1850 tourney list #2

this a new twist im my previous 1850 tourney list i posted a while back. The main difference is that its Heavy on the LR side. for more antitank action.

Gm w/ retinue 4 x GKT = 329

PAGK x 8 including Justicar w/ meltabomb = 230
PAGK x 8 including Justicar w/ meltabomb = 230

Inquisitor w/ retinue of 1 familiar mounted on a LR w/ ea and smoke = 284

LR W/ ea and smoke = 258
LR W/ ea and smoke = 258
LR W/ ea and smoke = 258

total 1847

Body count = 22 Heavys = 4 LRs

Wow, 4 LRs might be a little overboard? IMHO, I believe 3 is more than enough. I would actually switch one LR for an LRC, use the 284 pts you were going to use for the inquisitor and LR for another GKT for your GM, possibly another troop unit (IST w/ transport or another PAGK squad) and also beefing up w/ a few wargear. In my experience, our list is stronger when our units compliment and balance each other out. Having another troop choice definitely gives you a better chance at the C&C and SG missions and having a stronger HQ unit that gets right in their face (via the LRC) takes pressure off your LRs (which increases their survivability). Having too few infantry allows your opponent to concentrate more on popping your tanks. Of course 4 LRs are extremely tough to knock out but there ARE a lot of units out there that have melta's and actually have the mobility to make it effective. Fielding 4 LRs in a1850 pts is almost like putting all your eggs in one basket. If 1 or 2 gets popped right away, your infantry is going to have a hard time. Just my two cents

If you do use this list, I'm curious on how it performs so please let us know.

An Imperial Guard list with a couple of Leman Russ Vanquishers will spoil this list's day very quickly, however, there is a player at the LGS i go to, he plays Codex Marines and Grey Knights(Mainly GK), he has a 2000 point list with 5 Raiders(2 Crusader, 3 Regular), I have not faced him before, but i clearly remember that list getting torn to shreds by heavy melta and Vanquisher fire. But any other enemy will have a hard time combating this list I think, the same list that was torn to pieces by the IG Vanquisher list, beat a 'nid army by tank shocking the guys troops and synapse creatures 'til they ran away.

No incinerators? That list looks like its made for tank rushing your troops forward and then assaulting whatever you get your hands on.
I'd definately go 1 less LR and make the GM's LR a LRC increase the squad size, add some incinerators (used well thats anything from 5-10 extra 'shots' when you dismount and fire)
May be able to add some more PAGK, and a Dread with the points left then, or even make your inquisitor a firebase.

Just me suggestions though, I think it would be deadly in some situations, but have a few weaknesses against some lists.

this list isnint made for rushing at all hence no LRC. Its meant to use the 8 TLLC to take out priority targets and once I've waethered down those targets i move in and deploy. As far as IG vanquishers you have to play reactive (water warrior) and actually charge their vehicle squad while deniying line of site. Last time i checked GK with out S6 rape AV10. But the reason i made this list is because out LRC is geting a nerf Bat and will be kinda useless since HB wont b able to always fire at cruising speed.

I hear you Xterminator2. Any list can work with the right deployment and tactics. I just feel if the opponent gets lucky shots (there is the randomness factor after all) or if he has a lot of fast-moving (ie DS, infiltrators, etc) units w/ AT weaponry, it'll be tough. But like I said, I'm curious on how this will work for you

Incidentally, as long as we still have our codex, our LRC can still fire our HB anytime (even at cruising speed). So, technically, your LRC can move at cruising speed, fire the HB's and the POTM can still fire one weapon at the same or different target.

Well, they say proof is in the pudding. Try the list out and see if it works for you. I too think that running 4 Raiders is a bit risky in this melta-minded era we seem to be going through.