Vindicators MK2

[chapter master 454]

Vindicators are an oddity because now they have been brought into a role that they did sometimes but wasn't their primary function for most yet in lore was not their main purpose.

 

Vindicators in lore are bunker busters. When they have ferrocrete above their heads we drop demolisher cannons however in gameplay that wasn't how it panned out. Because of how templates were GREAT anti-infantry and for along time sucktastic anti-tank because of half strength on a whiff (which admitly was fixed) and thus we never took them for anti-tank really, it was just a bonus. In truth Vindicators pack a weapon that could make a even a knight get a little hot under the collar. These gun toting wagons are really in a bad way mainly because of two things however: bad rolls REALLY suck and even good rolls can feel mediocre at best and the second is why bring this when you could just bring like others have mentioned ether a predator or even quad laser devastators? Those are assured shots that hit with near equal power and while costing a little more, pack so much more of what we want. This coupled with how tanks still struggle to be relevant despite their buffs doesn't do the vindicator any favours.

 

They were literally tooled properly for their lore intended use and because of this, they suck. Even then they suck for their intended role because as mentioned, there are better options for only a few more points. Realistically, the vindicator is just a rhino chassis with a demolisher cannon strapped on with no self repair option but meaning the demolisher cannon is being priced at about 55 odd points, give or take. At no point I think we can all agree is a demolisher cannon worth 55 points while a twin-linked lascannon is 50 and has more consistent results. I would actually contend that if vindicators were 100 points, they may see use as they now become cheap enough to slip in as a pocket solution to bigger threats while not being too bad against infantry. 30 points for a demolisher cannon (in effect) to me is reasonable as it does come with 2 massive drawbacks that feed into one another and thus amplify their effects: Range and Heavy. Your range of 24" makes you have to move it up the board at least once to get one shot off which puts it's first round of shooting at a 50% success rate which means the average rates mean only 1 shot connects (2 if you targeted an infantry clump...I am being generous there). These two drawbacks make the gun heavily gimped and not exactly the 'turn 1 eraser gun' it used to be.

 

-had something to say about the siege dozer but the fact the vindicator has toughness 8 seems to account for the fact it does have extra armour and the massive dozer already-

 

Points reduction would be nice and I think putting it to 100 is reasonable however I would like to add that...isn't it odd it doesn't ignore cover? I mean...this thing is meant to bring buildings down and crush the residing traitors, heretics and xenos within if not by direct means but indirect justice of ceilings falling. Yes, it does have high AP but I don't think anyone would argue about the siege gun ignoring all benefits of your cover...I mean...a vinidcare assassin is a personalised greeting card...a vindicator is more of a "To whom it may concern" sort of affair.

 

I think the vindicator shows the pitfalls of this new design that was clearly not tested fully. I do think it is a good idea however certain considerations must be made in regards to consistency of effectiveness because lets face it and this sucks: when we all tried these tanks out...rolling a 1 for shots then missing feels so bad you never take one again and even slamming a 3 shot home often felt okish. It is a high possibility that all random shot weapons akin to demolisher cannons (aka blast weapons) should of also had auto-hit.

[Firepower]

It didn't ignore cover in recent previous additions either.  Infuriating at times, really 

[Lord_Caerolion]

Also no transport capacity, so add some more of the cost being for the gun rather than the chassis.

 

If they make it auto-hit, as well as other blast weapons, that'd go a great way towards making them more useful.

[Firepower]

I feel like auto hit would be a bit much, given the damage it and many other blase weapons are capable of. 

 

A flamer is one thing, but a Demolisher Cannon is a whole different sorta animal

Edited February 2, 2018 by Firepower

[Lord_Caerolion]

They used to before though? Well, they had Scatter, but anything under the template got hit. Maybe autohit, but limit the number of times each individual model can be hit?

Edited February 2, 2018 by Lord_Caerolion

[Toxichobbit]

All template weapons used to (sometimes) auto-hit. Now they don't. That's not a reason to give modern demolisher cannons auto-hit.

 

For a start, they were a long way from auto-hitting. It's impossible to give exact numbers on how likely they were to hit given the amount of vaiables (model size, model density, 2d6 scatter rolls etc), but it was quite a  way from 100%. Depending upon the size of the target, your scatter might be missing on as low as a 4+ on 2D6. Against the bigger targets (vehicles) you aren't missing as much but instead halving the Str with even just a short scatter. The only time it was close to auto-hit was against horde armies, which were less common in previous editions. You were probably going to hit something, but it might not be the models you want and it might not be as many models as you'd like; everybody spread out as much as possible against Vindicators.

 

The demolisher cannon simply isn't the same gun as it was when it used to "almost" autohit. It's better in many ways, with only the random shots letting it down. It didn't used to affect cover at all. Anything in cover usually got at a 5+, often a 4+. Nowadays they are much better at punching through cover. A model needs a 3+ armour save to get the same save as previous editions (5+), 4+ save to get anything at all and 5+ or worse means cover is just bypassed. It may not technically ignore cover, but because of the interaction between the cover and AP modifiers it ibypasses it on a lot of models and those it doesn't bypass cover on still take damage most of the time.

 

It also does D6 wounds, where previously it only did one. which makes many larger models more susceptable to demolisher cannons. Again, because of the many variables in the previous scatter system it's impossible to say if vehicles are more vulnerable to a demolisher cannon shot, but we can definitely say that T6+ multi-wound models are. Previously they only took one wound from it, now they are taking multiple, maybe even being entirely removed. Furthermore, a demolisher cannon could only hit a model once, nowadays it can hit it up to three times, each doing multiple wounds. That's a massive power boost against the tougher, multi-wound models.

 

These are all good reasons why "they used to before" isn't something we should use to judge if a demolisher cannon should auto-hit now. Previous edition rules were just too different, so lets judge the demolisher cannon on it's current rules and what it should be capable of, not what it was capable of.

[Firepower]

While auto-hit was a far fetched concept for the previous Demolisher, one advantage was that scatter could land it on a unit you weren't aiming for.  Of course, sometimes that was your own unit, but I never scattered onto one of my own boys.

 

Really, if we break down where the problem is with the Demolisher's effectiveness, it comes down to the random number of shots.  D3 is simply lousy, especially when you're trying to use it to clear out hordes, which was its old function (again, benefiting from landing on units you weren't even aiming for, if there were enough enemy models crammed into a relatively small space).  In comparing it to old Demolisher's damage, there's no longer the auto kill with Strength x2 Toughness (which could kill anything from Guardsmen to Chapter Masters), replaced instead by the random damage numbers.  Previously, the only way a horde unit survived a hit from the Demolisher was by cover saves...which were horrendously effective.

 

So the job has changed significantly to hunting small, high toughness units and vehicles, because no more auto-kill and no more scatter, replaced by single target, small shot counts and random damage.  It simply isn't the gun it used to be at all, or very good at what it does now compared to more conventional heavy weapons.

Edited February 2, 2018 by Firepower

[Captain Idaho]

It's a great big gun so it should do serious damage. Against single targets the D3 shots is average if you hit twice or otherwise it's lacklustre since you have to roll to wound then roll to damage.

 

Remember that against most vehicles and Monsters in the game you wound on the same as a missile Launcher, whilst against T8 you wound the same as a Lascannon.

 

So that big S10 gun isn't actually so dangerous.

 

Maybe it would have S14, but then I'm sure there's all sorts of people who'll protest!

[Toxichobbit]

I don't think the Str is an issue. It wounds almost everything on 3+ or better, with only the really big super heavies requiring 4+ or worse. The problem is, like Firepower said, reliability. D3 shots is crap, especially when it's followed up with might not hit, might not wound and random damage. It's too many rolls and any one of them going wrong and you've wasted a ton of points. If we look at it as the "enemy" is 1s & 2s (because that's 1 shot, a miss, a failed wound or pitiful damage), we've got four rolls which means we're very likely to get at least one 1 or 2. Depending on where in the rolls we get that 1 or 2 is going to define if the shot is just bad or outright wasted.

 

It's heavily weighted towards that first roll, with the random number of shots being arguably more important than any other aspect. If we get a bad roll for the number of shots, not only does it put a significant cap on the potential damage but also amplifies any other bad rolls. If we only have one shot, a 1 or a 2 to hit is disastrous. If we only have 1 shot a 1 (and against T6+ a 2) to wound is disastrous. If we have one shot, we only have one D6 for damage so no chance of averaging out a bad roll into something more acceptable. If we get 2-3 shots (or more if the unit is 5+ models) the bad rolls elsewhere aren't as problematic because we have a second or third chance to even things out.

 

With that in mind, I really think the first thing that needs addressing with the demolisher cannon is the D3 shots. D6 base shots is probably too much. I'm leaning towards D3+1 for base and maybe D6+1 for units of 5 or more, though I'm unsure about whether the latter is too much.

[chapter master 454]

Well the question really might be better aimed at points. Like I mentioned, using the rhino chassis as a base for what it costs, there are only minor details being added however all things considered the differences between the tanks are thus:

 

Rhino has 10 transport capacity

Self-Repair

vs.

Toughness 8

+1 wound (which in an average game is what self repair equals anyway)

 

This means that considering the vindicators hull as 70 points base isn't far fetched or unfair, in fact one could go as far as to comment that it's a surprise we haven't seen more codex standard uses of this variant hull (even for possibly a "Siege Predator" variant). At that point as noted, a demolisher cannon is not worth 55 points. Compared to the aforementioned weapons like the lascannon and missile launcher, there are some really big differences. First, range is a massive consideration. While maybe not something to note on smaller differences, when factors get to magic numbers like x2 then we need to consider this important (as the magic numbers I believe are 0, 1 and 2. However that is in card games like magic though). The fact a lascannon can pick a target from deployment and snipe it from turn 1 with no need to move makes it an incredibly powerful weapon, with high rolls leaving most tanks practically half healthed and that's without any moving. Same goes for the missile launcher and a key thing to note is that they both hit with the force enough to wound anything on 3s (except missiles against T8). So that means their difference is very minor in that lascannons only 2+ against marines while the demolisher can 2+ against t5.

 

The big thing here though is that while the demolisher cannon can output a tremendous amount of firepower on a big target, it suffers from range issues. The magic number here in 40k is 24". If your range is that then you need to move to fire. Prior to this edition it was an issue: Roll up 6" and let loose. Now however moving causes a massive issue with hit rate as I noted. While it hits like a freight train, it has the accuracy of a leman russ. Talking of which, what is the cost of a demolisher cannon for the guard? I only have my index so it is likely outdated but GW believes one of these siege guns is worth 40 points. That means by comparison then ether the hull is overcosted or us marines have gone to the wrong retailer of siege guns. That would put a vindicator at 115 points, somewhere I think we could call it reasonable to field.

 

However I think there are issues other than this. The big one is that it really isn't meant for anti-infantry duty. It would leave most big targets ether heavily crippled or worse but how many times do you see big guys in numbers enough to have this one tank be valuable or needed? only a couple of lascannons are needed for not much more (165 vs 125. for 40 points, you get consistent 4 shots with equal firepower and damage rates really).

If that difference was closer to needing to spend 50-65 points more for devastators then I think we would consider vindicators more accessible.

 

One other note I would consider is that it's strength 10 feels like a "tradition". Again a measuring stick weapon. To be honest the lightest armour I have seen is T6 so why isn't this thing str12 to at least allow it to easily dismiss light armour without a thought?

[MeltaRange]

T8 is essentially -1 to wound vs. Str 4, 7, 8, and 14-15.  That's a fair number of weapons including most small arms fire, plasma (both overcharged and not), most missiles, autocannons, the vast majority of melta, a lot of tau stuff, a lot of Nid shooting, Dark Reapers, many dread/monster melee attacks, etc.  A lot of those things will be what is being aimed at this tank.  Anecdotally, you might not notice it, but it's there and is definitely under-estimated by would-be Vindi users.

[Schlitzaf]

Vindi’s and similar units should say when it shoots a Model with “10 Wounds or more” at minimum. Through I’d also like to see be a flat 2D3+2 shots and when shooting larger squads, add an additional D3 but drop the lowest result.

[The Unseen]

2d3+2 is insane, that'd make it the best tank buster I know of.

 

But 1D3+1/2 or even 2d3 would be fine.

Demolisher cannons now just have way to high a chance to do literally nothing.

Rough math tells me it's 29% of the time, a d3 shot weapon hitting on 4s (assuming the vindicator has to move, which is pretty damn likely with a 24" gun) it just misses entirely.

Before wounding or any saving throws, nearly 30% of the time you just...

Miss.

With a shell the size of a man.

It irks me.

[Toxichobbit]

2d3+2 is insane, that'd make it the best tank buster I know of.

 

But 1D3+1/2 or even 2d3 would be fine.

Demolisher cannons now just have way to high a chance to do literally nothing.

Rough math tells me it's 29% of the time, a d3 shot weapon hitting on 4s (assuming the vindicator has to move, which is pretty damn likely with a 24" gun) it just misses entirely.

Before wounding or any saving throws, nearly 30% of the time you just...

Miss.

With a shell the size of a man.

It irks me.

 

That's almost a third of the time. Even against fortifications, which are huge and don't move. That's some Ork level aiming there.

 

It's basically a high tech version of this.

 

 

Does that look like it would completely miss a third of the time?

[Race Bannon]

I think it hit a third of the time :lol:

[Captain Idaho]

Strength 14 is needed because it wounds on a 2+ versus most vehicles.

 

2D3+2 shots isn't insane. Baneblades fire 3D6 shots and Leman Russ and Fire Prism tanks fire twice.

[Race Bannon]

I still support the idea ^_^

[Toxichobbit]

Strength 14 is needed because it wounds on a 2+ versus most vehicles.

 

2D3+2 shots isn't insane. Baneblades fire 3D6 shots and Leman Russ and Fire Prism tanks fire twice.

 

While we're on that, Vindicators firing twice if they don't move/move less than half their movement isn't a terrible idea.

[Firepower]

That could actually be rather interesting.  With only a 24" range, it wouldn't be an easy thing to accomplish, which does help to limit abuse, while rewarding good tactics (and luck).

[Toxichobbit]

It's also in keeping with Millitarum and Aeldari vehicles, so helps to address the psychological issue of their vehicles being better than Marine vehicles while not making either Millitarum or Aeldari players feel like Marines are getting a bost over them (which quite frankly Marines need, but that's another topic). Obviously the fix would need to apply to all Vindicators, so Space Wolves, Blood Angels, Dark Angels & Chaos Space Marines.

[Schlitzaf]

So just an interesting aside, two comparable units, only 1 Weapon that is D6 Shots and has Imperium Keyword, is the Onager Dune Crawler and Excorcist. At 36” and 48” respectively, one is 10 less points, lower AP (and situationally only is D3 attacks, but higher AP) and other is 10 more Points, has 6+ IV, always does D6, and is AP -4. Both of them are 2 less strength, so are poor at ‘bunker’ busting. Which let us not Demolishers are Bunker Busters/Destroy Enemy Fortifications, using to dislodge enemy Infantry is secondary, that most comes about due to what it initially targets. Excorcists are meant to destroy enemy heavy armor and infantry, so have AP -4, they are not bunker busters (not STR 10). Onagers are ‘fill’ Eredication Beamer is an anti-Infantry and enemy armor. In short range it’s AP increases to -4 but has less shots.

 

I think the pie plates induced a belief Vindicators are supposed to be anti-Infantry when they were meant to bunker buster styled units. I still believe their dice should be increased. But I’d almost first want to see if it got changed to “If target unit has 10 or more WOUNDS” increase the die to D6. While as the target degrades you’d have less shots, that be because their is less to shoot at. Just some food for thought

[arigatous]

For 2 command points 3 Vindicators have 55% chance (re-rolled 5+) to do 6 (on average) mortal wounds to a character, not including the damage to surrounding units at the very first turn. They could also continue to do it every turn, and to prevent that you need to kill a T8 W11 model completely, which is not an easy task by any means and will bring an enemy just 125 points in return.

Edited February 5, 2018 by arigatous

[Firepower]

Or you can just lock one of the Vindicators in combat and remove its ability to shoot as well, which is relatively easy with how close they have to get to shoot.  You don't have to kill them to avoid the Stratagem.  2 command points are a precious commodity as well, really, for anyone but Ultramarines.  It's a nasty trick, but not one to spam.

[Ebon Hand]

I think giving it the dozer ram from the Land Raider Aries would be really cool. 

Dozer Ram, 0 pts,

Str User, -1 Ap, d6 Dam, "Against INFANTRY units make three hit rolls for each attack rather than one if the Land Raider Ares has successfully completed a charge this turn."

 

That would encourage you to get aggressive with it and give it some much needed cinematics.  The main reason you don't see the vindicator is that its not as much fun to use anymore.  It doesn't seem to do anything exciting like putting a strength 10 pie plate.  The stratagem is situational and requires you to go all in on a platform that is cheap and durable but kind of ho hum in what it does.  It definitely could use a d3 per 5 models rule.  Bonus damage to buildings for an extra cost or perhaps a stratagem too.  That wouldn't make it an offensive powerhouse but it could at least do some damage (considering those still have to roll to hit.)  All this could be done keeping it the same cost and I think it would be fun and characterful.

[Firepower]

For all the discussion and ideas here...has anyone actually contacted GW? :teehee: