To sponson or not to sponson, that is the question!

[Brother Clavero]

Hello all! I really do not like having sponsons on my tanks, however; in your opinion are they worth taking? Should I put them on all, some, or none of my tanks? Does some type of tank(s) benefit from having sponsons while others don't? Help!!

[WarriorFish]

I'm moving this topic to the barracks where it belongs and you will get more responses. Quite a few I imagine as this is always a hot topic! The short answer is "it depends" which while correct isn't particularly useful

Generally speaking thanks to the rules and natures of the different Russes some decisions are easier. For example the ordnance Russes (standard battle tank and Demolisher) will be snap firing other weapons if they fire their main gun which is a good argument for saving some points and not taking sponsons. However there's also an argument for taking them as backup weapons, or should the main gun not be suitable or just to spam out some more shots even at BS1.

Certain sponson weapons also mesh better with some Russes, for example matching stats or roles (e.g. heavy bolters on an anti-infantry/light armour Russ) but again this doesn't mean it's the only choice. You can take alternative weaponry to give it some flexibility, or a sponson weapon to give it more range if the main gun is one of the 24" cannons. It's a decision that rests on your list as much as anything else. I think you should either specialise all of your tanks or generalise them all, so this is how I approach my sponson choices.

So as a slightly longer short answer: if you can afford it sponsons are worth taking, but be careful not to overspend if you have a few Russes. When in doubt all Russ variants are more than capable of being effective without sponsons so leaving them at home is ok - and maybe the points saved can help fund an extra unit somewhere?

[elmo]

On a purely modelling standpoint it is always worth having the option to use sponsons. If you are undecided or your loadout varies game to game then use magnets ;)

 

Leman Russ magnetisation tutorial

[greendestiny]

Use magnets, then you can change your mind as often as you would like.  Plenty of tutorials on how to do this.

[WarriorFish]

Leaving aside the modelling question (to which the answer is always magnetise), perhaps we should focus on table top answers? :P

[Jacinda]

or just to spam out some more shots even at BS6.

BS 6? Yes, please!

I put sponsons on Pask always His BS is too good to pass up the opportunity. Even if it is not 6

From there it all depends on the role of the tank. Is it volume of fire? Then sponsons. If it is for The Big Hit™, then I don't

[WarriorFish]

A typo that always slips me up :lol: Better correct it just in case!

 

Pask is indeed a special case, like the tank commander you pay for his better BS so you may as well use it :) I like to keep my units cheaper so I don't take sponsons often especially as I tend to take the ordnance Russes.

[Karack Blackstone]

Depending, I would think that the AM specialize in sponsons when needed.  Look through the rules for the weapons on the tank in question, and since I figure this is mostly about the Leman Russ, consider that the main weapon is the one in the turret.  If, and that's a big if, the sponson mounts can be fired as well, or instead of, the main gun, then go for it if points allow.

 

Put another way, are you in need of three heavy bolters or a battle cannon that turn?  If you like having an either or option on the table, you have your answer.  Change the turret weapon in this leading question as needed, of course.  Also, two HB's and a LC, or three HB's?  Better to ask at the armory this question, than to have to ask it in the field.

[varchilde]

Another vote for the "it depends camp"!

 

If the sponsons complement the main gun then it makes sense to add them, especially on a Russ when you can make best use of the Heavy rule. If you are paying 150 odd points on a tank, spending another 20 or so to give it more dakka seems a no-brainer to me.

 

Combos I like (apologies as I fail to remember the variant names and the codex is out of arms reach...)

 

Vanquisher with hull Las and multi melta sponsons

Plasma turret weapon and plasma sponsons

Gatling Cannon (Punisher?) with hull heavy bolter and heavy bolter sponsons.

TLDR; what WarriorFish said. Except I seem to specialise my tanks!

[captain sox]

Here's how I load out mine. 

 

 

 Long range Russ(72"): No sponsons (Battle Cannon, Vanquisher) Reasoning is not too likely the sponsons will get used. I figure if the enemy is that close to tanks you keep in the backfield, something went horribly wrong! It will have a Lascannon in the front too.

 

 Medium Range (36"): I really like the Eradicator Nova Cannon with heavy bolter sponsons. Same range, etc. great for the anti horde roll. For a Russ with more punch, the Tri-Plasma Executioner. All 4 weapons have the same range, 3 Plasma Cannons and the standard Heavy Bolter.

 

 On the short range Russ (24"), I once again arm it with sponsons, with Multi-Meltas. However the Punisher I'll likely use Heavy Bolter sponsons. 

 

 I don't glue the weapons in the sponsons, they slot in easily and with a tiny ball of sticky tack, will stay in place. This way you can mix n match to your hearts content. 

 

I have about 3 long range Russ that I can make either variant of and 5 of the short-medium ranged ones (so far)

[scatmandoo]

Depends on the tank as people have said.

 

Ordnance tanks. - no, utter waste of points.

 

Vanquisher - possibly MM if points and situation allow to cement its roll as a tank hunter and aids kill rapidly approaching enemy/podded dreads and the like.

 

Eradicator - i use HB as they mesh well though a case can be made for PC.

 

Exterminator - Jack of all trades and just about any sponsons bar HF can be justified though i personally prefer a HB for more shots.

 

Punisher - again most options can be justified though i feel MM don't sync well even with same range, HB adds another 6 shots at S5 for same cost and PC helps when shooting heavier armed targets.

 

Executioner - i Go full PC and to hell with gets hot (go full or not at all is my motto). Makes it a target but leaves attention off the rest of the force until it is dead. Capable of stripping hull points and decimating squads.

 

Think thats all the main tanks. Hope it helps.

[Acebaur]

Regarding the Punisher, what if it's Pask's tank? Seems like with the rending on the punisher you can take on medium/heavy armor with it so MM's might not be a bad idea for it?

[Brother Clavero]

Thanks for all of the input guys! Each one of you has a valid point so I guess ultimately (for me) it will boil down to versatility. I think I will go ahead and add the sponsons. A little more dakka never hurts!

[Reyner]

Don't do what I did when I was a teen and bought my Demolisher and Leman Russ... The Demolisher has a lascannon and plasma cannons! (Least all I need to do is get a plasma turret now hehe) :D My LR has Lascannon and Heavy Bolters.

[WarriorFish]

Regarding the Punisher, what if it's Pask's tank? Seems like with the rending on the punisher you can take on medium/heavy armor with it so MM's might not be a bad idea for it?

Pask's special rules make him his own category for this, where combinations that would be odd normally become viable such as this. Again, all different arguments for and against stuff so having the MMs to let him crush everything at 24" is good, but so is something like HBs so he can target stuff outside of 24" and lay down a hail of anti-personnel fire cheaper. The question is "what does my list need" as ever, but it's a good option to have so we should be thankful the Russ is so versatile

[Rob451]

If you want a rant about the Russ and Ordnance rules then check below...

 

 

My favourite rule misconception is that Russes snap fire sponsons when firing ordnance weapons. They don't.

 

This is a case of the majority of people looking at a line from the rule book out of context and treating it as a global rule.

 

The line that states that a vehicle snap fires all other weapons if they fire an ordnance weapon is a sub-heading in the Moving and Shooting with vehicles section. Not the Ordnance section or the Shooting with Vehicles section (which contains the moving and shooting with vehicles section). It is a specific exception to the rules for Relentless and how it applies to vehicles that move and shoot. Sadly the formatting of the page this is on makes it ambiguous.

 

Russes are heavy so always count as being stationary when shooting so they always fire their sponsons at full BS.

 

This also means that if you don't move your Basilisk you can fire the Heavy Bolter just fine but if it moves and fires it's Earthshaker then the Heavy Bolter is snap firing (which it would be anyway).

 

The great thing about this rule argument? You'll never see an FAQ for it because the GW rules team have said "There is no ambiguity in the rule so there is no need for an FAQ."  - except it clearly is ambiguous otherwise so many people wouldn't question it (an example of GW rules writing team not actually being connected to the community).

 

 

 

However with that all said...

 

Sponsons are basically a waste of points on anything but Executioners, Exterminators and Punishers.

 

None of the other main weapon systems have good synergies with the sponson options and the roles your tanks will be filling.

 

Vanquishers should be abusing their massive range not getting close enough to use Multi-Meltas (but do put a hull Lascannon on them).

 

Battle Tanks exist largely as ablative hull points for their more specialist squad mates so should be kept cheap and cheerful.

 

Eradicator is very specialist and can benefit from some sponsons but you're buying it for that ignores cover pie plate so anything you shoot at probably has a huge cover save and bad armour save making just about all the sponson options ineffective for their points (I've seen one with triple Heavy Flamers but it only ever gets to fire once at most then gets eaten in combat).

 

Demolisher benefits from Multi-Meltas but it depends on your interpretation of the vehicle ordnance rules. Most groups I've played with have house ruled the snap-fire always interpretation so they are useless.

 

Exterminators and Punishers load up on Heavy Bolters and Stubbers while the Executioner benefits from Plasma Cannons and a Lascannon (and babysit with a tech priest).

 

Ultimately it costs about £2 and an extra hour of your life to magnetise a Russ so it's not a big deal.

[Idlem]

My head just exploded Rob, I've been snap firing my weapons while stationary this entire time. Thank you for bringing that up, makes me not regret my sponsons.

[CoffeeGrunt]

I'll have to crack out the rulebook to double-check that interpretation, it sounds interesting.

 

IMo, you're understating how well Heavy Bolter Sponsons work with the Eradicator. Range synergy, AP synergy, roughly similar Strength, and still keeps the Eradicator at a Meltagun less than a stock Russ. If you don't play exclusively against Power Armour, it's awesome. Besides, there will be times when you'll be firing at squads in the open, and those Sponsons make Weapon Destroyed much less of a problem.

[WarriorFish]

Unfortunately you are wrong Rob, the rulebook says on page 73 that vehicles firing an ordnance weapon must snap shoot all other weaponry in that shooting phase. All the Heavy vehicles rule does it have the tank count as being stationary for firing, this doesn't overrule the ordnance rule forcing other weaponry to snap shot (page 88). The vehicle ordnance rule just specifies that vehicles can also move and fire ordnance unlike other unit types, as well as that "a vehicle that fires an Ordnance weapon", not "a vehicle that moves and fires and Ordnance weapon" must snap shoot other guns.

Maybe you're reading too much into the last sentence of the paragraph that talks about snap shooting ordnance weapons? Believe me, if this was the case I'd have been all over it long ago indoctrinating educating everyone about the glory of Russes... not that I don't do so anyway

[elmo]

Agree with WarriorFish - snapshots when Ordnance fired.

 

This can mean that putting sponsons on a LRBT may be less than worthwhile especially if it is high priced single shot weapons which are forced to fire snapshots... and as the main reason for taking the LRBT is the cannon or else you would have taken a different variant, better to save the points for somewhere else ;)

[Rob451]

Unfortunately you are wrong Rob, the rulebook says on page 73 that vehicles firing an ordnance weapon must snap shoot all other weaponry in that shooting phase. All the Heavy vehicles rule does it have the tank count as being stationary for firing, this doesn't overrule the ordnance rule forcing other weaponry to snap shot (page 88). The vehicle ordnance rule just specifies that vehicles can also move and fire ordnance unlike other unit types, as well as that "a vehicle that fires an Ordnance weapon", not "a vehicle that moves and fires and Ordnance weapon" must snap shoot other guns.

Maybe you're reading too much into the last sentence of the paragraph that talks about snap shooting ordnance weapons? Believe me, if this was the case I'd have been all over it long ago indoctrinating educating everyone about the glory of Russes... not that I don't do so anyway

I was just going with how GW told me to play it when I asked them. Up until then I had played it the way the rest of the internet plays it. Believe it or not the Context a rule appears within in the rulebook does actually matter.

I put it in spoiler tags precisely because it has no bearing on the conclusions of this conversation - Sponsons on Ordnance based Russ variants aren't useful not because they have to snap fire but because they don't synergise well with their main weapons.

I didn't use Sponsons on Ordnance Russes (and the Vanquisher) when Lumbering Behemoth was a thing and I still don't now - my reasons haven't changed because of the tank losing that rule and gaining Heavy.

[Acebaur]

Unfortunately you are wrong Rob, the rulebook says on page 73 that vehicles firing an ordnance weapon must snap shoot all other weaponry in that shooting phase. All the Heavy vehicles rule does it have the tank count as being stationary for firing, this doesn't overrule the ordnance rule forcing other weaponry to snap shot (page 88). The vehicle ordnance rule just specifies that vehicles can also move and fire ordnance unlike other unit types, as well as that "a vehicle that fires an Ordnance weapon", not "a vehicle that moves and fires and Ordnance weapon" must snap shoot other guns.

Maybe you're reading too much into the last sentence of the paragraph that talks about snap shooting ordnance weapons? Believe me, if this was the case I'd have been all over it long ago indoctrinating educating everyone about the glory of Russes... not that I don't do so anyway

This is probably best for the OR, but...

I'm actually going agree with Rob on this. First that heading is under Moving and Shooting and then the first line says "Unlike other units, vehicles can move and fire with Ordnance weapons." The next sentence where it talks about snap shots start's with "However, " So it's a continuation of the first sentence which is only discussing moving and shooting.

[WarriorFish]

I'd like to agree but I'm not sure. Super-heavy vehicle rules on page 94 says ordnance weaponry has no effect on it's ability to fire other weaponry, but it also specifies this as in addition to counting as stationary when shooting. If being stationary ignores the issue of ordnance forcing other weaponry to snap shoot then why does this need mentioning? Probably be worth creating an OR topic to get to the bone of it?

For more appropriate discussion I'm working on my tank commander for the Big Guns challenge (small modification from Pask). Following the magnetising tutorial it will have removable sponsons. I will have my cake and eat it, though for a tank commander I think the only time I'll run him without sponsons would be as a Vanquisher. As I tend to use several Russes the cost of sponsons mounts, for the price to upgrade them all I could get another Sentinel in or something.

The exception being when I'm rolling out my old school Russes with lascannon and heavy bolters. Being such venerable war machines they deserve every point! This makes them a solid and versatile backbone to build my list around

[Zsolt]

There is a constant price on tkaing the LR chasis. If you are not taking sponsons, then you are paying that constant price only to get the main cannon, while if you take sponsons, then that price is divided between the main cannon and the sponson weapons.

 

For ordnance weapon your sponson weapons are wasted, so don't have one on those, otherwise put a sponson weapon that goes wwell with the main gun.

[CommissarZac]

I would tend to agree with the majority here.  I still like Sponsons on my Vanqs but only because I've been drop podded, too many times and haveing extra dakka in that situation is always good.  For my Punishers, most definatly.  I run HB with Heavy stubbers.  In a squadron of 3 punishers thats 96 dice coming at you.  I don't care what save you have Mathhammer rules. LOL  Just my humble opinion.