Feelings towards the new Land Raider Points costs

[Djangomatic82]

I think a 200 point Landraider would see play in casual games, but think of this, at that cost, would you be playing more than 1? Considering that and the prevalence of anti tank this edition, would being able to afford 1 , but still having it removed from play as easily as they are,  really make them something you enjoy bringing to a game?

 

Doubling their wounds ( as well as "most" other vehicles) would let them stay in play, under current condition, to a greater extent.

I don't believe their damage output is really significant enough to warp the meta at a higher wound count, they aren't a major threat to hoard armies or elite with their weapon load outs. Their mediocre anti tank capabilities and lack of the CORE keyword will keep them out of the top tiers. With double the wounds they jut become what they are meant to be, a durable transport with middling offensive capability that can specialize to a minor degree, without needing to create esoteric rules or more book keeping.

 

Caveate: I say most vehicles are probably in the same situation as the land raider for the same reasons, their damage output to durability, even at double wounds, is mediocre compared to almost all  infantry options.

I'd be concerned about Storm Ravens, both Repulsor types, Storm Speeders, Redemptor Dread and similar units. All of those would have a bit too much fire power if they had double wounds. The Redemptor probably could survive at its current state just because it is still so efficient. A 14 wound Redemptor with -1 to damage for 175 points, versus a 22 wounds quad las predator at 180 is not an auto choice in either direction, but becomes an interesting decision based on use case scenario. The Redemptor remains a solid, versatile unit that can engage in both the shooting and fight phase, as well as buff other units. The quad las Predator at 22 wounds and 180 becomes a decently durable anti tank specialist.

Edited June 6, 2021 by Djangomatic82

[Waking Dreamer]

Yeah it seems very unlikely GW will change current datasheets for vehicles - unless it's a big transitional change like another new Edition.

 

Which reminds me, at what point did GW create that bundle of rules to improve SM in general (e.g. shock assault, bolter discipline etc.)? Was it around the same time 8E Codex SM 2.0 was released?

 

It seems besides the point drops, a set of rules targeting particular vehicles/transports is the only feasible way to balance SM vehicles to fit into the currently infantry-heavy army lists for the rest of 9E.

[Captain Idaho]

GW could produce a supplement for vehicles of all races, which includes new rules that are universal.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

@Waking Dreamer

I'm pretty sure that shock attack and bolter drill were introduced as a FAQ between the first and second marine codex.

[Karhedron]

I'm pretty sure that shock attack and bolter drill were introduced as a FAQ between the first and second marine codex.

Yes. It was before the Marine2.0 codex. I think it was around the time Vanguard Marines were released.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

How would the my fellow festers feel about a rule for MoF that allows vehicle within X" of him treated as having the core keyword as a potential way to make LRs (and other tanks) more viable?

Though admittedly that would be fairly niche.

[Lord_Ikka]

How would the my fellow festers feel about a rule for MoF that allows vehicle within X" of him treated as having the core keyword as a potential way to make LRs (and other tanks) more viable?

Though admittedly that would be fairly niche.

It would be a start, but I'm unsure of how the balance could play out. Land Raiders are just in a bad state due to having zero special rules, no invulnerable save, and a higher point cost, even with the recent cut, than anything with it's equivalent weaponry. At least Repulsors/Repulsor Executioners have a lot of firepower to throw out, Land Raiders don't have near the amount of dakka needed to justify their cost and they aren't really that much harder to kill than a Predator or Leman Russ. If Land Raiders are supposed to be tough, make them tough. Give them an invuln, up their Toughness or Wounds, do something. Give them the Assault Transport rule, or something that gives them a unique utility to put them back on the table. Right now LRs are just a waste of points, which is sad on such an iconic unit.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

The main thing it’s needs is better survivability. If it dies first turn doesn’t matter how much they drop points .

[MegaVolt87]

GW could produce a supplement for vehicles of all races, which includes new rules that are universal.

I could see that happening, but not until we have all the 9th ed codexes released first. Lets face it, GW got it wrong with vechicles this edition. This would be the way to fix it, would rather this way than re-buying a codex re-print. Stright data sheets and text walls, no art, pics or lore to use the page count efficently. Stright utility.

[Lord_Ikka]

 

GW could produce a supplement for vehicles of all races, which includes new rules that are universal.

I could see that happening, but not until we have all the 9th ed codexes released first. Lets face it, GW got it wrong with vechicles this edition. This would be the way to fix it, would rather this way than re-buying a codex re-print. Stright data sheets and text walls, no art, pics or lore to use the page count efficently. Stright utility.

 

GW doesn't do straight utility. If they did, every rulebook/codex would move to pure online for a subscription ($100 a year gets you access to every codex and all rulebooks, which are automatically updated when needed) and then "fluff" codices would be the only hardbound books (Same price, same stuff as current codices in regards to lore/art, maybe a code to unlock the codex). Of course, that would require a fully funded, experienced, dedicated team to make a good app that is usable as both a reading guide to rules and a list builder. Won't happen, but it is a nice dream.

 

My little rant aside, a Munitorium Armor Update would be really nice- give use new datasheets/abilities/points costs for all vehicles. 

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

GW could produce a supplement for vehicles of all races, which includes new rules that are universal.

I don't think a book another book is the answer. At this point to play space wolves I pretty much need three books on me CA, space marine codex, and the space wolf supplement. That said I don't run forgeworld so there would be players who need FIVE books if they went that route.

 

If vehicles are broke it should just be a free FAQ or in the next chapter approved. More likely though if you view new rules as the only fix you'll just have to wait for 10th.

[Schlitzaf]

 

GW could produce a supplement for vehicles of all races, which includes new rules that are universal.

I could see that happening, but not until we have all the 9th ed codexes released first. Lets face it, GW got it wrong with vechicles this edition. This would be the way to fix it, would rather this way than re-buying a codex re-print. Stright data sheets and text walls, no art, pics or lore to use the page count efficently. Stright utility.

I don’t see that as the case. Vehicles sre fine. Certain vehicled have problems. But as a whole vehicles are reasonable or put another way. If vehicles were bad (as you claim). You wouldn’t take suicide units like Eradicators whose only purpose to pew pew ueavy tanks

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

If the problem is suicide melta squads, maybe letting raiders and repulsors use the auspex scanner stratagem. Opponent has to decide if it's worth it to deep strike within half range or not.

 

How would the my fellow festers feel about a rule for MoF that allows vehicle within X" of him treated as having the core keyword as a potential way to make LRs (and other tanks) more viable?

Though admittedly that would be fairly niche.

I wouldn't like this to be honest. One just giving it core means you still need another unit to provide it with a bonus. Two it'd basically make vehicles better in a Castle build which isn't really how you want to make an assault vehicle better.

[Waking Dreamer]

 

I'm pretty sure that shock attack and bolter drill were introduced as a FAQ between the first and second marine codex.

Yes. It was before the Marine2.0 codex. I think it was around the time Vanguard Marines were released.

 

 

 

 

GW could produce a supplement for vehicles of all races, which includes new rules that are universal.

I don't think a book another book is the answer.

 

If vehicles are broke it should just be a free FAQ or in the next chapter approved. More likely though if you view new rules as the only fix you'll just have to wait for 10th.

 

So, hypothetically if they did do another free online FAQ within 9E (unlikely, I know), in the same vein as what they did in 8E (eg. bolter discipline) and the following rules upgrade targeting land raiders followed (suggested rules from multiple posters):

 

- Heavy Armour = Shooting attacks made against this model receive a -1 to their wound rolls.

- Assault Vehicle = Units inside this model can disembark and either shoot or charge in the same turn the model has already moved or advanced. 

- Built to Last = In your Command phase this model regains a previously lost wound.

 

^ For its current 265 points how good is that?

Edited June 8, 2021 by Waking Dreamer

[dice4thedicegod]

Too good

[Waking Dreamer]

Too good

 

Finally, the reputation the Land raider deserves...! 

 

 

 

Or maybe just bump it back to it's base 285pts, or drop one of the bonus and keep it at its 265pts. lol 

[Captain Idaho]

Assault Vehicle - units can disembark, move and charge as if the vehicle remained stationary, even if it had moved already that turn.

 

Give it Land Raiders and Repulsors.

 

Sure we'd see 1st turn charges potentially, but only from a unit and vehicle combination that is extortionate in points cost and the vehicle can be oneshotted next turn by melta.

 

That would be a worthy trade for the points. You can get a Terminator squad up the table turn 1 and fighting. Or Bladeguard. Wouldn't need anything else and is fairly opposable with screening units anyway.

[Karhedron]

Whilst assault ramp rules would be cool,it would just result in them being used as melee springboards which doesn't seem quite right either. I remember the dark days of Beserker Rhino Rush in 3rd edition and Marines on skateboards just aren't fun to play against.

[Oxydo]

Whilst assault ramp rules would be cool,it would just result in them being used as melee springboards which doesn't seem quite right either. I remember the dark days of Beserker Rhino Rush in 3rd edition and Marines on skateboards just aren't fun to play against.

But that's what LR are supposed to be. Assault tanks delivering close assault units to breach enemy lines and fortifications.

[dice4thedicegod]

I think, especially given the proliferation of d3+3 weapons, they should differentiate the three marines heavy weapons more:

 

Melta (unchanged) - the swingy high damage at close range option

Krak missiles - +1 to hit (guided missile)

Lascannons- 2d3 damage (reliable ranged damage dealer)

 

That would immediately make a 4 lascannon platform more reliable. Would also give a boost to the poor predator.

 

Maybe also cut the points to 240.

[Captain Idaho]

 

Whilst assault ramp rules would be cool,it would just result in them being used as melee springboards which doesn't seem quite right either. I remember the dark days of Beserker Rhino Rush in 3rd edition and Marines on skateboards just aren't fun to play against.

But that's what LR are supposed to be. Assault tanks delivering close assault units to breach enemy lines and fortifications.

Yeah I got to echoe those sentiments. Land Raiders should be used to launch assault forces into the heart of the enemy.

[Djangomatic82]

 

 

Whilst assault ramp rules would be cool,it would just result in them being used as melee springboards which doesn't seem quite right either. I remember the dark days of Beserker Rhino Rush in 3rd edition and Marines on skateboards just aren't fun to play against.

But that's what LR are supposed to be. Assault tanks delivering close assault units to breach enemy lines and fortifications.

Yeah I got to echoe those sentiments. Land Raiders should be used to launch assault forces into the heart of the enemy.

 

Something like the Sanguinor's rule but also applicable in your charge phase might be better since GW seems to nuke everything that lets us get into the enemies face T1.

[jarms48]

The points cost was nice, but it's not enough to really justify bringing one. It needs to be:

1) A better transport. So, minimum 12 inch move and give it the Assault Vehicle ability the Impulsor has.

2) A more durable vehicle. Maybe bump it up to 18 wounds. Though this would be a double edged sword, as it would put it into the 18+ wound category for terrain rules. I personally believe that the whole 18+ wound terrain category is pretty arbitrary though and should either be removed, or changed to minimum 20+ wounds.

[Ishagu]

Look on the bright side, guys.

 

Soon we'll all have a Spartan instead!

[Karhedron]

Look on the bright side, guys.

 

Soon we'll all have a Spartan instead!

How to make the Land Raider great again? Make it a Spartan.