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!
Debate time. I'm trying to find a way to make the tankbustas useful. here's my thoughts. Unit of 10-15 tankbustas w/ 3 bomb squigs with a Nob with PK, att in a warphead. Basically the idea is to make the deepstrike and engage 2 enemy tanks on a turn 1 w/ the rokkits, and another tank with 3 Bomb squigs which auto hit.
Granted its a pricey unit, however, it forces the opponent to engage them. And you could potentially drop 2 tanks in 1 turn. Only problem I see is being a fire magnet the following turn.
My other thought is a suicidal 1st turn move. Deepstrike a unit of minimum tankbustas with 3 bomb squigs on turn 1... if you get that lucky roll... to pop a tank. The minimum unit should have a good shot of hiding more, total points thrown away though=150ish...
Just some thoughts on usability and trying to find a use for them.
40K-Beakies(9-14-4),Guard(4-7-2),Orks(34-12-11). FANTASY-Dwarves(15-6-7),Beasts (14-14-1), Skaven (17-17-10) DoC (6-1-2). CYGNAR (28-15-1)
The tankbusta conundrum, in general, is that they're most effective either at mid-range, or behind the enemy. The latter is a difficult place for them to be, considering they can't ride in a trukk. The former isn't as difficult a place to be, but it can be a difficult place to stay, at least safely.
If you ride the tankbustas forward in a looted wagon or battlewagon, you have the potential of doing a lot of damage, but you'll also be within range of most of your enemy's weapons, so a looted wagon will explode fairly quickly. A battlewagon will have more staying power, but the cost of the battlewagon, combined with the cost of the tankbustas makes it expensive, and a likely target. A nob and a bosspole also works well, but it's also quite expensive as well.
The best solution I've found is to run them in cheap units of 5, inside a battlewagon. A friend of mine pointed out: don't think of them as a unit, think of them as five detachable rokkits for the battlewagon, that can all fire even if the battlewagon moves. You could also use a looted wagon, but it most likley won't survive long. Still, a 40 point looted wagon (big shoota and nothing else) combined with a 75 point team of tankbustas is fairly effective, given its 115 point cost. You could also attach 1-3 bombsquigs as well, and simply consider them a suicide rokkit/squig delivery system.
The only time I've honestly used tankbustas to assault armor effectively is in a counter-assault move against walkers, in CC. Otherwise, you just can't get them close enough to be effective.
There are two effective ways of running tankbustas, as far as I can see: expensive or cheap. 9 tankbustas + 1 nob w/pk + bosspole (10 models total) in a battlewagon (with your weapon of choice upon it) will tear up a battlefield and possibly win you the game, but they don't have the staying power or speed of nobz, and will be relatively vulnerable to enemy attacks.
On the other hand, given the price of ordnance on the looted and battlewagons, 5 tankbustas seem like a nice cheap alternative to a large number of guns on the vehicle itself (especially since big shootas won't be defensive weapons soon), and if the wagon breaks down, they can simply leave.
Getting back to your original question, those tankbustas attached to the weirdboy are going to be turned into paste during your opponent's following turn unless they also have a nob with a powerklaw and bosspole. The problem is, they begin to get expensive that way, but since they're attached to the weirdboy, they're fairly expensive anyway.
Those tanks are most likely either crippled or toast, but was it worth it? Even if you destroy both tanks, if the enemy takes you out, then you're not that far ahead in points. A smaller group of tankbustas would cost less, but you'd still have to take out 2 tanks for it to really be worth it.
Still, I like the idea, as your opponent won't see it coming, and it will be crippling to Imperial Guard and Tau players. Of course, against Tyranids it won't really help much at all, but tankbustas in a battlewagon will. Personally, I'd keep both options open. I'd field a weirdboy, tankbustas and a battlewagon. Depending on the situation, I might attach the weirdboy to the tankbustas, and in another I might attach the weirdboy to a large shoota boy mob, and field the tankbustas inside the battlewagon. It all depends on what I felt I needed.
Last edited by mynameisgrax; March 5th, 2008 at 19:59.
I've had really great success with a unit of 14 Tank Bustas (nob w/ bosspole and 1 tank hammer) rolling inside a Battlewagon. It would be a fire magnet, but with 3+ trukks screaming across the board, the enemy is just a tad bit occupied.
"It takes a vast amount of self control to be this dangerous."
---Ogvai Ogvai Helmshrot, Jarl of Tra, VI Legion Astartes
Putting a IC psyker in with the squad, and counting on the him to roll up "ere'we go" to DS seems to be a little risky. Its a lot of points that may work, but probably end up as victory points for your opponent. remember that deepstriking is random, the power rolled is random AND furthermore... the tankhunters MUST shoot at the closest vehicle, if the Warphead is attached he may also fall into that constriction. So, if you roll wild and DS in the direction of a juicy command squad or soemthing that is gonna rip you up on the charge next round, you are toast. Gift wrapped VPs with crimped ribbons and fancy bows.
However, at no point does the rule state that they have to shoot at the closest vehicle. In fact, the rule doesn't mention range at all. All that matters is line of sight. If they can see a vehicle, they have to shoot a vehicle, but if there's more than one vehicle, you may choose which one you shoot, with the regular target priority rules applying.
Last edited by KhlauKolash; March 7th, 2008 at 18:18. Reason: re-quote
This isn't the only time a situation like this comes up. For example, what happens if you attach Mad Doc Grotznik to a unit of tankbustas? The tankbustas rules state they must shoot and assault a vehicle if possible. The Mad Doc's rules state that the unit he's attached to must move towards and assault the nearest enemy. Which takes precedent?
Say you move towards a group of marines, which are the nearest unit, but you can also see a rhino. By the tankbustas rules, you must shoot at the rhino, which you can do, but then what happens in the assault phase? Let's say you're within assault range of the marines. Doc Grotznik's rules state they must now assault the marines, but the tankbustas rules state they must assault the vehicle, and if Mad Doc's rule takes precedent, what happens if you didn't shoot the unit you're forced to assault? Do they assault the marines (Mad Doc), tank (tankbustas), or does it simply fail?
Would you not think that the same logic as "fearless" would apply? IIRC the rules for fearless state that a fearless IC will make a joined squad fearless, but a non-fearless IC that joins a fearless squad does not gain the fearless ability and removes it from the squad. So, following that logic, which I know is a dangerous step, I would think that the tankbustas would follow the Mad Doc's rules.
40k rules state that IC do not confer special abilities to the units they join, unless specified, and vice versa, but they do share limitations. Otherwise, you could strip away any weaknesses of a unit by simply attaching an IC that doesn't share the same weakness, and if that's true, you can take away slow and purposeful simply by adding an IC that doesn't have it.
What makes this example complicated is that both the Mad Doc and the tankbustas each have a different limitation as to what models they can shoot and assault. The question is, which of the two limitations takes precedent?