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.

hello.
i'm building a new "all comers" IG list and i'm stuck.
i can go with 3 naked Russes. or i can go with 1 Executioner and 1 Demolisher.
it's the old quantity or quality arguement in a sense.
the upside if go with the 2 more expensive tanks it does leave me enough points to
upgrade a Vet sqd. from meltas to plasma.
thoughts?

I'm not a huge fan of taking plasma weapons on infantry, for the most part. Especailly on guard, who will die to 'Gets Hot!' much easier. Also, plasmaguns aren't really an upgrade to meltaguns. They serve different purposes on the battlefield. Meltaguns are awesome versus vehicles at close range, plasma thrives on killing MEQs. Reassess what you want to do with the squad.

That said, LRBTs have a fair amount of versatility, meaning that they have at least mild effectiveness against all unit types and enemies. The Executioner and Demolisher are more specialized, and once it's destroyed, you'll have a hole in your armies effectiveness in that area.

Also, I don;t like the short range of the Demolisher, but thats strictly a personal preference thing.

Commander Endova wrote:I'm not a huge fan of taking plasma weapons on infantry, for the most part. Especailly on guard, who will die to 'Gets Hot!' much easier. Also, plasmaguns aren't really an upgrade to meltaguns. They serve different purposes on the battlefield. Meltaguns are awesome versus vehicles at close range, plasma thrives on killing MEQs. Reassess what you want to do with the squad.

That said, LRBTs have a fair amount of versatility, meaning that they have at least mild effectiveness against all unit types and enemies. The Executioner and Demolisher are more specialized, and once it's destroyed, you'll have a hole in your armies effectiveness in that area.

Also, I don;t like the short range of the Demolisher, but thats strictly a personal preference thing.

well, it seems like an upgrade seeing that all the other Vet squads i've got in the list are using Meltas. point taken and a poor choice of words on my end.
so in the end i would take it you're leaning more towards the 3 naked Russes then. thanks for the input.

I prefer demolishers over other variants of LR. They have the anti-heavy infantry of the executioner, but can fire all weapons on the move, cost less, and can threaten vehicles. The trade off is slightly less effective firepower and range.

thanks for the imput, but i'm confused by this statement:

"The trade off is slightly less effective firepower and range. "

i get the range, but how's it less effective firepower? str 10 / ap 2 is awesome i think.

Yeah, but then you've got to remember that you get one shot; a bad scatter roll and your Demolisher is either a sitting duck or (very unlikely) a member of the Judean Suicide Squad, 1st Tank Division. Whereas with the Executioner you get at least three shots, so that's three chances. If it were me, I'd take the "feth-you cannon" of the Demolisher since it has the armour to survive getting up close and personal and a S 10 AP 2 pie plate will murder anything short of AV 13-14, but then you might need to get more plasma wielding veterans.

Executioner is popular, but just too many points. The metagame has a lot of stuff (meltas, etc) that can kill tanks, and with one big target like that, it's too risky.

I like the basic Russ and the Demolisher, it depends on what the rest of your list has. If you have plenty of AP2, then the basic Russ is a pain to get rid of, and has a very respectable shot.

The executioner is a lot of points, but everybody always takes it with plasma sponsons. I have to wonder--on the basis of the "more bodies-fewer upgrades" principle--if it wouldn't be worthwhile taking the executioner without the sponsons, and then maybe taking a second executioner, also with no sponsons.

I'm not a guard player and I've never seen a sponsonless executioner, so I'm genuinely raising a question I don't know the answer to here. But it seems to me that the advantages of two hulls in separate units (twice as hard to kill or shake, can shoot at two targets, has slightly more firepower than a single executioner, can cover more of the board with 36" guns) might make two executioners proportionally a better value for their points than a single one with sponsons?

Of course, it is two heavy slots and if you put two executioners into a squadron together then you lose some of the advantages and create that whole "die on immobilization" problem. But what do guard experts think?

I prefer 3 naked russes.

at range tanks with front armor 13/14 are very hard to eliminate for most armies, as one squadron your opponent would have to destroy all 3 for just a single killpoint. Also, S8 pieplates are threatening to everything in every army; no one can ignore it.

what does the rest of your list look like? it would help with the discussion to know what we are working with

Personally, I run your standard LRBT with heavy bolter sponsons. I feel as if the range and strenght of its main weapon outweigh any weaknesses it may have. Then again, I don't use your typical IG melta vets like most players do, I try differnt things.

the rest of the list:

CCS 145
4 meltas
chimera

Inq. lord 155
emp tarrot
psychic hood
2 mystics
3 vets w/ plasma

Marbo 65

3 - vet sqds 465
3 melta ea.
2 chimera
(2 sqds in the Vendys, Inq. in 1 of the Chimera)

2 - Vendettas 260

Manticore 160

2 Hydras 150

comes to 1399 and i'm shooting for 1850.

With that list I would definately go with the naked russes.

use your meltas to crack transports, then spam large blasts on the creamy centers.

Personally, I'm in the basic-is-better camp. I dislike the demolisher for the short range of the demo-cannon. 24" is too close for my taste. I prefer to lay down a fussilade of shells from 72", on turn one but maybe I've just had bad luck when I've fielded the demo-tank.

I've never really felt that it played it's 15pts extra part compared to a vanilla russ. Sure, 15 pts for a 10/2 blast instead of 8/3 sounds like a good deal, especially since you get the slightly higher rear AV but, as I said, it doesn't fit my game.

Which is incidentally why I almost never field hellhounds or the like. They die too easily.

Maybe I'm playing against too many orc lists where everything has a PK that eats tanks when they come close.

It's safer to keep backing up and keep the range. In addition, there aren't a lot of things that really need the S10 characteristic of the demo-cannon. Most things die just nicely from the battlecannon. Including plauge marines which are arguably one of the hardest units in the game to get rid of.

But this is just my 2c.

If i want a tank hunter russ I usually throw on a lascannon to the vanilla russ to give it a slightly better "umf" while still maintaining a nice distance and being an even higher threat to anything MEQ.

and the Hydras as well. that's what i like about them, they can stop the transport and put the hurt on what was inside as well.

the one thing that worries me is the lack of AP2.

Now seeing the rest of your list I would suggest the Executioner and then look to getting more troops.

I agree that you need more AP 2 and that's where the Executioner is top notch. You can kill TEq with a lot of success, and if you catch a unit of MEq in the open you can usual eliminate an entire 10 man unit with one round of shooting.

You have sufficient Str 10 shooting and anti armor with all those melta vets and vendettas, I think you need more anti-troop (which the Executioner does well)

The whole I see in your list is the lack of scoring units. 3 of them, that are designed to suicide, aren't enough. I ran a very similar list to this (no Marbo, a fourth melta vet unit) and good opponents would just kill those 30 bodies (which is very easy when they jump out to fry stuff) knowing that they could only draw.

I now use a regular infantry platoon to minimize KP and to simple hold objectives while everything else goes out and kills the enemy. And I still struggle to win some games, usually smashing my opponent in "victory points" but not having enough to claim at the end of a game.

But the the problem with that is 1 Executioner isn't going to last very long at all. i would think it would be one of the top priorities.
at least 2 Demolishers would last a little bit longer. and 3 Russes even more so. but then i lose my AP2...ugh.

If its me and im going against opponent with tons of anti tank weapons , i would hide the majority of my Tanks behind trees out of LOS.

Then i would use artillery and the rest of the army to take out all the anti tank threat as top priority. After thats done my tanks will waltz around the battle field.

I run a lone Executioner and it lives roughly 3/4 of my games.

The key is that I really baby it. It almost always starts in reserves, so no turn one death. (I have an astropath, so getting it on the board happens quickly) When it rumbles on I usually know where my enemy is and I know where the melta weapons/ ccw tank killers are so I can stay away, utilizing that 36" range.

It also helps that I use a squadron of two vanilla russes that often draw more attention from the opponent, but do less damage overall.

I just don't think squadron-ing tanks is the best options, especially when one of them is an executioner and it could get zapped on a glancing hit. (even with dumping most hits on a Demolisher first) Plus, so many people kill tanks with multiple melta weapon shooting units, the squadron rule hurts even more.

Anyhoo, I am just saying that I think you'll be wanting more troops...

I'd take three Russes. They start doing damage far earlier and give your enemy more AV14 to deal with.

Dainty Twerp wrote:I run a lone Executioner and it lives roughly 3/4 of my games.

The key is that I really baby it. It almost always starts in reserves, so no turn one death. (I have an astropath, so getting it on the board happens quickly) When it rumbles on I usually know where my enemy is and I know where the melta weapons/ ccw tank killers are so I can stay away, utilizing that 36" range.

It also helps that I use a squadron of two vanilla russes that often draw more attention from the opponent, but do less damage overall.

I just don't think squadron-ing tanks is the best options, especially when one of them is an executioner and it could get zapped on a glancing hit. (even with dumping most hits on a Demolisher first) Plus, so many people kill tanks with multiple melta weapon shooting units, the squadron rule hurts even more.

Anyhoo, I am just saying that I think you'll be wanting more troops...

you're not running a lone Executioner. you're also running 2 vanilla russes...

alarmingrick wrote:you're not running a lone Executioner. you're also running 2 vanilla russes...

true dat. But I was meaning a Executioner on its own, opposed to having a Demolisher bodyguard.

but your point stands, a lone AV 14 is much more likely to die than one with two friends drawing fire. But you gave us the list you wanted to work with which included two heavy slots being already taken, so I gave the advice I thought best considering the situation.

One, off the cuff thought, is to take a LR variant for the Inq Lord (using IA rules if your group allows it) That gets you your other AV 14 and a tactic I've used in doubles play....

Im a HUGE fan of the Executioner. It has never failed me in the past. I always put the Plasma Sponsons on it also. I would park it behind my troops, and pump out 5 plasma blasts at what ever.

I would recommend a Executioner, and a naked Russ.

In my experience the best combination of Leman Russes you can field is thus:
LR Executioner
LR Eradicator w/ Plasma Sponsons
LR Battle Tank

Depending on what else your fielding in your list and what enemy your playing this allows for the best utility. These three guys give you the ability to deal with just about anything that comes your way no matter what it is. Each tank has marine killing ability, two of which Terminator killing ability, and all can deal with hordes equally well as they all unleash a lot of template fire. I run this group in every tourny I do, and I have yet to be disappointed.

I've always found the Leman Russ Executioner underwhelming. In general, it seems inferior to the Demolisher.

In my mind these decisions are always pretty simple. You need to be able to handle your opponents. You need options to stop hordes, medium infantry, MEQ/TEQ, then light vehicles, and heavy vehicles. Now in general medium infantry (Av4+) usually blends into hordes (Sv6+), and the same weapons in the IG army that are good for medium infantry also tend to be good against light armor. The Autocannon is the specific example I'm thinking of.

So you can simplify it to light (under Sv4+), MEQ/TEQ (Sv3+ and up), and heavy armor. At this point the only question you need to ask is what does your army lack? If you have an adequate amount of plasma, do you need more? Do you have enough anti horde? Anti vehilce? Ultimately the decision is, what Russ best fills in the gaps in your army?

Personally I am a fan of the executioner. Decent strength, if you had no other options, can hit some light armor. But the AP is the important part. I would never take the sponsons, that's just a waste. 3' range, and the fact that the executioner is a HUGE target on the table... means you need to stay mobile. And that means you'll only ever be able to fire the main cannon. Another 40pts is pointless for something you won't use. The strength of this tank is the 3 blast AP2. Normally you hit a squad with something, and you get, at best, 1 hit per model. You won't make all of those... so blast never quite finish off a squad. However, 3 blast very easily can. AP2 means they never get any saves, S7 means you (most likely) wound on a 2+, and 3 shots means you'll get enough hits to do what you need to do. Now against horde, this tank is fantastic... cause it's 3 blast. Against heavy armor infantry, this tank is EVEN MORE fantastic, as its 3 blast with no armor saves. This means, Mark 8 power armor, or ork metal scraps... this tank will roll over any of them just as easy.

The thing is, against a horde, the Russ would have been better cause you could have used 40pts to do more elsewhere... but as soon as someone brings Sv2+ you are going to have issues. The reverse is you pay a little more, and you wipe the table of all your problems 3 blasts at a time... and when those terminators land, or those meganobs disembark from their battlewagon... you wipe that squad from the table and laugh at how many points the enemy just lost because you desired it to be so.

Lt Lathrop wrote: And that means you'll only ever be able to fire the main cannon. Another 40pts is pointless for something you won't use.

The "lumbering behemoth" rule allows you to always fire the turret when you're moving 6" or less, regardless of whatever else you fire according to normal rules. So you can move up to 6" and fire the turret plus one sponson, only losing one blast.

But it's still a good point. If you want to keep your armor moving in the era of deepstriking nid monsters, you wind up paying 40 points for one extra blast.

I'd agree that sponsons seem like a bad idea for most LR tanks. You're gifted with a special ability to move/fire 1 extra weapon so why would you ignore that and take something that is only useful if you decide to remain static. Maybe if you didn't automatically have a hull weapon it would be different, but as it is now it seems like a waste.

minigun762 wrote:I'd agree that sponsons seem like a bad idea for most LR tanks. You're gifted with a special ability to move/fire 1 extra weapon so why would you ignore that and take something that is only useful if you decide to remain static. Maybe if you didn't automatically have a hull weapon it would be different, but as it is now it seems like a waste.

Hmm , im not good with math hammer but someone should come up with how long a Russ can survive and how easily it suffers weapons destroyed roll.
Because for sure people will choose to remove the turret weapon.

LunaHound wrote:
Hmm , im not good with math hammer but someone should come up with how long a Russ can survive and how easily it suffers weapons destroyed roll.
Because for sure people will choose to remove the turret weapon.

That is a valid point. More weapons = its surviving longer on the battlefield on average.
Of course more weapons = more expensive = fewer points to spend elsewhere (like another tank).

Personally I feel that if you keep your LR at range and in cover, you're going to be a fairly durable target with AV14 facing your victims and the biggest threat to LR are Melta squads, who have an increased chance of rolling a destroyed/wrecked result compared to weapon destroyed.

While thats very true , i feel that such roles Basilisk could do it more effectively.