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.

Hello everyone.

After several games of 6th Edition, it has come to my attention that the Leman Russ no longer requires any upgrades at all (save for, perhaps, Skilled Driver/Dozer Blade). It's armor is sufficient to ensure that it is rarely stunned or shaken (without being destroyed very soon after) and its main gun (as well as the Demolisher's) precludes any weapon upgrades.

This is a joy to me, as the newfound toughness of the Leman Russ chassis combined with the heavy base firepower for relatively few points means that I can run a 10-tank, fluffy armored company with 6x LRBTs, 1x Vanquisher command tank, and 3x Demolisher siege tanks (though in my company one is a Thunderer).

This does leave me with a dilemma, though, which I have gone through several iterations to solve. The removed upgrades release about 350-450 points (depending on what I leave in) in my 2000 point list, which can be used for everything from Allies to Armored Fist squads to different support options.

I have tried:
2x Basilisk, 1x Vendetta
1x Basilisk, 10 Stormtroopers w/ various upgrades
2x Basilisk, 5 Stormtroopers w/ various upgrades
1x Basilisk, 1x Vendetta, Stormtroopers w/ stuff
2x Techpriest w/ Servitors, 2x Basilisk

I am considering:
Allied Space Marines or Chaos for the MotF / Warpsmith repair (this is expensive for not much benefit).
Armored Fist squads for the scoring (but can only fit ~2 in the Troops slots).
Allied Imperial Guard (for the scoring, and cheaper troops because the Chimera is not mandatory).

Any other ideas? Which is best and why?

1) How are you winning objective games with that many points spent on non-scoring units, and no good troops without taking allies? Are you just going to table your opponent every game?

2) Slick Loader is mandatory on every ordnance tank, and even more mandatory now that you aren't tempted to take secondary weapons on them. And every non-ordnance tank should have Ace Gunner. Those two upgrades are the reason you take an Armored Battlegroup list in the first place.

1) I don't really play to win. I like tanks, so I run a tank list.

2) Slick loader isn't mandatory at all, because it's 20 points per tank. That's 200 points of shots, which I deem is not as much help as the saturation and associated durability increase from simply another Leman Russ for those points, though if I have basilisks they always have it. And Ace Gunner is my go-to upgrade if I have points left, so yes. I still don't consider it mandatory - the Leman Russ is quite a formidable tank without it.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) I don't really play to win. I like tanks, so I run a tank list.

There's a difference between "not playing to win" and "playing a list that's guaranteed to lose". I really don't see why you'd even bother playing when it's going to be a completely one-sided game, why not just paint all the pretty tank models and not waste your opponent's time?

2) Slick loader isn't mandatory at all, because it's 20 points per tank. That's 200 points of shots, which I deem is not as much help as the saturation and associated durability increase from simply another Leman Russ for those points, though if I have basilisks they always have it. And Ace Gunner is my go-to upgrade if I have points left, so yes. I still don't consider it mandatory - the Leman Russ is quite a formidable tank without it.

Of course it's mandatory. It doubles your firepower for a 13% increase in points. That's a massive increase in total firepower compared to buying an extra Leman Russ, and one that every other army would kill to have.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) I don't really play to win. I like tanks, so I run a tank list.

There's a difference between "not playing to win" and "playing a list that's guaranteed to lose". I really don't see why you'd even bother playing when it's going to be a completely one-sided game, why not just paint all the pretty tank models and not waste your opponent's time?

2) Slick loader isn't mandatory at all, because it's 20 points per tank. That's 200 points of shots, which I deem is not as much help as the saturation and associated durability increase from simply another Leman Russ for those points, though if I have basilisks they always have it. And Ace Gunner is my go-to upgrade if I have points left, so yes. I still don't consider it mandatory - the Leman Russ is quite a formidable tank without it.

Of course it's mandatory. It doubles your firepower for a 13% increase in points. That's a massive increase in total firepower compared to buying an extra Leman Russ, and one that every other army would kill to have.

1) It isn't guaranteed to lose; most of the time I usually have enough firepower to shred the opponent's troops - just as an example, the last game I lost was because a single Noise Marine was on the table (out of all the troops the opponent brought) and he passed four 5+ cover saves in a row.

2) It seems good on paper, but every time I've used it I've just found it to be one miss after another. Bad dice I guess?

EDIT: I'll go ahead and add it in, but I still have the left over ~200 points to spend

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) It isn't guaranteed to lose; most of the time I usually have enough firepower to shred the opponent's troops - just as an example, the last game I lost was because a single Noise Marine was on the table (out of all the troops the opponent brought) and he passed four 5+ cover saves in a row.

You have zero scoring units and zero denial units. The best you can manage is a draw unless you table your opponent (which is usually a one-sided game and not much fun), and if you fail to kill even a single model on an objective (which is a very easy failure) you lose the game. That's a horrible strategy, and goes beyond "not focusing on winning above all else" into "denying your opponent a fair game by bringing a list that's designed to lose".

2) It seems good on paper, but every time I've used it I've just found it to be one miss after another. Bad dice I guess?

Yes, bad dice. Slick Loader is easily the best upgrade in the entire game, and it would be game breaking if the rest of the list wasn't so weak.

EDIT: I'll go ahead and add it in, but I still have the left over ~200 points to spend

Slick Loader x10. And then trade some of those tanks for scoring units.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
1) It isn't guaranteed to lose; most of the time I usually have enough firepower to shred the opponent's troops - just as an example, the last game I lost was because a single Noise Marine was on the table (out of all the troops the opponent brought) and he passed four 5+ cover saves in a row.

You have zero scoring units and zero denial units. The best you can manage is a draw unless you table your opponent (which is usually a one-sided game and not much fun), and if you fail to kill even a single model on an objective (which is a very easy failure) you lose the game. That's a horrible strategy, and goes beyond "not focusing on winning above all else" into "denying your opponent a fair game by bringing a list that's designed to lose".

2) It seems good on paper, but every time I've used it I've just found it to be one miss after another. Bad dice I guess?

Yes, bad dice. Slick Loader is easily the best upgrade in the entire game, and it would be game breaking if the rest of the list wasn't so weak.

EDIT: I'll go ahead and add it in, but I still have the left over ~200 points to spend

Slick Loader x10. And then trade some of those tanks for scoring units.

My opponents and I enjoy it. I suppose you have a different definition of fun than us at my local FLGS. We don't consider it "denying my opponent a fair game by bringing a list that's designed to lose" because we put about as much importance to winning and losing as we do to farting. We have fun with it; I suppose others won't? Haven't met them yet.

I refuse to trade out any tanks. 10 tanks is the universal Imperial Guard standard for an armored company. We are not under-strength, so 10 tanks it will be.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My opponents and I enjoy it. I suppose you have a different definition of fun than us at my local FLGS. We don't consider it "denying my opponent a fair game by bringing a list that's designed to lose" because we put about as much importance to winning and losing as we do to farting. We have fun with it; I suppose others won't? Haven't met them yet.

How exactly is it "fun" to completely ignore the objectives of the game and not even bother playing? Without objectives an Armored Battlegroup list is about the least fun army I can imagine, you just line up all of your tanks and roll your shooting, and then the game ends and you either draw or lose depending on how good your opponent was at rolling cover saves for their troops. There's no strategy or thinking involved, you might as well just make a pretty diorama on your display shelf and push the models around while making gun noises.

I refuse to trade out any tanks. 10 tanks is the universal Imperial Guard standard for an armored company. We are not under-strength, so 10 tanks it will be.

Sigh. Have it your way. You obviously aren't looking for advice on tactics, so why bother posting a thread in the tactics section? Just take your 10 tanks and whatever extra models you feel fit the "fluff" of your army and continue to not care about winning. It's what you're going to do anyway no matter what anyone says.


(PS: a 40k game is not a pure and entire company. Some of your company's units are elsewhere, some units from other regiments have joined you, etc. You can decide to never play smaller games where you can't bring your entire fluff army, but that's a pretty bad lack of imagination.)

 Peregrine wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My opponents and I enjoy it. I suppose you have a different definition of fun than us at my local FLGS. We don't consider it "denying my opponent a fair game by bringing a list that's designed to lose" because we put about as much importance to winning and losing as we do to farting. We have fun with it; I suppose others won't? Haven't met them yet.

How exactly is it "fun" to completely ignore the objectives of the game and not even bother playing? Without objectives an Armored Battlegroup list is about the least fun army I can imagine, you just line up all of your tanks and roll your shooting, and then the game ends and you either draw or lose depending on how good your opponent was at rolling cover saves for their troops. There's no strategy or thinking involved, you might as well just make a pretty diorama on your display shelf and push the models around while making gun noises.

I refuse to trade out any tanks. 10 tanks is the universal Imperial Guard standard for an armored company. We are not under-strength, so 10 tanks it will be.

Sigh. Have it your way. You obviously aren't looking for advice on tactics, so why bother posting a thread in the tactics section? Just take your 10 tanks and whatever extra models you feel fit the "fluff" of your army and continue to not care about winning. It's what you're going to do anyway no matter what anyone says.


(PS: a 40k game is not a pure and entire company. Some of your company's units are elsewhere, some units from other regiments have joined you, etc. You can decide to never play smaller games where you can't bring your entire fluff army, but that's a pretty bad lack of imagination.)

We don't ignore the objectives, in fact, some of our toughest engagements are over objectives (sometimes me using a squadron of vehicles to manhandle enemy models away from it, for example). And I'm sorry your imagination for commanding a company of armor in battle doesn't extend beyond "line up on the ridge and shoot" but some of us at least try to be creative with our armor - including maneuvering to bring guns to bear on enemy targets while evading (or bullying) enemy AT assets, or pushing the Demolishers up the flank because its where most of the objectives are and protecting them from enemy CQB troops. Just as a pair of examples.

And I posted in the Tactics Section, if you read my OP, to find out what others thought would be best to spend on the remaining points of my list, because I honestly am at a loss. I think that is a perfectly reasonable question.

And you're right, and I do play smaller games, when I bring smaller forces, such as a Squadron of LRBTs and two platoons of Armored Fist. But that isn't what this thread is about.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
We don't ignore the objectives, in fact, some of our toughest engagements are over objectives (sometimes me using a squadron of vehicles to manhandle enemy models away from it, for example).

Except you DO ignore objectives. You have no scoring units and no denial units, which means nothing that can even attempt to interact with the objectives. All you can do is line up your tanks and shoot and hope that at the end of it your opponent's scoring units are dead and you can get a draw. Your chances of winning have nothing to do with your own actions or choices, and are almost entirely based on pure luck of the dice.

And I'm sorry your imagination for commanding a company of armor in battle doesn't extend beyond "line up on the ridge and shoot" but some of us at least try to be creative with our armor - including maneuvering to bring guns to bear on enemy targets while evading (or bullying) enemy AT assets, or pushing the Demolishers up the flank because its where most of the objectives are and protecting them from enemy CQB troops. Just as a pair of examples.

Why do you need to maneuver when you have guns that can shoot the entire length of the table? And how do you evade enemy anti-tank when none of your vehicles can move more than 6" per turn, which is much slower than any viable anti-tank unit except for the ones that can just shoot you from across the table no matter where you go?

And no, "move the LR Demolishers forward so they're in range" isn't a very complex tactic. It's just one step above "don't forget to have a shooting phase" in complexity, and only barely.

And I posted in the Tactics Section, if you read my OP, to find out what others thought would be best to spend on the remaining points of my list, because I honestly am at a loss. I think that is a perfectly reasonable question.

Except you've made it clear that you have already made your decision and you're not going to listen to any advice about how to improve your list. Why bother asking for help if you don't want it?

And you're right, and I do play smaller games, when I bring smaller forces, such as a Squadron of LRBTs and two platoons of Armored Fist. But that isn't what this thread is about.

So, if you're willing to play games where you can't bring an entire 10-tank company, why do you insist that it's impossible to take less than the full 10 tanks?

 Peregrine wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
We don't ignore the objectives, in fact, some of our toughest engagements are over objectives (sometimes me using a squadron of vehicles to manhandle enemy models away from it, for example).

Except you DO ignore objectives. You have no scoring units and no denial units, which means nothing that can even attempt to interact with the objectives. All you can do is line up your tanks and shoot and hope that at the end of it your opponent's scoring units are dead and you can get a draw. Your chances of winning have nothing to do with your own actions or choices, and are almost entirely based on pure luck of the dice.

And I'm sorry your imagination for commanding a company of armor in battle doesn't extend beyond "line up on the ridge and shoot" but some of us at least try to be creative with our armor - including maneuvering to bring guns to bear on enemy targets while evading (or bullying) enemy AT assets, or pushing the Demolishers up the flank because its where most of the objectives are and protecting them from enemy CQB troops. Just as a pair of examples.

Why do you need to maneuver when you have guns that can shoot the entire length of the table? And how do you evade enemy anti-tank when none of your vehicles can move more than 6" per turn, which is much slower than any viable anti-tank unit except for the ones that can just shoot you from across the table no matter where you go?

And no, "move the LR Demolishers forward so they're in range" isn't a very complex tactic. It's just one step above "don't forget to have a shooting phase" in complexity, and only barely.

And I posted in the Tactics Section, if you read my OP, to find out what others thought would be best to spend on the remaining points of my list, because I honestly am at a loss. I think that is a perfectly reasonable question.

Except you've made it clear that you have already made your decision and you're not going to listen to any advice about how to improve your list. Why bother asking for help if you don't want it?

And you're right, and I do play smaller games, when I bring smaller forces, such as a Squadron of LRBTs and two platoons of Armored Fist. But that isn't what this thread is about.

So, if you're willing to play games where you can't bring an entire 10-tank company, why do you insist that it's impossible to take less than the full 10 tanks?

If you think you cannot possibly do anything at all in an objective game without being required to take certain units, then I'm sorry. But tanks take up space on the table, and they can't score from too far away (just as an example).

Because we use lots of LOS blocking terrain, and also to deny cover saves. You evade it by maneuvering behind cover, or hopping from cover to cover. And the Leman Russ can't always afford to get in a long range duel with enemy AT assets when it should be engaging targets on the objectives.

It is a more complex tactic than the one you proposed - line up and shoot. And it was merely an example.

And I've made my decision about the first 1600 points or so. I will happily listen to recommendations for the next 400. I already have, in fact, with the addition of Slick Loaders.

Because if I am playing 2000 points, then I can take my 10 tanks and I will. If I'm playing 1500, then it is a fact of life that I can't, so I have to be a Mechanized company instead.

Well if you've got spare points, I'd get something that could score OP. Either an allied platoon to hold an objective and a PCS riding in a flyer to cap others or an armored fist platoon which would be fluffy as well. That, or you can take some tried and true mech vets and just hide them behind the wall of demolishers.

I know this will sound like heresy, but you probably dont need any more tanks at this point in your list.

First, it is very possible to win games with this list. Tricky but possible and it is very suited to winning both Purge and Big Guns. All the secondary objectives can be handled by tanks and artillery. To win he is going to need really good target selection skill and bit more luck than other lists.

Have not seen an Armored Company in a while, are you using an IA list? The list so far looks like fun for playing Spearheads. I was just thinking Penal squads would be very grim dark fluffy in a Stalinesque way.

Or conscripts.

First all please stop beefing with the other guy, kinda silly.

If you are looking for allied scoring units... Orks always do fine. You will have the HQ & the boyz to score. Take a mek and give him some interesting weapon, and see how many boyz you can fill in. I would not upgrade the nobz beyond bosspole. Maybe even consider not taking a nob if you gonna put HQ with the group to safe points if you want just one group.

I will advocate standard IG allies. Taking a commissar tank is all kinds of awesome with a blob of cheap guardsmen on the field.

Take IG... this list + large masses of units is incredibly effective and fluffy - lets just say that it makes sure your opponent cant win just cuz of spamming AT (which is very possible, ie BA take sternguard in pod w/ meltas RAS w/ meltas attack bikes w/ meltas... you die).

Those are all wonderful ideas.

I'm having a dilemma between a large Blob squad all on foot, or mechvets, or an Armored Fist platoon.

I think the large Blob-squad is the most bang for the buck, as mechanized infantry are just adding more tanks (as one person so eloquently put it).

How does:
1x CCS w/stuff (what upgrades? I don't need the normal Lascannon, as I think my list has plenty of high-strength weaponry) <= 70 points

1x PCS w/ nothing really (just an orders machine)
2x Infantry Squad w/ 2x autocannon / heavy bolter

I could always drop some of the Slick Loaders to get more (because 400 or so points of blob guard would be awesome); perhaps even enough for a second IG allied troop.

I haven't considered Orks (because I don't own the 'dex).

Yes, I am using the Imperial Armored Battlegroup out of IA1, with the 5th Edition update

I'd still say guard, as much infantry as possible. Why? You don't need special weapons, because you can cover that with your tanks. Melta withstanding. Throw bodies at the objectives after your tanks have mushed most of their army to be sure of at least contesting, if not holding them. Or use them as assault denial meatshields. Bring in an allied Hydra for anti air.

Instead of getting a second troops choice thing just get a lot of squads within the one... like for 400 I would do:

CCS - Vox, Flamer x2 - 65

PCS - Vox, flamer x2 - 45
IS - flamer - 55
IS - flamer - 55
IS - melta - 60
IS - melta - 60
IS - melta - 60

Or something... That gives you 60 models, 55 are scoring. It gives a lot of kill points though :/ meh.

Thats awesome, I am currently working on building an armored battle group myself but as I am unsure of how you build one I am haulted before I get more tanks. And I would probablly go with the foot guard and get a bunch of boots on the ground to cover your tanks from assault. I also would say this list has a bit more tactics and strategy than most lists. Mainly because it has little scoring you will have to manouver the tanks so you can advance on your opponent or get good firing lanes on objectives to blast your opponent off of them. Not to mention if advancing up you need to avoid choke points and areas the enemy has an advantage in ambushing your tanks and hitting side or rear armor. If you have a guard player that knows what hes doing then this list could be very scary against an opponent. drop pod lists will scare this army a bit as you will surely lose some tanks and it will scatter the rest as they try to avoid and blast the troops that just came in, which would be an advantage to taking all the foot slodging guardsmen.

Is it possible if you could private message me with how you build one and what are the requirements for it?

First of all, to the OP props for sticking to your guns (battle cannons?), if you want 10 tanks then by all means use 10 tanks...it's your army, and you obviously like how it plays so stick with it. I would, however argue that the goal of war is to win, so taking scoring units with your leftover points is a good idea, even if it's just a couple squads of guardsmen (though in a big guns match you don't need to worry about it).
One idea might be to take armoured fist squads and keep them way back and hidden until turn 4, then rush them forward to claim objectives at the end cause that's the only time that holding them matters. 12"+6" flat out a turn=36" by game's end (or 24" if you want to disembark) means you can rush in late game after your tanks have already wiped the board.

I can always take a pair of Armored Fist squads as troops.

Very interesting list. You must get first blood alot.

Chaos space marines: Typhus/Plague Zombies mix fairly well with armored company. The zombies are fantastically cheap and can come in big squads... You will however be a heretic. As I remember allies of convenience score.

What sort of upgrades do you run? Curious as I have the tanks but have never run an armored company.

I usually don't run any upgrades.

As demonstrated in this thread, I recently started running Slick Loader but it gets expensive.

I would take a basic platoon and get conscripts with sitnw.

Why ? Because like that I always have something to score with, seeing as the OP is a treadhead, and is damn right in saying that more tanks is better than less tanks.

What more ? I could be fluffy. The Tanks advance, blasting there way across the field, as the weak cowardly infantry dies in droves trying to capture meaningless objectives.
Classic IG tank commander view right there.

Mayfist, I tried that but it's just too expensive, even just arming everyone with Lasguns.