Switch Theme:

Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 fraser1191 wrote:
There could be multiple reasons for the repulsor to not gain grinding advance, like not wanting to draw fire from enemies, or maybe not having extra ammo since it's got more crew capacity, etc
IDK man...If you don't want to get shot probably shouldn't have 11 weapon systems. Plus literally all the weapons that claim to befit from the rule are energy based. Plus beingtwice the size of a lemon russ which has the rule....this rule would literally fix the majority of space marine armor. Though - it's not the best way to do it. I don't care. This belong on probably every tank in the game if some are gonna have it. Fix pricing too. Obviosuly it would make some things too good.

If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Steadfast Ultramarine Sergeant






 Xenomancers wrote:
 fraser1191 wrote:
There could be multiple reasons for the repulsor to not gain grinding advance, like not wanting to draw fire from enemies, or maybe not having extra ammo since it's got more crew capacity, etc
IDK man...If you don't want to get shot probably shouldn't have 11 weapon systems. Plus literally all the weapons that claim to befit from the rule are energy based. Plus beingtwice the size of a lemon russ which has the rule....this rule would literally fix the majority of space marine armor. Though - it's not the best way to do it. I don't care. This belong on probably every tank in the game if some are gonna have it. Fix pricing too. Obviosuly it would make some things too good.


Don't get me wrong I'd love it, maybe even shed a tear, but I can't see them going back patching something like that on all repulsor chassis'
   
Made in ca
Bounding Ultramarine Assault Trooper





 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Well, some interesting information just came out courtesy of Apocalypse previews.

Notably, it all but confirms that the Repulsor Executioner will have a Grinding Advance rule.

Less can be read into from it possessing 2 attacks, but that does give a fair prediction that it will probably have a d3 or similar number of shots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 mew28 wrote:
 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
It's kinda odd then, because a missile launcher is 48" right? I can't remember. In any event, that leads to the conclusion, that is false, that a missile launcher is a more effective first turn weapon than a Plasma Cannon.

The missile launcher has the problem of it cost all most as much as a lascannon and it is much weaker in all most all situations you want to use them in.


I generally pick Missile Launchers for my Long Fangs over Lascannons, actually.

When push comes to shove, there's not a lot of T8 out there, and even less of that is going to see the light of day. I'd rather save the points. My Razorback[s] generally are adequate numbers of Lascannons, and the extra 20 points in an already vulnerable and expensive squad doesn't sit well when it's not neccessary.
T8 is literally everywhere. Rockets are gartbage for their cost. At least Ap-3 comes in handy sometimes when the str difference doesn't matter - plus - it's almost always better to shot a an ap-2 str 8 over d6 str 4 0 AP anyways so just forget about the frag rule. turns out though both weapons are overcosted


I have no problems with my rocket launcher long fangs. As for T8, it's basically just Knights, which AP higher than 1 basically is irrelevant against. Fundamentally, only one of the Lascannon's advantages will be in play at any given time: either the S9 matters and the AP is on Invul, or the AP matters and you'd be on 3+ to wound anyway. In addition, Lascannons are 5 points more than Missile Launchers, and I'd rather not put 20 more points into an already fragile and expensive unit.

I don't think Lascannons are universally bad, since I equip my Razorback with them, but I don't feel they're worth the upgrade for Long Fangs over Missile Launchers; and I do actually find myself firing frag a lot at Genestealers, Guardsmen, and Boyz if tank targets are unavailable.

All most all the heavy hitting imperial units are T8 knights, command russes and repulsseers. I don't know about your region but that makes up over half the meta around where I play sure if all you play is vs tau and eldar the S9 might see a bit over priced but even then the extra AP would still be worth the 5 points.

Ultramarine 6000 : Imperial Knights 1700 : Grey Knights 1000 : Ad mech 500 :Nids 4000 : Necrons 500 : Death watch 500 
   
Made in us
Hellacious Havoc





Yeah if it can shoot twice with the whole turret that would seem to be enough of a difference to be worth a look. I currently use a 4 las Repulsor with Deathwatch and frequently use the +1 wound strats on it. It really isn't too bad when used in this way. All the dakka guns do add some decent chip damage with that +1W, esp the gatling.

Regarding RL comparisons I think the tech level has to be considered. Bradleys with Uranium ammunition destroying 50's era T-55 is interesting but 40k is supposed to have relative parity at the point/power level. Even if we just compare it to WWII, the 37mm was a great anti tank gun for a few years and then became obsolete once the medium tanks were introduced. So the new US "Tank Destroyer" with 37mm becomes the new US "Scout Car" and everyone starts making bigger guns. A Bazooka fires a much weaker round than more modern missile launchers like the Javelin.

It is fun to talk about this stuff but there is only so far you can take it. A marine squad with a ML very probably will not destroy a tank shooting at it the whole game. Two marine squads each with a ML now are getting closer to the cost of a tank and still probably will not kill one in a game by themselves. But they can do other stuff other than just shooting their missiles. How weak should they really be? I think they are already on the weak side.

   
Made in us
Omnipotent Necron Overlord






 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
Well, some interesting information just came out courtesy of Apocalypse previews.

Notably, it all but confirms that the Repulsor Executioner will have a Grinding Advance rule.

Less can be read into from it possessing 2 attacks, but that does give a fair prediction that it will probably have a d3 or similar number of shots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 mew28 wrote:
 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
It's kinda odd then, because a missile launcher is 48" right? I can't remember. In any event, that leads to the conclusion, that is false, that a missile launcher is a more effective first turn weapon than a Plasma Cannon.

The missile launcher has the problem of it cost all most as much as a lascannon and it is much weaker in all most all situations you want to use them in.


I generally pick Missile Launchers for my Long Fangs over Lascannons, actually.

When push comes to shove, there's not a lot of T8 out there, and even less of that is going to see the light of day. I'd rather save the points. My Razorback[s] generally are adequate numbers of Lascannons, and the extra 20 points in an already vulnerable and expensive squad doesn't sit well when it's not neccessary.
T8 is literally everywhere. Rockets are gartbage for their cost. At least Ap-3 comes in handy sometimes when the str difference doesn't matter - plus - it's almost always better to shot a an ap-2 str 8 over d6 str 4 0 AP anyways so just forget about the frag rule. turns out though both weapons are overcosted


I have no problems with my rocket launcher long fangs. As for T8, it's basically just Knights, which AP higher than 1 basically is irrelevant against. Fundamentally, only one of the Lascannon's advantages will be in play at any given time: either the S9 matters and the AP is on Invul, or the AP matters and you'd be on 3+ to wound anyway. In addition, Lascannons are 5 points more than Missile Launchers, and I'd rather not put 20 more points into an already fragile and expensive unit.

I don't think Lascannons are universally bad, since I equip my Razorback with them, but I don't feel they're worth the upgrade for Long Fangs over Missile Launchers; and I do actually find myself firing frag a lot at Genestealers, Guardsmen, and Boyz if tank targets are unavailable.

Russ/Knights/Levi dreads/ Custodes tanks/dreads. Basically every Imperial faction is putting A lot of T8 out there. Those are all competitive units too. All these units can get cover saves too. The AP is not useless. If your goal is to make things use their 5++ save Ap-3 is good to have. Also - anything with a 2+ save in cover you really want that AP-3.

I can see wanting to save 20 points but I can think of better places to save it.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/18 00:37:01


If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced.
- Fox Mulder 
   
Made in us
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard





 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
The game already takes too long for all the shooting rules. # of shots rolls, re rolls, hit rolls, re rolls, wound rolls, re rolls, save rolls, re rolls, invuln rolls, re rolls, FNP rolls, re rolls, damage rolls., then do it all again twice for the charge phase and the melee phase.

I like the idea of removing invuln saves. It would nerf psyker heavy armies like 1kSons though, because they rely on mortal wounds. Or remove FNP. But as is there are too many re-rolls, and invulns play a big part of that.

As for the Repulsor, if it's getting the damage potential that some people are throwing around here, this is getting into DBZ levels of power scaling ridiculousness. There are entire armies that were designed around the capabilities of pre-primaris weaponry.

At the end of DBZ, the power levels were expanded to such a degree that it was impossible to keep up, because each boost was muliplicative of the previous level. 2 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 16...etc. If you have a sub 300 pt unit roaming around with 4d6 damage potential over 2-3 shots from 1 of it's 3-5 guns, we have officially gone SSJ4 Blue.


How do invulns affect rerolls? You take either the armor save, or the invuln. You don't take the armor save, reroll the fails, then take the invuln, and reroll the fails. Invuln and Armor are an either or.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Insectum7 wrote:
 Stux wrote:
 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
36" is by and large "enough range" most of the time.

It's enough to fire from within your deploy area across the no-man's land and across a good chunk [generally about 1/3-2/3] of the enemy deploy area.

24" on the other hand, does not have that flexibility, and generally cannot reach units in the enemy deploy area, odd deployments like the arrowhead deployments notwithstanding.

48" is enough that the leading cause of not being able to hit things will be line of sight, not range.


Agreed. 36" makes a huge difference over 24" much of the time.

Not that I'm saying Plasma Devs are a 'good' unit. The opposite in fact, that they are sub standard and Gravs are only situationally a bit better, and in some instances worse.


I'm curious as to what you're comparing the Plasma Devs too. They're a mainstay of most of my builds.


I'm guessing this was in response to the mathhammer I posted a few above comparing PC Devs, Hellblasters, and Grav Amp Devs to both add context to an earlier speculation about Grav vs Plas, and to set a "baseline" for shooting effectiveness of a Heavy Support Slot like a Repulsor Executioner. The Executioner did not fare well compared to any of the infantry Devs on a purely killing aspect.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/18 04:29:52


My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Xenomancers wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
CapRichard wrote:
So, double shot turret for the executioner in 40k too?




If that doesn’t port over 40k, I’ll be shocked.

Nice way to bump it’s AV potential as a MBT without going crazy.

Now to see it on all the other marine tanks that need it...
So the plasma version becomes 2d6 shots? With str 9 ap-4. Manking stronger than the standard version opf the castellans plasmacannon and only slightly worse than the relic version. Yes - this tank will see play with this rule. Kinda weird if the standard repulsor does not get access to this rule as well.


And the powercreep cycle goes into full swing.
If the anti infantry weapon is 2d6 S9 Ap-4 what kinda rediculous stats is the heavy laser destroyer going to have to compete with that.
   
Made in ca
Bounding Ultramarine Assault Trooper





Ice_can wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
CapRichard wrote:
So, double shot turret for the executioner in 40k too?




If that doesn’t port over 40k, I’ll be shocked.

Nice way to bump it’s AV potential as a MBT without going crazy.

Now to see it on all the other marine tanks that need it...
So the plasma version becomes 2d6 shots? With str 9 ap-4. Manking stronger than the standard version opf the castellans plasmacannon and only slightly worse than the relic version. Yes - this tank will see play with this rule. Kinda weird if the standard repulsor does not get access to this rule as well.


And the powercreep cycle goes into full swing.
If the anti infantry weapon is 2d6 S9 Ap-4 what kinda rediculous stats is the heavy laser destroyer going to have to compete with that.

Why bother competing with stats when you can just compete with a 50 point discount.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/18 06:20:21


Ultramarine 6000 : Imperial Knights 1700 : Grey Knights 1000 : Ad mech 500 :Nids 4000 : Necrons 500 : Death watch 500 
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter





 Xenomancers wrote:

Russ/Knights/Levi dreads/ Custodes tanks/dreads. Basically every Imperial faction is putting A lot of T8 out there. Those are all competitive units too. All these units can get cover saves too. The AP is not useless. If your goal is to make things use their 5++ save Ap-3 is good to have. Also - anything with a 2+ save in cover you really want that AP-3.

I can see wanting to save 20 points but I can think of better places to save it.


4++. Knights generally have a 4++.

Anyway, sure, fine, I'll switch back to Lascannons, we can talk about missiles versus lascannons on a disgustingly expensive infantry unit with literally no survivability somewhere else.


Back to the Repulsor Executioner:
It's definitely going to have a fire-twice property, and it looks like it's main gun will have more than one shot. These are both signs that it will at least break even with the vanilla repulsor. Will it do better? I don't have high hopes, but maybe.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/18 06:57:03


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in fi
Locked in the Tower of Amareo





One knight. Which means opponent has ONE knight. If not you have 5++ target to shoot as well.

2024 painted/bought: 109/109 
   
Made in us
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter





tneva82 wrote:
One knight. Which means opponent has ONE knight. If not you have 5++ target to shoot as well.


2 Knights. Ion Bulwark and Rotate Shields.

The 3rd knight is usually an arniger helverin.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/18 07:28:01


Guardsmen, hear me! Cadia may lie in ruin, but her proud people do not! For each brother and sister who gave their lives to Him as martyrs, we will reap a vengeance fiftyfold! Cadia may be no more, but will never be forgotten; our foes shall tremble in fear at the name, for their doom shall come from the barrels of Cadian guns, fired by Cadian hands! Forward, for vengeance and retribution, in His name and the names of our fallen comrades! 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 mew28 wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
CapRichard wrote:
So, double shot turret for the executioner in 40k too?




If that doesn’t port over 40k, I’ll be shocked.

Nice way to bump it’s AV potential as a MBT without going crazy.

Now to see it on all the other marine tanks that need it...
So the plasma version becomes 2d6 shots? With str 9 ap-4. Manking stronger than the standard version opf the castellans plasmacannon and only slightly worse than the relic version. Yes - this tank will see play with this rule. Kinda weird if the standard repulsor does not get access to this rule as well.


And the powercreep cycle goes into full swing.
If the anti infantry weapon is 2d6 S9 Ap-4 what kinda rediculous stats is the heavy laser destroyer going to have to compete with that.

Why bother competing with stats when you can just compete with a 50 point discount.

i don't follow?
Given the plasma is 31 points and I can't see GW adding 2 points costs for the same weapon that would make the laser destoyer -19 points.
The base points cost is going to have to be higher or it's going to be cheaper than a repulsor.
   
Made in us
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers




So the Repulsor is getting shoot twice rules? Where did this get dropped?
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So the Repulsor is getting shoot twice rules? Where did this get dropped?


Apocalypse faction article on Space Marines.

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/06/17/apocalypse-faction-focus-space-marinesgw-homepage-post-2/

No official confirmation on if itll transfer over to 40k, but its a reasonable inference to make.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Aquilon Optics gives me hope that some of the other Marine vehicles / weapon options will get a badly needed fix in Marine Codex 2.0. Predators, Vindicators, Dreadnaughts, the Repulsor's main turret gun has that huge targeting array (despite the hull-mounted Lascannons being the actual main gun...), lots of stuff in the current Marine book could use that bump.

Not to change the subject there, but Marine codex 2.0 is actually a little worrisome. The rumors I'm hearing are that it's all Primaris and "here's how to use your old Marines as Primaris units now", there's a lot of potential for old Marine units to not make the transition. Here's hoping they caught enough of the backlash over Bretonians and Corsairs to not make that mistake again.

(Although if GW converted all the old Rhino and Land Raider-based tanks to hover-rhinos and Repulsor variants and released a couple of "upgrade" kit to replace the tracks on old Rhino and Land Raiders I'd pull a "Shut up and take my money" on them. I would not argue with Fly on all the Marine armor.)

   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




The Newman wrote:
Aquilon Optics gives me hope that some of the other Marine vehicles / weapon options will get a badly needed fix in Marine Codex 2.0. Predators, Vindicators, Dreadnaughts, the Repulsor's main turret gun has that huge targeting array (despite the hull-mounted Lascannons being the actual main gun...), lots of stuff in the current Marine book could use that bump.

Not to change the subject there, but Marine codex 2.0 is actually a little worrisome. The rumors I'm hearing are that it's all Primaris and "here's how to use your old Marines as Primaris units now", there's a lot of potential for old Marine units to not make the transition. Here's hoping they caught enough of the backlash over Bretonians and Corsairs to not make that mistake again.

(Although if GW converted all the old Rhino and Land Raider-based tanks to hover-rhinos and Repulsor variants and released a couple of "upgrade" kit to replace the tracks on old Rhino and Land Raiders I'd pull a "Shut up and take my money" on them. I would not argue with Fly on all the Marine armor.)

I can see why as a marine player you would eant that but I have to say I hope they don't do that as it doesn't fix the underlying issue that doubel shooting russes caused.
It favoured mass die rolling over actually having the right weapon.
   
Made in us
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers




That would be great for SM armies. I hope this gets the clear.
   
Made in ca
Steadfast Ultramarine Sergeant






Big difference between a doubling shooting model that 300 pts and one thats about 150
   
Made in us
Resolute Ultramarine Honor Guard





 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:


Back to the Repulsor Executioner:
It's definitely going to have a fire-twice property, and it looks like it's main gun will have more than one shot. These are both signs that it will at least break even with the vanilla repulsor. Will it do better? I don't have high hopes, but maybe.


Dont forget the transport capabilities. If the Transport capabilities are tiny, that's going to be what makes them both stink.

My WHFB armies were Bretonians and Tomb Kings. 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 fraser1191 wrote:
Big difference between a doubling shooting model that 300 pts and one thats about 150

No the underlying issue is throwing 20 dice for a 5+ is way better than 3 for a 3+
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





Ice_can wrote:
I can see why as a marine player you would eant that but I have to say I hope they don't do that as it doesn't fix the underlying issue that doubel shooting russes caused.
It favoured mass die rolling over actually having the right weapon.

I totally agree. I'd actually go a step further since it adds to the general problem of the edition being vastly too lethal. Unfortunately that's not going to get fixed without a complete overhaul so the best we can hope for is getting the factions into balance.

As designed Marines seem to be set up to play a gunline that doesn't have great fire output but is tough enough to grind out wins on attrition (which would be forgiving for new players) but to actually make that strategy work in 8th every single thing in the army needs almost twice as many wounds as it actually has. There is no way that's going to happen, so getting the firepower tapped upward is the best we can reasonably expect.

   
Made in us
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers




That raises an interesting point: If a unit is designed as a gunline army, what need is there for transports? The units that need to be in melee usually have abilities or good movement that lets them cross the field quickly. The units that don't are usually long range shooty types.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
That raises an interesting point: If a unit is designed as a gunline army, what need is there for transports? The units that need to be in melee usually have abilities or good movement that lets them cross the field quickly. The units that don't are usually long range shooty types.
You could ask what is the point of many primaris units it feels very much like an army without an identity.
It's a gun line that can't gun line, it's really the aura ball of death army which is super unfun to play as or against.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/18 13:55:09


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut





 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
That raises an interesting point: If a unit is designed as a gunline army, what need is there for transports? The units that need to be in melee usually have abilities or good movement that lets them cross the field quickly. The units that don't are usually long range shooty types.


Game-wise it's because at least some transports bring as many guns per-point as the units they might be carrying and putting static gunline units in transports lowers your drop count. Going first is still a pretty big advantage after all. (It baffles me that GW hasn't done more to address that, they have to have had a ton of suggestions by now and at least some of them had to be good ideas just on probability.)

   
Made in us
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers




I feel like this is getting more and more off topic. I don't see how they can effectively price the new Repulsor with these rules, the weapons, and the transport capacity, and still expect it to be viable or even take-able. Before the shoot twice rule got dropped, it was hypothetically closing to 350pts range. Now with shoot twice, 360-370? That's too much. I doubt it will come to that, but if this ends up being 300 max I'll re-think painting up my old SMs.
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I feel like this is getting more and more off topic. I don't see how they can effectively price the new Repulsor with these rules, the weapons, and the transport capacity, and still expect it to be viable or even take-able. Before the shoot twice rule got dropped, it was hypothetically closing to 350pts range. Now with shoot twice, 360-370? That's too much. I doubt it will come to that, but if this ends up being 300 max I'll re-think painting up my old SMs.


GW almost pathologically overvalues transport capacity, especially in its hybrid units. Dropping from 12 to 6 is going to cover most, if not all, of the cost for being a better gunship.
   
Made in us
Ancient Venerable Dreadnought




San Jose, CA

mew28 wrote:
Ice_can wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:
CapRichard wrote:
So, double shot turret for the executioner in 40k too?




If that doesn’t port over 40k, I’ll be shocked.

Nice way to bump it’s AV potential as a MBT without going crazy.

Now to see it on all the other marine tanks that need it...
So the plasma version becomes 2d6 shots? With str 9 ap-4. Manking stronger than the standard version opf the castellans plasmacannon and only slightly worse than the relic version. Yes - this tank will see play with this rule. Kinda weird if the standard repulsor does not get access to this rule as well.


And the powercreep cycle goes into full swing.
If the anti infantry weapon is 2d6 S9 Ap-4 what kinda rediculous stats is the heavy laser destroyer going to have to compete with that.

Why bother competing with stats when you can just compete with a 50 point discount.


competition isnt the only way to play the game.

If this thing isnt so damn expensive (pl/pts/$€£¥) I might buy it instead of an additional repulsor. At this rate the troop transport version will be $150 & have only 8 weapons, but 12 trans capacity, so probably 270pts.

we can look at the rhino/razorback/pred pricing as a "guide";
Rhino is $37.25
Razorback is $41
Predator is $57.75

Grav-rhino $?
Repulsor $80
Executioner $100
Grav-MTB $?

At this point I'm kinda concerned that the repulsor IS the rhino version & there will not be a "cheaper" version.
   
Made in us
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers




The Rhino costs what it costs because no one uses it anymore and no one is buying it. See the cost of drop pods. There are two at my local store, $60. And they will stay there forever likely.

The Repulsor will be commiserate with other Transpo-tanks out there. 100-120.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/18 20:02:18


 
   
Made in us
Ultramarine Chaplain with Hate to Spare






 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
The Rhino costs what it costs because no one uses it anymore and no one is buying it. See the cost of drop pods. There are two at my local store, $60. And they will stay there forever likely.

Nobody's buying Rhinos because we already have a bunch left over from the glorious Gladius Formation

And They Shall Not Fit Through Doors!!!

Tyranid Army Progress -- With Classic Warriors!:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/743240.page#9671598 
   
Made in us
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers




 Insectum7 wrote:
 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
The Rhino costs what it costs because no one uses it anymore and no one is buying it. See the cost of drop pods. There are two at my local store, $60. And they will stay there forever likely.

Nobody's buying Rhinos because we already have a bunch left over from the glorious Gladius Formation


Also that. But honestly, every day GW is making it clearer that regulars are being squatted. They are dropping older models from shelves, removing things, making them special orders, etc. Keep on those Rhinos, because they are going to be collectors items in a couple years.
   
 
Forum Index » 40K General Discussion
Go to: