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.

Ignore my post saying it isn't horrible.
It is horrible, I thought it was 36" not 24".

I'd rather have the russes with the autocannons and heavy bolter sponsons, in a squadron of 2.

-Matt

DarkHound wrote:(And Demolishers, and Executioners.)

Sure.

I mean, the damage to cost for all russ variants is pretty cruddy. The only real advantage is the AV14. If you're able to use that to your advantage (say, with field position, or something (note lumbering behemoth)), then fine, but otherwise, it's just an expensive way of putting rounds down field.

DarkHound wrote:

KplKeegan wrote:What? The Leman Russ Battle-Cannon, Demolisher, Eradicator, and Executioner patterns; Hell Hounds and Bane Wolves; and Basilisks, Medusae, Griffons, and Mortars would like to have a word with you.

I was referring to units within the Heavy Support selection. I've already objectively shown that Executioner, Demolisher, and Battle Tank variants are inferior for anti-infantry.

And you have blatantly ignored the Eradicator and dismissed cover-ignoring barrage weaponry like the Manticore and Basilisk and Griffon, which are better anti-infantry than the Punisher just so your argument looks stronger.

You keep saying it is useless, but have yet to produce any reason for it. I've given plenty of evidence to my point. If you want anecdotal evidence instead of empirical, I've got a couple battle reports with Punishers on Dakka.

DarkHound wrote:The Punisher is better than every Russ against hordes. Even if an opponent clumps his models up such that a large blast template can hit 7 models (small blast would hit about 4), a Punisher is better. Assuming a scatter only drops the hits to half (because the horde is so large) large blast templates score 4.3 kills out of cover on average. The Executioner can get 7.47, hitting 4 models. The Punisher 6.9 T3 6+ models out of cover, and 5.5 T4 6+. Now watch what happens if the horde has even 5+ cover: Executioner drops to 5, but the Punisher only drops to 5.5 and 4.4 respectively. By 4+ cover, the Punisher is the most effective at clearing horde (save for the Eradicator, but no one uses that).

You've also given evidence to reinforce my point, but of course, the Eradicator variant is ignored because you say so, even though the Punisher is better than every Russ variant against Hordes.

DarkHound wrote:The Punisher is also better than any other Russ at MC killing simply because it can inflict more than 1 wound at a time (and does). It is even more effective than the Executioner (1.25 vs 1.65 against T5 3+ MC).

Most Monsterous Creatures are Toughness 6, which the Exterminator or Executioner are better suited for their AP and strength.

Tell me, what does a punisher do that two Hydras do not, aside eat up more points?
Two Hydras will get an average of 12 S7 hits and three S5 hits, compare the Punisher's average of 10 S5. All Hydra hits are AP4, versus the punisher's AP-.
They have more range by a GARGANTUAN amount. More durability on account of their numbers. A much wider range of targets they can take down.
Two Hydras cost 150. What's a Punisher cost again? ooohh....

In short, the Punisher is a horrible machine and comparing it exclusively to the LRBT (always against marines at absolute max coherency and in cover while going to ground, obviously) is extreme tunnel-vision to try and make it look better than it is.

Want pure no-template dakka in your Heavy Support? Hydras will treat you right. The Punisher won't.

even if you want to ignore math, the Punisher has never worked out well for me when I use it. A lot of bullets going downrange, doing a lot of "diddly squat". Meanwhile double-hydras rarely if ever fail to do their duty.

mynamelegend wrote:Tell me, what does a punisher do that two Hydras do not, aside eat up more points?

Shrug off missile launchers. And plasma cannons/plasma guns, and melta weapons outside of melta range. Plus, the hydras likely need to be put into a single squadron.

Of course, the better case here is to compare hydras to exterminators, rather than punishers.

If you play against people who are too lazy or incompetent to space out their models, than the Punisher is not going to be as successful for you than blast weapons. Unfortunately, my opponents have all realized that taking a few extra seconds to space out basically negates any damage blasts can cause.

Against those opponents, the Punisher can dump wounds on infantry, and kill things, or dump glances on transports and hope to do something. either way, it's similar in price than the other template Russes and is much more consistent, and also much less of a huge Melta target *cough Demolisher cough*.

Does it have the squad-clearing power of the Executioner? No, but like all Russes, it's a pain to kill and will consistently put wounds on nearly everything in the game.

Ailaros wrote:Shrug off missile launchers. And plasma cannons/plasma guns, and melta weapons outside of melta range. Plus, the hydras likely need to be put into a single squadron.

Of course, the better case here is to compare hydras to exterminators, rather than punishers.

Another way to put it is of course that the Russ is just a giant glowing "Lance me" sign against anything that can bring that, and "Ordnance me" against anything that can bring that. And of course be extra sure to be in melta range due to that 24'' maximum firing range as compared to that nice safe 72'' range.

And how come comparing Hydras to Exterminators is a 'better' case? Because both have autocannons?
That's actually the point here: The Punisher's expected damage output is lower than that of the Executioner, at closer range, for higher cost.
Hell, nobody can point to "cover!!!" either against Hydras because their number of expected hits, the strength, and for when cover is NOT a factor, the AP of their attacks are all superior.
As for them being squadroned, yes, that's correct.
Essentially, my statement was the following.

Two Hydras in a Squadron is Better at the Punisher's role and Cheaper than a Punisher. If you want something to fill the Punisher's role, don't bring that piece of useless, bring Hydras. Them being able to take down light armor while the Punisher might be able to take down a Dark Eldar vehicle or a Trukk on a really lucky day is just another reason to never look at the Punisher.

Obviously the Exterminator's not fantastic either but at least it's got twice the range of the Punisher, even though its damage output is lower.
Whereas the Hydras have > twice the range. And their damage output is greater.


Objectively, regardless of if you arbitrarily claim "autocannon should only be matched against autocannon", 12 S7 > 10 S5. Logically, doesn't that mean that Hydras will beat Punishers in the Punisher's own role?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
next-post edit (due to some weird errors): Second paragraph, Hydra, not Executioner, my bad. Point remains.

KplKeegan wrote:And you have blatantly ignored the Eradicator and dismissed cover-ignoring barrage weaponry like the Manticore and Basilisk and Griffon, which are better anti-infantry than the Punisher just so your argument looks stronger.

Ok, if it makes you feel better, the Eradicator is better against hordes. It still isn't worth taken because it is exclusively effective against hordes. The Punisher is effective against all infantry, so it is worth taking. Also, only the Colossus is able to ignore cover. You'll find that the vast majority of cover is area terrain, which indirect fire are not able to ignore. Here's the math on it:

MEQs in cover, assuming moderate spread, 4 hits with a large blast, 2 with a small:
2 Griffons: 1.6 dead, 1.92 adjusted for price difference
Bassy: .83, 1.2 adjusted
Colossus: 1.66, 2.1 adjusted
Manticore (assuming 3 rockets): 1.5, 1.7 adjusted
Punisher: 2.2

T3 horde with cover and poor spacing, 7 hits on large and 4 on small, assuming scatter results in half as many hits:
2 Griffons: 5.46, 6.6
Bassy: 2.2, 3.1
Colossus: 4.4, 5.6
Manticore: 2.2, 2.5
Punisher: 4.15

KplKeegan wrote:Most Monsterous Creatures are Toughness 6, which the Exterminator or Executioner are better suited for their AP and strength.

Actually, if you do the math, you'll find that the Exterminator is awful at anti-MC and the Executioner isn't much different than the Punisher. Except the Executioner struggles to get a wound on if the MC is in cover, and the Punisher is unaffected.

So, I've shown that the Punisher is more effective than other Russes. I've shown it competes with even artillery. And I don't even advocate it on its killing power. I like how durable it is.

EDIT:

mynamelegend wrote:That's actually the point here: The Punisher's expected damage output is lower than that of the Executioner, at closer range, for higher cost.

When? Show me.

If you can't appreciate AV14, you've never used it. It will ignore a third of all Meltaguns in melta range. It will ignore virtually all long ranged firepower. Your AV12 vehicles are not so safe at range, and even more vulnerable to backfield clearers.

Not that I'm defending Punishers or anything but how are you getting 12S7 hits when your guns only fire 8S7 shots?

I'm slow in the head is how. Ignore me.

Ahh. He must have been thinking 3 hydras instead of 2. Easy mistake to make.

Okay, so i'm not sure why this turned into a flame war in the last 24 hours... but yeah.


Okay considering the weaponry on the Leman russ Punisher it's ideally built in my opinion to take on hordes well. I would equip it with either 3 flamers or 1 with 2 heavy bolters and rush a squad of them foreward knowing my REAR BACK ARMOR 11 is safe from standard infantry. For example how would a guants fair against something that is shoots 20 shots on the move and throws fire while tank shocking? not well

How would a MC? much better.

The idea that a Leman russ is better or worse in a codex i don't know if I agree with. What i can say is i know for a fact Leman Russes (reguardless of variant) can be devastating to fight against especially if i didn't use KFF fields as Orks. But since I don't i don't really pay them mind. but then again I can look at losing 6-10 orks a round as just fine. Most armies can't do that though, so i offer you this. My roommate has played IG it wasn't his thing but i see them used very well and the punishers are no expection. Everyone here will talk about cover saves and better builds. While I think some things have more tactical flexibility than the Punisher i think it's a fine choice to force a monsterous creature to take saves, or getting into thick fire fights as even your rear armor is good. I primarily think it's meant to secure your last 24 inches are most gun lines have set up were terrian isn't effect , where they are widdled down and desperate to connect those charges unless they are in transports... but considering you bought 1 tank instead of 3 means you have points to take a few extra anti-tank weapons right?

Wow it's like you took a more prudent choice to balance your army for higher functions than just shooting at a certain distance where the enemy who most are pretty reactionary players rather than foreward thinkers in from round to round you'll lure then into taking high amounts of damage the last few rounds before things get hairy... You'll be able to see if you crack squads and or tank shock them away... and right as all that happens you let loose your lasgun lines? wow thats smart i mean after all you didn't buy excessive amounts of anti infantry cause your infantry can kinda help out with that? Oh wow better watch out infiltraters showed up and they are assualting that Punisher! Oh poo, they can't do anything even with those frag gernades because of your rear armor 11. Well you better send some guardsmen to tarpit them up while you deal with all these other threats within smaller ranges.

See this is what I am talking about. EVERY option has a use just most refuse to see it or want to admit it. I see the true power of your Punishers in concert with frfsrf as it tears down even mighty ork squads when they are most vulnerable! Or Luring the enemy to assume your guns are worthless as they charge and get tripped up in those last 24 inches where you thrive. I'd say personally I am a big fan of Battle cannons as they seem the smartest to me sometimes. But you need to craft your army and tanks to work how you play... not to what these guys say is good and bad. You should be open to advice but most of the posts i saw were people trying to intimidate you into making new choices.

If you want to have your troopers deal with anti-tank and have your tanks deal with infantry because your troops can help out there as well when the tanks are dead then so be it. I rate it as one of the toughest tanks out there besides the Necron tech and land raider.