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.

So my friends and I have a small gathering every week, I play Custodes, 1 person plays Guard Mech, and one guy plays exclusively Chaos. I want to make the Guard player able to use his Baneblade because he really loves it and spent a lot of time on it, but we haven't come up with an effective homebrew rule set to make it even half way viable. We tried Invulns of 5/6++, we tried altering the backets, and finally we tried giving it strats that cost a few CP but allow it to shoot at it's top bracket. Either it was broken and game ending, or it barely survived the first turn. Has anyone had any luck with homebrew Baneblade stats that are fun but not broken?

1. Any titan unit in your homebrew game can divide the AP of any NON titan unit (or non-titanic weapon) attacking it in half.
The main gun of a titan? Titanic. (You should also argue with your friends about what is or isn't considered titan slaying stuff here). The main cannon on a baneblade, for example, or the anti-orbital volcano gun on a castellan are good examples of titanic weapons. I wouldn't consider anything below S9, however, to be qualifiable as such. round the ap DOWN. So a bucnh of 4/-1/1 bolters firing by some marines? are now ap0, even when they expect to be blowing big holes in this behemoth, and it can probably ride through a lot of them without trouble. Suddenly, this beast is going to be doing what it should -- being more or less resistant to infantry's base weapons, but still quite vulnerable to real antitank.

You can even make an upgrade for the baneblade that is similar in style for the upgrade that chapter masters get .. like another 60 points called "titanic armor upgrade" .. or whatever you and your buddies think is fair for this ability. If you play it and its way overpowered, raise the price, or lower it. Or change the exact cutoff of what weapons you let be 1/2 ap (for example, you might end up ruling anything with higher strength than this tank's toughness gets to have full effect, rather than anything titanic).

Point is, play with that, and it should make your big one tank a lot tougher for the hordes of infantry (even custodial infantry) to bring down

An alternate possibility is to make a damage reduction of some amount of points (like 2 or 3) per UNIT attack. So if you have 5 custodes beating on the tank and between them they do something like 12 points damage, you reduce it by 2. IF you have 30 horrors beating on the tank and they force it to make 10 saves, doing 3 damage? They just did ONE point.

That's a different way to make powerful antitank things still useable, but stuff like "my lasguns fry your baneblade" never happen.


So yeah, you can shoot a tank with nontitan weapons (thus half down ap) in the face with your barrage of plasma guns? Go ahead, but they are going to affect it like they are only ap-1, and its got decent odds of shrugging a lot of them off. Especially if someone has spent his money wisely and gotten a +1 save from an astropath. BUT, you haven't made the tank MORE vulnerable to lasguns (a combination of 1/2 ap and 1 point of DR per unit would potetnaitlly make your tank almost immune to them, but still allow the occasional gaurd unit to scratch it for 2 points and have 1 stick.)

Also, teach him how to make a good patrol of admech to support this now much longer lived behemoth --
engenseer (nechromechanic warlord trait)
vangaurd 5 troops (about 45? points)

The admech variant of the engenseer repairs 1+d3 points per attempt, and has a strategem to make a second attempt on the same target (or a different one) in the turn. So for the price of an astropath (35) and this little patrol (I think its 80 points so 115 total) you can both protect your baneblade and repair the snot out of it.

Another simple method (if you have that repair and a bit of protection from the astropath) is to give it WAY more hit points so that its stuck (make it not able to use the strat) with an actual degrading profile.

I dislike the way that titan brackets are set up, beacuse you can do all sorts of damage to the damn things and they are still 100 percent functional, then suddenly, they are -1, -2, and dead.

Instead, write your own damage capability and your own brackets for the tank, like.

Baneblade.
T8 sv3+ 42 wounds bs4+_ws5+ A9

then damage category 42 to 32W bs 4+
then damage category 31 to 16W bs5+_
then damage category 15 to 1W bs6+.

Now its probably going to last a longer time in a lower bracket, firing its guns happily but not hitting as many targets, leaving the player able to manuever it for "crush them" but not necessarily singlehandedly winning this game for him.


Any or all of these ideas might work to fix it, together, or singley employed. I don't know, but they are suggestions that soudn fun to me but not broken. (Well, ALL of them would be a nightmare baneblade nothing could kill, but I mean, yeah.)

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So my friends and I have a small gathering every week, I play Custodes, 1 person plays Guard Mech, and one guy plays exclusively Chaos. I want to make the Guard player able to use his Baneblade because he really loves it and spent a lot of time on it, but we haven't come up with an effective homebrew rule set to make it even half way viable. We tried Invulns of 5/6++, we tried altering the backets, and finally we tried giving it strats that cost a few CP but allow it to shoot at it's top bracket. Either it was broken and game ending, or it barely survived the first turn. Has anyone had any luck with homebrew Baneblade stats that are fun but not broken?

I play with homebrew rules all the time.

They tend to be useful for one game / scenario, then skew the balance in a way people find unsatisfactory.

Baneblades suffer due to their size. An easier solution would be having enough LOS blocking terrain.

Would love to know how a Chaos army is taking out a Baneblade first turn. Seems hard to do in 9th.

Baneblades really aren't that tough. T8 yes, but only 3+ save and 24 wounds.
So depending on the points of game, it's quite easy to have that much AT, especially if you're planning around a Baneblade.
They're twice as tough as a Leman Russ, but 3x the cost.

Hello.
I would suggest to give the Baneblade a 2+ save.
For a big chunk of armor like that, being quite vulnerable to medium firepower is a shame.
The Leman Russ can be upgraded to 2+ save thanks to a tank ace ability. The Land Raider has 2+ as standard.
So 2+ save Baneblades ? Yes ! Compelling, simple and not broken.
Especially against dedicated anti-tank firepower, but at least he retains a small saving chance.

I definitely agree on a 2+ save.
Is T9 reasonable as well?

2+ armour save

Large los blocking terrain

Adequate screening if it dies to deepstrikers

But it into reserve and target some of the anti tank before it reaches the table.

As a non guard player don't take so much anti tank in your list

Or just acknowledge it is a weak unit that makes up a big chunk of your points like IK they are just not good at this point in this edition. Its ok to play it but you are handicapping yourself doesn't mean it won't receive a boost when the 9th ed guard codex comes out.

All are legal within the rules

I would take the Baneblade and divide its total Wounds into separate models based on weapons, each with the same Toughness and Save, and ignoring whatever damage-track it has. That way you can whittle down the model like you would a big unit of Terminators or the like, and maybe even inflict morale effects on it.

Nurglitch wrote:
I would take the Baneblade and divide its total Wounds into separate models based on weapons, each with the same Toughness and Save, and ignoring whatever damage-track it has. That way you can whittle down the model like you would a big unit of Terminators or the like, and maybe even inflict morale effects on it.

I really like that idea. If half the crew gets slaughtered by a especially vicious attack, the remaining crew might panic and abandon their weapons, and get killed by the CO. Each Sponson is a seperate 2 man crew, and the main gun and crew could be a 5 man unit. Gunner, Driver, Loader, Engiseer, CO.

I suspect a big part of the trouble is, once you spent 660 poitns on a baneblade varient, you are going to be short on screens and short on total kill pressure in your list. (Three leman russes can way outshoot one, and have 36 wounds among them, for example, and make excellent use of strats like the master mechanic tank ace, to raise that resilience immensely. Perhaps all you need do is make that strat also available on the far less efficient model baneblade?)

Is it dying to melee or shooting?

Of course, reducing the points is always an option.
How about 400 points as a starting point? Approximately equal to two Leman Russes.

Is that with or without sponsons? His sponsons are basically 200 points.

With one pair of sponsons.
Although if he has 200pts of sponsons he has two pairs?

In terms of firepower compared to a Leman Russ, a Baneblade with two pairs of sponsons has 15 heavy weapons, 1 gun half as effective as a Leman Russ's turret, and another that's 1.5x as effective. (Assuming the Leman Russ is always double firing).
So it's 5x as many heavy weapons and 2x as many main guns.
Along with twice as many wounds and extra mobility.

Although I just grabbed 400pts as a random rhing, I really have no idea.
Perhaps the Baneblade should have Lumbering Behemoth as well honestly.

All four of those sponsons are twin linked heavy flamers with an added lascannon. Thats 24d6 auto-hitting in 12 inches, against the Chaos player he can flat out delete a BL bomb in one Charge phase. If he goes HBs, he can flat out delete 1-2 of my Terminator squads.

make it so that LOW can only be used in big games/ apoc rules..

LOW dont belong on the same table as a blimin grot.

Easy potential solution that should be quite balanced -- play it as if it's a squadron of 2 or 3 Leman Russes, and pay points accordingly. Move it on the table like one model, because it's fun to actually use your model after spending all that time building and painting it. But have it take damage the way 2 or 3 Russes take damage, and have it shoot and fight like however many are left (one possibly bracketed much of the time).

Maybe the -1 damage rule that SM dreads get? With all the redundant systems and multiple crewmen it would make sense that minor damage wouldn't be as affective. Or maybe a self healing rule since there's meant to be a minor techpriest in every one of them.

There's a lot of little things you can do honestly.

Make the Baneblade broken. is that not the point of titanic/LoW units?

Humble suggestion: give the Baneblade the benefit of Regimental Doctrines, and a single Tank Ace ability of its owner's choice.

The Tank Ace doctrines are really MEH. It gains cover until it moves, it grants morale re-rolls to anything within 6 inches, and I forget the third but it is equally blah. I am really considering just letting him fire twice with his main gun, seeing as how it's just BS4 and we bracket it down so fast.

The problem with all high units like this is.... they die to fast.

I would just make it so you could take 1 and it stays alive almost all game.

I mentioned this in another thread, but I think stuff like Baneblades should have a 1+ armor save. It would solve a lot of problems with the damage they take from small arms fire without needing to totally re-examine the T of vehicles across all codices.

 Mud Turkey 13 wrote:
I mentioned this in another thread, but I think stuff like Baneblades should have a 1+ armor save. It would solve a lot of problems with the damage they take from small arms fire without needing to totally re-examine the T of vehicles across all codices.

The problem is that a 1+ save actually makes small arms fire more effective since that also completely neuters anti-tank weaponry, since you can only fail a 1+ save on a natural roll of 1. Most anti tank is relatively low rate of fire, which is more likely to be ignored by an effective 2++ save versus spamming overcharged plasma or plinking away with D2 weapons.

I think making them T9 and bumping them to a 2+ save with a decent points cut would be ideal.

Baneblades should just be cheaper.

They should (without sponsons) cost about 10% less than 2 lemon russ's (without sponsons).

This is because its easier to focus fire them and they cant hide much.

Sponson weapons themselves probably cost a bit too much. Use the same price as the lemon russ sponsons cost.


Alternately, you could stick Pask in the Baneblade and give it a 2+ save.

 Grimskul wrote:

 Mud Turkey 13 wrote:
I mentioned this in another thread, but I think stuff like Baneblades should have a 1+ armor save. It would solve a lot of problems with the damage they take from small arms fire without needing to totally re-examine the T of vehicles across all codices.

The problem is that a 1+ save actually makes small arms fire more effective since that also completely neuters anti-tank weaponry, since you can only fail a 1+ save on a natural roll of 1. Most anti tank is relatively low rate of fire, which is more likely to be ignored by an effective 2++ save versus spamming overcharged plasma or plinking away with D2 weapons.

I think making them T9 and bumping them to a 2+ save with a decent points cut would be ideal.

What I mean is a 1+ that follows the regular rules for AP. So, if it gets shot with an AP 0 weapon it only fails on natural 1s. It also only fails against an AP -1 weapon on a natural 1. AP -2 would go through on an armor save of 1 or 2, and so on.

 Mud Turkey 13 wrote:

 Grimskul wrote:

 Mud Turkey 13 wrote:
I mentioned this in another thread, but I think stuff like Baneblades should have a 1+ armor save. It would solve a lot of problems with the damage they take from small arms fire without needing to totally re-examine the T of vehicles across all codices.

The problem is that a 1+ save actually makes small arms fire more effective since that also completely neuters anti-tank weaponry, since you can only fail a 1+ save on a natural roll of 1. Most anti tank is relatively low rate of fire, which is more likely to be ignored by an effective 2++ save versus spamming overcharged plasma or plinking away with D2 weapons.

I think making them T9 and bumping them to a 2+ save with a decent points cut would be ideal.

What I mean is a 1+ that follows the regular rules for AP. So, if it gets shot with an AP 0 weapon it only fails on natural 1s. It also only fails against an AP -1 weapon on a natural 1. AP -2 would go through on an armor save of 1 or 2, and so on.

You'd have to make it a bespoke rule then given how saves and modifiers work currently in the game, because that's the exact reason why they stopped Meganobz from gaining a 1+ save from the Loot It strat. What you're basically saying is that you want it to have a baseline 2+ save while also reducing the AP of weapons that attack it by 1 to a minimum of 0.

The 6s=20s mentality of 8th ruined lords of war. If you have even a slight chance of hitting and wounding a Baneblade with a las pistol, due to your 6s=success mechanic, something is wrong with your wounding mechanic. I know it's not mathematically likely, but the fact that it's possible in a game dependent on RNG means t8 platforms need to fear Guardsmen squads with FRFSRF, which is stupid. Make Baneblades T(, give them a titanic keyword, and give them a self heal per turn ability due to the Adept who literally lives in the tank. 4+ to heal D3 wounds per turn. Also, drop their cost.

To be entirely fair, and getting back to the point of this post, I just wanted my friend to be able to play with his toy that he spent a lot of time on, and not feel butt hurt because the Zerker squad leveled it after 2 turns.

Also, raise the game to a D10 system. Long overdue.

I'd say bring back the old wounding style chart where weapons below a certain strength just can't hurt super heavies.

Also expand the Toughness chart, something like a Baneblade shouldn't just take more shells to kill than a Russ they shouldn't be killable with small arms. A Baneblade should probably be T10 With a 2+ save easily.

It is possible to expand this higher, to incorporate things like like T12 and those values and enhance the strength of of AT Weapons to increase the value of the numerous weapon systems. Make it so plasma isn't the go too weapon system for everything which its becoming. Thankfully Deathguard are neutering that particular trend, along with the Melta weaponry becoming the default AT gun.

Big units having the exact same rule interactions as small units creates the scaling problem that baneblade style units suffer from, they should be exceptions to the norm to accommodate their vast size not just treated like bigger leman russes. Things I would like to see would include:
1. Saving throws on 2D6 like 2nd ed terminators so that low AP weapons suffer against them
2. A new class of weapon that is bigger than "heavy", which either has splash damage - or is made intentionally weaker but allowed to fire at multiple targets (number of activations could be a damage chart stat)
3. Damage during movement by crushing models you move over

Insularum wrote:
Big units having the exact same rule interactions as small units creates the scaling problem that baneblade style units suffer from, they should be exceptions to the norm to accommodate their vast size not just treated like bigger leman russes. Things I would like to see would include:
1. Saving throws on 2D6 like 2nd ed terminators so that low AP weapons suffer against them
2. A new class of weapon that is bigger than "heavy", which either has splash damage - or is made intentionally weaker but allowed to fire at multiple targets (number of activations could be a damage chart stat)
3. Damage during movement by crushing models you move over

1. I like that idea! I never thought of expanding the dice like that. Thank you!
2. Like MACRO? Like Titan based weapons, which is literally what most bane blade variants are? I would love to see them get Macro, with all the associated rules that come with.
3. They already have 9 S8 AP4 D3 attacks, that's pretty "crush what gets near me". Not to mention the blast upgrades on the 5 twin heavy flamers. Thats 20d6 autohitting S5 AP1 D1.

I like the idea of "Mass reactive" armor being a T8 vehicle thing in 9th. If a weapon that does not contain an AP of 4 or better shoots this model, it's can only wound on a 6. That would cut out a lot of Bolter/Plasma nonsense, and anything less than a Lascannon or a Melta, which is how it should be.