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.

 Asmodai wrote:
Leman Russ Battletank

WS3 BS4 S8 T8 W6 I3 A3 Ld10 Sv3+/4++

Unit Type: Gargantuan Creature
Wargear: Battle Cannon, Heavy Bolter

Special Rules: It Will Not Die, Relentless

Variants and sponsons as wargear options.

+25 points to the base cost.

We need to STOP vehicles becoming MCs not encourage it.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:
Leman Russ Battletank

WS3 BS4 S8 T8 W6 I3 A3 Ld10 Sv3+/4++

Unit Type: Gargantuan Creature
Wargear: Battle Cannon, Heavy Bolter

Special Rules: It Will Not Die, Relentless

Variants and sponsons as wargear options.

+25 points to the base cost.

We need to STOP vehicles becoming MCs not encourage it.

But look at this, its not actually so bad... Its competitive... Powerful.... NO, BAD MoO!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 commander dante wrote:


This is what makes Russes fair, they have God Tier Front armour, OK Side and weak rear, so you know that you HAVE to flank the russ to destroy it

So what about the Landraider? You know, the Marine tank with the Russes frontal armour on EVERY SINGLE FACING? Plus Assault transport and arguably more effective firepower too. And more HP. What about that?

 master of ordinance wrote:

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:
Leman Russ Battletank

WS3 BS4 S8 T8 W6 I3 A3 Ld10 Sv3+/4++

Unit Type: Gargantuan Creature
Wargear: Battle Cannon, Heavy Bolter

Special Rules: It Will Not Die, Relentless

Variants and sponsons as wargear options.

+25 points to the base cost.

We need to STOP vehicles becoming MCs not encourage it.

But look at this, its not actually so bad... Its competitive... Powerful.... NO, BAD MoO!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 commander dante wrote:


This is what makes Russes fair, they have God Tier Front armour, OK Side and weak rear, so you know that you HAVE to flank the russ to destroy it

So what about the Landraider? You know, the Marine tank with the Russes frontal armour on EVERY SINGLE FACING? Plus Assault transport and arguably more effective firepower too. And more HP. What about that?

That massively overpriced marine assualt tank...
It needs some love along with the Leman Russ.

We need simple fixes not over the top shenanigans in my opinion. Maintain the current points costs just add:

-4 Hull Points per Leman Russ
-Multiple shell options for certain variants
-Beast Hunter Shells: Instant Death, against Gargantuan Creatures auto inflict 3 wounds.
-Built in Split Fire between Turret and Sponsons, no Snap Shots for Firing Ordnance

Under the current rules system...

A 4th HP at least, exceptions for Ordnance weapons to firing restrictions, cheaper cost on many variants like the Demolisher, enhanced rear armor on all variants, and some extra shell upgrade options would not be inappropriate.

 gmaleron wrote:
We need simple fixes not over the top shenanigans in my opinion:

-4 Hull Points per Leman Russ
-Multiple shell options per tank
-Beast Hunter Shells: Instant Death, against Gargantuan Creatures auto inflict 3 wounds.
-Built in Split Fire between Turret and Sponsons

Um. No.

More HP per Russ? Ok, fair enough. Heavy tank, makes sense.

Multiple options for shells? As upgrades, similar to Soul Grinder weapons? Fair enough.

Instant Death, Auto 3 GC wounds?

....

NO.

I'm sorry your Leman Russ is unloved. I'm sorry that Tau and Eldar are abusing certain unit types because the designers took a few hits too many when deciding what was a vehicle and what wasn't.

But no son. I don't think the fix for you is to directly nerf Daemons, Dark Eldar, Tyranids and to a lesser extent CSM and KDK so that you may be able to possibly deal with Eldar and Tau. You don't drown the orphanage to put out the oven fire. Instant death 4 foot range large blast shells? Really? You feel you need this and not, say, a points reduction across the board like those other armies have gotten?

Built In Split Fire between Turret and Sponson - No. Other vehicles don't get this by default. Why should you?

You've proposed 2 ideas that are feasible.

And 2 ideas that are over the top shenanigans, to use your own words.

Stop that.

RAV 11 for the regular Russes and RAV 12 for the siege variants?

Split fire with turret and sponsons isnt necessarily that over the top, the Russ actually has individual gunners for each of those weapons unlike most other vehicles, and would give more meaningful value to some neglected weapons options.

Eh, the problem in my possibly wrong opinion as a non guard player that two of the russ variants, the punisher and demolisher, are amazing and the rest is pretty garbo imho personal perference local meta etc. sorry if i took a shot at anyone's fav, but we can all agree most of them are delicately sub optimal. Maybe a reasonably costed BS boost that can be taken as a vehicle upgrade would help. But you gotta remember, Russes have roles. You gotta use 'em appropriately. Don't forget to bring the bubblewrap and some astropaths/wyrd psyker buffs if need be. Pask is great. Don't think I''d go for an all mechanized list like you do with orks. Need dat bubblewrap.

Demolisher has a tendency to get suppressed before it can fire. The punisher is solid, but autocannon one is my favorite.

WK cares not for your bubblewrap.

master of ordinance wrote:So what about the Landraider? You know, the Marine tank with the Russes frontal armour on EVERY SINGLE FACING? Plus Assault transport and arguably more effective firepower too. And more HP. What about that?

The one that costs almost twice as much as the Russ for a single extra HP, with weapons about as effective (or even less effective) while being a giant fire magnet and being locked into transporting the same terminators every says are overcosted and ineffective? That one?

DarkStarSabre wrote:You don't drown the orphanage to put out the oven fire.

Well, this is 40k....


That said, I think the issue is less Russ's being too weak (as someone who has to deal with upwards of 3 of them from time to time, I wish that was the case), and more that all vehicles are a bit less durable in general, and MCs outperform them. Rebalancing the game's core mechanics first and then tweaking stuff would be a better tactic than trying to race the red queen around, constantly trying to patch a broken system is not a winning tactic.

I'd like to point out that the land raider is perhaps the worst unit in my entire codex of failure.

Something interesting about the Land Raider, the Russ and Demolisher especially originally had better armor than the Land Raider when vehicles were released in RT and through 2E, with the Land Raider getting something of a minor reboot of concept with the greater 3E reboot while Russ tanks got comparatively nerfed (getting stuck with side AV12 from 1998 until 2009).

 Battlegrinder wrote:


That said, I think the issue is less Russ's being too weak (as someone who has to deal with upwards of 3 of them from time to time, I wish that was the case), and more that all vehicles are a bit less durable in general, and MCs outperform them. Rebalancing the game's core mechanics first and then tweaking stuff would be a better tactic than trying to race the red queen around, constantly trying to patch a broken system is not a winning tactic.

You're actually spot on here. I like.

Vehicles are far too weak in the current state. HPs actually made them worse as they can now just be pinged to death by high ROF, high Strength weapons - hence why Twin-Devourers and Autocannons are so damn popular and get used more than the actual weapons that are meant to kill vehicles and armoured targets.

However the fix simply isn't 'Nerf MCs.' The problem with a blanket MC and GC nerf is that it hurts a number of armies that were already in questionable states to begin with. Tyranids, DE, CSM and KDK. Daemons are the odd blip here.

The problem with these armies is that they are reliant on their MCs to be viable (yay Codex Full o' Trash approach) or that their MCs in general are horrendously overpointed, understatted and functionally useless.

I'll be honest here - I used to love my Tyranids. Then I sold them to buy GSC instead. Because Tyranid MCs outside of Flyrants are utter trash. Overpriced, understatted, prone to eating themselves or just prone to dying while accomplishing nothing.

The MCs and GCs that DO perform amazing are Tau and Eldar - and are underpointed and/or overbuffed much like the rest of the army they accompany.

And that's a problem because....

If you buff vehicles and leave MCs as is? Tau and Eldar will benefit from it.

If you nerf MCs and leave vehicles as is? Tau and Eldar still have Plan B to fall back on - if anything it'd hurt Tau more.

If you nerf MCs and buff vehicles? Tau and Eldar will still have their Plan B - in fact, you just buffed that whilst Tyranids at this stage will have gone from Bottom of the Barrel to drilling a hole to make a new level of bad.

The problem is that even if they don't get one shot, all they need is ONE crew stunned or crew shaken to render most of the blast shooting tanks useless.

My personal wish list:

*4 HP.
*Reduced prices by at least 20%
*Pask is cheaper.
*Punisher range increased to 36'' or 48''. Punisher gets Shred by default.
*All tanks are BS4. Pask is BS5.
*Damage does not over spill in squadrons.
*Searchlight ignores cover.

 commander dante wrote:
You cant just "Remove" the Rear Armour 10/11

Weak Rear Armour is iconic on the russ, and it allowed weapons of all types to be able to destroy it

This is what makes Russes fair, they have God Tier Front armour, OK Side and weak rear, so you know that you HAVE to flank the russ to destroy it

And then Grav came out....Remove the vehicle destroying capabilities of Grav, and Russes will be good again

I think the rear armor could use a slight boost. Bring the other variants in line with the Demolisher, Punisher, and Executioner, which have additional rear protection. It doesn't make them invulnerable. But you don't have to worry about your mounts being threatened by weaker regular infantry surrounding it.


On another note, I would like to see the Conqueror return, but with updated rules and the Fast Rule implemented across the board. I think it would be cool if the Guard had an honest to god cruiser tank.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Martel732 wrote:
I'd like to point out that the land raider is perhaps the worst unit in my entire codex of failure.

Which is nuts, in my opinion. The Land Raider in fluff is supposed to be a rolling brick of death and doom. The rules should reflect it's toughness and power.

It moves 6" and fires a mighty one gun before tracking itself on a shrub? Nice crunch, GW. All in an effort to get an overcosted assault unit into combat. Yeah, worst unit in the codex hands down bar none.

Make default cover save 5+, including Jink. Remove most cheap increasers to cover saves.

Remove Feel No Pain modifiers.

There, I've fixed Leman Russes and a great many other things.

Not really.

Fixing the Russ is easy:
Without modifying the current (crap) vehicle rules:
>Reduce costs by 20% to 30%, variant dependant
>Increase rear armour to 11/12
>Re-introduce Lumbering Behemoth
>Give all variants Splitfire
>Give the Punisher Rending and Shred and AP4
>Give the eradicator radphage
>Make the Vanquisher auto inflict D3+1 HP/Wounds on a hit and give it Instant Death
>Give a option for veteran Crews (+1 BS) for 10 points
>Coaxial Heavy Stubbers

Keep the LR as it is (perhaps a change to ordnance snapfire) and fix what is actually broken. The top lists.

 master of ordinance wrote:
Fixing the Russ is easy:
Without modifying the current (crap) vehicle rules:
>Reduce costs by 20% to 30%, variant dependant
>Increase rear armour to 11/12
>Re-introduce Lumbering Behemoth
>Give all variants Splitfire
>Give the Punisher Rending and Shred and AP4
>Give the eradicator radphage
>Make the Vanquisher auto inflict D3+1 HP/Wounds on a hit and give it Instant Death
>Give a option for veteran Crews (+1 BS) for 10 points
>Coaxial Heavy Stubbers

That's too many changes, and doesn't address any other vehicle.

You can't make russes great again until you make 40k great again. We would have to fix the core rules first. Having said that, there's loads of good ideas in here to keep in mind.

 Dakka Wolf wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:
Leman Russ Battletank

WS3 BS4 S8 T8 W6 I3 A3 Ld10 Sv3+/4++

Unit Type: Gargantuan Creature
Wargear: Battle Cannon, Heavy Bolter

Special Rules: It Will Not Die, Relentless

Variants and sponsons as wargear options.

+25 points to the base cost.

We need to STOP vehicles becoming MCs not encourage it.

This is one way to fix it. If everything is an MC, then it becomes fair.

"Give the Punisher Rending, Shred and AP4"

Yeah sure if you only want to make every other Leman Russ Irrelevant


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also the Conqeror still does exist
IA14 and (I Believe) Siege of Vraks

Fast Russes FTW!

The problem with Leman Russes is that vehicles that aren't flyers or fast skimmers are weak across the board. None of them have enough hull points. None of them have adequate ability to fire on the move. None of them besides Land Raiders have any ability to fire at multiple targets, and even with it Land Raiders are overpriced hot garbage. Buff vehicles across the board, and Leman Russes will benefit.

As for the rule restricting a vehicle to snap shots with other weapons when firing an ordnance weapon in the same turn - there's no point to having that rule at all if Leman Russes get an exemption to it. Taking Russes out of the picture, the next most common ordnance-bearing tank is the Vindicator, and it's firepower beyond the demolisher cannon? A single storm bolter - two if you spring for an upgrade! Mind you, the current Russ main gun options support removing the rule. It's stupid that a S8 AP3 large blast inflicts a snap shooting penalty on the rest of the vehicle's weapons, but a trio of S7 AP2 small blasts doesn't.

Plus, IG do have cruiser-style tanks. They're the Hellhound variants. A Fast Russ would be stupid.

Regarding a couple points that keep coming up:

-Increased rear armor: No. Having weak rear armor is supposed to be the Russ's main drawback, to compensate for it's heavy front and side armor and give people some method to counter it.
-Lumbering Behemoth: Eh....tolerable.
- Split Fire: Eh, not really seeing the point to that.
-Punisher with shred/rend/AP/ect: Yeah, let's take the tank that gets deemed nearly broken when Pask is in it, and make it even worse. NO. The Paskisher is bad enough, since he lets a tank that's designed to take down light infantry knock out heavy tanks, but at least it's just the one tank he's in that can do that. What possible reason is there to take that, buff it even more, and make it the default? Heavy 20 with AP 4, shred, and rending would make it not merely able to damage to most units, but able to drop most anything in one round of shooting.

 Future War Cultist wrote:
Demolisher and Regular (the regular russ needs a name ): Remove the hindrance to other weapons firing. That rule is stupid.
Vanquisher: Give it Instant Death.
Eradicator: Give it a Rad effect, so that units hit by it are reduced in toughness. This ties into that combined arms combo theme I mentioned earlier. Oh, and consider increasing it's range to 48".
Executioner: Help it with the issue of gets hot.
Punisher and Exterminator: They're OK.

And slash the price of all the tanks.

Pretty solid with all you thoughts there except the executioner. Don´t really see the issue here as much but I would like to have the weapon maybe fire even if it gets hot but it should keep the gets hot rule with the thinking that the inside of the tank is over heating.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Battlegrinder wrote:
Regarding a couple points that keep coming up:

-Increased rear armor: No. Having weak rear armor is supposed to be the Russ's main drawback, to compensate for it's heavy front and side armor and give people some method to counter it.
-Lumbering Behemoth: Eh....tolerable.
- Split Fire: Eh, not really seeing the point to that.
-Punisher with shred/rend/AP/ect: Yeah, let's take the tank that gets deemed nearly broken when Pask is in it, and make it even worse. NO. The Paskisher is bad enough, since he lets a tank that's designed to take down light infantry knock out heavy tanks, but at least it's just the one tank he's in that can do that. What possible reason is there to take that, buff it even more, and make it the default? Heavy 20 with AP 4, shred, and rending would make it not merely able to damage to most units, but able to drop most anything in one round of shooting.

Maybe give it 1 extra HP so that grav does destroy it with 2 shots.

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

If you buff vehicles and leave MCs as is? Tau and Eldar will benefit from it.

Would that really be so bad?

I can't speak for Eldar, but the Tau MBT costs almost twice as much as a broadside battlesuit and does not come close to competing with its equal weight of the same.

Would it really be so bad if the oft maligned Tau player had reason to take a few hammerheads instead of that second and third Riptide sometimes?

I don't know about you, but for me, seeing less gundam lists and more gasaraki lists is not too high a price to pay to see tank duels with russes and predators on the field again.

 Captain Joystick wrote:

 DarkStarSabre wrote:

If you buff vehicles and leave MCs as is? Tau and Eldar will benefit from it.

Would that really be so bad?

I can't speak for Eldar, but the Tau MBT costs almost twice as much as a broadside battlesuit and does not come close to competing with its equal weight of the same.

Would it really be so bad if the oft maligned Tau player had reason to take a few hammerheads instead of that second and third Riptide sometimes?

I don't know about you, but for me, seeing less gundam lists and more gasaraki lists is not too high a price to pay to see tank duels with russes and predators on the field again.

When the problem present is that MCs and GCs are just too good (supposedly) and yet no one considers a Tyranid Carnifex or a DE Talos to be ZOMG OP BROKEN NERF NERF yet virtually everyone can agree that Tau Riptides and Eldar Wraithknights are ridiculously good....

That's a sign of where you need to be aiming your nerfs.

The problem isn't so much Vehicles vs MCs/GCs. It's Vehicles in a meta with Tau and Eldar MCs/GCs.

The balance needs to happen with Tau and Eldar in particular.

The whole Nerf MCs! approach will utterly destroy Tyranids and do a nasty number on CSM and DE as well. It will hardly phase Tau and Eldar - sure, you've nerfed units that were considered S++ in codexes that are for the most part S or A rank across the board.

I'm not sure destroying codexes floundering in the C and D range to penalise codexes in the S to A range and attempt to buff a B-C range codex is the right approach here.