Wh40k 10th Edition Vehicles in 10th + Rhino Datasheet

[acrozatarim]

Happy to see degrading profiles largely rolled back.

 

Increased durability is nice, but I hope they've gone further in a few other areas too. One of the big issues with non-transport vehicles is what the point of them is, when non-vehicles can largely carry the same heavy firepower around in a much more cover-friendly package, and when a vehicle can largely be stopped dead in its tracks by a thin line of grots.

[Tokugawa]

Weird that this page doesn't show how many models(and what type) a rhino could transport. 

[Bloody Legionnaire]

Also overlooked WS4+ on the tracks. Vehicles are really gonna be able to slap back in CC

[Ahzek451]

Wondering if the monolith wil bt T14. I just hope 10th means flyers fit a moderately decent roll as apposed to the past few editions where they are stupid good or hardly seen. Arguably, they shouldn't be in the game to begin with but they are not going anywhere now, so here's to GW finally finding the sweet spot. 

[Ammonius]

At this point, I think that the datasheets they're showing us don't have the full text showing so that they can focus our attention on what the article is about. Today was about Toughness and Degrading Profiles.

 

Transport capacity not being on the card seems off. Even if you buy transports at list making for specific squads, does that mean that no other squad can get in the transport later? Also, I wonder if that pickup truck looking Impulsor have a significant firing deck stat, or just 2 for the hatches? It would be pretty yee-haaw if everyone in the back could shoot too. Maybe Orks will get to lean out of da Trukk to fire off some dakka?

[BrainFireBob]

Or Land Speeder Storms

[Focslain]

Seem that if the pattern follows that armigars are going to T10 and Questoris to T12. That puts them in the 6s to wound range of just about all basic infantry weapons.

 

Now the question is how the new railguns are going to look.

[Ming the Merciless]

Erm, so a Storm Speeder has the same toughness as a Rhino and one more wound? 

[Special Officer Doofy]

Hmmm. I hope chaos gets a new rhino model next edition. And with DG it should get DR. Shooting blight launchers out of it will be fun. I wonder what  plagueburst crawlers, great unclean ones and Mortarion's toughness are going to.

 

I just hope they don't create the opposite issue of making vehicles too strong. Playing as DG exclusively in 9th our vehicles were all decent once they got their points drop. It's nice having a balance of infantry and vehicles.

[ChapterMasterGodfrey]

Dear God-Emperor, 

 

Please give my Spartan Assault Tank T13 and nerf my friend's Hammerhead Railgun.

[Redcomet]

44 minutes ago, Orange Knight said:

They really didn't show much, so I am kind of disappointed - I was waiting on the vehicle tease since Monday.

 

The Repulsor still has a 3+ save, I find that a bit strange.

 

Hmmm? What am I missing?

 

Oh no...

Eh? They told us a lot

[ZeroWolf]

I think they were referring to the transport issue and the thing with the smoke launchers.

 

Edit:

 

Things are looking fine to me as they stand so far. I guess I'll have to wait till the index hits to see how my Necron vehicles shore up.

Edited April 13, 2023 by ZeroWolf
My opinion

[Closet Skeleton]

43 minutes ago, ChargingSoll said:

This makes chainfists on terminators a real considerable option 

 

Edit

Wow hunter killer missiles almost auto pick for a strong alpha strike with bs 2+ and a S 14 AP - 3 D d6

 

d6 damage one use only is basically useless. You need like 6 rhinos before they have a noticable impact on the game.

 

35 minutes ago, MARK0SIAN said:

I’m glad they’re upping toughness. It does seem to be a bit weird that at the same time they’ve upped the hunter killer missile to be S14 ap-3. Making vehicles tougher then making the weapons better seems to make the whole process redundant.

 

Hunter killer is 1x per game it would be useless if it didn't wound on 3+

[CL_Mission]

13 minutes ago, Ammonius said:

Transport capacity not being on the card seems off. Even if you buy transports at list making for specific squads, does that mean that no other squad can get in the transport later? Also, I wonder if that pickup truck looking Impulsor have a significant firing deck stat, or just 2 for the hatches? It would be pretty yee-haaw if everyone in the back could shoot too. Maybe Orks will get to lean out of da Trukk to fire off some dakka?

 

With nods to previous edition like being able to shoot out the top of a Rhino I could see those units that were previously 'Open topped' such as Ork Trukks and Drukhari Raiders having high firing deck stats. Maybe for those units we'll see 10 and something like a Drukhari Venom 5.

It's nice to see shooting from the top of a Rhino back, I wonder how Chimeras will be handled.

 

[Bloody Legionnaire]

49 minutes ago, MARK0SIAN said:

I’m glad they’re upping toughness. It does seem to be a bit weird that at the same time they’ve upped the hunter killer missile to be S14 ap-3. Making vehicles tougher than making the weapons better seems to make the whole process redundant.

It means smaller arms can’t dink vehicles to death.

 

I know people like simplicity but I actually miss the vehicle damage charts from previous editions because it meant strong anti-tank weapons had the chance of instantly killing the armor they were designed to kill..

 

8th and 9th editions made weaker weapons stronger and stronger weapons weaker simultaneously. A lascannon or multi-melta lost so much potency and a standard bolted gained a lot because you could dink a tank to death on enough 6’s. I don’t find it redundant at all to make vehicles tougher and also make anti-armor weapons stronger. 

Edited April 13, 2023 by Bloody Legionnaire

[MARK0SIAN]

21 minutes ago, Closet Skeleton said:

 

d6 damage one use only is basically useless. You need like 6 rhinos before they have a noticable impact on the game.

 

 

Hunter killer is 1x per game it would be useless if it didn't wound on 3+

Not really, they cost like 5 points. Wounding on a 4 would be perfectly acceptable for 5 points. People pay the same for a combi-melta that only wounds on a 4 against most proper tanks and has significantly shorter range.

 

The main point is though that these articles seem to be following a pattern:

 

Article 1: We really want to make stuff more durable. Oh and here’s oath of moment.

 

Article 2: We really want to make stuff more durable. Oh and here’s lethal hits

 

Article 3: we really want to make stuff more durable. We’ve upped tank toughness but also upped this weapon strength.

 

I know it’s too early to say about weapons for definite but if this increase for weapons is fairly uniform it’s going to make the increase in toughness pointless. I know I’m being pessimistic but if the lethality isn’t genuinely reined in then I think I’m done, I can’t do another edition of everything dying as fast as it does in 9th so there’s a lot riding on this for me 

Edited April 13, 2023 by MARK0SIAN
Spelling

[ThePenitentOne]

If smoke continues to be a strat, a) that's not ideal and b) it better be a core rulebook strat, because if we only get six per faction and smoke is one of them, that's a waste of a strat slot.

 

Not putting transport capacity on the card is also less than ideal.

[Cruor Vault]

9 minutes ago, MARK0SIAN said:

Not really, they cost like 5 points. Wounding on a 4 would be perfectly acceptable for 5 points. People pay the same for a combi-melta that only sounds on a 4 against most proper tanks and has significantly shorter range.

 

The main point is though that these articles seem to be following a pattern:

 

Article 1: We really want to make stuff more durable. Oh and here’s oath of moment.

 

Article 2: We really want to make stuff more durable. Oh and here’s lethal hits

 

Article 3: we really want to make stuff more durable. We’ve upped tank toughness but also upped this weapon strength.

 

I know it’s too early to say about weapons for definite but if this increase for weapons is fairly uniform it’s going to make the increase in toughness pointless. I know I’m being pessimistic but if the lethality isn’t genuinely reined in then I think I’m done, I can’t do another edition of everything g dying as fast as it does in 9th so there’s a lot riding on this for me 

 People pay for a combi-melta because the platforms it typically goes on can be buffed.  Also combi-weapons weren't single use for 9th.

 

Single use D6 damage is BAD.  It would have to be free, and then it would still be bad, but it would at least be free lol.

 

You're missing the forest for the trees when looking at these articles.

 

Yes Oath is potent, but its LESS potent than having army wide re-rolls.  Yes LT's autowounding on 6s looks good, but its for a single unit with limited interactions.  Overall lethality is much reduced.  And when we get a look at tomorrow's article its going to reinforce that even more. 

 

Having anti-tank weapons range from ~10-14 isn't  really anything more lethal than it is now.  It's just moving the threshold of stat interactions to create a second distinct range of combinations allowing for large monsters and vehicles to have their own set of mechanics without having to write an entire extra set of rules like the old armor facings.

[Brother Carpenter]

1 hour ago, RedFox said:

Weird that the rhino has no info on transport capacity on the datasheet 

Maybe everybody can board now?

[AceofCase]

Didn't one of the previous articles mention that wounding is done slightly differently now? We really can't judge anything until we have all of the rules in front of us. We can't compare anything as it's shown and can only look at the standalone features. 

[Cruor Vault]

5 minutes ago, ThePenitentOne said:

If smoke continues to be a strat, a) that's not ideal and b) it better be a core rulebook strat, because if we only get six per faction and smoke is one of them, that's a waste of a strat slot.

 

Not putting transport capacity on the card is also less than ideal.

 

Its almost a certainty that they're not putting all the information on the datasheets were seeing.  If anything smoke will function like the other unit abilities we've seen where one SMOKE unit can do XYZ each turn.

 

Showing us Transport Capacity rules would inevitably entangle GW in the Primaris/Firstborn debate and it seems like they want to avoid uncorking that genie until we have more 10th edition shineys to distract us.

[Redcomet]

22 minutes ago, Bloody Legionnaire said:

It means smaller arms can’t dink vehicles to death.

 

I know people like simplicity but I actually miss the vehicle damage charts from previous editions because it meant strong anti-tank weapons had the chance of instantly killing the armor they were designed to kill..

 

8th and 9th editions made weaker weapons stronger and stronger weapons weaker simultaneously. A lascannon or multi-melta lost so much potency and a standard bolted gained a lot because you could dink a tank to death on enough 6’s. I don’t find it redundant at all to make vehicles tougher and also make anti-armor weapons stronger. 

I still miss the hit location templates from 2nd

2 minutes ago, Brother Carpenter said:

Maybe everybody can board now?

Yes but how many

[tzeentch9]

1 hour ago, Orange Knight said:

Smoke is no longer a stratagem. This edition is immediately better than 9th.

I believe you mean smoke confirmed as a generic stratagem

[Cleon]

21 minutes ago, MARK0SIAN said:

Not really, they cost like 5 points. Wounding on a 4 would be perfectly acceptable for 5 points. People pay the same for a combi-melta that only wounds on a 4 against most proper tanks and has significantly shorter range.

 

The main point is though that these articles seem to be following a pattern:

 

Article 1: We really want to make stuff more durable. Oh and here’s oath of moment.

 

Article 2: We really want to make stuff more durable. Oh and here’s lethal hits

 

Article 3: we really want to make stuff more durable. We’ve upped tank toughness but also upped this weapon strength.

 

I know it’s too early to say about weapons for definite but if this increase for weapons is fairly uniform it’s going to make the increase in toughness pointless. I know I’m being pessimistic but if the lethality isn’t genuinely reined in then I think I’m done, I can’t do another edition of everything dying as fast as it does in 9th so there’s a lot riding on this for me 

 

We've already seen Bolters are still str 4, so assuming the same wound chart (I've missed it if it was confirmed) we are at least going to marines and chaos marines wounding each others Rhinos and Predators on 6s instead of 5s, so they are at least harder to damage than Gravis marines now....

[Zoatibix]

I hope they push monster Toughness values up, too. 
 

The value of this toughness increase will depend on how many weapons get anti-vehicle or some other rule that adds to wound rolls or simply removes them (we have already seen the latter)