Anyone using Gladiator(s)?

[Prot]

I am finding vehicles, but especially marine vehicles, are terrible. 

 

I've done my own in game testing and aside from the lowliest of funsie games, I can't get any mileage out of tanks/repulsors/etc. (I don't include Dreadnoughts in this conversation.)

 

I was honestly shocked GW didn't help out the Gladiator Chassis (I suspect they don't care about the Impulsor anymore, those sales are exhausted). The FAQ came and went, and the Gladiator is still feeling incredibly over costed, and damage in the game has ramped up making the tanks feel far less survivable.

 

I've had test games with the following combinations:

 

- 2 Gladiators, 2 of the new Turrets, 1 of the Bunker

- 3 Gladiators

- 2 Repulsor Executioners

- 2 Gladiators, 1 Repulsor

 

In the above combo's I used the Primaris Techmarine on and off, depending on points remaining. 

 

After my test games, I found it very challenging to want to put any of those vehicles in any list, but I stuck it out for the point of playtesting. 

 

The biggest problem was the vehicles just disappeared too quickly (no matter their point cost they felt flimsy). The second problem was their cost. They just left too few points for the stuff that gets you points. 

 

Thirdly they just don't interact with the army well. They aren't Core, and today's tables are heavy obscurity and while this is fine, it's just yet another reason it's very hard to 'park' somewhere. Lacking Core make is worse since they are missing a lot more than they used to.

 

Fourthly, the Techmarine really hurts as an HQ choice. It's really difficult to keep this to a Battalion because as we know the HQ slots are strongly contested for in a marine list, so I'd love to see the Techmarine move to Elite.

 

So at this point I have to ask if anyone has found an army type, or a type of list or set of rules that make the Gladiator tank worth taking. How many of you have bothered to use it in game? Would you take it to a competitive game, and if so, what configuration?

Edited January 18, 2021 by Prot

[Brother Kraskor]

Can I add on to this and ask if Repulsor Executioners are finding much love after they lost their shoot twice? (I suspect not).

 

Interesting trend on the shoot twice rules come to think of it. Aggressors and Executioners had it when they were new releases, now they don't have it. Eradicators to follow suit when the next new thing comes out maybe...!

[Karhedron]

I find myself in reluctant agreement. One of the few Marine vehicles with mileage seems to be the humble Razorback.

1. It is cheap enough to spam
2. It doesn't take up slots
3. It gets 6 marines where they are going
4. It packs some decent firepower (particularly the Twin assault cannon armament).

GW seems to have overpriced a lot of vehicles in 9th edition considering how much the (already high) damage has been dialled up since 8th. Armies are kitted out to be able to at least threaten most LOWs these days so even "heavy" options like the Land Raider or Repulsor just disappear faster than free food at a freshers fayre.

 

The denser terrain in 9th does not help as much as it should since it also restricts vehicles ability to fire back and movement since vehicles can't get through obstacles like infantry can.

 

I run both Blood Angels and Space Wolves and despite having several nicely painted tanks for both in my collection, I can't remember the time they last saw play. My Blood Angels use Jump Packs for mobility with Attack Bikes and Inceptors providing heavy firepower. My Wolves run a mix of Dreads and Razorbacks as they seem to be the only cost-effective options.

 

GW has shown they are willing to swing the nerf bat swiftly at anything that crops up too much in lists (Inceptors and Eradicators have already felt it's tickle). The question is whether they will bother with discounting units that consistently fail to show up. It can't escape their notice for long that top-tier Marine lists are eschewing tanks completely. I appreciate that  to some extent it may be deliberate. Marines themselves are the stars of the list and it is good to see MEQs finally behaving on the tabletop they way they are depicted as operating in the fluff. However units like the Land Raider are an iconic part of 40K and seeing them effectively obsoleted is a little sad. Primaris are seriously lacking in affordable transport options, particularly for larger squads.

 

Do sales of Gladiators reflect their poor value on the tabletop? GW have shown in the past that they are not averse to buffing/discounting units to get them to shift. Or is it just us competitive players who worry about such things? Are Gladiators selling well enough among casual players that the disdain of the competitive minority is beneath GW's notice?

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

We lost fly which is huge and unfair of GeeDub to take this away. No invulnerable save and as said pointed to high to be efficient for building an army list now.

[9x19 Parabellum]

The problem is that GW thinks putting an "8" in the "T" column means something. It doesn't.  There are guns that are meant to handle things that have an "8" in the "T" column, and unless you have the overlapping defenses that some things have (-1 to be shot, invuln save, damage reduction, FnP), then your T8 expensive tank is going to end up tinfoil.

 

I'm dealing with GW's over-valuation of T8 (and under-valuation of overlapping defenses) now in my crusade campaign against a buddy with a CCB.  Yeah it's T6, which sounds flimsy, but character rule + 4+ Invuln, + Living Metal + Quantum Shielding + -1 damage jEnduring Will warlord trait; I haven't been able to put more than 4 wounds on this thing over the course of 3 games. 

 

At least the land raider has 2+ armor save and smoke launchers.  For the Gladiators, I'd say purchasing the auto-launchers is a must have.  Also, @Prot as part of your testing, did you try putting anything into reserves? I imagine the gladiator reaper could mop up the board by itself if one was able to neutralize anti-tank threats on turn 1.

 

I actually think all the Astartes T7 ground vehicles need to be T8, and all the T8 need to be T9, OR all the 3+ saves need to be 2+ and the 2+ saves need to be 1+.  A Tau devilfish should not be more durable than a rhino in my opinion.

Edited January 18, 2021 by 9x19 Parabellum

[Indefragable]

In my humble opinion, Tanks in 8th and 9th have rarely felt like tanks. 

 

Especially for their price point, everything from Predators to Gladiators and such should be much beefier, most especially when it comes to defense. I think that's one of my gripes with the Primaris tanks in general, you seem to be paying for a crapload of guns on something that should first and foremost, in a K.I.S.S. perspective, be all about resilience. 

 

Footage of GW design process. 

[Prot]

 For the Gladiators, I'd say purchasing the auto-launchers is a must have.  Also, @Prot as part of your testing, did you try putting anything into reserves? I imagine the gladiator reaper could mop up the board by itself if one was able to neutralize anti-tank threats on turn 1.

 

I actually think all the Astartes T7 ground vehicles need to be T8, and all the T8 need to be T9, OR all the 3+ saves need to be 2+ and the 2+ saves need to be 1+.  A Tau devilfish should not be more durable than a rhino in my opinion.

 

Actually I keep calling the "Executioners" Conquerers by accident. Anyway, yes I tried reserves (encirclement) as White Scars, and as Ultra's I can redeploy units after I know who takes first turn which is handy for this type of unit.

 

I didn't find smoke launchers to be that huge. Necrons especially have no trouble ripping through them in my tests (Executioners). 

[9x19 Parabellum]

Man, I never get tired of that Pentagon Wars clip.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

There’s absolutely no reason not to take Eradicators over the Gladiators and there’s no reason to feel bad about it either.

[Brother Kraskor]

Is there also an argument to be had that, unless you make a substantial points investment in vehicles, your opponent's AT weaponry will just wipe off a token unit turn 1? Unless you go hard and force the opponent to split fire or make decisions, it will be easy for them to just shoot a lone Gladiator or Repulsor off the board. And if you do invest heavily, that points premium you pay for vehicles is multiplied and you really lose bang for buck overall. You can't win really!

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

I think 9 X 19 Parabellum made a good point about GW over estimating the value of T8. At that moment I think the main reason to buy a repulsor or a gladiator is rule of cool. They just aren't durable enough, I really think GW should consider giving more vehicles inv saves or fnp style rules.

[Karhedron]

Is there also an argument to be had that, unless you make a substantial points investment in vehicles, your opponent's AT weaponry will just wipe off a token unit turn 1?

For Marines I think that you definitely have a valid point. I can't see an Astartes armoured company being viable at the current points values. Part of the problem is that both the Land Raider and Repulsor pay a premium for being both a gun platform and a transport despite the fact that it is hard to do both jobs effectively at the same time.

 

GW seems to have priced the Gladiator roughly in balance with the Predator but failed to take into account that the predator is pretty bad too.

[Captain Idaho]

Personally I do think they are very expensive for what is an easier to kill Land Raider.

 

I do believe they can have some use though, as a powerful vehicle inside an army with other vehicles.

 

Which means alongside all the old classic vehicles. This is because they're cheaper and thus easier to get into a list. Razorbacks and Dreadnoughts in particular can benefit from having a big old distraction.

 

Unfortunately, how competitive remains to be seen but perhaps with Obscuring Terrain and the new mission rules there might be a chance.

 

Regarding points... Well that's an issue. Dropping the Gladiators means dropping the Predators. Which probably also means dropping a whole swath of vehicles etc.

 

Maybe that's what's needed but it's a big job.

[Helias_Tancred]

Regarding points... Well that's an issue. Dropping the Gladiators means dropping the Predators. Which probably also means dropping a whole swath of vehicles etc.

 

Maybe that's what's needed but it's a big job.

 

I think you hit the nail on the head! IMO the best solution would be to drop the points of Tanks/APCs to find that sweet spot that represents the best for balance.

Edited January 19, 2021 by Helias Tancred

[MegaVolt87]

Make all gladiator variants 200 points, free Auto launchers, Icarus rocket pod and Ironhail heavy stubber. Having those upgrades be free along with being 200 points would at least make them a consideration. Better yet also allow for old vehicle squadrons on top, 1-3 a slot, act independently. Saving HS slots on marine vehicles via squadrons would justify their current points premiums more. 

Edited January 19, 2021 by MegaVolt87

[armarnis]

Yeah uncapping stats at 10 in 8th was a freat idea but they never really implemented it in a meaningful way at all. Pretty much a wasted opportunity

[Karhedron]

I do believe they can have some use though, as a powerful vehicle inside an army with other vehicles.

 

There is some mileage in threat overload. Run multiple T8 vehicles, moving up the board supported by a Librarian with Psychic Fortress and a Techmarine to repair them and buff their shooting. There could be some mileage in it although 2 Gladiators come close to the cost of an Imperial Knight. They have similar stats but no melee capability and rely on the Libby passing his psychic test every turn to maintain their 5++.

 

The problem is that Knights warp the meta. If a list can handle Knights, conventional vehicles do not stand much chance. I don't really know how to square this circle apart from cutting the price of most Astartes tanks by at least 25%.

[War of the Eagle]

I use a Gladiator Reaper with a Techmarine sidekick. I mostly fight Necron players and it works great vs them. But I do think tanks are a bit underpowered right now. Maybe a rule that makes them unable to lose more than half their wounds in a round.

[Iron Father Ferrum]

Instead of spitballing how to Make Tanks Great Again, let's go back to the topic at hand -- how to use the different types of Gladiator efficiently.  Consider this a friendly nudge.

[Malakithe]

Storm Speeders > Gladiators

[TheNewman]

Instead of spitballing how to Make Tanks Great Again, let's go back to the topic at hand -- how to use the different types of Gladiator efficiently. Consider this a friendly nudge.

The fairly significant problem with that is that we all know the only way to make the Gladiator an efficient piece on the table is to not buy any of them until GW fixes it's rules, but that's not fun to talk about.

 

Even if the Gladiator isn't making any headway on the table it's still a pretty efficient kit since it can easily be built modular enough that a single kit can be any of the three Gladiator variants or an Impulsor depending on what you need today.

[Jorin Helm-splitter]

@TheNewman - I agree to certain extent, Gladiators aren't going to be considered competitive units any time soon, but as someone who has been in the hobby along time figuring out how to get something out of a subpar unit that you like is really rewarding.

 

 

I think if I were trying to make a Gladiator Reaper work, I would try to keep a techmarine and a dread or two near it. The healing ability is nice, and boosting the hit rolls for one the vehicles is a strong ability (more so with a reaper because of the volume of shots being effected). Another option would be a librarian with psychic fortress to give the units a 5++.  

 

My other thought would be using strategic reserves to outflank one, I wouldn't deploy it until my opponent had brought all their reserves in or I had too. The drawback of melta is the range, and this tank isn't bad at going after most of the units that leverage melta. The tank is also pretty good at clearing objectives, so you can go after a flank and flip an objective relatively quickly.

 

I could see running the lancer in an infiltrator heavy list. With the infiltrators restricting reserves, and the main gun outranging melta by a lot I could see it being viable if we start to see more vehicles. I don't think I would try to outflank it because the main gun doesn't have a lot shots, so I think you want as many opportunities to get one through as you can get.

 

I don't really have an ideal of how to make the valiant work. I'd probably start with on the edge of my deployment zone, hope for first turn, be really aggressive with it, and see how long it lasted lol.

 

 

Storm Speeders > Gladiators

 

I'm really excited for the storm speeders. I do think with how much they overlap that there typically won't be a happy medium between them, either the speeders or the tanks will be better depending on the edition/codex. 

[Kenzaburo]

I was thinking of using a lancer for sniping heavy targets from my backfield and using the anti-armour storm speeder for the quick hit-and-run up-close slot, that the valiant falls in as well. I can't say if this will work - due to Corona I am getting no games in whatsoever. But that way I get to use both new kits in an all Primaris list. 

 

I also think (gut-feeling, I guess) that we will see more vehicles on the field, the further the edition progresses. And once that happens I want something faster than Eradicators to handle them. I also like the look of vehicles on the field and am far from maximising points-efficiency, it's mostly rule of cool for me. :)

[MegaVolt87]

Storm Speeders > Gladiators

Definitely. Storm speeder and Gladiator are far too close to each other in utility. The Hailstrike has my intrest, I definately want to run two of those in a list I have in mind.

[Prot]

 

Storm Speeders > Gladiators

Definitely. Storm speeder and Gladiator are far too close to each other in utility. The Hailstrike has my intrest, I definately want to run two of those in a list I have in mind.

 

 

I debated this with myself for a long time. Guess who won? ;)

 

Seriously though I don't know if I believe that just yet. First off the Hailstrike (?) cheapest of the three... is really not that great to me. I want a much greater volume of firepower for those points. I think it should have had a Heavy Onslaught perhaps? 

 

The other ones are okay, but the points are starting to contest with Redemptors which I like better.

 

For my money I think the T8, Gladiators, with higher wound count, and ability to "Smoke Screen" are more attractive to me. However, actually the one single thing that has me liking the Storm Speeders is range and fly. Just zooming through ruins is big.  But T6 and the lower fire rate... I just feel like the Gladiator makes more sense.

 

Maybe not. I haven't proxied the Storm Speeders but I have played the Gladiators (as shown in my opening post).