Tank commander

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.

**Mmmpi**

I like building to themes for my more casual games. Granted I'll try to make the best list possible in that theme.

**UMGuy**

Horst wrote:

Statistically Pask + 3 tank commanders and a Basilisk can bring down a 3++ Castellan this way on average, just pump out so many wounds that there's no way he can pass enough 3++ saves.

Curious on the mathammer here, what kind of loadouts on the tcs?

**Horst**

UMGuy wrote:
Horst wrote:

Statistically Pask + 3 tank commanders and a Basilisk can bring down a 3++ Castellan this way on average, just pump out so many wounds that there's no way he can pass enough 3++ saves.

Curious on the mathammer here, what kind of loadouts on the tcs?

Pask in a Las/Plas Executioner
1 TC in a Las/Plas Executioner
1 TC w/ Battle Cannon, 3 HB
1 TC w/ Battle Cannon, 1 HB
Basilisk

This assumes that they didn't move, and that they're all clustered around my Warlord, who has Old Grudges, so they can re-roll wounds on the Castellan. Comes out to like 28.5 damage on average to the Castellan IIRC, so while not 100% sure of killing him, on average it should. I have some Sentinels I could shoot at it too if I absolutely had to to hopefully score the last wound or two.

**tneva82**

Horst wrote:
This assumes that they didn't move, and that they're all clustered around my Warlord, who has Old Grudges, so they can re-roll wounds on the Castellan. Comes out to like 28.5 damage on average to the Castellan IIRC, so while not 100% sure of killing him, on average it should. I have some Sentinels I could shoot at it too if I absolutely had to to hopefully score the last wound or two.

One problem with this is that you assume you didn't move. That means knight hides out of LOS and thus gets 1st shot at you taking down at least 1, more likely 2 out. Albeit you might get some other knight if you get 1st turn as he's unlikely to have enough terrain to hide EVERYTHING out of LOS.

**Horst**

tneva82 wrote:
Horst wrote:
This assumes that they didn't move, and that they're all clustered around my Warlord, who has Old Grudges, so they can re-roll wounds on the Castellan. Comes out to like 28.5 damage on average to the Castellan IIRC, so while not 100% sure of killing him, on average it should. I have some Sentinels I could shoot at it too if I absolutely had to to hopefully score the last wound or two.

One problem with this is that you assume you didn't move. That means knight hides out of LOS and thus gets 1st shot at you taking down at least 1, more likely 2 out. Albeit you might get some other knight if you get 1st turn as he's unlikely to have enough terrain to hide EVERYTHING out of LOS.

I've also got a Shadowsword in my list, I'm assuming the knight will nuke it first, and this would be my counter stroke. If I go first, I'm fine with moving and shooting at it because the Shadowsword will cripple the hell out of it anyway.

**tneva82**

Horst wrote:
I've also got a Shadowsword in my list, I'm assuming the knight will nuke it first, and this would be my counter stroke. If I go first, I'm fine with moving and shooting at it because the Shadowsword will cripple the hell out of it anyway.

That would be interesting situation. Castellan can actually duel it out with 2 shadowswords so he could conceivably opt to take out the executioners first though as that cripples that thing. Then take shadowsword to shin. If rest of your army can't help it you won't kill it(about half dead average) so he would be able to kill shadowsword still.

That's assuming he can't use LOS to avoid part of your huge footprint of vehicles.

**Ice_can**

tneva82 wrote:
Horst wrote:
I've also got a Shadowsword in my list, I'm assuming the knight will nuke it first, and this would be my counter stroke. If I go first, I'm fine with moving and shooting at it because the Shadowsword will cripple the hell out of it anyway.

That would be interesting situation. Castellan can actually duel it out with 2 shadowswords so he could conceivably opt to take out the executioners first though as that cripples that thing. Then take shadowsword to shin. If rest of your army can't help it you won't kill it(about half dead average) so he would be able to kill shadowsword still.

That's assuming he can't use LOS to avoid part of your huge footprint of vehicles.

What type of terrain are you using that a Castellen can reliably be out of LoS, not in cover,100% can not be seen?

Trying to hide an Armiger out of LoS is usually about the limit of most terrain.

**tneva82**

Ice_can wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Horst wrote:
I've also got a Shadowsword in my list, I'm assuming the knight will nuke it first, and this would be my counter stroke. If I go first, I'm fine with moving and shooting at it because the Shadowsword will cripple the hell out of it anyway.

That would be interesting situation. Castellan can actually duel it out with 2 shadowswords so he could conceivably opt to take out the executioners first though as that cripples that thing. Then take shadowsword to shin. If rest of your army can't help it you won't kill it(about half dead average) so he would be able to kill shadowsword still.

That's assuming he can't use LOS to avoid part of your huge footprint of vehicles.

What type of terrain are you using that a Castellen can reliably be out of LoS, not in cover,100% can not be seen?

Trying to hide an Armiger out of LoS is usually about the limit of most terrain.

One that isn't planet bowling ball. Last time I faced rip tide for example it was comfortably able to use big building to make my lootas have to chase it around to line up shots.

If you don't want 1st turn be all and gunlines dominate better have some terrain.

**Ice_can**

tneva82 wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
tneva82 wrote:
Horst wrote:
I've also got a Shadowsword in my list, I'm assuming the knight will nuke it first, and this would be my counter stroke. If I go first, I'm fine with moving and shooting at it because the Shadowsword will cripple the hell out of it anyway.

That would be interesting situation. Castellan can actually duel it out with 2 shadowswords so he could conceivably opt to take out the executioners first though as that cripples that thing. Then take shadowsword to shin. If rest of your army can't help it you won't kill it(about half dead average) so he would be able to kill shadowsword still.

That's assuming he can't use LOS to avoid part of your huge footprint of vehicles.

What type of terrain are you using that a Castellen can reliably be out of LoS, not in cover,100% can not be seen?

Trying to hide an Armiger out of LoS is usually about the limit of most terrain.

One that isn't planet bowling ball. Last time I faced rip tide for example it was comfortably able to use big building to make my lootas have to chase it around to line up shots.

If you don't want 1st turn be all and gunlines dominate better have some terrain.

A Riptide and a Castellen are not the same size, it's also much shorter range weapons than a Castellen, I don't even see why you would think they are comparable.
That's the equivalent of saying you can always hide a baneblade out of LoS because last game someone hid a rhino.

**ValentineGames**

Horst wrote:
ValentineGames wrote:
Horst wrote:
ValentineGames wrote:
There are hundreds of reasons to take regular russ tanks over commanders.

However if your only interested in creating really dumb lists to make people eye roll at you then no.

Oh come on. You can easily explain a group of 3 tank commanders with fluff just as easily as you can explain regular russes from a fluff perspective... maybe your army received intel that there was a high value enemy armored target in the area, so the Warmaster dispatched a spearhead of his finest tank aces to deal with it.

Or if you have Pask + some Tank Commanders, it's Pask and his chosen command squadron, like how an officer would take a command squad of veterans, he just takes a command lance of tanks.

Just because you think it's a "really dumb list to make people eye roll at you" doesn't mean there aren't legit fluff reasons such a thing could happen.

Come off it.
Nobody plays fluff.
Yes you could say you've got an elite tank ace platoon.
But we are talking about 40k players here remember.
On a forum where a very vocal group of players control every single thread and tear apart fluff gamers and sling open insults at them while mods sit back with dicks in hands.

You sound like you would be really fun to play a game with.... damn. Love the holier than thou attitude, really I do.

I've never had anyone complain about a single game against me in 24yrs. So I guess I am fun to play against.
And that's more than just 40k.

Stux wrote:

Yeah, there are a few people who get too argumentative.

Yeah that's damn true. Then you get moronic gak like this bulk crap

Peregrine wrote:
Why should we bother talking about some weird version of 40k where people take bad units that are exactly identical to better units except for having worse BS? Can't the one person who plays that way just talk to themselves offline?

I mean that DOES break rule one in a passive aggressive way.

**vipoid**

Mmmpi wrote:
I like building to themes for my more casual games. Granted I'll try to make the best list possible in that theme.

Same. I've found that having a theme makes my armies a lot more enjoyable to play.

**Stux**

People behave very differently in person than they do psuedonominously online. Just because soemoen is being unreasonable here doesn't mean we should assume they're like that in person.

**prastie**

Always go for commanders since bs 3 and orders makes them so much more better. My favorite is the vostroyan demolisher commander.

**Mmmpi**

Stux wrote:
People behave very differently in person than they do psuedonominously online. Just because soemoen is being unreasonable here doesn't mean we should assume they're like that in person.

While that may be true, how they present themselves here is pretty much the only thing we have to go on.

**Stux**

Mmmpi wrote:
Stux wrote:
People behave very differently in person than they do psuedonominously online. Just because soemoen is being unreasonable here doesn't mean we should assume they're like that in person.

While that may be true, how they present themselves here is pretty much the only thing we have to go on.

I just think it best to try not to get personal. Even if it's something the other person is doing.

**Smirrors**

Stux wrote:
There's someone on here saying that, but I don't buy it. If that was the case, why only reduce the Tank Commander specifically?

That was me. You've presented no better argument and like to disagree.

As for your new question:

Going from BS4 to BS3 is 20points
Going from BS3 to BS2 is 35 points

I think those are very valid price jumps. BS3 heavy weapons platforms are fairly standard across many codex. Going to BS2 is supremely strong even though the platform itself is not going to be durable against AT weapons.

**MrMoustaffa**

I'm honestly surprised we're not forced to take a regular Russ unit per command tank, that's how it used to be and command squads are limited to how many commanders we have. It's honestly probably how it should be too, otherwise you have no mechanical reason to take normal Russe's, which is unexcusable from a game design standpoint.

**ValentineGames**

It absolutely should be forced from game mechanics.
But then you'd get the usual suspects whining how guard are nerved and not meta enough and going on about tiers.

**Mmmpi**

Double hilarious because those same people go on about how Russ suck, and don't use them.

**Stux**

Mmmpi wrote:
Double hilarious because those same people go on about how Russ suck, and don't use them.

I play Guard. Russes don't suck. I use them. They just aren't top tier competitive.

**Mmmpi**

I don't think Russes suck. I'm saying that the same people who would typically complain about the mentioned nerf idea are the ones who don't like russes as is.

Sorry if I wasn't clear.

**Rocmistro**

Ok so basically, what you guys are telling me is that I can now expect to see an army of BS3+ AM tanks going forward? Is that the gist of this thread? Check.

**Unit1126PLL**

Rocmistro wrote:
Ok so basically, what you guys are telling me is that I can now expect to see an army of BS3+ AM tanks going forward? Is that the gist of this thread? Check.

hardly an army; more like three. Because of the Ro3

**Trickstick**

Rocmistro wrote:
Ok so basically, what you guys are telling me is that I can now expect to see an army of BS3+ AM tanks going forward? Is that the gist of this thread? Check.

Well no more than three, as long as you use rule of three of course.

**Horst**

Trickstick wrote:
Rocmistro wrote:
Ok so basically, what you guys are telling me is that I can now expect to see an army of BS3+ AM tanks going forward? Is that the gist of this thread? Check.

Well no more than three, as long as you use rule of three of course.

Three BS3+ tanks, and one BS2+ tank, since Pask uses a different data sheet

**Stux**

Horst wrote:
Trickstick wrote:
Rocmistro wrote:
Ok so basically, what you guys are telling me is that I can now expect to see an army of BS3+ AM tanks going forward? Is that the gist of this thread? Check.

Well no more than three, as long as you use rule of three of course.

Three BS3+ tanks, and one BS2+ tank, since Pask uses a different data sheet

If they're Cadian. A lot of Guard run Catachan as it maths better on Battlecannons.

But yeah, Pask is still very good.

**Horst**

Stux wrote:
Horst wrote:
Trickstick wrote:
Rocmistro wrote:
Ok so basically, what you guys are telling me is that I can now expect to see an army of BS3+ AM tanks going forward? Is that the gist of this thread? Check.

Well no more than three, as long as you use rule of three of course.

Three BS3+ tanks, and one BS2+ tank, since Pask uses a different data sheet

If they're Cadian. A lot of Guard run Catachan as it maths better on Battlecannons.

But yeah, Pask is still very good.

I thought they kinda evened out in leman russes, since cadians can order to re-roll number of shots, and catachans can order to re-roll ones on hits. Catachan are better with artillery though, a catachan manticore is terrifying. What sold me on the cadians was 1) Pask, 2) Overlapping fields of Fire, 3) I hate the catachan models.

**Trickstick**

I'd like to make a case for Tallarn, but movement is a far harder thing to show with numbers. The JSJ order can be really nice though, as is simply having increased movement.

**Stux**

Horst wrote:
Stux wrote:
Horst wrote:
Trickstick wrote:
Rocmistro wrote:
Ok so basically, what you guys are telling me is that I can now expect to see an army of BS3+ AM tanks going forward? Is that the gist of this thread? Check.

Well no more than three, as long as you use rule of three of course.

Three BS3+ tanks, and one BS2+ tank, since Pask uses a different data sheet

If they're Cadian. A lot of Guard run Catachan as it maths better on Battlecannons.

But yeah, Pask is still very good.

I thought they kinda evened out in leman russes, since cadians can order to re-roll number of shots, and catachans can order to re-roll ones on hits. Catachan are better with artillery though, a catachan manticore is terrifying. What sold me on the cadians was 1) Pask, 2) Overlapping fields of Fire, 3) I hate the catachan models.

It is very close to be fair. Other way around though, Cadian re-roll 1s and Catachan re-roll number of shots.

For Tank Commanders, one volly from a Battlecannon (d6) shots:

Catachan average 2.83 hits

Cadian average 2.72 hits

So if all you're bringing is a Tank Commander you're slightly better off running Catachan. But you're right that things like Pask and other stratagems make this choice more nuanced.

**Trickstick**

Stux wrote:
It is very close to be fair. Other way around though, Cadian re-roll 1s and Catachan re-roll number of shots.

They were talking about how you can use a tank order to recreate the buff of the other regiment. Cadians get an order that lets them reroll the number of shots for turret weapons, whilst Catachans can use the reroll 1s tank order.