Jump to content

Thoughts on the Vindicator


Redo

Recommended Posts

I was daydreaming today, looking at tanks and comparing the Vindi to the Baal Pred. The Vindi model is so much thicker, squat and with that seige shield menacing.

 

Does anyone think that the Vindi deserves better armour or it is just me. In my mind it makes sense. Afterall if a tank is designed for Close Supoort and/or siege operations it usually has better armour, just look at the Imperial Leman Russ. Some models (those designed for more aggressive operations) have AV11 rear and in the last codex the Demonisher had better side armour. Of course they now have the same but I still think that the Vindi should have a AV12 on the side, AV11 on the rear and AV14 up front.

 

Anyway just musing, what do you guys think?

Link to comment
https://bolterandchainsword.com/topic/204411-thoughts-on-the-vindicator/
Share on other sites

But what if you run you vindi without siege shield? Does it seem fair to be able to upgrade your front armour to 14 for a mere 10pts? If it can be done for vindi, why not all rhino variants? As for it looking more sturdy and squat- its a rhino hull. Its exactly the same size n shape as a rhino, and a pred, but with less 'clutter' around it like turret and sponsons... I would happily take side armour 12 ahead of front av14 though.
But what if you run you vindi without siege shield? Does it seem fair to be able to upgrade your front armour to 14 for a mere 10pts? If it can be done for vindi, why not all rhino variants? As for it looking more sturdy and squat- its a rhino hull. Its exactly the same size n shape as a rhino, and a pred, but with less 'clutter' around it like turret and sponsons... I would happily take side armour 12 ahead of front av14 though.

 

To be fair I was not thinking about points costs...just looks. If it ever happened, year the vindi would have to be re-pointed. It should be noted that a siege shield is not an open for other rhino variants. I think the shield could make it difficult to for gunners to target other tanks.

 

Anyway don't you think that with that additional chunky side armour that the vindi looks like it should have more? Indeed the other variants look virtually all the same and have AV11, yet look again and you will see that the vindi has additionally side, top and even front armour.

Giving a Vindicator armor 14-12-11 would be too good. The cost would have to go up to 180ish.

 

Yes, which would be silly for one weapon. I feel ours is already to expensive and would really rather have the SM variant. Guard stuff that expensive and well armorer has several weapons. However, as mentioned, it is true the Vindi HAS extra armor so it does make sense to have something. 150 points with venerable, regular speed, and extra armor doesn't seem completely unreasonable to me.

I had the same thoughts when building my 1st Vindicator a few months ago. What is defined as a siege shield is technically a dozer blade and has nothing to do with a siege!?! It allows us to reroll Difficult Terrain tests, same as dozer blades, which are really nothing more than bush guards. That's a BIG chunk of plasteel that doesn't add a single point of AV. BOOOOO!

 

My vote: Siege Shield adds +1 FAV and is a 15-point ($11 for GW :)) option for all Rhino variants.

^ not quite.

 

Considering the description of the vehicle always seems to mention protection from infantry firing down from windows I'd expect side armor 12 or something that at least gives that otherwise worthless bit of tech fluff a purpose.

 

It IS odd that the siege tank has the exact same side and rear armors as the MBT.

 

My preference would be to increase the points by 10 (or thereabouts) and increase the REAR armor to 11, stealing a page from the IG demolisher and variants. After all the demolisher is the closest equivleant to the vindie.

 

Obviously this should apply to all vindies, not just ours. Or maybe it should apply to all vindies EXCEPT ours but we get a points drop. Perhaps the BA had to sacrifice some of the close range protection on the tank to make it fast.

If your going to advocate Vindicators getting extra armour from the siege shield I guess I'll advocate siege shields removing the fast part on the BA vindicators since all the extra mass slows it down.

 

I had that in my original reply but deleted it for fear of heretical branding!!! :)

Sorry, but no. I think the Vindicator is right were it should be. It is based off of the RH1N0 STC, only will better front armor (which is adequately represented in the kit, but not on the SM Predator kit). A siege shield gives the Vindicator an effective means of crashing through fortification. I think a siege shield does exactly what it should.

 

I don't want to come across as cynical, but as a die hard marine player I hear a lot of Marine players complain about how marines should be better. I just cannot understand how some one can think that. Marines have a hard time being balanced, and the reason that so many young people play marines is that they are very forgiving.

 

Just my 2 thoughts.

I never understood why people thought the siege shield, which is simply a beefed up dozer blade that is tall enough to push the huge walls of rubble away from the tank, accounted for the vehicle having AV13 in the front. It's silly. The predator has AV13 and has no shield leading me to believe that since both the pred and vindy are both heavier tanks than the rhino the armor is on the hull and not some shield.

 

That irrelavent point aside as far as representing the vindy chugging along maybe it could have a rule similar to the LRBT lumbering behemoth rule. Of course, ours would be slightly faster than those vanilla boys.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.