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.

By the way, the Basilisk Leman Russ is actually a thing.

My point was more (but that might be my personal problem) that in both cases I see open toped chimera chassis. But I see that there is already some abstraction at work since technically no matter how well protected the hull of the Manticore and Deathstrike are: both carry large, unarmored missiles and one good hit there should blow them up pretty quick.

Nontheless: I think such a "modularity" in vehicle design would not be that hard to transfer ruleswise. One could maybe separate the hull costs/toughness/wounds from the turret. So a Leman Russ would be T8 W10 hull + T8 W2 turret + BC, a Basilisk might be T7 W9 hull + a T5 W 1 gunshield + an eartshaker resulting in a T6 W10 vehicle etc.
Again: just a wild thought. What I find attractive about that is that with relatively small effort one could create the opportunity for quite some variation in models while keeping the whole simpleness of STCs as described in the fluff. And from GWs perspective the number of kits would be relatively small. Two or three hull kits (with some upgrades like track guard etc.), a "turrets" kit including heavy (LR), medium (Hellhound) and light (Chimera/Baneblade sponson) and an artillery kit with the missiles, a gunshield that fits earthshakers as well as Hydras, the Hydra/Wyvern gun and a heavy mortar/Medusa/earthshaker gun that might share parts similar to the current battlecannon/Vanquisher gun.

Just to dream a bit from there one could scrab the "intermediate" Malcador or rather change it to having 2 turret mounts which might (!) make it situational interesting even without doubletap option.

Stylewise I personally like the general concept of the current line but I think some areas like the LR "engine deck" could use some more details. And (again personal preference) the calibers of the guns could be toned down a bit and the turrets enlarged to make it more believable that someone really manages to load these cannons.

Pyroalchi wrote:
Stylewise I personally like the general concept of the current line but I think some areas like the LR "engine deck" could use some more details. And (again personal preference) the calibers of the guns could be toned down a bit and the turrets enlarged to make it more believable that someone really manages to load these cannons.

The Leman Russes (supposedly) have autoloaders. AFAIK their cannons being manually loaded was taken from the Tanith First and Only books by Forge World to figure out how the crew of 4 works (it is actually commander + driver + gunner + comms/hull gunner).

Pyroalchi wrote:
My point was more (but that might be my personal problem) that in both cases I see open toped chimera chassis. But I see that there is already some abstraction at work since technically no matter how well protected the hull of the Manticore and Deathstrike are: both carry large, unarmored missiles and one good hit there should blow them up pretty quick.

Nontheless: I think such a "modularity" in vehicle design would not be that hard to transfer ruleswise. One could maybe separate the hull costs/toughness/wounds from the turret. So a Leman Russ would be T8 W10 hull + T8 W2 turret + BC, a Basilisk might be T7 W9 hull + a T5 W 1 gunshield + an eartshaker resulting in a T6 W10 vehicle etc.
Again: just a wild thought. What I find attractive about that is that with relatively small effort one could create the opportunity for quite some variation in models while keeping the whole simpleness of STCs as described in the fluff. And from GWs perspective the number of kits would be relatively small. Two or three hull kits (with some upgrades like track guard etc.), a "turrets" kit including heavy (LR), medium (Hellhound) and light (Chimera/Baneblade sponson) and an artillery kit with the missiles, a gunshield that fits earthshakers as well as Hydras, the Hydra/Wyvern gun and a heavy mortar/Medusa/earthshaker gun that might share parts similar to the current battlecannon/Vanquisher gun.

Just to dream a bit from there one could scrab the "intermediate" Malcador or rather change it to having 2 turret mounts which might (!) make it situational interesting even without doubletap option.

Stylewise I personally like the general concept of the current line but I think some areas like the LR "engine deck" could use some more details. And (again personal preference) the calibers of the guns could be toned down a bit and the turrets enlarged to make it more believable that someone really manages to load these cannons.

I'm not really sure about the mix&match turrets thing, but yeah, better scaling/archtitechture would be cool.

This could be solved model wise by simply adopting the Demolisher "wide" turret for all Leman Russ kits, doing away with the "narrow" turret and moving the commander's hatch to the side. The Leman Russ has a bunch of problems though, including a tall hull, small turret ring, and tiny turret. At the same time, I wouldn't want to change it's signature look for a more realistic one, maybe just adjust it so it doesn't look like the commander's legs are in the same place as the breech.

As for the mix/match hulls/turrets, it doesn't really make sense to me. Vehicle families are a thing since sharing parts between all the vehicles is good, but having the same vehicle on multiple set ups sounds like a recipe for "entertaining" logistical problems.



Technically, the Chimera in on the Basilisk chassis. The Legion Basilisk uses a recognizable modern basilisk chassis with some SM-styled greebling, and existed before the Chimera was created, so the Imperium had an spg and then said "hey, we can make an IFV out of this!"

My headcannon says that after the creation of the Leman Russ during the Great Crusade, and effort was made to standardize the army onto the Leman Russ chassis out of a desire for a vehicle family and streamlined production flow as the Russ replaced the Carnodon, thus explaining the Leman Russ Basilisk. But it was just too small for an effective APC design to replace the Aurox and the artillery variants weren't really all that ergonomical or well set up for the mounting of heavy artillery. But when the legions were broken and the Basilisks became available, it was realized that the larger Basilisk chassis could form the standardized vehicle family for the newly reformed Imperial Guard, and the Leman Russ was kept as the only out-of-family vehicle.

Kind of on-topic but not quite, modifying the standard Russ turret to have the hatch jutting out to one side (like the Macharius) would be cool af and, as ILK said, go some way toward explaining how the commander doesn’t get his legs pulverised every time the cannon fires.

 DalekCheese wrote:
go some way toward explaining how the commander doesn’t get his legs pulverised every time the cannon fires.

As with many things in WH40K I've come to the conclusion the answer is "magic".

There is so much wrong with the size of the vehicles it isn't worth thinking about. I know the crew compartment can be fairly tight but there is only enough space in a Russ for about 6 shells, even if you are going with caseless ammo. Heck look at the Marine models, they've generally only got one mag for their bolters.

But I still think the heroic scale vehicle weapons looks cool. Scale tank weapons always look puny.

i just figured the turret being that small and the gun being that big was part of the heroic scaling, and therefore exaggerated.
I also headcannon the russ's battle cannon to basically be a howitzer, for it's short range and HE effect on the tabletop.
Would make sense for it to recoil into a small turret becasue the recoil would be miimal in comparison to even a mid velocity cannon.

I mean it's mainly going against fortified positions, lightly armoured xenos skimmers, monsters, infantry and other tractor tanks, to think it actually has to be good is A redundant due to the nature of it's design and B irrelevant due to what it's having to fight. Better to go the route of the ISU152 stick a big arse howitzer in it and drop tons of ordnance on the enemy and in my opinion this suits the guard nicely.

In this line of logic the Vanquisher, actually being armed with a gun and not a howitzer or mortar either has a much smaller gun(which would make sense why it does not have a HE option), or advanced recoil systems. But that is kind of irrelevant becasue it's trash unfortunately.

Just like the Cadian's rifles, they are very big. Or the guard heavy weapons, 2 people seriously can''t carry something that big around.

 OldMate wrote:
i just figured the turret being that small and the gun being that big was part of the heroic scaling, and therefore exaggerated.
I also headcannon the russ's battle cannon to basically be a howitzer, for it's short range and HE effect on the tabletop.
Would make sense for it to recoil into a small turret becasue the recoil would be miimal in comparison to even a mid velocity cannon.

I mean it's mainly going against fortified positions, lightly armoured xenos skimmers, monsters, infantry and other tractor tanks, to think it actually has to be good is A redundant due to the nature of it's design and B irrelevant due to what it's having to fight. Better to go the route of the ISU152 stick a big arse howitzer in it and drop tons of ordnance on the enemy and in my opinion this suits the guard nicely.

In this line of logic the Vanquisher, actually being armed with a gun and not a howitzer or mortar either has a much smaller gun(which would make sense why it does not have a HE option), or advanced recoil systems. But that is kind of irrelevant becasue it's trash unfortunately.

Just like the Cadian's rifles, they are very big. Or the guard heavy weapons, 2 people seriously can''t carry something that big around.

It has AP & HE shells, as per IA1 which had some "entertaining" rules for filling a Leman Russ's ammunition stocks. I think it's like a regular Sherman to a Firefly. It fights most tanks well enough, and it has a adequate HE shell. It does have "long range" under the game's pretty serious range compression.

The Vanquisher is a Firefly, with a very powerful specialized AT gun, and the Demolisher would be the 105mm support howitzer

In my humble opinion the Russ is a piece of junk, they also suggested the best russes have a performance similar to the M1A2 Abrams, which is entertaining given the model.

I don't think the russ is a sherman, firefly or cromwell, if was meant to be a decent tank it'd look like one, the only thing we have to go off is the model and well, it speaks for itself.

It's a piece of junk in a universe where the closest competitors are either woefully unarmoured skimmers, riveted together tractor tanks or an APC with a fire-support turret placed on it.

So really it's actually pretty good relatively speaking.

It's main gun does not appear to be a gun, and for such a small turret it does not make sense, besides looking at the forgeworld models the battle cannon is very clearly a howitzer. Not only that but it would be much better off being a howitzer than a gun, because a gun would offer no advantages.

Velocity don't matter to fire HEAT and that is equally good for killing enemy armour and infantry, so you'd only need one ammo type. And you don't have storage capacity for a wide range of ammo, or a lot of ammo with the russ model. Especially if you have like 3 hull heavy bolters that need feeding.

The Vanquisher is the gun variant. Presumably rarer becasue howitzer works so well against most targets.

As a tanker, I try not to think about the interior layout of the Leman Russ. I am assuming that the model designers also did not think about the interior layout of the Leman Russ. Aesthetically, though, its a beautifully ugly tank and its about as iconic an item as we can get for the IG/AM. I embrace change as long as everything I am familiar with stays exactly the same so don't go messing with my Russes.

Speaking of which, which Regiment could they make into the next plastic box? The Cadians are familiar/iconic, and can be painted in a variety of schemes to represent Tallarans, Mordians or Catachans. On the other hand, why would they invest money into redoing a kit that is....OK? Sure the kit is old enough to drive and its about as exciting as a bowl of sand, but its functional.

A Catachan kit could be nice, since the 1999 one is just bad. My metal Catachans try to keep their distance on the tabletop from those plastic fellows. On the negative side it would also be much less flexible than the Cadians - Catachans are Catachans no matter how you paint them. Tallarans and Mordians are cool but very niche, even for the 40K hipsters. Valhallans are an option, I suppose. But you can make them with pretty much any WW2 Soviet kit - very hard to defend against the IP boarding 3rd-parties.

Which maybe leaves us with Steel Legion? No faces to mess up. Great coats to make the great coat brigade happy. Iconic, and with a WW1 aesthetic that the WW2 kits can't just substitute for. Done! Sign me up for the CAD course.

So I guess we'll just keep our Cadian kit.

With respect to the Russ, I think what has amused me most was the actual cutaway diagrams that have been done by GW and FW, showing the main gun breach to essentially fill the entire space of the turret below the hatch, making it impossible to actually enter, exit, or stand in the hatch

The Russ is a wonderful steampunky retro vehicle that really fit the game's more cartoony and old-school-D&D-esque vibe from older editions, though as GW's aesthetic changes over time, it's becoming increasingly out of place next to other product lines I think (especially with the removal of the accessory sprue and stuff like track guards). While stuff like the Eldar Falcon has kinda proven immune to the ravages of time and worked well unchanged since 2E, the Russ just hasn't aged as well, especially next to things like the the newer Space Marine and AdMech releases. I think the Mortian battle tank (done by a former FW sculptor who did the Macharius) is a far better design for the current edition while maintaining the same vibe.

Kayback wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Nothing that looks "modern" or "World War II". No stetsons. No pith helmets.That trash is for Infinity and their nonsensical tropes, not for 40k.

What does that leave you with?...

Solar Auxilia. Baroque diving-helmet spacesuits.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
...The Russ is a wonderful steampunky retro vehicle that really fit the game's more cartoony and old-school-D&D-esque vibe from older editions...

It is? It just looks like a bizarrely-tall Sherman expy to me...

 Vaktathi wrote:
With respect to the Russ, I think what has amused me most was the actual cutaway diagrams that have been done by GW and FW, showing the main gun breach to essentially fill the entire space of the turret below the hatch, making it impossible to actually enter, exit, or stand in the hatch

The Russ is a wonderful steampunky retro vehicle that really fit the game's more cartoony and old-school-D&D-esque vibe from older editions, though as GW's aesthetic changes over time, it's becoming increasingly out of place next to other product lines I think (especially with the removal of the accessory sprue and stuff like track guards). While stuff like the Eldar Falcon has kinda proven immune to the ravages of time and worked well unchanged since 2E, the Russ just hasn't aged as well, especially next to things like the the newer Space Marine and AdMech releases. I think the Mortian battle tank (done by a former FW sculptor who did the Macharius) is a far better design for the current edition while maintaining the same vibe.

Sorry, have to disagree with you on the comparison of the Russ to the new primaris tanks. That's like comparing a classic car to its modern namesake, one has its own kind of style, the other looks like it was designed by a focus group of marketing execs. Probably from Hasbro.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
With respect to the Russ, I think what has amused me most was the actual cutaway diagrams that have been done by GW and FW, showing the main gun breach to essentially fill the entire space of the turret below the hatch, making it impossible to actually enter, exit, or stand in the hatch

The Russ is a wonderful steampunky retro vehicle that really fit the game's more cartoony and old-school-D&D-esque vibe from older editions, though as GW's aesthetic changes over time, it's becoming increasingly out of place next to other product lines I think (especially with the removal of the accessory sprue and stuff like track guards). While stuff like the Eldar Falcon has kinda proven immune to the ravages of time and worked well unchanged since 2E, the Russ just hasn't aged as well, especially next to things like the the newer Space Marine and AdMech releases. I think the Mortian battle tank (done by a former FW sculptor who did the Macharius) is a far better design for the current edition while maintaining the same vibe.

Sorry, have to disagree with you on the comparison of the Russ to the new primaris tanks. That's like comparing a classic car to its modern namesake, one has its own kind of style, the other looks like it was designed by a focus group of marketing execs. Probably from Hasbro.

Both can be true , though honestly the newer SM tanks remind me a lot of some old GI-Joe toys, and while I'm not a huge actual fan of the Primaris tank designs like the Repulsor, the newer stuff in general from almost all factions has a visual different vibe, there's a lot more gubbins, details a bit sharper, they tend to have more stuff like sensors/antennae/cameras, etc.

 AnomanderRake wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
...The Russ is a wonderful steampunky retro vehicle that really fit the game's more cartoony and old-school-D&D-esque vibe from older editions...

It is? It just looks like a bizarrely-tall Sherman expy to me...

Mostly I was referring to the proportions, stuff like the ginormous gun caliber coupled to the tiny turret, complete lack of suspension, etc

 Vaktathi wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:
...The Russ is a wonderful steampunky retro vehicle that really fit the game's more cartoony and old-school-D&D-esque vibe from older editions...

It is? It just looks like a bizarrely-tall Sherman expy to me...

Mostly I was referring to the proportions, stuff like the ginormous gun caliber coupled to the tiny turret, complete lack of suspension, etc

I got a few Team Yankee models recently, and they have me really wishing I could have an in-scale Merkava or Leopard 2 as a Russ proxy without being accused of modeling for advantage because I have tanks of reasonable height...

 AnomanderRake wrote:


It is? It just looks like a bizarrely-tall Sherman expy to me...

It has very sherman-esque lines. The turret also has a bit of Panzer IV with the centered hatch behind the gun and the general more hex-shape, but it also looks like an M4/76 turret in general lines.

And of course, the way the engine and slope of the glacis are very sherman-esque, though the all-round tracks are evocative of earlier tanks.

I generally think of the Battle Cannon as like the 75mm gun. Good HE, pretty okay AP too against most threats, but not so great against the big stuff.



Maybe I'd like to see an IG M10/M36/Achilles. That would be pretty neat. Or a Archer on the Chimera chassis would be pretty cool.

steel legion would be nice in plastics. Or a WW1-2 British themed army. But 3rd party sorta has that market covered so maybe they could attempt to re-birth some of their old ideas.

I'd fully support a re-release of the leman russ as the Indiana Jones tank it always wanted to be. Squish it down slightly, so it looks a bit sportier next to a Malcador, add a longer rear section.
Boxy 2-3 man turret.

Or give it a more churchill shaped hull.
It's not my idea of a great tank, but it'd look great for most guard units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Catachans and Elysians really want a space Centurion though.

I think a generic kit with some add-on sprues for regiments may be the best way forward.

So a lightweight flak vest, with tunic arms and normal combat boots, and a small helmet. Generic enough that it could go to more or less any regiment in light dress.

Then put out a few sprues of add-ons. So things like bare arms and bandana'd heads for Catachans, greatcoats and stick on masks for steel legion (taking inspo from the coat in the Scion kit), different helmets, etc.

 OldMate wrote:
steel legion would be nice in plastics. Or a WW1-2 British themed army. But 3rd party sorta has that market covered so maybe they could attempt to re-birth some of their old ideas.

as the Indiana Jones tank it always wanted to be.

??

As an aside to all this, here’s someone who built a full interior for his Russ, and the only modification needed was a thin plasticard spacer between the upper and lower hull pieces: https://m.imgur.com/a/LQpS3FK

You don't think the russ was primarily inspired by this?

And it' wouldn't look bad. Just move the drive's position and put a gun in the front hull.

 DalekCheese wrote:

As cool as that is the only reason it works is the super sub caliber main gun, especially down from the Demolisher cannon. And holy unsafe ammo storage. That's asking for a brew up.

Also what's wrong with plastic steel legion or a similar british/american themed faction? They already have ww2 germans and russians so you might as well complete the collection


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe a Chimera based assault gun, like a stug, cheap as and packs a cannon, or battlefield artilley such as towed battle cannon, or vanquisers. and towed flack arrays.

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
As a tanker, I try not to think about the interior layout of the Leman Russ.

An important note here is that the Leman Russ is controlled by a neural bridge interface, called the Mind Impulse Unit in-setting. So IRL crew experiences cannot really apply because, well, you don't have that thing in modern tanks, and it is a kind of game-changer if you think about it.

 OldMate wrote:
You don't think the russ was primarily inspired by this?

Spoiler:

And it' wouldn't look bad. Just move the drive's position and put a gun in the front hull.

This kit is actually 28mm if anyone is interested http://www.copplestonecastings.co.uk/

Oh, fair enough. I hadn’t connected the two. Yeah, I can see that.

that nicely done out Leman Russ with the interior does look way better than the standard one, I suspect though the bulk of the improvement externally is the longer, but narrower gun barrel that removes the ARVE look and makes it look like an actual long barrel tank gun - extended bustle is nice but more 'modern' in outlook.

just dropping the width of the gun barrels makes them look a lot better

Copplestone vehicle It's OPP :(


Automatically Appended Next Post:

leopard wrote:
that nicely done out Leman Russ with the interior does look way better than the standard one, I suspect though the bulk of the improvement externally is the longer, but narrower gun barrel that removes the ARVE look and makes it look like an actual long barrel tank gun - extended bustle is nice but more 'modern' in outlook.

just dropping the width of the gun barrels makes them look a lot better

I'd have to agree, LARP barrels don't look too nice, if the main gun was a bit smaller it'd make a hell of a difference

 OldMate wrote:
Also what's wrong with plastic steel legion or a similar british/american themed faction? They already have ww2 germans and russians so you might as well complete the collection


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe a Chimera based assault gun, like a stug, cheap as and packs a cannon, or battlefield artilley such as towed battle cannon, or vanquisers. and towed flack arrays.

Mostly because the towed array take too long to set up. The G5 L45 towed artillery has a 90 second into /out of action time. A minute and a half is a long time in game terms. At least one turn setting up. Self propelled G6 L45 is sub 60 seconds. With complaints about games being over by turn 2 they wouldn't have much use.

Edit fixed turn complaint number

As cheap guns to bring on the field, I guess this would make campers a real pain, although, I can see the guard quite typically camping with a big line of guns, towed and otherwise

 OldMate wrote:


As cheap guns to bring on the field, I guess this would make campers a real pain, although, I can see the guard quite typically camping with a big line of guns, towed and otherwise

pdf seem more campy then regular guard.

 AtoMaki wrote:

TangoTwoBravo wrote:
As a tanker, I try not to think about the interior layout of the Leman Russ.

An important note here is that the Leman Russ is controlled by a neural bridge interface, called the Mind Impulse Unit in-setting. So IRL crew experiences cannot really apply because, well, you don't have that thing in modern tanks, and it is a kind of game-changer if you think about it.

What Black Library books are you reading? The MIU is an Admech thing. Guard vehicles control just like modern ones. Even marine tanks don't have MIUs.