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'd still only pay 180ish for a heavy Land Raider. Especially with the speed restriction. Let's say it's carrying a terminator assault squad. So now you have 400 ish points of assault closing in at 6" a turn. That thing is a non-priority for targeting. It's firepower is still poor, and it still has the problems of D weapons, haywire, etc. Land raiders don't really mount anything that's very scary even if fired twice. Remember that this is a game where 60-90 S6 shots is normal coming from an Eldar list. The game has just completely passed the land raider by. There is just no single assault worth 400+ pts. Especially when terminators can't sweep.

This is an interesting thought exercise in underscoring just how bad expensive vehicles currently are.

 raverrn wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You can let it have a dozer blade, but beyond that, all you can do is make it cheaper.

Heavy - A Heavy vehicle has an overabundance of crew or internal control systems. Heavy vehicles may only move 6", but may fire all of their weapons in the as if stationary. If a Heavy vehicle is Shaken or Stunned it may choose one weapon to fire at normal Ballistic Skill instead of firing a snap shot. If a Heavy vehicle is not Shaken or Stunned it may instead fire one weapon twice - choose one weapon before rolling to hit with any attacks and double the weapon's fire rate.

Would that do it?

So... what is the substantial difference between giving heavy vehicles the option to fire "some weapon" ie the main weapon 2ce, or 1ce normally even is shaken or stunned different than a 5pt upgrade to let it fire 2ce? the 3rd shot has been recanted by op

 pumaman1 wrote:

 raverrn wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
You can let it have a dozer blade, but beyond that, all you can do is make it cheaper.

Heavy - A Heavy vehicle has an overabundance of crew or internal control systems. Heavy vehicles may only move 6", but may fire all of their weapons in the as if stationary. If a Heavy vehicle is Shaken or Stunned it may choose one weapon to fire at normal Ballistic Skill instead of firing a snap shot. If a Heavy vehicle is not Shaken or Stunned it may instead fire one weapon twice - choose one weapon before rolling to hit with any attacks and double the weapon's fire rate.

Would that do it?

So... what is the substantial difference between giving heavy vehicles the option to fire "some weapon" ie the main weapon 2ce, or 1ce normally even is shaken or stunned different than a 5pt upgrade to let it fire 2ce? the 3rd shot has been recanted by op

I think that was his point.
Why even make it an upgrade when there is absolutely no reason on earth not to take it, just put it in the profile straight up.

I think your heavy vehicles should also ignore, or at least reroll, terrain tests.

To be honest, I just made it a 5 point upgrade because I didn't have the points cost for each russ on hand. Personally I don't see the difference between a 5 point upgrade vs writing each one out with a 5 pt increase. Same effect different semantics. The only only issue I see with making it mandatory is if there's anyone who doesn't want to risk exploding on a 4+ from AP-1 fires. But upping the RoF and providing limited protection from the vehicle damage table seems like a way to improve the russ, right?

Really like the use of recant. It makes this seem like a religious council

Oh also apprently there is a 40k version of WP called phosphex so I'll change that name.

Martel732 wrote:
Not so simple. Yes, that would help, but the power lists still crush you. WKs still crush you trivially.

The reality is that we can do a LOT to russes before they get op. After all, a single shaken ends the party for a turn.

Honestly, I think comparing anything to something as stupidly powerful and criminally undercosted as the WK is a waste of time; there's no point to be made. WK will beat every unit that's reasonably balanced or weaker in the game. It's an entirely moot point. So could we, as a community, stop acting like Wraith Knights are the standard to which everything in 40k should be compared, a mindset that only accepts and normalizes the power creep ruining the game.
/

On topic, I think against reasonable enemy units, the return of Lumbering Behemoth is indeed necessary for Ordnance Russes, but enough to make them rather strong choices. I very much like the idea of paying ~20 points for veteran crews, it is fluffy and the improved BS can make a significant difference for basically any vehicle available to the IG. I'd be willing to pay for that upgrade for artillery and flyers.

I have also heard in other threads the idea of making Russes 4 HP. While I'm not particularly sure about that, perhaps of Heavy Tanks gave a -1 modifier to vehicle damage rolls instead of an extra HP could work, or a roll to ignore Crew Shaken results? I think that an extra buff or two in addition to LB would make them worth their points. I'd rather try for that than drastic points decreases, as that will only add further to the number of models that IG armies need just to make lists the same size.

At the same time, I'd like to win, as well. So the WK is a kind of standard for being able to win vs those using WKs.

I thought of another few potential upgrades. Altjough I wouldn't wish all to be implemeted.

Wet/armoured ammunition stowage. 5pts
When a vehicle with wet/armoured ammunition stowage suffers an Explodes! result on the vehicle damage table roll a D6, on a result of a 4+, treat the result as a Crew shaken instead.
A vehicle cannot have both a ready rack and wet/armoured ammunition stowage.

Auspex Targeters. 10pts
Any enemy unit targetted by the vehicle suffers -1 to its cover saves against shots fired by the vehicle.
Furthermore a Leman Russ Vanquisher or Demolisher may ignore LoS when firing with it's main gun.
[Too much for the demolisher here?]

Gyro Stabilisers 15pts
A vehicle with Gyro Stabilisers required to snap shot may still fire any weapons with a blast-type special rule may still do so, however it will always scatter, use the arrow on a 'hit' result or otherwise reroll that dice.

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I thought of another few potential upgrades. Altjough I wouldn't wish all to be implemeted.

Wet/armoured ammunition stowage. 5pts
When a vehicle with wet/armoured ammunition stowage suffers an Explodes! result on the vehicle damage table roll a D6, on a result of a 4+, treat the result as a Crew shaken instead.
A vehicle cannot have both a ready rack and wet/armoured ammunition stowage.

Auspex Targeters. 10pts
Any enemy unit targetted by the vehicle suffers -1 to its cover saves against shots fired by the vehicle.
Furthermore a Leman Russ Vanquisher or Demolisher may ignore LoS when firing with it's main gun.
[Too much for the demolisher here?]

Gyro Stabilisers 15pts
A vehicle with Gyro Stabilisers required to snap shot may still fire any weapons with a blast-type special rule may still do so, however it will always scatter, use the arrow on a 'hit' result or otherwise reroll that dice.

Stabilize with Gyros!


Why does the Vanquishers targeting array go from reduce 1 cover to ignore it entirely? Same with Demolisher. It seems like a LARGE leap for those two specific vehicles, and aside from essentially longest and shortest range Russes, cannot see the connection.

 pumaman1 wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:

Auspex Targeters. 10pts
Any enemy unit targetted by the vehicle suffers -1 to its cover saves against shots fired by the vehicle.
Furthermore a Leman Russ Vanquisher or Demolisher may ignore LoS when firing with it's main gun.
[Too much for the demolisher here?]

Why does the Vanquishers targeting array go from reduce 1 cover to ignore it entirely? Same with Demolisher. It seems like a LARGE leap for those two specific vehicles, and aside from essentially longest and shortest range Russes, cannot see the connection.

Vanquishers and Demolishers don't ignore cover, they ignore LoS. So cover saves as normal with the -1.
The logic behind that was the Vanquisher is a high velocity AP round, and so can penetrate walls and such force.
The Demolisher I'm less sure should be a thing, but due to the same reasons, it's a bunker busting round.
Perhaps it should have two separate points values? like 10pts if taken by a regular vehicle, 25 if taken by a Demolisher or Vanquisher?
Logic of -1 cover was because that's why Space Marine hand held Auspex grant.

 pumaman1 wrote:

 kirotheavenger wrote:
I thought of another few potential upgrades. Altjough I wouldn't wish all to be implemeted.

Wet/armoured ammunition stowage. 5pts
When a vehicle with wet/armoured ammunition stowage suffers an Explodes! result on the vehicle damage table roll a D6, on a result of a 4+, treat the result as a Crew shaken instead.
A vehicle cannot have both a ready rack and wet/armoured ammunition stowage.

Auspex Targeters. 10pts
Any enemy unit targetted by the vehicle suffers -1 to its cover saves against shots fired by the vehicle.
Furthermore a Leman Russ Vanquisher or Demolisher may ignore LoS when firing with it's main gun.
[Too much for the demolisher here?]

Gyro Stabilisers 15pts
A vehicle with Gyro Stabilisers required to snap shot may still fire any weapons with a blast-type special rule may still do so, however it will always scatter, use the arrow on a 'hit' result or otherwise reroll that dice.

Stabilize with Gyros!


Why does the Vanquishers targeting array go from reduce 1 cover to ignore it entirely? Same with Demolisher. It seems like a LARGE leap for those two specific vehicles, and aside from essentially longest and shortest range Russes, cannot see the connection.

I had a gyro yesterday, and my day felt thoroughly stabilized thereafter.

In all honesty, I think there was just an excuse to give the Demo and Vanq Ignores Cover for super cheap - It would essentially make those variants broken. The Demo cannon would become an a Deathstrike for all intents and purposes literally every turn it's alive, and the Vanq cannon would get to one-shot even vehicles deliberately put in cover or skimmers sacrificing their shooting via Jink, because "Hey, feth you/your jink saves," even though a clever IG player can earn (that is, neither inexpensive nor cheese) Ignores Cover on their vehicles with Divination psychic support. No thanks, I really don't want to pay 10 points to become as infuriating as Tau.

EDIT: I see that you explicitly mentioned you said "ignores LoS" rather than "Ignores Cover". Though this would be much less broken, it really doesn't make much sense to me; it feels hard to explain away with the upgrade itself, rather than the nature of the Russ variant's stock weapon. Also, why just those two variants? I'm sure the Battle/Punisher/Executioner Cannons would eventually start punching/chewing through walls.

I hadn't considered that ignoring LoS means only area terrain would grant cover saves, so vehicles/MCs wouldn't get cover.
Perhaps if LoS is ignored the enemy unit get's a 3+ cover save, down to 4+ with the -1?
Perhaps that is rather too much on the Demolisher, but the Vanquisher that's presumably firing some kind of solid projectile, while the rest are some kind of HE/APHE projectile, so would either explode on contact with significant debris or shortly thereafter, whereas the Vanquisher would just keep going unimpeded. The logic was the Demolisher fires an APHE with a longer fuse time, as it's designed to smash through buildings then give the contents hell.

The upgrade grants it rather than a stock ability as the implication is that without the upgrade the crew is targeting 'the old fashioned way' relying the Mk.I Eyeball targeting system. The auspex allows them to accurately locate targets that would otherwise be impossible to spot.