Which is the most versatile LRBT version?

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.

**Hedkrakka**

Ailaros wrote:
The punisher cannon is not just good against light infantry.

It's better than a battlecannon against MEq, and it's better than almost everything against terminators and it's also better than any russ variant against monstrous creatures.

And, as mentioned, it can be good against vehicles.

The punisher is only versatile if you ignore the fact that, kitted properly, it can handle more targets better than any other russ.

Arguing that something is crappy by carte blanche ignoring huge swaths of its effective abilities makes for a pretty weak viewpoint.

Seriously, how many hits are you assuming per Battlecannon shot?

vs. MEQ (cover saves scale linearly, so no need to consider them)
BC - assume average 4 hits, 3.33 wounds, 3.33 unsaved wounds
or assume 3 hits, 2.5 wounds, 2.5 unsaved wounds
PGC- 10 hits, 6.67 wounds, 2.22 unsaved wounds

Never mind that the BC gets at least one extra shot due to the range difference, and the differences in cost. Don't start whimpering about sponsons again, comparing a 200+-point vehicle to a 150-point vehicle is pointless.

"It can be good against vehicles" is plain ridiculous, I'm not taking that one seriously. Anything is good against AV10, and your precious Punisher can't take down anything else.

Oh, and I'm also sure it's much better than everything against Termies and MCs. Better than an Executioner, for example (which would have been contending for most versatile were it not for its high cost). Laughed and ignored.

What does "kitted properly" mean? From your earlier posts, I believe that would be MM sponsons and a hull LC. Colossal waste of points to get a weapon that can hurt something, a weapon that can hurt something else, and a weapon that can't hurt anything, and the tank is still very short ranged and cumbersome, and thus inflexible.

Going with your definition:
-a Valkyrie w/MRP is more versatile than a Vendetta,
-it's a good idea to throw pintle mounted weapons and/or HB sponsons on a Vanquisher,
-a CCS with PF, one melta, one plasma, one flamer and one sniper is versatile (hey, technically it can hurt anything!).
I don't think I need to say more.

**ChocolateGork**

The punisher MIGHT be able to hurt anything but if you do the math its incredibly unlikely and it has a tiny range

**Ailaros**

All right people, you want me to list them all out for you? Let's assume that both tanks have hull lascannons and sponson multimeltas.

Punisher vs. Exterminator

AV10: punisher
AV11: exterminator
AV12: exterminator
AV13: equal
AV14: equal
T4Sv6: punisher
T4Sv6 in cover: punisher
T3Sv5: punisher
T3Sv5 in cover: punisher
T3Sv5 w/aegis: punisher
T4Sv3: punisher
T4Sv3 in cover: punisher
T4Sv3 w/aegis: punisher
T4Sv2: punisher
T6Sv2: punisher
T6Sv3: punisher

Look at that again. The punisher is better than the exterminator at almost everything. It is more versatile. End of. I'd also note that the only time that the exterminator is much better is against AV12 - a target type that the exterminator isn't that effective against.

Now, let's try that again against the LRBT:

AV10: punisher
AV11: punisher
AV12: LRBT
AV13: LRBT
AV14: equal (because you're going to be using sponsons)
T4Sv6: punisher
T4Sv6 in cover: punisher
T3Sv5: punisher
T3Sv5 in cover: punisher
T3Sv5 w/aegis: punisher
T4Sv3: LRBT
T4Sv3 in cover: punisher
T4Sv3 w/aegis: punisher
T4Sv2: punisher
T6Sv2: punisher
T6Sv3: punisher

Once again, the punisher walks away with it.

What's more important here, even, is that it's not just more versatile than one tank, it's more versatile than ALL tanks, which is a much harder feat to accomplish.

The punisher can handle more things than any other tank. It is more versatile. A properly equipped punisher can handle many things well. You have to ignore the math to come to a different conclusion.

**alarmingrick**

But I'm not equipping EITHER of the tanks with a hull las or MM sponsons.
Now redo the math. The Punisher is too expensive before I make it outrageously expensive.
The LRBT is good with just a HHB, IMHO. If I'm putting sponsons on it, it's a Demolisher, Executioner
or an Exterminator. You're pouring more points onto something to make it better. It's like throwing
points into a CCS or any IG unit to make them SM, which they'll never be.

**Hedkrakka**

I hate talking about people rather than arguments, but you're forcing me to. Seriously, Ailaros, you need to stop ignoring select portions of the argument just to believe you're in the right. If both tanks have a hull LC and sponson multimeltas, you already beat the point, since you're not considering the differences between the Punisher and the Exterminator, and once again you're ignoring the fact that the Exterminator gets at least one extra round of shooting due to its range (in which case most of the points turn in its favor), ignoring cost issues, and even your math is wrong and manipulative.
The EAC can glance AV13, so the exterminator is better against AV13. Cover saves make no difference whatsoever, since the enemy gets them against both tanks, they're just there to make the areas where the Punisher is better seem more broad. That alone shows that your intention is to prove yourself right rather than impartially look at the facts. I conceded multiple times that the Punisher is a great tank and the PGC is great against infantry and AV10, but that doesn't make the tank versatile. I'm tired of repeating the same thing over and over-look at the earlier posts if you finally decide to understand why.

**Ailaros**

Yes, any russ can take the same sponsons. This does not make it a control variable, though, as sponsons mean different things to different russes based on what their turret weapon is.

For example, a pair of multimelta sponsons won't make a demolisher very much more versatile, but it certainly will make a punisher.

Discounting hull weapons on a russ is like discounting special weapons in a vet squad.

As for your comments, helldrakka, I've read them all up until this point, and have been replying in kind. Arguments that punishers are bad aren't based on fact. Arguments that exterminators are better at a small number of things than a punisher does not make them more versatile over all. I mean, a vanquisher can handle AV14 better than either a punisher or an exterminator, but does that make it a more versatile tank? No. You have to look at things comprehensively.

And then, as mentioned, there's the definition of versatility itself. In order to be versatile, in my book, something has to be able to handle a lot of target types WELL. So what if the exterminator can hurt AV13? It doesn't do that job well by any stretch of the imagination.

This whole thread isn't devoted to what's the best russ variant to blow up rhinos, it's devoted to what's the overall best against the most targets. Everything you've said up until this point looks at things too narrowly to answer the broader question.

**ph34r**

You are loading your initial conditions Ailaros. Why would we always assume to be taking max sponsons + hull gun? That is 45p of bloat in many cases. When comparing that loadout on a LRBT, the LRBT is obviously going to be bad because it can't shoot its main gun with its 45p of sponsons!

Combining extremely high strength AT with extremely low strength AT is obviously going to give you the best overall results. That should be apparent. The real question is, are those 45p of sponsons worth it? Are LR hull vehicles worth it at all compared to artillery? I find the 6" movement to be somewhat crippling for a punisher in my experience, even if every time it fires it wipes out a rhino or landspeeder, you just are not going to get there soon enough.

**TheCaptain**

Ailaros wrote:
Yes, any russ can take the same sponsons. This does not make it a control variable, though

Uh.

That's exactly what a control variable is.

Also.

Leman Russ Annihilator is still the absolute best for versatility.

**Glocknall**

It is seriously silly to try and compare the Punisher to any other Leman Russ in the codex. It is a very niche tank no matter what sponsons you put on it.

10 shots from the cannon miss straight out of the gate. 7 of those wound MEQs, of which you might net 3 kills.

Against TEQs you might net 1 kill. No way in hell is a Executioner not better than those numbers.

Furthermore range is always an issue. AV 14 is great but a lot of units are very nasty the closer they get to the tank. 24" is just not a lot of cushion to keep such an obvious target alive. See Land Raider if you doubt this....

Punisher is great on paper but its like a lot o units, once someone has blundered into its sights they will not do so again.

**Hedkrakka**

Ailaros wrote:
Yes, any russ can take the same sponsons. This does not make it a control variable, though, as sponsons mean different things to different russes based on what their turret weapon is.

For example, a pair of multimelta sponsons won't make a demolisher very much more versatile, but it certainly will make a punisher.

Discounting hull weapons on a russ is like discounting special weapons in a vet squad.

As for your comments, helldrakka, I've read them all up until this point, and have been replying in kind. Arguments that punishers are bad aren't based on fact. Arguments that exterminators are better at a small number of things than a punisher does not make them more versatile over all. I mean, a vanquisher can handle AV14 better than either a punisher or an exterminator, but does that make it a more versatile tank? No. You have to look at things comprehensively.

And then, as mentioned, there's the definition of versatility itself. In order to be versatile, in my book, something has to be able to handle a lot of target types WELL. So what if the exterminator can hurt AV13? It doesn't do that job well by any stretch of the imagination.

This whole thread isn't devoted to what's the best russ variant to blow up rhinos, it's devoted to what's the overall best against the most targets. Everything you've said up until this point looks at things too narrowly to answer the broader question.

I see your fantasies are quite vivid. I keep saying "Punishers are good, but not versatile" and you keep somehow perverting what I post and claim I have tried to show Punishers are bad. I'm simply looking at things the way they are, rather than trying to make something work. It's a simple fact that an EAC can take wounds/HPs off more types of enemies than the Punisher can. So does the EPC and the Battlecannon. You are claiming yourself that "The Punisher is better against this and that and this and that", and refuting your own argument. I know you can't get it into that head of yours, but I have been saying all along that the Punisher does its job superbly if it is in range, but lacks the reach, target breadth and genuine versatility/flexibility of the Exterminator. To make things even simpler for you: If you take multiple specialized weapons, you're either highly specialized (such as a bolter boat Punisher) or unfocused and wasteful (such as an Eradicator with MM sponsons, or your Punisher build). If you have weapons that are effective (not necessarily super effective) against most types of enemies, you're versatile (such as an Exterminator, Executioner or LRBT).

**ender502**

Though you have to consider sponsos when comparing the LRBT against the Punisher (b/c ordinance) you do not need to do that for the Punisher/Exterminator example.

v MEQ

Punisher, 20 shots, 10 hits, 6.6 wounds, 2.2 unsaved wounds per turn

Exterminator, 4 shots, 3 hits, 2.5 wounds, .75 unsaved wounds per turn

The question is do we modify for range? The exterminator has twice the range so should be able to hita target longer. Also, with a greater range you will have greater target selection options.

Also, since w edo not need to consider sponsons.... The exterminator is better versus AV 13

The Punisher is also 30 points more than the exterminator.

I think it is fair to say the Exterminator is better versus vehicles than the Punisher, while the Punisher is better versus infantry.

ender502

**Stormrider**

As someone who has trumpeted the Punisher as a viable tank for the longest time, the thought if it being truly versatile now with the new rules hosing Ordnance tanks is pretty cool.

Punishers aren't intended to beat up vehicles, trying to argue its effectiveness (or lack thereof) against vehicles is a bonus to the respective arguments. It's S5, the only vehicles it should ever fired at vehicles out of a lack of targets. With proper sponson kitting (I use HB's for more S5 and a hull LC) it can take on any kind of model in the game.

Infantry in the open or bad cover, low model count units, independent characters, monstrous creatures, light vehicles, and anything foolish enough to deep strike near a Punisher will probably be blended up.

Exterminators are also the bomb, love 'em. Can effectively hurt most things in the game (albeit with less shots) and really can be quite a dangerous in great lists.

**Hedkrakka**

Stormrider wrote:
As someone who has trumpeted the Punisher as a viable tank for the longest time, the thought if it being truly versatile now with the new rules hosing Ordnance tanks is pretty cool.

Punishers aren't intended to beat up vehicles, trying to argue its effectiveness (or lack thereof) against vehicles is a bonus to the respective arguments. It's S5, the only vehicles it should ever fired at vehicles out of a lack of targets. With proper sponson kitting (I use HB's for more S5 and a hull LC) it can take on any kind of model in the game.

Yes, Punishers are fully viable, even great, but specialized, i.e. the exact opposite of versatile. I like them too, but in the context of this thread, which is about versatility, they are pretty much fail. Think about other units in the game, or from other games.
1-Obliterators. Versatile? Yes. Why? They have a weapon (called "obliterator weapons") that is effective against everything. It's a single weapon that fires in different profiles to achieve that. Nothing ever sits idly by and only costs points. They don't pay for extra weapons that will be useless against whatever they're shooting at. The Punisher proposed by Ailaros (and seemingly, you) does. And they have a good reach, too. The Punisher doesn't have that either.
2-Devastators/Havocs/Long Fangs/Purgation Squads. Which squad is versatile, one with one heavy bolter, one missile launcher, one lascannon and one plasma cannon, or one with four missile launchers (or plasma cannons)? Definitely the latter. Versatility comes from WEAPONS THAT ARE EFFECTIVE AGAINST MULTIPLE ENEMY TYPES-not having multiple weapons that are very effective against different enemy types that sit there being useless whenever you fire at something else. You're paying for weapons, so every turn they sit around doing nothing is a waste of points.The loadout discussed for the Punisher costs 50% more than a naked Exterminator or LRBT, most of which go to waste if there is no viable target for the main gun in range.
I don't dispute the fact that Punishers can be better on the tabletop, but they're not versatile by any stretch of imagination.
BTW, about people deep striking near your tanks... The suicide melta tactic works great against anybody who brings in overpriced vehicles which are dangerous if they get in range, such as... Guess what? Players will likely take the chance, rather than be scared off, deep strike near your Punishers and melta them to death with good chances of success.

**Tomten**

I think that i should try both the punisher and the exterminator.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think that i should try both the punisher and the exterminator.

**Hedkrakka**

Tomten wrote:
I think that i should try both the punisher and the exterminator.

Great idea. It's quite easy to make an Exterminator turret without using any glue (except the plates on the turret, the searchlight and the hatch, of course) if you use a closed hatch. The Punisher Gatling cannon also fits the turret without gluing, so if you don't like either, you can easily go back to other tried and tested versions.

**tankboy145**

For my own experiences over the past couple weeks I will say I am never taking a punisher against meq or teq. I had tried the bolter boat and even when there was many wounds my opponents managed to make them. Only successful time the bolter boat worked was when pask was in it and the tank killed 3 and a half daemon princes(took 2 wounds off one so i would say half) in 1 game. But against meq I will gladly stay with my LRBT's.

Since 6th has started most of my opponents and meta in general have learned that with hull points and glancing not doing any damage result to vehicles my LRBT's are a bit harder to kill, so at range most of my opponents dont even fire at my tanks. With that said I cant remember the last time I had a tank die when it was shot, they all die to assault, so also on that note with the punishers range unless all its PGC shots, MM shots, and lascannon kill its target it is probably going to die. So with a 24in range the tank will probably get 1 or maybe 2 effective turns of shooting before it is assaulted and most likely killed.

Until I start seeing more people having good use I dont think I want to bring out a tank that cost 200+ points. In my meta most of my opponents run up with transports or have some sort of deep striking units and I would would rather have a 150pt LRBT die without any use(although with the LRBT's range it will see something) than a 200+ tank dieing only to be a meatshield.

**Stormrider**

Hedkrakka wrote:

Yes, Punishers are fully viable, even great, but specialized, i.e. the exact opposite of versatile. I like them too, but in the context of this thread, which is about versatility, they are pretty much fail. Think about other units in the game, or from other games.

More Vacuum-Hammer...

S5 is great against all infantry in the open and can wound all MC's. A bolterboat Punisher is a blender. I think you're confusing efficiency for versatility. The sponson weapons on a Russ are there for two reasons: 1. Synergize with the main gun (i.e. Plasma Cannons on an Executioner) or 2. As a "just in case" measure. I use my sponsons both ways and have never really felt that I wasted my points by taking them. Alairos is arguing point 2, he's saying that if you need some multi-meltas in a pinch, you'll have them instead of relying on another unit (melta vets) to pick up the slack and be at complete positional efficiency and have all of the weapons ready in order for them to fill the role.

The view that a tank must have optimum efficiency is quite narrow, Land Raiders are intrinsically inefficient at both of their jobs for their cost. Now, are they effective? Hell yeah. AV 14 all around is a tough nut to crack and they pretty much cannot be killed easily by anything except melta spam or Vendetta LC Spam.

[quote=]
1-Obliterators. Versatile? Yes. Why? They have a weapon (called "obliterator weapons") that is effective against everything. It's a single weapon that fires in different profiles to achieve that. Nothing ever sits idly by and only costs points. They don't pay for extra weapons that will be useless against whatever they're shooting at. The Punisher proposed by Ailaros (and seemingly, you) does. And they have a good reach, too. The Punisher doesn't have that either.

**tankboy145**

Of course it wont stop marine players from bringing land raiders its about termintors or death star units favorite transport(probably their only) short of a storm raven now if the army has it. With that said that land raider is more so protection for those termies. Because as mentioned is hard to crack but if it is their will be a ton of pain coming out of it. Generally easiest way to pop one too is to melta or assault it or get rreally lucky shooting and rolls with high strength low ap weapons. But if your already close to melta or assault it, then the power unit inside is also ready to rip you apart as well.

With guard you usually spam vehicles. Most lists I see on dakka everyone is spamming something in the list and if you have different units all mixed up then that list will probably fail. So will you actually spam 2 or 3 LRP with MM sponsons and hull lascannon or 2 that are kitted as bolter boats? In a marine army that land raiders job is probably just to deliver a more powerful unit up the board to destroy anything they come up against. With guard we spam our units because 1 will always fail, 2 will come close to getting the job done, and sometimes 3 might finish it. Ive seen this else where on dakka and Ive found it to be true. I just cant find myself paying 225pts for a tank that probably wont do a great job, and then to spend another 225pts on another tank to back up the first.

**Ross74H**

Having actually used my tanks a bit recently (LRBT, Vanq, Exterminator, Eradicator, Executioner, Destroyer and Thunderer) I have found that actually, the most helpful game wise has been the Thunderer.

yes I know its FW, but its proved to be a pretty good unit, it doesnt look as potent as it is thanks to the lack of turret, but all the times I have used it, its been the only one of my three Russes to survive to the end of the game.

Might just be the way I play as I'm still a bit new at this but its provde itself good enough for me to build another pair of them. And if it gets moaned about I just play it as a Demolisher.

**Tomten**

Hedkrakka wrote:
Tomten wrote:
I think that i should try both the punisher and the exterminator.

Great idea. It's quite easy to make an Exterminator turret without using any glue (except the plates on the turret, the searchlight and the hatch, of course) if you use a closed hatch. The Punisher Gatling cannon also fits the turret without gluing, so if you don't like either, you can easily go back to other tried and tested versions.

But sadly I didnt succed. I tried tried to magnetize the gun but when i realized that it would be a lot of work I just glued the battlecannon on the turret.

**tankboy145**

Ross74H wrote:
Having actually used my tanks a bit recently (LRBT, Vanq, Exterminator, Eradicator, Executioner, Destroyer and Thunderer) I have found that actually, the most helpful game wise has been the Thunderer.

yes I know its FW, but its proved to be a pretty good unit, it doesnt look as potent as it is thanks to the lack of turret, but all the times I have used it, its been the only one of my three Russes to survive to the end of the game.

Might just be the way I play as I'm still a bit new at this but its provde itself good enough for me to build another pair of them. And if it gets moaned about I just play it as a Demolisher.

As i dont really have forgeworld Im not familiar with that type of russ variant, what does it have?

**Hedkrakka**

Stormrider wrote:
Hedkrakka wrote:

Yes, Punishers are fully viable, even great, but specialized, i.e. the exact opposite of versatile. I like them too, but in the context of this thread, which is about versatility, they are pretty much fail. Think about other units in the game, or from other games.

More Vacuum-Hammer...

S5 is great against all infantry in the open and can wound all MC's. A bolterboat Punisher is a blender. I think you're confusing efficiency for versatility. The sponson weapons on a Russ are there for two reasons: 1. Synergize with the main gun (i.e. Plasma Cannons on an Executioner) or 2. As a "just in case" measure. I use my sponsons both ways and have never really felt that I wasted my points by taking them. Alairos is arguing point 2, he's saying that if you need some multi-meltas in a pinch, you'll have them instead of relying on another unit (melta vets) to pick up the slack and be at complete positional efficiency and have all of the weapons ready in order for them to fill the role.

The view that a tank must have optimum efficiency is quite narrow, Land Raiders are intrinsically inefficient at both of their jobs for their cost. Now, are they effective? Hell yeah. AV 14 all around is a tough nut to crack and they pretty much cannot be killed easily by anything except melta spam or Vendetta LC Spam.

Hedkrakka wrote:

1-Obliterators. Versatile? Yes. Why? They have a weapon (called "obliterator weapons") that is effective against everything. It's a single weapon that fires in different profiles to achieve that. Nothing ever sits idly by and only costs points. They don't pay for extra weapons that will be useless against whatever they're shooting at. The Punisher proposed by Ailaros (and seemingly, you) does. And they have a good reach, too. The Punisher doesn't have that either.

Obliterators are quite versatile, they're also Demons, +2 Armor and are one of the more powerful units in the game. They're also 70 points (MoN is another 8 if you're smart) a model and cannot avoid being ID'd without MoN. They also cannot be a part of a vehicle squadron, are highly immobile and eat up one FOC choice in a pretty beefy codex. Sure they're versatile, they can also be run over by Kabalite splinter rifle fire. The Punisher is not built for anti-tank, it's just not, it's built to be an area denial unit/infantry spiller. If you need to kill/damage a lighter vehicle, it can, and it will be arguably just as effective as an Exterminator.

2-Devastators/Havocs/Long Fangs/Purgation Squads. Which squad is versatile, one with one heavy bolter, one missile launcher, one lascannon and one plasma cannon, or one with four missile launchers (or plasma cannons)? Definitely the latter. Versatility comes from WEAPONS THAT ARE EFFECTIVE AGAINST MULTIPLE ENEMY TYPES-not having multiple weapons that are very effective against different enemy types that sit there being useless whenever you fire at something else.

More Marine foot units that can still be killed by all kinds of small arms fire, have no invulnerable save and can still be trolled in Close combat. Yes they are certainly versatile, they're also not a Leman Russ. Conflating the argument is a sign you're losing it.

You're paying for weapons, so every turn they sit around doing nothing is a waste of points.The loadout discussed for the Punisher costs 50% more than a naked Exterminator or LRBT, most of which go to waste if there is no viable target for the main gun in range.
I don't dispute the fact that Punishers can be better on the tabletop, but they're not versatile by any stretch of imagination.

Are CCS's with PG's in your back line that are well out of range of everyone "wasting points"? No, it's a calculated risk you take with BS4 models that are infantry, especially if they're trying stay alive. Are Leman Russ' that are moving flat out to try to get to an ideal shooting location next turn wasting their points? No, this game is based upon tactics, not raw statistics. Statistics are great indicators of a unit's overall potential against other units, however, this game has variables that cannot be accounted for with raw numbers (terrain layout, turn length, objective locations, movement of your opponent, your opponent themselves), when you argue in a vacuum anything makes sense. I am not disagreeing that Punishers are inefficient points wise, but they're quite versatile.

BTW, about people deep striking near your tanks... The suicide melta tactic works great against anybody who brings in overpriced vehicles which are dangerous if they get in range, such as... Guess what? Players will likely take the chance, rather than be scared off, deep strike near your Punishers and melta them to death with good chances of success.

Does meltacide stop Marine players from bringing Land Raiders? NO! This has been a part of the game since at least 3rd. This requires very small positioning of your tank (i.e. hide your rear armor of 11) and some unit placement to deny the easy Deep Strike placement of that meltacide unit. This argument is bush league. If you honestly think I don't account for that, you're truly grasping at straws. I've taken highly immobile artillery for all of the 10 years that I have played IG, do you honestly think I have never seen that before?

**TheLionOfTheForest**

I am sensing anger and frustration in this thread and there seems to be no consensus on the actual most versatile LR model.

**TheCaptain**

TheLionOfTheForest wrote:
I am sensing anger and frustration in this thread and there seems to be no consensus on the actual most versatile LR model.

Leman Russ Annihilator. Literally /thread.

Only tank that can (reasonably) threaten:

GEQ
MEQ
TEQ
MC's
Multi-wound models
Transports
Tanks
Flyers

and pen:
AV10
AV11
AV12
AV13
AV14

Literally /thread. Literally.

The only other tank that can do ALL of this is the Vanquisher.

And the Vanquisher is made of suck.

**tankboy145**

Whats the profile of the annihilator isn't it twinlinked lascannon or am I thinking of something else?

**Inquisitor Jex**

Yes that's it. A FW model believe

**Unit1126PLL**

What TheCaptain says is true, but the LRBT Annihilator is almost as garbage as the Vanquisher.

...moreso in an ABG where it lacks co-axial weapons and special ammunition.

**Ailaros**

TheCaptain wrote:
Ailaros wrote:Yes, any russ can take the same sponsons. This does not make it a control variable, though

That's exactly what a control variable is.

No it's not. Just because something is common does not automatically make it a control variable.

What you're saying is the equivalent to "You can't tell a good baseball team by its pitchers, because all baseball teams have pitchers". If the quality of a pitcher made the same impact on every team equally, then it would be a control variable, but it doesn't, so it's not. Same for russes.

Hedkrakka wrote:It's a simple fact that an EAC can take wounds/HPs off more types of enemies than the Punisher can.

The math will never make this statement true, no matter how vigorously you assert it.

Hedkrakka wrote:unfocused and wasteful (such as an Eradicator with MM sponsons, or your Punisher build)

What? So versatility you happen to disagree with is wasteful rather than versatile? Why?

Plus, unfocused is not an antonym for versatile. If anything, it's a synonym.

Hedkrakka wrote:Oh, and if you think MM sponsons make a Punisher versatile, give serious thought to why the Demolisher isn't versatile.

Because demolishers are terrible against infantry, what with having their firepower seriously disrupted by displacement, not ignoring cover saves, and being a blast weapon, so not even the best against hordes. And it can't even shoot at fliers.

Of course, you can ameliorate this somewhat with bolter sponsons, certainly, but you're still not going to be very good against fliers, and against infantry the main cannon causes the rest of them to snap fire, making all those bolter shots less effective.

**Martel732**

Since a given vehicle or weapon team can generally only fire at a single target, specialization, rather than versatility, seems more desirable.

This question is similar to the missile launcher thread. Yes, the ML is versatile, but it does both jobs poorly, so its still rubbish.

I think what TheCaptain said is true, but versatility does not equal effectiveness. If you want to now find the sweet spot of versatility and effectiveness for the Leman Russ hull, that's going to be a long thread I think.

**TheCaptain**

Ailaros wrote:
TheCaptain wrote:
Ailaros wrote:Yes, any russ can take the same sponsons. This does not make it a control variable, though

That's exactly what a control variable is.

No it's not. Just because something is common does not automatically make it a control variable.

What you're saying is the equivalent to "You can't tell a good baseball team by its pitchers, because all baseball teams have pitchers". If the quality of a pitcher made the same impact on every team equally, then it would be a control variable, but it doesn't, so it's not. Same for russes.

If every baseball team has the same 4 pitchers, then it is a control variable.

Every russ has the same 4 (or 5?) sponsons. Viola, control variable.

The constancy of the variable across all tanks is what makes it a control variable. That's a fact. By definition.