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.

Ran an 1850 mech list and my opponent let me borrow a baneblade (with a set of sponsons) he had. List was Pask punisher and default Russ, 3 vet chimeras (2 melta squads 1 plasma squad), wyvern, manticore, and Baneblade. I was up against a really weird list (4 assassins, 3 units of custodes, a melta/chainsword knight, and an inquisitor hiding in the corner.

Against that specific list at least, I was really underwhelmed. We played on a heavy terrain city, hammer and anvil (deployment is using the narrow edge of the 4x8 with 24" in between us), so while I had the range advantage and nothing but the assassin with the poisoned blades ever got near it (and went for the manticore instead since it was a lot more likely to hurt it, died to plasma before it accomplished anything anyways). The knight I was a bit worried about but it only just made it to 12" away before the baneblade and manticore took it down (and one HP from a multilaser).

While it didn't take a single HP it didn't really accomplish much other than beat on the knight, which the manticore did better and the meltavets could have done a number on anyways. If we had played long deployment zones the knight would have easily gotten into combat and wrecked, so I feel having a wider array of stuff would have helped.

In the end (turn 6) he only had a squad of 4 custodes slowly slogging towards the baneblade (but in cover), it was just holding an objective since it would never make it to the assassin hiding on an objective and the inquisitor (his HQ) as far away as possible out of LoS. All I had left was the baneblade and one chimera with vets, that would have taken an objective but crashed despite dozer blade.

So all in all I'm not impressed. I feel like, while it did hold up well, another manticore/russ, another wyvern, and another squad of meltavets (with some spare change still) would have done more than it did. Was this just because of this one game, or are they really that underwhelming? I feel like either they hold up all game and kill a handful of stuff (unless we're on planet bowling ball) or just die to D. What's the one w/ S10 ignores cover and a demolisher? Now that I feel would do some work. But the fact that everthing had a 4+++ against it, it just kind of sucked. Maybe killed 300 points worth of stuff (since it only did 2 HP, to the knight, but was much more expensive than the manticore that did three, and more vets/wyvern/russ would be able to defend it a lot better than the baneblade did, since it was terrified of firing at models near the manticore).

Are they always a crap point sink distraction carnifex, or do they actually kill stuff? Should I just invest in a shadowsword or the ignores cover one? Really just.... 500+ points for that thing. And over $100. Do I run it again or get a bunch more tanks?

Powercreep, but to be honest they where never really good in their natural environment. Even in 5th apocalypse they where cool but died quite fast.
Those bane blade based tanks, just do not have the same cutting power as modern knights.The ignore cover one is much better not sure if it is good enough for its points. There is also the transport one that you can fill up with the new agents of imperium repair dudes so that it lives longer and becomes even more expensive. If you are using them as gun platforms you could also to buy a skyshield parking lot for that low cost but great 4++.

I have never seen it nor tried it but it might be fun to use them next to a psyker conclave giving them AV15.

Yeah, they have suffered a bit as more superheavies have been introduced.

They're pretty good if you fight against a lot of infantry/light transports, but struggle against most other things in my experience.

Which is a shame as -- gaming issues aside -- it's also a nice model.

A while back my group shot the breeze about allowing it to fire some kind of armour piercing shell rippeddoff/inspired by some old FW rules from...err...... some version of one of the IA books.

Give it like a single D shot -- no blast or anything -- from it's cannon.

Not much help here though I'll grant you.

I made a Stormlord out of my Baneblade kit.
Prefer how it looks and it brings something unique to the IG army (high S AP3 attacks that aren't blasts).

But then I also have a thing for Bullgryns and usually have 9 of them embarked on the damn thing.

It's also surprisingly resilient if you have 3 Enginseers and 4 Servitors onboard.

You know, I have THREE baneblades and I've never been able to field ANY of them

Fellblade with relic upgrade for ignore cover is the only way to go with those big hulls i think

I think bigger tanks like baneblades would've good in huge games I.e 5k or up games and only taken in pairs or higher

In all honesty the Baneblade suffers due to over-reliance on BS3 for its shooting, lacking any Ignores over what so ever, and like many Guard tanks being stuck in 3rd/4th edition.

The Stormsword is my go-to tank these days. It has fewer weapons, but its main cannon is a S10 AP1 ignores cover 10" pieplat with a 36" range, and it can make any, and I mean any form of Infantry and none IW character sweat buckets. If your opponent has transports then pop them with Multilasers and Autocannons before going in for the kill.

what about the Shadowsword? Does anyone think that is a worthy addition to a guard list? IRC the only D weapon that the IG has access to without allies. I was thinking about doing a IG list based on an emperor's shield company with a shadowsword.

IMHO baneblades and shadowswords are not good, at all. I have never tried the hellhammer so I can't really say for sure but I highly doubt it is worth it.

The baneblade, as others have noted, suffers from low ballistic skill and no ignores cover. So most things can take cover and take fire from it all day. On top of that it seems to be a generalist so it isn't good at killing anything in particular and it is just too expensive to not be able to kill things.

The shadowsword also has the problem of no ignores cover and low ballistic skill. And you would think having a S D gun would make it an obvious super heavy hunter, and you would be right, but having only one S D shot means it is terrible at that job. Because when you look at it, vs SH most of the ones you need it to kill will have a save of some kind, I.e. knights, WK, storm surge, anything deamon, or void shields on titans. So if you don't get a six you might not even get your d3, and while a six will kill just about any of them, paying 450points for a 1 in 6 to do anything meaningful to them a turn is way too expensive, especially when they will almost invariably kill you first.
Don't let the fact it is a large blast fool you in to thinking it will be useful against infantry or groups of lighter vehicles, because we pay out the nose for its str and rang and vs infantry for the vast majority there is no difference between S D and S 10 or even S 8, vs light vehicles you have a very low probability to kill them with one shot, even if they fail any save they may have, it is just so inefficient at that job you might as well have left it on the shelf and opted in to a 450 point handy cap. It may have been a bit under costed with 6th's D weapon rules but in 7th a 450 point single D shot has no reason to exist.


In case it isn't obvious, yes I have both of those tank and yes I am highly disappointed with them. :(
They are both really cool so if you like them use them, but don't expect much out of any of them, and never take them for competitiveness.

Off all of them, the Stormsword (especially the IA version which is cheaper and can take side armour 14) i've found to be the most useful. Since the BB Cannon isn't even S10, you're not insta killing bikes, whereas the stormsword is not only insta-killing them and denying FNP, but doing it reliably with ignores cover. This is a Big Deal against quite a lot of bike reliant builds regardless of faction.

The Hellhammer i've found comes a fair second, as 2 S10 attacks is pretty useful for general purpose mop-ups.

The Shadowsword I have and used to use quite frequently with double sponsons and targetters, but I eventually just started taking 2 vendettas and a punisher vulture for statistically the same effect but more survivability.

I finally played my Baneblade against my sons Necron Decurion. After four turns of shooting I was unimpressed with it. He had a great deal of models behind an Aegis Defense Line, with a 4+ cover save and 4+ reanimation I killed remarkably few models with it.

 Solis Luna Astrum wrote:
I finally played my Baneblade against my sons Necron Decurion. After four turns of shooting I was unimpressed with it. He had a great deal of models behind an Aegis Defense Line, with a 4+ cover save and 4+ reanimation I killed remarkably few models with it.

5+ because ID though, right? Still, statistically it isn't going to kill a ton of stuff. I'm definitely leaning towards either of the two ignores cover variants. Did you magnetize yours, or are you stuck with the standard? I'm definitely in favor of magnetizing it.

Get yourself a Forge World knight, they are that beautoful, that your opponent will still be swooning at it, as it cuts his army to pieces.

An Imperial Knight is cheaper and does more work, in my opinion.

I've never met a guard player who started playing guard because "I really like big stompy walkers".

 MarsNZ wrote:
I've never met a guard player who started playing guard because "I really like big stompy walkers".

Fair enough. I would say a baneblade is fine in more casual games (with the condition that you tell your opponent you're bringing a baneblade, since it is a superheavy) but if you're looking to get competitive, points are better spent elsewhere.

 MarsNZ wrote:
I've never met a guard player who started playing guard because "I really like big stompy walkers".

^^This

I really don't like the look or playstyle of the knights, if I want to play gundam I'll go tau.

This honestly looks like a matchup problem to me; Baneblades like fighting normal vehicles and single-wound infantry, not strange low-model-count armies or Knights.

The Hellhammer or the one with the hull-mounted Hellhammer cannon are more effective than the Baneblade proper because of Ignores Cover, but even then they'd like fighting Skitarii, a Gladius, Space Marine Bike shenanigans, Tau, Scatterbikes, or the like much better than Custodes/Assassins/Knights.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
the one with the hull-mounted Hellhammer cannon .

Stormsword

I have a whole regiment of baneblades (pics are available on request) and baneblade chassis vehicles. They are 30k baneblades, but the rules are fairly similar. What I have learned is thusly:

One Baneblade is awful at anything above 1.5k points. Two Baneblades is okay, but not great. Three Baneblades at around 2k is where the tipping point really is where they become okay, because in 30k they come in a Leviathan which gives them certain bonuses and in 40k they get the Emperor's Fury Superheavy Company which makes them really good.

The EFSC bypasses having to wound enemy units, requiring you to merely hit them with the Primary Weapon of all 3 tanks in the formation (whatever baneblade chassis vehicles you have brought) to force them to take a Morale check on 4d6. This usually results in them breaking. I know there are several fearless units out there and this isn't an auto-win button, but I always laugh when I do 0 wounds to TWC because of the awfulness of the Baneblade cannon and then they fail a leadership test and fall back 3d6 off the board, or a Riptide Wing sitting far too close together all fall back 3d6 as well just from being /hit/ by the Baneblade's gun. Heck, in one game against the Tau I fired at some Broadsides with all three of their main guns but there were Fire Warriors, Pathfinders, and a Riptide caught under the template as well. All three units left the board because of the EFSC, and the Broadsides were vaporized because the Baneblade cannon is actually phenomenally good against them. Remember: Blasts can hit multiple units, and the criterion for the EFSC rule to trigger is that the Primary Weapons must simply hit.

What this means is you want a tank with a TON of secondary weapons (Because you're firing all three of your primaries at or near the same target, so having lots of secondaries actually lets you participate in the battle without having most of your firepower sucked up into firing at one enemy unit), and with a 10" blast so you can catch a ton of enemy units in it (if they stay close together) and force all of them to take the 4d6 Morale checks.

Only the basic Baneblade fulfills this criteria - Most of the other superheavies have main weapons that cannot hit as many units as a 10" blast or, if they do, they lack the number and firepower of the Baneblade's secondary weapons (Read: demolisher cannons).

Having said that, the best Baneblade variant, in my opinion, is 30k only at the moment, the Stormhammer. The Stormhammer trades in the Baneblade's demolisher cannon for a twin-linked rapid-fire battlecannon (so you get two Str 8 AP3 Ordnance Large Blasts that are Twin Linked and 72" range instead of one Str 10 AP2 Ordnance Large Blast at 24"). It also comes with its sponsons for not much more than the stock, sponsonless Baneblade, giving it 3 multilasers per side (Though the fire-arcs are terrible). It has a hull lascannon instead of the twin-linked heavy bolters of the Baneblade. Its main gun, the Stormhammer Cannon, possesses the same profile as the Baneblade Cannon but is only 7" Blast; however, it gains both the Shred and Pinning special rules, so that's a wash imho, though honestly Shred is pretty awesome. Importantly, the co-axial weapon is a Multilaser, not an autocannon, so you have more chances to make the main weapon twin-linked. The Stormhammer also has ten hull points, and any of the aforementioned Multilasers (sponson or co-axial) can be upgraded to lascannons for MOAR LASCANNONS.

The true coup-de-grace for the Stormhammer though is the Targeters upgrade, which like the Targeters available to the Shadowswords adds +1 BS. Unlike the Shadowsword and its friends, however, the Stormhammer does not have to trade in a weapon, or anything, to get the targeters. It simply pays its points and voila, BS4.

This means you can have a tank with 8 Lascannons, one double-shot battlecannon, and one Shredding Baneblade cannon all of which are BS4, and one more hull point than the Baneblade itself. This gets expensive (usually I upgrade only 3 lascannons, making it a total of 4, not 8) and lacks anti-infantry punch, kinda... but not really. That double battlecannon is scary.

So I guess after all my rambling the point is:

In order for Baneblades to be good, you need to run the formation. If you want a tank that's like a Baneblade that can be good on its own, ask your friends to let you run the Auxilia Stormhammer with it's 30k rules. There's no reason for them to say yes but it never hurts to ask.

You took one of the fairest super heavies out there, ran into list that's exact opposite baneblade prefers to face and it still was alive at the end and seemed to at least do something. Not much but with bad matchup not that bad.

Baneblade isn't broken good. It's basically trio of leman russes in price and performance.