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 was thinking of ways to un-suck this tank, cause the idea is neat, and the model looks good too.

Now, still being somewhat new to the game, there are probably some minute balance issues, but its the basic idea I'm looking for feedback on.

Take the Leman Russ Punisher hull (14-13-11 AV), and replace the the Punisher cannon for a TL Assault Cannon. Drop the point cost to 165, and keep all other options the same.

This has the same range, an ap value, higher strength, TL, and rending, but only fires a fifth of the shots. This gives the tank a slightly less horde specific focus, but gains versatility. Combine it with hull HB and sponson HB and you have an effective anti-horde tank, and with rending and some multi-meltas, it can perform well as a tank killer (though short ranged). I think doing this would make the tank at least a viable option in semi-competitive settings (thought LRBT, LRD, and Exec. are still king).

Thoughts, changes, harsh criticism all welcomed.

Why not make the Punisher Cannon:

R30" Str5 Ap6 Heavy 20
Then reduce the cost of the LR Punisher by 10 points.

Done.

the punisher is fine, just a bit overcosted, maybe 10-20 points, if is was somehow bs4...

Reduce it to the cost of the standard LRBT and it's fine as is.

Melissia wrote:Reduce it to the cost of the standard LRBT and it's fine as is.

yep, but not too much, sqauds of LR's running around is too scary

I think LRBTs wuold be scarier than LR punishers even if the LR punishe was reduced by thirty points to equal the cost of the LRBT.

again i agree, its just im an ork player, 6 LRBT would put a crimp in my day lol

I like the idea of using an existing weapon as the Punisher Cannon. Instead, however, I'd suggest something like

Punisher Cannon
Rng24" S7 AP4 Heavy 4 Rending

It goes with the Exterminator being

Rng48" S7 AP4 Heavy 4 Twin-Linked.

The real problem is the Eradicator.

Rng36" S8 AP3 Heavy Blast Ignores Cover

That leaves the Ordnance as the Battle Cannon, the Demolisher Cannon, and the Vanquisher Cannon and make the latter a Blast weapon on top of the extra D6 penetration and profile.

Drop it to AP 4 and it will be good and solid. Twin-link it and it'll be worth every point, as effective for its own particular strategy as the Executioner.

lots of ways...

- making it cost 150 points
- giving it the "sniper" rule
- making it twin-linked
- letting it reroll wounds
- giving it 24" more range
- making its shots AP5 and ignoring cover

Any of these might make it worth taking. That GW didn't do any of them really shows how poorly thought out this vehicle was.

Now that you mention it, twin-linking it (and the price drop) would go a LONG way to making it a viable tank. Though I think if it was AP 5, ignore cover, it would cost more than 150pts.

Why the sniper rule? That seems...unintuitive?

You don't give it sniper because it's literally a sniper rifle, you give it sniper to make it always wound on 4+ and occasionally cause rending shots.

This would make it an actually effective anti-MC tank, that could also double against other tough stuff like wraithguard, plague marines or terminators.

Drop the price a little and it's fine.

People seem to be going out of their way to make an explicitly anti-horde tank something other than an anti-horde tank, which is a very strange way of approaching unit design.

20 rending shots that wound on 4+.... no

just for giggles i just rolled 20 dice, i shot a wraithlord
i rolled four 6's
next roll
yep another 4 6's
again
5 6's

to OP

Dump the points by about 20, increase the range to 36". Done. The only thing that really sucks with the punisher is its range; 20 str 5 shots is great, even if something gets saves

Ailaros wrote:You don't give it sniper because it's literally a sniper rifle, you give it sniper to make it always wound on 4+ and occasionally cause rending shots.

This would make it an actually effective anti-MC tank, that could also double against other tough stuff like wraithguard, plague marines or terminators

I see. Kind of defeats the point IMHO. I don't think it's supposed to be a variant of the assault cannon, it's a massive machine gun for horde-hunting.

Formosa wrote:20 rending shots that wound on 4+.... no

just for giggles i just rolled 20 dice, i shot a wraithlord
i rolled four 6's
next roll
yep another 4 6's
again
5 6's

to OP

MekanobSamael wrote:Strange how? A unit should have a function. You can design the Leman Russ Whatever Feels Right, but we're talking about the Punisher, which "eschews anti-tank effectiveness for increased anti-infantry firepower."

Did you read what you quoted? He said that is was strange to take an anti-horde tank and try to make it into a not-anti-horde-tank, in other words making it a vehicle that 'eschews anti-tank effectiveness for increased anti-infantry firepower and also gains anti-tank effectiveness'.

Melissia wrote:Reduce it to the cost of the standard LRBT and it's fine as is.

Have to agree with this.

Though, I personally feel that ALL LRBT's are slightly over cost to begin with. **Looks at my origional AC codex and wonders why they went up in both base cost and upgrades while loseing every cool skill they had**

Could be usefull for horde killing.

BearersOfSalvation wrote:

MekanobSamael wrote:Strange how? A unit should have a function. You can design the Leman Russ Whatever Feels Right, but we're talking about the Punisher, which "eschews anti-tank effectiveness for increased anti-infantry firepower."

Did you read what you quoted? He said that is was strange to take an anti-horde tank and try to make it into a not-anti-horde-tank, in other words making it a vehicle that 'eschews anti-tank effectiveness for increased anti-infantry firepower and also gains anti-tank effectiveness'.

Whoa.

This is what I get for posting at four in the morning.

If they wanted it to be anti-horde, they should have made it so that the tank has more anti-horde power than it's points in lasguns. For not being able to score, and having all it's firepower shut down with shaken, stunned, weapon destroyed, or wrecked results, they could have at least made it do more damage.

If you want to keep the tank as-is with the same price and the same-as-possible statline, you'd need to up it to at least heavy 30, or S3 heavy 40 before I'd even begin to consider it.

Ailaros wrote:If they wanted it to be anti-horde, they should have made it so that the tank has more anti-horde power than it's points in lasguns.

QFT.

Ailaros wrote:If they wanted it to be anti-horde, they should have made it so that the tank has more anti-horde power than it's points in lasguns.

Which is a function of price, which leads us back to the argument that you could fix it by dropping the points cost.

For not being able to score, and having all it's firepower shut down with shaken, stunned, weapon destroyed, or wrecked results, they could have at least made it do more damage.

AV 14 is not something you should ignore when considering the toughness of a unit.

No, but it isn't something you should focus on to the exclusion of all else, because unless it's wraparound AV14 the vehicle can still be very vulnerable against a good player.

Ailaros wrote:lots of ways...

- making it cost 150 points
- giving it the "sniper" rule
- making it twin-linked
- letting it reroll wounds
- giving it 24" more range
- making its shots AP5 and ignoring cover

Any of these might make it worth taking. That GW didn't do any of them really shows how poorly thought out this vehicle was.

You are being sarcastic, I hope.

I run a Leman Russ punisher with Pask on it...

and it owns...

but I agree with other people that the points cost needs to be lowered...

Orlanth wrote:You are being sarcastic, I hope.

No, why?

I mean, I was assuming that any ONE of those things would make it worth taking, not that they should have ALL of them.

sebster wrote:AV 14 is not something you should ignore when considering the toughness of a unit.

Yes, but why not just buy a plain LRBT if all you want is a piece of AV14 with some firepower?

sebster wrote:

Ailaros wrote:If they wanted it to be anti-horde, they should have made it so that the tank has more anti-horde power than it's points in lasguns.

Which is a function of price, which leads us back to the argument that you could fix it by dropping the points cost.

Right, and dropping it to 150 would be a good start. The problem, though, is that it would be just like an exterminator: a 150 point tank that no one would ever take because you could take a russ for the same number of points.

Its price:power ratio is one of it's problems. Its sheer craptasticness is another. As-is, it's just another tank that the hydra does a better job than.

The punisher should be the budget Russ, rather then the current price point.

Start it at 130ish since as noted it bring nothing new to the table compared to guardsmen. Make it the go to tank in low points games.

Jack

I actually like that idea. And it would make sense considering how badly it sucks.

Sure, it works fine when fighting anything other then MEQ.
Sadly, that is ALL you ever run into anymore thanks to GW forcing Space Marines down everyones throat.