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.

gendoikari87 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I mean, the Russ isn't under 150, which is what you claimed. I don't know what you want me to say. "Yea, sure, 152 is under 150. also 2+2 is 5."

quit being pedantic. yes 152 > 150 No fething gak. it's also not significantly over 150, about 1% or

You said less than 150. It's actually vastly closer to 2% difference because the closest less than is three points away.

...Taking a drink now.

Okay. Moving on.
The vindactor is 125 so a decent chunk cheaper than a Russ. I don't think I've heard many people complain about it, other than being lack luster.
It's a big cheap gun. 27 points cheaper. Shoots less shots. Has half range and does not get to shoot twice.
I think the problem with most tanks is the ability to shoot twice in a turn

The issue is the volume at which a Vindicator produces shots in addition to being penalized for moving.

 fraser1191 wrote:
Okay. Moving on.
The vindactor is 125 so a decent chunk cheaper than a Russ. I don't think I've heard many people complain about it, other than being lack luster.
It's a big cheap gun. 27 points cheaper. Shoots less shots. Has half range and does not get to shoot twice.
I think the problem with most tanks is the ability to shoot twice in a turn

It's the same gun a demolisher has for significantly cheaper. Demolishers are considered lackluster at 170pts. GW is a bit too optimistic when it comes to vehicle mounted weapons that have a short range, forgetting that's where enemy AT tends to shine and it is at a way greater risk of being charged.

If you're comparing it to a regular Russ, it has a 1/3 the range. Not to mention russe's get other weapons that also operate in at least the 36" range.

I honestly don't see the double firing russe's being an issue outside of fringe cases like an executioner on full overcharge or a punisher. Most of the Russ weapons are kind of meh and needed that double shot just to be useful. Remember when the index dropped? Nobody really ran russe's because most of the turrets were garbage with a single shot. Basilisks put tanks to shame in the firepower department with consistency, better AP, range, better strength, cost, and being able to ignore line of sight. It quite literally is a more consistent lascannon that doesn't need to see you.

The russe's big benefits are durability, certain regiment traits, and potential for orders/objective secured. But you'll note most of the really cutthroat guard lists reach for artillery every time. Leman russe's are nifty, but until they learn how to shoot around corners, especially on ITC tables, they will always be outshone by artillery.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Okay. Moving on.
The vindactor is 125 so a decent chunk cheaper than a Russ. I don't think I've heard many people complain about it, other than being lack luster.
It's a big cheap gun. 27 points cheaper. Shoots less shots. Has half range and does not get to shoot twice.
I think the problem with most tanks is the ability to shoot twice in a turn

It's the same gun a demolisher has for significantly cheaper. Demolishers are considered lackluster at 170pts. GW is a bit too optimistic when it comes to vehicle mounted weapons that have a short range, forgetting that's where enemy AT tends to shine and it is at a way greater risk of being charged.

If you're comparing it to a regular Russ, it has a 1/3 the range. Not to mention russe's get other weapons that also operate in at least the 36" range.

I honestly don't see the double firing russe's being an issue outside of fringe cases like an executioner on full overcharge or a punisher. Most of the Russ weapons are kind of meh and needed that double shot just to be useful. Remember when the index dropped? Nobody really ran russe's because most of the turrets were garbage with a single shot. Basilisks put tanks to shame in the firepower department with consistency, better AP, range, better strength, cost, and being able to ignore line of sight. It quite literally is a more consistent lascannon that doesn't need to see you.

The russe's big benefits are durability, certain regiment traits, and potential for orders/objective secured. But you'll note most of the really cutthroat guard lists reach for artillery every time. Leman russe's are nifty, but until they learn how to shoot around corners, especially on ITC tables, they will always be outshone by artillery.

Not that russ ever really needs it's range. Even 36" range is something rarely actually comes up. Especially in 8th ed where ranges of battles have come down. If you can't find something of range within 29" then...Well then you are already in great shape. Your infantry are super durable with no rapid fire weapons even close, no assaults coming up, no plasma and melta pestering you.

gendoikari87 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I mean, the Russ isn't under 150, which is what you claimed. I don't know what you want me to say. "Yea, sure, 152 is under 150. also 2+2 is 5."

quit being pedantic. yes 152 > 150 No fething gak. it's also not significantly over 150, about 1% or so. let me spell it out for you:

CHEAP GIANT GUNS

Arguing that "hurr durr Technically 152 is over 150" is nothing more than technicalities and pedantics. What are you? a bureaucrat?

Remember folks being technically correct is NOT the best form of correct.

Cheap giant guns has been a guard thing since 3rd. Or are you saying the Russ would be a fantastic tank with only 1d6 shots? Because it was 1d6 in the index, and was universally regarded as junk. And we won't even talk about how the 2d6 shots for the Russ is situational and not always on.

And no, I'm not a bureaucrat, but I do try to strive for truth in all things. The guard get literally 1 strength 8+, 2d6 weapon for under 150. To say they have "too many" is both false, hyperbolic, and fairly pointless.

And while being technically correct may not be the best form of being correct, it sure beats being utterly wrong and also acting like a buffoon.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I mean, the Russ isn't under 150, which is what you claimed. I don't know what you want me to say. "Yea, sure, 152 is under 150. also 2+2 is 5."

quit being pedantic. yes 152 > 150 No fething gak. it's also not significantly over 150, about 1% or so. let me spell it out for you:

CHEAP GIANT GUNS

Arguing that "hurr durr Technically 152 is over 150" is nothing more than technicalities and pedantics. What are you? a bureaucrat?

Remember folks being technically correct is NOT the best form of correct.

Cheap giant guns has been a guard thing since 3rd. Or are you saying the Russ would be a fantastic tank with only 1d6 shots? Because it was 1d6 in the index, and was universally regarded as junk. And we won't even talk about how the 2d6 shots for the Russ is situational and not always on.

And no, I'm not a bureaucrat, but I do try to strive for truth in all things. The guard get literally 1 strength 8+, 2d6 weapon for under 150. To say they have "too many" is both false, hyperbolic, and fairly pointless.

And while being technically correct may not be the best form of being correct, it sure beats being utterly wrong and also acting like a buffoon.

No one should have giant cheap guns. One is too many. It should be giant moderately priced guns. The 2D6 shots is basically always on, and it shouldn't have been free. Pretending otherwise is debating in bad faith.

Martel732 wrote:
No one should have giant cheap guns. One is too many. It should be giant moderately priced guns.

Someone can. It's all based on army design. I think IG are kind of ill-designed at the moment, because "gunline" isn't really fun. But army-design-wise, cheap guns is like Quantum Shielding: OP in a vacuum, but balance-able in context (though it's obviously not in this case).

Martel732 wrote:
The 2D6 shots is basically always on, and it shouldn't have been free. Pretending otherwise is debating in bad faith.

I'll let my buddy know he can shoot me 2d6 times in overwatch next time.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I mean, the Russ isn't under 150, which is what you claimed. I don't know what you want me to say. "Yea, sure, 152 is under 150. also 2+2 is 5."

quit being pedantic. yes 152 > 150 No fething gak. it's also not significantly over 150, about 1% or so. let me spell it out for you:

CHEAP GIANT GUNS

Arguing that "hurr durr Technically 152 is over 150" is nothing more than technicalities and pedantics. What are you? a bureaucrat?

Remember folks being technically correct is NOT the best form of correct.

Cheap giant guns has been a guard thing since 3rd. Or are you saying the Russ would be a fantastic tank with only 1d6 shots? Because it was 1d6 in the index, and was universally regarded as junk. And we won't even talk about how the 2d6 shots for the Russ is situational and not always on.

And no, I'm not a bureaucrat, but I do try to strive for truth in all things. The guard get literally 1 strength 8+, 2d6 weapon for under 150. To say they have "too many" is both false, hyperbolic, and fairly pointless.

And while being technically correct may not be the best form of being correct, it sure beats being utterly wrong and also acting like a buffoon.

I'm pretty sure in addition to the whole shooting twice thing that they got the little tidbit about moving a certain distance to not suffer penalties on top of a price cut right?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I mean, the Russ isn't under 150, which is what you claimed. I don't know what you want me to say. "Yea, sure, 152 is under 150. also 2+2 is 5."

quit being pedantic. yes 152 > 150 No fething gak. it's also not significantly over 150, about 1% or so. let me spell it out for you:

CHEAP GIANT GUNS

Arguing that "hurr durr Technically 152 is over 150" is nothing more than technicalities and pedantics. What are you? a bureaucrat?

Remember folks being technically correct is NOT the best form of correct.

Cheap giant guns has been a guard thing since 3rd. Or are you saying the Russ would be a fantastic tank with only 1d6 shots? Because it was 1d6 in the index, and was universally regarded as junk. And we won't even talk about how the 2d6 shots for the Russ is situational and not always on.

And no, I'm not a bureaucrat, but I do try to strive for truth in all things. The guard get literally 1 strength 8+, 2d6 weapon for under 150. To say they have "too many" is both false, hyperbolic, and fairly pointless.

And while being technically correct may not be the best form of being correct, it sure beats being utterly wrong and also acting like a buffoon.

I'm pretty sure in addition to the whole shooting twice thing that they got the little tidbit about moving a certain distance to not suffer penalties on top of a price cut right?

They did get a 10 pt price cut, but they had grinding advance already, so they never suffered the penalties, even in the index. Do you think the 10 pt discount alone would have made the regular 1d6 Russ a viable choice in the IG codex compared to the Basilisk and Manticore and Wyvern?

Hi, haven't been on in a very long time so haven't followed 40k very closely until recently (casual). The question is if they are going to nerf Astra Militarium what do they plan doing to Eldar? clearly its head and shoulders above the rest. Taking a middle of the road codex and making harder to play isn't exactly going to help balance anything. I'm so confused at GW action here.

Pretty much everyone agrees that the hammer should be coming down on the Eldar as well.

But will they?

How are we to know?

It's telling that eldar need a unit like dark reapers to compete vs ig.

Martel732 wrote:
It's telling that eldar need a unit like dark reapers to compete vs ig.

You can tell because IG got 21st at LVO and all 20 of the armies above them were Eldar and nothing else.

Oh wait.

I own Dark reapers and I don't need them to table a Guard army. Scat/ShCannon Bikes, Wave Serpents, and Fire Prisms pretty much rape guard.

 Rune Stonegrinder wrote:
I own Dark reapers and I don't need them to table a Guard army. Scat/ShCannon Bikes, Wave Serpents, and Fire Prisms pretty much rape guard.

Except when they don't. Which is a lot.

Eldar have no problems agaisnt Imperial Guard even without Dark Reakers. I know Martel you are traumatized with Guard, but don't try to make Eldar less powerfull that what they really are just to make IG appear more powerfull that what they are (And they are very powerfull)

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I mean, the Russ isn't under 150, which is what you claimed. I don't know what you want me to say. "Yea, sure, 152 is under 150. also 2+2 is 5."

quit being pedantic. yes 152 > 150 No fething gak. it's also not significantly over 150, about 1% or so. let me spell it out for you:

CHEAP GIANT GUNS

Arguing that "hurr durr Technically 152 is over 150" is nothing more than technicalities and pedantics. What are you? a bureaucrat?

Remember folks being technically correct is NOT the best form of correct.

Cheap giant guns has been a guard thing since 3rd. Or are you saying the Russ would be a fantastic tank with only 1d6 shots? Because it was 1d6 in the index, and was universally regarded as junk. And we won't even talk about how the 2d6 shots for the Russ is situational and not always on.

And no, I'm not a bureaucrat, but I do try to strive for truth in all things. The guard get literally 1 strength 8+, 2d6 weapon for under 150. To say they have "too many" is both false, hyperbolic, and fairly pointless.

And while being technically correct may not be the best form of being correct, it sure beats being utterly wrong and also acting like a buffoon.

people like you remind me of why I quit dakka. Literally the worst type of pedantic fool that exists. Unable to see the point and continually believing their own. Superiority.I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I mean, the Russ isn't under 150, which is what you claimed. I don't know what you want me to say. "Yea, sure, 152 is under 150. also 2+2 is 5."

quit being pedantic. yes 152 > 150 No fething gak. it's also not significantly over 150, about 1% or so. let me spell it out for you:

CHEAP GIANT GUNS

Arguing that "hurr durr Technically 152 is over 150" is nothing more than technicalities and pedantics. What are you? a bureaucrat?

Remember folks being technically correct is NOT the best form of correct.

Cheap giant guns has been a guard thing since 3rd. Or are you saying the Russ would be a fantastic tank with only 1d6 shots? Because it was 1d6 in the index, and was universally regarded as junk. And we won't even talk about how the 2d6 shots for the Russ is situational and not always on.

And no, I'm not a bureaucrat, but I do try to strive for truth in all things. The guard get literally 1 strength 8+, 2d6 weapon for under 150. To say they have "too many" is both false, hyperbolic, and fairly pointless.

And while being technically correct may not be the best form of being correct, it sure beats being utterly wrong and also acting like a buffoon.

I'm pretty sure in addition to the whole shooting twice thing that they got the little tidbit about moving a certain distance to not suffer penalties on top of a price cut right?

They did get a 10 pt price cut, but they had grinding advance already, so they never suffered the penalties, even in the index. Do you think the 10 pt discount alone would have made the regular 1d6 Russ a viable choice in the IG codex compared to the Basilisk and Manticore and Wyvern?

Not alone it wouldn't have, but it got a price cut on top of literally almost twice the firepower (only almost because turret weapons only get the bonus).

gendoikari87 wrote:people like you remind me of why I quit dakka. Literally the worst type of pedantic fool that exists. Unable to see the point and continually believing their own. Superiority.I award you no points and may god have mercy on your soul.

Good argument. I especially like the strawman fallacy and ad-hominems. Would you like to make an actual point? Or will you continue with the personal attacks and buffoonery? Or, perhaps you'll assert something else demonstrably false so we can have this go around again?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:Not alone it wouldn't have, but it got a price cut on top of literally almost twice the firepower (only almost because turret weapons only get the bonus).

Now this is a discusison. What would you have done to the LRBT to make it competitive, since the 10pt cut didn't do it, and doubling the firepower is too much?

The double fire was needed, but it plus the price cut was both lazy, silly and extreme.

From a datasheet pov the Leman Russ is fine, it just need some more tuning with its point cost.

 Galas wrote:
Eldar have no problems agaisnt Imperial Guard even without Dark Reakers. I know Martel you are traumatized with Guard, but don't try to make Eldar less powerfull that what they really are just to make IG appear more powerfull that what they are (And they are very powerfull)

My games against Eldar usually go down to the wire, up to and including 10 dark reapers. Bottom line is that I can remove points off the table against Eldar. I can HURT them. IG have Eldar firepower and triple the models. Also, try playing not-altioc and see how it goes.

Leman Russ is overtuned? Must be why you see so many Russes at competitions. Oh wait. You don't. You see none. It has no invulnerable save or -1 to hit modifiers or indirect fire. Means it takes a couple lascannons to the chin, can't do anything about it, and keels over dead in 1 turn.

What kind of stupid point is this?

Moving on.

Tyran wrote:
The double fire was needed, but it plus the price cut was both lazy, silly and extreme.

From a datasheet pov the Leman Russ is fine, it just need some more tuning with its point cost.

Wait what?

The price cut was lazy. Silly, and extreme.
But Leman Russ' were bad.
So they just needed to change it's point cost.

... Down, right? By giving it a... Price... Cut...

!??!?!?!

Leman Russ is affordable T8, so it can be spammed in a T8 wall. Marine T8 is all crazy overcosted. Granted, lots of weapons don't care about T8, but many do, especially S4.

Martel732 wrote:
Leman Russ is affordable T8, so it can be spammed in a T8 wall. Marine T8 is all crazy overcosted. Granted, lots of weapons don't care about T8, but many do, especially S4.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaat, Guard stuff is cheaper than Marines?

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THIS TRAVESTY!?!

Sarcasm out of the way, when you try to paint it as though you 'only' have S4 to deal with T8...it makes your point even more laughable.

Martel732 wrote:
Leman Russ is affordable T8, so it can be spammed in a T8 wall. Marine T8 is all crazy overcosted. Granted, lots of weapons don't care about T8, but many do, especially S4.

Excuse me while I spam my army of Wraithlords, whom are toughness eight, ignoring wounds on 6, 3+ armour save good in close combat walkers, for around 100pts each.

Oh. Wait. That would be terrible.

AdmiralHalsey wrote:

Tyran wrote:
The double fire was needed, but it plus the price cut was both lazy, silly and extreme.

From a datasheet pov the Leman Russ is fine, it just need some more tuning with its point cost.

Wait what?

The price cut was lazy. Silly, and extreme.
But Leman Russ' were bad.
So they just needed to change it's point cost.

... Down, right? By giving it a... Price... Cut...

!??!?!?!

Except that they also gave it the rule to fire its main weapon twice, which is a quite massive buff by itself.
Unless you are arguing that even with the double fire the Leman Russ is still bad.