Warhammer 40K: My Opinion of the Leman Russ Vanquisher

OK, this one started out as a comparative article on the Leman Russ tank, a unit with almost as many variants as there are space marine chapters. Then I realised that it was gonna get a bit samey, and I didn't have the experience to add much to the conversation. Then I realised that I could probably focus in on one variant, perhaps with more of a game design angle than a purely tactical one. So, the Vanquisher. A unit that is popular due to a low cost, which results from a quirk of 10^th edition 40K, but its actually kinda bad at what its supposed to be doing.

 

A Leman Russ Vanquisher, Stygies VIII pattern, sourced from Lexicanum

Let’s start with a few basics. A Leman Russ is a decently mobile, heavily armed brick of a vehicle fielded by the Astra Militarum, A.K.A Imperial Guard. They lack an invulnerable save, although all their other defences are quite formidable. The 2+ save and W13 are key breakpoints, meaning common anti-tank tools will not totally bypass its armour, and require repeated good hits to destroy. Railgun equivalents, massed meltas, and properly brutal melee combatants can and will bring them down. But most things have to try, laying on sustained effort and mortal wound effects. It is routine for such a tank to stoically tolerate melee attacks and just keep blasting, although some variants obviously do better with that, for a reason I'm getting to. While differing in their turret armament and unique rule, each russ has access to a common selection of sponson and secondary weapons. Most of the time this results in a lascannon, HK missile, heavy stubber, and either two multimeltas or two plasma cannons, the two most destructive sponson options. This keys into a wider issue, as the choice between Blast weapons and non-Blast weapons has a substantial influence on how a russ is used. The latter makes a tank more melee tolerant and a natural brawler, because it can fire pointblank, while the former is better at ranged combat and hordes. Finally, through the order system you can make any if these tanks briefly faster, more accurate, and better at holding objectives. The Vanquisher is the anti-tank variant of the Leman Russ, historically described as being very rare in fiction and hard to make. As a tank hunter its defining feature is a very powerful anti-tank gun with range of 72 inches, the heavy rule, AP-4, and a damage of 6 + d6, supported by re-rolls to wound against its preferred targets. It can cover an entire board with that range and worry any singular hard target within it. Otherwise, a Vanquisher functions much as a stock russ does, although as it not feature a blast weapon in the turret, its a brawler, happy to fight close even with its massive effective range. As of time of writing, the Vanquisher is cheapest variant at 145 points, 5 points less than the unpopular Punisher, and 40 less than the vanilla russ which famously isn’t rare. How did that happen? One attack.

 

 One of the tanks I proxy as Leman Russes...

This is an unintended implication of 10th edition design conventions. Its a quirk that makes the Vanquisher mediocre at its stated job, so therefore cheap, and then exploited by the tournament scene. Its main gun is a railgun equivalent which is massively unpleasant against its intended target of vehicles, however it is only one shot a time, and as you might gather from my comments about durability above, GW generally doesn't let you one shot vehicles. You have to wear them down usually, or get a couple of good hits in. So you have to roll to hit, roll to wound, and then your foe gets a save, which is possibly invulnerable because a lot of big things have one, (if not, then cover, or some other damage resistance,) and then there’s the damage roll. The vanquisher battlecannon is undeniably effective when it connects, but its far from reliable due to that low volume of fire, and with the damage roll you’ll still need at least two good hits to drop the kind of target this weapon demands. This includes other russes, by the way. I repeat: one attack at a time. That can make the weapon feel bad for both sides, as the user spends multiple turns trying to stop rolling ones despite whatever buffs it has from other units to make it more accurate, or the foe suddenly finds a smoking crater where their tank used to be, with little in-between. Few things disappoint or annoy like a powerful weapon that feels like a coin flip, you know? So the Vanquisher is cheap, as cheap as a russ can be, but it paradoxically has a weapon on it that traumatises people when it actually works. But… A single shot anti-tank gun simply isn't consistent enough for that task by itself, especially with guard marksmanship, you need more shots to even things out, and even at this price the Vanquisher isn't easily spammed. So you look at the other weapons on the hull, and truthfully the Vanquisher tank is no better with those than most russes, and ranks behind a couple. If you start thinking about other variants? Well, their turret guns are obviously much less destructive, but all of them have dramatically higher rates of fire so they will do *something* every turn. As an example, the Demolisher is obviously much shorter ranged, and its own issues with inconsistency, but that's looking at twice the rate of fire at worst, hits like a lascannon, and is very happy in a melee. The vanilla Russ isn't an anti-tank platform, its a generalist, but having a bunch of rerolls and the Combined Arms detachment can go a long way. Either is better a lot of the time, while not being bad at anti-tank if properly armed, and that's true for basically all of the variants.


The only thing the Vanquisher does well at present is be a cheap Leman Russ. And that's ok, Leman Russes are good. You can get a lot from a mobile brick with two multimeltas and a lascannon on it. But the tankhunter probably shouldn't be the cheap disposable one, that’s a specialised role. This isn’t a Catachan situation, where something looks bad until you understand it. The Vanquisher is popular mainly via through min-maxing, people treating the main gun as a side bonus. To be blunt, that’s a failure of game design. I wouldn't say no to having them in my force, and I’ve fielded them before, but I’m honestly surprised that these went unchanged in the 10th ed Astra Militarum codex AND the June Dataslate.