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.
2019/06/30 08:46:31
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
BrianDavion wrote: as for what it does. It gives Primaris Marines a SERIOUS anti-tank option. I mean, one of the things people always would qualify about all Primaris Marines is "their anti-tank isn't very good" this new tank gives a primaris army a solid bit of anti-tank work, we can argue about the points cost all day long but points costs change as time goes by, and GW's been pretty consistant about pricing primaris high and eventually moving the points costs down. so yeah it does give Primaris something they need.
If i want a serious anti tank option for marines i go with the quad lascannon contemptor mortis dreadnought. For 300 pts i can almost get two of them. That 8 lascannon shots, hitting on 2s, with 5+ inv., with chapter tactics, which the executioner doesnt get. Go with RG, and they get -1 to hit at 12+". The repulsor gets +1 to hit with an anti FLY weapon Move is 9" for the dread, compared to 10" for the executioner, still hitting on 3s, like the executioner. This repulsor is DOA. GW has no idea how to make a viable marine tank.
You also need two HS slots. And Forgeworld.
8 shots hitting on threes is 5.36 hits, wounding on 3's is 3.5912 - *3.5 (average roll on a D6) is 12.56, 10.47 after armor saves. 10 hellblasters are similarly costed - probably within about 4 points - and put out more damage on the rapid fire for one Heavy Support Slot.
5 Plasma Inceptors at ~10% fewer points, and the FAR less crowded Fast Attack slot do 13.4 wounds
Your Two Contemptor Mortis dreads are: not Serious Anti-Tank compared to basic GW options, somehow appreciably better than a Repulsor Executioner, and not any sort of proof the Executioner is a bad tank. Its not actually a bad tank. Its not a great tank either. It won't be DOA or a Must Take.
KurtAngle2 wrote: 293 Points with Laser, 284 with Plasma Incinerator.
Seems cheap as feth and honestly wouldn't be taking any other anti-vehicle units
300 points, 1 HS slot is not "cheap" - 1 HS slot of 10 Hellblasters gets far more (Anti-Tank viable) shots - with likely more wounds per round - per HS slot for similar points.
Vs T8 3+, No Invuln:
10 Hellblasters (Overcharged + Single/Rapid Fire) - 110% of the points - 10/20 shots, 6.5/13 hits, 3.25/6.5 successful wounds doing 6.5/13 damage.
1 Repulsor Laser Destroyer 4 shots, 2.68 hits, 1.7956 successful wounding rolls, 7.1824 damage.
Macro Plasma 7 shots, 4.69 hits, 3.1423 wounding rolls, 6.2846 damage
T8 vs Cover + discarded multi-wound damage is a situational wash. A person's local meta could easily benefit either over the other more often.
The Repuslor does have the benefit of secondary and tertiary weapons systems to allow some anti-personnel as well as anti-tank work and the drawback of a higher target priority, all eggs/one basket.
Fewer shots as Hellblasters die, and less accurate shots is probably a wash overall, with peaks and valleys depending on the wound tier.
So neither the fully kitted out Hellblasters nor the Repulsor are cheap. Nor do they appear all that expensive once you look at the math.
Compared to Devastators -
Min Size Devs, 4 ML's 50-60% of the points, 4 shots, 2.68 hits, 1.34 wounding rolls, 4.69 wounds, 3.1423 after armor saves.
Compared to Interceptors (5, Plasma)
5 x 2D3 shots = 20 shots, 13.4 hits, 6.7 wounding rolls, 13.4 wounds - roughly halfway between the Hellblasters, and the Repulsor in points cost, and the less crowded FA slot - Durability is far far less assured - they will get a guaranteed turn of work, but could be forced into a practically throw away situation, even if not, probably next turn opposition reaction will be hard on them, and assuming the deep alpha strike usage, Captain/Lieutenant/Gulliman aura support is less assumed - but still easily doable - than it is for the units mentioned already making 20 overcharged shots potentially suicidal for 3 of them.
Just looked at the data sheet - two interesting things jumped out at me. Can't upgrade the twin HB's into Twin LC's, and the Gatling Cannon really is the Heavy Onslaught not the smaller Onslaught. Which I figure is nice, but a mistake. They stuck both right arm options of the Redemptor (one of which was already the main gun for the first Repulsor as well) in the turret at the same time. This diminishses the Redemptor a bit, plus throws off the scale a bit as well. The mini turrets above the doors weren't removed, they were just moved. They're now on the back of the big turret where they weren't very visible. Options for many of these turrets have gone away and they're just hard coded - they will be launchers/stormbolters/whatever they start as rather than being swappable.
Why the heck would you bother doing the calculations for Devs if you're only going to give them Missile Launchers? Plasma or Las at least if you're calculating vs. T8 3+
BrianDavion wrote: as for what it does. It gives Primaris Marines a SERIOUS anti-tank option. I mean, one of the things people always would qualify about all Primaris Marines is "their anti-tank isn't very good" this new tank gives a primaris army a solid bit of anti-tank work, we can argue about the points cost all day long but points costs change as time goes by, and GW's been pretty consistant about pricing primaris high and eventually moving the points costs down. so yeah it does give Primaris something they need.
See Above: Hellblasters and Plasma Interceptors are both within some +/- margins for anti-tank and points costs. If the anti-tank was bad before, it's still bad. If this is good anti-tank they had good anti-tank before. Of course, I'll allow perception and reality are rarely the same, it may improve perception of Primaris Anti-tank. This Repulsor is unlikely to come down in price unless the other does, and neither is likely to happen this edition. They'll perform on par with other choices for similar points, plus have added secondary and tertiary weapons/roles. This one is theoretically cheaper for everything you want it to do than the normal Repulsor except transport - and neither is really taken as a transport first, tank second - the transport capacity is the frosting, not the cake.
A key part you're forgetting - range.
15-18 is not a good place for your AT to operate without becoming suicide squads. While they could do the job, they really only had one way to do it. Worse, it was immediately telegraphed to your opponent. They are effective but easy to counter. Now there's another option with range.
Variety is important. This provides AT in a heavily armoured package that operates very differently than Hellblasters and Inceptors. Some lists could very much make use of a couple of these while others that built different AT solutions would find it hard to fit them in. As usual, new unit, new lists - folks who are too set in their preferences don't need it. They'll only misuse the damn thing anyway.
2019/06/30 15:51:31
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
The new Repulsor is good in my opinion. Easy to include in lists and projects a lot of firepower at respectable ranges. It is not invulnerable, so any list using it will require redundancy, target saturation and will need to place pressure on an opponent in other ways.
The firepower is comparable to a Knight Crusader, at 200 points less. 3 of these cost only 150 points more than a single Castellan, and they'll grant you 48 T8 wounds with Fly. Prepared positions makes them more durable in the early turns.
It's easy to target a tank in the distance, but less so if the opponent it belongs to has surrounded your units and has claimed objectives across the board.
-~Ishagu~-
2019/06/30 15:57:34
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
Breton wrote: This Repulsor is unlikely to come down in price unless the other does, and neither is likely to happen this edition.
you realize the repulsor has already gotten a points drop this edition yeah?
What does that matter? Was the points drop recent enough it occurred after they priced this one, so this one was priced on the old price model? The old one with a Heavy Onslaught Turret (and TLHB to match the new one as close as possible) is 272 with carrying capacity 10. The new one has everything the first one does minus a couple krakstorm launchers, adds a second Icarus Ironhail to the first and twin linked them, plus added a second turret main gun, AND gave it the ability to double-tap the new main gun while taking away 4 transport capacity - for what did people say? about 27 points? The two repulsors are going to be pretty linked on price, and this new one isn't going down unless the old one does first/as well. And expected performance for the first one is fairly comparable to other units performing similar functions.
A regular Land Raider 297 points - 2 TLLC - 4 shots, 2.68 hits, 1.7956 wounding rolls, 6.2846 wounds, 5.235 after Armor Saves. They're going to keep the Primaris stuff slightly better and slightly cheaper than the old stuff, but they're not going to break the game.
Every marine vehicle deserves at least a 10-15 point drop for not having chapter tactics which should really scale with how expensive the unit is. Obviously a -1 to hit is worth more on a LR than a rhino. This is across the board no questions asked. You have to accept this. There is no reason for marine tanks to no have CT or point drops. On top of this. LR are bad. They are really bad. They are the epitome of bad. They cost too dang much and everyone knows it and everyone is tired of explaining why. Just listen to us. We know. They aren't getting played because they are bad. You cant use them as a measuring stick for things. Repuslors at the end of the day are still better than LR. This doesn't mean a Repulsor is a good unit though. Its at the better end of the marine spectrum if you don't go to forge world. Marines are a bottom tier army though that every unit is made deliberately bad because they have good buff auras.
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
2019/06/30 15:58:52
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
Ishagu wrote: The new Repulsor is good in my opinion. Easy to include in lists and projects a lot of firepower at respectable ranges. It is not invulnerable, so any list using it will require redundancy, target saturation and will need to place pressure on an opponent in other ways.
The firepower is comparable to a Knight Crusader, at 200 points less. 3 of these cost only 150 points more than a single Castellan, and they'll grant you 48 T8 wounds with Fly. Prepared positions makes them more durable in the early turns.
It's easy to target a tank in the distance, but less so if the opponent it belongs to has surrounded your units and has claimed objectives across the board.
Is it really comparable to a crusader though? A crusader has access to a relic weapon moves farther is devastating in assault can act normal when it falls back. It's damage potential is propably more around double than equal to a repulsorEX. Plus of course. On demand 4++ from shooting and 8 more wounds and a house trait. It's not even in the same ball park dude.
A good example was made - you don't get a lot going from a pred to a repulsor for around 100 points. You get a lot more for 100 more points on a crusader.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ishagu wrote: There are rumors that Astartes will get modified chapter tactics on vehicles in the next codex, expected in the second half of September.
That will be welcome. Not sure why it takes 2 years to make such an obvious change but it will help.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/30 16:08:56
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
Although I do agree a Knight Crusader is better than a Repulsor, and by more than 100 points. However, they're a top-tier competitive unit. Not that does not equal garbage.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2019/06/30 16:19:06
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
Reading the leaked datasheet and point costs for the Repulsor Executioner made me wonder: is there a good reason to take regular Repulsor over the Executioner?
The difference of anti-infantry firepower between two variants is little, yet the Executioner sports far greater anti-tank firepower.
The Executioner also has plethora of special rules which the regular variant already has, including auto launchers and -2 penalty to enemy charge rolls.
And yet the difference in points cost between the two Repulsor variants is only about 20, assuming the regular variant takes all-out anti-infantry weaponry.
The regular Repulsor can carry four more Primaris models, but I have rarely seen this extra transport capability come into action.
Not unless someone wishes to carry 10 Hellblasters safely until they are in range, but with abundance of to-hit penalties nowadays large unit of Hellblasters do not seem appealing.
2019/06/30 16:29:42
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
Sagittarii Orientalis wrote: Reading the leaked datasheet and point costs for the Repulsor Executioner made me wonder: is there a good reason to take regular Repulsor over the Executioner?
The difference of anti-infantry firepower between two variants is little, yet the Executioner sports far greater anti-tank firepower.
The Executioner also has plethora of special rules which the regular variant already has, including auto launchers and -2 penalty to enemy charge rolls.
And yet the difference in points cost between the two Repulsor variants is only about 20, assuming the regular variant takes all-out anti-infantry weaponry.
The regular Repulsor can carry four more Primaris models, but I have rarely seen this extra transport capability come into action.
Not unless someone wishes to carry 10 Hellblasters safely until they are in range, but with abundance of to-hit penalties nowadays large unit of Hellblasters do not seem appealing.
Absolutely. The Regular Repulsor is not punished for moving. It acts as a fire support tank, advancing with other units.
This new variant is a more static, ranged unit.
-~Ishagu~-
2019/06/30 16:47:27
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
Sagittarii Orientalis wrote: Reading the leaked datasheet and point costs for the Repulsor Executioner made me wonder: is there a good reason to take regular Repulsor over the Executioner?
The difference of anti-infantry firepower between two variants is little, yet the Executioner sports far greater anti-tank firepower.
The Executioner also has plethora of special rules which the regular variant already has, including auto launchers and -2 penalty to enemy charge rolls.
And yet the difference in points cost between the two Repulsor variants is only about 20, assuming the regular variant takes all-out anti-infantry weaponry.
The regular Repulsor can carry four more Primaris models, but I have rarely seen this extra transport capability come into action.
Not unless someone wishes to carry 10 Hellblasters safely until they are in range, but with abundance of to-hit penalties nowadays large unit of Hellblasters do not seem appealing.
I imagine one could do quite well to take a Repulsor kitted for anti-infantry with four Aggressors and a Gravis Captain while hammering away at enemy armor with two Executioners in the back.
If the truth can destroy it, then it deserves to be destroyed.
Is it really comparable to a crusader though? A crusader has access to a relic weapon moves farther is devastating in assault can act normal when it falls back. It's damage potential is propably more around double than equal to a repulsorEX. Plus of course. On demand 4++ from shooting and 8 more wounds and a house trait. It's not even in the same ball park dude.
A good example was made - you don't get a lot going from a pred to a repulsor for around 100 points. You get a lot more for 100 more points on a crusader.
Different models with different rules. If I fly my repulsor executioner up onto a ruin exactly what can that Knight Crusader do to it in assault? Fly is an amazing keyword to have if you know how to use it - unless you are playing on planet bowling ball in which case I'd suggest finding a better place to play your games.
I don't see how you think the Crusader has double the damage output. Its shooting does not really justify the additional 160 points and its CC output is highly situational - both on whether you can afford to commit it to assault and on whether anything it wants to fight is standing at ground level.
As for the las-predator comparision, for 100 points you get nearly 60 points of additional weapons (literally that much of the cost difference is in the points you pay for all that dakka) plus more toughness, more wounds and Fly. Effectively 40 points for +1T, +5W and Fly seems OK to me, although this did remind me why I think las-predators are so terrible.
Of course where the Knight does benefit is in having some great stratagems etc. This is the real problem with Primaris units and by now I think we all know it - desperately poor access to decent stratagems. So if you have CP to burn the Knight will perform better than the Repulsor Executioner because it has great ways to turn CP into extra durability/firepower. With the Repulsor you need to have units elsewhere in your list which can make use of the CP because this one really cannot. If they fix this one thing in a new codex they will immediately make Primaris armies a lot more fun to play - right now pure primaris feel a lot like an index army.
So if the Knight is the thing in your list in which you invest all your CP then it will perform better than a Repulsor Executioner. If the repulsor is in a list where something else is what you invest all your CP in (for me its smash captains, because why not) then you still get plenty of bang for your CP you just get it elsewhere in your list. For me the Knight is not an obvious choice because for those points I can have the tank and a smash captain and still have some points to spare and not use a detachment.
2019/06/30 20:06:15
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
right my post was that it gave PRIMARIS an anti-tank option. I know people love the contemptor dreadnought but I'm getting a liiiiiiiittle sick of every bloody post turning into "just buy the motis contemptor" etc
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
Contemptors (with their new cost) are "the" dreadnought to have. They make normal ones, and even the Leviathan obsolete (you can have two Contemptors for the cost of a Leviathan....and that's better, lol)
2019/06/30 21:23:42
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
p5freak wrote: Did we mention it doesnt have an inv, for ~300 pts. ? Even a 30 pts. character has an inv. FLY is great for weapons that get +1 to hit FLY, and there are many of those. Its a bullet magnet, easier to hit, and no inv.
Again take three or take 0.
Also hope you have 300ish dollars to drop.
The reason I'll not get them is I lack 300 dollars to spend on tanks. I'm already buying a gak ton of GW stuff
2019/06/30 21:54:39
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
Ishagu wrote: There are rumors that Astartes will get modified chapter tactics on vehicles in the next codex, expected in the second half of September.
Hmmm, I will take that one with a pinch of salt. Did CSM vehicles gain traits in their v2.0 codex? (Honest question, I don't play CSM and I haven't faced them for months).
I stand between the darkness and the light. Between the candle and the star.
2019/06/30 22:07:24
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
Ishagu wrote: There are rumors that Astartes will get modified chapter tactics on vehicles in the next codex, expected in the second half of September.
Hmmm, I will take that one with a pinch of salt. Did CSM vehicles gain traits in their v2.0 codex? (Honest question, I don't play CSM and I haven't faced them for months).
They did not.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2019/06/30 22:15:11
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
Bleh, I'd much rather see marine traits get a revamp in CA. Somewhere they can just drop them all at once. Same could be said for the other troublesome traits from other factions, and the lackluster traits.
2019/06/30 22:31:03
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
fraser1191 wrote: Bleh, I'd much rather see marine traits get a revamp in CA. Somewhere they can just drop them all at once. Same could be said for the other troublesome traits from other factions, and the lackluster traits.
yeah if they updated traits in a codex they'd almost need to incldue the crimson fists in the codex,
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
2019/06/30 22:31:58
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
Every marine vehicle deserves at least a 10-15 point drop for not having chapter tactics which should really scale with how expensive the unit is. Obviously a -1 to hit is worth more on a LR than a rhino. This is across the board no questions asked. You have to accept this. There is no reason for marine tanks to no have CT or point drops. On top of this. LR are bad. They are really bad. They are the epitome of bad. They cost too dang much and everyone knows it and everyone is tired of explaining why. Just listen to us. We know. They aren't getting played because they are bad. You cant use them as a measuring stick for things. Repuslors at the end of the day are still better than LR. This doesn't mean a Repulsor is a good unit though. Its at the better end of the marine spectrum if you don't go to forge world. Marines are a bottom tier army though that every unit is made deliberately bad because they have good buff auras.
More hyperbole...Look, Xeno - not everyone agrees with you. In fact, based on your rather abrasive attitude and lack of basic candor and cordiality, I'd even think most folks find what you're saying to be not worth listening. I do, because I think you're trying to be helpful. Unfortunately, you're not. I beg of you, please consider abandoning the constant railing against this unit. Folks in here are thinking about ways to make use of it and the one thing they absolutely do not need is some spoil sport coming in here derailing the thread by chastising, attacking, and outright insulting people who want to make use of this new model. It's a cool kit with neat rules! Why can't you just enjoy yourself without having to put others down.
More importantly, I think I speak for a few here when I say it's far more valuable to talk about units as they exist in reality. That means there's really no call to belly ache about something that doesn't exist. Vehicles don't get CTs. That's just how it is and is a known factor. I know it will boil your blood to hear this, but I'm excited for the unit even though it doesn't get CTs! What type of monster must I be, eh?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/06/30 22:32:15
fraser1191 wrote: Bleh, I'd much rather see marine traits get a revamp in CA. Somewhere they can just drop them all at once. Same could be said for the other troublesome traits from other factions, and the lackluster traits.
yeah if they updated traits in a codex they'd almost need to incldue the crimson fists in the codex,
Oh they'd have to or we'd never hear the end of it
That being said has there been much outrage over traits like the bladed cog where they have a 6++ and ignore movement penalty for heavy weapons yet iron hands only have the 6++?
I know given the choice iron hands would probably have preferred moving and shooting heavy weapons....
With capt and lt support, this thing's main weapon averages vs a 5++ is
4 * 0.77 * 0.77 * 0.666 = 1.58 cleared hits. Each hit does an average of 4.5 damage, which is nice. Total damage: 7.1.
Three hits getting through is almost double the average, which is extremely unlikely. Without the 5++, you are looking at 2.37 cleared hits. You are FAR more likely to clear your three hits with an average of 2.37. You still won't, more than half the time though.
Vs an IK, this thing's main weapon does less than 6 damage total.
The devil is in the details. So no, you didn't do the math.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2019/06/30 23:19:25
2019/06/30 23:22:38
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
That being said has there been much outrage over traits like the bladed cog where they have a 6++ and ignore movement penalty for heavy weapons yet iron hands only have the 6++?
I know given the choice iron hands would probably have preferred moving and shooting heavy weapons....
no but by time codex GSC came out Space Marine fans had pretty much come to accept that we had a monkey version of everyone else's chapter tactics
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
2019/06/30 23:25:56
Subject: Re:Speculation on the Repulsor Executioner.
This thing makes the Phobos Librarian Trick even more potent. If you can position the Librarian near enough to a big target with Temporal Corridor and drop Null Zone, you are going to wreck whatever you want with the main Cannon of this tank.
Move is 9" for the dread, compared to 10" for the executioner, still hitting on 3s, like the executioner. This repulsor is 
5250 pts
3850 pts
2500 pts