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.

Hi Guys

I am about to start painting my Leman Russ Battle Tank and Demolisher and was wondering what you all thought would be the best hull mounted weapon for each out of a Lascannon and Heavy Bolter?

I was thinking Heavy Bolter on the Battletank and Lascannon on the Demolisher.

For future reference this should be in 40K tactics, not in "you make the call", that's only for rules debates.

Ok, thanks mate!

Stannley wrote:
I was thinking Heavy Bolter on the Battletank and Lascannon on the Demolisher.

This. Demolisher can benefit from the added range of the lascannon and the bolter will get more 6s and costs less (if I recall) than the lascannon. Presumably you'd be firing the battle cannon every round. That's how my friend runs those two tanks every game.

Yeah that was basically my thought. Thanks mate!

Actually, I think its better if you just stick with a hull HB for both tanks since both Demolisher and the LRBT's weapons are ordnance and therefore everything else on the LR can only snapfire. Even with the demolisher's limited range, if you position it correctly or use tank orders (depending on where you take it from) you should generally be in range of most targets. The lascannon costs too much for something that will snapfire too often and even at BS3 you're not likely to do much with only a single shot. I'd only take hull lascannons on LR where the main gun isn't ordnance so you can make the most of its Heavy rule.

Hmmmm that's a good point. I guess it comes down to how often the demolisher will be out of range, but then again, having an anti infantry gun would be useful if anyone gets too close. I think I will do as suggested and go HB on both.

Heavy flamer in case the enemy gets too close. Instead of going back providing another 6" advance in your territory for a charging foe, you roll forward, flame them and prepare to die gloriously haulting the advance.

Or when you shoot at something like a venom/raider that's gone close. A single s10 blast and a few snapfire shots that also need to hit and go through 3+ cover will do less than a heavy flamer that ignores cover and roasts the passangers.

Or when you shoot something in heavy (2+/3+) cover.

All in all, no matter what you choose has slim chances of having any real impact on the outcome. Heavy flamer has some reliable utility at least.

That is true, however I am using the FW Krieg tanks which do not come with a hull mounted heavy flamer. Hmmn, now I am thinking I need to rummage around my bits box and see if I can find one to convert with.

Can't snapfire flamers, so you'll only be able to choose one or the other

I would always suggest a heavy bolter or lascannon over the heavy flamer. Like JSewell mentioned, no snap firing on the template flamer.

I've found the HB to be more useful at reliably giving you 6's. Specifically with a demolisher (24" main gun range) you rarely find yourself sitting at range to make the lascannon effective.

Are you planning on sticking any sponsons on them?

For ease of mind, why not simply NOT glue them?

I do that, and I can switch from a HB on a LRBT to a lascannon for a Vanquisher or go with a Flamer if we're doing a cityfight-like scenario

Inquisitor Jex wrote:
For ease of mind, why not simply NOT glue them?

I do that, and I can switch from a HB on a LRBT to a lascannon for a Vanquisher or go with a Flamer if we're doing a cityfight-like scenario

Magnets! They're much easier to use than I had ever thought. Definitely worth it.

Heavy Bolter. Paying points for something that will have to snapfire is pretty silly.

Stannley wrote:
That is true, however I am using the FW Krieg tanks which do not come with a hull mounted heavy flamer. Hmmn, now I am thinking I need to rummage around my bits box and see if I can find one to convert with.

Do you mean the FW models, or Krieg rules? In either case you should be able to use Heavy Flamers if you want, the Krieg tank rules still have to option to swap the default heavy bolter for the heavy flamer, and each model is supposed to 'be supplied with the current plastic Leman Russ parts including sponsons' as per the FW website.

If you're using the Krieg rules, what do you make of the Conqueror? As per the up to date Siege Army List (in the recently updated Imperial Armour: Siege of Vraks), it's cheaper than a hellhound and a Fast vehicle. I'm wondering if it could make a good all rounder tank especially adept at hunting monstrous creatures.

Wow, lots of replies I'll answer all in one hit rather than quoting individually...

Yes, I am using the FW models - the hull mounted weapon on these is set up different to the standard GW one - it is attached to a triangular plate with reinforced ribbing and you only get a HB and a Lascannon to choose from - no heavy flamer although I think there is one on the standard plastic sprue that comes with it.

The reason I am not making it switchable - it's because of that triangular plate. When I paint them I will be doing a camo scheme and don't want to screw it up when that part gets switched out. Probably nothing worth worrying about but if I am only ever going to use one weapon on the hull anyway, not a lot of point making it changeable

Sponsons - no. Mostly for the same reasons as above, plus, for Krieg, I prefer the no sponson look. Looks so WW1

So I am thinking now that I will go the HB route - gives me an extra 12" of range over the Demolisher cannon, with the extra shots over a Lascannon, and is probably more useful than a heavy flamer. If someone gets too close I will be reversing and hitting them with the big template (and hoping for it not to scatter back).

Thanks for all the help guys!

 NuggzTheNinja wrote:
Heavy Bolter. Paying points for something that will have to snapfire is pretty silly.

This. The LC is a bad idea because you're paying full points for a weapon that hits 33% as often as a normal gun, and swapping the free HB for the free HF is kind of pointless when template weapons can't snap fire at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stannley wrote:
The reason I am not making it switchable - it's because of that triangular plate. When I paint them I will be doing a camo scheme and don't want to screw it up when that part gets switched out. Probably nothing worth worrying about but if I am only ever going to use one weapon on the hull anyway, not a lot of point making it changeable

Just don't glue the plate in, it doesn't need any magnets/glue/etc to hold it in place. You can get the camo pattern close enough on the alternate gun that nobody will notice the difference if you ever want to swap weapons. And you probably will want to swap them since the LC becomes a lot more appealing if you use one of the non-ordnance variants (and since FW sells separate turrets using a different version is easy).

The point of HF is to fire it instead of the main gun when it's more advantageous.

 Peregrine wrote:

Just don't glue the plate in, it doesn't need any magnets/glue/etc to hold it in place. You can get the camo pattern close enough on the alternate gun that nobody will notice the difference if you ever want to swap weapons. And you probably will want to swap them since the LC becomes a lot more appealing if you use one of the non-ordnance variants (and since FW sells separate turrets using a different version is easy).

I am not sure I would want one of the non-ordnance versions. The executioner used to be appealing but with the gets hot rule and my ability to roll 1's it gets less so. Still, it's a great looking tank, and I would buy one just because of that. But I would more than likely buy the whole tank so I could field lots of tanks (I love tanks ).

The other turrets I see as pointless. I like my tanks to bring a lot of killing power and a single Lascannon shot or two Autocannon shots from the turret is not enough. Especially as my ability to reroll is as good as my ability to roll 1's!

Nah, for the Demolisher I am going HB.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 koooaei wrote:
The point of HF is to fire it instead of the main gun when it's more advantageous.

I decided to go HB, but I play a great group who won't mind me saying "that's a HF, not a HB"

Cheers anyway!

Pask w/ 3 heavy bolters and punisher cannon, another russ with Eradicator Nova cannon and 3 heavy bolters. Melts 1 unit a turn, you can split fire and do 2 units a turn if you need.

 Wingeds wrote:
Pask w/ 3 heavy bolters and punisher cannon, another russ with Eradicator Nova cannon and 3 heavy bolters. Melts 1 unit a turn, you can split fire and do 2 units a turn if you need.

I can't have Pask in my Krieg army (at least I don't think so). Don't know about the Eradicator - I don't have the 2nd edition vraks book yet. But as I said, no sponsons on my tanks because I prefer the WW1 look for my Krieg.

Stannley wrote:

 Wingeds wrote:
Pask w/ 3 heavy bolters and punisher cannon, another russ with Eradicator Nova cannon and 3 heavy bolters. Melts 1 unit a turn, you can split fire and do 2 units a turn if you need.

I can't have Pask in my Krieg army (at least I don't think so). Don't know about the Eradicator - I don't have the 2nd edition vraks book yet. But as I said, no sponsons on my tanks because I prefer the WW1 look for my Krieg.

You can't have both competitive advice and "I want my tanks to look fabulous".

Zsolt wrote:

You can't have both competitive advice and "I want my tanks look fabulous" both.

I get what you are saying, but to be fair on myself, the question I asked was which was better - the HB or the Lascannon. At no point did I ask which was the best tank, what should I put on the turret or should I use sponsons. Not that I am complaining by the way. Very happy for people to offer their advice. And I will take thus opportunity to thank everyone for it!

Although a lascannon will be snapfiring if the demolisher cannon fires, for the first few turns the demolisher is unlikely to be in shooting range, so you will have a few turns to tankhunt at full BS with the lascannon.

Alternatively whilst expensive, also taking multi-melta sponsons lends more flexibility, if price to the tank. Say an enemy predator has closed on you quickly and its your shooting phase, you may prefer to shoot 2 multi meltas and a lascannon at close range as opposed to the demolisher cannon as you could penetrate easily but roll on the damage table appallingly with the cannon, whereas you are very unlikely to do so 3 times especially with AP1. Also if you need to kill some termies but don't want to risk the pieplate scattering onto your company command squad, you eliminate the risk firing single shot sponsons.

dont commit to one, just interchange them. With the new LR kits you dont even need a magnet. just paint the edges of the fitting with a little super glue and let it dry. It creates a nice way to fill the gap and create friction to keep the gun in, plus it saves a lot of magnets.

Stannley wrote:

The other turrets I see as pointless.

Eradicator is amazing vs stuff that likes to hide in cover or jink like crazy.

Ehh... some things.

Most competitive units (that I can think of atm) that rely on cover saves also usually have either a decent armor save (Eldar jetbikes, Marine bikes), an invuln or are tough enough/have enough wounds (gliding FMC's) to not care about single strength 6 AP4 shots.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
Ehh... some things.

Most competitive units (that I can think of atm) that rely on cover saves also usually have either a decent armor save (Eldar jetbikes, Marine bikes), an invuln or are tough enough/have enough wounds (gliding FMC's) to not care about single strength 6 AP4 shots.

There are often enough targets for this wonderful cheap tank that is also not ordnance.

It's golden for when you fight things that are 4+ or worse. Can singlehandedly win you a game vs tau with pathfinders or FW/Sniperdrone spam. Is often effective against Ig, orks, necrons, dark eldar - both models with toughness and vehicles as they'll still have to jink HB salvo and still get hit by a cover-ignoring s6 large blast. At the same time, the tank's cheap enough to not be a waste even vs heavilly armored troops and even some MC and light tanks. Just 140 pt for a main gun and 9 HB shots on a 14-13-10 platform.

I'm going to vouch for Eradicators as well. An eradicator with triple Heavy Bolters does a ton of wounds.

Yeah Eradicators are the new workhorse Russ imo. Everyone talks about about how amazing Executioners or a Punisher with Pask are, and they're right, but the Eradicator gets over-looked.

If your local meta is filled with nothing but 3+ save infantry then a bare-bones Battle Tank may or may not be better, but if you have any opponents working 4+ or worse infantry in (ie Xeno armies) then you can really clean house with an Eradicator.