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.

You can build all kinds of armies that might easily take out Land Raiders, but the fact it that the odds are highly stacked in your favor that you will not meet up with the perfect list to counter your own.

Every single army you encounter in the second and third rounds of a tournament is going to have good counters to Land Raiders. AV14 isn't a black swan the way that Nob Bikers or Jetseer Council are; everybody expects it and plans accordingly. There isn't a single competitive list that simply says 'I'll be fine as long as I don't encounter a Land Raider!'.

Green Blow Fly wrote:Agreed. sour clams was trolling again.

G

Reading comprehension really helps your argumentative tendencies.

I know this is a bit OT but I do think the problem with the basic land raider is it TL Las Cannons don't perform well enough to A) to reduce the transport capacity and B) cost as much as it does.

Right.

sourclams wrote:Post a battle report about what? A list with a Land Raider that would be better off with speeders?

Just in general. You talk a lot of game but I've never seen you post a battle report. You realize you're turning into Stelek 2.0, but at least he posted battle reports to back up his talk (although arguably they were always rigged)

sour clams if you are not trolling then I can only conclude you don't know what you are talking about.

G

If I'm being brutally honest I don't really think any LR have a place in any list if they're not being used to transport an assault unit. That is there only use in 40K other wise they are just a point sink with no return.

I mean just look at the weapons by them selves ...

A)TL Heavy bolter and 2 TL LasCannon
Has the best range 36-48" but very little to shoot (total 5 shots)
B)TL Assault cannon and 6 TL bolters
Is mid ground 24" + 6" move
C)TL Assault cannon and 2 FlameStorms
Lowest range and has to more or less has to rely on POTMS to fire its FlameStorm.

.... All of these weapons combinations are limited compared with same points worth of anything ...

I'm not say that any type of LR is bad, but the only time that they're going to help you win is when they're doing there job.
Transporting a unit from A to B in safety.
A vanilla LR should be used the same as any other version. The guns (no matter which version you've taken) are there to help you soften up a target so your assault will go better. Thinking of them as a bad ass gun platform will get you nowhere. They are a Taxi

Deadshane1 wrote:Before this thread deviates into arguement, let me again clarify something.

This Tactica is not about top tier armies. It's not about how to make a tier 1 Marine list.
This thread is about how to run a LR effectively, maybe not in a Tier 1 list. Maybe simply because one likes the model. Maybe because you're trying to prove something to yourself, who knows? I'm not necessarily targetting the winningest players on the circuit with this tactica. Maybe there are some people out there that could use some help with this army selection on how to run it most effectively.

Thanks for the post. it was well thought out and presented your opinion backed by some meat to support it.

I get so tired of sportsmachine players talking down their nose about "The only way to play x is..." or "You never field x if you wanna win..." blah, blah, blah

Good to see a little counterbalance to that whole mindset...

Green Blow Fly wrote:sour clams if you are not trolling then I can only conclude you don't know what you are talking about.

G

Then read Tri's post, he obvoiusly doesn't know what he's talking about either.

To be honest, tri (and everyone else, as not all of this pertains to his comment), you have to remember that everything plays a very different battlefield role. The godhammer may not have the same transport carrying potential as the other patterns, and it also may not be very good at horde killing, but a Land Raider is not the only choice in an army. What you field should be varied and have hordekilling possibilities as well as the potential to take out characters, tanks, walkers, and so on. A Land Raider may not have the same capacity in terms of killing these hordes, and can't kill many models per turn, but on average, it WILL do damage to a more important part of your opponent's army. A crusader or redeemer can take out tons of little underlings as well as make it across the battlefield, but they are, with the possible exception of the multimelta and possibly the TL assault cannon, useless against killing things with an armour value or a high save. A person with a crusader or redeemer in his army will doubtless field other tanks or units with the capability to shoot down heavy stuff, while a regular LR player will field forces that can take down tons of light infantry as well. It is only logical, and a player who plays straight up heavy weapons will lose instantly to any sensible ork player with a bospole or two.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Likewise, a player who plays only anti-infantry will find himself over-run by tanks.

Personally, I ignore taking any heavy weapon capabilities, and instead settle on every squad taking a plasma pistol for monstrous creatures, and melta bombs for tanks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
However, I do respect the possibilities the standard LR has to offer, and I would always try a few test runs before i put it out of the question.

Thanks for writing this up DeadShane. It really did get me thinking again about just what the LR could do other than dropping berzerkers off in my lap. It kind of makes me sad that the WH LR do not have the new machine spirit, since it would be cool to drop 50 points of storm troopers in one to sit on an objective while the girls zoom across the table with meltas. It would probably draw fire away from my exorcists nicely, and perhaps grant them some cover. I might have to give it a shot.

I also like the dialogue between opposing viewpoints on this topic. I don't find tactics posts where everyone agrees to be as helpful in my thinking as this has been. To tell you the truth this discussion has got me thinking very seriously about buying 2 regular Land Raiders for my Marines. (I only use one, but I buy things in two's) The more I envision all these IG armor 12 transports (Valk's, Vendetta's, and Chimera's), the more I really want a 250pt tank that can shoot at two different transports per turn with PotMS.

I understand the power of 3 MM Speeders (though I like 3 MM attack bikes better), however unless they are all in 1 off FA slots (ouch to the KP missions) those guys can only shoot at one target a turn. The Lascannon LR can pick out 2 targets per turn. The potential to pop 2 transports in one turn from one KP slot seems very nice.

Also since Sourclams is very adament and convincing in his argument on why the basic LR should not be taken, it might play into my overthinking opponents who will see the LR and dismiss it's potential. Eyeing it as a waste of 250pts. The key will be to fill in the rest of the list will more seemingly innocuous units whose offensive potential seems mute until unleashed together in one lists. It is the heart of my current marine list, what I call the Sea of Gizz list.

Land Raiders have different values in different armies.

In a DH force, they're one of the only sources of long-range firepower in a GK force. Or, you can stick a 50-point Stormtrooper squad inside and sit on a home objective.

For Space Wolves, they are again, a good source of long-range firepower. Sure, they're 2x the cost of a Predator, but it can shoot 2 targets. And you don't have heavy weapons in 5-man combat squads to help fill that void.

Is the LR the most effective unit? No. Is it as bad as stikkbombaz were in third edition? No.

Green Blow Fly wrote:sour clams if you are not trolling then I can only conclude you don't know what you are talking about.

G

C'mon GBF, Sourclams isn't trolling, he's presenting valid opposition to Deadshane (Shane even admitted so). If a tactica can't support itself under criticism then it's not a good tactica. Frankly, the only trolling being done is by you.

That being said, I only take GHLR's in my Deathwing army. There I need the long range anti-tank and the GHLR allows me to be flexible, charging forward if I need to or hanging back waiting to counter-assault. In my mech DA list, I'd use the Crusader over the Godhammer in just about any situation.

dietrich wrote:Land Raiders have different values in different armies.

In a DH force, they're one of the only sources of long-range firepower in a GK force. Or, you can stick a 50-point Stormtrooper squad inside and sit on a home objective.

For Space Wolves, they are again, a good source of long-range firepower.

and

Ozymandias wrote:That being said, I only take GHLR's in my Deathwing army.

I agree that both of these armies need long range anti tank options. I would point out that both are generally considered "weaker" codices that aren't often played competitively (although obviously DW/GK players can and do try). I have a GK army and I, too, run a GHLR because quite frankly it's cheaper than the alternatives. My comments are more for the Space Marine Land Raider, and for armies that can take the cheaper alternatives.

dietrich wrote:Sure, they're 2x the cost of a Predator, but it can shoot 2 targets. And you don't have heavy weapons in 5-man combat squads to help fill that void.

But then why not just take two Predators? Two Preds with TL las cost 210 points, can still move and shoot, and there's two of them. They're easier to castle around because of top-mounted turrets, and there's less risk of the one-shot-kill from lucky Railgun/Medusa strikes. Likewise Rhinos/Razorbacks with combat squadded heavies sitting in them have fire points and can shoot, whereas Raiders don't.

Again, I don't hate Shane or his Tactica, but the point of Tacticas is to help players play more competitively. And part of playing competitively involves examining all of your options, and if you can get identical or better for fewer points or with more utility, then even if you're determined to play X model you should still examine your motives for that mindset.

Ok, first let me pour out my derision, then I'll get on topic.

So, some of you are suggesting that Battle Reports, highly biased, easily rigged, and utterly subjective retellings of past events are somehow more reliable that logic and mathematics in a game based on set statistics and very consistent randomization? This is like implying that if you can't name a great poker hand you played than you aren't a good poker player. It's even funnier that Stelek was brought up given that the reason most players disliked him at first was exactly because he cited "battle experience" above the well known mathematics of the game and utilized the intellectual dishonesty of claiming generalship as so important, despite there being no good objective definition of generalship.

Frankly, I think SourClams had the gall to call out the weaknesses of the Land Raider and unable to come up with an actual rebuttal you have moved the goalposts, bringing up this comical idea that battle reports can prove anything.

Now, I am not denying that playing the battle out is important. But far more because there are synergies and tactical considerations that are hard to take into account on paper until you see them in real life. Once you have seen it though, you don't magically pull some "tactical intuition" out and win. You logically think through the situation and come up with a solution. Sometimes it is a tactical one, but other times it is a strategic change to the list or to deployment/early turn development. You have conflated the tactics of the actual in-game with the strategy behind the usage of many of these tactics. If it wasn't such a laughably transparent attempt to obfuscate your lack of argument it would telling as a common mistake made by even very good players.

**********

Now, onto the main topic. Personally, the land raider does fill a role very well. Outside of 24" it is a nigh unkillable vehicle that has a legitimate amount of firepower. The firepower is low for its point cost but this is off-set by its immense defensive abilities, with both Av14 all around and a set of defensive special abilities that keep it contributory throughout the game. However, this is primarily the problem with it too. Space marines in general do not need this role filled. They have the impressively hardy tactical marines, the powerful suicidal MMspeeders, Predator annihilators, and even dreadnaughts to provide medium to long range firepower, and these units generally synergize better into the roles that Space marine armies need than the LR, which only performs its above described role well. In many marine varients, there is a void in the role of long range, durable AT-support. In these variants, the LR is a powerful tool, as many posters have stated.

Really, nothing is wrong with the LR. It is very good at its role, capable of providing a strong backbone of AT to a list. The issue is that SM have a strong power armoured backbone already and can get numerous long range AT weapons easily and cheaply.

Both Sourclams and Deadshane have valid points about landraiders.

I may not post many battle reports but I do know for a fact that landraiders have a tendency to either blow up very early in the game or go the distance of the game. I also believe that it depends on the composition of the army that changes the role of the landraider and its efficiency. There are alot of factors as well like size of game, composition, tactics, luck, etc.

At 2500, landraiders while plentiful are looking at some armies with plenty of tank busting weaponry. Where as against demons, the landraider is the bane of that army due to a lack of a reliable anti-tank option for av 14.

Sourclams is correct that the landraider is not exactly the most efficient use of lascannons but it does have a transport capacity thus making it a force multiplier by having it sit on an objective with a scoring unit inside. A predator while boasting more firepower when taken in equal points as a landraider do not have a transport capacity and suffer from rear armor 10 and side armor 11. In HtH it will take MCs, Powerfists/claws at S9 or 10, meltabombs, and some grenades to kill a landraider.

One final point, and then I honestly think I've said everything that I can regarding GHLRs.

Calling rear armor 10 on a Predator a liability is a non-issue, because in nearly all of the situations where that matters, a Land Raider would die as well. The primary claim made earlier in the thread (although admittedly by GBF, not Shane) is that Land Raiders can be defended by "linebacker" units and therefore kept safe from 6-12" melta shots and MC assaults. If your opponent is close enough to nail rear armor 10 Predators, then he's close enough to melta your Land Raiders and your gunline fails regardless. The same can apply to side armor 11, although even I admit that this is a more disproportionate vulnerability.

thehod wrote:
...having it sit on an objective with a scoring unit inside...

Sorry but really your spending 265pts + 75 (scouts) or 90(tac) on a unit to baby sit your lines? I hope i meet some one like you. In my books your handing me the game.

Eldar Brightlance, Haywire grenades, Wraithlords, Wrathgun, Firedragons, Fireprisms and witchblades
SM Melta guns, multimeltas, Combi-melta, LasCannon, Dreadnoughts, Landspeeders, Preditors, RazorBacks, Vindicators and orbital bombardment
IG Melta guns, multimeltas, Combi-melta, LasCannon, Sentinels, Leman Russ (any with multimeltas or a lascannon), Devildog, Basilisk, medusa, Mantucore, Deathstrike, chimra and lastly the worst enemy the Vendetta
Tau Rail gun (not that you need much more then that for anit tank ... like popping zits), oh and melta
CSM meltaguns, Multimelta, LasCannon, Vindicator, Defiler, LR, Oblitorator, Preditor, Dreadnoughts,
Orks will have a little trouble with it... but you'll have more with them heavily out numbing you.
Nids Also have trouble unless a Carnifex can get to it and open it up ... again you'll have more trouble with them heavily out numbing you.
Necrons .... Destroyers, and monoliths ... they might get lucky and gauss flay you to bits.

There are too many things that can kill you. If I'm playing you and your sitting back shooting I will have brought things to reach out and touch you. AV14 is great. TL-LasCannons are great. Twelve man transport capasitity and the ability to assault after the tank has move, yes please. 250pts no thanks that's 6th of my 1500pt army. At the end of the day if i take the same number of weapons on razorbacks it'll come in cheaper by 60pts no it won't have the armour bit nether will they all be destroyed by a single lucky shot.

If you want batreps to illustrate a point, here you go…

Adepticon April 2009

Adepticon Gladiator I brought 1 Land Raider
Game #1: I faced off against 5 land Raiders and I killed only 1 with a Chainfist, mine survived.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236216.page
Game #2: We both had a Land Raider and his dies on turn #2 to Lascannons, and mine never died.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236289.page
Game #3: My Land Raider dies on turn #4 after 2 turns of getting beat on by Nob Bikers and a ton of power klaws
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236321.page
Game #4: My Land Raider survives.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236327.page
So out of the 10 Land Raiders used, 3 died.

Adepticon Invitational
Game #1: Land Raider does to Nob bikers on turn #5
Game #2: Land Raider survives
Game #3: My Land Raider kills my opponents Land Raider
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236438.page
Out of 4 Land Raiders, 2 die in much harder competition

Broadside Bash Feb. 2009
Game #4: I fought against 2 Land Raider Crusaders and I shot the crap out of them with Melta and they both survived the game.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/232549.page

Baltimore GT Nov 2008
Game #3: I shoot the crap out of his one Land Raider and because I could not kill it, it gave him the tie.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Blackmoor_goes_to_the_Baltimore_GT#Blackmoor_goes_to_the_Baltimore_GT.

Las Vegas GT Sept. 2009
No batrep because I did not face one in the GT, but the day before Jathkin and I were playing Tau in the team tournament and we faced one and we shot the crap out of it with railguns and we never killed it, but it was immobilized, running out of weapons!

So, for the national events that I went to since 5th edition has been released, I have used or I have faced off against 18 Land Raiders, and of those, 5 have died. Sure a lot of them have been chewed up, but 5th edition makes them so much harder to kill.

Blackmoor wrote:If you want batreps to illustrate a point, here you go…
...
So, for the national events that I went to since 5th edition has been released, I have used or I have faced off against 18 Land Raiders, and of those, 5 have died. Sure a lot of them have been chewed up, but 5th edition makes them so much harder to kill.

.... Yes I agree you've done well with your CHAOS LAND RAIDER .... 220pts ... or 240 with possession ignoring all stunned and shaken (ok BS3 but every things TL any way). POTMS is good, no where near as good as possession, but it cost more to have it. (Ok chaos can only fit 10 people inside but they need their space what with the spiky bits)

Blackmoor wrote:If you want batreps to illustrate a point, here you go…

Adepticon April 2009

Adepticon Gladiator I brought 1 Land Raider
Game #1: I faced off against 5 land Raiders and I killed only 1 with a Chainfist, mine survived.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236216.page
Game #2: We both had a Land Raider and his dies on turn #2 to Lascannons, and mine never died.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236289.page
Game #3: My Land Raider dies on turn #4 after 2 turns of getting beat on by Nob Bikers and a ton of power klaws
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236321.page
Game #4: My Land Raider survives.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236327.page
So out of the 10 Land Raiders used, 3 died.

Adepticon Invitational
Game #1: Land Raider does to Nob bikers on turn #5
Game #2: Land Raider survives
Game #3: My Land Raider kills my opponents Land Raider
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/236438.page
Out of 4 Land Raiders, 2 die in much harder competition

Broadside Bash Feb. 2009
Game #4: I fought against 2 Land Raider Crusaders and I shot the crap out of them with Melta and they both survived the game.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/232549.page

Baltimore GT Nov 2008
Game #3: I shoot the crap out of his one Land Raider and because I could not kill it, it gave him the tie.
http://www.dakkadakka.com/wiki/en/Blackmoor_goes_to_the_Baltimore_GT#Blackmoor_goes_to_the_Baltimore_GT.

Las Vegas GT Sept. 2009
No batrep because I did not face one in the GT, but the day before Jathkin and I were playing Tau in the team tournament and we faced one and we shot the crap out of it with railguns and we never killed it, but it was immobilized, running out of weapons!

So, for the national events that I went to since 5th edition has been released, I have used or I have faced off against 18 Land Raiders, and of those, 5 have died. Sure a lot of them have been chewed up, but 5th edition makes them so much harder to kill.

My summary of personal experience at the Adepticon Championship:

13 Land Raiders used in 3 games.

One died.
............................................

Its definatly my experience that the land raider is MUCH more than the sum of its parts or what mathhammer shows.

Shane, great thread and a perfect breakdown of the subject without having to call on numbers and percents.


//Edge

Yeah Shane stated he won all three games at the Adepticon RTT this year with a raider spam list. And no sour clams just because you can shoot the linebackers does not mean you can shoot the raiders at half range... Unless of course you can magically place your models on top of the opponents'. Maybe I missed something over in YMDC.

G

A talented player can win with a sub standard list (not that im saying a raider list is sub standard, just that an individual's wins are not always great evidence)

as for this tactica, its well written and does argue some good points for what the Godhammer pattern can do, and yet it always seems to be written in a "make the best of a bad situations"

"Oh you didnt get the best land raider, don't worry heres some tactics so it doesnt have to completely suck"


I just think the Land Raider's job and the Lascannon dont interact well, The Land raider wants to deploy close combat troops, and for that it obviously needs to get close, and yet it had mediocre long range fire power.

Hurricane bolters are mediocre but you get extra troop space and can fire them whilst moving 12 and still fire the hull mounted weapon, Redeemers are just well awesome ap 3 flamers will put a dent in any army, the Land Raider Vanilla is nice, but it pales in comparision to the more close orientated Raiders.

See, this is what I dont understand.

WHY must the landraider always transport assault troops? Does the assault ramp make this manditory or something?

Space marine "Troops" struggle to be useful in a competetive list. They just really dont do much.

What they CAN do is make an armour 14/14/14 vehicle scoring.

75pts in scouts can do this.

80pts in PA Marines can also do this.


A Standard Land Raider definatly DOES NOT want to deploy assault troops with the exception of the times that it transports a counterassault unit. What it wants is to be a heavily armoured scoring unit that is nigh impossible to destroy. One that is capable of tankshocking everything further than 3" away from an objective while its sitting pretty on top of it.

Standard Land Raiders are NOT assault tanks...thats pretty much the point that this tactica is trying to get across.

sourclams wrote:

dietrich wrote:Sure, they're 2x the cost of a Predator, but it can shoot 2 targets. And you don't have heavy weapons in 5-man combat squads to help fill that void.

But then why not just take two Predators? Two Preds with TL las cost 210 points, can still move and shoot, and there's two of them. They're easier to castle around because of top-mounted turrets, and there's less risk of the one-shot-kill from lucky Railgun/Medusa strikes. Likewise Rhinos/Razorbacks with combat squadded heavies sitting in them have fire points and can shoot, whereas Raiders don't.

Maybe you have your other 2 heavy slots filled up? Maybe your heavy slots are all filled up and you're taking a GHLR as a transport? And armies like GKs and SWs and DW don't have a tac squad or combat squad with a heavy weapon to put in a rhino or razorback, which 2/3 of those don't even have access too. GHLR isn't Bike Council good, but it's not Flash Gitz bad either.

Deadshane1 wrote:See, this is what I dont understand.

WHY must the landraider always transport assault troops? Does the assault ramp make this mandatory or something?

Space marine "Troops" struggle to be useful in a competitive list. They just really don't do much.

What they CAN do is make an armour 14/14/14 vehicle scoring.

75pts in scouts can do this.

80pts in PA Marines can also do this.


A Standard Land Raider definatly DOES NOT want to deploy assault troops with the exception of the times that it transports a counterassault unit. What it wants is to be a heavily armoured scoring unit that is nigh impossible to destroy. One that is capable of tankshocking everything further than 3" away from an objective while its sitting pretty on top of it.

Standard Land Raiders are NOT assault tanks...thats pretty much the point that this tactica is trying to get across.

Why do i think that a Land Raider is an assault tank? I don't. I think its a jack of all trades. I think it should be used to move units from A to B ... Assault units are the main type that want moving. Others would be expensive shooting unit such as sternguard (come on who doesn't like rapid firing the special issue ammunition). Heck even moving Tactical squads has its merrits.

Also... "
Space marine "Troops" struggle to be useful in a competitive list. They just really don't do much. "
... From the point of view of most other codes what are you complaining about? These guys are the great all rounder. At 16pts each (sergeant auto upgrade must be the extra 10pts) you have a stat-line that can take on other race heroes and win. Heck these guys are good enough to assault all but dedicated CC unit. Oh and if you take a full ten please take 2 free special weapons. Scout are a cheap assault unit and with infiltrate as standard they're always where you need them to tie up the enemy.

If these guys are not being competitive, in your list, you're using them wrong.

I think if you wanted to be cheeky, you could take a 5 man WH/DH stormtrooper squad to make your HS SM LR (wow acronym) scoring. Then it is just 50 points instead of 75.

Just saying

Wow...a lot happened when I wasn't looking.
I don't have much to say, but it seems here like all of you are saying you would take a Land Raider if it was cheaper. You keep on stressing the whole 250 points thing, and while no one has directly stated that it costs too much for its purpose, you have stated that it costs too much to take.
I am reasonably sure that GW has it cost that much for a reason, and is adding another 75 points for that scout squad really going to kill your roster that much?
For that 325 points, what do you get?
-one cheap scoring unit protected by AV14 all round, with possible counter-assault capabilities, in an assault vehicle.
just that by itself is almost worth it, because I have known countless times when I could have won a game if my scoring units just had a little protection, and tons of the other choices I took were useless.
now, add in the all the powerful shots the land raider can take to cripple your enemy's more powerful choices, and you have more than your money's worth. Or points worth, as it were.
Of course, this isn't mentioning that your opponent will have to waste his shots that should be spent on your advancing troops on this monstrous vehicle instead.

Tri wrote:
.... Yes I agree you've done well with your CHAOS LAND RAIDER .... 220pts ... or 240 with possession ignoring all stunned and shaken (ok BS3 but every things TL any way). POTMS is good, no where near as good as possession, but it cost more to have it. (Ok chaos can only fit 10 people inside but they need their space what with the spiky bits)

1. I posted those Batreps because Sourclams was saying that a Land Raider was not that durable, and a lot of lists can take it out. I wanted to illustrate that they are hard as heck to kill.
2. Yes it was a Chaos Land Raider at 220 points. I would gladly pay 30 points for the SM PoTMS. The ability to shoot at 2 different targets with your lascannons, move 6” and shoot both your lascannons, move 12” and fire one weapon, still fire one weapon if it is stunned or shaken, or my favorite, shoot 2 lascannons at tanks, and split fire with the heavy bolter at infantry.
3. I used my Land Raiders just the way that Deadshane suggests in his post. They are just lascannon platforms until the opponent gets close and then they use their assault capability.
4. I took a predator along with the Land Raider, and Sourclams was suggesting that a predator and a rhino are a better substitute than the Land Raider. If I was to do it all over again, I would leave the predator at home, but not the Land Raider.

Thank you for providing this tactica. I, in the excitement of jumping back into the hobby, bought a GHLR in the dying hours of 4e.

Sincethat time, my GHLR has pretty much sat the bench.

I recently played a small bought with much success using my LR and now after reading this article I can have more focus when deciding what to do next with it.

thanks

Thanks Allan! That was very nice of you. : )

G