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.

Few question guys,

Out of apocalypse, do super heavies get their chance to be used at all?

Which is bigger? baneblade or stompa?

Does anyone have pics for size comparison? to normal infantry or other tank is fine too.

Thanks :"D

Generally, people frown on superheavies in basic games 40k.

Look at the recent Stompa challenge for why - if you're not geared for killing Superheavies, you might have no chance.

But if everybody is playing Apoc or Supers, then it's no problem.

There was a comic online a while ago about this. I'll see if I can find it. It's a shadowsword that's worth 850 points, prevetning the gsmer from taking any other units, and it gets destroyed in the first round.

If you and a buddy get together, and decide to play a 40k game with normal armies, and normal 40k rules, but want to add a superheavy, then go for it.

But for pretty much anything else, they are limited to Apocalypse style games.

Stomper is bigger than a baneblade. 4 vs. 3 structure points, and about the same ratio of points values. I'd say about equal in firepower, overall, but the stomper can also charge things and tear the hell out of them in Close Combat. Don't let your baneblade get too close to a stomper. Stomper will kill it in one round of CC, most likely.

i allow and use supers in 2,500+, anything under that and it does get a bit annoying when you have a stompa or 2 going on a rampage with gattlings.

Golden Eyed Scout wrote:There was a comic online a while ago about this. I'll see if I can find it. It's a shadowsword that's worth 850 points, prevetning the gsmer from taking any other units, and it gets destroyed in the first round.

Ah, yep.

That was a Turn Signals.

sounds like my kinda luck

anyways, im off to watch skins then get some sleep

I actually thought it was cool when you could have superhaevies in their own force org slot. 2500 points and above.

If you and your opponent agree, I say go for it. That said, I'd recommend using the older Imperial Armour rules for any unit that has them, as they're a bit more balanced for "regular" 40K(ie., written for it and not Apocalypse).

okee dokee,

Sisters of battle bane blade here i come!

eh, idk
techinically by GW standards, no...
like JD said, i would allow it in games around 2.5k or 3k level, and only if it costs 749 points or less...

if you do want to do this, just be sure with your opponent before playing

ive also seen people that make, for example, a baneblade take up 2 heavy slots, and the like...

How about size comparison guys?

any side by side pics?

Super Heavies can be taken in any game 2000 points or more as a second detachment... at least... the ones from the Imperial Armour books can. The ones from the Apoc book are Apoc only as they have different rules.

LunaHound wrote:How about size comparison guys?

any side by side pics?

Lots of pics on GW's website and in White Dwarf.

IMO, Superheavies is not something you "spring" on your opponnt.

You agree beforehand wether superheavies are allowed.
Remember that the default is "no superheavies in a standard game of 40k", so no whining if your opponent says "no".