight effectiveness since the vehicle has to move 6" to fire with 24" weapon. It's not a terrible range but the other option is fare more useful... Â Â No, that rule ensures that the shots fired by the vehicle using the searchlight do not profit from the searchlight. Also you can only illuminate a target that you can see. Â My question was not: Do the shots fired by the vehicle using the searchlight profit from it? but Do we have to illuminated ONLY the target the vehicle hit or can we choose to illuminate another unit or even the same unit if we didn't hit? It obviously the shots fired by the vehicle cannot benefit from the searchlight since we can activate it after the shots have produced their effect. Â Oh sorry, I misunderstood. But since there's no specification in the rule text I guess you could illuminate whatever you want? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Willy Posted October 31, 2012 Share Posted October 31, 2012 The first blood thing can easily be balanced by getting line breaker with one of your wall of rhinos making a chainsword delivery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.