Kratos battle cannon and artillery

[nefarious squirrel]

Hello, and good evening,

 

I was thinking about the Kratos battle cannon. It annoys me that it is 36” range yet the coaxial autocannon is 48”. I don’t think it would be game breaking to match the range of the autocannon.

The melta blast-gun and volkite cardanelle both have ranges that fit in there weapon types. 
this then had me thinking about artillery thats been nerfed. I agree on the mass elimination of AP2, yet the new stats don’t reflect the threat of these weapons. They introduced the new breaching rule for plasma weapons. In my head (fluff) this is representing a big splash of plasma compared to the precision rounds used in rending. 
Artillery could use the breaching rule to good effect, representing its lethality to infantry and limited affect to heavily armoured vehicles. 

I.e:  Earthshaker cannon 240” Str 9 Ap 4 ordnance 1 barrage  blast 5” Shred pinning and add breaching 6+

 

A other example: Scorpius launcher 48” Str 8 Ap 4 Heavy 1 Barrage Large blast breaching 6+or if applicable Rocket barrage.

 

or Kratos battlecannon:

HE shell; 48” Str 8 Ap 4 heavy 1 large blast pinning breaching 6+

AP Shell; 48” Str 8 Ap2 Heavy 2 Sunder Exoshock 6+ 

 

I hope this explains my idea, i think breaching could be used subtly to balance some weapons better.  

 Bob.

 

[SkimaskMohawk]

Artillery needs way more help than a trash breaching roll tacked on.

 

The Scorpius is good because it's cheap, has a large blast, has a strength to cause instant death, and rends on a 4+.  

 

The earthshaker doesn't get any better when you add breaching/rending 6+ to it. How do I know? Because that's what the current Medusa is, and it's still awful. 

 

Just revert the ap and keep their higher points costs. Still can't react, can get shaken, weapon destroyed, affected by night, etc.. Will still have las heavy support squads and dreadnoughts to deal with.

[Noserenda]

Yeah breaching or rending is on the arty pieces that only got semi purged but it certainly looks like the devs didnt want people using arty generally rather than trying to make it work, thus the deliberately bad stats. 

[TheTrans]

I think you can tell, pretty clearly in the rules, that the dev's were 'run my marines straight at the enemy' sort of guys, because cover has been downgraded to near uselessness, then overlayed that artillery has also been nerfed down to near uselessness... ergo... You don't need cover, because pie plates aren't making you pig up handfulls of mooks.

I still maintain that 2.0 was written by 2 different teams and instead of picking the best of either option, they just rolled them both together.

Blasts are too powerful, they make us pickup marines too easily.
Team 1: Make the blasts higher AP

Team 2: Make the blasts smaller and more expensive

 

Final Result: Make many blasts smaller, with higher AP and more expensive.

Lascannons are another example/
Lascannons aren't in a great spot.
Team 1: Give them Sunder

Team 2: Make them cheaper

Final Result: Cheaper Lascannons with Sunder. 

 

Etc
 

[Marshal Mittens]

Contemptor Dread Plasma cannons still pick up big fist fulls of marines, in my experience. 

 

I think they want to avoid "leaf blower" style lists. Some arty is still ok, most sucks against marines however. But marines should be decently resistant to it, their in power armor. It's good against Solar Aux and some mechanical Fellows, but most folks have a bunch of marines, dreads, terminators and Spartans because that's what's in the launch box, and most arty is not great against that. Honestly I am ok that arty is not as strong as it was, though the pie plates on a lot of guns should probably be bigger. 

 

 

Agreed that the Kratos seems like it should be 48" range. 

 

 

[SkimaskMohawk]

1 hour ago, Marshal Mittens said:

Contemptor Dread Plasma cannons still pick up big fist fulls of marines, in my experience. 

 

I think they want to avoid "leaf blower" style lists. Some arty is still ok, most sucks against marines however. But marines should be decently resistant to it, their in power armor. It's good against Solar Aux and some mechanical Fellows, but most folks have a bunch of marines, dreads, terminators and Spartans because that's what's in the launch box, and most arty is not great against that. Honestly I am ok that arty is not as strong as it was, though the pie plates on a lot of guns should probably be bigger. 

 

 

Agreed that the Kratos seems like it should be 48" range. 

 

 

 

I'm pretty sure they wanted to avoid playing any way other than the one that got them eating blasts, like @TheTrans already mocked them for.

 

Medusas were regarded as a really good unit in 7th-1st because:

• you couldn't hide from it while in range
• it could instant death custodes
• it pierced armour saves
• it could penetrate and possibly explodes av 14

It was basically an all-rounder star, able to clip both infantry and vehicles and bring the fear. But, it still had mitigating factors:

• cover was great, and conqueror of cities enabled a lot of 3+ saves
• you could only take 1 unit of them
• they hated having to target transports
• low, low armour
• shaking them stopped shooting for a turn
• weapon destroyed stopped them shooting

The last three points basically meant they were hyper-vulnerable to deepstrike/outflank, and 1st was the edition of easy turn1 deepstrike. Dread pods and termites dumped units exactly where they needed to be, with many options able to burn down AV10. And then there were also the criminally costed javelins that could get into position very easily. I still play 1st along with 2nd, and people bring the artillery a lot there. But there's a lot of tools to deal with it, even in its more deadly form.

 

But people didn't like getting their models shot from out of los I guess. We still have it in the scorpius, and it bombs out those infantry almost as hard as the scorpius. Direct fire stuff has surpassed the medusa battery or old scorpius with las and multimeltas, so the "problem" of infantry dying is still there. With less cover to mitigate it (because it was apparently also unfun to save models from good weapons?).

 

If people adamantly don't want to live in a world of 10/2 large blasts, I really don't know what you can do to the medusa to make it viable. The only real options are to give it either brutal or multiple shots. Maybe drop the thing to 90 points so you can actually saturate with quantity of fire, the traditional solution to having bad stats; a lasgun has more chances of killing a cataphractii than a medusa does now.

 

[Xenith]

9 hours ago, TheTrans said:

I still maintain that 2.0 was written by 2 different teams and instead of picking the best of either option, they just rolled them both together.

 

This is exactly what I think happened with 40k - two teams had a list of issues with 8th, and then one team wrote the codexes and one wrote the core rules and missions, and both tried to solve the problems. That's why we had both table sizes reduces, and weapon ranges increased so now we have 18" pistols that can shoot across half the board. 

[Xenith]

I agree that blasts are nerfed to pointlessness, however I also agree that they needed to be reigned in as not to dominate.

 

What about just increasing the size of the blast overall to make them AoE weapons and keep the worse AP, like anything with traditionally 5" blast goes to 7" and all gain pinning & Shell Shock (1) (unless they already have it as barrage) to make them mass-pinning tools, to separate them from other weak high RoF weapons. 

[MichaelCarmine]

12 minutes ago, Xenith said:

I agree that blasts are nerfed to pointlessness, however I also agree that they needed to be reigned in as not to dominate.

 

What about just increasing the size of the blast overall to make them AoE weapons and keep the worse AP, like anything with traditionally 5" blast goes to 7" and all gain pinning & Shell Shock (1) (unless they already have it as barrage) to make them mass-pinning tools, to separate them from other weak high RoF weapons. 

Doesn't quite cut it, i'm afraid...

Everything with the Heavy subtype will laugh at Pinning and ShellShock (1), as the reroll their 2+/3+ armor saves against it.

They'd definitely need a good(better) version of rending to be any kind of a "real" threat.

Like, give Blast weapons with the Ordnance special rule rending (5+), or rending(4+) for something like a Medusa/Demolisher, vor example.

That way a basilisk can atleast try ro take on a HSS, which is its sole purpose in this game, i would say... 

 

And most of all - they need a special rule when used against vehicles.

Right now, there is not a single Blast weapon, that could destroy a vehicle (that isn't sitting on its last hullpoint), that isn't mounted on a SuperHeavy platform.

They atleast need a rule like - count the AP of Blast weapons with the Ordnance special rule, as if they where better by 2, when rolling on the vehicle damage table.

That way, a Demolisher with its 3" blast (what a joke) for example could atleast threaten a LandRaider or any kind of vehicle with its "special" AP1, since Brutal does nothing against armor. I mean, its a weapon designed to destroy Bunkers and Bastion walls, but it can't even destroy a rhino?

Same goes for the Basilisk/Medusa - no chance in hell to threaten anythig with an armor value, because their AP4 prevents them from anything better than immobilising a vehicle on a pen roll of 6.

 

[Noserenda]

Yeah it really feels as simple as design team likes scissors, nerfs rock.

 

A contemptor weapon of all things being a functional blast weapon is particularly hilarious.

[nefarious squirrel]

I think that with what I discussed, is not move them back HH 1 rules but try and work within the nuances of HH2 rules. 
I feel breaching represents the best mechanic to increase the effect of arty.

Arty is traditionally the killer of infantry, luckily in the 31st millennium power armour mitigates that to a degree but if your militia ap4 would mince you. 
Putting rending on the effect would tip it to far in the other way. If your in a LR, the pinnacle of rediscovered armoured warfare, splinters from arty should not bother you. 
Now, adding uber realism to a fun game must be balanced, but tweaking weapons (house rule) to give you another tool set with out looking like what a lot of weapons in HH1 turned into (Ap2 pie plate hand full auto remove!) leads me down the route of using some of the new rules mechanics.

Sure there is other ways that have been mentioned, lower points etc. But as @xenith said maybe pinning and shell shock is the best way forward. 
The idea of a bunch of marines unharmed but unable to advance as the earth moved from under them due to steel rain fits the fluff. 
But in the end, they are possible house rules id want to use, so I could not and should not impose this view. 
But id like to keep narrative and fun play going. (Id still loose with my Imperial Fists, im really good at rolling 1’s!)

[MegaVolt87]

Give rending, breaching and fleshbane to arty gun profile in the one stateline.  The templetes shrunk, so they should be dangerous to compensate. 

[MichaelCarmine]

47 minutes ago, nefarious squirrel said:

I think that with what I discussed, is not move them back HH 1 rules but try and work within the nuances of HH2 rules. 
I feel breaching represents the best mechanic to increase the effect of arty.

Arty is traditionally the killer of infantry, luckily in the 31st millennium power armour mitigates that to a degree but if your militia ap4 would mince you. 
Putting rending on the effect would tip it to far in the other way. If your in a LR, the pinnacle of rediscovered armoured warfare, splinters from arty should not bother you. 
Now, adding uber realism to a fun game must be balanced, but tweaking weapons (house rule) to give you another tool set with out looking like what a lot of weapons in HH1 turned into (Ap2 pie plate hand full auto remove!) leads me down the route of using some of the new rules mechanics.

Sure there is other ways that have been mentioned, lower points etc. But as @xenith said maybe pinning and shell shock is the best way forward. 
The idea of a bunch of marines unharmed but unable to advance as the earth moved from under them due to steel rain fits the fluff. 
But in the end, they are possible house rules id want to use, so I could not and should not impose this view. 
But id like to keep narrative and fun play going. (Id still loose with my Imperial Fists, im really good at rolling 1’s!)

That's why i specifically said, Blast weapons with the Ordnance rule, these weapons already have a so to say Sunder build in, to represent their capability to penetrate armor on a direct hit. Give it Rending(5+) and an Earthshaker Cannon has a good chance to penetrate a LandRaider (and everything else, that isn't 14 all around) - which is how it should be, when a cannon that size lands a 155mm Shell on the roof of a tank!

 

Besides, rending is the Special rule, some of the ordnance blast weapons already have - i only propose, to give that rule to every ordnance version, not just the former ap2 variants. 

 

You could give breaching to the rest of the blast weapons, maybe (6+) to things like Quad Mortars, so they have a chance to pin a HSS for once... 

Though i would keep the adjustments to the "heavy" artillery/cannons.

[Cactus]

Does anybody else recall the old WHFB stone thrower rules? The model under the hole in the centre of the template would take a higher strength hit than those around it. I'm ok narratively with the idea of cataphractii weathering artillery fire with their 2+ heavy (it's the heaviest toughest terminator armour after all) but maybe one model hit directly, as opposed to just caught in the blast, could suffer a hit at AP2? Perhaps the same concept to could be applied to vehicle targets - if the hole is over the model the AP is improved, or one of the vehicle-busting USRs is applied?

[Noserenda]

Yeah artillery traditionally absolutely slaughters tanks too, more so in fact because its much harder to get a tank in a foxhole! A decent rending value like 4+ would get them back in the right ballpark, really the bigger guns should have large templates too but thats something you could cede to steer the game in a direction, making the guns ineffectual is by far the worse choice, though obviously they did both,,,

[SkimaskMohawk]

1 hour ago, nefarious squirrel said:

I think that with what I discussed, is not move them back HH 1 rules but try and work within the nuances of HH2 rules. 

 

Ap, strength and blast sizes are all rules in both editions. Theres also....very little nuances to 2nd for weapons. Most do one job and one job only, and any who's jobs are "kill heavy infantry" or "kill vehicles" is outclassed by the lascannon. 

 

1 hour ago, nefarious squirrel said:

Arty is traditionally the killer of infantry, luckily in the 31st millennium power armour mitigates that to a degree but if your militia ap4 would mince you.

 

Well, no.

 

In the 3rd-7th skeleton of rules these guns were extremely able to kill vehicles for most of their life. A penetrating hit meant a vehicle died on a 4+; ordnance gave you a special 6 result to kill embarked units in a couple editions. This got changed in 7th when only an ap2 or better weapon could kill a vehicle from a pen.

 

Similarly, infantry was able to hide from blasts and barrage by taking cover in ruins; they were literally untargettable if they were hiding under the floors of the ruins for a couple of editions. This also got changed in 7th.

 

They turned into a unit that was the bane of infantry, but that's not at all the rules those weapon profiles were designed around.

 

1 hour ago, nefarious squirrel said:

Putting rending on the effect would tip it to far in the other way. If your in a LR, the pinnacle of rediscovered armoured warfare, splinters from arty should not bother you. 

 

Rending doesn't change the issue with artillery and vehicles in 2nd; they do 1 hull point. Rending just increases the armour value that can then take 1 hull point. A typhon can shoot into av 10 all around and still only ever do 1 hull point. And an earthshaker already pens av 14 on a roll of a 6 anyways...

 

@Cactus that's how it used to work in 4th. The center hole did full strength to vehicles, while the rest of the blast did half. Made it so you couldn't whack a bunch of vehicles at once (unless the outside ones were really low armour and you got lucky). This got changed with the less brutal 5th Ed damage table and changes to scatter, but would have made the manticore a little less infamous.

Edited March 28, 2023 by SkimaskMohawk

[Misterduch]

I feel like an introduction of "piercing (x)" or something similar that grants AP3 as a rule would help here.

 

It would allow arty to clean up power armour while not also granting it the ability to destroy AA/terminators like scorpius does atm.

 

For example the basilisk could get rending 6+ while also having piercing 4+ with rending overwriting piercing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Cadmus Tyro]

14 minutes ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

 

Ap, strength and blast sizes are all rules in both editions. Theres also....very little nuances to 2nd for weapons. Most do one job and one job only, and any who's jobs are "kill heavy infantry" or "kill vehicles" is outclassed by the lascannon. 

 

 

Well, no.

 

In the 3rd-7th skeleton of rules these guns were extremely able to kill vehicles for most of their life. A penetrating hit meant a vehicle died on a 4+; ordnance gave you a special 6 result to kill embarked units in a couple editions. This got changed in 7th when only an ap2 or better weapon could kill a vehicle from a pen.

 

Similarly, infantry was able to hide from blasts and barrage by taking cover in ruins; they were literally untargettable if they were hiding under the floors of the ruins for a couple of editions. This also got changed in 7th.

 

They turned into a unit that was the bane of infantry, but that's not at all the rules those weapon profiles were designed around.

 

 

Rending doesn't change the issue with artillery and vehicles in 2nd; they do 1 hull point. Rending just increases the armour value that can then take 1 hull point. A typhon can shoot into av 10 all around and still only ever do 1 hull point. And an earthshaker already pens av 14 on a roll of a 6 anyways...

 

@Cactus that's how it used to work in 4th. The center hole did full strength to vehicles, while the rest of the blast did half. Made it so you couldn't whack a bunch of vehicles at once (unless the outside ones were really low armour and you got lucky). This got changed with the less brutal 5th Ed damage table and changes to scatter, but would have made the manticore a little less infamous.

 

I think you’ve misinterpreted the point NS was making. He’s not arguing that “traditionally” in previous editions Artillery was the bane of infantry and not vehicles. He’s arguing that in reality artillery is the bane of infantry and the rules should be geared to represent this. 
 

Hence the suggestion that breaching would perhaps be a more “fluffy” rule, especially for vehicles with an anti-infantry role such as the Scorpius and Aquitor (spicula rockets) and even the earth shaker. 
 

I think breaching is a rule with an interesting nuance, but the designers (unsurprisingly) have not taken full advantage of it.
 

Either way, I think we can all agree artillery needs fixing…..

 

Cadmus

[Armillion]

The Basilisk and Medusa got nerfed HARD in 2.0, which means my two basilisks will collect dust on a shelf.  Vastly overcosted compared to any other option really.  This is particularly jarring since the Scorpius is now just sooooo much better by comparison.

 

Admittedly the old 1.0 Medusa statline was just so ubiquitously good because you could just anti-everything and needed toned down.

 

Basilisk

• Pinning effects from the basilisk definitely make sense in headcannon with big HE shells.  Maybe drop the strength to 7 but add shellshock 1 and rending (5+) so you aren't doubling out Terminators anymore but can still use ordinance and rending together to slap vehicles somewhat.  You don't do as much raw damage as a Scorpius, but you can sure slow everything down and possibly get those pesky camping HSS to take cover.    Then it becomes sort of a longer ranged side-grade to the scorpius, with the ability to mess up light armor but barely scratch AV14 most of the time.  It deals slightly less raw damage than a Scorpius and but longer range, better tank busting, and a higher chance for pinning to take effect, though no chance to double out elite infantry.
• R240" S7 AP4 Ordinance 1, Barrage, Large Blast (5"), Pinning, Shell Shock (1), Rending (5+)

Vindicator

• The demolisher cannon is designed for bunker busting.  It would make sense if it could actually bust a bunker, yet given this, the shell wouldn't likely arm when passing through and pasting a random mook, hence keeping a small blast.  Replace rending with Exoshock to deal multiple HP against targets, but since it is trying to damage through brute force instead of armour piercing ability, you don't get a chance to explode the target.  Its not going to kill infantry very well but that's the point.
• R24” S12 AP3 Ordinance 1, Blast (3”), Brutal (3), Exoshock (5+)

Medusa

• The Medusa used to be essentially the longer ranged, barrage version of the demolisher cannon.  So maybe change it to be that again to allow it to reach out and nuke something.  It becomes better against hard targets, while the Basilisk is better against infantry and light vehicles.  Exoshock is there to allow multiple HP loss against vehicles and fortifications (if you play those).
• R36” S12 AP3 Ordinance 1, Barrage, Blast (3”), Brutal (3), Exoshock (5+)

Arquitor - Morbus

• The Morbus Bombard now neatly fits in between the Medusa and the Basilisk, with characteristics between both profiles to be a middle ground. with the chance to double out infantry and mess with enemy tanks simultaneously.
• R36" S10 AP4 Ordinance 1, Barrage, Large Blast (5"), Rending (6+), Pinning - unchanged

Finally, as side topic but an indirect buff to the Vindicator and Medusa, nerf the Contemptor's (and maybe Deredeo) from a 2+ Sv to 3+ Sv.  Suddenly Brutal 3 gets a lot scarier, and yet Dreadnoughts still get a 5++ against this to go with its 6 wounds and non-degrading stats, unlike a vehicle.  This would also allow Missile launchers to be viable (again Dreadnoughts still have a 5++), as well as allowing power mauls to have a use in wounding on a 5+ but ignoring armour, while existing AP2 weaponry behaves no differently.

 

 

 

Edited March 28, 2023 by Armillion

[SkimaskMohawk]

1 hour ago, Cadmus Tyro said:

I think you’ve misinterpreted the point NS was making. He’s not arguing that “traditionally” in previous editions Artillery was the bane of infantry and not vehicles. He’s arguing that in reality artillery is the bane of infantry and the rules should be geared to represent this.

 

Sure, but it came down to caliber of round vs the strength of the armour. The bigger artillery pieces absolutely were used to kill tanks in WW2, and basilisks and Medusas were designed to be analogues to those, not the area denial pieces for infantry. 

 

No one's saying the quad launcher should crack tanks. They're saying the large caliber howitzer should.

[Stitch5000]

Given that Legion Basilisks and Medusas are based on the Chimera chassis that didn;t actually exist at teh time of the HH, according to FW Imperial Armour books (despite what ADB seems to think) and that backline bombardment artillery really doen;t fit into the doctrine of Cresade/Heresy era warfare, it's no wonder that they are being quietly retconned out of HH with nerfs. 

[nefarious squirrel]

48 minutes ago, Armillion said:

The Basilisk and Medusa got nerfed HARD in 2.0, which means my two basilisks will collect dust on a shelf.  Vastly overcosted compared to any other option really.  This is particularly jarring since the Scorpius is now just sooooo much better by comparison.

 

Admittedly the old 1.0 Medusa statline was just so ubiquitously good because you could just anti-everything and needed toned down.

 

Basilisk

• Pinning effects from the basilisk definitely make sense in headcannon with big HE shells.  Maybe drop the strength to 7 but add shellshock 1 and rending (5+) so you aren't doubling out Terminators anymore but can still use ordinance and rending together to slap vehicles somewhat.  You don't do as much raw damage as a Scorpius, but you can sure slow everything down and possibly get those pesky camping HSS to take cover.    Then it becomes sort of a longer ranged side-grade to the scorpius, with the ability to mess up light armor but barely scratch AV14 most of the time.  It deals slightly less raw damage than a Scorpius and but longer range, better tank busting, and a higher chance for pinning to take effect, though no chance to double out elite infantry.
• R240" S7 AP4 Ordinance 1, Barrage, Large Blast (5"), Pinning, Shell Shock (1), Rending (5+)

Vindicator

• The demolisher cannon is designed for bunker busting.  It would make sense if it could actually bust a bunker, yet given this, the shell wouldn't likely arm when passing through and pasting a random mook, hence keeping a small blast.  Replace rending with Exoshock to deal multiple HP against targets, but since it is trying to damage through brute force instead of armour piercing ability, you don't get a chance to explode the target.  Its not going to kill infantry very well but that's the point.
• R24” S12 AP3 Ordinance 1, Blast (3”), Brutal (3), Exoshock (5+)

Medusa

• The Medusa used to be essentially the longer ranged, barrage version of the demolisher cannon.  So maybe change it to be that again to allow it to reach out and nuke something.  It becomes better against hard targets, while the Basilisk is better against infantry and light vehicles.  Exoshock is there to allow multiple HP loss against vehicles and fortifications (if you play those).
• R36” S12 AP3 Ordinance 1, Barrage, Blast (3”), Brutal (3), Exoshock (5+)

Arquitor - Morbus

• The Morbus Bombard now neatly fits in between the Medusa and the Basilisk, with characteristics between both profiles to be a middle ground. with the chance to double out infantry and mess with enemy tanks simultaneously.
• R36" S10 AP4 Ordinance 1, Barrage, Large Blast (5"), Rending (6+), Pinning - unchanged

Finally, as side topic but an indirect buff to the Vindicator and Medusa, nerf the Contemptor's (and maybe Deredeo) from a 2+ Sv to 3+ Sv.  Suddenly Brutal 3 gets a lot scarier, and yet Dreadnoughts still get a 5++ against this to go with its 6 wounds and non-degrading stats, unlike a vehicle.  This would also allow Missile launchers to be viable (again Dreadnoughts still have a 5++), as well as allowing power mauls to have a use in wounding on a 5+ but ignoring armour, while existing AP2 weaponry behaves no differently.

 

 

 

Excellent, im liking the earth shaker but would use breaching personally. The demolisher cannon for vindicator i think would work very well.

 

I may look at typing up a house rule sheet. 

39 minutes ago, SkimaskMohawk said:

 

Sure, but it came down to caliber of round vs the strength of the armour. The bigger artillery pieces absolutely were used to kill tanks in WW2, and basilisks and Medusas were designed to be analogues to those, not the area denial pieces for infantry. 

 

No one's saying the quad launcher should crack tanks. They're saying the large caliber howitzer should.

 
And i think a LR or a Kratos is more like a Merkerva mkiv MBT compared to Sherman or Panther tank. But i get what your saying. But maybe thats the problem of this game. Its lifting bits from WW1,WW2 and modern warfare with a healthy dose of space magic mixed in. So often direct comparisons wont work with out a bit of imagination. 
 

Thank you for your responses though. 

[Armillion]

21 minutes ago, Stitch5000 said:

Given that Legion Basilisks and Medusas are based on the Chimera chassis that didn;t actually exist at teh time of the HH, according to FW Imperial Armour books (despite what ADB seems to think) and that backline bombardment artillery really doen;t fit into the doctrine of Cresade/Heresy era warfare, it's no wonder that they are being quietly retconned out of HH with nerfs. 

 

Even if the Chimera chassis did not exist, the design is similar yet different enough to assume they may share some design lineage.  The unreliable narrator framing of HH means there is plenty of room for interpretation and speculation due to inherent vagueness.  Additionally, even if some legions weren't prone to using sustained artillery, IW and IF would love themselves some siege weapons, just as WS abhor dreadnoughts but here we are with a WS leviathan.

 

For example, you could come up with the following:

 

During the Great Crusade, the Astartes legions were vast apparatuses that were able to conduct warfare on a massive scale unseen in the centuries and millennia to follow, with the ability to commit thousands of Astartes to frontal assaults against entrenched enemies, backed up with equipment and firepower unseen in the smaller chapters that would follow Guilliaman's reformations.  To support such a direct and brutal form of warfare, some legions were known to employ large caliber artillery en masse, conducting massive saturation bombardment actions against enemy positions prior to massed infantry and armoured assaults.

The Legion Basilisk and Legion Medusa were early developments of mating an existing weapon design to a chassis capable of carrying it.  While superficially resembling those heavy artillery platforms employed by the later Astra Militarum regiments, and indeed sharing some design lineage, these were uniquely suited to the Astartes and as such internally derived much of their internal drive machinery and augury systems from the ubiquitous Rhino chassis.  As the Great Crusade progressed, new and more advanced means of providing indirect fire support were developed and employed, though the Basilisk and Medusa platforms retained some primacy within some legions, such as the IVth and VIIth.  Nevertheless, as the Horus Heresy consumed frontline equipment at a voracious rate, many of these older weapons were pulled out of reserves to commit to the galaxy wide civil war.

After the heresy and subsequent scouring, and with the breaking of the remaining loyalist legions, the Legion Basilisk and Legion Medusa were made fully obsolete, neither well suited to the smaller chapter sizes and their mobile ways of war, nor were they ergonomically feasible for smaller unaugmented humans to operate effectively.  This was not the least compounded by vast mechanical dissimilarity with Imperial Regiment's supply chain and thus most such vehicles would ultimately be scrapped or repurposed as static defenses for PDF forces.  Nevertheless, to support the needs of the Astra Militarum, the design would be examined and used as the basis for development of the highly successful Chimera chassis, with the substitution of advanced materials and technology with more mundane but easily producible alternatives.

 

[Noserenda]

The Chimera not being pre heresy is likely the mistake tbh as they and their variants pop up in all sorts of places and the chassis is a mainstay of imperial armed forces. That and things not being around in the heresy is the exception rather than the rule, 99% of Imperial tech is discovered during the great crusade/early heresy after all. 

That and the actual official models are Chimera variants...

[Valkyrion]

Things like the Demolisher and Dreadhammer weapons are designed to blow holes in fortifications for the rest of the army to get through. They breach, not explode. 

I think anything with a S10 or higher should do D3 HP of damage to vehicles but retain its AP.  

Melta, plasma, las weapons firing the heat of a thousand sons - that makes things go boom. A big shell dropping on you from a great height makes you go splat. 

It's the Wile E Coyote difference between his ACME TNT and the anvil falling on his head.