How To Improve Space Marine Tanks

[SkimaskMohawk]

What good is Fly on Repulsors or Impulsors if it doesn't allow fall back and shoot? If it's just for mobility, having them fly over buildings like they aren't there was just stupid and immersion breaking in the first place. They hover, they don't fly.

Welcome to every other tank that uses a a clear plastic support. Wave serpent, falcon, fire prism devilfish, hammerhead, sky ray, caladius, coronus, etc...They were all skimmers back in the day, the concept of which was that they hovered over the ground but could crank it to go over larger objects like terrain and models. The mechanic has always worked that way, and very few if any of those vehicles are portrayed as flying around all over the place instead of being ground-level in the fluff.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I'd disagree with that in respect of Eldar tanks. Heck, the 3rd ed Codex Eldar cover had a flying Grav Falcon.

 

And Repulsors don't drop from space. That was never stated, they were dropped from a modified Overlord. Once down, they can't crank it over a building. I agree they should ignore things like craters and barricades, 2" at most and should be able to go through some buildings, but they can't fly.

[Ishagu]

 

What good is Fly on Repulsors or Impulsors if it doesn't allow fall back and shoot? If it's just for mobility, having them fly over buildings like they aren't there was just stupid and immersion breaking in the first place. They hover, they don't fly.

Welcome to every other tank that uses a a clear plastic support. Wave serpent, falcon, fire prism devilfish, hammerhead, sky ray, caladius, coronus, etc...They were all skimmers back in the day, the concept of which was that they hovered over the ground but could crank it to go over larger objects like terrain and models. The mechanic has always worked that way, and very few if any of those vehicles are portrayed as flying around all over the place instead of being ground-level in the fluff.

This

 

Custodes Tanks kept fly, as have other things like the Tau and Eldar tanks. Repulsors and Impulsors should not have lost the rule.

 

It was a bad overreaction to a few cheesy players using 3 Repulsors atop a building to shoot opponents off the table back in 8th. This is no longer viable due to the new terrain/board rules and the units are heavily over-costed.

 

I'd disagree with that in respect of Eldar tanks. Heck, the 3rd ed Codex Eldar cover had a flying Grav Falcon.

 

And Repulsors don't drop from space. That was never stated, they were dropped from a modified Overlord. Once down, they can't crank it over a building. I agree they should ignore things like craters and barricades, 2" at most and should be able to go through some buildings, but they can't fly.

Not everything with the keyword Fly is something that flies around like a bird.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Ishagu

[Sword Brother Adelard]

I agree with that, but the Primaris Space Marine tanks are not even skimmers in the classic sense of the word, they hover above the ground, and that's it, they're blunt force objects. 

 

What I would advocate is for a new keyword for tanks which just hover, but don't fly. Allowing them to ignore some terrain interactions, but not perch on top of buildings.

[Ishagu]

That would be great, but I don't see it happening any time soon.

 

In the meantime these are tanks that don't touch the ground and can go over terrain that tracked vehicles cannot. Fly keyword is the only way to show that in the current rules. Also actual flyers have the supersonic keyword to distinguish them.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

Landraider variants - all drop by 50 points

 

Repulsors - Give them the Fly Keyword back, Drop by 50 points

 

Machine Spirit change - Balistic Skill is not reduced when the vehicle drops a bracket due to damage (only applies when unit is within 6" of Techmarine)

 

Gladiators - Give them Fly keyword back, drop by 50 points, save improved to 2+

 

Predators - Drop by 20 points

 

Impulsor - Give them Fly keyword, drop by 30 points

I like this list, it's pretty close to the 20% drop I've been suggesting. The argument against fly does make sense though. So maybe give them back their rule making them harder to charge?

[Ishagu]

Do you imagine Tau Hammerhead tanks flying over tall buildings?

 

If the Repulsors should lose the rule then so should all the other hover tanks.

 

I'm in favour of a new set of rules for hover vehicles, but until such a rule exists then Fly should be re-instated.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Yeah, I do imagine Tau Tanks can do more than just hover along the ground. Devilfish chassis have massive vectored thrust engines, which can be vectored to give lift as well as propulsion. They wouldn't be as graceful as Eldar stuff, but certainly more so than a Repulsor. The original box art for the Devilfish always looked as if it had just touched down, dropped troops and was about to lift off again. It's probably not sustainable flight, but I don't see it as immersion breaking for them to move over or across buildings.

[Ishagu]

Maybe the Devilfish, it does look pretty sleek but so does most Tau tech.

 

What about the Hammerhead? A slow tank with a large rail gun on top. That to me does not look like it can hop over tall buildings. Point is that the fly rule is not perfect, but until a better rule for Hover tanks is made that's all we have. Currently the Astartes tanks are very bad units on the tabletop, and I don't see why they should fall behind other vehicles of a similar type even more.

 

I 100% agree that they should have a different, bespoke rule. The chance of that happening this edition is almost zero, and the codex has only just come out. Adding fly back to their keywords, on the other hand, isn't a far stretch.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Ishagu

[Sword Brother Adelard]

The Hammerhead has the same chassis? It may be a bit heavier, but its still going to be able to chuck a huge amount of thrust out of the engines. The two races use completely different methods of generating lift, which are not similar at all, so no, I don't have an issue with them being treated differently. 
 

The first time I played my Impulsor, in 9th, but before the codex dropped, I moved it (incorrectly it seems) around terrain, because it didn't even for a second occur to me that it could literally fly over buildings and ruins, because nothing in the fluff suggests it can do that.

 

For me, they are far closer in their nature to non-flying vehicles than actual fliers, so I have no issue with them not having that keyword, otherwise, what's the point of the Speeders?

It's also not going to change the real problem with SM tanks, that they die too easily, even if they were 20%+ cheaper, as you suggest, they still wouldn't as good as the infantry or biker alternatives. 

[Ishagu]

Making them playable on the tabletop is more important than a particular type of immersion in how the rules play out.

 

It's not just an issue of durability at play.

[SkimaskMohawk]

@adelard skimmer rules have always been abstract. None have been atmospheric flying craft. If the devilfish could fly around, why have the orca? If falcons and prisms were always flying around in the sky and unloading, then why have superiority fighters? They've always been hover-craft in essence, capable of boosts to their vertical but not sustained flight. It's like assault marines. And lore arguments in 8th+ are dumb. Some guy can't destroy a land raider by punching it 18 times; guns facing backwards on planes who's turning is restricted can't shoot forewards, but here we are.

 

Not sure how you thought impulsors went around terrain as GW has conditioned anyone playing to associate stuff hovering off the base on a clear stand to ignore terrain forever.

[Sword Brother Adelard]

Probably because I never played with any tanks that didn't have tracks, and with Impulsors having proper bases I thought that that was what was key to getting around. They don't have flying bases in the traditional sense, just a weird see through block. I also knew they couldn't actually fly around, so it never crossed my mind that it would be legit to move one on top of a three storey ruin.

[SkimaskMohawk]

Well if a talos and venomthrope can casually fly up a skyscraper despite not zooming around in the air in the fluff, it's safe to say the fly is incredibly abstract as a rule. So is bases; traditionally walkers had them...and skimmers/flimmers and flyers. It means precisely zero in what can move over something else.

[Bonzi]

I think the entire problem of vehicles in 40K revolves around two problems.

 

#1 GW introducing superheavies into regular game play. Knights dominated and destroyed the meta of 8th edition. Armies must have access to cheap and effective anti-tank weapons to deal with these units, but such access makes regular armor laughably easy to kill. The game is skewed, even in this edition, by the presence of such units. GW could far more easily balance this edition if superheavies were put back in apoc where they belong.

 

#2. The d6 system is too limited to cover the interactions that span from a grot to a baneblade. 16% intervals doesn't leave enough room for unit variability in statlines without adding in endless absurd special rules and abilities. The game could be played with a lot less 'special rules' if the statlines and dice system offered more flexibility.

 

Neither of my issues is viable to fix within this edition so I'll say that vehicles need to come down in price somewhat and anti-tank weapons need to go up in cost somewhat. And broken units like Eradicators need to take it in the shorts and get a points hike that befits their ability to oneshot a superheavy. It would also be good if GW could alter or limit the availability of anti tank weapons on the battlefield.

[Ishagu]

Eradicators aren't broken, and they aren't even the main issue. They are simply very common as an element in the most popular army.

 

But I agree the costs for various vehicles are not where they should be, and this will probably be the most likely fix... If it even comes at all.

Edited February 24, 2021 by Ishagu

[The Unseen]

I saw an army that ran 15 eradicators in space wolves that (ab)used the rune priest rules and strat to give them all cover, -1 to/hit, and a 5++ (with tome) that felt pretty broken.

30 assault melta shots, with that defensive profile, being guarded by a 6"HI Judiciar with the armor of russ felt kinda broken.

But that's kinda an edge case

 

Vehicles are still suffering the sins of 8th

They cost like their core, but aren't.

 

If you made them *just* cheap enough that offensively they compared to buffed infantry, and could then not buy those support characters and rely on having a flat defensive profile, they wouldn't feel so bad.

[Ishagu]

I saw an army that ran 15 eradicators in space wolves that (ab)used the rune priest rules and strat to give them all cover, -1 to/hit, and a 5++ (with tome) that felt pretty broken.

30 assault melta shots, with that defensive profile, being guarded by a 6"HI Judiciar with the armor of russ felt kinda broken.

But that's kinda an edge case

 

Vehicles are still suffering the sins of 8th

They cost like their core, but aren't.

 

If you made them *just* cheap enough that offensively they compared to buffed infantry, and could then not buy those support characters and rely on having a flat defensive profile, they wouldn't feel so bad.

I didn't say they aren't powerful, but there are counters to this too, and there are armies that are peforming significantly better than Astartes.

 

But you are right, Eradicator are good. Our Tanks need to be able to compete with them for a spot in a list. A Gladiator Valiant needs to be as compelling as a few Eradicators. That's why I'm suggesting a point reduction and the return of the Fly rule - then it has the advantage of mobility at a comparative price.

[Brother Kraskor]

Tanks will be able to compete more with Eradicators when they lose shoot twice upon release of the next Primaris shooty unit...!

[Ishagu]

If that happens the unit will be utterly worthless. Units with equally deadly firepower are common across factions - such as Sisters squads with Multi Meltas. Heck, Devastators with a cherub and 4 Multi Meltas aren't far behind.

 

The Primaris range is nearly complete - I'd say the only things lacking are flying, close combat infantry?

 

The tanks definitely need an adjustment, and it's what this topic is about. Let's hope GW don't take too long to fix them - if more units are viable we'll have more list variety.

[Emurian]

I am less annoyed about the price of the tanks compared to that of the transports to be honest. (Though I agree tanks in general need a point drop as suggested above)

Now don't beat me to death over this, but from what I remember (17 years ago. . .) Chaos Rhino's where around 35 points in 4th edition.

10 man squad could board it, so minimum of 150 points, champ + fancy wpns = give or take a 180-200 point unit.
Transport cost = less then 20% of the total unit cost to transport them.

Nowadays we have the impulsor. Minimum cost 110 points.
6 man squad can board it = 120 points of intercessors, or ofc the obvious BV for 210 cost.
Transport cost = +50% of the unit its transporting.

I am not going to include an apothecary in the above as likewise you can put a random character with the other rhino squad.

My point being, the cost of the transport is so incredibly high nowadays compared vs the past and I don't know why. Just keep them cheap. All they need is a single storm bolter or whatever trivial gun and be done with it. I don't want a transport with multiple weapon options that is going to push its points. I just want a cheap transport. I have 2 Impulsors but no desire to ever use them. The only viable option seems to be with a bladeguard squad. It just feels meh at best that its only ''cough suited cough'' to transport a single squad from the codex.   

I understand there is a difference in game play between 4th and 9th, mainly tabling your opponent vs objectives. I understand mobility is thus worth more in this edition but this price increase in transports is just absurd. Likewise we are paying quite some points for the transport capability with the Repulsors that hardly anyone uses as the tank has the same problem as our old land raiders. You want to keep the tank at some range, whereas the transport option forces you to get it close to the enemy. 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Emurian

[Karhedron]

To be fair, not many people put Intercessors in their Impulsors. Bladeguard or Hellblasters are the more common cargo.

 

But I do take your point that the Impulsor costs a lot more than a Rhino for minimal gain while the similarly priced Razorback has much better offensive output.

[SkimaskMohawk]

It's also funny to consider that you could move and disembark in the past with a rhino. And shoot out the top. And were more durable. And weren't tied up in combat.

 

And are now 80 points for some reason

[Ishagu]

It was a different game. No point in comparing, everything worked differently, and it was generally worse.

[SkimaskMohawk]

It was a different game. No point in comparing, everything worked differently, and it was generally worse.

Sure it was lol, with 8th being the most failed edition from a rules standpoint.