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.

The question is in the topic title. I have the Deathwatch version, so I have hurricane bolter and lascannon sponsons, as well as assault cannons and heavy bolters for the turret weapon. It's a phenomenal model, and I'd love to use it more. But it's never been worth its points. With the change to vehicles shooting in combat, will things change for it? Does anyone have experience using one yet?

Thanks.

.. hopefully. it'll come down to points cost etc. I have high hopes.

Well, with Multimeltas going up to 2 shots you get to stack a lot of firepower on that thing, and the changes to cover will make it easier for it to protect itself from enemy fire. I'm hoping it'll have a place.

I don't really think so. I don't think the LRs points will change much from CA2020 (if at all), and it still looks ferociously overcosted at 285.

Plus the new tanks are coming. The AT version of the Gladius has 2 multimeltas and a twin-lastalon, and will likely make all the current tanks feel a bit on the under-gunned side.

Insectum7 wrote:The changes to cover will make it easier for it to protect itself from enemy fire

Only the to-hit penalty from dense cover can apply to vehicles, and as soon as the enemy move into that terrain, it no longer applies. And (with some exceptions) if the LR is being protected, so is the enemy.

^Ahh, but obscuring + positioning can mean LOS to target while avoiding the counter fire of its friends.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Ahh, but obscuring + positioning can mean LOS to target while avoiding the counter fire of its friends.

Unless the Land Raider in question is an Achilles.

No, 40k's game mechanics don't mesh well with big fire platforms. Throwing too many eggs in one basket is only valuable if you can buff the hell out of that basket, and you can't really do that with LRs. Short of viciously cutting their points, there's not a great way to make stuff like it valuable in the game.

And they definitely don't make much sense in an eradicator meta.

Short answer is no.

Long answer is they are expensive for a split transport/gun platform that actually isn't all that survivable in this age. If you are going to invest in an expensive platform it has to be worth it in lethality or purpose. The land raider does neither well.

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Ahh, but obscuring + positioning can mean LOS to target while avoiding the counter fire of its friends.

Obscuring is _very_ hard with something the size of a land raider, especially if you're trying to simultaneously draw LOS with the LR. Dense cover is very permissive about granting the -1 to hit, Obscuring doesn't work at all if even a single line can be drawn outside the terrain to any little projection on the tank.

Enemies with even a token amount of mobility should be able to get into a firing spot unless you're using some very sizable and specifically shaped terrain.

The land raider never wasnt good. just cuz it's not in the top 3% of marine units, doesnt make it bad.


It really depends on the rest of your list more than your only source of anti-tank, probably not best. In a balanced list, shouldn't be a detriment.

Racerguy180 wrote:
The land raider never wasnt good. just cuz it's not in the top 3% of marine units, doesnt make it bad.

There's an argument no one made.

It briefly had a shining moment as a delivery vehicle for TH/SS terminators when they could charge right off the tank, but other than that it has been most definitely not good.

To feth with the 'top 3%,' it didn't make the top 60% of marine units most of the time, just an undergunned, overcosted transport. The most common stories about land raiders center around being blown up turn 1 and never contributed anything beyond disproportionately reducing the size of the space marine army.

Bringing one inherently unbalances the list. In smaller lists it just doesn't fit at all, at 2000 its still just eating an eighth of your points for little to no point or return.

Voss wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:
^Ahh, but obscuring + positioning can mean LOS to target while avoiding the counter fire of its friends.

Obscuring is _very_ hard with something the size of a land raider, especially if you're trying to simultaneously draw LOS with the LR. Dense cover is very permissive about granting the -1 to hit, Obscuring doesn't work at all if even a single line can be drawn outside the terrain to any little projection on the tank.

Enemies with even a token amount of mobility should be able to get into a firing spot unless you're using some very sizable and specifically shaped terrain.

Just a ruin towards one corner of the table will suffice. Our local store has a ton of pieces that would do this.

But that shows the problem with it. You're paying a lot of points for transport capacity, and a transport sitting off in a corner somewhere is a terrible use of it.

The landraider is trying to be too many different things and as a result it ends up efficient and therefore competitive for none of them.

Not sure about other armies, but for GK it is better to take the same points and buy paladins or other infantry, and if you want to have a gunboat, then buy dreads or the raven.

Compare a land raider to a repulsor, or a repulsor executioner. The answer is no. GW doesnt want you to play with old models, they want you to buy new models.

For deathwatch, no (although you do get a first turn invuln from the shield relic). I think the Crusader has a place (my Deathwing will be rocking one), but Deathwatch don't have issues bringing massed anti-infantry firepower.

yukishiro1 wrote:
But that shows the problem with it. You're paying a lot of points for transport capacity, and a transport sitting off in a corner somewhere is a terrible use of it.

The landraider is trying to be too many different things and as a result it ends up efficient and therefore competitive for none of them.

Last time I used one I packed it with Devastators to keep them out of harms way for the first turn, it used it's tramsport capacity to help form a firebase. Worked great.

Yeah, or you coulda just put them in a drop pod like everyone else for double the efficiency.

I mean don't get me wrong, if you're enjoying it go for it, by all means.

Voss wrote:

Racerguy180 wrote:
The land raider never wasnt good. just cuz it's not in the top 3% of marine units, doesnt make it bad.

There's an argument no one made.

It briefly had a shining moment as a delivery vehicle for TH/SS terminators when they could charge right off the tank, but other than that it has been most definitely not good.

To feth with the 'top 3%,' it didn't make the top 60% of marine units most of the time, just an undergunned, overcosted transport. The most common stories about land raiders center around being blown up turn 1 and never contributed anything beyond disproportionately reducing the size of the space marine army.

Bringing one inherently unbalances the list. In smaller lists it just doesn't fit at all, at 2000 its still just eating an eighth of your points for little to no point or return.

Yeah, even as a player in a relaxed environment I have to say, the Land Raider was the one unit in my DG Codex where I thought, well, you really have to love that thing to put it in your list and then need Crawlers to compensate / draw fire away from it. So, basically it's like many Forgeworld models

Define good.

Pillar of a top tier list that is going to win multiple events? Maybe not.

But in any casual to semi-competitive meta they'll do fine, if not wonders, like they did in 8th.

The Crusader at least will stay viable since clearing troops is always useful, probably more than ever now, and the 16 seats are very handy for units like wulfen. Maybe even the Redeemer will do fine with smaller tables and longer ranges for flamers; its biggest weakeness was the lack of range, now it may not worry about it anymore.

In short - no. It's far too many points for what you get and due to the inability to fly, it's not even that good of a transport.

 p5freak wrote:
Compare a land raider to a repulsor, or a repulsor executioner. The answer is no. GW doesnt want you to play with old models, they want you to buy new models.

Then why do they make the new models so ugly? Hellforged Land Raider Achilles: T8, 2+, 4++, 19W, 2 twin multi-meltas, and a Soulburner Bombard spitting 2d3 mortal wounds. Bring that ugly floating box.

 p5freak wrote:
Compare a land raider to a repulsor, or a repulsor executioner. The answer is no. GW doesnt want you to play with old models, they want you to buy new models.

The one big flaw in this argument is that repulsors and executioners are terrible garbage as well. Sure, they're better than a landraider but that's not saying a whole lot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blackie wrote:
Define good.

Pillar of a top tier list that is going to win multiple events? Maybe not.

But in any casual to semi-competitive meta they'll do fine, if not wonders, like they did in 8th.

The Crusader at least will stay viable since clearing troops is always useful, probably more than ever now, and the 16 seats are very handy for units like wulfen. Maybe even the Redeemer will do fine with smaller tables and longer ranges for flamers; its biggest weakeness was the lack of range, now it may not worry about it anymore.

Land raiders have historically sucked, even in non-competitive settings. Basically if you had 4 or more lascannon equivalent weapons in your army, land raiders get popped almost instantly.

Transport rules are still too slow for the game I'd say. Thay are the same as 8th and was not good then. No drive and disembark=why are you even in it?

Shooting into CC is an improvement but being charged is still an issue. Lets say you hava a LR crusader. Get charged by vehicle? Yeah you wont kill it or get out without giving up shooting. Have a standard LR? Charged by infantry and its gg.

Getting charged shuts down your movement if you shoot (wich sucks if you have passengers or have dropped them of and need to get away from anti tank danger) or give up shooting (wich sucks because its 40k).

 Blackie wrote:
Define good.

Pillar of a top tier list that is going to win multiple events? Maybe not.

But in any casual to semi-competitive meta they'll do fine, if not wonders, like they did in 8th.

The Crusader at least will stay viable since clearing troops is always useful, probably more than ever now, and the 16 seats are very handy for units like wulfen. Maybe even the Redeemer will do fine with smaller tables and longer ranges for flamers; its biggest weakeness was the lack of range, now it may not worry about it anymore.

Smaller tables will hurt it. I doubt we'll see less terrain in casual/store games because with human nature you use what you've got. Now we're more likely to have more on less space. So you might be able to hide better, but your "roads" are going to be far less usable.

Someone else mentioned another issue it faces - it pays for transport and again for tank capability. Between it pulling double duty, being a huge points cost, any disruption to your transportation plan, and whatever bonus damage to unit inside.

The Raven does have basically the same stats trading 1T and 2W for all the hard to hit aircraft bonuses and unfortunately an Aircraft slot. If you can finagle an aircraft slot, it's the better choice I'd say.

When you start hopping up to 2500-3000 then you might start getting enough stuff on the board - likewise if we're looking at something akin to a One-Of-Everything comp. Outside of Knights - which skew by their very nature - if everyone makes a one-of-everything list you won't likely see 600 anti-tank shots in a 6 turn game and the Land Raiders start living for a few turns or more and having some fun. Even if you make it one of any data sheet (Potentially doubles/triples/etc for Troops) Even taking a Land Raider and a Land Raider Crusader together doesn't (or didn't when it was armor pen exploding tanks) skew lists because they had very different weapon loads.

Coincidentally those are the games I find most fun. 2500-3000 points not a lot of duplicate units, trying to cobble some kind of synergy between whatever unit ends up next to whatever other unit 4 unpredictable turns in.... Its amazing how many games are different that way.

If you want to have a "fun" game where units that are good on paper but mauled by the Meta can shine, find yourself a friend and figure out how to break the meta using army comp.

I think there's a certain amount of knee-jerk reaction here that doesn't take the whole picture into account.

- Heavy Bolters going to D2 is significant against a lot of targets.
- The optional Multimelta is a much bigger increase in damage output now.
- The Firstborn Marines the basic LR can transport are all getting a significant boost,
- Smaller table sizes have made DS landing zones a fair bit harder to find.
- Higher terrain density and terrain rules that actually work, significant amounts of LoS blocking etc. etc.

All of that raises the LR's value. Even without any other big changes in the wings it's still probably better than it's getting credit for at the moment.

If your entire local meta is WAAC tourney minmax the. They may not fare well.

If you play amongst friends they can dominate some matchups or get splatted in short order, depends on the matchup. They can be fun, but are still a tad too expensive and suffer from mixing their roles. At least Crusader wants to close the range so tends to do a tad better, though a Phobos LR with full rerolls and reroll 1s to wound buffs can be scary.

yukishiro1 wrote:
Yeah, or you coulda just put them in a drop pod like everyone else for double the efficiency.

I mean don't get me wrong, if you're enjoying it go for it, by all means.

If you subtract the cost of a Drop Pod from a Land Raider, you pay something like 230 for 16 T8 2+ Wounds, 7 S8+ shots and 6 S5 shots. That's a pretty solid deal, imo.

The Newman wrote:
I think there's a certain amount of knee-jerk reaction here that doesn't take the whole picture into account.

- Heavy Bolters going to D2 is significant against a lot of targets.
- The optional Multimelta is a much bigger increase in damage output now.
- The Firstborn Marines the basic LR can transport are all getting a significant boost,
- Smaller table sizes have made DS landing zones a fair bit harder to find.
- Higher terrain density and terrain rules that actually work, significant amounts of LoS blocking etc. etc.

All of that raises the LR's value. Even without any other big changes in the wings it's still probably better than it's getting credit for at the moment.

Yeah this. I'm definitely looking forward to trying it out in the new paradigm. I think Reserves can help it out too.

Playing with and against land raiders a lot, I feel like the idea works in general, but is just way to expensive pointswise.

At 180-200 including guns it might worth bringing a landraider to carry some terminators into the fray, but at almost 300 points bringing one is just shooting yourself in the foot - and that's already considering that DG can give it a 5++ and DR.

Competitively I think it depends entirely on costs vs things like repulsors+primaris. Fly no longer really matters so the one of the main things repulsors had over the LR is nerfed.

Also terminators might be a thing as well as various first born units.

I would certainly like to see more land raiders. Even got one I picked up real cheap on ebay to do as a fun project one day coz I really like the model and also naturally the nostalgia of a "wow man maybe I will be able to afford one of these with enough pocket money 16/16/16 OMG dat scary" vehicle

Think they deserve their assault ramps as well.