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 think it has a lot to do with the varying crew quality. Even the best tanks can be chumped by inferior ones if their crew isn't up to snuff. Since this is the Imperial Guard we're talking about the crew probably varies from being born tankers to being factory workers they just threw in the things because they knew how the tanks worked.

the 3 things AFV..MBTs..tanks..whatever you want to call them , are measured on.
Speed...protection..firepower

And as to the continued comparison of the Leman Russ and Hammerhead..this is the breakdown I would envision...more from a pseudo-fluff tabletop comparison.
Equal crews skill for sake of comparison as well.
standard Russ..standard Hammerhead.

Hammer head and Leman russ firepower..roughly equal if in range if not in raw tank killing power..each has its advantages..with a slight advantage to the hammerhead in anti-vehicle potency. (it is a freaking railgun after all)
Protection..Leman russ has thicker armor...and the Hammer head without upgrades is less well protected..so advantage Leman Russ
Speed/ maneuverability...Hammerhead hands down..roads...bridges..rivers...etc are of no concern for it..strategic and tactical mobility is unimpaired..compared to a Leman Russ..that is subjected to these hazards and obstacles.

So in a very basic comparison they are equal...and I have used both on the tabletop.
But I would much rather be in a Hammerhead

And if you can move in 3 dimensions and overcome most any terrain with ease you can usually maintain the combat tempo..so hit and fade..popups..etc, would always favor the Hammerhead..and put the Leman russ on the defensive..something that no one enjoys..again this is thinking beyond the 6' X 4' world they usually have to fight on.

But as always..just my opinion.

It seems like the Hammerhead was actually built to engage enemy armor threats from afar with as little risk to the tank itself as possible.

It seems like the Russ was made to be a mobile bunker as much as a tank to support grinding offensives.

 EmpNortonII wrote:
No, you can't. It overheats, period.

According to game mechanics, and game mechanics only.

Although its debatable whether game mechanics are or aren't admissible. Alot of fluff that has appeared over the years was shaped by specific games, after all.

I'm also not sure you can do just a simple straight comparison between a Hammerhead or a Russ. Hammerheads are dedicated, specialist designs. They kill stuff, and they kill it from long range with alot of firepower and mobility. Its alot like the FCS concepts the Army keeps envisioning as the next 'big thing' really (although to my knowledge we have no hard data on its armour or stuff like that.) ITs got a Railgun and that gives it lots of advantages (no propellant means their recoil is lower for an equivalent projectile mass and velocity, and for a equal level of recoil likely means the gun throws a heavier and/or faster round.) No propellant means nothing potentially volatile to blow up in the tank. It also has a speed advantage over most Russ stats (70-100 kph depending on source, the latter comes from a very early IA supplement around 3rd edition I believe.. a time when Earthshakers were 125mm and had a 410 m/s muzzle velocity lol) Give it lots of terrain to move in and unconstrained operations (EG nothing critical to defend) and it would be playing to its strengths.

The Russ on the other hand is multi-everything. Meant to be built and repaired/maintained by all kinds of materials and industrial/technology levels, running on a wide variety of fuels, operated by different kinds of crews (varying quality, fighting doctrines, cultures, etc.) and having all manner of variations in how its kitted out (such as weapons, or engines. Some Russes have turbines and can fire on the move, for example.) It is meant to fill a variety of roles and fight a wide variety of roles - thsi means it isn't as good as a specialist design, but it can do whatever is needed adequately and it can be adapted in any number of ways, at need (which, along with the ease of construction and maintenance, is important for the way the Guard works.)

I'm not sure it would neccesarily have a more powerful gun. whilst to my knowledge we don't know what kind of round it fires (is it fin stabilized, spin stabilized, what is ti made of, etc.) it does fire it very fast (Mach 6-10 depending on source) and it would be hard to get a Russ to consistently match that. Vanquishers (and maybe Annihilators) would be a closer match in the offensive department. And maybe the Destroyer Tank Hunter.

Edit: Also, ammunition is an issue. IF the Russ is only packing HE rounds, or if its using full caliber AP (like AP capped or APCBC) its not going to be as effective if it was packing, say, APCR, APDS or ideally APFSDS or some sort of HEAT round (which is available depending on source.... for example the Russ is listed as a 120mm smoothbore, so that means it has to use fin stabilized ammo unless its firing the tank gun equivalent of a shotgun slug. Wheraes by other sources like Imperial Armour, it seems to be rifled given the driving band.)

Anyhow, projectile design and competition has a major influence on performance along with speed (which is a big reason why modern tanks are smoothbore discarding sabot.. it optimzies for fin stabilized high density ammo at the highest possible speeds.)

The Imperial Answer wrote:
[
Steam powered stuff can be pretty effective so it may not be a draw back if a Russ is steam powered assuming it still functioned the same.

Well true. Even a nuclear powered tank might still run on steam (I'm pretty sure its important for moving turbines in RL nuclear reactors, anyhow.) But what I was trying to get at was a really low tech sort of tank like of the late 19th/early 20th century earth. Constructed of iron plate and a really crude engine by such standards. It could look more or less like a Russ (thats th enature of STC) but have different performance and capabilities because the construction methods and/or materials used (and stuff used to fuel/arm it) are of varying quality.

The best comparison to a Hammerhead would be a Vanquisher tank with Beast-Hunter shells.

Mobility: The Hammerhead still wins, though it is worth noting that the sheer mechanical reliability and ruggedness of the Leman Russ may make it more mobile on a huge (I.E. Imperial) scale by avoiding breakdowns.

Firepower: Hands down in favor of the Russ. The Vanquisher's sub-calibre AT round is much more effective, both in game and instances of the fluff where it is mentioned, than the Hammerhead's railgun round. The railgun's Submunition round, while having a larger kill radius, lacks the potency of the chemical-energy Beast Hunter shell at both piercing infantry armor and killing large creatures. The Leman Russ's firepower is further increased with the addition of co-axially mounted heavy stubbers, hull-mounted heavy weapons (including lascannons), and sponson-mounted heavy weapons (including multi-meltas). For sheer tankbusting, the Leman Russ Vanquisher is far superior to the Hammerhead, and it also has increased firepower against heavy and very heavy infantry and drastically increased potency against large creatures.

Protection: Also hands down in favor of the Russ. Although Jinking is possible in a Hammerhead, it so boggles the internal systems that I imagine it is not SOP (even if it is on the TT). The Leman Russ's armor is easily patched when damaged, easily constructed, more protective, and can be laced with camoleoline materials (to make it more resistant to detection) without meaningfully affecting the protective value of the tank's armor. The addition of other defensive armaments (while not present in the TT game) helps it to deter enemy infantry from approaching the tank.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
{comparison}

Too bad this is based entirely on game mechanics instead of fluff.

^ That. Based entirely on game mechanics, except for where the fluff would favour the Leman Russ.

Forgot to mention where the Hammehead is capable of sub-orbital descent unaided, for example. Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if a Russ tried that.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
{comparison}

Too bad this is based entirely on game mechanics instead of fluff.

I can provide fluff evidence as well.

First of all, reliability has no bearing in-game. It is simply repeatedly stated to be reliable in the fluff.

Secondly, the Vanquisher is said to be able to penetrate the toughest ground armor that the Imperium could muster - Titan armor. It is said in IA1v2 that a company of Vanquishers can destroy traitor war-engines (obviously by penetrating its armor). If 10 Hammerheads could easily deal with Imperial titans, the Tau would probably be justified in considering them scrap metal, and wouldn't be afraid enough to build the AX-10. As for the Beast Hunter shells, the fluff for them is that they contain "volatile chemicals and mutagenic acids" which are more effective than shrapnel shells against certain targets (though they do have a lower kill radius in the explosion).

Lastly, the armor of the tank is tough enough to withstand the KE of a round moving it two meters sideways. I saw someone doing a calculation of how tough the armor would be (based on various assumptions admittedly) based on the weight of the tank and other information, and came out with some absurd number. There's other examples of the Leman Russ being quite well armored as well, I just won't be arsed to look them up.

Most pertinently, however, I would like to believe that at least in general statements, the rules writers try to emulate the fluff. If the Hammerhead had more armor than the Russ, it would've had more armor numbers. If the Russ had a worse cannon, it would have a worse cannon. If the Russ didn't have sponsons, it wouldn't have the option to take sponsons, etc.

I'm not even just outright comparing the numbers - those statements are general, and I think the people that developed the game have some effect on the fluff and visa-versa.

Happy New Year.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ashiraya wrote:
^ That. Based entirely on game mechanics, except for where the fluff would favour the Leman Russ.

Forgot to mention where the Hammehead is capable of sub-orbital descent unaided, for example. Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if a Russ tried that.

I gave mobility to the HH - that counts as mobility, yes?

 Ashiraya wrote:
^ That. Based entirely on game mechanics, except for where the fluff would favour the Leman Russ.

Forgot to mention where the Hammehead is capable of sub-orbital descent unaided, for example. Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if a Russ tried that.

Just replace a few lugs, springs, put in a new crew and you'll be good to go.

Well, you have to get the old crew out first . A hose might do.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Lastly, the armor of the tank is tough enough to withstand the KE of a round moving it two meters sideways. I saw someone doing a calculation of how tough the armor would be (based on various assumptions admittedly) based on the weight of the tank and other information, and came out with some absurd number. There's other examples of the Leman Russ being quite well armored as well, I just won't be arsed to look them up.

Isn't that like the Marine running at supersonic speeds in Night Lords?

Or Plasma Pistols firing at temperatures that would wipe out continents?

GW is not good with numbers.

Weeelll if the shot was brief enough you could fire a really high temperature bolt without damaging the environment too much. You wouldn't want to be standing too close to the bolt's path, though.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Lastly, the armor of the tank is tough enough to withstand the KE of a round moving it two meters sideways. I saw someone doing a calculation of how tough the armor would be (based on various assumptions admittedly) based on the weight of the tank and other information, and came out with some absurd number. There's other examples of the Leman Russ being quite well armored as well, I just won't be arsed to look them up.

Isn't that like the Marine running at supersonic speeds in Night Lords?

Or Plasma Pistols firing at temperatures that would wipe out continents?

GW is not good with numbers.

Perhaps not. But it means what it says, and it says "The armor of this tank is stupid good." Whether or not you disagree with the writer on whether or not it should be that good, it simply is stated as fact.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Lastly, the armor of the tank is tough enough to withstand the KE of a round moving it two meters sideways. I saw someone doing a calculation of how tough the armor would be (based on various assumptions admittedly) based on the weight of the tank and other information, and came out with some absurd number. There's other examples of the Leman Russ being quite well armored as well, I just won't be arsed to look them up.

Isn't that like the Marine running at supersonic speeds in Night Lords?

Or Plasma Pistols firing at temperatures that would wipe out continents?

GW is not good with numbers.

Even FW, which generally does a better job, has a land raider at a density of far less than water.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
If 10 Hammerheads could easily deal with Imperial titans, the Tau would probably be justified in considering them scrap metal, and wouldn't be afraid enough to build the AX-10.

This is a bad argument because the railgun Tigershark wasn't built because the Tau had no other option. They already had the Manta as a titan killer, it was just too expensive and wasted too much space on transport capacity to be ideal in that role. The Tigershark gives the Tau an efficient titan killer with far better mobility than a Hammerhead squadron (so it can quickly react to titan attacks instead of having to mass Hammerheads everywhere a titan could appear) and the ability to blow away a titan in a single strafing run instead of having to fight it in an evenly-matched battle.

As for the Beast Hunter shells, the fluff for them is that they contain "volatile chemicals and mutagenic acids" which are more effective than shrapnel shells against certain targets (though they do have a lower kill radius in the explosion).

Which is a single line of vague fluff for a weapon that doesn't appear anywhere else. That's hardly better than the game mechanics explanation of "FW realized that it's stupid how MCs are more durable than tanks" if you want an objective analysis of how effective they are.

Lastly, the armor of the tank is tough enough to withstand the KE of a round moving it two meters sideways. I saw someone doing a calculation of how tough the armor would be (based on various assumptions admittedly) based on the weight of the tank and other information, and came out with some absurd number. There's other examples of the Leman Russ being quite well armored as well, I just won't be arsed to look them up.

On the other hand there's also fluff of Hammerhead railgun shots going in one side of a LRBT, trashing the interior and liquefying the crew, and spraying the bloody mess out the exit hole in the other side of the tank. So either LRBT armor isn't all that impressive, or Hammerhead railgun shots are way more powerful than you seem to think.

Most pertinently, however, I would like to believe that at least in general statements, the rules writers try to emulate the fluff. If the Hammerhead had more armor than the Russ, it would've had more armor numbers. If the Russ had a worse cannon, it would have a worse cannon. If the Russ didn't have sponsons, it wouldn't have the option to take sponsons, etc.

No, because you're overlooking the fact that things change over multiple editions. For example, the Predator's autocannon was supposed to be a pretty good anti-tank weapon when it was first published (and IIRC it was), but now in 7th edition it's a joke. Is it really a pathetic gun fluff-wise, or were GW's rule authors just too lazy and/or incompetent to update the old 2nd edition rules to match the 7th edition game?

Now, I'll admit that the LRBT probably has better armor, but the Hammerhead has good armor combined with far superior evasion ability and powerful defensive electronic warfare so in terms of which tank is harder to kill the LRBT's advantage is much less clear. And the LRBT's gun is completely outclassed by the Hammerhead. In IA3 it's explicitly stated that the LRBT has no hope of beating a Hammerhead in an open-field tank duel, the Hammehead can just snipe it from beyond the range of effective return fire.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Even FW, which generally does a better job, has a land raider at a density of far less than water.

I don't really see the problem with that, because a Land Raider isn't a solid block of metal. A real-world battleship has less density than water (as demonstrated by the fact that it floats), but I don't think anyone would argue that it is poorly armored.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Perhaps not. But it means what it says, and it says "The armor of this tank is stupid good." Whether or not you disagree with the writer on whether or not it should be that good, it simply is stated as fact.

You have to throw it out because it's hard to imagine the tank being shoved to the side like that without the shock of the impact killing the crew. Remember, even if the armor isn't penetrated the stuff inside the armor can still be destroyed. So the more likely case is that this is yet another "GW sucks at numbers" example that doesn't match the rest of the fluff and should be discarded.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
If 10 Hammerheads could easily deal with Imperial titans, the Tau would probably be justified in considering them scrap metal, and wouldn't be afraid enough to build the AX-10.

This is a bad argument because the railgun Tigershark wasn't built because the Tau had no other option. They already had the Manta as a titan killer, it was just too expensive and wasted too much space on transport capacity to be ideal in that role. The Tigershark gives the Tau an efficient titan killer with far better mobility than a Hammerhead squadron (so it can quickly react to titan attacks instead of having to mass Hammerheads everywhere a titan could appear) and the ability to blow away a titan in a single strafing run instead of having to fight it in an evenly-matched battle.

Its also implied in the Taros Campaign books that a Manta wouldnt neccessarily win in a confrontation with an imperial titan. As Imperial Armor Vol 3 (2nd edition) states in the Tigersharks entry

Due to its vital role as a transport craft for the Tau's highly mobile Hunter Cadres, Tau commanders were reluctant to risk their Mantas in direct confrontation with the Imperium's Titans. Even if the Mantas were able to successfully destroy their gargantuan prey, they would likely be so damaged after the encounter that they would be unable to continue their role as transports, leaving Tau ground forces unable to redeploy in the face of an enemy's continued advance.

Also the Manta is a liability at times in general when confronting large targets like a titan . Im unsure of if the lore supports this, but on the tabletop when targeting the manta it has this rule attatched to it:

AA Fire - Due to its size, any enemy units that target the manta do not need to make Snap Shots when it is zooming and roll To Hit using their normal BS score even if they do not possess the Skyfire special rule.

I took a tank command squad of 2, corner deployment. I had them moved up just a little for good line of sight shooting.
Guy drop podded a "combat squad" veteran squad exactly right behind them and popped them both with multimeltas, turn 1... worst 400 pt investment ever.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
The best comparison to a Hammerhead would be a Vanquisher tank with Beast-Hunter shells.

Mobility: The Hammerhead still wins, though it is worth noting that the sheer mechanical reliability and ruggedness of the Leman Russ may make it more mobile on a huge (I.E. Imperial) scale by avoiding breakdowns.

Firepower: Hands down in favor of the Russ. The Vanquisher's sub-calibre AT round is much more effective, both in game and instances of the fluff where it is mentioned, than the Hammerhead's railgun round. The railgun's Submunition round, while having a larger kill radius, lacks the potency of the chemical-energy Beast Hunter shell at both piercing infantry armor and killing large creatures. The Leman Russ's firepower is further increased with the addition of co-axially mounted heavy stubbers, hull-mounted heavy weapons (including lascannons), and sponson-mounted heavy weapons (including multi-meltas). For sheer tankbusting, the Leman Russ Vanquisher is far superior to the Hammerhead, and it also has increased firepower against heavy and very heavy infantry and drastically increased potency against large creatures.

Protection: Also hands down in favor of the Russ. Although Jinking is possible in a Hammerhead, it so boggles the internal systems that I imagine it is not SOP (even if it is on the TT). The Leman Russ's armor is easily patched when damaged, easily constructed, more protective, and can be laced with camoleoline materials (to make it more resistant to detection) without meaningfully affecting the protective value of the tank's armor. The addition of other defensive armaments (while not present in the TT game) helps it to deter enemy infantry from approaching the tank.

There is, actually, one other comparison you can make. Ease of manufacture.

The Hammerhead is the standard tank of the Tau Empire. Knowledge of how to build it is widespread. It's going to continue to be used until something better is built.

The Vanquisher is built on two worlds. (One of which makes them exclusively for Cadia, meaning the Tau will never ever face them in battle- and the third was recently eaten by Tyranids). The shells it uses aren't used by (many?) other Imperial units, so ammunition is probably also coming from a limited source. One Waagh! or Hive fleet can literally take the Vanquisher out of production for the forseeable future. One ship being swallowed by the Warp could leave a regiment without ammunition in the field. Certain spare parts- those specific to the tank- might be hard to come by. From what I understand, the three versions used different caliber shells- meaning that those made on Gryphonne IV will start running out if the ammunition was also manufactured there.

The Hammerhead has no such problems. Of course, compared to the standard Leman Russ, the Guard probably fares better (I've never read anything talking about Hammerhead manufacture or maintenance- it could be that the HH is just as reliable as the LRBT). What we *do* know is that it's hard for a Commander to come by a Vanquisher regiment. Even given its small size, in all likeliness the Tau Empire has more Hammerheads than the Imperium has Vanquishers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

The Imperial Answer wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
If 10 Hammerheads could easily deal with Imperial titans, the Tau would probably be justified in considering them scrap metal, and wouldn't be afraid enough to build the AX-10.

This is a bad argument because the railgun Tigershark wasn't built because the Tau had no other option. They already had the Manta as a titan killer, it was just too expensive and wasted too much space on transport capacity to be ideal in that role. The Tigershark gives the Tau an efficient titan killer with far better mobility than a Hammerhead squadron (so it can quickly react to titan attacks instead of having to mass Hammerheads everywhere a titan could appear) and the ability to blow away a titan in a single strafing run instead of having to fight it in an evenly-matched battle.

Its also implied in the Taros Campaign books that a Manta wouldn't necessarily win in a confrontation with an imperial titan. As Imperial Armor Vol 3 (2nd edition) states in the Tigersharks entry

Due to its vital role as a transport craft for the Tau's highly mobile Hunter Cadres, Tau commanders were reluctant to risk their Mantas in direct confrontation with the Imperium's Titans. Even if the Mantas were able to successfully destroy their gargantuan prey, they would likely be so damaged after the encounter that they would be unable to continue their role as transports, leaving Tau ground forces unable to redeploy in the face of an enemy's continued advance.

Also the Manta is a liability at times in general when confronting large targets like a titan . Im unsure of if the lore supports this, but on the tabletop when targeting the manta it has this rule attatched to it:

AA Fire - Due to its size, any enemy units that target the manta do not need to make Snap Shots when it is zooming and roll To Hit using their normal BS score even if they do not possess the Skyfire special rule.

On the Hammerheads vs Titans or Manta vs Titans... there's one important thing to remember. Things that are considered sound strategy for the imperial are considered vile for the Tau. One of these is the concept of throwing troops and tanks mindlessly at a problem until it goes away. The Tau philosophy views every Manta, every Hammerhead, every Fire Warrior, as having value. Heavy losses are always unacceptable to the Tau. In the Imperium, manpower is a low-value expendable resource, easily acquired and usually thrown into the meat grinder with as little thought. Even if a Manta can take a Titan with little chance of losing and if ten Hammerheads can take a titan, there will be casualties or more damage than is viewed as acceptable.

To the Tau, there is ALWAYS value in finding a better way to do a job. To the Imperium, innovation is a temptation that leads to ruin. That's why in six thousand years, they couldn't figure out how to solder some anti-aircraft missiles and a radar on a rhino.

The Imperium actually does innovate. It's just that every innovation has to be carefully tested to ensure that it works properly and the AdMech likes to be very thorough when it comes to their testing. Otherwise, you may end up with disastrous results.

The Imperial Answer wrote:


Its also implied in the Taros Campaign books that a Manta wouldnt neccessarily win in a confrontation with an imperial titan. As Imperial Armor Vol 3 (2nd edition) states in the Tigersharks entry

Due to its vital role as a transport craft for the Tau's highly mobile Hunter Cadres, Tau commanders were reluctant to risk their Mantas in direct confrontation with the Imperium's Titans. Even if the Mantas were able to successfully destroy their gargantuan prey, they would likely be so damaged after the encounter that they would be unable to continue their role as transports, leaving Tau ground forces unable to redeploy in the face of an enemy's continued advance.

Also the Manta is a liability at times in general when confronting large targets like a titan . Im unsure of if the lore supports this, but on the tabletop when targeting the manta it has this rule attatched to it:

AA Fire - Due to its size, any enemy units that target the manta do not need to make Snap Shots when it is zooming and roll To Hit using their normal BS score even if they do not possess the Skyfire special rule.

... the other side to the rules is that, while it is vulnerable to a lot of fire, it's still a flier, and thus immune in game to blasts, large blasts, and torrents- you know, most Imperial titan weapons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TheCustomLime wrote:
The Imperium actually does innovate. It's just that every innovation has to be carefully tested to ensure that it works properly and the AdMech likes to be very thorough when it comes to their testing. Otherwise, you may end up with disastrous results.

In six thousand years, they couldn't figure out how to solder some anti-aircraft missiles and a radar onto a Rhino.

Yeah I have pointed out that rule a few times..but it always defaults to fluff vs. rules vs. realisim.

thats why the tigershark is so scary...Titans hate fliers..lol

we discovered this in a mega battle..as my pait of A-X Tigersharks bagged 3 warhounds... the anti flyer rule boned them.

 Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
Yeah I have pointed out that rule a few times..but it always defaults to fluff vs. rules vs. realisim.

thats why the tigershark is so scary...Titans hate fliers..lol

we discovered this in a mega battle..as my pait of A-X Tigersharks bagged 3 warhounds... the anti flyer rule boned them.

A-yup! Kill any AA the first round they enter, and then go to town. Watch your opponent cry when you hit his Vendettas with D-strength weapons.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

The Imperial Answer wrote:


Its also implied in the Taros Campaign books that a Manta wouldnt neccessarily win in a confrontation with an imperial titan. As Imperial Armor Vol 3 (2nd edition) states in the Tigersharks entry

Due to its vital role as a transport craft for the Tau's highly mobile Hunter Cadres, Tau commanders were reluctant to risk their Mantas in direct confrontation with the Imperium's Titans. Even if the Mantas were able to successfully destroy their gargantuan prey, they would likely be so damaged after the encounter that they would be unable to continue their role as transports, leaving Tau ground forces unable to redeploy in the face of an enemy's continued advance.

Also the Manta is a liability at times in general when confronting large targets like a titan . Im unsure of if the lore supports this, but on the tabletop when targeting the manta it has this rule attatched to it:

AA Fire - Due to its size, any enemy units that target the manta do not need to make Snap Shots when it is zooming and roll To Hit using their normal BS score even if they do not possess the Skyfire special rule.

... the other side to the rules is that, while it is vulnerable to a lot of fire, it's still a flier, and thus immune in game to blasts, large blasts, and torrents- you know, most Imperial titan weapons.

Rules wise this still leaves the Vulcan Mega Bolter.

This may not seem like much, but some titans can carry many of these. Particuarly the Warlord, which can have up to two of these and the Emperator which can have up to six.


Lore-wise, shooting down a flyer with a titan is not hard. They did it in one of the Eisenhorn novels. In the Dark Eldar codex it even mentions a Stompa swatting Razor-Wing fighters from the sky.

In any case a titan is usually never caught alone so there is a high probability that the larger ones ,due to their cost and value, will be near something that can handle any flyer related issues that may arise. Titans are usually meant to be supported and aren't risked without precaution.

yes the vulcan mega bolter...if a player kitted out one of their titans with that you just kill it first..to short of range in mega battles...but usually players dont take that in preferance for turbo-laser..blast guns blah blah..templates blah

again in fluff anything is possible...a ork on a bike took out a warlord (or somesuch) titan by diving his bike into it....fluff is funny that way.

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
Yeah I have pointed out that rule a few times..but it always defaults to fluff vs. rules vs. realisim.

thats why the tigershark is so scary...Titans hate fliers..lol

we discovered this in a mega battle..as my pait of A-X Tigersharks bagged 3 warhounds... the anti flyer rule boned them.

A-yup! Kill any AA the first round they enter, and then go to town. Watch your opponent cry when you hit his Vendettas with D-strength weapons.

Id like to see how that "kill any AA" works on the Praetor Armored Launcher. Its a super-heavy AA missile launcher that fires 2 Str 8, Ap 3 missiles with Twin-Linked, Sky Fire and Interceptor rules. In addition where the Tigershark seems to be 660 points, the Praetor Armored Launcher is only 250 points which makes it about the cost of a land raider (which is cheap by the standards of games large enough to field multiple titans and or super-heavy units).

The Imperial Answer wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
Yeah I have pointed out that rule a few times..but it always defaults to fluff vs. rules vs. realisim.

thats why the tigershark is so scary...Titans hate fliers..lol

we discovered this in a mega battle..as my pait of A-X Tigersharks bagged 3 warhounds... the anti flyer rule boned them.

A-yup! Kill any AA the first round they enter, and then go to town. Watch your opponent cry when you hit his Vendettas with D-strength weapons.

Id like to see how that "kill any AA" works on the Praetor Armored Launcher. Its a super-heavy AA missile launcher that fires 2 Str 8, Ap 3 missles with Twin-Linked, Sky Fire and Interceptor rules. In addition where the Tigershark seems to be 660 points, the Praetor Armored Launcher is only 250 points which makes it about the cost of a land raider.

Sigh..yes we can play that game...suicide crisis suits with melta weapons..in single model groups..deep striking blowing up Praetor..or drawing fire...blah blah..the never ending one upmanship from a endless toybox..in a vacuum...that way leads to madness..lol

The Russ seems like a simple, strong, tank that gets the job done, and done well.

When compared to the Hammerhead, Fire Prism, and whatever it is Necrons use can we really assume that it's even meant to be on par?

Hammerheads for the large part are off on the Eastern fringe, Eldar like to pick and choose their battles as they see fit. I'm sure Fire Prisms aren't that common of an enemy for the Russ crews. Same with Necrons, they pop up every once in awhile and thats that.

The Russ was designed for general combat, and it does it's job well. To compare its experiences against rarer tanks in the fluff would just be unfair.

 Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:

The Imperial Answer wrote:

 EmpNortonII wrote:

 Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
Yeah I have pointed out that rule a few times..but it always defaults to fluff vs. rules vs. realisim.

thats why the tigershark is so scary...Titans hate fliers..lol

we discovered this in a mega battle..as my pait of A-X Tigersharks bagged 3 warhounds... the anti flyer rule boned them.

A-yup! Kill any AA the first round they enter, and then go to town. Watch your opponent cry when you hit his Vendettas with D-strength weapons.

Id like to see how that "kill any AA" works on the Praetor Armored Launcher. Its a super-heavy AA missile launcher that fires 2 Str 8, Ap 3 missles with Twin-Linked, Sky Fire and Interceptor rules. In addition where the Tigershark seems to be 660 points, the Praetor Armored Launcher is only 250 points which makes it about the cost of a land raider.

Sigh..yes we can play that game...suicide crisis suits with melta weapons..in single model groups..deep striking blowing up Praetor..or drawing fire...blah blah..the never ending one upmanship from a endless toybox..in a vacuum...that way leads to madness..lol

The point is to emphasize that you may not be able to destroy the enemy AA as it may survive your attacks and or be out of reach, at which point it is free to retaliate and or disrupt your flyer.

NauticalKendall wrote:
The Russ seems like a simple, strong, tank that gets the job done, and done well.

When compared to the Hammerhead, Fire Prism, and whatever it is Necrons use can we really assume that it's even meant to be on par?

Hammerheads for the large part are off on the Eastern fringe, Eldar like to pick and choose their battles as they see fit. I'm sure Fire Prisms aren't that common of an enemy for the Russ crews. Same with Necrons, they pop up every once in awhile and thats that.

The Russ was designed for general combat, and it does it's job well. To compare its experiences against rarer tanks in the fluff would just be unfair.

From a rules perspective only, the standard Leman Russ is an infantry support weapon rather than a tank killer. Its S8 AP3 isn't powerful enough to reliably kill tanks (only able to immobilise if it penetrates) though it will obliterate heavy infantry unless they have cover.

Though the point people were making by comparing it to Hammerheads or Fire Prisms is that these are the standard tanks (in the Hammerheads case, at least, don't know about the Fire Prism) of their respective armies. So whilst they may not be as common on a galaxy wide scale they are what the Leman Russ will come up against in any confrontation with that respective species. So you're comparing the baseline tank of both armies.