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.

Had some games recently that are making me re-evaluate my choices in Guard Vehicles. The first was a small game against another Guard player, which I won by objectives, and the second was against a AoS player who had recently bought an old Iron Hands army off of another player, which I barely lost.

So, the vehicles I currently have are the following:
2 Leman Russ Battle Tanks
2 Leman Russ Annihilators
1 Hellhound
1 Salamander Scout Tank (converted from an Achilles Ridgerunner)
2 Armored Sentinels

The first game had one Russ Tank, one Sentinel, and the Salamander doing some limited Anti-Vehicle work, taking out a Russ Eradicator, and then harassing the infantry to the point where he could no longer take objectives. The second game had seen 3 of the four Russ tanks taken off the board turn 1, and all other vehicles by turn 3. That game I focused on keeping as much Infantry alive as possible and trying to hold onto as much objectives as I could, only losing once my opponent was able to take one of the three (out of four) I had and using one of his tanks to block the path to that objective.

I'm finding I don't like the Sentinels BS4 stat. I had been running them with Lascannons and using them as turrets, but out of four games, I've only had maybe 3 hits between the two of them, for a total of 11 damage. I'm thinking of changing their weapons (weapons aren't glued yet), but to what I'm not sure of as of yet.

The Salamander I'm finding incredibly situational. It seems good at harassing 1W infantry that's camped on an objective, but all the marine players at my flgs are using Primaris, so I suspect I won't be dealing as much as I'll be getting in return against them. I'll still keep it as I love the Ridgerunner model I made it from, but I may not be using it as much.

The Hellhound has always been shot off the board before it could threaten infantry. I guess it's good that it's diverting fire from other things?

I modeled the Annihilators out of spare Lascannons and two Russ tanks as I saw one Guard player at the flgs using them (he moved away awhile back). I initially thought that the 4 las shots would at least deal some good damage against vehicles. However, they were shot off the board turn 1 when I went up against the new Iron Hands player. Also, I did some maths awhile back and discovered that Executioner Tank Commanders actually deal significantly more damage for only slightly more points. Also also, with the change to Demolishers, I'm wondering if Demos are just overall a better AV choice.

Battle Tanks I think are fine as they're more general purpose, and have excelled in a general purpose role.

I had ordered the Leman Russ Demolisher kit to build one Executioner Tank Commander to see how it did on the tabletop, but with the change to Demolishers overall, I'm wondering if the Demolisher Cannon is a better choice? Granted, it is shorter range, so I'd have to hug cover until I get to what I want to destroy, but 2d6 Str10 AP-3 D6 Damage could be worth the time it would take to get into that closer range.

I guess my question is, what vehicles should I, maybe not get rid of, but at least use less of? What vehicles or loadouts should I look into in their place?

Tank commanders are a lot more efficient than standard russes these days

Battle cannons = good all round, good range
Executioner = slightly better AP, flat 2 damage and cheaper than battle cannon, worse range, some chance of hurting yourself, particularly against enemies with -1 to hit
Demolisher = better all round than the battle cannon, MUCH better against big targets, but have only 24" range which puts them at much higher risk than a battle tank due to enemy weapons being in range and chance of getting charged.
Relic battle cannon from vigilus defiant book = absolutely awesome but costs 1CP and a relic slot to unlock

They've all got positives and negatives, good arguments can be made for all of them in my opinion.

I agree with the post above. It is really situational as to what is good or not. You can't use that second game agains Iron Hands as much evidence. Iron hands are currently just going to shoot things off the board turn 1 (pretty much this edition in truth). I do have some questions:

How does your army play overall?
I run a mixed force with 3 platoons, 30 rough riders (yeah, old school, but do not knock them. the combo of speed and hitting power for one turn can really screw up someone holding medium to far range objectives), 4 tanks, 3 sentinels, and bullgrynns supporting characters, and some other random things (ratlings sometimes). So opponents generally get caught in the too many targets trap.

What doctrine are you running?
I have really good luck with a 3 sentinel Plasma cannon/hunter killer missile unit because I run Vostroyan for the +1 to hit strat. Also the basic ability of +6" range really screws a lot of people up. They just don't factor it in. So 42" plasma cannons can cause damage.

Do you use a tank commander?
A tank commander helping an executioner is really effective (or being the executioner). I run the executioner as a separate tank, because it tends to draw more fire, and so maybe my tank commander gets a screen for a turn or two.

The Demolisher change is another hard to judge move. Basically your damage output is really good, but range hurt. Again, my Vostroyans add 6" to the range of rapid and heavy weapons that have a base range of 24"+ so Demolisher cannons range 34" for me (adding the 4" of movement I can use and still shoot twice).
Can't help with the hellhound, I haven't run one in forevor.
I vote against the lascannon ones. I spread my lascannons out onto my other tanks, although there is a good argument for more hulls vs one hull with all weapons.

This is not a competitive suggestion...

Demolisher cannon is the most underrated/underused Leman Russ weapon.

24"? That's a 48" bubble of "screw you". It can also be equipped with a lascannon if you really need an additional long-range punch. Marines just had their Demolisher cannons upgraded to Heavy D6 (not sure if this made it into the Guard book - if so, it makes the Marine one even worse).

So you move half speed, you end up with 2D6 shots. Like a battle cannon...only they're Strength 10, -3, D6 damage...that's 2D6 shots better than a lascannon. First turn? Advance up the board into the damned center with two or three of these, pop smoke. That's a lot of Tough 8 that can't be ignored, so it'll serve as a distraction. If they don't kill them, they need to stay way the hell away from them. Throw in the sponson weapons (maybe flamers to protect them since they need to get close). But that gun cannot be ignored. I dropped 11 wounds off a knight with one shot from a Vindicator when it was still Heavy D3.

Three demolisher cannons firing twice could put out 216 wounds (in completely bizarro world perfect rolling...of course)...and that doesn't count the hull or sponson weapons, or stubbers, etc. Is it ideal in a competitive game? Oh hell, probably not. But man, that's a rude friggin' awakening. If I ever did Guard I'd build the whole army around three demolishers. Make one a tank commander? Forget about it. Run Valhallan rules so they count wounds as double for the purposes of degrading...that's pretty solid.

Hell Hounds are great distractions.
Sentinals are just cheap filler to get more cp/or minor area denial.
Regular Lemon russ are not worth it.
Conquerers and Tank Commanders are the way to go.

And this is where you see some major failings in the general game design for 40K. You see a lot of "command tank" style units in 40K where there is zero reason to take the lesser unit. The game is sorely lacking in simple restrictions on units.

"You may take one Leman Russ Tank Commander for each Leman Russ unit in your army" etc. Just little things. You see the same nonsense with Eldar, where you simply take the Exarch Flyer over the normal one...because why not? It really is a rather silly issue I think should be addressed.

edwardmyst wrote:
I agree with the post above. It is really situational as to what is good or not. You can't use that second game agains Iron Hands as much evidence. Iron hands are currently just going to shoot things off the board turn 1 (pretty much this edition in truth). I do have some questions:

How does your army play overall?
I run a mixed force with 3 platoons, 30 rough riders (yeah, old school, but do not knock them. the combo of speed and hitting power for one turn can really screw up someone holding medium to far range objectives), 4 tanks, 3 sentinels, and bullgrynns supporting characters, and some other random things (ratlings sometimes). So opponents generally get caught in the too many targets trap.

What doctrine are you running?
I have really good luck with a 3 sentinel Plasma cannon/hunter killer missile unit because I run Vostroyan for the +1 to hit strat. Also the basic ability of +6" range really screws a lot of people up. They just don't factor it in. So 42" plasma cannons can cause damage.

Do you use a tank commander?
A tank commander helping an executioner is really effective (or being the executioner). I run the executioner as a separate tank, because it tends to draw more fire, and so maybe my tank commander gets a screen for a turn or two.

The Demolisher change is another hard to judge move. Basically your damage output is really good, but range hurt. Again, my Vostroyans add 6" to the range of rapid and heavy weapons that have a base range of 24"+ so Demolisher cannons range 34" for me (adding the 4" of movement I can use and still shoot twice).
Can't help with the hellhound, I haven't run one in forevor.
I vote against the lascannon ones. I spread my lascannons out onto my other tanks, although there is a good argument for more hulls vs one hull with all weapons.

How does my army play overall?

Pretty much lots of infantry and a few vehicles. The vehicles I have are as above, and I try to bring as many of them as I can. I tend to bring a cheap-ish brigade, the Russes in a Spearhead, and try to bring an extra battalion when I can. I bring Scions now due to me having a bunch painted; they're good for distractions and grabbing lightly defended objectives, but at present I am finding them super situational. I also bring Crusaders when I can due to their prayers and have an astropath buffing their invuln save. Makes a great distraction unit.

Gameplay, I almost purely focus on getting and holding objectives, so I focus a lot on my infantry. While I try to bring as many of my vehicles as I can, their number one goal is to protect the infantry and get them to their objectives, whatever the cost. (I know Russes in Spearheads get ObSec, but the Infantry almost always outlives them, so I don't typically use them for their ObSec.) I realize this is kind of a backwards approach for this edition as literally everyone else has infantry squads as a cushion for their vehicles, but I rarely play games with the only objective being kill points. In a kill points type game or against an army that would tear through my infantry if unimpeded, even with a tiny amount of forces remaining, then yeah, I would bubble wrap my vehicles. I simply play to win the game I am given.

Doctrine can vary a bit, got enough models of each that I can just add one or two to each squad and make it count. I've run Tallarn to good effect, but primarily run Cadian as, again, that's what I have painted. I got a bunch of Catachan and want to see how they play out with Cadian support as opposed to Cadian with Scion and Crusader support.

I absolutely use a Tank Commander whenever I can as it brings another HQ unit for Russ Spearheads and/or Battalions.

 Elbows wrote:
This is not a competitive suggestion...

Demolisher cannon is the most underrated/underused Leman Russ weapon.

24"? That's a 48" bubble of "screw you". It can also be equipped with a lascannon if you really need an additional long-range punch. Marines just had their Demolisher cannons upgraded to Heavy D6 (not sure if this made it into the Guard book - if so, it makes the Marine one even worse).

So you move half speed, you end up with 2D6 shots. Like a battle cannon...only they're Strength 10, -3, D6 damage...that's 2D6 shots better than a lascannon. First turn? Advance up the board into the damned center with two or three of these, pop smoke. That's a lot of Tough 8 that can't be ignored, so it'll serve as a distraction. If they don't kill them, they need to stay way the hell away from them. Throw in the sponson weapons (maybe flamers to protect them since they need to get close). But that gun cannot be ignored. I dropped 11 wounds off a knight with one shot from a Vindicator when it was still Heavy D3.

Just charge them with some screen unit, and your Demolishers are completely useless now. Even a Tau would charge them with some spare firewarriors or drones. That's assuming the other player doesn't have a fast dedicated unit for stuff like that, which he should have.

nekooni wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
This is not a competitive suggestion...

Demolisher cannon is the most underrated/underused Leman Russ weapon.

24"? That's a 48" bubble of "screw you". It can also be equipped with a lascannon if you really need an additional long-range punch. Marines just had their Demolisher cannons upgraded to Heavy D6 (not sure if this made it into the Guard book - if so, it makes the Marine one even worse).

So you move half speed, you end up with 2D6 shots. Like a battle cannon...only they're Strength 10, -3, D6 damage...that's 2D6 shots better than a lascannon. First turn? Advance up the board into the damned center with two or three of these, pop smoke. That's a lot of Tough 8 that can't be ignored, so it'll serve as a distraction. If they don't kill them, they need to stay way the hell away from them. Throw in the sponson weapons (maybe flamers to protect them since they need to get close). But that gun cannot be ignored. I dropped 11 wounds off a knight with one shot from a Vindicator when it was still Heavy D3.

Just charge them with some screen unit, and your Demolishers are completely useless now. Even a Tau would charge them with some spare firewarriors or drones. That's assuming the other player doesn't have a fast dedicated unit for stuff like that, which he should have.

As Guard, you are the king of screens...just move move move the rest of your army up along with the tanks. You also have the option to run heavy flamers on your tank, though that’s more expensive, a lot more situational and probably not effective enough. A lot of guard players run a big bully bullgryn unit, stick that thing next to your tanks. And you don’t have to move them up that far since Tallarn and Vostryan gives you just under 36” threat range.

 greyknight12 wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
This is not a competitive suggestion...

Demolisher cannon is the most underrated/underused Leman Russ weapon.

24"? That's a 48" bubble of "screw you". It can also be equipped with a lascannon if you really need an additional long-range punch. Marines just had their Demolisher cannons upgraded to Heavy D6 (not sure if this made it into the Guard book - if so, it makes the Marine one even worse).

So you move half speed, you end up with 2D6 shots. Like a battle cannon...only they're Strength 10, -3, D6 damage...that's 2D6 shots better than a lascannon. First turn? Advance up the board into the damned center with two or three of these, pop smoke. That's a lot of Tough 8 that can't be ignored, so it'll serve as a distraction. If they don't kill them, they need to stay way the hell away from them. Throw in the sponson weapons (maybe flamers to protect them since they need to get close). But that gun cannot be ignored. I dropped 11 wounds off a knight with one shot from a Vindicator when it was still Heavy D3.

Just charge them with some screen unit, and your Demolishers are completely useless now. Even a Tau would charge them with some spare firewarriors or drones. That's assuming the other player doesn't have a fast dedicated unit for stuff like that, which he should have.

As Guard, you are the king of screens...just move move move the rest of your army up along with the tanks. You also have the option to run heavy flamers on your tank, though that’s more expensive, a lot more situational and probably not effective enough. A lot of guard players run a big bully bullgryn unit, stick that thing next to your tanks. And you don’t have to move them up that far since Tallarn and Vostryan gives you just under 36” threat range.

sure, but that's not remotely "advance 3 of them up the board and pop smoke, done". Of course a single Fire Warrior squad wouldn't get through a bullgryn screen. Of course you could try to protect them, but that's harder to do than if you had Battle Tanks sitting in the back (since you're attackable from more directions, and you've reduced the distance the enemy has to run to get to you - you're gifting him a full turn of movement in many cases for that slight increase in damage output over a Battle Tank - which is questionable in itself since you just lost a full turn of shooting due to popping smoke and advancing.

 Elbows wrote:
And this is where you see some major failings in the general game design for 40K. You see a lot of "command tank" style units in 40K where there is zero reason to take the lesser unit. The game is sorely lacking in simple restrictions on units.

"You may take one Leman Russ Tank Commander for each Leman Russ unit in your army" etc. Just little things. You see the same nonsense with Eldar, where you simply take the Exarch Flyer over the normal one...because why not? It really is a rather silly issue I think should be addressed.

The Tank Commander was the less popular version before CA18, it's not game design, it's lack of balance. Unless you consider underpriced command units a feature rather than a bug. What you're suggesting is covering up the symptom of people taking the more powerful unit instead of fixing the problem that is the low price of that unit. I don't think it's fair that you get to have OP units regardless of whether there is a restriction involved or not. That's like balancing Guilliman by putting him in a bad codex. If you're so inclined you may also view it as the common Russ being overpriced and needing to be lowered, whatever floats your boat. Putting that restriction on it might be a good idea from a thematic standpoint, but it's not a proper way to balance the unit.

Command tanks its true are a bargain, however if they made them not a bargain i doubt you'd see people take many more of the standard russ as the power creep is too real they'd be outclassed these days. All the bump in cost to commander would do is lead to worse guard lists over all without also some tweaking downward to the standard russ. As people would still take the tank commanders for reliable shots.

So yeah, it was less popular but still the go to option and still would be with a cost increase without their being some reason to take the standard russ squads. Numbers only count if you can hit with them or have some value in their inclusion.

I don't like the idea of advancing your Leman Russ up the table, not shooting, and then hoping they are still there to respond next turn. If you go second that gives your opponent 2 shooting phases to effectively win the game without these units doing anything.

With that said I'm not sure on Demolisher range being terrible. Call it 29" with the move (Tallarn optional) and you are going to cover a lot of the board unless you have camped right in a back corner.

I think the issues will be against other people's castles (Tau, Iron Hands etc) where that 29" isn't going to let you hit anything good on turn one - and potentially nothing at all.

You can say something will run in and tag them - but it takes Tau Fire Warriors several turns to cover 29". Unless you are again going with "I'm going to hide right in the far corner and use my crazy range" (doable on planet bowling ball, often less doable with LOS blocking terrain) I think you are just as vulnerable as being tagged by fast flying stuff when equipped with a battlecannon.

I suspect the battlecannon is the way to go though.

Elbows wrote:And this is where you see some major failings in the general game design for 40K. You see a lot of "command tank" style units in 40K where there is zero reason to take the lesser unit. The game is sorely lacking in simple restrictions on units.

"You may take one Leman Russ Tank Commander for each Leman Russ unit in your army" etc. Just little things. You see the same nonsense with Eldar, where you simply take the Exarch Flyer over the normal one...because why not? It really is a rather silly issue I think should be addressed.

vict0988 wrote:The Tank Commander was the less popular version before CA18, it's not game design, it's lack of balance. Unless you consider underpriced command units a feature rather than a bug. What you're suggesting is covering up the symptom of people taking the more powerful unit instead of fixing the problem that is the low price of that unit. I don't think it's fair that you get to have OP units regardless of whether there is a restriction involved or not. That's like balancing Guilliman by putting him in a bad codex. If you're so inclined you may also view it as the common Russ being overpriced and needing to be lowered, whatever floats your boat. Putting that restriction on it might be a good idea from a thematic standpoint, but it's not a proper way to balance the unit.

The problem with TCs from a design perspective is that since giving orders to themselves is almost always better than giving orders to another vehicle, they're directly competing with regular Russes rather than being synergistic. If they're cheap enough you only see TCs, if they're too expensive you only see regular Russes, and there's basically no in-between. Even if you made it so they couldn't order themselves, you'd see pairs of TCs ordering each other.

Wishlisting for a moment, I think the Tyranid system, where a Prime gives nearby Warriors a flat +1 to hit, is a better model. Primes are too expensive on their own to be worthwhile, while Warriors greatly benefit from the buff, so that if you have a large number of Warriors it's a no-brainer to bring a Prime. Tanks ought to work the same way IMO; if you just have one or two they should be regular tanks, but if you're taking 3+ one of them should optimally be a commander. As much as I generally dislike auras from a gameplay perspective, for literal commanders it makes sense.