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've been looking at the two and it seems that the basalisk has the same cannon but is cheaper and stays behind the lines out of harms way.

So is the Baslisk really better or am I wrong?

Well both fill different roles

Basilisk is barrage, +1 strength (so str 9 large template ap 3 Ord, thats nasty)

Its biggest advantage is which 240", range is never a concern, nor is placement since you can just stay out of LOS and barrage to your hearts content, and when they get within the minimum range, directly fire

Leman Russ has Av 14 front, 12 side, and I think your talking about the LRMBT, which has the marine shredding battle cannon. higher AV facings, can move and shoot its turret+ another weapon and is generally prepared to face most things the 40k univserse can throw at it.

Think of it like this, Basilisk is truely a 'sit back and shoot' whilst LRMBT charges forward, blasting everything that moves and generally suppporting an advance or a gunline majorly.


Hope I helped

You can't really compare the Leman Russ Battle Tank and the Basilisk head to head. They fill very different rolls in the army. While they both have a similar gun (Battlecannon is S8 AP3, while the Earthshaker is S9, AP3) that seems to have a similar targeting profile--namely, medium armor and MEQs--the two units act in very different ways. So lets break this down.

The Basilisk is an artillery piece, which means its cheaper, slightly more powerful, but is much much more fragile. Not only is it on a Chimera chassis, but it's also open topped. However, what it gains is range, and the ability to fire indirect. You can hide that Bassie behind anything on the table, and it will be able to shoot everything else. However, it's thin armor means that a good deepstriking or outflanking squad with melta, will be the death of it.

On the other hand, the Leman Russ still has good range, but it's lack of indirect fire means it has to be in the open. Thankfully though, front armor 14 makes this a slightly less risky proposition. However, everyone knows how to kill a Leman Russ, but provided you protect it properly, it has fairly good survivability.

Now, how do these units stack up? Well if you want a unit that can kill anything a long way away, go for the Bassie. Since barrage shots ignore intervening cover, you will be able to snipe those annoying Long Fangs behind a wall no problem, and AP3 means that they won't be taking any armor saves. Also, S9 means that the Bassie can put the hurt on vehicles quite well with barrage hitting side armor and all. Combined with its cheapness, this means that the Basilisk is USUALLY the better buy.

However, the Leman Russ isn't completely useless. Being able to survive in the open tends to mean that the Leman Russ can easily have a list built out of it. Basilisks are great supporting units, and can be tacked on to most IG lists without much fail, however, if you build your list around the Leman Russ, and make sure that you have something to fill in its weaknesses, you'll probably get alot of mileage out of that list, as much if not more than with the Basilisk.


tl;dr
Basilisk = good support, can be tacked onto most lists fine
LRBT = can't just toss in, list needs to be built around it

ChrisWWII wrote:You can't really compare the Leman Russ Battle Tank and the Basilisk head to head. They fill very different rolls in the army. While they both have a similar gun (Battlecannon is S8 AP3, while the Earthshaker is S9, AP3) that seems to have a similar targeting profile--namely, medium armor and MEQs--the two units act in very different ways. So lets break this down.

The Basilisk is an artillery piece, which means its cheaper, slightly more powerful, but is much much more fragile. Not only is it on a Chimera chassis, but it's also open topped. However, what it gains is range, and the ability to fire indirect. You can hide that Bassie behind anything on the table, and it will be able to shoot everything else. However, it's thin armor means that a good deepstriking or outflanking squad with melta, will be the death of it.

On the other hand, the Leman Russ still has good range, but it's lack of indirect fire means it has to be in the open. Thankfully though, front armor 14 makes this a slightly less risky proposition. However, everyone knows how to kill a Leman Russ, but provided you protect it properly, it has fairly good survivability.

Now, how do these units stack up? Well if you want a unit that can kill anything a long way away, go for the Bassie. Since barrage shots ignore intervening cover, you will be able to snipe those annoying Long Fangs behind a wall no problem, and AP3 means that they won't be taking any armor saves. Also, S9 means that the Bassie can put the hurt on vehicles quite well with barrage hitting side armor and all. Combined with its cheapness, this means that the Basilisk is USUALLY the better buy.

However, the Leman Russ isn't completely useless. Being able to survive in the open tends to mean that the Leman Russ can easily have a list built out of it. Basilisks are great supporting units, and can be tacked on to most IG lists without much fail, however, if you build your list around the Leman Russ, and make sure that you have something to fill in its weaknesses, you'll probably get alot of mileage out of that list, as much if not more than with the Basilisk.


tl;dr
Basilisk = good support, can be tacked onto most lists fine
LRBT = can't just toss in, list needs to be built around it

the only thing i don't agree with is for a LRBT the " list needs to be built around it" . i've had them thrown in at the last minute to fillout points(forgot a Sabol case at home !!!), and have left them in since.
they draw alot of fire, but man, when they do their job, they really do it well!

I think a lot of the comments above are somewhat deceptive.

Bassie range is longer than the Russ, sure... but who cares?

72" vs 240" is irrelevant when most shots are going to take place in the 24-48" range.

Bassie can fire indirectly, but with a huge minimum range... so who cares?

Can hide out of LOS (if the terrain allows it), sure... but at that point is so innacurate that who cares? I also find this doesnt really make it much more survivable anyway. Tons of deep strike, outflanking, etc. And true LOS makes it hard to hide anything the size of a basilisk. Seriously, set it around on a table sometime and see how hard it is to hide it. A Leman Russ, even out in the open, is going to be vastly more survivable than a Basilisk. Side armor on a Russ is 13 now, by the way.

I suppose you could make an argument that Basilisks, being relatively cheap, are going to be better if you're trying to spam pieplates. But even then, I dunno. Stripped down Russ with cannon is only 25 points more and the much higher toughness is totally worth that extra 25 points.

Don't get me wrong, I like Basilisks and all... but I'm realistic enough to realize that they're probably best kept for casual and semi-casual games. Wish we still had the option to run them as assault guns for only 100 points.

Hmm, that is true. Of course, I'd imagine that there are some situations when that's true, but I'd hold that a Leman Russ needs to be an integral part of the force, whereas you can generally toss a Basilisk onto most any army and it'd do pretty well.

I'd say toss a russ into any army and it will do fine...
AV 14 is a to get through at range, especially in cover, and nothing except for TEQ's like getting hit by that thing. I like to think of it as the grot vs the space marine- If i shoot my Russ at a bunch of grots, I wound on 2's, ID multiple wound models, and they get no armour save. If I shoot my Russ at a bunch of marines, well... I wound on 2's, ID multiple wound models, and they get no armour save. The difference is a 3pt model to a 16 pt model. It's the same to a plague marine too- 23 point model smashed like a grot!

They can smash expensive MEQ's to bits, they can tear chunks out of hordes, in a pinch they can fire at another vehicle... they are a great all round anti-infantry platform. It has to be visable to the enemy to fire- big whoop, its AV14! less fire into your other vehicles!

Hmmm, see I disagreee with you. To me, the Basilisk can do everything you just described....except better and cheaper, while more fragile. So, as a support unit you toss in to rip your way through MEQs, the Basilisk is better, far better.

However, you are also right that a Leman Russ has the toughest pure armor in the game at AV14. However, to make it worth taking the Leman Russ over hte Basilisk, you'd have to have a reason to need AV14. Hence, a Leman Russ belongs in a list designed to take advantage of that fact and exploit it as much it can, while simply giving long range, MEQ killing, anti-vehicle in a pinch firepower is much better suited to the Basilisk.

Think of it this way. The Basilisk is a tool like a claw hammer. No matter what job you have, it'll be useful. On the other hand, the Leman Russ is something like a mallet. It'll be useful in most situations and do the same thing, but unless you know you NEED the mallet, why not just use the hammer?

ChrisWWII wrote:Hmm, that is true. Of course, I'd imagine that there are some situations when that's true, but I'd hold that a Leman Russ needs to be an integral part of the force, whereas you can generally toss a Basilisk onto most any army and it'd do pretty well.

In my experience this statement is backward.

Because a Basilisk also needs some sort of protective system unless you want it dead on turn 1-2. A chimera to stick in front of it for a cover save, etc. Even then it's still relatively fragile. Otherwise even long range shooting like krak missiles, autocannons, etc, are going to kill it reliably. Very easy to get side armor shots vs 10 on a Basilisk. I find people already tend to run a lot of that sort of thing for dealing with Rhinos, Chimeras, and other transports.

Russes this is much less true due to the higher armor. You may still need some sort of infantry screen to keep it from getting scragged in assault (and possibly that won't be necessary if it's a fire support Russ firing from behind your infantry).

Russ is more expensive but winds up being cheaper because it requires less support. And a stripped down Russ isn't even much more expensive than a Basilisk.

That said, to some extent, a Russ and Basilisk can team up effectively sometimes. Russ out front to give cover to the Basilisk. Basilisk for another cheap pieplate.

Chaos Lord Gir wrote:

Leman Russ has Av 14 front, 12 side:

13 Side Armor.

That's all assuming you DO invest the kind of effort into keeping it alive, which isn't fully necessary. Even then, the best defense for a Basilisk is for it to be out of LoS completely rather than to just be getting a cover save. However, when I run Basilisks I don't try to keep them alive. I know they're going to die since they're so fragile, so I settle for making them do as much damage as possible before they inevitably die. I mean lets face it. No matter what you do, if the enemy wants the Basilisk dead, they are going to kill it somehow. Hopefully, it draws the enemies anti tank fire away from more important and valuable things.

You are 100% right that Basilisks mesh well with Russes. It's nice to have your enemies AT trying to rush your Basilisks, as it gives your Leman Russes more shooting time. However, the expense of a Russ, as well as its place as a front line tank means that you simply MUST invest some resources to keeping it alive. However, Basilisks can simply sit far away from your gunline, shooting away while they draw attention to themselves.

Regarding the 36" minimum range, it's not that bad TBH. Pop it in a corner and you've got more than half the board to fire at.

yes, 36 is a long ways, added to the barrel and the length of the tank, you are looking at something like 40 inches from the board edge you put him on.

and to make it cover the side of the board that your stuff is on, you have to deploy it away from the main force (or else you have your opponent raining down on your face and it has to direct fire, making the russ that much better in this situation). If you put it so it can fire effectively, you are putting it by itself and it dies to some pot shots from stuff as they advance on your other stuff.

Bassies really have to place anymore because they get outclassed by manticore imho. Manticore has way more capabilities in more aspects than the bassie does but evens out its anti-meq ability with muliple pies.

If you just want ap3 go with collosus or battle tank with h flamer. cheapest stuff that gets the job done completely right.

Potshots that, against MechGuard, could have been popping your Chimeras or Hydras.

I'd argue that it's hard to say which is better, the Basilisk or Manticore since they preform such different jobs. The Manticore is, first and foremost, an anti vehicle and anti horde platform. It's designed to give the guard SOMETHING for long range AT and antihorde work.

The Basilisk on ther other hand is meant for at most, medium anti-tank work, and anti-MEQ.

While the Manticore does indeed have a wider target range, the Basilisk still has a place in the IG armory. I personally try to run both. Use the Basilisk to take out the MEQs, while the Manticore takes out Land Raiders and Predators. Against a horde army, the Manticore switches its fire to the infantry while the Basilisks try to single out nastry things like Zoantrhropes that need some AP3 loving.

Ivan wrote:I think a lot of the comments above are somewhat deceptive.

Bassie range is longer than the Russ, sure... but who cares?

72" vs 240" is irrelevant when most shots are going to take place in the 24-48" range.

Bassie can fire indirectly, but with a huge minimum range... so who cares?

Can hide out of LOS (if the terrain allows it), sure... but at that point is so innacurate that who cares? I also find this doesnt really make it much more survivable anyway. Tons of deep strike, outflanking, etc. And true LOS makes it hard to hide anything the size of a basilisk. Seriously, set it around on a table sometime and see how hard it is to hide it. A Leman Russ, even out in the open, is going to be vastly more survivable than a Basilisk. Side armor on a Russ is 13 now, by the way.

I suppose you could make an argument that Basilisks, being relatively cheap, are going to be better if you're trying to spam pieplates. But even then, I dunno. Stripped down Russ with cannon is only 25 points more and the much higher toughness is totally worth that extra 25 points.

Don't get me wrong, I like Basilisks and all... but I'm realistic enough to realize that they're probably best kept for casual and semi-casual games. Wish we still had the option to run them as assault guns for only 100 points.

I use bassies competitively, and they do fine....the bassie can do an alpha strike better than the russ, and in many instances the success of this first shot can make or break the game....

Accuracy is just the same if you fire indirect versus direct fire shots, as long as the target can be seen. With IF, you still subtract the BS of 3 from the scatter roll, as long as you see the target.

For this early shot(s), the bassie has the advantage as it bypasses intervening cover, and versus vehicles will hit side armor. Versus infantry, any casualty caused by it's barrage forces a pin check with a -1 penalty, and a successful pin at this stage can also swing a game in your favor. This is the same for any IF artillery tank, but as my other preferred unit for this is the manticore, that tank usually is used for heavy vehicle busting, while the bassie ends up being used versus lighter vehicles or other shooty infantry, like devastators or long fangs.

Later in the game, the LR becomes better as ranges close (not too close, as in CC range, in which case the LR and bassie are practically the same versus assaults!). However, at this stage the enemy will be occupied by your chimeras and their passengers, so if the bassie is still alive at this point then target saturation is a factor and the bassie can (and often does) survive until the end.

My HS choices revolve around a LR, manticore, hydra (s), and a bassie..and I select 3 among these 4 choices (without duplication) in my usual lists. In lower point games the griffon also gets to make an appearance, and once I paint my colossus then it too will show up. I find the medusa to be my last choice, but that's just me.

ChrisWWII wrote:The Basilisk is an artillery piece, which means its cheaper, slightly more powerful, but is much much more fragile. Not only is it on a Chimera chassis, but it's also open topped. However, what it gains is range, and the ability to fire indirect. You can hide that Bassie behind anything on the table, and it will be able to shoot everything else. However, it's thin armor means that a good deepstriking or outflanking squad with melta, will be the death of it.

The range difference is irrelevant, so the main advantage of the basilisk is being able to fire indirectly at targets over 36" away and being 25 points cheaper. An outflanking/deepstriking squad with melta will be the death of a Leman Russ just as quick, making its advantage that of additional hull/sponson weapons (at a cost) and higher front/side armor to bounce long-range AT shots. The range of the Russ is sufficient to not have to get too close to the enemy, where melee/melta kills it as fast as a chimera.

As far as the basilisk is concerned, I never field it unless I have the points/inclination to buy two to squadron. Then the cost savings really add up, while the lack of survivability simply goes from really bad to terrible (pens kill on 3+ ). Otherwise, if I am looking for indirect fire, I reach for the Manticore, AP4 be damned. Overall, I agree with Chris; you pay a premium for the armor of the Leman Russ, so you really need a plan to take full advantage of it (and probably be fielding multiple Russes to add to the AV14 saturation).

However, the expense of a Russ, as well as its place as a front line tank means that you simply MUST invest some resources to keeping it alive.

I think that the basilisk and russ are very comparable as, as the OP mentions, they are very similar.

Basically, you have the same gun, but one comes affixed to AV14 while the other can hide out of LOS and hit hidden targets. That and the basilisk is better against vehicles at long range, what with hitting side armor.

Basically the difference between ALL tanks and their artillery counterparts. Tanks are more expensive, do somewhat less damage, and are AV14, while artillery is cheaper, does more damage, and is more fragile against long-range shooting.

... Which is usually why I take artillery, unless I specifically need AV14 for something.