Are Baneblade Variants Competitive?

[gunnyogrady]

I've been turning my gears looking at Heavy Support and LOW options for Guard/AM. It seems to me that even with high AV and 9 HP, our Baneblade-Variant Super Heavies just aren't competitive. With all the gnarly walkers around (Wraithknight, Imperial Knight, even Dreadknight and Riptide), I feel our big old tanks have fallen by the wayside.

 

Any gameplay examples or thoughts to offer?

 

 

[march10k]

Well...I'm undefeated when fielding my shadowsword, but It's a small number of games, and it's still a ton of points in one basket.  To make it competitive, it HAS TO have all of the available weapon upgrades...a naked shadowsword isn't worth its points, but for 110 points more, it gains NINE more heavy weapons:  five twinlinked heavy bolters and four lascannons...each of which can choose a separate target and none of which is vulnerable to "weapon destroyed" results.  That's a stupid amount of firepower...and to really put the icing on the cake, put it on top of a skyshield landing pad for a 4+ invulnerable save!  A lot of what you're paying for in a knight is a melee d weapon, I don't think that compares to the shenanigans you can get from a superheavy...how about eighteen heavy weapons teams firing from the open-topped one in addition to that tank's own weapons?  That's nasty.

[WarriorFish]

Well, you're right to a degree. Tanks are vulnerable to assault this is as true for the big ones as small, I think it's more down to the age of the kits. GW gets overexcited and the new stuff eclipses the old but that's far from the death knell. So a Knight can take down a Baneblade in combat quickly, but that's far from new - all LoW need appropriate support to be effective. The benefits of a SH are many; the ability to split fire and the durability and immunity to certain damage rules go a long way so think of one as a supplement to your army and you won't go far wrong.

 

I think it's as much down to the selection of the right variant for your list as anything else. They're a fair investment of points so if you have the wrong tank it can hold you back, which is why I think the Baneblade is the standard choice for when you're in doubt as it's flexible and capable enough.

[gunnyogrady]

Valid points, both. And that is a TON of weapons that you can put on the Shadowsword in addition to that big nasty cannon. I think I tend to forget that they're immune to Weapon Destroyed when I'm building lists. I guess I should treat them just like any other unit in a good Guard list -- give them a specific purpose, and protect them adequately with infantry models and/or target saturation.

[Ulrik_Ironfist]

Competitive, it depends. I wouldn't field one below 1850, because it's a huge investment of points. If nothing else, superheavies are fun, and for pete's sake it's a game. The whole point is to have fun. 

[librisrouge]

It really all comes down to your local meta. Overall, I'd say no. They're too many points for too little firepower that could be better spent elsewise. That doesn't mean that they cannot have winning moments and awesome games though and none of them are genuinely terrible.

 

On a related note, look out for games that reinstated the rules from Escalation to 'balance' superheavies. Under those rules, most superheavies are not worth it.

[Butcher Braxton]

Something that should also be taken into account is that there is a certain scare factor involved, besides all of the glorious gun options for a bane-chassis.
I've fielded both my baneblade and shadowsword in different games and it automatically becomes your opponents main concern, either they want to hide from it or kill it asap, this could also give you an advantage in "board control". 
But like previously stated, it also depends on what the rest of your list looks like.

[WarriorFish]

Yeah, being able to attract attention can do a lot for your game :)

[march10k]

They're too many points for too little firepower that could be better spent elsewise. 

I dunno about the first part...565 points for five TLHB, 4 LC, and a D pieplate that are immune to weapon destroyed results and inependently targetable behind AV14 ...that's not "too little firepower."  Especially if you go the extra mile with a cheap prescience caster, skyshield, and/or techpriest.  I rarely field mine not because it's not worth it, but because it unbalances the game.  A superheavy in a 1850 game is like a leman russ at 500 points.  It is a ton of eggs in a single basket, but oh, what a basket.  Most enemies are going to struggle to deal with it, and if they pull  it off, it's at the expense of sucking up 75% or more of their antitank potential for the entire game.  If the superheavy is your only AV14, then it's probably a bit 'meh,' but if you're fielding at least four other AV14 platforms, especially some short-ranged, but devastating ones like demolishers or punishers...

 

Yeah, I know you can get a lot of other cool stuff for the same 565 points...

[Ulrik_Ironfist]

 

Yeah, I know you can get a lot of other cool stuff for the same 565 points...

 

 

That was the main point I was getting at. Doesn't stop me from wanting one, and if I get one, it won't stop me from Fielding it. I'm not too worried about being competitive, since I don't do tournaments, I just play for fun. I take a Knight as often as I can, because it's fun.

[march10k]

It is kinda fun...but even though it's not terribly WAAC, it always gets loud protests of "cheese," perhaps based on the assumption that it will always roll a six to ignore saves...which to date it hasn't EVER done...and only once has it single-handedly dismantled an enemy army (two squads of GKTs and two squadrons of ravenwing in the first two turns, causing my opponent to concede after having played only one turn himself).  The other games, it's done as much damage as perhaps 300 points worth of conventional armor while attracting 1000 points worth of enemy attention, so its main contribution has been to play the role of the matador's cape while the rest of my army quietly gets about the business of winning the game.

[Ulrik_Ironfist]

That's about what my knight does. Though with the RFBC it does a hefty bit of damage.

[march10k]

That's about what my knight does. Though with the RFBC it does a hefty bit of damage.

RFBC=two battlecannon shots for the price of...two LRBTs? That's not a hefty bit of damage, that's 300 points worth of damage, lol.

/edit/ I think the main difference between superheavy tanks and superheavy walkers is that the walkers will never match the tanks in firepower, while the tanks, well, they not only lack a melee D weapon, they lack a WS value! Knights will rip Baneblades apart head to head just as surely as a DCCW will end a land raider, but baneblades will kill more stuff (even on a per point invested basis), and both will distract the enemy from what the rest of your army is doing.

[gunnyogrady]

Very valid points. It seems to me like the 'Blade Chassis is valuable as a distraction/bullet-magnet as much as a firebase.

 

I just wrote up a basic 1850 list, and was able to fit a CCS in Chimera, two Lascannon-blobs, two Techpriests with full Servitors, two Demolishers, and two Vendettas along with a fully kitted Shadowsword.

 

If you had access to any models, how would y'all support a Baneblade variant at 1850?

 

PS: I realize this is pure-cheese discussion. The actual lists I run are quite fluffy, but I like the theoretical discussion. #JustAGame

[Ulrik_Ironfist]

Oh, I'm not arguing that. Per game, my Knight tends to kill well more than its points, as long as I keep it hanging back and taking advantage of its range. I wasn't saying that a knight can match the volume of fire or damage output of a baneblade variant. Just saying that my knight has a tendency do perform the same function as your Shadowsword. 

[Butcher Braxton]

If you had access to any models, how would y'all support a Baneblade variant at 1850?

 

PS: I realize this is pure-cheese discussion. The actual lists I run are quite fluffy, but I like the theoretical discussion. #JustAGame

I'd use something like this as a base and play around a little with this.

 

Baneblade

2x punishers (with pask if points alow it)

4x chimera with vets

Vendetta

2x wyvern

Maybe add another LR if points alow it...

 

But then again, i do love my armour ;)

[CoffeeGrunt]

I haven't fielded my Baneblade in a casual game yet - waiting to get it painted for the final part of my ETL vow - but it seems about fair for its points, which is the case for most Imperial Guard units other than the Wyvern, which is pretty cheap, and some options that are sadly too overpriced to use, *cough cough* Stracken *cough.*

 

IMO, the Guard itself aren't, "competitive," if you're looking at the same tier as Jetbike spam or the ol' Screamerstar, but in more casual play you can have real fun with a lot of options. A Baneblade with all the sponsons runs at about 630pts if I remember rightly, and it puts out some punishing firepower that can deal with a lot of things fairly well. The Shadowsword is a good look in these days of big toys given its D weapon, and the Stormlord is handy so you can pack it with Heavy Weapons Teams.

[Chefzilla]

My weapon of choice is the Hellhammer. Str10 AP1 Ignores Cover is quite a force multiplier. It's been hinted that I should only field a SH when there's another on the field to counter it but it's very hard for the Tread Head in me to not want to bring my big dog into the fight.

 

I'm a firm believer in Peace Through Superior Firepower.

 

Unltimately it comes down to how you play. All the points above are valid and more often than not. Thuinderchild on the board distracts my opponents enough that the rest of my army is allowed to maneuver, bring their firepower to bare and destroy my enemy.

[Ulrik_Ironfist]

Personally, I'm of this mind:

 

http://aero-stuff.com/image/cache/B52PeaceLogo_25-400x400.jpg

 

If I could afford a Marauder, that's hat I'd rather have. Actually that's not entirely true, I'd rather just have all of the things...

 

I'm leaning heavily towards the Baneblade/Hellhammer for my first baneblade chassis. 

[march10k]

Gunny,

 

If you're running four lascannons on your superheavy, you might consider something other than lascannons for the infantry...maybe autocannons?

 

How would I support my shadowsword?  More tanks.  Specifically, two demolishers and maybe an eradicator to push up the field and force the enemy to deal with them...which will dilute, if not completely divert, the theoretical "gotta kill that shadowsword" fire...of course, if they choose to ignore the standard tanks and focus on the big one, that's fine, too...unmolested demolishers put a huge smile on my face, too!  Also, I'd support with Pask in a Vanquisher.  A shadowsword is designed to pop superheavies, but the reality is that D weapons are kinda more bark than bite if the enemy has access to an invul or a cover save.  So a little assistance from Pask in the task of killing what threatens the shadowsword is never a bad investment.  Beyond that, mechanized infantry.  With all that armor on the table, there should be fairly little enemy antitank capacity available for transport hunting, and chimeras keep with the theme of rendering enemy anti-personnel fire inert...

[librisrouge]

*Rant Beginning*

I've never entirely understood the idea of having to take a super heavy to counter a super heavy. Do you know what super heavy the stormlord counters? None. The Marcarius Omega? None. Knight Crusader? None. All of those are vastly more oriented toward killing infantry. Even the Baneblade isn't exactly a vehicle killer as much as it punches marines right in the face.

 

What does counter super heavies? Deep striking meltaguns. Yet nobody ever complains about drop podding melta squads or scions. "Oh, that is so OP. Now my super tank is worthless! Play a balanced game man," said nobody ever.

*Rant Ended*

 

Sorry, that built up a bit in there and had to come out. Can't let those things build up or you'll get sick.

[Ulrik_Ironfist]

The only time my knight died was to a unit of sanguinary guard.

[march10k]

 

What does counter super heavies?  Deep striking meltaguns.

Well...not my super heavy.  It sits on top of a closed skyshield.  If you're within 6", you're out of LOS unless you're on top...if you want to risk a deepstrike mishap to try and land next to me up there, have at it.  Even if you don't scatter off of the platform (and lose LOS) or onto the tank (and thus mishap), I still get a 4++ and you get one round of shooting before I kill you.  If you're lucky, you'll strip about four hull points...that's painful, but I'll survive...you won't. 

 

The scariest thing to me is a flying daemon prince of nurgle.  He gets a 2+ jink as he approaches and then I'm getting clobbered.

[Ulrik_Ironfist]

A knight errant with the new codex (the helm of something gives you rampage, so that's more attacks with that D strength chainsword), and it has that 36 inch large blast melta, that could do the trick. Something with the ability to wreck vehicles might also do well. Maybe some hammernators could do it. Like I said sanguinary guard can kill a knight, something S10 and melee might be able to get through the armor.

[march10k]

Actually, a unit of five deathwing knights in smite mode (so only four, not five, the sergeant doesn't get the bonus) will on average delete one baneblade on the charge...and that's without a chaplain letting them reroll misses.  Pretty sure they get the same result against a knight...knights are AV13 in melee, versus the AV12 of a baneblade, but they also have fewer HP...I'd still want a chaplain along, since they only get one turn of smite mode!

 

/edit/  Best knight-killer, though?  Repentia.  The trick is getting them the charge...Average pen roll is 13, but there'd be nine of the little wenches with three attacks each and a 3++ to protect against the knight's swings.  That'll kill a proper titan, let alone a knight!