And I also agree with the Leman Russ Companies being 625 without the Vanquisher (+25 for the Vanquisher upgrade).

Not played steel legion, but against them many Times. I agree totaly with the above. The manticores are better than the other choices.
Cheers

Bear in mind that Manticores in mixed 9 unit artillery companies would be worse as they'd lose Disrupt on turns when you fired any of the other artillery so I don't think the price reduction should be -25pts per 3, but -75pts if you take all Basilisk or Bombard.

If we make any change at all that is.

The Leman Russ flexibilty, to have 10 battletanks for 625 is a very comfort change. I would love it!
For Artillery Company, I think there is quite a big agreement in cost reduction.

For griffon part, some time ago I used to take them, but was never really satisfied with it. I think they just can't fit in neither formation, not even mech. inf. coy. First of all; most IG companies are perfectly viable on their own, they don't need firepower booster, and it is also more benefical to spend the points on activations instead of upgrades (except hydras).
What I would like to see and is a big change, to add them as artillery battery option. 3 units for 200.
They are cheap 3BP that may put out the same firepower as a basilisk, should the opponent approach too close.
After or before that, they are 30 cm moving AV, 5+ FF, these adds up to very useful later turn options, not to mention it's uniquity and character it could bring to the battery palette!

50 points upgrade for 3 griffon is something that is extremely cheap, and just wierd. (In this exact case I think it's not advisable to follow the UK route.)

I totally agree with Paradox, regarding Hellhounds - cost and armor reduce. (I found hellhounds really cool for 125 as well, it will be superb to have some on 100!)

Baneblade is already on the table, and is already a good choice. All it needs it's main gun receieving some AT love. Currently my suggestion for that, to change the main gun from 1x AP3+/AT3+ to 2x AP4+/AT3+. It has been tested in battles with 2x AP3+/AT3+, where the AT power on it's farthest reaching weapon raised it's level to acceptable, while the AP power slipped over the top, so that's the reason to make them different.

Basilisk, Bombard, Manticore... the batteries. Honestly idk this part. Used every variant many times. And each variant was very cool for me. I think the balance here is so fine, that it only slides away if we add combos and opponent armies into the box. 2x manticore battery is an excellent formation breaker, but if you have only 1x, it may not have the opportunity to place that much BM to do the difference.
Whenever I take 1x battery, I mainly do with basilisk for resilience and ad hoc direct fire opportunity, it's very cool.
Recently I have started to go with bombards, and I think they aren't that bad; many times the ignore cover ability and 6 BP generated so much punishment that no other variant could do, not even Manticore!
It's just perfect siege artillery, excellent garrison breaker!
If you have at least one bombard formation and couple of shadowswords then you have completely covered the two edge of formation stereotypes the opponent would field; the smallest (quantity) and the largest (quality).

Considering all these options I really don't know wheter the arty battery needed to be changed at all. (Apart from adding griffon option for 200 )

My two cents.

_________________
Epic Commander of the Prassium Invasion Troops 214th Regiment
***Action is our prayer. Victory is our offering.***

Haven't played SL for a while, but salivating at prospect of 50 point griffon upgrades. Firepower is ok, but more than that means enemy formations can't bunch up so easily if they knock out your Manticores.

Arty batteries have always gone Manticores>Bombards (situational - i.e. an enemy that puts weak infantry forward like Guard, Orcs or Eldar Guardians)>Basilisks.

But for companies, if the game is big enough, pretty much only Bassies are any good due tot he fragility of the save 6+ models.

On Warhounds the EpicUK route was a good one, making the crit do a point of damage.

I support Bombards and Basilisks dropping to 225 too, they're a subpar choice and I always take Manticores for the 3 strong formations.

I actually think the bombard batteries are OK. 225 seems right. Clearly not on a par with manticores, but not very far off. In general I think they're unfairly maligned. I find that manticores are targeted very early on (first activation) and you have to have perfect deployment (and a bit of luck with flak) to save them from aircraft, counter-battery etc. By contrast, because bombards can't reach the deployment zone they are often left alone until later in the turn, and by then there are other things the opponent wants to do. Basically they survive longer, but also can do more damage than the other types. They don't fill the same tactical niche as bombards or basilisks (alpha strike), but they do still have a very useful battlefield function, which is to disrupt infantry advances up the board. So I rarely take them as first choice above manticores, but in larger games I take them both.


Not sure I follow what you're saying here.

--

BTW you can't take bombards in arty coys.

IMO the optimal arty company is actually 1 manticore and 8 basilisk. This fires either 8 or 10 BP, as opposed to 9 from pure basilisks. Since 9 is no different from 8, even without disrupt it is still better. I would also have no problem fielding 5 manticores and 4 basilisks, firing a 10 BP disrupt barrage turns 1 and 3, and 4 BP turn 2. This is all assuming they are well priced, and that they fit into the army composition. This latter part is IMO what holds back the formation - there simply isn't a role for a such a large artillery formation when it's in competition with other expensive things I need in my list - hard BTS, objective holders, supreme commander etc. In very large games there'd be room to include them at the right price. What is the right price for them? Honestly I'm not sure I'd take them even if they were the same price as 2 batteries...

_________________
Kyrt's Battle Result Tracker (forum post is here)
Kyrt's trade list

Hey Rug can you weigh in on the Leman Russ 625 base +25 Vanquisher Upgrade suggestion above? Since Dave's almost done with the latest Tourny Pack I'd hate to see such a minor tweak miss out and wait another year (or more) if you and the ERC are in agreement.

thanks!

_________________
He's a lawyer and a super-villian. That's like having a shark with a bazooka!

-I HAVE NO POINT
-Penal Legion-Fan list
-Help me make Whitescars not suck!

Baneblade !!!! ( Please do something ) :-)

we discussed the baneblade last night, I'm in favour of a full 2xAP3+/AT3+ on the turret, I can't see why it needs lowering to AP4+..... one other suggestion was to make the main gun 2BP, it's a much bigger gun than a leman russ battlecannon and would make baneblades powerful again, your drop in AT power would be compensated by being able to hit multiple targets

_________________
NetEA Space Marine, Imperial Fists and Blood Angels Army Champion

NetEA Red Corsairs Army Champion

My hobby/painting threads

Army Forge List Co-ordinator

The bigest problem I have with Baneblades is that their unique selling point is their volume of guns, they put out massive firepower. But they lack the speed to actually employ that firepower most of the time. I guess they'd work better as a Blitz guard as ten the enemy has to come to them.

Sorry, I realise my comment probably wasn't overly constructive, though it think all the issues are well known and well discussed.

I agree with KIC - 2x 3+/3+ seems reasonable, and I've played it this way in 4 or 5 games and received no negative comments from my opponents. To be honest, they act like a slightly slower but slightly tougher Russ Co. Never used them as singles yet.

That said dropping the AT to 4+ would still make them a viable option finally !

The bp option is also good, though I suspect opponents may get fed up of having templates hurled at them! :-)

I really like the idea of BP templates for the Baneblades main cannon. The 2 BP , 75cm range suggested sounds great. It isn't direct so it doesn't compete with artillery and it doesn't disrupt so it doesn't compete with Stormswords. I think FF sound be left alone as it compete with the Stormhammer indirectly.

In terms of a role, the BB should be an all rounder and as such it should provide long, medium, and short range fire power, but not necessarily be the best at them. Right now it seems to have the short and medium range covered fairly well, but is very lacking in the long range fire support. The 75cm 2 BP cannon would let it threaten at the longer ranges without directly competing with other units. This would make it a great synergist in being able to hold back objectives (due to its slow speed and great short ranged firepower) while still participating in the army's advance (due to its BP armament). This makes it very defensive but with teeth, and creates a great dichotomy with the overly aggressive and long ranged Shadowsword.

I don't mind the 2 shot option, but I never thought of the baneblade cannon as being rapid fire. Granted some people have already mentioned this as being an extrapolation of a giant shells explosion in an already extrapolated game (or whatever word you guys use). Still, would prefer the BP.

What do people think of the 2bp main cannon being used in an SHT Co. though?

6BP direct fire only at 75cm on a blitz guard style unit with a great deal of close range firepower.

Personally I'd love to try that out but I'm not certain my opponents would agree!

With regular artillery detachments you can plink a BM or get an Aircraft to suppress them while that SHT Co. needs a hell of a lot more to suppress or damage.

EDIT: Oooh, add a set of Griffons for 9BP at 60cm with the Griffons hidden behind the BBlades so they can't be shot at (WE's block LoS)

Well, in an ideal world we wouldn't have these stats match name thing and simply be able to give a unit stats to match its intended us.

Going to the source, how does the 40k gun differ from a battlecannon?

Baneblades aside, what would be the effect of making the SC either free or a 50 point upgrade added to any unit?