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.

Anyone know where I can get some leman russ conqueror turrets?

I checked forgeworld site but they seem to be oop.

Thanks all.

I have to say, after the last few games with my mono guard list that they almost feel like glass cannons.

Everything dies just so damn easy, including Russes. The lack of accessible invurln saves on the army (outside of a few specialist melee units) really hurts them. I'll land lascannon/melta shots on enemy knights and they just bounce off the CP reroll saves. Meanwhile -4 AP just utterly rips through my army without mercy. I feel I have no answer to stuff like Custodes that are strong enough to get into melee and then its game over. 4+ BS hurts badly too with army wide negative to hit modifiers being really common in my meta.

Infantry squads are the most overrated unit in the game (when being used for something other than loyal 32 CP battery). The squad maximum of 10 utterly gimps them and mine die very easily to the plethora of anti-chaff weapons in this edition. I think GW drank the internet rage kool aid that argued they are the strongest unit in the game. Mine have never done a thing except hold backline objectives. S3 AP0 does literally nothing to anything other than grots and other guard.

The book felt right when it was dropped but the constant nerfs and codexes since have left the AM book in a really bad spot I think. i

glados wrote:
I have to say, after the last few games with my mono guard list that they almost feel like glass cannons.

Everything dies just so damn easy, including Russes. The lack of accessible invurln saves on the army (outside of a few specialist melee units) really hurts them. I'll land lascannon/melta shots on enemy knights and they just bounce off the CP reroll saves. Meanwhile -4 AP just utterly rips through my army without mercy. I feel I have no answer to stuff like Custodes that are strong enough to get into melee and then its game over. 4+ BS hurts badly too with army wide negative to hit modifiers being really common in my meta.

Infantry squads are the most overrated unit in the game (when being used for something other than loyal 32 CP battery). The squad maximum of 10 utterly gimps them and mine die very easily to the plethora of anti-chaff weapons in this edition. I think GW drank the internet rage kool aid that argued they are the strongest unit in the game. Mine have never done a thing except hold backline objectives. S3 AP0 does literally nothing to anything other than grots and other guard.

The book felt right when it was dropped but the constant nerfs and codexes since have left the AM book in a really bad spot I think. i

Russes are fairly easy to kill, but they're also some of the highest damage per point units in the game. Never take anything except Tank Commanders, my new favorite loadout is 3x heavy bolters on them. Make sure you take the vigilus tank formation, and always take the relic cannon on one of them. I always take them as Cadian as well, the re-roll number of shots order is great, and if you tag a big scary thing with something else first and use overlapping fields of fire, your tank commanders hit on 2+ and re-roll misses. Very strong.

Infantry is decent for a troops choice, especially with orders. Most troops are terrible, Guardsmen are not bad for their cost if you give them First Rank Fire Second Rank Fire, 2 squads rapid firing average 4 dead marines for 110 points (2 squads + officer). Against less durable targets, they're very good for their cost. Eldar are the scariest thing a Guard player can fight, and if you get Guardsmen in rapid fire range they will take the Eldar apart.

Anyone else annoyed by all this allying armies for CPs. Is this just a GW money making scheme because it's pretty lame to me. Just started collecting again but i'm already being put off.
How long do you think before 9th edition hits?

I've been trying to get some leman russ conqueror turrets because I play vostroyans but they are oop and I can't find any, feels bad man.

whitelion40k wrote:
Anyone else annoyed by all this allying armies for CPs. Is this just a GW money making scheme because it's pretty lame to me. Just started collecting again but i'm already being put off.
How long do you think before 9th edition hits?

Not really... My current tournament army I'm working on is almost a 50/50 split between Guard and Knights, I'm not allying in the Guard just for CP.

The LVO tournament winner was 1400 points of Guard, 600 points of Knights. Not allying just for CP. The "loyal 32" IMO is not as good as actually taking advantage of the strengths of the Guard codex.

whitelion40k wrote:
Anyone else annoyed by all this allying armies for CPs. Is this just a GW money making scheme because it's pretty lame to me. Just started collecting again but i'm already being put off.
How long do you think before 9th edition hits?

I've been trying to get some leman russ conqueror turrets because I play vostroyans but they are oop and I can't find any, feels bad man.

Well given whats been announced its not likely to be this year. Allies have been a core part of the game for a few editions now thats not likely to change.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Horst wrote:

whitelion40k wrote:
Anyone else annoyed by all this allying armies for CPs. Is this just a GW money making scheme because it's pretty lame to me. Just started collecting again but i'm already being put off.
How long do you think before 9th edition hits?

Not really... My current tournament army I'm working on is almost a 50/50 split between Guard and Knights, I'm not allying in the Guard just for CP.

The LVO tournament winner was 1400 points of Guard, 600 points of Knights. Not allying just for CP. The "loyal 32" IMO is not as good as actually taking advantage of the strengths of the Guard codex.

No he was allying for the castellan

U02dah4 wrote:


No he was allying for the castellan

Right, which means he wasn't just allying for CP. I mean that was a bonus of using Guard as an ally, sure, but it wasn't the only reason he took Guard as an ally for his Castellan.

glados wrote:
I have to say, after the last few games with my mono guard list that they almost feel like glass cannons.

Infantry squads are the most overrated unit in the game (when being used for something other than loyal 32 CP battery). The squad maximum of 10 utterly gimps them and mine die very easily to the plethora of anti-chaff weapons in this edition. I think GW drank the internet rage kool aid that argued they are the strongest unit in the game. Mine have never done a thing except hold backline objectives. S3 AP0 does literally nothing to anything other than grots and other guard.

The book felt right when it was dropped but the constant nerfs and codexes since have left the AM book in a really bad spot I think. i

No one expects mono guard to be competitive against soup. They are however strong when compared mono codex.

Infantry squads are good if taken mass (more than just the minimum 3 or 6 squads) and you have decent table top cover. Rushing out in the open will see them get mulched pretty quick but if you can get them moving building to building then they are tough to remove for some lists.

The codex is fine however with knights around, and a meta geared to take them out, Russes and guard super heavies will struggle. That doesnt make guard bad, it just means you have to soup to be competitive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

whitelion40k wrote:


I've been trying to get some leman russ conqueror turrets because I play vostroyans but they are oop and I can't find any, feels bad man.

They should be easy enough to convert and there is a cast version being sold on ebay.

Anyone think crusaders are worth taking for a screen? They seem pretty durable and can do ok with a priest nearby. Thoughts?

Absolutely untill the beta sisters codex becomes an actual codex and they replace the good acts of faith with the weak ones.

Dont forget the astropath to make them 2++

Wouldn't they still be good without the acts of faith. I mean I know its better rules but the acts of faith don't make them good. It's he 2++ no.
If those acts of faith go live why would you use those acts over the ones in the codex anyway?
The crusaders in the beta rules dont even have the same keywords and are 2 pts cheaper..??

Becauae they state in the forward to the sob beta codex that they intend to update the AM datasheet in the final version so you wont have a choice.

The ability to move twice or fight twice is huge when it comes to damage output and that turn 5 sprint to an objective. Sure they are still viable without but they go from being a flexible unit to a tank objective holder and they are competeing with 30 infantry

U02dah4 wrote:
Becauae they state in the forward to the sob beta codex that they intend to update the AM datasheet in the final version so you wont have a choice.

The ability to move twice or fight twice is huge when it comes to damage output and that turn 5 sprint to an objective. Sure they are still viable without but they go from being a flexible unit to a tank objective holder and they are competeing with 30 infantry

Yea that's true. Well that kinda sucks, hope the acts of faith don't end up being too bad then. I just feel like my guard infantry just get mowed down way to easy, really sucks. Even just having a 2++ staying power sounds good to me, but i'm a fairly new player.

135 bolt gun shots from space marines to kill 10 crusaders vs 102 for 30 guardsmen (not factoring moral) but infantry have range and take up a bigger surface area and are cheaper.

AP1,2 make infantry die faster where as crusaders are immune but crusaders get weaker if your psychic power fails.

Its not a terible choice it just goes from an optimised unit i have happily run in a tourney and would again to a mediochre one.

U02dah4 wrote:
135 bolt gun shots from space marines to kill 10 crusaders vs 102 for 30 guardsmen (not factoring moral) but infantry have range and take up a bigger surface area and are cheaper.

AP1,2 make infantry die faster where as crusaders are immune but crusaders get weaker if your psychic power fails.

Its not a terible choice it just goes from an optimised unit i have happily run in a tourney and would again to a mediochre one.

Yea true, well thanks for the info big help. Do you think they will keep the acts of faith as is? Anyway I hope they buff it a bit once it's released as a codex.

I personally feel that sob are a little on the underpowered side an AoF is oe feature that could be altered to improve them but there are other options its very much a wait and see.

How can crusaders have 2++?

 Lothar wrote:
How can crusaders have 2++?

3++ save with astropath or psyker casting psychic barrier on them to improve their saving rolls by 1, giving them a 3+/2++

Shrug. I feel for a mono army guard is quite good compared to most. Its just hard to match up to the best units and stratagems of 3 armies at once with a single army. And heck as you can see from my reports my mono guard has been holding its own.

Khadorstompy wrote:
Shrug. I feel for a mono army guard is quite good compared to most. Its just hard to match up to the best units and stratagems of 3 armies at once with a single army. And heck as you can see from my reports my mono guard has been holding its own.

Guard is probably the second best Mono codex. I'd put it a bit behind Craftworld Eldar, but maybe that's just because an Alaitoc army just naturally hard counters Guard. And even then though, you can specifically list tailor to kill them.

Definitely holds it's own in most cases.

Yeah as long as you don't take tourney results into account which consistently show a host of mono factions tau drukhari orks nids doing better hell even mechanicus post CA. Mono guard has a terrible success rate but it is a damn good soup component

whitelion40k wrote:

 Lothar wrote:
How can crusaders have 2++?

3++ save with astropath or psyker casting psychic barrier on them to improve their saving rolls by 1, giving them a 3+/2++

Can't they also just "Take Cover'?

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

whitelion40k wrote:

 Lothar wrote:
How can crusaders have 2++?

3++ save with astropath or psyker casting psychic barrier on them to improve their saving rolls by 1, giving them a 3+/2++

Can't they also just "Take Cover'?

Take Cover got errata'd to no longer do anything.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

whitelion40k wrote:

 Lothar wrote:
How can crusaders have 2++?

3++ save with astropath or psyker casting psychic barrier on them to improve their saving rolls by 1, giving them a 3+/2++

Can't they also just "Take Cover'?

Take Cover got errata'd to no longer do anything.

Unless you're an Ogryn. They can literally have a 2+ save against freaking plasma, if you have them in cover, with barrier cast on them, and use Take Cover.

No, I mean it literally. Take Cover does nothing because there is no such thing as an Armour Save. Slab Shields also do nothing now. Also Slab Shields are for Bullgryns, not Ogryns.

whitelion40k wrote:
Anyone know where I can get some leman russ conqueror turrets?

I checked forgeworld site but they seem to be oop.

Thanks all.

The only way I was able to get mine was to 3D print them myself. Well maybe not exactly myself - my son has a 3D printer and I gave him the file to print. Looks really sharp and fits perfectly on my russ bodies.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
No, I mean it literally. Take Cover does nothing because there is no such thing as an Armour Save. Slab Shields also do nothing now. Also Slab Shields are for Bullgryns, not Ogryns.

... Well damn. You're right. I wonder does anyone actually play that? Like, if in a tournament I said I was using Take Cover, and my opponent said I couldn't do that, would a T/O rule in his favor or not?

 Horst wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
No, I mean it literally. Take Cover does nothing because there is no such thing as an Armour Save. Slab Shields also do nothing now. Also Slab Shields are for Bullgryns, not Ogryns.

... Well damn. You're right. I wonder does anyone actually play that? Like, if in a tournament I said I was using Take Cover, and my opponent said I couldn't do that, would a T/O rule in his favor or not?

A T/Os job is to make up and enforce house rules. A T/O can decide that all pink models have a 1++ save and move 30", and that's their call. What a T/O decides and what the rules say have no relation.

 Horst wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:
No, I mean it literally. Take Cover does nothing because there is no such thing as an Armour Save. Slab Shields also do nothing now. Also Slab Shields are for Bullgryns, not Ogryns.

... Well damn. You're right. I wonder does anyone actually play that? Like, if in a tournament I said I was using Take Cover, and my opponent said I couldn't do that, would a T/O rule in his favor or not?

As an opponent, I'd certainly allow it to work as intended.

I'd imagine most TOs would rule the same way-the intent of the Strat is blindingly obvious, even if the RAW is borked. If you're really worried, contact your TO ahead of time.

 Horst wrote:
I wonder does anyone actually play that?

No. BCB's hobby is derailing threads with ridiculous RAW arguments that have nothing to do with the game as played by real people. Everyone knows how Take Cover is supposed to work and no reasonable person is going to argue that GW intended to errata it to say "this does nothing" but decided to do so via a wording change that can be interpreted to not function if you read it carefully enough instead of "page XX: remove the Take Cover stratagem". No TO that wants to have repeat customers is going to respond with anything other than "stop being TFG, of course the stratagem works as intended". The fact that BCB is able to find a piece of the rule that technically isn't correct by the strictest RAW interpretation is of interest to BCB and nobody else.