Wh40k 10th Edition Vehicles in 10th + Rhino Datasheet

[Gothical]

20 hours ago, Lemondish said:

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.

 

I imagine that you can still embark/disembark at will, but I do wonder if, similar to how characters have to join units before the battle and can't leave, if dedicated transports can only transport the unit that they were bought for. It would cut down on some shenanigans and give extra incentive to pick up non-dedicated transports too, and could be the reason we see no transport capacity - if it cannot transport any other unit then it isn't needed on a Rhino/Drop Pod/Razorback datasheet because you bought it for a 5-10 strong Tactical Squad and they can only be joined by (typically) 1 character. Units like Terminators cannot take these transports so the old restrictions aren't needed (especially if Terminator/Gravis characters cannot join non-Terminator/Gravis units).

[Mr. Oddity]

1 hour ago, Gothical said:

 

I imagine that you can still embark/disembark at will, but I do wonder if, similar to how characters have to join units before the battle and can't leave, if dedicated transports can only transport the unit that they were bought for. It would cut down on some shenanigans and give extra incentive to pick up non-dedicated transports too, and could be the reason we see no transport capacity - if it cannot transport any other unit then it isn't needed on a Rhino/Drop Pod/Razorback datasheet because you bought it for a 5-10 strong Tactical Squad and they can only be joined by (typically) 1 character. Units like Terminators cannot take these transports so the old restrictions aren't needed (especially if Terminator/Gravis characters cannot join non-Terminator/Gravis units).

This feels likely to me based on what we've seen so far regarding the Lieutenent as well as the matched play update requiring transports to have a unit in them at deployment. It's also fitting given the name. A dedicated transport may not just refer to its role but also to the fact that it's assigned to a specific unit. 

 

Further supporting this are the old images of the Ultramarines 2nd Company from a past codex in which each tactical and devastator squad had their own rhino, the epic-scale Ultramarines chapter where each squad had their own transport, and he vehicle marking refrence spreads across several codexes outlining how squad role and number markings should be applied to the hull.

Edited April 17, 2023 by Mr. Oddity
More research

[Schlitzaf]

23 hours ago, Lemondish said:

 

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.

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?

If degrading kicks in at any point after 50% it may as well not exist. Because at that point its basically “I’m better off killing a whole tank then trying to split fire”. Tank Degrading should be a function similar to stun/shaken locking in 5th-7th. Given twnks ignore heavy penalties in 8th. Losing for example a point of BS wouldn’t be that devestating but this is a topic for elsewhere

[Lemondish]

6 minutes ago, Schlitzaf said:

If degrading kicks in at any point after 50% it may as well not exist. Because at that point its basically “I’m better off killing a whole tank then trying to split fire”. Tank Degrading should be a function similar to stun/shaken locking in 5th-7th. Given twnks ignore heavy penalties in 8th. Losing for example a point of BS wouldn’t be that devestating but this is a topic for elsewhere

I'd say it's still relevant to the vehicle discussion from the original post.

 

I see where you're coming from, but we also don't yet know how these battle shock tests are supposed to work. Perhaps that is where some sort of stun/shaken effects might exist. We shall see in time...

 

I do believe having vehicles essentially operate and degrade differently than infantry units goes a long way towards differentiating the two even though they carry essentially the same core unit sheet design.

[Kallas]

21 minutes ago, Lemondish said:

I see where you're coming from, but we also don't yet know how these battle shock tests are supposed to work. Perhaps that is where some sort of stun/shaken effects might exist. We shall see in time...

Battleshock to degrade performance of vehicles would be very interesting.

[spessmarine]

On 4/17/2023 at 1:42 PM, Kallas said:

Battleshock to degrade performance of vehicles would be very interesting.

 

And appears to be the case!
Difficulty falling back and no longer can receive strategems seems to be the case. Which makes sense as it works like a crew shaken/injured effect.

[Karhedron]

And it is good that it is now consistent with how Morale works for infantry. There certainly seems to have been a level of thought and consistency applied to 10th that I am starting to appreciate.

[Lemondish]

6 hours ago, spessmarine said:

 

And appears to be the case!
Difficulty falling back and no longer can receive strategems seems to be the case. Which makes sense as it works like a crew shaken/injured effect.

 

And those effects can apply once the unit hits less than half of their starting Wounds, so you have effects potentially applying at 50% and 33% of your wounds remaining. Degradation also appears to only affect shooting, so there's trigger points as a vehicle takes damage where its ability to leave a combat, shoot, hold an objective, or be the target of a stratagem is affected.

 

That's not nothing, and I'm super happy to see it.

[jaxom]

On 4/17/2023 at 3:12 PM, Schlitzaf said:

If degrading kicks in at any point after 50% it may as well not exist. Because at that point its basically “I’m better off killing a whole tank then trying to split fire”. Tank Degrading should be a function similar to stun/shaken locking in 5th-7th. Given twnks ignore heavy penalties in 8th. Losing for example a point of BS wouldn’t be that devestating but this is a topic for elsewhere

 

6 hours ago, Lemondish said:

 

And those effects can apply once the unit hits less than half of their starting Wounds, so you have effects potentially applying at 50% and 33% of your wounds remaining. Degradation also appears to only affect shooting, so there's trigger points as a vehicle takes damage where its ability to leave a combat, shoot, hold an objective, or be the target of a stratagem is affected.

 

That's not nothing, and I'm super happy to see it.

 

I'd guess we're only going to see degradation on super-heavies and knight-equivalents. Have them degrade at 21 wounds, Battleshock at 14, and degrade again at 7 wounds.

[Khornestar]

If something has OC 0, does it just not have the ability to hold an objective? Or will it be like 9th, where Obsec only mattered for contesting? Do we even know that yet?

[WrathOfTheLion]

2 minutes ago, Khornestar said:

If something has OC 0, does it just not have the ability to hold an objective? Or will it be like 9th, where Obsec only mattered for contesting? Do we even know that yet?

There's no obsec ability anymore. You own the objective or not based on the sum of your OC on it, whether that exceeds the opponents. So if it's OC 0, it can't hold an objective at all.

 

That's at least how I've read their statements so far. They didn't quite say it directly, but they circled around the idea that they shouldn't be able to hold the objective at all.

Edited April 19, 2023 by WrathOfTheLion

[Khornestar]

6 minutes ago, WrathOfTheLion said:

There's no obsec ability anymore. You own the objective or not based on the sum of your OC on it, whether that exceeds the opponents. So if it's OC 0, it can't hold an objective at all.

 

That's at least how I've read their statements so far. They didn't quite say it directly, but they circled around the idea that they shouldn't be able to hold the objective at all.

Yeah I get no Obsec; just conceptually a comparable situation that I gave.

 

It would make sense as you say, but I wondered if they’d outright said that. We’ll find out soon enough. It wouldbe a reasonable consequence for 0 to not be able to hold objectives. Wouldn’t be surprised if they did something like make units like spawn have OC 0 (which wouldn’t be fun, but would also sorta be thematic).

Edited April 19, 2023 by Khornestar

[WrathOfTheLion]

13 hours ago, Karhedron said:

And it is good that it is now consistent with how Morale works for infantry. There certainly seems to have been a level of thought and consistency applied to 10th that I am starting to appreciate.

Yeah, that's the thing I picked up on real quick and I've mentioned a few times here as well, I guess doing graphics software makes you look for that kind of stuff. Whatever comes of it in the end, someone clearly spent some real time dotting their i's and crossing their t's. There's a lot of real design thought that actually went into creating this one, above and beyond what I've seen before. Makes me optimistic for its future, given the level of visible refinement.