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.

I guess everyone takes Full Payload Manticores because of the higher strength and increased number of shots? Even though you can only shoot four rounds with the Manticore...

Two Basilisks are slightly less points efficient, I guess? What if you gave one Basilisk Full Payload and an Augur Array? Manticore is still more efficient?

 dadx6 wrote:
I guess everyone takes Full Payload Manticores because of the higher strength and increased number of shots? Even though you can only shoot four rounds with the Manticore...

Two Basilisks are slightly less points efficient, I guess? What if you gave one Basilisk Full Payload and an Augur Array? Manticore is still more efficient?

I can't speak directly to efficiency, but generally shots in the 5th round are often going to be less impactful than in the first couple of rounds. Personally (and I'll remind you, I'm not the best 40k player by a very long shot), I've never had a manticore survive long enough to run out of ammo (still working on figuring out the proper ratios of screening units at 1250pts when taking a mechanized list)

I believe that's the logic, yes - not being able to fire after Round 4 is pretty meaningless if most games are decided on Rounds 2 or 3, and 120" less range is rarely an issue; the extra strength and extra d6 shots are more useful in pretty much every scenario. Augur Arrays are still 1 use/game, right? I recall hearing some people bringing them alongside a Hunter-Killer to ensure the H-K wounds, but I'm not sure it would be worth bringing on a Basilisk for anything else (not unless we get all our vehicle upgrades for free come the new codex).

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Incidentally this is a list that actually did ok in a tourney.
https://www.goonhammer.com/competitive-innovations-bonus-paris-gt/

Note the important part here: a bunch of infantry to screen the tanks, not trying to go pure tanks like OP was talking about.

 dadx6 wrote:
I guess everyone takes Full Payload Manticores because of the higher strength and increased number of shots? Even though you can only shoot four rounds with the Manticore...

Two Basilisks are slightly less points efficient, I guess? What if you gave one Basilisk Full Payload and an Augur Array? Manticore is still more efficient?

Yep. If your artillery is still alive on turn 5 you've won the game already so it doesn't matter what you do that turn. And the Manticore is far more effective in the turns that matter because of having 2D6 shots.

Side note, remember that firing overwatch uses one of those storm eagle rockets (although I wouldn't let that stop me from firing it during overwatch)

Agreed. When games were 6 turns long, only having 4 shots mattered a lot more. When you're only missing shooting once it's a much better deal, and in an armoured spearhead if someone is hunting down the indirect fire manticores they're not taking out the 2+ sv AoC Leman russ that will actually score you points.

 DoctorDanny wrote:
What a IG Tank line struggles with is basically anything that does melee and comes at you fast.
They will tag your tanks and diminish your firepower.

Tank lines also hate 'max X# number of wounds per phase' models. As they only have one phase, shooting.

That being said, a 2k spearhead is definately mid-tier competetive. I've taken spearhead lists to tournaments and did quite allright,
The firepower of 7+ Leman Russ tanks is very hard to withstand for most armies out there.

The sad thing is this is easily fixed by saying tanks can still fire even in CC with ZERO penalties. They're tanks, they should be able to do that.

 Togusa wrote:

 DoctorDanny wrote:
What a IG Tank line struggles with is basically anything that does melee and comes at you fast.
They will tag your tanks and diminish your firepower.

Tank lines also hate 'max X# number of wounds per phase' models. As they only have one phase, shooting.

That being said, a 2k spearhead is definately mid-tier competetive. I've taken spearhead lists to tournaments and did quite allright,
The firepower of 7+ Leman Russ tanks is very hard to withstand for most armies out there.

The sad thing is this is easily fixed by saying tanks can still fire even in CC with ZERO penalties. They're tanks, they should be able to do that.

its easily fixed by bringing guardsmen. Pure tank lists are a meme skew list that doesnt have place in a wargame IMO

It's a fun fluffy list...why doesn't it belong?

DeadliestIdiot wrote:
It's a fun fluffy list...why doesn't it belong?

how is all tanks a fluffy thing?

Ever heard of armored regiment? There's a whole series of books about purely Super-Heavy tanks companies and regiments, it's entirely fluffy.

 Bobthehero wrote:
Ever heard of armored regiment? There's a whole series of books about purely Super-Heavy tanks companies and regiments, it's entirely fluffy.

Do they go into battle completely unsupported in those books? Or are there other non-protagonist units who assist their operations?

 Altruizine wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Ever heard of armored regiment? There's a whole series of books about purely Super-Heavy tanks companies and regiments, it's entirely fluffy.

Do they go into battle completely unsupported in those books? Or are there other non-protagonist units who assist their operations?

In Gaunts Ghost's 4th book Sabbat Martyr, the Tanith 1st, are assigned to an armored regiment. The tanith act as their infantry support.

Very often regiments are highly specialized and must work in concert with another regiment to engage in combined arms tactics.

so yes there is precedent for imperial guard regiments being composed only of tanks and mechanized assets without infantry support.

 Sledgehammer wrote:
so yes there is precedent for imperial guard regiments being composed only of tanks and mechanized assets without infantry support.

But then, as you said, once they go into battle they have infantry support from another regiment. The force you'd see on the tabletop in a 40k game is not 100% tanks.

To be fair, my impression is that LRBT squads are typically detached to support infantry regiments...but they are organized as armored regiments and infantry regiments (from what I can tell, having a mixed LRBT and infantry regiment is an oddity, but million worlds and all... it's probably the norm somewhere...one of the reasons I love guard tbh... plenty of room for everyone's custom fluff to coexist)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CadianSgtBob wrote:

 Sledgehammer wrote:
so yes there is precedent for imperial guard regiments being composed only of tanks and mechanized assets without infantry support.

But then, as you said, once they go into battle they have infantry support from another regiment. The force you'd see on the tabletop in a 40k game is not 100% tanks.

It would be if they were ambushed, or this was...say...an armored spearhead in a larger battle (appropriate considering the detachment is also called a spearhead)

 Altruizine wrote:

 Bobthehero wrote:
Ever heard of armored regiment? There's a whole series of books about purely Super-Heavy tanks companies and regiments, it's entirely fluffy.

Do they go into battle completely unsupported in those books? Or are there other non-protagonist units who assist their operations?

Depends. Some moments the Super Heavies are used to smash apart the defences of the enemies, allowing the infantry to move in further, but without infantry coming along. LAter in the book, the Stormsword is used to support an entranched platoon. There's bits of both.

As for regular tanks, there's this huge armored pushed in Necropolis, of the Gaunt's Ghosts, where its pure tank punching through the enemies, with the infantry... not there.

By the IG lore, if you play a mono regiment, it's more fluffy to have a pure list of X than otherwise (unless you play an Armored Fist or a Siege Regiment)

Also I'd like to revisit the point that an all tank list is fun and not broken as reason enough for it's existing in the tabletop game

CadianSgtBob wrote:

 Sledgehammer wrote:
so yes there is precedent for imperial guard regiments being composed only of tanks and mechanized assets without infantry support.

But then, as you said, once they go into battle they have infantry support from another regiment. The force you'd see on the tabletop in a 40k game is not 100% tanks.

I agree that guard should not be able to only take tanks in a game of 40k.

i just think that its entirely possible to justify it on the basis of lore.


an all tank regiment is better suited to epic.

DeadliestIdiot wrote:
Also I'd like to revisit the point that an all tank list is fun and not broken as reason enough for it's existing in the tabletop game

You can say the first half of that about every skew list, as long as you're the skewer and not the skewed.

I quit 40K at the beginning of 8th, but I can definitely see how the "everything can wound everything" era could unbreak a list like that. In the earlier AV editions it absolutely was an obnoxious, broken skew list, though.

 Altruizine wrote:

DeadliestIdiot wrote:
Also I'd like to revisit the point that an all tank list is fun and not broken as reason enough for it's existing in the tabletop game

You can say the first half of that about every skew list, as long as you're the skewer and not the skewed.

I quit 40K at the beginning of 8th, but I can definitely see how the "everything can wound everything" era could unbreak a list like that. In the earlier AV editions it absolutely was an obnoxious, broken skew list, though.

I guess when I think of a list as being "fun" it has the connotation of being fun for all involved rather than a power trip kind of fun. If pure tanks was game breaking, I might play it once against my buddy just out of curiosity then return to my more typical mechanized list.

(I probably missed the period where vehicles were strong as I played in 5th and then stopped until relatively recently... I remember working under the assumption that my tanks would get one turn of firing before they were crew shaken or worse for the rest of the game and firing a second time was a juicy bonus...but maybe that was down to who I tended to face)

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

DeadliestIdiot wrote:
It's a fun fluffy list...why doesn't it belong?

how is all tanks a fluffy thing?

Ig doesn't actually do combined arm regiments. It's quite common situation in fluff as infantry would require multiple regiments around.

Whole point of ig doctrine is if regiment mutinies they don't have support easily. Combined arm regiments are extremely rare exceptions.

Typically it's different regiments working in tandem with one another.

The_Real_Chris wrote:
Incidentally this is a list that actually did ok in a tourney.
https://www.goonhammer.com/competitive-innovations-bonus-paris-gt/

.

That list actually is pretty good. I can see why he was able to do good things with it. I do wonder that he didn't take 2 Manticores and a heavy weapons mortar team, though. Should have been the same points cost, easier to hide, and more shots. It's got a lot of board presence and with the scout sentinels has some early blocking action. Plus with Armor of Contempt, even Scout Sentinels aren't complete trash now.

at the moment a combined arms battalion/brigade seems to be the way to go.

get your mechanized infantry, get some tanks, get some artillery/guess ranged options.

jury rigged, and disciplined shooters isn't a bad option, neither is gunnery experts with either of those.

In my experience gunnery experts is one of the best traits to get.
To capitalize on it you simply bring a spearhead 9+ demolishers, take the other trait with 6" extra range on heavy weapons to offset the short range a bit.
2 Tank aces with the steel commander trait to order 4 of those tanks to reroll 1s each turn and just bring the damage.

That leaves you with no CP. Any CP that you get during the game you use for Vengeance for Cadia or the strat that lets you fire your leman russ at full number of shots.

The people here telling you that this is not viable simply havent played or faced such a list.

CadianSgtBob wrote:

Andykp wrote:
So, when you say you CAN’T take an all tank army, you mean you CAN. But you don’t like it.

If you're a masochist who enjoys losing 100-0 with no hope of telling any story other than "wow our tanks suck, we all got slaughtered without achieving anything" you can. Normal people can't.

Maybe you can paint all of your models and get 100-10 instead?

JakeSiren wrote:

CadianSgtBob wrote:

Andykp wrote:
So, when you say you CAN’T take an all tank army, you mean you CAN. But you don’t like it.

If you're a masochist who enjoys losing 100-0 with no hope of telling any story other than "wow our tanks suck, we all got slaughtered without achieving anything" you can. Normal people can't.

Maybe you can paint all of your models and get 100-10 instead?

Well we know now at least cadiansgtbob is one of worst players in the world since he's unable to get any vp's with that army.

No. Not one of the worst. The worst by his own admission.

And this is why you shouldn't use hyperbole when trying to have a discussion