Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Someone recently pointed out that adding heavy bolters to a LR could actually cause FEWER casualties than just the battle cannon alone. If you land the template on a squad of say 6 marines, wound 5 or 6 of them on 2's, then add aditional wounds with HB's, the opponent can double up the unsaveable wounds on models and leave others to take only saveable HB wounds.
I guess the solution would be to only fire the HB's if you don't nail most/all of the squad with the battle cannon. Has anyone seen this happen, and does anyone feel it lessens their desire to do the BC/3 HB russ setup?
It only becomes an issue if you do more total wounds (with some HB wounds) than there are models in the unit, which gives you opponent the ability to double up battlecannon wounds. It mainly hurts when firing at smaller units.
I run LRBT w/ Plasmasponsons and have switched to hull HeavyFlamers. The wound allocation played a part in the choice, but it was mainly because I would rather have a HHF for those key moments, then have a HHB that isn't adding much.
Is it legal to allocate wounds this way? Yes, is it ethical, no, not really. I would argue that since there is only one shot for the BC, you can only be hit once by it.
I would not advice fielding a Normal Russ anyway - but if you do, I'd run it as a cheap battle cannon, and take the free heavy bolter. If you've got a bunch of MEQs that you've got a good shot on, you could just choose not to shoot the heavy bolter.I guess the solution would be to only fire the HB's if you don't nail most/all of the squad with the battle cannon. Has anyone seen this happen, and does anyone feel it lessens their desire to do the BC/3 HB russ setup?