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.

Most marine armies are going to run right at you to either assault your blobs, melta your heavies, drop pod behind you, or do something that is completely within 3 feet of a basilisk.

The problem with the bassie is the 3' radius is too far to make it truly reliable. It looses its affectiveness against vehicles too quickly unless you are facing another guard army, but the ig vs. ig games are already such a cluster-mess that they really are a different topic.

Look at what a 3' radius is on the table. Measure it out and look that after you account for the length of the barrel and the tank's chassis for being on the board, you quickly see that this is a most unacceptable bubble to really call a threat.

The bassie has its niche, but it is so hard to consistently see it in a game that it loses effectiveness because it is easily avoidable without doing too much harm to an overall plan, especially against a forward moving marine army (which is a lot of them, and the gun lines will put your artillery in shaken/stun/weapon destroyed mode quickly anyways even in the case of other vehicles, especially being open-topped, which the manticore is not, making the difference, really, only about 10 points for the weapon).

Just Dave wrote:

Ailaros wrote:

-Nazdreg- wrote:I want to see that...

Done.

Just a single manticore taking out a single squad of boyz in one shot, but you get the idea.

Yet the manticore did pretty much nothing the rest of the game, this was a relatively small sized squad of boys and most important of all anecdote =/= fact.

I'm not saying the Punisher is necessarily superior or the other way round, just adding some balance to an otherwise subjective statement of the manticore being superior.

And yet again I'm put in the unfortunate situation of having to agree and support Ailaros!

Everyone knows that anecdotal evidence is very far from a proven fact, but I have yet to see any Punisher defender provide even anecdotal evidence of why the tank isn't a complete waste of points, the best case I've read in its favour was: "its fun to roll that many dice"...

Ailaros wrote:

Terminus wrote:You forgot to add "when they are NOT over 36" away" to your list, which is actually pretty damn often.

True, but, as mentioned, the 36" blind spot doesn't cover even half the board when you tuck it away in a corner

And lets not forget that basilisks have the option of firing direct in order to ignore the minimum range. (only the collosus, griffon and deathstrike may not fire direct)

I also find it interesting that people decry the 36" minimum of the basilisk as a huge problem but the 24" minimum of the manticore is a non-issue.

-Nazdreg- wrote:Given that target saturation from vendettas and chimeras is there, yes. Of course.
But merci for the HS section if they are on their own. A Russ will soak almost every long range weaponry, AV12 can be shut down quite easily.
The contrary is, that russes generally do less damage.
But if you deny the punisher, you deny the use of Russes at all (because I don't see him in such a bad state, that he underclasses the other variants (except for the executioner, MAYBE)).

Wait wait wait, clarify this please. Are you saying the punisher is superior to the executioner?!?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Scott-S6 wrote:I also find it interesting that people decry the 36" minimum of the basilisk as a huge problem but the 24" minimum of the manticore is a non-issue.

To be fair, that 12" makes a huge difference. For example, I would love the demolisher if he had a 36" range gun, and maybe would even consider the punisher if it had the same.

I think the whole 36" problem has to do with the medusa. Once they close that gap theres no difference between medusas and bassies except one has more S and AP

PhantomViper wrote:but I have yet to see any Punisher defender provide even anecdotal evidence of why the tank isn't a complete waste of points, the best case I've read in its favour was: "its fun to roll that many dice"...

Done. Although I don't comment on it much, watch as the squads the Punisher has LoS to vanish.

The problem with 36" is when you can no longer fire indirectly, making it no different than the medusa, yes, while the manticore is still able to take out Sv4+ without a problem, and be able to hit barrage on those targets close by, with the potential to cause more wounds at the same time causing pinning with a possible higher output of damage. Also, being able to take on close range assault vehicles like baals, vindicators, or even LR being ordinance S10.

The combination of things the manticore can do is above all else any other artillery can do. On top of that, the thing looks more badass than all of them combined (maybe not the colossus, but you may as well be playing with a bombard with that kind of model lol).

DarkHound wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:but I have yet to see any Punisher defender provide even anecdotal evidence of why the tank isn't a complete waste of points, the best case I've read in its favour was: "its fun to roll that many dice"...

Done. Although I don't comment on it much, watch as the squads the Punisher has LoS to vanish.

The only thing that report shows is you rolling WAY above average to put 11 wounds out of 29 shots needing 4+ to hit and 4+ to wound and then showing of one of the biggest weaknesses of the tank when your opponent rolls average armour saves and only takes 2 casualties... Not exactly a stellar performance from a 215pts tank IMO.

With the way that those bikers where close to each other and without cover, an Executioner with sponsons could easilly get 2 and sometimes 3 bikes beneath the template, needing 2+ to wound and negating any type of save.

DarkHound wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:but I have yet to see any Punisher defender provide even anecdotal evidence of why the tank isn't a complete waste of points, the best case I've read in its favour was: "its fun to roll that many dice"...

Done. Although I don't comment on it much, watch as the squads the Punisher has LoS to vanish.

What exactly did it do? If I'm following correctly, at one point it killed 5 bikers, which would happen 2.15% of the time (did it have help?), and later it inflicted 11 wounds, which happens 0.39% ofthe time.

So this anecdotal piece of evidence proves the Punisher is awesome if you have crazy luck?

PhantomViper wrote:The only thing that report shows is you rolling WAY above average to put 11 wounds out of 29 shots needing 4+ to hit and 4+ to wound and then showing of one of the biggest weaknesses of the tank when your opponent rolls average armour saves and only takes 2 casualties... Not exactly a stellar performance from a 215pts tank IMO.

With the way that those bikers where close to each other and without cover, an Executioner with sponsons could easilly get 2 and sometimes 3 bikes beneath the template, needing 2+ to wound and negating any type of save.

As I said before, I don't give the play by play for the Punisher in the game, and only mention when it puts on those fantastic 11 wounds. If I remember correctly, the Punisher kills 3 or 4 of the purple based bikes, all the orange based ones and 4 or 5 of the black bases over the course of the game, not to mention numerous wounds on ABs. The Punisher with sponsons is only 200 points, so 10 Bikers at 25 points a model is not a bad haul.

Now, I had an Executioner in the same game. Getting 2 or 3 models under the template is cool and all, but half your shots will scatter and half again will get saved by cover. Worse if he's turbo-boosted. Say with 5 templates you get 6 hits (2 models per template, half of them scatter off and maybe 1 gets a favorable scatter). You'll lose a wound, leaving you with 5. Then half of that is gone to cover, so you get lucky and cause 3 wounds. That isn't much better a performance than the Punisher, but you don't cause enough wounds to force allocation like the Punisher. You kill slightly more with the Executioner, but the Punisher can pull more than Joes off a squad. (Unless you're shooting at something less than T5, in which case the Punisher does better.)

Terminus wrote:What exactly did it do? If I'm following correctly, at one point it killed 5 bikers, which would happen 2.15% of the time (did it have help?), and later it inflicted 11 wounds, which happens 0.39% ofthe time.

So this anecdotal piece of evidence proves the Punisher is awesome if you have crazy luck

And Ailaros' anecdotal evidence shows his Manticore having some great luck for a single turn. Like Ailaros, I don't pretend to think anecdotal evidence changes the math, but PhantomViper wanted anecdotal evidence that supported the Punisher.

Actually Ailaros was using an equally-flawed anecdote to support his assertions, but math has never been his strong-suit.

Anyway, you are woefully underestimating the Executioner. 6 hits for 5 templates, especially with that juicy cluster he presented you with? Come on...

If you're talking about that cluster on turn 2, the Executioner was out of range. If it had been in range, you'd have seen no cluster and they all would have turbo-boosted. The Punisher still would have stomped face, and the Executioner still would have floundered.

Stop loading your dice, and then we'll talk.

DarkHound wrote:If you're talking about that cluster on turn 2, the Executioner was out of range. If it had been in range, you'd have seen no cluster and they all would have turbo-boosted. The Punisher still would have stomped face, and the Executioner still would have floundered.

How can the Executioner be out of range? It has an effective range of 42", wheren't you playing on a 4' table?

And if your opponent is so "placement minded" why didn't he spread up and TB anyway? Wasn't he affraid of the Colossus?

Your report is way too vague about the performance of your various tanks and artillery pieces to take away any conclusion (and after a more detailed reading I disagree with ALOT of your placement, movement and target selection choices), especially 5 months after the actual game was played and like I've said before the only thing that you actually say the Punisher kills is 2 bikes. If the Punisher performed so admirably during the actual battle then why don't you say it in the report?

That "Battle Report" exemplifies all the reasons why I don't play in Vassal, you can't compare it with playing in a real table, you and your opponent could have played a game of Dawn of War that the comparable result to a real game of 40k would have been about the same.

PhantomViper wrote:How can the Executioner be out of range? It has an effective range of 42", wheren't you playing on a 4' table?

And if your opponent is so "placement minded" why didn't he spread up and TB anyway? Wasn't he affraid of the Colossus?

Sure there were clusters, but I didn't think the Executioner wasn't in range to hit the cluster of 4, and hitting the closer squads would be a waste. The Punisher had those covered. I suppose he was afraid of the Colossi, but if he could draw their fire for 2 turns, they wouldn't be able to kill the black based squad holding 2 objectives before the end of the game.

Your report is way too vague about the performance of your various tanks and artillery pieces to take away any conclusion (and after a more detailed reading I disagree with ALOT of your placement, movement and target selection choices), especially 5 months after the actual game was played

When I write, I focus on the 'why' instead of the 'how.' You can see the 'how' in the pictures. What would you have changed and why?

and like I've said before the only thing that you actually say the Punisher kills is 2 bikes. If the Punisher performed so admirably during the actual battle then why don't you say it in the report?

DarkHound, in his conclusion, wrote:The Punisher was a monster though, followed by the Vanquisher and the two Battle Tanks while the Executioner didn't really earn its keep.

PhantomViper wrote:That "Battle Report" exemplifies all the reasons why I don't play in Vassal, you can't compare it with playing in a real table, you and your opponent could have played a game of Dawn of War that the comparable result to a real game of 40k would have been about the same.

What? Why?

DarkHound wrote:

PhantomViper wrote:How can the Executioner be out of range? It has an effective range of 42", wheren't you playing on a 4' table?

And if your opponent is so "placement minded" why didn't he spread up and TB anyway? Wasn't he affraid of the Colossus?

Sure there were clusters, but I didn't think the Executioner wasn't in range to hit the cluster of 4, and hitting the closer squads would be a waste. The Punisher had those covered. I suppose he was afraid of the Colossi, but if he could draw their fire for 2 turns, they wouldn't be able to kill the black based squad holding 2 objectives before the end of the game.

This is one of the things that I would have changed, you have the Executioner targeting the least favourable unit for it, that black based squad HAD to be spread out so that it could cover both objectives, the Punisher should have traded spots with the Executioner because it doesn't care about placement, allowing the Executioner to hit the clustered up targets.

Sorry but despite what you say, I can't find any evidence whatsoever from the pictures that your opponent paid any attention to squad deployment when facing templates, appart from that single squad, everything else is clumped up, your Collossus and even your normal LR should have performed allot better than the Punisher in that type of situation.

The other thing that I disagree with is your movement and placement, you have your 72" LR placed waaay up front and your lower ranged Executioner and Punisher at the back, this doesn't make any sense... Also, why move forward so early in the game against an opponent that is so short ranged? There was no need to start moving before the third turn.

DarkHound wrote:

Your report is way too vague about the performance of your various tanks and artillery pieces to take away any conclusion (and after a more detailed reading I disagree with ALOT of your placement, movement and target selection choices), especially 5 months after the actual game was played

When I write, I focus on the 'why' instead of the 'how.' You can see the 'how' in the pictures. What would you have changed and why?

I really can't see the how in the pictures, I can see what dies, but I can't see why those things died, what fired at what target, what was the scatter, what did you roll and what did your opponent rolled, etc... Might be because I suck at understanding Vassal images but I really can't get that information from your report.

DarkHound wrote:

and like I've said before the only thing that you actually say the Punisher kills is 2 bikes. If the Punisher performed so admirably during the actual battle then why don't you say it in the report?

DarkHound, in his conclusion, wrote:The Punisher was a monster though, followed by the Vanquisher and the two Battle Tanks while the Executioner didn't really earn its keep.

But you don't say or even better, don't demonstrate during the BR WHY he was a monster. In such a target rich and devoid of cover environment I find it really hard to believe that the 2 tanks less suited at killing marine bikes (because they have low strength and low AP in the case of the Punisher and very low volume of fire, low strength and low AP in the case of the Vanquisher), are precisely the tanks that performed better for you...

Here's a question:

The rule book says that ordnance barrage weapons must remain stationary, so the Colossus and the Griffon are going to stay put if you want the to fire. That means you can move your Medusa or Basilisk and fire directly right?

Also: Is it required to have crew on your artillery?

Yes to your first question, no to your second.

Wait wait wait, clarify this please. Are you saying the punisher is superior to the executioner?!?

I said, that the executioner will be the only LR variant I consider superior to the punisher. But this highly depends on the enemy's actions. if the enemy spaces properly, so that you get 1 model per small blast marker, you wont have fun with the executioner. How about... 2 kills with 5 small blast hits? (assuming cover)^^

The main strength of the punisher is, that the enemy can do absolutely nothing to save MEQs from his fury. Going to ground? Useless, armour is as good as the improved cover. Spacing? Useless, there are no blast weapons. One model in sight and casualties cant be denied. And again, a pair of punishers reliably kills a combat squad a turn, and the opponent can do nothing about it.

But still the executioner is important against deepstriking terminators or just to force the opponent to space his models.

400 points to kill a combat squad? Wow, super awesome.

It isn't 400 points and furthermore it will kill a 10 man squad per turn, it even stands a very good chance of taking a terminator squad out per turn.

A Punisher with Heavy Bolter Sponsons comes out to 200 pts exactly, so 2 will come to 400
That will cause 6.44 dead marines a turn. At 24". Not moving.
Without the Sponsons, you save 40 points, and cause about 5.12 wounds.

Against Marines, to match those results, a regular Leman Russ needs 7.73 Marines under its Large Blast. Not quite that likely, but that's 1 regular Leman, and not even counting the Heavy Bolters which account for 1/3 of the punisher's output (Which the regular Leman Russ can get as well).
150 Points of tank here has a quite good chance to beat 400 Points of Punishers.

Combat squad of Marines is about 90 points. At 24" range, you have maybe 2 turns of shooting before someone sticks a meltagun/many krack grenades up the leman's tailpipe. 200 points of marines traded for 400 points of weak tanks.

I.e. Punisher sucks.

Eh I think it can do well with Pask as a MC hunter. It can put a pretty slowed number of wounds on them.

Still, its pretty darn expensive. I'd like to try it out though.

odorofdeath wrote:Eh I think it can do well with Pask as a MC hunter. It can put a pretty slowed number of wounds on them.

Still, its pretty darn expensive. I'd like to try it out though.

I'd also recommend trying the same thing with a standard Russ. i bet it works better.

Terminus wrote:I.e. Punisher sucks.

Compared to what? 360 points that can kill 5 MEQs (one of which will be a special, heavy weapon, or sergeant) spaced out and in cover.

alarmingrick wrote:

odorofdeath wrote:Eh I think it can do well with Pask as a MC hunter. It can put a pretty slowed number of wounds on them.

Still, its pretty darn expensive. I'd like to try it out though.

I'd also recommend trying the same thing with a standard Russ. i bet it works better.

A LRBT can only inflict a single wound per turn with its cannon, which can be negated by cover. The Paskisher outperforms it with 2.59 wounds (vs T6 3+) to the LRBT's .33 wounds, after scatter and cover.

DarkHound wrote:

Terminus wrote:I.e. Punisher sucks.

Compared to what? 360 points that can kill 5 MEQs (one of which will be a special, heavy weapon, or sergeant) spaced out and in cover.

alarmingrick wrote:

odorofdeath wrote:Eh I think it can do well with Pask as a MC hunter. It can put a pretty slowed number of wounds on them.

Still, its pretty darn expensive. I'd like to try it out though.

I'd also recommend trying the same thing with a standard Russ. i bet it works better.

A LRBT can only inflict a single wound per turn with its cannon, which can be negated by cover. The Paskisher outperforms it with 2.59 wounds (vs T6 3+) to the LRBT's .33 wounds, after scatter and cover.

your not counting sponson/hull weapons are you?

DarkHound wrote:

Terminus wrote:I.e. Punisher sucks.

Compared to what? 360 points that can kill 5 MEQs (one of which will be a special, heavy weapon, or sergeant) spaced out and in cover.

Well, they can't be fully spaced out AND in cover. Who fields 5-man squads except razorspam armies? In which case they are often clumped up after they fall out of their transport. 5 space marines clumped up and in cover are not a serious threat anyway, unless we're talking longfangs, in which case they are well-taken care of by artillery or a special weapons squad with demo charges, or any number of things available to the IG.

The Punisher sucks because you pay 30 points more for the gun. It should be 150 points like the Russ and Exterminator (and really the exterminator should be cheaper).

Yes, I agree that its a bit overpriced. Even if the Punisher cannon was only AP 5 it would be passable. AP - basically eliminates any chance of transport busting.

Alarmingrick: can you please explain that statement? I don't see how a single large blast, sponsons and a Hull weapon can out-perform a similarly equipped Punisher.

alarmingrick wrote:your not counting sponson/hull weapons are you?

Since both vehicles have access to them at the same prices, it would inflate their scores at the same rate. The only point of difference is in the main gun.

Terminus wrote:Well, they can't be fully spaced out AND in cover. Who fields 5-man squads except razorspam armies? In which case they are often clumped up after they fall out of their transport. 5 space marines clumped up and in cover are not a serious threat anyway, unless we're talking longfangs, in which case they are well-taken care of by artillery or a special weapons squad with demo charges, or any number of things available to the IG.

The Punisher sucks because you pay 30 points more for the gun. It should be 150 points like the Russ and Exterminator (and really the exterminator should be cheaper).

A 10 man squad of Marines can be spaced such than a small blast template can't hit more than a single model and still gain cover. Not all the models have to be in the cover, just over 50% of them and the entire unit gets cover. They can very easily be spaced out and in cover.

Who cares about 5 man squads? 360 points can open up on a 180-200 point squad (10 man Tac with upgrades) and kill it reliably in 2 turns regardless of cover, spacing and with only a single model in LoS or range. During the enemy's turn between finishing off the squad you've got AV14/13/11 to protect yourself.

What else competes? Artillery: the Manticore is prime contender I suppose, so we'll start there. 2 Manticores fire an average of 4 templates a turn. If you're getting LoS to a model, you can still subtract your BS despite firing indirectly so their accuracy is still 50%. You can usually get 3 models under a single template, but say there's a favorable scatter in there. (3x4)/2 and I'll give you 1 for grins and giggles and you've got 7 hits. You'll drop 1.19 on your roll to wound, leaving you with 5.81 wounds (and you can't cause allocation because they're firing separately). After the armor saves, your two Manticores kill 1.92 Marines, which are guaranteed to be joes. You kill half as many Marines a turn, and you're worse off against Terminators and GEQs.

3 Basilisks? 5 hits, 4.15 wounds, 2.07 kills. Even if they don't get cover, the Punishers beat them. Three Colossi gets 4.15 wounds to the Punisher's 5, and cost 60 points more.

Special weapons squads? Demo-charges? How do you intend to get one into range?

You know what I'm dieing to compare it to? Two Executioners with sponsons. Say you're lucky and can get 2 models under the template. That's 10 templates, times two then divided by two, means you've got 10 hits. You'll lose nearly two to wound (8.3 left), then cover comes in and you kill 4.15 while costing 440 points to the Punisher's 360.

Are you going to argue range? What deployment puts you more than 30" away from the enemy? Dawn of War, and that pretty much hamstrings all the contenders.

Nothing competes with the Punisher pound for pound against infantry, except its weight in Guardsmen (which are the most cost effective infantry killers in game, I might add).