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.

would that be a simple solution? and just not allow pask in the punisher? Cause it would make sense that the gun just fills the opponent with lead.

Also, it would actually fullfill its role as anti-hoard and anti MC whilst still being crap against MEQ and vehicles (except AV10).

Although if marines are spread and in cover then the new punisher might outperform the basic russ in that scenario, but, the basic russ and demo have versatility so it wont hurt if the punisher has a bit as well. Also it would help justify the fact that its more expensive.

What do you think?

I've always simply played it TL'd. Even with pask, it's not that bad. (18 hits).

your opponents let you do that?

Why not? It has no AP value so even Orks get a save against it.

Not being twin linked, it will get 10 hits and then like 6.6 wounds, which go down to 5.5 wounds v orks and about 2.2 vs Marines. Battlecannons are so much better.

People just see "Heavy 20" and go berserk when it's really not that good. Twin-Linking it would actually make it worth the cost.

TL'd is 15 hits, 10 wounds, 3.3r unsaved vs meq and 8.83 unsaved vs orks.

For almost 200 points.

Conversely, that's 27 orks and a power klaw.

You be the judge.

My Orks faced off against Guard yesterday, who bought a Punisher with them. Believe me. It does not need twin linking.

Statistics say one thing, and bitter, bitter experience tells me another.

They are horrible things.

*Shudder*

Anecdotal evidence is nothing. If you lost more than average 7 orks per shooting phase over a trial period of 100 shooting phases from the punisher, then your dice are badly flawed and I suggest you get a decently balanced set.

My gravest apologies. I shall pack up my sense of humour and leave.

What about Rending? An assault cannon gets it yet a minigun Fething Cannon diosn't?

I would just love the punisher to be say 160-165 points. But nope it seems that anything with 20 for its shots must have a huge price tag (same with the tyranno fex that has a 20 shot bolter, for the price of a land raider)

Deadshot wrote:What about Rending? An assault cannon gets it yet a minigun Fething Cannon diosn't?

Hmm...never though about rending, I like this idea.

chrisrawr wrote:I've always simply played it TL'd. Even with pask, it's not that bad. (18 hits).

Uhhhhhh

Personally I'd rather it (and the Eradicator) just be the budget Leman Russ choices, say more along 125ish per (along the lines of the XXXhounds in other words). Then I'd find them a darn interesting choice in smaller battles.

Jack

chrisrawr wrote:TL'd is 15 hits, 10 wounds, 3.3r unsaved vs meq and 8.83 unsaved vs orks.

For almost 200 points.

Conversely, that's 27 orks and a power klaw.

You be the judge.

You can't exactly justify or denounce a unit by comparing to a unit of another codex, especially since it is a completely different unit type.

Granted, you're right in saying that it either needs a price drop or twin-linking but comparative evidence, when used outside of the context of the unit's codex, is about as useful as anecdotal evidence.

Iranna.

The problem with rending is that with so many shots you would end up taking down terminator squads and the like, if you have seen grey knights you shouldn't underestimate a wave of rending shots.

Twin Linked, that is ok, but 20 rending shots I think is a bit OTT

I ran the number though a combat calculator and rending gets 3 kills against MEQ opposed to 2 for regular Punisher. That doesn't seem too bad, and it would make the punished worth the price increase over the standard Leman Russ.

Normal:
Shots: 20
Hit Chance: 50%
Hits: 10
Wound Chance: 66.67%
Wounds: 6.667
Saved Wounds: 4.444
Unsaved Wounds: 2.222
Models Killed: 2.222

Rending:
Shots: 20
Hit Chance: 50%
Hits: 10
Wound Chance: 50%
Rend Wound Chance: 16.67%
Wounds: 5
Rend Wounds: 1.667
Saved Wounds: 3.333
Unsaved Wounds: 1.667
Unsaved Rending Wounds: 1.667
Models Killed: 3.333
Options: Rending

Iranna wrote:

chrisrawr wrote:TL'd is 15 hits, 10 wounds, 3.3r unsaved vs meq and 8.83 unsaved vs orks.

For almost 200 points.

Conversely, that's 27 orks and a power klaw.

You be the judge.

You can't exactly justify or denounce a unit by comparing to a unit of another codex, especially since it is a completely different unit type.

Granted, you're right in saying that it either needs a price drop or twin-linking but comparative evidence, when used outside of the context of the unit's codex, is about as useful as anecdotal evidence.

Iranna.

Everything in 5e is fairly easily comparable to orks and marines when you break the math down. I used orks here because they're the most likely to suffer from a high-S manyshots weapon. If the enemy it was designed to fight against (swarms) is laughing at your inefficient use of points just because the sheer numbers they get aren't made up against in any way by your swarm-eradication machine, it means your swarm-eradication machine needs to be looked at and tweaked.

When designing shooty-vs-swarm, my personal philosophy is "If a max-mob of orks can reach and kill it in a vacuum/ideal situation before It makes up its points, it's not doing it right."

In this case, maxmob of orks reaches the punisher in avg 3 turns, taking 13 casualties (nob 1 save 1 wound). The nob then kills it over the next 2.

The best change is to just make it twinlinked - a blanket change that doesn't affect much. It could also be AP6, but that doesn't address the fundamental problem. Other changes involve adjusting points costs (it's still a front 14 tank that can have side plasmas, so not much leeway), altering number of shots (the bell curve will hate you for this), making it rending (oh my god please no, or not without being 225-250 points at LEAST.)

You could also change it to Heavy 8 (Blast) - removing much of the anti-elite power through decreasing number of shots, but improving the anti-swarm, and more closely representing its wild spread and rate of fire.


@Above - With no other changes, Rending also means that you get .5R glances against AV14, or .75 with pask. This also means that you're able to chew through most OTHER armour in the game with fair ease.

The Mad Tanker wrote:I ran the number though a combat calculator and rending gets 3 kills against MEQ opposed to 2 for regular Punisher. That doesn't seem too bad, and it would make the punished worth the price increase over the standard Leman Russ.

Normal:
Shots: 20
Hit Chance: 50%
Hits: 10
Wound Chance: 66.67%
Wounds: 6.667
Saved Wounds: 4.444
Unsaved Wounds: 2.222
Models Killed: 2.222

Rending:
Shots: 20
Hit Chance: 50%
Hits: 10
Wound Chance: 50%
Rend Wound Chance: 16.67%
Wounds: 5
Rend Wounds: 1.667
Saved Wounds: 3.333
Unsaved Wounds: 1.667
Unsaved Rending Wounds: 1.667
Models Killed: 3.333
Options: Rending

Of course, but the main aim of it is not shooting against MEQ

jgehunter wrote:Twin Linked, that is ok, but 20 rending shots I think is a bit OTT

Twin-linking it would be dumb enough for free (which is always what everyone wants in these posts).

Rending would just be right out. Not only would it be too strong, but it would change it's attack profile from light infantry killer to everything killer, including vehicles.

If you're using an AP - weapon agains an MEQ army, you're doing it wrong. The Punisher is something you'd use against Orks or DE, not MEQ.

Twin-linking the weapon would get it more hits, rending more wounds. Honestly, I don't know why the Punisher doesn't have Rending. The AC does, and it's what, Heavy 6? I would assume the Punisher uses a different round that the AC does.

AC is heavy 4.

If it had rending then 5+6+3 would make it able to take the weapons off of a land raider and kill AV13. Its not ment to be able to do that.

Twin-linked would make it decent at anti-hoard (its reliable, not affected by cover or spreading out) and anti MC/AV10.

As i said tho, with pask, itll probly destroy squadrons of light vehicles and expensive MCs to well.

Havent mathhammered it tho

Deadshot wrote:AC is heavy 4.

Ah. Well, that goes to prove my point. If the Heavy Bolter is Heavy 3, the AC is Heavy 4, how fast is the rate of fire for Heavy 20? Unless the rounds are tiny, it should also have Rending, simply because it has an insane ROF.

Again, I think a weapon like this should be at least AP6, not AP-. That would be my solution. Still a anti-horde weapon, but not overpowered.

Ok, most armies I face are MEQ, but here it is with Orks

Normal:
Attacker Group 1
Shots: 20
Hit Chance: 66.67%
Hits: 13.333
Wound Chance: 66.67%
Wounds: 8.889
Saved Wounds: 1.481
Unsaved Wounds: 7.407
Models Killed: 7.407

Rending:
Attacker Group 1
Shots: 20
Hit Chance: 66.67%
Hits: 13.333
Wound Chance: 50%
Rend Wound Chance: 16.67%
Wounds: 6.667
Rend Wounds: 2.222
Saved Wounds: 1.111
Unsaved Wounds: 5.556
Unsaved Rending Wounds: 2.222
Models Killed: 7.778
Options: Rending

Very little theoretical increase. My main point is the Punisher will almost always be out performed by the the standard LRMBT, but it costs 30pts more! Keep in mind too that the range on the Punisher Cannon is the same as the Demolisher cannon, so it is just as threatening as a Demolisher at penetrating armor, and for more points.

Edit: Also, it is AP -, so it drops by one on the vehicle damage charts.

The Mad Tanker wrote:Very little theoretical increase. My main point is the Punisher will almost always be out performed by the the standard LRMBT, but it costs 30pts more! Keep in mind too that the range on the Punisher Cannon is the same as the Demolisher cannon, so it is just as threatening as a Demolisher at penetrating armor, and for more points.

Edit: Also, it is AP -, so it drops by one on the vehicle damage charts.

Which is not accurate at all.
While you assume Battle Cannon's Pie plate will cover ALOT of models hence increase its killiness,
what happens if you are aiming at small unit of very high armor enemies?

There are too many scenarios I can think of to counter that.

I ran that in an earlier post, against MEQ's, normal punisher got 2 kills, rending punisher got 3 kills.

The Mad Tanker wrote:I ran that in an earlier post, against MEQ's, normal punisher got 2 kills, rending punisher got 3 kills.

In my quote, it says standard.

Standard is the Battle Cannon, which is what im using to compare.

With units at the the max 2 inch cohesion, you are still looking at four marines on average under the plate, with an average of 3.33 killed. That is more kills with a LRMBT over a Punisher that cost more. With rending, the two are now comparable, but the Punisher still cost more.

I think this may require some play testing...

The Mad Tanker wrote:With units at the the max 2 inch cohesion, you are still looking at four marines on average under the plate, with an average of 3.33 killed. That is more kills with a LRMBT over a Punisher that cost more. With rending, the two are now comparable, but the Punisher still cost more.

I think this may require some play testing...

You dont need play test, you can use scenarios.

Say you have 2 terminators left, you shoot it with battle cannon
vs you shoot it with a real punisher cannon no rending no TL stuff.

and see the results.