What's the consensus on this new Astra Militarum tank?

[Mr4Minutes]

I’ve been pretty disappointed with multilasers as well. They used to be a good anti light tank option in 7th, but are pretty meh in 8th. While a point reduction may make them a better option, I personally think making them assault weapons would be better.

 

But to get back on topic, I like its look. I’m a fan of the solar auxilia aesthetic and hope that this model getting 40k rules leads to the rest of the army getting them as well.

[Reviler]

The fifth multi laser is a pinitel weapon.

 

Multi lasers either need to be an assault weapon or have -1 save to have any worth.

[JBugman]

it certainly looks nice but it's Forge World which means it's (1) expensive and (2) got potential quality control issues that make you live in fear until the package arrives.  The only FW stuff I ever purchased was from Games Day where I could see and feel the merchandise.  Even if the rules were totally OP I'd still pass because at some point something's going to change, usually for the worst.

 

What GW should do is take a hint from FW and design another chassis with a few alternate weapon configurations.  Surely, it can't be that difficult.  I just skimmed through the FW catalog and they've a dozen Imperial battle tanks vaguely based on other Imperial chassis.

 

Sorry for ranting a bit at the end

[MARK0SIAN]

Even if the rules were totally OP I'd still pass because at some point something's going to change, usually for the worst.

 

This is so true. You would think the rapid balancing changes with this edition would be great but actually they just mean the model(s) you’ve spent a fortune on and lovingly painted cannot be relied on to be worth the plastic/resin they’re made of in a few months time or they’ll become too expensive to play. It makes you reluctant to buy any models, even mediocre ones.

 

Sadly the rapid changes also don’t seem to address any of the actual balance issues in the game.

[NatBrannigan]

Quite like it with the All Volkite loadout you know, for 108 pts. Then it hits me that when moving (And I'd want it moving) it hit's on a 5...

 

If not for that I'd be tempted to treat myself because I like the model a lot.

[JBugman]

If not for that I'd be tempted to treat myself because I like the model a lot.

I like the model as well.  Just make one from GW and not a third party.

[Feral_80]

What's all this fuss about moving this little tank around? Infantry is meant to do that. Tanks stay still and shoot. It has decent range and it won't need to move at all in half games, and likely only need to move on turn 1 in the other half.

[Inso]

Rules wise... I haven't a clue but the rest of the peeps on here are covering that :) .

 

Looks wise, the beading could be a little more subtle but the shape of the tank is quite nice :) .

[Tirak]

What's all this fuss about moving this little tank around? Infantry is meant to do that. Tanks stay still and shoot. It has decent range and it won't need to move at all in half games, and likely only need to move on turn 1 in the other half.

 

You don't play with enough LOS blocking terrain then. Mobility is huge at my club because we make sure sightlines are blocked all over the place specifically because my Tanks could touch the whole board without trying.

[NatBrannigan]

Agreed there, I insist on a lot of terrain because otherwise my Heavy Weapons tend to smash everything with ease. I like the idea of a medium tank supporting my other more mobile units and hoped this would fit the bill. Hitting on a 5 (often a 6 with all the negative modifiers out there) isn't worth it though, I already load up on useless units I'm overly fond of!

[Feral_80]

Well sure terrain should include some los-blocking elements, but not so many that it is impossible to get long fire lanes.

 

Otherwise you penalise long-range weapons too much (a feature you *do* pay pts for) and exceedingly advantage stuff like mortars and artillery, which AM has in abundance compared to other armies and many players tend to spam already. You also give too much importance and advantage to units that <fly>, which again are horrendously strong and spammed already.

 

In my average gaming table there will be a balanced mixture of features, which will certainly allow a couple of good long range firing lanes. Enough for a couple of tanks to do their job for sure.

[duz_]

Lets keep it gentlemanly Officers and don't digress too far into what is considered appropriate terrain or not 

[Tirak]

Different clubs have different tables sure, but we found the most fun can be had with lots of built up terrain, we all enjoy that a lot more than having long fields of fire. Sure there do tend to be one or two on the map, generally on the edges, but if it doesn't make me think city, I want more stuff on that table XD

 

With that said, mobility is a pretty big deal, even if you're just going to sit it still and blast away with Lascannons, there will come a time when you've got to move, and not having the ability to do that with any accuracy is a major detriment. I don't think you'd argue the Vendetta is a good gunship because you can sit it still since it's high up and has long enough range weapons to hit the whole map. This is a similar thing. 140 points is a decent price for that much firepower, but if the moment I pick up stakes I hit next to nothing, then honestly I'd rather shell out a bit more and take the Leman Russ, who I know I can make more flexible use of.