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 never liked using pask, makes the russ a tasty target especially since you'll be easy to get smashed in CC

The few tanks they really just dropped the ball on are pretty much the Eradicator, Vanquisher, and the Punisher as Kirika and many others have already said. The Eradicator most of all. I honestly have no idea what they were thinking when they made the Eradicator. I mean I guess against foot slogging non-meq armies it is good, but that really limits its usage. It is basically a tougher hellhound with 36in range that can scatter. I guess that kind of range boost and better armor is nice, but is it really worth the 30 extra points compared to the hellhound? Perhaps it will come into its own in 6th edition if they alter vehicle rules a lot, but that is highly doubtful. For now it will pretty much remain a much more expensive long ranged hellhound. Granted, if you are running all of your fast as vendettas, then perhaps your list may benefit from it assuming you desire that anti-horde the hellhound would usually focus on.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kenshin620 wrote:I never liked using pask, makes the russ a tasty target especially since you'll be easy to get smashed in CC

Yes, but that is why you put him in the cheaper tanks. So that when he does kick the bucket its not a terrible loss. That and you balance this out with other more terrifying things like Demos and Vendettas to distract. What you never want to do is put Pask in a Demo or Executioner. Put him in a low profile exterminator or MBT and he'll last a bit longer.

Necrontyr40k wrote:

Tell that to my plague marines, who die just like a 6 point ork boy (wounded on 2+, no saves, no FNP!). Tell that to any MEQ, when you pay 15p minimum per model and they die like a 6p boy. or even a 3p grot. They die like grots. 23ppm!


For 150p you get a damn nice tank that is flexible and tough.

The large blast with S8 AP3 range 72" is not bad, but like I said, there are better options. I'd rather have a colossus, which I can hide someplace and fire indirect and ignore cover with the same AP3 and plentiful S6. So, for that application, the colossus is better. If you like direct fire, take a medusa (S10, AP2), which is MUCH better than the battle cannon. If you like AT, take vendettas. If you like flexibility between large blast and AT, take medusa with bastion breacher shells (just 5 pts). The BB shells do not replace the standard ammo, so you can choose on the fly what you want to fire every turn. In all these roles, including flexibility, Medusa is better.

Regarding PM dying to MBT, yes, that is the point of AP3, but they should still get FNP, because PM are T5, right? On the other hand, Medusas will ignore FNP, because of S10. Also, if you put your PM in cover, the battle cannon will still be subject to 4+ cover saves which are almost as good as the power armor save, and besides, the PM can go to ground and essentially ignore the AP3. That is how the colossus is so much better ignoring AP3 and cover saves.

Finally, MBT cannon is just one template - scatter badly on a single roll and most of the usefulness of the tank is gone for that turn. By comparison, an Executioner with plasma sponsons gets 5 templates, of which 3 usually hit causing 10-15 S7 AP2 hits. That wipes out a squad ON AVERAGE!

So, like I said, MBT is unimpressive compared to other options.

Plague Marines lose FNP to Battlecannons as the weapon is double their unmodified toughness. Same with Bikes, bikes can be overkilled by lesser weapons due to their unmodified toughness being doubled up. Mark Of Nurgle's entry even specifies this. Don't ever let a Plague Marine player try this one on you.

As per the OP, please get a Codex. Annihilator's and Conquerors are Imperial Armor only. I would love to see them in the main Codex.

Of all of the Variants, the Executioner gets the most love for it's sheer destructive potential to armored infantry, MC's, light transports and bunched up infantry. They kill bodies and make marine players have nightmares. But, I think there's a spot for each one of these tanks in any list.

I run a list right now with a squadron of 2 Executioners w/ heavy bolters and PC's and an Exterminator w/LC & PC's, these tanks have accounted for scads of casualties and break apart large chunks of my opponent's line. They shred transports through the obscene volume of S7 Shots.

I've used every one of these tanks except the Eradicator. The Punisher is fluffy, but a damn fine grinding stone for MC's or small model count units. It's always thought of as a horde blender, when it is used to cut apart units of bikes or a squad of Killa Kans behind a KFF, it's extremely effective. Not the most efficient, but it's still pretty cool to roll 29 S5 dice.

The Vanquisher is mighty underrated with Pask. A 6 foot ranged Melta Gun with S9 + 2D6? Plus a S10 LC? Yes please. Re-rolls against MC's? Meh, not as good but still nice to re-roll invariable 1's

Exterminators are grossly underrated, 4 TL Autocannon shots are great, the price really isn't bad and with PC's it makes the tank a counter to pretty much any kind of unit.

Demolisher's are awesome, they do a great job of mincing elite infantry, blowing vehicles apart and they're damn tough to kill. Not the greatest range, but used with Creed, it's not a problem.

LRBT are just damn nice, not much to complain about with these.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

tracer wrote:Has anybody put an exterminator to good use?

I'm naturally suspicious about any LRMBT that does not sport a huge barrel.

What I'm trying to figure out is somehow more versatile than a hydra, however the only thing it seems to have going is the greater armor (which is a huge plus) and the ability yo fire 4 shots while moving. On the other hand it only has 66% range of the hydra and comes at double the point cost.
Back when the hydra cost 200 points i would use 2 or 3 exterminators when going up against orcs (usually in a squadron with a conqueror for fluffiness) and the like but now i'm struggling to find a reason to put it in my list...

Two words: Lumbering Behemoth

Hydras are frail and they're only the best when squadroned up to two or three. That's a lot of static AV12/10/10 clogging up a deployment zone. Hydras are awesome, but they're pretty much a static gun platform.

The Exterminator can still move 6" and shoot every weapon, every turn.

Stormrider wrote:The Vanquisher is mighty underrated with Pask. A 6 foot ranged Melta Gun with S9 + 2D6? Plus a S10 LC? Yes please. Re-rolls against MC's? Meh, not as good but still nice to re-roll invariable 1's

I would say overestimated instead of underrated. You're paying quite a lot for something just to take out armor when there are much cheaper, more mobile, and more reliable ways with IG

Really, imo I would never take pask if I wanted to use my points wisely

Stormrider wrote:The Exterminator can still move 6" and shoot every weapon, every turn.

Well as long as you only fire one extra primary weapon along with the turret and the defensive

What do you guys feel about a LRBT with lascannon and plasma sponsons vs the Executioner with just a lascannon?

Which gives the best "bang"(should that be boom?) for your buck?

I like to care of my tanks, that's why I put them in bubble wrap...

The only useful Russes are basic, Demolisher and Executioner.
Punisher and Vanquisher are both defeated by low BS. With Pask, their effectiveness increases dramatically, but you're paying a huge premium-over 200 points-for a single tank. It's rarely worth it.
For the price of 1 Executioner, you can get 2 Hydras. 8 TL Autocannon shots, all of which ignore Skimmer/jetbike cover saves and have 72" range, beats 4 TL Autocannon shots at 48", which takes a single weapon destroyed to remove rather than 4. 2 light tanks are also of comparable toughness to 1 heavy tank; often more so.
The Eradicator sucks. Short ranged, with not enough strength to take down transports and no AP3 to take down marines. Against hordes it's still very overpriced for what it does.

vorpalhit wrote:What do you guys feel about a LRBT with lascannon and plasma sponsons vs the Executioner with just a lascannon?

Which gives the best "bang"(should that be boom?) for your buck?

I like to care of my tanks, that's why I put them in bubble wrap...

None of those two builds makes sense to me. An executioner has no use for LC, because it is not an AT build, it is an anti-MEQ, anti-termi build. The extra one shot on 4+ is not worth its 15 pts when you get 15 hits with plasma already.

Similarly, a BT build with plasma is a weaker cousin of the executioner with the same role, so why the LC? Also, BT does not work very well with plasma, because of 72 vs 36 range. You will want to shoot those devs across the board, except then the sponsons are wasted for the turn. The executioner is a better build in the role, because all plasma is 36 range.

If you want to pop MEQ and termi at mid range, take a plasma sponson executioner with standard free hull weapon.

If you want to touch devs and have some versatility to AT role, take BT with LC in the nose and no sponsons, in a squad of 2. I am not a fan of the build, but it has some merit because it combines mobility with Av14 and non-diminished firepower through the lumbering behemoth rule.

Necrontyr40k wrote:

vorpalhit wrote:What do you guys feel about a LRBT with lascannon and plasma sponsons vs the Executioner with just a lascannon?

Which gives the best "bang"(should that be boom?) for your buck?

I like to care of my tanks, that's why I put them in bubble wrap...

None of those two builds makes sense to me. An executioner has no use for LC, because it is not an AT build, it is an anti-MEQ, anti-termi build. The extra one shot on 4+ is not worth its 15 pts when you get 15 hits with plasma already.

Similarly, a BT build with plasma is a weaker cousin of the executioner with the same role, so why the LC? Also, BT does not work very well with plasma, because of 72 vs 36 range. You will want to shoot those devs across the board, except then the sponsons are wasted for the turn. The executioner is a better build in the role, because all plasma is 36 range.

If you want to pop MEQ and termi at mid range, take a plasma sponson executioner with standard free hull weapon.

If you want to touch devs and have some versatility to AT role, take BT with LC in the nose and no sponsons, in a squad of 2. I am not a fan of the build, but it has some merit because it combines mobility with Av14 and non-diminished firepower through the lumbering behemoth rule.

See I'd have to disagree, I think the MBT with PC sponsons and the LC is a far better build than the executioner w/sponsons. It's simply just more versatile even with the plasma sponsons. 36in range is nothing to scoff at either. Unless you are playing APOC when has anyone seriously ever used the full 72in range of the battle cannon? Most of the time things are within 48in. And after that 36in targets won't be to far off if you simply move tactically to take them out. The executioner to me just falls short because of how expensive it is for the single roll it plays (i.e. TEQ killer). I can get the something similar for cheaper price and have some long range MEQ and AT with the MBT and plasma sponsons. Plus, why else would you take plasma vets in your list as well? There are other ways to deal with terminators you know so why bother spending a bazzillion points on something that is rendered almost useless upon 1 weapon destroyed when you can have 3 plasma vet squads running around or deep striking stormies coming down with plasma to be your main answer to anti-TEQ?

Necrontyr40k wrote:None of those two builds makes sense to me. An executioner has no use for LC, because it is not an AT build, it is an anti-MEQ, anti-termi build. The extra one shot on 4+ is not worth its 15 pts when you get 15 hits with plasma already.

I run an Executioner with just an LC and it does great. I find my Russes have to move every turn to get proper LOS on their target and with just an LC I can keep moving along with my power weapon blobs who also act as bubble wrap for the tanks. Once the power blob gets into close combat the Executioner uses the whole CC mess as cover while firing over them. The LC usually doesn't get to shoot but such is life.

I find the LC to be worth it to synergize with the AP2 of the plasma cannon and my Executioner has killed a whole lot of Rhinos in the first couple of turns before it starts killing the infantry that pile out.

Also, are you saying that you can get an average of 15 hits a turn with 5 plasma cannon shots? I think I can count on one hand the number of times I've been able to get more than 2 hits per small blast in the last six months.

I ran an Executioner with sponsons for a while but I found that it was outmaneuvered 99% of the time and I rarely got to use those expensive sponsons.

tuebor wrote:

Necrontyr40k wrote:None of those two builds makes sense to me. An executioner has no use for LC, because it is not an AT build, it is an anti-MEQ, anti-termi build. The extra one shot on 4+ is not worth its 15 pts when you get 15 hits with plasma already.

Once the power blob gets into close combat the Executioner uses the whole CC mess as cover while firing over them. The LC usually doesn't get to shoot but such is life.

I don't think the rules allow you to use infantry as cover for tanks. The tanks are considered too big to be occluded by infantry models.

I find the LC to be worth it to synergize with the AP2 of the plasma cannon and my Executioner has killed a whole lot of Rhinos in the first couple of turns before it starts killing the infantry that pile out.

That may be meaningful at low point levels. At 1500 or above, you should be popping rhinos with autocannons and hydras, and then drop the MEQ with plasma.

Also, are you saying that you can get an average of 15 hits a turn with 5 plasma cannon shots? I think I can count on one hand the number of times I've been able to get more than 2 hits per small blast in the last six months.

With sponsons, you get 5 templates. Statistically, 1/3 should be on target, and about a third of the rest 2/3 will scatter too little (subtract BS on direct fire). So the expectation is 1/3+2/9=5/9, on 5, is 25/9 or essentially 3 templates will be effective on the unit. Depending on placement, you can get anywhere between 3 and 5 models per template, so 9-15 hits. Maybe I exaggerated a bit calling it 15, but the point remains. Do you pay 15 pts for 50% chance at one more AP2 hit when you already have that many from the templates?

I ran an Executioner with sponsons for a while but I found that it was outmaneuvered 99% of the time and I rarely got to use those expensive sponsons.

Depends on the opponent and the terrain. Yes, it is a problem on crowded maps and with fast-moving armies. But, on the other hand, we all know the turret cannon is the first to go in a weapon destroyed result, so sponsons allow me to keep dropping plasma templates long after my turret is gone. Practice has shown that the enemy keeps shooting at the crippled tank, because they hate the plasma sponsons still functioning. Any shots that go into that AV14/13 hull do not land on the rest of my AVs.

Necrontyr40k wrote:I don't think the rules allow you to use infantry as cover for tanks. The tanks are considered too big to be occluded by infantry models.

Tanks can get cover from infantry if they physically block 50% of the hull from the shooting unit's POV. Since close combat (especially with 30 man blobs) has a lot of tightly packed models it'll generally cover 50% of the tank's hull.

Necrontyr40k wrote:That may be meaningful at low point levels. At 1500 or above, you should be popping rhinos with autocannons and hydras, and then drop the MEQ with plasma.

In my metagame I very rarely have infantry targets to fire at during the first turn so my Executioner pulls double duty in killing AV11 and below targets. I do this even 1850-2000 point games.

Necrontyr40k wrote:With sponsons, you get 5 templates. Statistically, 1/3 should be on target, and about a third of the rest 2/3 will scatter too little (subtract BS on direct fire). So the expectation is 1/3+2/9=5/9, on 5, is 25/9 or essentially 3 templates will be effective on the unit. Depending on placement, you can get anywhere between 3 and 5 models per template, so 9-15 hits. Maybe I exaggerated a bit calling it 15, but the point remains. Do you pay 15 pts for 50% chance at one more AP2 hit when you already have that many from the templates?

The bolded is the part I disagree with, I very, very rarely get more than 2-3 hits per template. MEQ units tend to be small enough they can spread out to the full 2" coherency, which will only net you 2 hits per template on a hit.

Also, I do absolutely pay 15 points for that extra lascannon shot. You really won't find a lascannon anywhere cheaper in the Codex and I put a lot of stock in AP synergy.

Necrontyr40k wrote:Depends on the opponent and the terrain. Yes, it is a problem on crowded maps and with fast-moving armies. But, on the other hand, we all know the turret cannon is the first to go in a weapon destroyed result, so sponsons allow me to keep dropping plasma templates long after my turret is gone. Practice has shown that the enemy keeps shooting at the crippled tank, because they hate the plasma sponsons still functioning. Any shots that go into that AV14/13 hull do not land on the rest of my AVs.

Where I play we make sure to use the full 25% terrain and we always place it from the middle out, so there's a lot of LOS blocking terrain in the midfield so maybe mobility is more important in my metagame.

There's certainly something to be said for keeping the tanks going despite all the weapons destroyed results but for those 40 points I'd rather have an outflanking autocannon Sentinel. Also, my lists tend away from firebase lists, which I could see a sponsoned Executioner excelling in.

tuebor wrote:
Tanks can get cover from infantry if they physically block 50% of the hull from the shooting unit's POV. Since close combat (especially with 30 man blobs) has a lot of tightly packed models it'll generally cover 50% of the tank's hull.

The problem is LR are massive - infantry don't even reach the turret ring in height. I can see 1/2 cover for chimeras maybe. In any case, I can't get away with it in my meta.

The bolded is the part I disagree with, I very, very rarely get more than 2-3 hits per template. MEQ units tend to be small enough they can spread out to the full 2" coherency, which will only net you 2 hits per template on a hit.

If the transport explodes, many players unload the troops in the resulting crater, to take advantage of the immediate cover save. That bunches them up. Alternatively, if the transport gets wrecked, they have to emerge within 2 inches of the hatch. For a unit of 10 troops, that results in a bunchup, especially since only few players are clever enough to deploy the unit in a ring around the wreck. I guess it depends on the meta.

There's certainly something to be said for keeping the tanks going despite all the weapons destroyed results but for those 40 points I'd rather have an outflanking autocannon Sentinel. Also, my lists tend away from firebase lists, which I could see a sponsoned Executioner excelling in.

I guess I look at it the opposite way - 190 points for 3 plasma templates, of which maybe 100 are for the Av14 hull and the HB. This means I already pay 30 pts per plasma. The sponsons are 40 for 2, or 20 each. Then getting the sponsons is at a nice discount.

I well remember a particular game with DE in which my Executioner got immobilized, then the turret got blown off, then one of the sponsons. At the end of the game, it was down to either one sponson or just the HB. Opponents just HATE the Executioner. Hate is good.