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.

I just learned about this and it would finally mean that the Emperor's Fist Tank Company (which I bought almost a decade ago) can finally be fielded as a legit Battleforged Army. Now it's merely an issue of what kind of tanks to field.

Since the original Emperor's Fist only had the old russes, which only came with the battle cannon, I will need to do some converting if I was to run anything other than 10 vanilla russes. However it seems like, apart from shooting into the air, the vanilla russ can do pretty well against everything. I could convert a few into Demolishers though. So thoughts?

Also, since that decurion requires me to run 2 Tank Commanders (and each has to take at least one other tank in his squadron) I was thinking of allocating 6 of my tanks to the Commander's squadron, then fielding 2 singletons and 1 unit of 2 Leman Russes. Thoughts?

Hi!

First: you don't need to field 2 TCs, you can either include in your army as separate detachment or just take CCS (probably in Chimera) as mandatory Command choice.

Second: I strongly recommend to convert all off your tanks to Punishers, Vanquishers, Executioners and Eradicators. LRBTs just not a good choice anymore: they do not force as much saves as Punishers do, do not have AP2 of Executioner, not as good anti-tank as Vanquishers and lack Ignores Cover ability of Eradicator. For example for tomorrow game I'm planning to take 2 Punishers (1 for TC and another ont for his wingman), 1 Executioner and 2 Vanquishers but may be will trade 1 Vanquisher for Eradicator for some ruin cleaning. Of course for me it's just a matter of some gun-swapping because I magnetise everything and to do this is another thing I can recommend to everyone .

Hope this will be of some help.

Also you can take any of these formations as standalone formations. You just won't get the battle group special rules which was all for infantry anyways so it doesn't even matter for the tank company. So you can theoretically just run the company if you wanted.

Keep in mind the bonuses for the tank company too. All other russes within 12" of the tank commander gain bs4. So I would personally take russes that can fire hull weapons and sponson weapons normally, so avoid the ordnance russes as much as possible unless you like the fluff as much as I do lol.

But really avoid the battle tank and demolisher. If they fire their main guns all other weapons snap fire. Where as all the other russes would be able to fire all of their weapons at full bs.

Also as for your tank commander I wouldn't want him to be in a squad of 3. It makes him a bigger target as he already is now that he gives all other russes bonuses, it also makes it easier for enemy units to assault them now that their unit is bigger.

New AM Codex could be just around the corner, so maybe hold off on conversions for 6 months to see what pans out. Nothing worse than converting right before a codex change, only to find your hard work has been nerfed.

I'd not hold my breath for a new codex yet.

 koooaei wrote:
I'd not hold my breath for a new codex yet.

Unless the authors just completely forgot who commissars are allowed(forced) to join, I would be expecting a new codex relatively soon: the psykana formation does not currently work(wyrdvanes are not on the list of the units a commissar must join, so encouraging presence cannot actually do antthing). Currently most are forgetting or ignoring this, or houseruling the RAI to allow the formation to function.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

 koooaei wrote:
I'd not hold my breath for a new codex yet.

Unless the authors just completely forgot who commissars are allowed(forced) to join, I would be expecting a new codex relatively soon: the psykana formation does not currently work(wyrdvanes are not on the list of the units a commissar must join, so encouraging presence cannot actually do antthing). Currently most are forgetting or ignoring this, or houseruling the RAI to allow the formation to function.

You do realize that GW dicks up their own rules all the time, and makes no effort to correct them, right? A mistake does not mean that GW has some grand plan that we don't quite understand yet.

It sounds like a IG codex is just over the horizon and I have other things to work through atm, so I'll hold off until the new codex comes in.

The reason I wanted the second TC is because I wanted it to be a full battlegroup since they usually have fun rules on top of existing ones and TCs have a better BS for a modest price increase. However I don't know what other benefits it would bring cuz I'm just going on hearsay and online images (I was mainly happy that it would let me legally field a Tank Company).

As for rule fumbles, yeah GW does do that a lot. The biggest one aside from this is the Ravenwing FoC in the Dark Angel Codex, where it states that the only HQ choices allowed are those with the Ravenwing rule, but Sammael being the only HQ unit in the entire book with that rule, it meant that all those extra HQ choices are effectively useless. GW's proofreading skills have reached an all-time low recently and their refusal to publish FAQs just exacerbate the problem.

EDIT: I can understand Punishers for the volume of fire and Executioners for the AP2, but why Eradicators and Vanquishers? Eradicators have the ignore Covers rule but pretty crap AP while the Vanquisher's 1 shot nature make it seem like a liability to use as an anti-tank platform rather than just shoot it with a Demolisher.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
EDIT: I can understand Punishers for the volume of fire and Executioners for the AP2, but why Eradicators and Vanquishers? Eradicators have the ignore Covers rule but pretty crap AP while the Vanquisher's 1 shot nature make it seem like a liability to use as an anti-tank platform rather than just shoot it with a Demolisher.

Re: Eradicators: quite a lot of armies have 4+ saves these days, and those armies usually rely on cover to compensate. Even if you are against MEQs and you are steadfastly against tailoring your list, Eradicators can still do reasonable damage by forcing saves. IMO Eradicators are much better than Punishers unless you put Pask in one.

Re: Vanquishers: this formation makes them bs4, which makes them good tank killers again, especially with hull lascannons. Demolishers are ok but expensive and they lack range.

 Krusha wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
EDIT: I can understand Punishers for the volume of fire and Executioners for the AP2, but why Eradicators and Vanquishers? Eradicators have the ignore Covers rule but pretty crap AP while the Vanquisher's 1 shot nature make it seem like a liability to use as an anti-tank platform rather than just shoot it with a Demolisher.

Re: Eradicators: quite a lot of armies have 4+ saves these days, and those armies usually rely on cover to compensate. Even if you are against MEQs and you are steadfastly against tailoring your list, Eradicators can still do reasonable damage by forcing saves. IMO Eradicators are much better than Punishers unless you put Pask in one.

Re: Vanquishers: this formation makes them bs4, which makes them good tank killers again, especially with hull lascannons. Demolishers are ok but expensive and they lack range.

I forgot that Vanquisher Cannons are not Ordinance, so they can fire alongside the other weapons. Vanquisher Cannons would be easy to convert too.

On the subject of Eradicators, I think the Punisher or Vanilla Russ would still be better, considering that the russ would, at the very least, be subjected to a 4+ cover save whereas the Eradicator would be more likely subjected to 3+ Armor Saves. While there are units that could get a 3+ or even 2+ cover save, it might be too specific and narrow to bring Eradicators for that. And punishers have potential to force more saves on enemies since they can get in more hits (on average, a normal Punisher would get 10 hits, which the Eradicator would only get if the template wholly lands on an enemy unit. The Punisher would also always get this many hits, while the Eradicator's gun depends on the number of models in a unit).

I get plenty of use out of Eradicators. Guardsmen, Orks, Space Marine Scouts, Pathfinders, Firewarriors, Skitarri and AV10 Skimmers are all targets the Eradicator eats for breakfast. And even against Space Marines, you're still wounding on 2s and if they had a cover save then you're not that much less effective than an Executioner or Battle Tank.

Being able to delete squads of say Pathfinders off the board - no saves, back to the pavilion - is a huge thing. It dicks over Tau Markerlight support something fierce, and makes them much more manageable to deal with.

MechaEmperor wrote:I forgot that Vanquisher Cannons are not Ordinance, so they can fire alongside the other weapons. Vanquisher Cannons would be easy to convert too.

On the subject of Eradicators, I think the Punisher or Vanilla Russ would still be better, considering that the russ would, at the very least, be subjected to a 4+ cover save whereas the Eradicator would be more likely subjected to 3+ Armor Saves. While there are units that could get a 3+ or even 2+ cover save, it might be too specific and narrow to bring Eradicators for that. And punishers have potential to force more saves on enemies since they can get in more hits (on average, a normal Punisher would get 10 hits, which the Eradicator would only get if the template wholly lands on an enemy unit. The Punisher would also always get this many hits, while the Eradicator's gun depends on the number of models in a unit).

I guess it largely depends on whether MEQs dominate your meta. It's mostly about 4+ saves and cover spam where I am. In that scenario the Eradicator benefits from superior range, strength and of course ignores cover when compared to the Punisher. If those ten guys you hit are in cover then you will only kill about four (or less if they're Orks).

But if you face MEQs all the time then yes the vanilla Russ is a decent choice.

Yesterday I've played a game against Imperial Fists with my Cadian Battle Group, mentioned in the second post of the thread and it was a pure win. I've fit Vanquisgers with lascannons and it took only 2 tuns to kill Land Raider in 4+ cover. Punishers exploded another Land Raider with their multi-meltas and lascannons and after that wiped out a group of TH/SS terminators with libby (volume of fire they produce is enormous). Execotioner did almost nothing for the first 3 turns but after that killed 3 grav-centurions in one turn and cleared a ruin from 5 tactical marines in the last turn of the game (I've gave it a "Preferred Enemy" rule using engineseer's Trojan service vehicle and it helped a lot). Of course BS4 for all the tanks (formation rule) turned out to be a real blessing (of the Omnissiah ).

And a bit about the rules: all good ones (for a tank company) are contained in the formation itself. You will get nothing from a full Cadian Battle Group if you are not fielding a lot of infantry, so don't bother.

Question as a Marine player who is interested in guard: Can a tank Commander give the ignores cover order? Or is that just for infantry?:

 Swampmist wrote:
Question as a Marine player who is interested in guard: Can a tank Commander give the ignores cover order? Or is that just for infantry?:

tank commanders have their own seperate orders in the tank commander entry

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:


On the subject of Eradicators, I think the Punisher or Vanilla Russ would still be better, considering that the russ would, at the very least, be subjected to a 4+ cover save whereas the Eradicator would be more likely subjected to 3+ Armor Saves. While there are units that could get a 3+ or even 2+ cover save, it might be too specific and narrow to bring Eradicators for that. And punishers have potential to force more saves on enemies since they can get in more hits (on average, a normal Punisher would get 10 hits, which the Eradicator would only get if the template wholly lands on an enemy unit. The Punisher would also always get this many hits, while the Eradicator's gun depends on the number of models in a unit).

I've run eradicators quite a lot. They generally do better than regular russes. The reason is you're still using your sponsones. 9 hb shots even at bs3 are still good for the price. Besides, you're still forcing jink for non 3+ stuff or for things with 2+ jink or ravenwing. Yes, a regular russ can still hurt vehicles and is somewhat better against t4 multiwound stuff. But not too good to justify it's price. It should really be like 120-130 pts.

 koooaei wrote:

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:


On the subject of Eradicators, I think the Punisher or Vanilla Russ would still be better, considering that the russ would, at the very least, be subjected to a 4+ cover save whereas the Eradicator would be more likely subjected to 3+ Armor Saves. While there are units that could get a 3+ or even 2+ cover save, it might be too specific and narrow to bring Eradicators for that. And punishers have potential to force more saves on enemies since they can get in more hits (on average, a normal Punisher would get 10 hits, which the Eradicator would only get if the template wholly lands on an enemy unit. The Punisher would also always get this many hits, while the Eradicator's gun depends on the number of models in a unit).

I've run eradicators quite a lot. They generally do better than regular russes. The reason is you're still using your sponsones. 9 hb shots even at bs3 are still good for the price. Besides, you're still forcing jink for non 3+ stuff or for things with 2+ jink or ravenwing. Yes, a regular russ can still hurt vehicles and is somewhat better against t4 multiwound stuff. But not too good to justify it's price. It should really be like 120-130 pts.

This right here is why I almost exclusively use Eradicators for my "filler" tanks once I pick out my specialist tanks. They are 30 points cheaper and its really easy to throw on some HB sponsons to get those extra 6 shots at BS 3, (or 4 if they are part of the core). I think of it as your large blast is hitting maybe 3-4 guys if you are lucky, you will always wound on a 2+. More often than not those marines will be in some sort of cover, so they will likely get a cover save of some kind, usually a 4+. The eradicator is simply doing what guard does best, make you take so many saves that pure statistics will cause you to fail. The extra 9 HB shots will likely add another 4-5 wounds on top of that so you are just as likely to kill them than if they are getting killed with AP3, and you now have a much greater chance to glance light vehicles to death too with your HBs.

While I love LRBTs, they need to be cheaper or have primary weapon so sponsons work for them again in order for them to make a triumphant return to the battlefield

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Swampmist wrote:
Question as a Marine player who is interested in guard: Can a tank Commander give the ignores cover order? Or is that just for infantry?:

tank commanders have their own seperate orders in the tank commander entry

But the "Emperors Wrath Artillery Company" formation from Mont'Ka allows the formation's company commander to issue ignores cover to the artillery tanks. Some of them already have ignores cover, or are barrage, but the others don't. So an Ignores Cover Manticore is a very real thing. Or even the hydra. It would ignore jink saves on flyers.

 Icculus wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Swampmist wrote:
Question as a Marine player who is interested in guard: Can a tank Commander give the ignores cover order? Or is that just for infantry?:

tank commanders have their own seperate orders in the tank commander entry

But the "Emperors Wrath Artillery Company" formation from Mont'Ka allows the formation's company commander to issue ignores cover to the artillery tanks. Some of them already have ignores cover, or are barrage, but the others don't. So an Ignores Cover Manticore is a very real thing. Or even the hydra. It would ignore jink saves on flyers.

That literally has nothing to with my post or the post i replied to. We were specifically talking about Tank Commanders

I mean, it is relevant as that means they can get it he ignores cover order, which is super cool and probably nerfs the Eradicator if Im reading the responses right.

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Icculus wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Swampmist wrote:
Question as a Marine player who is interested in guard: Can a tank Commander give the ignores cover order? Or is that just for infantry?:

tank commanders have their own seperate orders in the tank commander entry

But the "Emperors Wrath Artillery Company" formation from Mont'Ka allows the formation's company commander to issue ignores cover to the artillery tanks. Some of them already have ignores cover, or are barrage, but the others don't. So an Ignores Cover Manticore is a very real thing. Or even the hydra. It would ignore jink saves on flyers.

That literally has nothing to with my post or the post i replied to. We were specifically talking about Tank Commanders

Literally, it does have something to do with the post. Because it sounds like he wants to give his tanks the ignores cover order. If he wants to do that, then there is a way. Yes he asked if a Tank Commander can issue orders, so the answer to that was no. BUUUUT, there is a way to issue that order to other tanks.

You own 10 Russes? Sweet!

Assuming you have a Chimera, I'd still take the Chimera as the overall command. That would allow you to field 2 "core" units of 5 tanks each:
* 2 Tank Commanders
* 3x 1 Russ Squardon
That would give you more flexibility.

I'd consider the Hellhound Veterans formation as the 3rd, as it's ObSec. Or a Hellhammer.


BTW, as you've got the chassis and the interest, have you considered converting at least one of each Russ variant, a la Pokemon?

 Icculus wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Icculus wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:

 Swampmist wrote:
Question as a Marine player who is interested in guard: Can a tank Commander give the ignores cover order? Or is that just for infantry?:

tank commanders have their own seperate orders in the tank commander entry

But the "Emperors Wrath Artillery Company" formation from Mont'Ka allows the formation's company commander to issue ignores cover to the artillery tanks. Some of them already have ignores cover, or are barrage, but the others don't. So an Ignores Cover Manticore is a very real thing. Or even the hydra. It would ignore jink saves on flyers.

That literally has nothing to with my post or the post i replied to. We were specifically talking about Tank Commanders

Literally, it does have something to do with the post. Because it sounds like he wants to give his tanks the ignores cover order. If he wants to do that, then there is a way. Yes he asked if a Tank Commander can issue orders, so the answer to that was no. BUUUUT, there is a way to issue that order to other tanks.

He want to give his Leman Russ squadrons ignore cover. Tank Commanders are for Leman Russes and nothing else. The Artillery Company formation doesn't have any Leman Russes in it so has nothing to do with the conversation at hand

well if we take his quote as a standalone, it looks like we were both making guesses because he never said who was going to be the target of the orders. He just asked if tank commanders could give the order. Either way it's irrelevant now, this is a discussion board, where I figured people would be open to someone interjecting with a related comment or fact.

Hey guys. I'm interested in running the Decurion as an Armored Company. Haven't played in a while, but thought I'd scratch up a list. Maybe get some dialogue started on the best ways to utilize it.

Command:
-Tank Commander vanquisher, hull lascannon
-Commander's Buddy executioner, sponsons plasma cannons, hull lascannon

Core:
Emperor's Fist Armoured Company
-Tank Commander punisher, heavy stubber
-Commander's Buddy 1 eradicator, sponson heavy bolters
-Commander's Buddy 2 eradicator, sponson heavy bolters
-Russ Squadron 1 exterminator, sponson multi-meltas, hull lascannon
-Russ Squadron 2 exterminator, sponson multi-meltas, hull lascannon
-Russ Squadron 3 exterminator, sponson multi-meltas, hull lascannon
-Enginseer servo-arm servitor

Auxiliary:
Emperor's Wrath Artillery Company
-Company Command Squad chimera (multilaser, heavy bolter), lascannon team
-Manticore
-Wyvern
-Wyvern
-Enginseer servo-arm servitor

1850 points
8 Russ chassis, 4 Chimera chassis

So is there any reason to ever run a Company Command Squad for your command, besides to save points? Would it be worth taking an Aegis Defense Line for the Artillery Company? Do Wyverns make Eradicators redundant - should I switch the Wyvern to Basilisks, Eradicators to X Russ, or is there never enough ignore's cover? Is it even worth having an Artillery Company in favor of more Russes, or should more points be allocated for artillery? Is there any place for an infantry platoon?

Like I said, I haven't played in a while, but I used to use an Armored Company regularly (I miss beast-hunter shells). Let's figure out how devastating the modern Armored Company can be.

The Command Chimera is generally better because it saves points, and you're already taking a Tank Commander. It also gives you more options with the advisors, like a 2nd MOO to go with your Arty Co...

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
You own 10 Russes? Sweet!

Assuming you have a Chimera, I'd still take the Chimera as the overall command. That would allow you to field 2 "core" units of 5 tanks each:
* 2 Tank Commanders
* 3x 1 Russ Squardon
That would give you more flexibility.

I'd consider the Hellhound Veterans formation as the 3rd, as it's ObSec. Or a Hellhammer.


BTW, as you've got the chassis and the interest, have you considered converting at least one of each Russ variant, a la Pokemon?

This. This managed to singlehandedly derail my entire plan for tactical soundness.

The russes I got are the old 3rd edition ones, and it was from the limited edition Emperor's Fist Tank Company Apocalypse formation (back when it was just introduced in 4th edition). Yes I basically waited almost a decade to use these models and no, they're still new in the box.

I might consider building one russ of each type but I'm gonna have problems making the plasma cannon variant. Although one of the reasons I want to pick out different Russes is because I want them to look uniformed, with maybe no more than 3 variants (two "troop" types and one for the custom Tank Commander).

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
The Command Chimera is generally better because it saves points...

125 for 5 guardsmen and a chimera that don't do anything seems like a waste, especially when the points I save are going towards tanks anyways. Are options such as advisors that much better than another BS4 Russ? Or do you mean saving points provides greater list flexibility, despite an underwhelming command option?

I believe the Tank Commanders have to take a minimum of one other tank in their unit, which chews up points.

 MechaEmperor7000 wrote:

 JohnHwangDD wrote:
You own 10

BTW, as you've got the chassis and the interest, have you considered converting at least one of each Russ variant, a la Pokemon?

This. This managed to singlehandedly derail my entire plan for tactical soundness.

The russes I got are the old 3rd edition ones, and it was from the limited edition Emperor's Fist Tank Company Apocalypse formation (back when it was just introduced in 4th edition). Yes I basically waited almost a decade to use these models and no, they're still new in the box.

I might consider building one russ of each type but I'm gonna have problems making the plasma cannon variant. Although one of the reasons I want to pick out different Russes is because I want them to look uniformed, with maybe no more than 3 variants (two "troop" types and one for the custom Tank Commander).


I believe the Tank Commanders have to take a minimum of one other tank in their unit, which chews up points.

The Tank Commander *does* require a 2nd Russ, so that HQ pick is more than 2x as expensive as a Command Squad.

Because you have 10 chassis, Pokemon is a good future-proofing choice as well. LRBT, Demolisher, Vanquisher, Exterminator for sure, because they are the 4 classics from 2E/3E. Then Punisher & Rxecutioner & Eradicator from the new kit (if you buy just one kit, that solves the weapons issue, BTW.), so that's 7 tanks. Then the Annihilator & Conquerer, plus convert the Destroyer Hunter & Thunderer, so that's your 11 tanks!

Or the 11th chassis gets built up as an Atlas, count as Command Chimera.

For the uniformity, that comes from painting them all at once in the same scheme. Not a big deal.

Anyhow, rock on, it'll be awesome!