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.

honestly, the vanquisher was great in the 3rd edition codex .... can switch between normal shells and AT shells, got vet crew..... it was win win .. its had 96 range too lol not like that was really helpful

to make it viable again, why not the following;

Vanquisher basic cost = 200 pts for that you get the ability to switch between 72" S8 AP2 (AP down from 3 to reflect longer barrel and thus higher velocity) ammo and AT ammo, veteran crew ( giving it the acegunner ability from the old armored company list ie re-roll misses if you roll a 1 and re-roll scatter dice if you choose. In addition it ignores the crew shaken results ), co-axle storm bolter and lascannon on the hull, smoke launcher and searchlight

can be upgraded with sponsors etc...

then if you wanna be mean you add knight commander for total of 250 pts...

If you give it the choice to shoot a big blast or it's 2 D6 shot then no one would ever take a normal leman Russ anymore, the vanquisher would just be a normal Russ that could choose between blast or straight shot

yes, thats why GW had the 0-1 rule for the vanquisher reintroducing it would fix this no problema

I think that the rules are great but the points is to low.

The Forgeworld rules for vanquishers are ace.

co-axial heavy-stubber: fixes all problems; chances to hit at least once out of three are good, so the vanquisher-cannon becomes twin-linked => lot more reliable at BS 3.

And, please: The change from AP 3 to 2 was not that important at all against its main target - tanks - although it could shred some terminator-characters.
But I'm against AP 1, that, in combination with the coaxial stubber, would be overpowered (and to similar to melta weapons)

yeah i agree with you, the AP 1 idea is bad, bad, bad ... turning it into a melta weapon is not what a vanquisher is meant to be