SpellArcher wrote:
I think krysith has had some joy with multiple RBT's also.
Under hard comp they tend to be limited to 2 as for some armies versing lots of RBT is a no-fun game. I suspect lots of RBT increase the importance of match-up, being great against some enemies and poor against others.
It's interesting how RBT were regarded pretty poorly a few months ago but now feature in perhaps the majority of lists.
I own 6 RBTs and I have played with all 6 on the board (even in 8th edition, at 3000 pts). I have had some joy, but it has been limited.
There are three advantages to RBTs over archers: range, armor piercing (-2), and the ability to shoot all around. Because archers are decently mobile, and can musician reform to shoot a foe initially out of their line of sight with only a Ld check and -1 for moving, I find the only big advantage to RBTs is their armor piercing ability.
RBTs are great against armored targets. The more expensive per wound the target is, the better. Chaos Knights and Bloodcrushers, despite their speed, are great targets for RBTs. Bretts are too. You won't get many shots before combat, but compared to what other shooters do you'll much do better. If you play it right, you'll always have some target to shoot at once your best targets get in combat.
What RBTs don't have that archers do is: steadfast, stand-and-shoot, combat capability, and lots of S3 shots (better against high T).
I find myself fielding more archers and less RBTs these days.
One of the big reasons is combat capability: either the RBT or whatever is defending it will almost certainly see combat. I can choose between sacrificing an RBT to get a tactical advantage (such as by pulling a unit away from the battle) or give up some of that tactical advantage by intercepting with a unit. Archers can perform the same function while actually performing in combat. In combat, archers are 11 pts per wound and S3 attack, while RBTs are 50 points per. RBTs never get steadfast. So I prefer archers in general despite their lack of armor piercing, just because they can fight, albeit weakly.
The other reason is more meta. Because everyone has to find a way to beat a gunline sooner or later, there are lots of good tactics that have been worked out in 8th edition for taking out warmachines (poisoned gutter runners, skinks, initiative test spells, tomb scorps, etc). Some of these were around in 7th (e.g. tomb scorps), but there are a lot of new threats which take advantage of the changes to war machine rules (e.g. poison). These work well enough against dwarf warmachines, which are reasonably tough. Against RBTs they are devastating.
I think as long as you aren't facing an army which includes more than one good way to kill warmachines, RBTs are pretty good. They are very important for balancing out your shooting between lots of weak shots and a few strong, penetrating shots, so that your army can shoot well against all comers. One or two RBTs is a really great, flexible threat to add to an army. Outranging your enemy is the first step to predicting/controlling his actions. However, I can't recommend loading up on 4+ RBTs, simply because then you are extremely vulnerable to effective anti-warmachine tactics.
_________________
Seredain wrote:
Haha! I'm guessing that the codename for this will be
Operation Evil Bumrush.
Eldria wrote:
Close buts its a bit more Operation Chargeblerghvomitvomiteateat ooolook I grew an extra head