Jump to content



Photo

Vehicles


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 ygg

ygg

    Member

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 22 August 2012 - 07:26 AM

 Hello everybody,

I am planning to run my first Deathwatch campaign in the near future. Anyway, I was wandering if there are any statistics for the Imperial Guard grade level vehicles (tanks, walkers) as I will most likely have to pit them against the Kill-team. I checked the Dark Heresy Apocrypha concerning vehicles, but there's nothing on such a scale. Any ideas in which book I could find what I'm looking for? 

Thank you, much appreciated.

ygg



#2 ygg

ygg

    Member

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 22 August 2012 - 08:38 AM

 * wondering :)

 

 



#3 KommissarK

KommissarK

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,499 posts

Posted 22 August 2012 - 08:45 AM

Rites of Battle contains the rules in the DW system on how to handle vehicles. I'm uncertain though if those rules contain the sorts of Imperial vehicles you're looking for (mostly its either Space Marine or Xenos vehicles). The Only War Beta rules had vehicles on it as well (although tooled slightly differently; I'd be cautious of straight importing them in), although those rules are no longer available, or at least last time I was on DTRPG, they were no longer there.

If you're not afraid of getting your hands dirty, its possible to use the vehicle rules in Rites of Battle, and a basic knowledge of the stats from say tabletop 40k, and convert at least a "simple" version of any given vehicle.



#4 herichimo

herichimo

    Member

  • Members
  • 891 posts

Posted 22 August 2012 - 08:56 AM

The rules in the Only War Beta never contradicted or ruined those from Deathwatch.

In fact the additional rules in Only War seemed to address many of the problems associated with the Deathwatch rules. I would suggest, if you find the vehicle rules in Rites of Battle insufficient or lacking to pick up the Only War rules. They really make much more sense out of vehicle use. There really shouldn't be any problem with incorporating them into a DW game.

The only thing I don't really agree with is the way they handle piloting talents, but actual vehicle rules are fine.



#5 ygg

ygg

    Member

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 22 August 2012 - 11:56 PM

 Thank you both for your answers. I guess I'll just nerf the Predator and hope for the best. Well, the Kill-team should anyway.  

All jokes aside, regrettably I have no experience playing the TT so I'll follow your advice and see what I can do using the rules from the Only War Beta and the vehicle statistics from the Rites of Battle.

Thanks again.



#6 H.B.M.C.

H.B.M.C.

    Freelance Writer/Play-Tester

  • Members
  • 1,462 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 12:07 AM

If you're using the Rites vehicle profiles mixed with the OW Beta's vehicle rules you'll probably need to do two things:

1. Reduce the armour values on the Rites vehicles by about ~15% (maybe a little more in some cases).
2. Work out where the weapon mountings/facings are. By RAW (rules as written), a Land Raider has a 270 degree fire arc with its sponsons. Clearly that's impossible as the sponsons cannot turn to fire through the tank. The weapon mounting/firing arc rules from the OW Beta should clear up how it works, and you'll need to judge each vehicle to determine what its fire arcs/mountings should be.

BYE


Matt Eustace. Contributing Author Credits: Church of the Damned, The Lathe Worlds, The Lathe Worlds - The Lost Dataslate, Only War Core Rulebook, Hammer of the Emperor, Shield of Humanity, Tome of Fate, Tome of Blood, Tome of Excess and Tome of Decay.

The views expressed in this post are my own. I do not speak for or on behalf of Fantasy Flight Games.


#7 herichimo

herichimo

    Member

  • Members
  • 891 posts

Posted 23 August 2012 - 03:44 AM

H.B.M.C. said:

1. Reduce the armour values on the Rites vehicles by about ~15% (maybe a little more in some cases).
 

Considering the Leman Russ's front glacis in OW has just about the same armour value (difference of 5, and honestly the Land Raider should be better, if just a smidge) as the Land Raider's hull, and the fact they are both AV14 on the tabletop, I don't think there is any need to smudge any armour values in Deathwatch. And yes, the Leman Russ's front glacis is higher than the predator's.

The OW doesn't make vehicles any easier or more difficult to destroy, it just fine tunes or expands on things like sponson mounting, vehicle hit locations (allowing RAW called shots, yay!), movement options, and vehicle turrets. The rules still ain't perfect (no guidelines for melee attacks, I mean its just ignorant to go up and smack the armoured hull of a tank instead of a periscope, weapon mounting, or crew hatch), but they are much improved.



#8 ygg

ygg

    Member

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 27 August 2012 - 12:06 AM

 Thanks for the constructive responses. I honestly don't know how the Kill-team will fare against armour, especially if not equipped properly for the engagement. What about the damage output of an average tank? Not necessarily Leman Russ.



#9 felixlucena

felixlucena

    Member

  • Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 05:52 PM

 That's part of the fun my fellow Battle-Brother…

If i were in your campaing… My rank 2 Assault Marine will jump from cover to cover trying to get into jumping distance to get atop of the tank/vehicle, then… use a demolition charge and stick it into the main gun to destroy it. Or… if a gunner is on a pinttle-mounted stubber/stormbolter, try to whack him out with my chainsword and then throw a krak grenade into the vehicle to kill the crew.

All is up to the creativity of the players and the combat momentum to get a nice idea to destroy a vehicle :)



#10 herichimo

herichimo

    Member

  • Members
  • 891 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 09:25 PM

You made a good point ygg. If a kill-team isn't well equipped to deal with armour, they probably should avoid it!

Damage output, like so many things military related, depends upon the vehicle and the role it is meant to play.

A kill-team isn't going to have a tank company out hunting for them. That is, unless they stole the trigger switch for the ultimate weapon the traitorous renegades need to destroy 90% of the Imperial Navy in orbit around them thats about to drop 18 different degrees of Hell upon them.

Even if your kill-team blows up a depot or something, your typical military response is to send out an appropriate scout, recon, or reactionary unit. Probably a Sentinel squad and/or a chimera or two with scout unit, or a valkyrie and gunship escort to do a hunt and retaliate mission. Only if the kill-team beats those and continues to be a MAJOR pain in the butt is your average military leader going to escalate. Seriously, a couple of vehicles and back-water depots attacked doesn't really warrant a full scale war, not when retaking and remanning them is a trivial matter for an army.

The kill-team going and/or attacking places or military units with tanks, thats another thing entirely. If you go poking a bee hive, don't be suprised when the bees poke back.

As for the vehicles themselves, I think the most damage output against infantry would be anything loaded up with heavy bolters or auto-cannons. These are weapons designed to mow through infantry (autocannons being a multi-purpose weapon), they have damage which can touch marines and also spew out enough shots to over come dodges and shred defenses in very little time. Flamers are also good anti-infantry but they are designed for lightly armored units, not so effective against space marines. A Leman Russ exterminator or a pack or auto cannon Sentinels would likely put the hurt on space marines. Multi-lasers (chimeras and sentinels) would also be effective but their lower damage output makes them less effective against marines.

Tanks with bigger guns run into several problems when facing infantry (even power armoured ones). First, shooting high-powered rounds at infantry kind of goes against doctrine. I mean thats what the heavy bolters are for right? Second, if you miss, well you miss. One shot every few seconds has fewer chances to hit (and thus do damage) than a constant stream of lead (especially a BS 30 gunner firing from a movinge vehicle: -10, these rounds were meant for other tanks, ones that give a +30 to hit and such). Third, an average dodge by space marines will avoid that lascannon or battle cannon shot. Thats not to say they can't hurt a space marine. Indeed if one of these shots, designed to put really big holes into a tank, hits an average marine, that marine is going to feel it in the morning. A Battle cannon is pretty devastating (it even has that rule!) and a single hit could cause a squad a lot of cohesion damage. A vanquisher round would put a marine into crit at the least, if not outright kill him, same for a decent lascannon hit. Lets not even go into a D-weapon hit… Turbolasers - fugetaboutit!

Artillery barages are mean, scary, and deadly. Even if you aren't a huge threat a general might just decide to lob a few shells your way. When I say "few" I mean three to five rounds (if not more) from anywhere from couple of guns to an entire company or more. (Its much cheaper to fling out 30 high explosive arty shells than use up the gass, time, and ammo of a tank company.) What makes arty even scarrier, you'll never know its coming. Even worse, if its indirect you can't possibly be aware of the attacks. The best you can hope for is to skedaddle out of the target area or find some damn good cover. On the plus side, the arty units would be shooting an area, not your kill-team specifically. They may hit close, they may be off by miles. They may have a nice concentrated shelling, or they coud be uncoordinated and dispersed.

Then there's aircraft. Honestly I'd love to see an Imperial Navy supplement for OW. Just to see if there are any new rules for bombing and strafing runs. Aircraft can be a MASSIVE threat. Striking at your kill team from altitude where the kill-team can't effectively counter-attack. I think aircraft are better as a non-structured threat and encounter. With few exceptions theres really not much you can do about a loitering aircraft, and its only going to be in range when it rolls into a pass at your marines.

When you are building your hostile or potentially hostile forces it helps to flesh them out. Decide how many of your armour units are equipped in what way. How does your military handle scout squads? What do they use for retaliator or reaction squads if anything? Which vehicles and what armament do they prefer? What kind of stuff does the Kill-team have to do to really piss off a general into sending in the big guns? Is the enemy general going to modify his tactics once he learns he's facing off against space marines? Answer thee questions ahead of time and you'll have a much easier go at determining armour forces.

Hope that helps.



#11 herichimo

herichimo

    Member

  • Members
  • 891 posts

Posted 28 August 2012 - 09:42 PM

felixlucena said:

 That's part of the fun my fellow Battle-Brother…

If i were in your campaing… My rank 2 Assault Marine will jump from cover to cover trying to get into jumping distance to get atop of the tank/vehicle, then… use a demolition charge and stick it into the main gun to destroy it. Or… if a gunner is on a pinttle-mounted stubber/stormbolter, try to whack him out with my chainsword and then throw a krak grenade into the vehicle to kill the crew.

All is up to the creativity of the players and the combat momentum to get a nice idea to destroy a vehicle :)

I like to see initiative.

I've had a chaplain jump-pack out of a chimera (passing a -10 piloting test) land on an ork trukk going full speed (another -10 piloting speed) with a charge action. Then make an attack against the driver, pulping it with a massive blow from a power fist. Finishing it off with an assassin strike move to jump off and away from the trukk and then watching it crash and roll end over end in the next turn (going from full speed to dead driver is never a good thing!).



#12 bogi_khaosa

bogi_khaosa

    Member

  • Members
  • 2,100 posts

Posted 29 August 2012 - 06:12 AM

Would it be a violation of IP for somebody to post the Leman Russ stats?



#13 ygg

ygg

    Member

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 30 August 2012 - 01:46 AM

herichimo said:

…..

 

Excellent post herichimo, thanks mate. I think the main issue here is my inexperience GMing in general. Well to be more specific about my previous question, the situation is as follows:

As a tertiary objective, the KT is tasked, by an IG general in the field, to capture a nearby enemy outpost, housing a small armoured division, numbering 14-16 tanks. The enemy commander (an IG insurgent) would not be aware of the KT in the area, not until they would have made their presence known to him, anyway. I expect the KT will try to parley in order to influence the commander to switch sides. In the event that the dialogue doesn't go in the KT's favour, I expect a more blunt course of action would have to be undertaken (taking into account that the KT is keen on accomplishing this tertiary objective) on their side.

Now the tanks are not manned yet and the engines are not in the ignition status, but might very well be in a matter of 10 rounds or so….not all at once mind you. I developed a system by which there is 30% chance that after 10 in game rounds the first tank would be operational. After that round, the 11th round would assume there is 40% chance of the first tank being operational. By extension, each other round there would be 10% more chance of this happening. After the first tank is ready to roll out (lol Starcraft reference) each other tank unit would have 50% chance each round of activating. Is this too much? Oh I need to mention that the KT is comprised of only two members so far.



#14 Thebigjul

Thebigjul

    Member

  • Members
  • 307 posts

Posted 30 August 2012 - 09:02 PM

If nop tank crew are ready to launch their tanks then it is far more than 10 round (mostly a minute) before any tanks could be battle ready count maybe 50 rounds since the soldier (if already clothes on) have to get from their barrack to the tanks, make a detour around the fighting SM, then ignite the engine, take the time for the prayer for the machine spirit of the tank, each weapon, …ect

Xell a KT may kill every single one of the IG in the camp before only one get a chance to have access to his tank.

If the crew stay near their tank, even around and inside, they still need  as say 10 to 15 rounds for an emergency ignite engine and weapons awakening.



#15 Charmander

Charmander

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,491 posts

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:12 PM

The only thing I'd caution against is 10 rounds of combat in this game (and most RPGs) can be an eternity.  A Marine with a Boltgun can do a ton of damage in that amount of time, especiall to the vulnerable human crew of a tank that's trying to climb in an exposed top hatch. 

How fast you wake up the tanks is more of a matter of how tough you want the encounter to be, IMO.  If you want it to be hard, and warn the PCs off from an agressive course, have a couple of heavier vehicles sitting idle on patrol.  This could tie up the PCs for a few rounds while the other tanks ready for combat.  This could give a strategic choice for the players as they have to figure out how to a) take out all these vehicles before they blowup or b) how to withdraw to claim an advantage over them.  If you want to give the PCs an edge and let them flex their big Marine muscles, let them have the full 10-50 rounds to deal with the issue. 

I find that how much creativity you allow to do special damage to vehicles (being able to disable a track or the main gun with krak or demo) follows the same decision tree- allowing it makes PCs feel bigger and cooler, disallowing it makes your players think twice when any armor enters the field. 



#16 ygg

ygg

    Member

  • Members
  • 25 posts

Posted 03 September 2012 - 05:03 AM

 All valid points, I'll take it into consideration. It seems to me there is a fine line between total obliteration of the KT and them cutting through the outpost's defenses like butter.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS