This message was edited 1 time. This message was edited 9 times. This message was edited 2 times. Forum Index. Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in.
|Published (Last):||4 July 2010|
|PDF File Size:||4.54 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||15.9 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
This message was edited 1 time. This message was edited 9 times. This message was edited 2 times. Forum Index. Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now. Hi, as stated in the thread about units that lost their role as guard player I find it quite sad that a lot of their tanks don't really find their place as they are in competition to the Leman Russ and Baneblade variants, which bring either the same firepower for cheaper costs or more for almost the same cost. There are a variety of examples but for now I'm mainly looking at the Malcador and Macharius Tanks.
But I don't really like the approach of making everyting even killier cause it seems to me we already are in such a kind of arms race. Therefore I wanted to propose to work on another screw and mike them a bit tougher instead. Adding Invulnerability or FnP saves does not really make sense fluff wise but what about ditching the damage table effect on the BS?
I mean: looking at the malcador it does not seem to farfetched to assume, that it is significantly harder to damage its weapon systems than those of a Leman Russ. Both tank variants would not really become harder to kill, but instead of a Baneblade or Leman Russ the enemy would have to really have to dedicate his fire power until the last wound is gone if he wants to stop them from shooting. Also this would reduce a small bit of bookkeeping instead of adding more dice rolls or something.
I think! What are your thoughts about this? In My Lab. It'd help, but I don't think it'd make them viable on anything but the most casual of levels. Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne! That would make them more into the pillboxes they were supposed to be, atleast the macharius.
The Malcador was intended to be a fast Superheavy: Maybee allow it to double instead it's maingun and ignore -1 to hit penalties thorugh movement? Trick Question, of course it's the loyalists!
Are Guard players really hurting for effective strategies and units? I get you like these specific tanks, but common. IG already have some of the cheapest, toughest, shootiest tanks in the game. Subject: Re:Giving Malcador and Macharius tanks a push. Fezzik: I agree with you and I wouldn't even mind downgrading or "upcosting" the existing units. I mean: why even bother Building a Malcador if it is that inferior while taking up more ressources?
And I think other factions have the same problem with some of their units but I'm not very versed there. I simply lack the experience to make an educated guess if this would add strategic possibilities and complexity or not and thats why I asked for advise from you which you did, by the way, therefore an honest thank you. Not Online!!! Increasing the firepower of the Malcador and Macharius would in the end just be the next step in a pointless arms race between the IG tanks.
I personally think this would not really add a true alternative to the tank choice, since "alternative" should mean "a truly different approach to the units use". To get my meaning: compare the Cadian and the Tallarn doctrine. Its really just a little bonus each yet they provide two completely different approaches on using IG units. While Cadia for example can use Sentinels as relatively cheap, stationary plasmaturrets, the Tallarn doctrine makes them the mobile, shooty scouts they were intended to be.
That is the kind of "choice" I would like to see more of instead of "Unit A costs twice of Unit B for twice the firepower". That's not including the Malcadors or the other FW nonsense tanks. Now that the new Specialist Detachments are making the old standby of RFBC even more over the top, it further reduced the need for half the tanks in the codex.
I think the problem with the number of tanks is that FW developed them typically during the earlys when they were focused on background more than rules. Often or not, two Leman Russes were better options than a single Malcador. In terms of buffing it, I think allowing it to move further as an active ability or even just increasing its speed would differentiate it from the Leman Russ. It generally is a weird tank anyway. The Wastes of Krieg. I agree with the OP , these are wonderful tanks in design and variance and would give more variety to IG as well as a more robust look.
As good as the Leman Russ tanks, they honestly look horrible. If they weren't resin and incredibly expensive, I would field quite a few of these. FezzikDaBullgryn wrote: Are Guard players really hurting for effective strategies and units? Fezzik: Yes you are right there are a lot of Leman Russ variants available.
But that's a bit misleading since it's just that they all have separate names and some are even quite redundant. But in the end they only differ in weaponry. The same goes with all the Baneblade variants. Don't get me wrong, I'm aware that these two platforms alone give IG much more to choose from that a lot of other armies have in the vehicle department. But from a fluffy perspective that is quite what guard is all about: Infantry, Tanks and Artillery and if you want to stay really fluffy it should rarely be all three at once.
That's the main reason why I, personally would like to see more of the other tank models on the board without that meaning to take the striktly inferior choice. But that's my personal opinion and I don't mind if you disagree. You can't give the malcador the durability it would need because it is stuck as a tank without shieldgenerator and not big enough to gain steel behemoth. This leaves you with firepower. I pay a small knight in this tank, it should out shoot said knight, which i dosen't, because i can't outtank it.
So the defensive is bad, and can't be buffed appropriately. The offensive is terrible but could be buffed. As for the macharius, it needs steel behemoth.
As far as I now the Macharius has "Steel Behemoth", hasn't it? And regarding the Malcador: ist still cheaper than a Knight, isn't it? But regardless: I don't think it is that good of an idea to compare the Malcador and Macharius to Knights, which again would be INTER faction Balance and hard due to knights being really good. My whole point is more: what should happen to give them some reason - as situational as it might be - to be taken instead of LR or BB? Therefore I would argument to look for other ways which might be: speed, durability without Inv.
It malcador doesn't even perform against a Leman russ. Sure if you want to turn it not into a huge gaping handicap, just into a massive hadnicap, this would need to happen: -No more detiroration. Alternatively, command version as inf support, may order infantry around, and or carry a squad with it. Allowing the Malcador to move at full speed and not suffering a penalty to hit and giving it the Battle Speed ability of moving and firing all or one? It is an Assault tank after all. If I recall the lore correctly, the Malcador used to be a fast battle tank during the great crusade, but by M41 current Malcadors are no faster than a LR.
The Macharius, meanwhile, is a discount Baneblade. Practically speaking, both of these are designed to fill the gap between a pt LR and a pt Baneblade, and their current point values reflect that. Eipi you make some quite compelling arguments, thank you. I must say, the changes to the Malcador lool really compelling. The increased damage on the main gun and the option to shoot after advancing with -1 and without penalty on the normal move would make it a good alternative to a heavy Russ.
Not really more firepower and still limited by not being a tank commander or able to get orders, but it would allow for a faster playstyle with a heavy tank.
Regarding the Macharius I'm a bit conflicted. On the one hand it makes sense, that needing to stand still for the doubletap is a huge price, but on the other hand, the doubletapped damage profile looks really mean.
But if I understand you right it would be only allowed to doubletap, if ALL weapons fire at the same target? So this way you would then either waste the 4D6 Battlecannon shots on Infantry or glance of the huge load of Bolter and Stubber shots on a heavy vehicle. Might be worth a try? But summing up: great contribution and it looks as if you put a lot of thought in it. I've always wanted to get a Malcador. I love the WW1 tank aesthetic, but I couldn't justify it with their current rules.
I've been mulling over some simple house rules for a few weeks. So do you think these will pass as good rules? Keep in mind you only get the advance bonus if you have a Tallarn tank. I don't want to give the Malcador the titanic keyword, so the Tallarn doctrine will need to be changed to include it titanic vehicle or Malcador.
I don't think this will unseat the LR in competitive play once you factor in all its tricks, but the base stats should be close now. I have little experience with the Marcharius.
Macharius Heavy Tank
The pattern itself is actually much older. It is part of a class of tanks known as "second-generation Baneblades " -- since the Adeptus Mechanicus keeps a very tight hold on the Baneblade STC patterns, supply is extremely limited. Other Forge Worlds try to fill the gap in super-heavy tank demand by building heavy tanks of the Macharius and Malcador families. Though it is less durable and possesses less firepower than the Baneblade, it is also substantially less expensive in the fluff and more common. Since General Vance Motherfucking Stubbs discovered that large quantities of Baneblades are prone to going missing, armies that needs lots of tanks e. In appearance and operation, the Macharius is the big brother of the Leman Russ Battle Tank -- each of the main weapons available to the Macharius chassis is the equivalent of one of the Russ variants. The options for the sponson- and pintle-mounted weapons are also similar.
Macharius tank rules