PDA

View Full Version : Baal Predators/Baal Razorbacks dilemma



Vegeta365
23-03-2010, 12:01
Whilst making slight alterations to my fleshtearers to adapt to the new codex, I will also be making my third Blood Angles army. Now over time I hope the army to grow so that I have a great deal of choice of what to field, but to begin with I will be playtesting tournament type lists and find out what works for me.

So about a month ago, I made a basic blood angels 150pts list with no thrils, just lost of TL assault cannons. Now I love the new Baal plastic kit and would obviously be using this for my 3 baal predators (no sponsoons). The dilemma comes with the razorbacks. I realy want to use the baal kit for these too as I feel that the model looks far superior to the razorback with the TL assault cannon taken from a landraider. And the cost of each is the same (Buying the redeemer sprue for a load of normal razorbacks).

So when I think to myself that the cost for either a baal or a razorback with redeemer assault cannon are the same but the baal looks so much better I think to myself why wouldn't I use the baal kit. Essentially both turrets are the same rules wise (a TL Assault cannon). My friend thinks (correctly to be fair) that the turret is not the one that should be used as it is realy a predator turret. The other obvious issue would be differentiating between the baals and razorbacks as they have different armour values and one can hold troops.

I could differentiate by buying the FW extra armour or spaced armour for the baals so that it would be obvious to the opponent and this would also resolve the issue of why do two tanks with the same kit have different armour values.

Interested to see what the community thought. As the opponent, you can tell what tank is what due to the thicker armour on the baals making them look different. But do you have a problem that technically the wrong turret is used as it is a predator turret rather than a razorback one even though no rules are effected between either one (even in the olden days the razorback had a marine firing the gun from above the main chasis).

As much as I love winning, the rules are not effected and my reason for doing it is for a better looking model. I want to continue to do well at tournements in terms of competing for best looking army, as my Eldar have done for me in the past.

Thanks,

ehlijen
23-03-2010, 12:40
If you actually intend to use both types of vehicles, using the same turret for each will be confusing at best and meet outright hostility at worst. I would advise against doing this.

Petay1985
23-03-2010, 12:52
I think this woud lead to confusion and potential problems, i too would advise against this!

Grand Warlord
23-03-2010, 13:01
I agree with the above statements, personally I would prefer to see the proper weapons on the tank.

I can honestly say I wouldn't get upset or deny you a game if you did just my personal preferences. :)

Falkman
23-03-2010, 13:04
A Razorback should have a Razorback turret.

Blue Orphen
23-03-2010, 13:16
A Razorback should have a Razorback turret.

OR, a Predator should very clearly be more heavily armoured. I actually prefer this method. Make the Predator look like it has Armour 13 on the front, and it will go a long way towards making the two look different. This can be done with FW armour or maybe the parts from the Vindicator box.

It's a shame you don't want to use Sponsons - they would certainly help differentiate between the two tank types on the battlefield.

Petay1985
23-03-2010, 13:48
...Make the Predator look like it has Armour 13 on the front, and it will go a long way towards making the two look different. This can be done with FW armour or maybe the parts from the Vindicator box.

Although potentially a good idea, this can then lead to problems differentiating between those vehicles with and without extra armour!

Mudkip
23-03-2010, 14:42
Who takes extra armour?

I wouldn't take issue with it personally, so long as the distinction between Predator and Razorback was clear. But it would not appeal to me aesthetically.

Shamutanti
23-03-2010, 14:45
Although potentially a good idea, this can then lead to problems differentiating between those vehicles with and without extra armour!

All tanks 'come' with extra armour as standard don't they :P

I've never, ever, seen anyone 'show' extra armour on their model.

The Marshel
23-03-2010, 14:51
by all technical means, you could just glue tack on a piece of sprue to the side and call it a day.
its not significantly extra armor... but its extra armor!

Petay1985
23-03-2010, 15:14
I find some folks lack of care for the presentation of their models disturbing! :p When i create an army list, it tend to build my force to it, if one of the tanks on said list has extra armour i give forgeworld a ring and purchase the appropriate parts. For me WYSIWYG is important, i wouldn't be happy if someone rocked up to game with a rhino and said today this is a predator i just didn't bother with the turret :p i know this is a little more extreme than modelling extra armour but you get the idea!

Leftenant Gashrog
23-03-2010, 15:24
I'm all for the extra armour idea, you could also take a leaf from EPIC - in order to help tell Annihilators from Destructors GW started painting the turrets differently:
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1440335_99060301015_EPICSMPredatorsMain_873x627.j pg

Vegeta365
23-03-2010, 15:42
Wow. I wasn't expecting quite such a negative response.

Like I said, the opponent will be able to tell the diference as the baals will have the FW extra armour on them so will look a lot more solid. I would also give them the BA forgeworld doors and front so the tanks themselves will look different.

The opponent would be able to tell what is what, there would be no confusion in this. Like i said it is realy only for the looks (plus it puts me off to think that the razorbacks will have the same cost as the baals due to the conversion kit needed).

The TL assault cannon turret realy doesn't look great (especially in comparison to the Baal) and has no rules differentiation what so ever.

All of my armies have the greatest care given to them, and have had a lot of time, money and effort spent on them. So the look realy is important to me. The only other thing I had considered was to get the conversion kits and paint them up aswell so if anyone I am playing has a problem with it I can swap them out. But that will be another 60 lol.

Well thanks for the opinions so far.

Noserenda
23-03-2010, 15:51
Personally I dont think some extra armour will make them look different enough. Sponsons might though.

And if you are building Ass Cannon Razorbacks, save yourself a couple of quid and buy a Rhino instead of a Razorback, you dotn actually use any of the Razorback bitz...

Shipmonkey
23-03-2010, 16:05
I show up to a game with six Tactical squads, each with a missile launcher, and three Devastator squads, each with four Missile Launchers. I tell my opponent each of the Missile Launchers is a Missile Launcher except for the ones with the sight lens painted blue instead of red. Those ones are Plasma Cannons. Each different weapon type is clearly marked different and it wouldn't be my fault if the other player couldn't keep them straight. Is that fair to the other player? No and it would lead to frustration by the second turn in all likelihood.

If you were only using one unit or the other, using Baals as Razorbacks would be fine. Using both at the same time though is a bad idea. You're putting the burden of remembering what unit is what on the opposing player and that is simply not fair.

Vegeta365
23-03-2010, 16:25
To be fair that comparison is not the same thing at all.

I am not making a weopon out to be something it is not and therefore causing confusion. We are talking about the same weopon in every way. The only difference is the turret that houses that weopon (of which there has been a few different varieties of).

I take youre point of causing confusion, which is why it would be important to make the models look different enough for it to be obvious. Modeling/use of FW doors, front plates and extra armour and painting should do this. My intentions in no way would ever be to cause confusion. Especially as I play a fair few tournaments each year including the GT.

Perhaps I will get the conversion kits aswell. Noserenda you are correct, but for 2 I would rather have the few extra bits and the option of making lascannon/heavy bolter razors as I would have the full turrets for these.

Thanks for the opinions

enigma-96
23-03-2010, 19:05
Along with your extra armour solution why don't you go the fluffy route and paint the proper vehicle markings on them. This would clearly distinguish between the razorbacks and the predators as they have different markings, and the markings are failry lrge enough to be noticeable.

Thud
23-03-2010, 19:14
Along with your extra armour solution why don't you go the fluffy route and paint the proper vehicle markings on them. This would clearly distinguish between the razorbacks and the predators as they have different markings, and the markings are failry lrge enough to be noticeable.

This.

As long as there is a clearly noticable difference between the Baals and the Razorbacks there shouldn't be a problem. Anyone intent on creating a problem out of the situation should just be avoided in the future. :)

Feyaden
23-03-2010, 19:17
I just looked at the Baal predator on GW website, the chassis is different so if you just use the turret and somehow mount it ont he back of a normal razorback, the chassis will be clearly distinguishable.

CrownAxe
23-03-2010, 19:35
I just looked at the Baal predator on GW website, the chassis is different so if you just use the turret and somehow mount it ont he back of a normal razorback, the chassis will be clearly distinguishable.

The chassis are the exact same

Feyaden
23-03-2010, 19:50
http://www.games-workshop.com/gws/catalog/productDetail.jsp?catId=cat400014a&prodId=prod680008a

Unless I am mistaking, the front only has one viewport? If I was playing a game that would be a big enough difference for me. However I misunderstood the original poster, I thought he was talking about mounting the turret from the BAAL onto the Razorback chasis xD, but I realise I understood wrong.

CrownAxe
23-03-2010, 20:07
It's the same chassis, it just has a different front view plate

Feyaden
23-03-2010, 20:52
It's the same chassis, it just has a different front view plate

Ok, maybe it is just the way the pictures show it, because besides the front plate it looked a little longer to me. Thanks for the clarification though ^^, I really appreciate it.

Vegeta365
23-03-2010, 21:17
Along with your extra armour solution why don't you go the fluffy route and paint the proper vehicle markings on them. This would clearly distinguish between the razorbacks and the predators as they have different markings, and the markings are failry lrge enough to be noticeable.

You can bet this will be done. I'm all up for fluff!

MadHatter
23-03-2010, 21:57
I just looked at the Baal predator on GW website, the chassis is different so if you just use the turret and somehow mount it ont he back of a normal razorback, the chassis will be clearly distinguishable.

I have them sitting on my desk, they are the same.

to the OP -

I would not have an issue with this if your Baal had the sponsons on it. Sorry I do know that in the thick of things in combat people who are not familar enough with your army may not remember the difference.
Personally I think it should be the Razorback turret for the razor back and not the Baal turret, and that is how I model my own.

Axis
23-03-2010, 22:47
Do whatever you want to, its your money and your models.

That said, do try and make it obvious which ones are which. Whether by modelling or paint or something. Or just by being really explicit when playing and always reminding people if you think they are confusing them.

scopedog91
23-03-2010, 23:06
Sadly, 99% of us are used to one style of turret for each, so you may be stuck using the standard models.
In a casual game, no problem.
But you know how some of the other players are out there...

Ol'Sarge2K
24-03-2010, 02:21
As others have noted, your army, your money.

But I wouldn't. The very slight differences between your Predators and your Razorbacks if you go this route, places an unfair onus on your opponents.

Furthermore.... It's kinda silly. That is a big turret ring. You got room for maybe two dismounts with a Predator turret mounted.....

sic
24-03-2010, 02:45
I wouldnt do it but purely for cosmetic reasons. The Baal turret looks great but its obviously a tank turret, its large and bulky and its hard to imagine there being much room in a Baal Pred for troops.

The Razorback however has a much smaller turret and as a result looks like a troop transport with some mid strength armament, which of course it is. You put a tank turret on it and it looks like a tank, not a transport.

Also it would be had to tell them apart in battle IMO even if you put extra armour on, the turret is the focal point not the slight difference on the front.

Logarithm Udgaur
25-03-2010, 10:45
I personally would not have a problem with it, even if they looked exactly the same, as long as you told me before hand which is which, and did not try to switch them around once the game started.

Going to a GT though....you are probably gonna have problems. The last one I went to, they would not let a guy use some bikers with Thunderhammers because they were modeled (beautifully BTW, I voted this guy for best appearance) as spears. It was doubly stupid to me, as he was playing a White Scars army. In that context, a spear makes much more sense to me than a hammer.

MistaGav
25-03-2010, 11:26
I think you would have to make some adjustments to let the player know at a first glance that a predator is a predator and a razorback is a razorback i.e. the paint scheme, maybe give the razorbacks different markings or the turret in a contrasting colour or just something!
I would say use the assault cannon on the baal sprue and scratch build a smaller housing but thinking about it, sounds like too much effort really.

wilsongrahams
25-03-2010, 19:15
I use Predators with Lascannon and Assault Cannon as Razorbacks and even the Autocannon as 'counts as' twin heavy bolter. I just don't like the look of the razorback model. Also, why does a predator have no storage inside when it's weapons are obviously in a turret, yet a razorback that has the majority of it's weapon mount inside the rear hull has loads of space for troops?

I just like my razorbacks to look like IFV's such as the Warrior or Bradley and a sponson-less predator fits this for me perfectly. My models are all magnetised and I never mix razorbacks and predators in the same list to avoid confusion. In fact I rarely use Predators as they cost far too many points just for the extra armour and I don't like spending all those points to fire all weapons on one target - an annihilator is overkill against a tank. Give it heavy bolters and you either waste lascannon on infantry or fire the bolters at something it can't kill. A Destructor with lascannon sponsons is too costly to take on light vehicles effectively, and with heavy bolters is just too expensive when you can take a pair of razorbacks instead.

However having said all this, with the new Baal kit having a different front, I can now use all my old predators (4 of them) as razorbacks, and the new baals as predators even if all have no sponsons, or because a baal is actually useful with sponsons that complement it's main armament I may use them with those too.

sic
25-03-2010, 20:18
A predator has no space for troops because it has the capacity to take weapon sponsons on the side as well as the turret weapon. So you need space for those weapons systems as well as gunners and also you need somewhere to store all that ammo which would take away your internal space almost completely.

IMO opinion the front is not different enough for your opponent to instantly recognise which is which, still if your using sponsons no drama really.

Badruk
25-03-2010, 23:12
Just use the TL Assault Cannon on the Lander Raider Crusader/Redeemer for the razorback...

Clang
26-03-2010, 06:17
Just use the TL Assault Cannon on the Lander Raider Crusader/Redeemer for the razorback...

Personally that's what I'd do - but that doesn't solve the OP's problem if he's in love with the Baal turret.

I do think the only good solution is to somehow have 'lighter' turrets for the razors and 'heavier' turrets for the preds. If the OP is dead set on using the Baal turret for the razors, how about bulking up the pred turrets somehow, e.g. big overhanging stowage bins on the back, along the lines of the Leman Russ turret? Or would that ruin the look of the turret?

Balerion
26-03-2010, 06:45
I agree with the apparent majority of people who say that it's bad idea to just throw the Baal turrets on the Razorbacks and differentiate the two types of tanks with smaller details. Not only is it slightly unsporting, it's lazy and unimaginative.

Are you opposed to a little conversion work? I think it's very possible to make minor edits to the Baal turret that will cause it to be look much more suitable on a Razorback. There are bulky areas that can be removed, and the turret can be made to look automated rather than having a large gunner's hatch. Or you can sub in a smaller, less obtrusive hatch.

Here's a quick mock-up, thanks to the magic of Photoshop. I think if you cut down the turrets in a manner like this, and then mounted them further back on the Razorback chassis' than on the Baal chassis' you would have a winning look that would also be very easy for your opponents to keep track of:

sic
26-03-2010, 07:28
Maybe go a little further and take the view port section of the gun shield off (the one molded into the back of the AC's on the moving part of the turret) to really give it a sense of being operated from inside the tank and you could be onto something there.

Balerion
26-03-2010, 08:23
Maybe go a little further and take the view port section of the gun shield off (the one molded into the back of the AC's on the moving part of the turret) to really give it a sense of being operated from inside the tank and you could be onto something there.
I agree 100% actually. I thought about trying to photoshop the shield out of the pic, but it would have tacked on about ten minutes of work that I didn't want to do at the time. ;)

He could also shorten the barrel assembly/barrel cover. It would look amazing, but it would be a much more difficult step than the others we're talking about.

Here's a real quick and dirty look at the improvement you proposed:

Balerion
26-03-2010, 08:28
And here's the shortened barrel assembly version:

sic
26-03-2010, 09:45
I'd go for the shorter version but maybe keep a little more of the cover to close up the gap between the gun shroud and the turret, I guess great minds think alike...
Of course its not my tank