I got three Repulsors. Was that as dumb as it seems to be?

[Trevak Dal]

Haven't built them yet, but I'm still got my Primaris stuff Master Chief'd in a freezer/on ice/waiting until they come out with...more complete Primaris only stuff, and I don't want to get more than three of any given unit or buy into (anymore) wasted units that don't do anything for me.

 

Should I keep them in storage, or try to sell them off?

[Panzer]

That depends on what your army building plans are. Do you plan to build just one army list with a few options and then stop there or do you plan to build a big with lots of options and enough for potentially huge games like Apoc? If the latter then just keep them. You may not use 3 Repulsors every game but when you want to they are there and when you want to play big games then they'll come in handy as well.

[Captain Idaho]

Keep one and sell 2. Then you can get one or 2 of these new, better Repulsors. You'll still have 1 just in case GW actually releases a Primaris unit worth going in it.

 

Alternatively, it you don't consider that ever to be the case, sell all 3 and and enjoy these better models.

 

(On on a personal level I think it's a shame how quickly GW made obsolete their new flagship models. There's no reason to take a Repulsor now there's these 2 new ones.)

[Blindhamster]

Repulsors are best in sets of 2 or 3. If you add the executioner to your army, it'll be similar.

 

If you have one of each, people will kill the executioner first I expect (unless they can't target it).

 

I don't think one of each will work as well for target saturation because they're likely to be in two very different parts of the board doing different things. So it'll be easier to prioritise one over the other than two repulsors both pushing into enemy lines.

 

Kind of feel like two of one variant and maybe one of the other would work depending on the rest of the list composition

[Blindhamster]

Repulsor isn't obsolete though. It has a different role as a transport. Once we get a dedicated melee unit that role will become very important no doubt.

 

What will probably happen is people will use the anti peraonel main gun on repulsors to keep them cheap

[Panzer]

Yeah regular Repulsors will still be useful as heavy fire support that advances together with your army. Also there's still no better way to deliver Hellblasters.

[Captain Idaho]

The cost of all these tanks will be that having more than 1 mean you're skewing your list to a nichè tank army with little else.

 

Like I said, a single Repulsor could be useful for an assault unit that doesn't yet exist, but it's like taking multiple Land Raiders.

[Marshal Rohr]

I want three for the cool armored column effect. With the new Badboi at the rear to put a laser beam through any wayward lascannon emplacements.

[Warhead01]

I wish I had three but stopped at two because of the new tank, I wanted to see the stats on it's main gun ect. Before buying anything else. 
In 1500 points I have used both of my repulsors and they worked as intended. 

I'm probably going to look for a third one even if I get the new tank killer, more is better.

 

 

Like I said, a single Repulsor could be useful for an assault unit that doesn't yet exist, but it's like taking multiple Land Raiders. 

I can see that but for me my assault unit is really just another shooting unit or a few shooting units. I just move into position with my little wall of dakka, disembark and continue shooting but with all the buffs.  If need be my aggressors can attempt to charge but that's not key.

[Trevak Dal]

I honestly don't know what I want with my Primaris force. I really like most of the models (basically the Intecessors) if I had known they were coming out back when I was looking to buy the Betrayal at Calth boxes, I'd have waited and just bought the Primaris because I love how they look.

 

I got three Repulsors because I'm familiar with the "one is none, two is some and three you got something" paradigm. But as it is, I feel like as others have said, I got three landraiders.

[War Angel]

I built mine up for the ETL and only realized last night that the las talon option is a waste. Damnit.

 

Going to be getting two of the executioners so they can provide support to the transport. Lately at my game store we’ve been playing open war so it’s just been everything we own.

[Panzer]

Why would the lastalon be a waste? You want the Repulsor to move forward anyway so you should get something in range with 24". It never was an issue for me at least.

If you want to get some Executioners with HLD and don't face too many tanks then the anti-tank loadout is not necessarily the best choice though, I can see that. Generally for such expensive models with easy to swap weapons it's advised to magnetise.

[War Angel]

Well, I plan to get two executioners, so that will cover me for a game where I need the anti tank. And now the repulsor is just a slightly not as good anti tank weapon, at roughly the same cost. Had I given it the HOC it would at least have the ability to shoot more troops.

[Panzer]

You could always give one Executioner the Plasma weapon instead to have an all-purpose tank if you feel like you have enough anti-tank in your list. Magnets are magic.

[War Angel]

Now that I think about it, if the two load outs stay realitivlt similar in cost, there’s no point for the old repulsor .

[Panzer]

Of course there is. The regular Repulsor can transport more models and move twice as far without losing any firepower. Different units with different purposes.

[War Angel]

But we have nothing to truely transport, and honestly moving full distance you loose out on two HLD shots, but you still have the heavy Bolter and HOC to shoot, so it’s actually still holding up with the standard

[Panzer]

We have Hellblasters and Aggressors to transport and personally I like to put some Intercessors in there for at least turn 1-2 because no matter what it still is decent alpha strike protection and increases their move range for a turn by 3".

And loosing two HLD shots is kinda a big deal when your argument is that the Executioner replaces the Lascannons on your regular Repulsor.

[RandomMarine]

I currently run 2 pretty much every game ,both have twinlas ,1 with dakka the other with the talon , I usually put 5 intercessors in each just to take objectives on each flank and park the respulsor near to just pour out shots . They eventually die but usually earn their points back

[Orange Knight]

The new Repulsor doesn't replace the old.

 

The original variant is more mobile, flexible, and acts better as a transport/fire support vehicle.

[War Angel]

Ok but if I was only running the repulsor for its firepower, and the transport / speed was just a bonus, i have no need for it now

[Orange Knight]

I think the two work better together.

 

A Repulsor advancing forward with infantry inside, a more threatening variant in terms of damage staying back. It gives an opponent some food for thought.

 

Whilst I'm a big fan of the new Repulsor, I'm not as invested in having multiple stationary units. I also don't feel that the regular variant has any problems pulling it's weight in terms of firepower.

[Panzer]

Ok but if I was only running the repulsor for its firepower, and the transport / speed was just a bonus, i have no need for it now

 

Well yeah then the Executioner replaces the regular Repulsor because you've been using the regular Repulsor in the role of the Executioner all along instead of utilising what it can do better.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

I wouldn't sell off all of the old style Repulsors. The movement is actually a big selling point for the tank, my plan is to have one of each. I don't like the ideal of having 600 plus points in my force be as static as the new tanks will be. That and at some point we will get a cc unit. So my suggestion would be to sell off one for sure and then decide on the other ones once you've got a better ideal of how you want to run your primaris.

[Lemondish]

I honestly don't know what I want with my Primaris force. I really like most of the models (basically the Intecessors) if I had known they were coming out back when I was looking to buy the Betrayal at Calth boxes, I'd have waited and just bought the Primaris because I love how they look.

 

I got three Repulsors because I'm familiar with the "one is none, two is some and three you got something" paradigm. But as it is, I feel like as others have said, I got three landraiders.

 

They aren't really much like Land Raiders. They have a significantly higher amount of damage output for a variety of targets than Raiders do and don't have to deal with being silenced by a bayonet. Neon has been running triple Repulsors with his Blood Angels for quite a while now and has a lot of good things to say about them. Check out this thread over on the Blood Angel side for more deets -http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/333543-grimdark-blood-angels-blog-170619-heat-1-experiences/

 

It's a paint blog with a lot of insight into his army design and success. It is certainly a very specific type of force designed around redundancy and saturating the field with armoured threats, which in turn helps some of these units really shine. Redemptors (of which he brings 2) for example are pretty squishy if they're your only main armoured unit, and since you're encouraged to move them forward to get into melee they kind of have a major target on them right form the start. If they're your only armored unit, that relative squishiness can often mean they're crashing into the enemy lines at a lowered bracket...or not at all.

 

But no matter how 'bad' a Repulsor is, they hurt...a lot, and a Repulsor gaining the benefit of cover is a T8 2+ save rock. So the Redemptors get ignored, because the target priority is so skewed, which removes their largest weakness. The Repulsors provide mobility for the limited infantry so you can react and play the board control game easier. It's one of my favourite 'counter-meta' lists.