I don't like them because they give to me, the impression that I don't even stand a chance against armored units. One die is just automatically removed, and I don't like that idea.
One of the charming things about the old ruleset was that I could do such stupid but funny things like have a group of spearman gang up on a tank. It gave factions of all time periods and genres a chance to fight on an equal footing- yes, it was unrealistic, but if I wanted a realistic game I could just play Warhammer 40k.
Now, I have to bring in tank and dreadnuts just to reliably kill an armored minifig, dakka better spent on actual dreadnuts and tanks- most minifigs don't even get to attack the armored minifig. And even if one minifig does manage to Overskill, probably one dude in a squad, what's the guarantee his Overskill die will kill the armored unit?
And what recourse is there for medieval battles, where armor is much more common? They might have the occasional size 2 ballista or catapult, but normal castlemen (ie not wizards and heros) can do almost nothing against mounted knights,. By the time they roll enough Overskill die, the armored units will have killed them all.
This can all be avoided, of course, by avoiding or disabling them, by the rulebook's suggestion. Seriously, stub hawk? Where's the violence or destruction in that? I play brikwars to kill and blow crap up, not play cult and mouse and knock him over for a turn when he catches up.
I rest my case- of course it's your ruleset so I have no right to coerce you to do something you don't want. Besides, the ultimate solution to the armored question in any case are What I Say Goes and heroic feats.