Wh40k 10th Edition Vehicles in 10th + Rhino Datasheet

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

34 minutes ago, apologist said:

As the example goes on to state: ‘Epic: Armageddon’.
 

The point – and the relevance to the thread – is that 40k is neither a battle game (favouring abstraction) nor a skirmish game (favouring simulation); and its rules should reflect that. 

The rumoured rules look promising, though where your particular ‘sweet spot’ for balancing these opposing principles will vary.

 

I mean 40k is definitely still a skirmish game 

 

and epic isn’t comparable to 40k, so it’s irrelevant 

Edited April 16, 2023 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Doghouse]

I'm looking forward to seeing the transport rules. For me personally, while the likes of the guard have the main battle tanks the Astartes have always been about transports with some additional variants based on those transport hulls. I'm genuinely getting excited for the chance to mix and match both Primaris and Firstborn transports.

 

As I have mentioned before in this thread the idea of treads crushing barbed while crossing trenches, disgorging Assault Intercessors or Blade Guard into heart of the enemy as the assault ramps slam down while equally being able to create drop ship style Firstborn Repulsors or have even have Stormravens dropping in Heavy Intercessors. So much modelling potential unleashed that previously felt so restricted by the rules and a fantastic way to create heavily themed armies.

 

It's peaked my interest in 40k again which is great.

[Orange Knight]

If the Rhino can indeed transport Primaris, they have to limit the numbers to 5. It's just such a small baby tank - transports for other factions are bigger and more imposing, and they transport smaller infantry than Marines.

[Kallas]

26 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

If the Rhino can indeed transport Primaris, they have to limit the numbers to 5. It's just such a small baby tank - transports for other factions are bigger and more imposing, and they transport smaller infantry than Marines.

Perfect scale is not likely. Transports (and vehicles in general) are scaled a bit down, even Repulsors probably can't fit 10 Primaris in properly. It's not a Rhino thing, it's a transport thing.

[ZeroWolf]

1 hour ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

I mean 40k is definitely still a skirmish game 

 

and epic isn’t comparable to 40k, so it’s irrelevant 

With all due respect, Kill Team is a skirmish game, Necromunda is a skirmish game. Infinity and Malifaux are all skirmish games.

 

Warhammer 40k moved away from that type of game in 3rd (indeed I clearly remember them saying that was one of the reasons the rules were changed, to allow people to play bigger games and not have it take the better half of a day). 

[Schlitzaf]

Also just to say this: 

I don’t disagree with the removal with Degradatiin disagree with method. Largely speaking degrading profiles issues imho was it took too long to degrade. If you degarded something meant did 50% of its wound. And it only was ij each “degraded” orofile for like barely any time. I’d done/started degradation at 66%/33%%. But /shrug

[thraxdown]

40 minutes ago, Kallas said:

Perfect scale is not likely. Transports (and vehicles in general) are scaled a bit down, even Repulsors probably can't fit 10 Primaris in properly. It's not a Rhino thing, it's a transport thing.

Do you think transport datasheets will list the units and the max model count of those units it can transport? 

[Kallas]

18 minutes ago, thraxdown said:

Do you think transport datasheets will list the units and the max model count of those units it can transport? 

It's what they've always done before. Was odd seeing the Rhino sheet without a capacity, but I suppose that's probably just for the WarCom article. If it's not on the datasheet, it'll be more awkward - at least for the Leaders that's a start-of-battle decision, whereas Transports can change their cargo throughout.

[jaxom]

2 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

I mean 40k is definitely still a skirmish game 

 

and epic isn’t comparable to 40k, so it’s irrelevant 

 

41 minutes ago, ZeroWolf said:

With all due respect, Kill Team is a skirmish game, Necromunda is a skirmish game. Infinity and Malifaux are all skirmish games.

 

Warhammer 40k moved away from that type of game in 3rd (indeed I clearly remember them saying that was one of the reasons the rules were changed, to allow people to play bigger games and not have it take the better half of a day). 

 

40k definitely isn't squad-based skirmish, but it's also not not-skirmish. Bases are per model and not per squad, the scale of fire, movement, and time is not at a strategic level (i.e. an infantry unit moving 6" doesn't occur within a time frame of tens-of-minutes or hours because those 6" represent more than half-kilometer). I think that's where 40k isn't comparable to Epic. However, a 2000 point 40k battle can resemble Epic more so then it used to, and HH even more so with 3000 point battles. Star Wars Legion is the only other not not-skirmish game I can think of off the top of my head.

 

The more I thought about it and my initial exposure to 40k, it's the bigger games that really differentiate 40k from other skirmish games which are also not squad-based. 1000 pts was the standard game size at my local GW for a long time. I think it started changing around the time of the 3rd War for Armageddon campaign. People enjoyed being able to use all or most of their collection in a single game (or their collection for a single army if they had more than one). The new Combat Patrol kind of looks like a return to that; three to four units and an HQ. 

 

So yeah, 40k got simpler because some people wanted to play with more toys, but there was still an undercurrent of the game should take X amount of time.

 

 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Just now, jaxom said:

 

 

40k definitely isn't squad-based skirmish, but it's also not not-skirmish. Bases are per model and not per squad, the scale of fire, movement, and time is not at a strategic level (i.e. an infantry unit moving 6" doesn't occur within a time frame of tens-of-minutes or hours because those 6" represent more than half-kilometer). I think that's where 40k isn't comparable to Epic. However, a 2000 point 40k battle can resemble Epic more so then it used to, and HH even more so with 3000 point battles. Star Wars Legion is the only other not not-skirmish game I can think of off the top of my head.

 

The more I thought about it and my initial exposure to 40k, it's the bigger games that really differentiate 40k from other skirmish games which are also not squad-based. 1000 pts was the standard game size at my local GW for a long time. I think it started changing around the time of the 3rd War for Armageddon campaign. People enjoyed being able to use all or most of their collection in a single game (or their collection for a single army if they had more than one). The new Combat Patrol kind of looks like a return to that; three to four units and an HQ. 

 

So yeah, 40k got simpler because some people wanted to play with more toys, but there was still an undercurrent of the game should take X amount of time.

 

 

No one said squad based skirmish, but a few squads of marines, or a platoon or two of guard is still a skirmish, and not a full battle.

[jaxom]

1 minute ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

No one said squad based skirmish, but a few squads of marines, or a platoon or two of guard is still a skirmish, and not a full battle.

Said, no. But it’s definitely the quick read, as ZeroWolf immediately listed squad games as reasons why 40k wasn’t skirmish. I made it explicit: 40k is not not-skirmish.

[jaxom]

15 minutes ago, KrakenBorn said:

 

With complete respect to you and with no malice intended; I say in jest that you consistently have the worse takes on this website everytime I see one of your posts not even this quote; just generally in every 10th ed thread that I've seen you in so far.

Not really sure how that could have a positive spin, but okay. @Inquisitor_Lensoven isn't wrong though, by most (all?) military history a few squads or a platoon or two engaged with enemy forces would be called a skirmish. That's why I felt the need to clarify that the assumption of a skirmish game having to be a squad was not entirely correct. At the same time, I wanted to acknowledge that tabletop wargaming has largely embraced the idea of Skirmish being squad, not really having a term for multiple squads (hence "not not-skirmish"), and Strategic being primarily 15 mm games like Flames of War, Halo: Ground Command, and Dropzone Commander.

[Lemondish]

1 hour ago, Schlitzaf said:

Also just to say this: 

I don’t disagree with the removal with Degradatiin disagree with method. Largely speaking degrading profiles issues imho was it took too long to degrade. If you degarded something meant did 50% of its wound. And it only was ij each “degraded” orofile for like barely any time. I’d done/started degradation at 66%/33%%. But /shrug

 

We also don't yet know how battle shock and those elements are going to interact with vehicles, if at all.

 

They do have leadership listed as well, and all we've seen thus far is a mere hint at the effects that failing a battle shock test will apply. We don't even yet know how these tests come up.

 

That could better represent certain elements of degradation without it being so easy to remove the threat of a vehicle the way harsh degradation tables like that would. I think these other folks are right, vehicles should behave differently than infantry. As an infantry unit loses models it loses effectiveness, but a vehicle being able to push past that and not feel those effects quite as quickly, or quite as linearly as infantry is actually a good thing for differentiation.

2 hours ago, thraxdown said:

Do you think transport datasheets will list the units and the max model count of those units it can transport? 

I was thinking about this and assumed it would behave kind of similar to the leaders list of units they can join.

 

As for the squad-based / skirmish/whatever discussion - would it make more sense to split that off into a separate thread?

[spessmarine]

There is no guarantee Primaris will hop onto Rhinos, the mention was for Land Raiders after all.

It is funny how they posed it as a question, we know why they couldn't hop in Land Raiders because you wanted to force people to buy new transports

[ZeroWolf]

I think they would just do it for all of them to be fair, it does make things easier. Though a question, we all know the vehicles are underscaled, how big would they have to be if they were scaled correctly?

[jaxom]

1 hour ago, Lemondish said:

They do have leadership listed as well, and all we've seen thus far is a mere hint at the effects that failing a battle shock test will apply. We don't even yet know how these tests come up.

Oh man that would be awesome if vehicles actually interacted with Leadership. I still remember "make them button up" from those old WW2 "how to deal with a tank" videos for infantrymen.

[Mr. Oddity]

1 minute ago, ZeroWolf said:

I think they would just do it for all of them to be fair, it does make things easier. Though a question, we all know the vehicles are underscaled, how big would they have to be if they were scaled correctly?

Funnily enough, the rhino model is actually almost exactly the right size based solely on height (not heroic) scaling of the models. If it were to be scaled properly in heroic, probably something like 20% bigger. Of course then table size becomes an issue as well.

[Lemondish]

4 hours ago, Kallas said:

If it's not on the datasheet, it'll be more awkward - at least for the Leaders that's a start-of-battle decision, whereas Transports can change their cargo throughout.

Hmm, might it be possible that we no longer have the ability to embark mid-match? I feel like that would be too crazy of a change, and I can't imagine there would be any reason for them to remove that ability. Not unless there's more value coming from starting within transports to begin with.

 

I still expect we'll see tomorrow.

[Kallas]

3 minutes ago, Lemondish said:

Hmm, might it be possible that we no longer have the ability to embark mid-match?

Would be a very stupid change, but it's possible! 

[WrathOfTheLion]

I think it depends on if transports are assigned in army building, or matter on the battlefield.

 

I guess it could be in army building, and there could be a core strategem to re-embark on the one assigned? Either way, not much point in dwelling too much if they're about to tell us.

Edited April 16, 2023 by WrathOfTheLion

[Kallas]

19 minutes ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

I guess it could be in army building, and there could be a core strategem to re-embark on the one assigned?

That would be awful. When they made Smoke a stratagem, that was dumb: embarkation as a stratagem would be even worse.

[WrathOfTheLion]

2 minutes ago, Kallas said:

That would be awful. When they made Smoke a stratagem, that was dumb: embarkation as a stratagem would be even worse.

Yeah, it wouldn't be the best. Either way, as I said, they'll tell us likely this week.

[Beta galactosidase]

2 hours ago, Mr. Oddity said:

Funnily enough, the rhino model is actually almost exactly the right size based solely on height (not heroic) scaling of the models. If it were to be scaled properly in heroic, probably something like 20% bigger. Of course then table size becomes an issue as well.

Table size and model scale is always a huge issue for vehicles.  In any situation other than this 28mm tabletop game, the vehicle’s biggest defense against something like a melta or power fist is range.  Balancing vehicles has always had to deal with this bizarre ratio of model size to table size

[Blurf]

5 hours ago, jaxom said:

 

 

40k definitely isn't squad-based skirmish, but it's also not not-skirmish. Bases are per model and not per squad, the scale of fire, movement, and time is not at a strategic level (i.e. an infantry unit moving 6" doesn't occur within a time frame of tens-of-minutes or hours because those 6" represent more than half-kilometer). I think that's where 40k isn't comparable to Epic. However, a 2000 point 40k battle can resemble Epic more so then it used to, and HH even more so with 3000 point battles. Star Wars Legion is the only other not not-skirmish game I can think of off the top of my head.

 

The more I thought about it and my initial exposure to 40k, it's the bigger games that really differentiate 40k from other skirmish games which are also not squad-based. 1000 pts was the standard game size at my local GW for a long time. I think it started changing around the time of the 3rd War for Armageddon campaign. People enjoyed being able to use all or most of their collection in a single game (or their collection for a single army if they had more than one). The new Combat Patrol kind of looks like a return to that; three to four units and an HQ. 

 

So yeah, 40k got simpler because some people wanted to play with more toys, but there was still an undercurrent of the game should take X amount of time.

 

 

Your talking in the parlance of the actual battles being played.

 

The other poster is talking industry parlance (by this understanding of the word 'skirmish', you're referring to games with less than 20 or so total models on the board, even in 'large' games). You're both correct, however industry parlance is more commonly referenced.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

=][= "Skirmish vs battle" is not on topic for a discussion on Rhinos and transports in general.  Lets get back on topic please. =][=