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.

Why does a Baneblade only have a 6+ save it should be at least a 5+ as the Space marine variants have 4+ and even an Imperial knight gets a 5+, they should be mighty war machines capable of tanking damage but with a 6+ they are way to easy to kill. I feel Leman Russ tanks should be 5+ also since a Land Raider is 4+ all in all Guard seem pretty weak in this edition of Apocalypse.

How many games of Apokalypse have you played with your Baneblade to check your concerns so far?

I also read some dataheets where I thought, hmm, that sounds weak, like the Beast of Nurgle that doesn't seem to have anything special, but with the rules hardly out yet it's hard to make out really.

Dude, have you guys seen the unit cost of the new Sisters of Battle in 12th edition? SO UNFAIR.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Dude, have you guys seen the unit cost of the new Sisters of Battle in 12th edition? SO UNFAIR.

That's a safe assumption actually.

The SM variants are T9/2+ in 40k while the Guard one is T8/3+. Why is giving the SM variant better armour in Apoc wrong?

I haven't played it yet but I've watched a couple of battle reports and have a good grasp of the rules and know how easy stuff dies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
The SM variants are T9/2+ in 40k while the Guard one is T8/3+. Why is giving the SM variant better armour in Apoc wrong?

I didn't say they should be identical but at least a 5+ to match an Imperial Knight.

 Tank_Dweller wrote:
I haven't played it yet but I've watched a couple of battle reports and have a good grasp of the rules and know how easy stuff dies.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
The SM variants are T9/2+ in 40k while the Guard one is T8/3+. Why is giving the SM variant better armour in Apoc wrong?

I didn't say they should be identical but at least a 5+ to match an Imperial Knight.

Baneblades don't have Ion Shields, remember that.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
The SM variants are T9/2+ in 40k while the Guard one is T8/3+. Why is giving the SM variant better armour in Apoc wrong?

This is also a relatively new development, the SM variant tanks weren't particularly more resilient (especially not to that level) in previous editions.

Relative to other Superheavies, the Baneblade line actually has gotten much weaker. Knights have basically identical wounds to a BB now (on top of their shields) but in the 6E/7E era the BB had 9 HP while the Knight only had 6, 50% more HP and a substantial native resiliency advantage. Originally SM superheavies werent any more resilient than Guard ones, IIRC HH rules came around and gave them an extra 3HP, but then they got T9 and 2+ armor with 8E.

Much the same happened to the Russ, in 2E it was just as heavily armored as a Land Raider, and the Demolisher even moreso

I'm still peeved at my Porphyrion Knight only having a 5+ save despite being T9 in 40k, and having it's Str12 Magna Lascannons wounding things on a 6+, when they're probably the single most damaging weapon in 40k outside Titans (or the valiant's harpoon. Serious, it's STR12, AP-3, flat 6 damage.... and it wounds things on a 6+ in apoc.

I'll still use the damn thing, but apocalypse rules just seem arbitrarily stupid sometimes.

 Horst wrote:
I'm still peeved at my Porphyrion Knight only having a 5+ save despite being T9 in 40k, and having it's Str12 Magna Lascannons wounding things on a 6+, when they're probably the single most damaging weapon in 40k outside Titans (or the valiant's harpoon. Serious, it's STR12, AP-3, flat 6 damage.... and it wounds things on a 6+ in apoc.

I'll still use the damn thing, but apocalypse rules just seem arbitrarily stupid sometimes.

The Magma Lascannons at least have the destroyer rule so it wounds twice for every wound, it should def have more than 6 wounds though as the thing is nearly the size of a Warhound and that has 12 wounds.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Dude, have you guys seen the unit cost of the new Sisters of Battle in 12th edition? SO UNFAIR.

That's a safe assumption actually.

Actually made me chuckle at my desk at work

SG