Land Raider Redeemer for Blood Anegls?

[ElectricPaladin]

What do you think?

 

At the moment, I am inclined against land raider redeemers for armies using the Blood Angels codex for the following reasons:

 

1) Template weapons on a non-Fast vehicle slow it down significantly because they cannot snap-shoot. Compare this to the crusader, which can still snap-shoot any weapons it can't fire at full BS.

 

2) Higher transport capacity, which allows for more of the unit-buffing Independent Characters we all love (ie. a squad of five terminators with a chaplain and a librarian and a captain - all in power armor - can all fit in a crusader, but not a redeemer).

 

3) If you really want a tank to hunt infantry in cover, we have access to fireBaals, who can sport a flamestorm cannon and a pair of heavy flamers and can be upgraded to sport a dozer blade, which makes them less likely to get stuck when they dive into cover after their targets.

 

It's a shame, because I think that the redeemer is visually and conceptually cool.

 

Anyway, as I am preparing to build my brand new crusader/redeemer kit, I am very interested to hear what kinds of thoughts my fellow Blood Angels players have.

[Xenith]

The problem with them is that the flamestorm requires you to be in melta range. granted, this works better on an assault tranposrt as the occupants should be assaulting threats to the tank.

 

I think the flamestorm works better on the redeemder than the rear AV12 Baal.

 

That said, the crusader is still, IMO, the better all round choice.

[thepowerofwar]

Baal rear av is 10, but the durability is way higher on the raider but the mobility for its firing capability does leave a lot to be desired. 

[t4play]

I've used a pair before Scout squads in cover drop them on the enemy Mmmm toasted enemy Scares the la la out of people when there is no scatter. That said I'm liking the baals better

[Jolemai]

t4play, you might want to edit that post before a mod sees it...