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!
you may have seen my thread elsewhere on this, here is my first attempt at using the list from IA1, note i am using the updated list. Though i am not sure that i have done it right...
company command tank- leman russ vanquisher, lascannon, battle hardened crew- 190
squadron command tank-leman russ vanquisher, lascannon, ace gunner- 180
1st squadron- 3 leman russes with hull lascannons- 495pts
2nd squadron-2 leman russ eradicators-320
3rd squadron- 1 leman russ exterminator
1 destroyer tank hunter- 160
i'll just add a few notes here, the squadrons do not work like the normal codex, they allow the tanks to operate independently. Also this force is going to add to my 'normal' guard army as something a little different hence no infantry,all in all i am doing it for fun.
thanks in advance!
The only issue that I would raise, is the lack of Armored Fist squads to score objectives.
Praise the Emperor and pass the promethium!
More generally, Russes just don't make a good backbone for a force. As they aren't true MBTs that can engage both infantry and tanks equally well. At the very least, put Hull Heavy Flamers on every tank that can take one. Otherwise Orks will walk all over you. Flamers are what IG gets instread of close combat troops.
The list will still be auto-fail to properly built IG/Wolves/Angels mech armies. Simply from it's lack of melta and multiple anti-tank shots. But what can you do?
It's my understanding that tanks, while in the troops slot in the force org. chart, are not scoring. The only scoring unit that is available under IA for IG is the Armored Fist squad. I think that this is the real issue with IA vs IG codex.
Praise the Emperor and pass the promethium!
well everyone has their own opinions... but in my experience i have seen such lists beat 'properly' built lists mainly due to players balking out at the sight of such things, and the majority of players i know have been playing for more than 15 years some possibly more.The list will still be auto-fail to properly built IG/Wolves/Angels mech armies
i know it would auto fail anyway my own dark eldar would have a field day against this, but then again it all comes down to how you use it... is was amusing when an IG mech army tried to close with an army like this got 'so close yet so far' and died messily after most of its transports got blasted en-route i think one got close enough for 'several' melta shots but didn't do much and then the eradicators got their chance to shoot what was left- not plesant.
though i am only doing this for fun, competitiveness never really came into it, and we play a lot of multiplayer games. So i agree this list would pop against 'normal' lists but when there are multiple armies on the table these things tend to get 'forgotten' as evryone tries to sort out what to do. very interesting games result with some very funny situations.
But hey, if it's fun for you, go with it. I enjoy my all Sanguinary list, even if it's only 4/5ths as competitive as the best BA lists out there. I'm just under no illusions about it.
Armored Battlegroup is super fun! I mean, who doesn't like 8 individual russes advancing across the battlefield blasting enemy armor and crushing infantry who stray too close. Anything not crushed under the weight of our tracks or demolished by our ordnance will soon meet the devastating hull mounted heavy flamers!
Yea, totally wicked. Problem, the list is easy to pick apart. I tested it against my hybrid list to see if it had a chance. Nope. The lack of multiple AT units really hurts. LRBTs are mediocre at best for killing high AV armored vehicles.
But in the end, the game is for fun. Personally I love the idea of Armored Battlegroups, I hope you have a lot of fun with it!
Last edited by GreyKnight6962; December 15th, 2010 at 21:59.
Stupid browser posted twice. My bad!
I just want to reinforce that only Infantry Troops can hold objectives in regular games. Some one-of books like the Battles book allow non-troops Infantryto score. Hulls, even walkers, never score. So an all-hull army must either table the enemy or play for a draw.
I have actually played an all Russ army in Apocalypse a few times (plus Baneblade). It was far less fun than I'd hoped. Once the assault troops, bikes and/or drop pod terminators got between the tanks, it was a game of how many tanks they could multi-change and kill per turn. If the enemy tunes for it, then you are truly toast.
It doesn't seem like it should be true, but it is...
RecklessFable's Journey to Mediocrity (Painting an IG army)
I've been addicted to World of Tanks lately and neglecting my IG... But it is so... much... fun!
As a veteran Armored commander for Imperial Guard, I will say that, while your list looks like an amazing amount of fun. However, it lacks the key component of Mechanized Infantry. This is to both claim objectives in games where the Russ’s cannot and to exploit holes in the enemy line. No, they arnt assault troops, but if you rush them up after a couple Russ’s take out a chunk of the enemy you will cause a great amount of casualties. In addition they can be used as blocking forces to slow down enemy units from assault the Russ’s, which saved me the game in the last game I played.
107th Regiment, 5th Armored Battle Group- 5500ptsFor someone to deal as much damage as you did, the Emperor must surely be at your side. - MaxDv