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.

If the stat leaks are true, what is the real point of the Baneblades anymore? This thing is a better Baneblade. The new Shadowsword is a glaringly insane re-write. If the Shadowsword cannon can't punch through an invuln, I literally give up trying to understand where the rules team wants to go.

I don't love it, but I think the paintjob probably lets it down a little.

"Tank between leman russ and baneblade" has been something that seems like a bit of a no-brainer as far as tanks to add, it's annoying it can't just be the Malcador or Macharius, but I figure they both want to make something New and want to make something more compact than those very large forgeworld models in terms of sprue space.

I guess some day in the far future they could make upgrade kits for it.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
If the stat leaks are true, what is the real point of the Baneblades anymore? This thing is a better Baneblade. The new Shadowsword is a glaringly insane re-write. If the Shadowsword cannon can't punch through an invuln, I literally give up trying to understand where the rules team wants to go.

The point of baneblades is to massively buff them in a couple of editions, after they dumpster this and let it languish in pointlessness.

It's an imperial guard tank. If you think the Leman Russ is cool (which I do), this one is cool too.

Yeah, there are inconsistencies and flaws, but remember, this is Imperial Guard 40k, which draws more from WW1 and Miyazaki than it does from actual practical tank designs. If anyone is looking for practicality and realism, they're in the wrong army and probably the wrong game.

Overall I think it's pretty cool. Probably won't buy one, but it's definitely a mega-Russ and that's no bad thing.

Who knows how much of the design is defined by AdMech adherence to "the old, sanctified ways" in the face of practicality?

I suspect the sponsons are controlled by servo-skulls, as that is how I recall they're done in a baneblade.

Anyways, looks like a fun model, but my bet is six months down the road they'll drop an alternate weapon build to the kit. Probably plasma.

All the sponsons and turrets are manned by the second honored LT directly. One man. The driver mans the forward HB, and the main gunner mans the main gun and it's co-ax AC. The Demo cannon is actually it's own operator. There are no servo skulls in a Baneblade. At least according to both books.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
All the sponsons and turrets are manned by the second honored LT directly. One man. The driver mans the forward HB, and the main gunner mans the main gun and it's co-ax AC. The Demo cannon is actually it's own operator. There are no servo skulls in a Baneblade. At least according to both books.

Doh, looks like the cross-section I saw is a piece of fan art, not GW's.

Yeah, the books and even specs on the tank in the black library clearly show that all secondary and tertiary gun systems are slaved into the 2nd honored LTs heads up tactical display system. He designates targets and the gun systems super powerful onboard systems take over "unalives" the target. Unless it's a Necron, in which case it simply just scraps it.

 Flinty wrote:


Based on the model size, The sponsons would also need to be remotely fired, but so maybe they just make use of the general tank sensorium. The heavy bolters at least have their standard targetter lumpy bit above the barrel.

I'm going to have to disagree about the sponsons. Having modeled a number of WWI tanks I can say that they are not too out of scale with 40k infantry.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
If the stat leaks are true, what is the real point of the Baneblades anymore? This thing is a better Baneblade. The new Shadowsword is a glaringly insane re-write. If the Shadowsword cannon can't punch through an invuln, I literally give up trying to understand where the rules team wants to go.

exactly they want to sell you models and make money...so they make a new model with new rules that are better than other older models, hoping you'll buy it because of that.

personally i'll buy one just because i like it, could have trash rules.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
why the hell are yall arguing about the stupidest gak?
servitor vs normal humans manning weapons likely varies between multiple sources, so yall will probably just keep pointing back and forth to official sources, but it doesn't fething matter.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ph34r wrote:
I don't love it, but I think the paintjob probably lets it down a little.

"Tank between leman russ and baneblade" has been something that seems like a bit of a no-brainer as far as tanks to add, it's annoying it can't just be the Malcador or Macharius, but I figure they both want to make something New and want to make something more compact than those very large forgeworld models in terms of sprue space.

I guess some day in the far future they could make upgrade kits for it.

now we need something between the chimera chassis and the leman russ.

I think the exterminator Russ is the best looking so I really like the twin battle cannon variant.

Seriously, The Baneblade is supposed to be the single most powerful tank in the ENTIRE imperial Armory. A Step below a Titan. Some are literally just titan weapon carriers. The new tank is literally a better Baneblade? Anyone wanna guess where Cawl Farted out the STC for these?

I love it when GW drops a unit on the game with ZERO precedent for it in the lore. There has never been a "rogal Dorn" tank in lore. So that means these are a new creation. That means the Mechanicus is purposely withholding STCs. Just make the Baneblade Good, and problems solved. WHY DOES THIS EXIST?

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Seriously, The Baneblade is supposed to be the single most powerful tank in the ENTIRE imperial Armory. A Step below a Titan. Some are literally just titan weapon carriers. The new tank is literally a better Baneblade? Anyone wanna guess where Cawl Farted out the STC for these?

I love it when GW drops a unit on the game with ZERO precedent for it in the lore. There has never been a "rogal Dorn" tank in lore. So that means these are a new creation. That means the Mechanicus is purposely withholding STCs. Just make the Baneblade Good, and problems solved. WHY DOES THIS EXIST?

How is it a "better Baneblade"? It's both less durable and has less firepower.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

I love it when GW drops a unit on the game with ZERO precedent for it in the lore. There has never been a "rogal Dorn" tank in lore.

Hey, you know what ALSO didn't exist - until it just did? Your precious BaneBlade.
Or the Chimera, or the Basilisk, or the Lemen Russ, or any variation of the BB chasis.....

Are you opposed to any of these because they didn't exist prior to being introduced in either 40k 2e or the various old Epic games (Epic/Titan Legions/Space Marine etc)

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
WHY DOES THIS EXIST?

Out-of-Game: To make $$
In-game: You know how there's billions of worlds or whatever in the Imperium all supplying men & equipment? Well, here's a unit we haven't seen until now. Buy it or don't, your choice.

I think there is a difference between something being created in 2ed and something being created, so that people replace their old Lemman Russes and GW can scale up their models and with that their price.

And buy it or don't buy it isn't in the player hands to chose. If GW designed the codex in such a way that the rogal , is not only the most optimal option, but also crucial part to the list,people will ahve to buy it. If they don't, then their army may not work. And losing because GW designed your army to lose, if you don't play it their way, ain't very fun. Specialy over a longer space of time.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Seriously, The Baneblade is supposed to be the single most powerful tank in the ENTIRE imperial Armory. A Step below a Titan. Some are literally just titan weapon carriers. The new tank is literally a better Baneblade? Anyone wanna guess where Cawl Farted out the STC for these?

I love it when GW drops a unit on the game with ZERO precedent for it in the lore. There has never been a "rogal Dorn" tank in lore. So that means these are a new creation. That means the Mechanicus is purposely withholding STCs. Just make the Baneblade Good, and problems solved. WHY DOES THIS EXIST?

I’m guessing you’re relatively new to the game? Well, brace yourself, for I am about to open my head and make a list of stuff “added with ZERO precedent”.

Ready? Here I go! But in no particular order.

1. Warp Spiders
2. Shining Spears
3. Crimson Hunters
4. Hemlock Wraith Fighters
5. Wraith Knight
6. Griffon (Imperial Guard Heavy Mortar)
7. Hydra
8. Taurox
9. Taurox Prime
10. Bullgryns (your namesake, for heaven’s sake)
11. Valkyrie
12. Banesword
13. Hellhammer
14. Doomhammer
15. Stormsword
16. Stormlord
17. Banehammer
18. Wyvern
19. Forge Fiend
20. Dark Commune
21. Venomcrawler
22. Obliterators
23. Heldrake
24. Maulerfiend

That’s a mere 24 because I’m even boring myself right now. But I trust my point is made, yeah? All 24 added in or since 2nd Edition. Do you see how daft your argument is here?

ccs wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

I love it when GW drops a unit on the game with ZERO precedent for it in the lore. There has never been a "rogal Dorn" tank in lore.

Hey, you know what ALSO didn't exist - until it just did? Your precious BaneBlade.

I'm fairly sure the Baneblade predates even the Imperial Guard. AFAIK it first showed up in the 1st Edition Epic 40k game back in '89. Or was it the 2nd Edition in '91? Anyway, the Baneblade is really REALLY friggin' old.

Baneblade was certainly in 2nd Ed Space Marine, alongside the Shadowsword and Stormhammer.

Stormblade popped up in Titan Legions.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Seriously, The Baneblade is supposed to be the single most powerful tank in the ENTIRE imperial Armory.

https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Leviathan

https://warhammer40k.fandom.com/wiki/Capitol_Imperialis

The new tank is literally a better Baneblade?

It isn't. In raw stats it's clearly worse than the Baneblade line, it's only "better" in the sense that it's better at winning games of 9th edition 40k because of how LoW interact with the detachment and terrain rules. In a straight 1v1 match the Baneblade kicks its ass.

The tank the Rogal Dorn infringes on is the Macharius, not the Baneblade. The issue is not that GW filled in a piece of the fluff and finally showed us a tank that has, in universe, existed "off camera" the whole time, it's that they ignored the existing unit in its role for the sole purpose of selling another model kit. Giving proper rules to the Macharius is correct option from a lore and game design point of view but that wouldn't sell as many kits as replacing the model people already have with a brand new one to buy.

Karol wrote:
I think there is a difference between something being created in 2ed and something being created, so that people replace their old Lemman Russes and GW can scale up their models and with that their price.

There is not. Fez is complaining that there's no lore precedent for something completely new to be introduced. My point is that ALL OF THIS was new at some point in the games history. There's a great many things in this game that had no lore until the day GW added them to the mix. The Dorn is just new for 2022.

Karol wrote:
And buy it or don't buy it isn't in the player hands to chose. If GW designed the codex in such a way that the rogal , is not only the most optimal option, but also crucial part to the list,people will ahve to buy it. If they don't, then their army may not work. And losing because GW designed your army to lose, if you don't play it their way, ain't very fun. Specialy over a longer space of time.

Wow. Somehow you've exceeded being 100% wrong.

For me the main issue is the tank lacks that imperial chunk, that distaste for a round edge on a vehicle unless you're a custodes or some mechanicus weirdo. A guardsman shouldn't even see a vehicle that doesn't have edges sharp enough to bisect a heretics skull on. They should look at the round edges on this vehicle and say, ew, looks Tau, get that shiz away from me.

 AtoMaki wrote:

ccs wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

I love it when GW drops a unit on the game with ZERO precedent for it in the lore. There has never been a "rogal Dorn" tank in lore.

Hey, you know what ALSO didn't exist - until it just did? Your precious BaneBlade.

I'm fairly sure the Baneblade predates even the Imperial Guard. AFAIK it first showed up in the 1st Edition Epic 40k game back in '89. Or was it the 2nd Edition in '91? Anyway, the Baneblade is really REALLY friggin' old.

You're right! It did start it's life there. Now if you'll scroll back up to my post your quoting & read a few more words.... You'll notice that I did indeed cover that. It's in ( ). would you like me to go back & highlight in red or something?
But prior to wichever version of SM/EPIC that was? It had no lore precedent.

As for predating the Guard? Sorry, the Guards been in the game since RT, day 1 (they are referred to as Imperial Warriors/Warriors of the Imperium/Army in the original RT book). No matter what edition of Epic, BaneBlades definitely came along later than '87.

Karol wrote:
I think there is a difference between something being created in 2ed and something being created, so that people replace their old Lemman Russes and GW can scale up their models and with that their price.

And buy it or don't buy it isn't in the player hands to chose. If GW designed the codex in such a way that the rogal , is not only the most optimal option, but also crucial part to the list,people will ahve to buy it. If they don't, then their army may not work. And losing because GW designed your army to lose, if you don't play it their way, ain't very fun. Specialy over a longer space of time.

its not a leman russ replacement...

I like it, might pick one up if it doesn't make my eyes water at the price.

I think it brings to the fore how the Leman Russ is pretty much a "medium" tank at best, kind of like a Sherman, T34 or Panzer III-IV.

The Rogal Dorn is a proper heavy tank, like a Pershing, Tiger or IS-2.

The Baneblade/Shadowsword stays the superheavy - a Maus, US T28 or similar sort of tank. The thing's a mobile fortress, even if its stats don't quite match that on the tabletop.

Now, if we could get a light/scout tank like the Stuart...

I just don't understand the need for this unit, at all. If there was a faction that was LACKING heavy Armor support, it's not IG. They are the kings of putting heavy metal on the board.

This is the equivalent to the Blade Champion that Custodes got. Cool looking model, tons of chances to do awesome things, but likely will almost never see the table in competitive play.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Karol wrote:
I think there is a difference between something being created in 2ed and something being created, so that people replace their old Lemman Russes and GW can scale up their models and with that their price.

And buy it or don't buy it isn't in the player hands to chose. If GW designed the codex in such a way that the rogal , is not only the most optimal option, but also crucial part to the list,people will ahve to buy it. If they don't, then their army may not work. And losing because GW designed your army to lose, if you don't play it their way, ain't very fun. Specialy over a longer space of time.

its not a leman russ replacement...

It might wind up as one.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I just don't understand the need for this unit, at all. If there was a faction that was LACKING heavy Armor support, it's not IG. They are the kings of putting heavy metal on the board.

This is the equivalent to the Blade Champion that Custodes got. Cool looking model, tons of chances to do awesome things, but likely will almost never see the table in competitive play.

psst, not every model needs to see the table in competitive play.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Blndmage wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Karol wrote:
I think there is a difference between something being created in 2ed and something being created, so that people replace their old Lemman Russes and GW can scale up their models and with that their price.

And buy it or don't buy it isn't in the player hands to chose. If GW designed the codex in such a way that the rogal , is not only the most optimal option, but also crucial part to the list,people will ahve to buy it. If they don't, then their army may not work. And losing because GW designed your army to lose, if you don't play it their way, ain't very fun. Specialy over a longer space of time.

its not a leman russ replacement...

It might wind up as one.

doubtful, considering leman russ are cheap spammable vehicles, while the rogal dorn seems to be a heavy tank. The vindicator/repulsor comparison is kinda close.

Is it possible that its gonna see more play than leman russ in the new codex? yeah but that doesnt mean its replacing the leman russ

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I just don't understand the need for this unit, at all. If there was a faction that was LACKING heavy Armor support, it's not IG. They are the kings of putting heavy metal on the board.

This is the equivalent to the Blade Champion that Custodes got. Cool looking model, tons of chances to do awesome things, but likely will almost never see the table in competitive play.

Ok, so what? I'm sure you can list all manner of things - for the Guard or any other faction - that almost never see tourney action. Yet GW keeps making them & people keep buying and using them in day to day gaming. Thankfully the game is not limited to tourney play.

As for the Guard not needing another tank? WRONG!
Any true Guard player will tell you they always need more tanks. (have you seen the pics of peoples IG armies???) We need little tanks. We need medium tanks. We need heavy tanks. We need super-heavy tanks. Hell, we might need two+ super-heavies glued together someday.... And we need multiple types & variations of each!

Plus there's all the GSC & Ork players to think of. They always need more options to subvert/loot/convert. Why shouldn't GW make a kit that's useful in at least 3 factions?

ccs wrote:
Plus there's all the GSC & Ork players to think of. They always need more options to subvert/loot/convert. Why shouldn't GW make a kit that's useful in at least 3 factions?

True - clearly this is the best version of the various Reddit paint jobs.

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I just don't understand the need for this unit, at all. If there was a faction that was LACKING heavy Armor support, it's not IG. They are the kings of putting heavy metal on the board.

That assumes that GW was considering all factions at once. They aren't. This is the big IG push right now, so they're going to put out a bunch of impressive models that make your old models seem inadequate (whether or not they are). Hence Artillery Batteries and a new Tank. It might be about gameplay -that remains to be seen- but really it's about selling big shiny models.

In this case, to be fair, artillery and a big tank are very much the IG flavor. Whether or not they are really needed is another question, but if you're going to do a reboot of the Guard line, big tanks and guns are certainly thematic. I essentially finished my Guard army over a decade ago, but there is something really tempting about more artillery and a big tank.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Seriously, The Baneblade is supposed to be the single most powerful tank in the ENTIRE imperial Armory. A Step below a Titan. Some are literally just titan weapon carriers. The new tank is literally a better Baneblade? Anyone wanna guess where Cawl Farted out the STC for these?

I love it when GW drops a unit on the game with ZERO precedent for it in the lore. There has never been a "rogal Dorn" tank in lore. So that means these are a new creation. That means the Mechanicus is purposely withholding STCs. Just make the Baneblade Good, and problems solved. WHY DOES THIS EXIST?

I’m guessing you’re relatively new to the game? Well, brace yourself, for I am about to open my head and make a list of stuff “added with ZERO precedent”.

Ready? Here I go! But in no particular order.

1. Warp Spiders
2. Shining Spears
3. Crimson Hunters
4. Hemlock Wraith Fighters
5. Wraith Knight
6. Griffon (Imperial Guard Heavy Mortar)
7. Hydra
8. Taurox
9. Taurox Prime
10. Bullgryns (your namesake, for heaven’s sake)
11. Valkyrie
12. Banesword
13. Hellhammer
14. Doomhammer
15. Stormsword
16. Stormlord
17. Banehammer
18. Wyvern
19. Forge Fiend
20. Dark Commune
21. Venomcrawler
22. Obliterators
23. Heldrake
24. Maulerfiend

That’s a mere 24 because I’m even boring myself right now. But I trust my point is made, yeah? All 24 added in or since 2nd Edition. Do you see how daft your argument is here?

That’s without even picking the scab that is spacemarines prior to primaris. Every edition, new models and units appearing out of nowhere (which folk were fine with but soon as they say “these primaris marines are new and didn’t exist before” people lose their minds and say the setting is broken. So clearly GW knows the best way to introduce new stuff is just release it and say it was there all along, no one mentioned it.