Tactica Imperial Guard

[Badger[Fr]]

Against tanks, it is still a poor choice with only a single Bs3 shot that can harm any armour value.

Well, a single MM on a fast vehicle, even a BS 3 one, is a threat few opponents can afford to ignore. A single AP1 penetrating hit is usually enough to leave a vehicle crippled. Would you park a Land Raider within 24' of a weapon that stands a significant chance of destroying it?

The hull MM is a versatile weapon that makes the BW even better at area denial, whereas a HF makes your tank killier at the expense of tactical opportunities. Keep in mind that if there are no enemy infantry units within 12 inches of the BW, his template weapons are all but useless, and a single immobilized result is all that it takes to neutralize it once and for all.

[Lord Cook]

Even so, if I wanted to spend 150 points (inc. smoke) on a vehicle with decent anti-infantry at Ap3 and a little anti-tank power, I'd buy a Leman Russ. When I want a cheaper alternative than can actually kill things reliably, I'll go with the twin-flamer Bane Wolf, or the twin-melta Devil Dog.

While I appreciate your argument, I think it's straying into the area of trying to make something do what it wasn't really designed for, and something it can't compete in compared to other alternatives.

[innerwolf]

What about a Hellhound with hull multimelta? Is it more viable of an option?

[Badger[Fr]]

When I want a cheaper alternative than can actually kill things reliably, I'll go with the twin-flamer Bane Wolf, or the twin-melta Devil Dog.

I suppose it eventually depends on how you play your Hounds. As a straight counter-assault unit, a HF Banewolf is indeed a better choice, but I tend to favour area denial, and in that regard the MM has proven unvaluable. For a mere 15 points, the additional versatility it provides far outweights the benefits of a hull HF.

think it's straying into the area of trying to make something do what it wasn't really designed for, and something it can't compete in compared to other alternatives

Well, it's another iteration of the traditional "Generalists vs Specialists" controversy. As far as I'm concerned, I tend to think that overspecialized units are too often predictible, and can somehow be ignored by a cunning opponent.

[freddieyu]

I suppose it eventually depends on how you play your Hounds. As a straight counter-assault unit, a HF Banewolf is indeed a better choice, but I tend to favour area denial, and in that regard the MM has proven unvaluable. For a mere 15 points, the additional versatility it provides far outweights the benefits of a hull HF.


Well, it's another iteration of the traditional "Generalists vs Specialists" controversy. As far as I'm concerned, I tend to think that overspecialized units are too often predictible, and can somehow be ignored by a cunning opponent.

I agree with you on this. In my lists most of my embarked infantry pack a flamer in addition to meltas (exception, the meltagun armed SWS), as the addition of even a single flamer makes a unit a threat against non MEQ armies....and my devil dog packs a hull heavy flamer, for the same reason....

It makes the army much more flexible in dealing with all kinds of threats, which for me offsets the loss of efficiency of a single unit, as the overall effectiveness of the army as a whole is enhanced, in my opinion.

[Lord Solar Plexus]

Or, depending on your point of view on this issue, abusing the already awesome fire points layout of the Chimera.

But that's the point - there is absolutely nothing awesome about those firepoints. In order to melta anything, you will have to stand bumper to bumper with the vehicle in question. Getting out is much better than using the firepoint set waaaay back to the rear with a turret in front of it.

I never understood why everyone was so excited about having those firepoints when the codex came out. It's not that they are useless but they are extremely tricky to use IMO, what with the shorter range, limited field of vision and/or wishing not to present AV 10.

[MasterSlowPoke]

I would not do this. Putting a multi-melta on a Bane Wolf means it can only move 6" while still firing both weapons. This reduces mobility, compared to the 12" it had before with a hull heavy flamer.

A Bane Wolf can move 12" and fire both the main cannon and the multimelta, as the main cannon is only S1. It's the same exact situation as with the HHF.

[Lyonator]

Pokey's got it.
Other than my inability to hit anything with BS3, my sole concern with the MM bane Wolf is the versatility... the fact that its weapons have different roles goes against my normal tendency to keep each unit focused on a single role
(An example that I doubt I'm alone on, that most of the lasguns in Mechanized Vet squads are a nice bonus, since ideally I'm firing at most two of them a turn, from the hotly contested Chimera top hatch)

As for MM DD vs MM BW, most of the time I run two MM DDs and one MM BW...
so I'm getting everything covered there.
It is a bit more points, but I have enough AT elsewhere, and enough of a headache from troops in cover, that having something that will (fairly) reliably handle MEQs (and just about anything else) that are hunkered down is a huge plus for me.
(Hell, that last note has me seriously considering a Colossus instead of a third demolisher, since cover is so good)

[RichBlake]

Fine. On that logic, I'm glad to see people using my sponson-less Executioner, my Veterans with vox casters, my Devil Dog with hull multi-melta, and my Griffons with hull heavy flamers. I similarly look forward to people using my Hydras, once I tell you how awesome they are. Have fun with your Inquisitor Juggalo.

Ha, I use none of them! In your face!

I would argue that the Conscripts are mine but probably no-one else uses them

The primaris psyker is amazing. He accounted for a little over 200 points of daemons over two player turns, and it would have been more had it not been for a fumbled psychic test turn 1. As far as units that "make their points back" this guy does it more often than anything else in my list.

Really? Now this interest me as I know someone else who swears by the bolt magnets.

However I've never really found them any use, 2D6 S6 shots are kinda cool but not compared to practically anything else you can get for 70-80 points. Against Daemons I can see why they'd be good (high toughness, low save) but against mech lists or MEQs does he still perform well?

i can see them being both very usefull, and a points sink at the same time...
is there ny general rule as to what should be in them? and what not? [unless you are going with a theme ob...]?

Personally I run mine as Multi-laser with Heavy Flamer and that's it. Cheap and cheerful and can deal with light armour and infantry.

Okay, so I've got a question about the manticore. I'm planning on including one in an army that currently has 2 demolishers and an executioner, and dropping one of the demolishers to do so. The army is a plasma heavy mechvets list, and the only thing I'm really short on is anti-horde firepower. I've got no meltaguns for tank hunting, I've left that to the lascannons that are in more or less every unit in my army. I'm switching out the demolisher for the manticore basically to get an extra 60 points, and because I don't really need THAT much AP1 death, I've got plenty already.

I'd be tempted to say colossus over manticore personally, just because the Collssus ignores cover saves and it's also AP3. I know you wanted anti-hoarde but I'm thinking S6 is more then enough as you'll be wounding on 2s and the "no cover saves" is probably better then "D3 shots".

Obviously though the colossus fails a soon as they move forward more then about 32"

[Sir_Lunchalot]

On the demolisher loadout - in my experience that is the most useful loadout. I've had more games where I stood still with it than games where I moved it around a lot. Yes, 24 inches is a short range, but you start out that far away from the enemy, and in my experience almost everyone tends to come towards me.

And as for the veterans heavy weapons - I'm using Steel Legion and Vostroyan models, two ranges which lack autocannon models. Second, the lascannons will do better against higher armour, and all my plasmaguns and multilasers will do well against light and medium armour. Also, lascannons will kill more marines than autocannons thanks to the AP value.

The extra armour was basically a "I've got 15 points left, what else could I spend it on" tyep buy.

[Tomdidiot]

The extra armour was basically a "I've got 15 points left, what else could I spend it on" tyep buy.

Erm, so is Extra Armour worth it? I tend to always max out my Russes - Extra Armour, 2 side sponsons, the whole shebang. However, I've found that generally, people don't seem to buy sponsons or the extra armour (My gaming group has no Guard at all, so I'm kind of lost here ).. Do most peopel just go for Russ/Executioner + Hull weapon?

Also, is a Vanquisher worth it, especially against lots of Land Raiders?

[Vaktathi]

Erm, so is Extra Armour worth it? I tend to always max out my Russes - Extra Armour, 2 side sponsons, the whole shebang. However, I've found that generally, people don't seem to buy sponsons or the extra armour (My gaming group has no Guard at all, so I'm kind of lost here ).. Do most peopel just go for Russ/Executioner + Hull weapon?

Also, is a Vanquisher worth it, especially against lots of Land Raiders?

EA is generally not worth it in most cases, especially with the amount of vehicles IG can field. In 4E it was needed as every penetrating hit, even if it didn't kill the tank, would stun it, and it was only 5pts. Now you only get in 1/6th of the time and it's 15pts. Normally it's most worth it on transports, but spending 15pts for EA on a 55pt transport that's hauling a 50pt squad seems...overkill.

Sponsons are very much a preference thing. I have a hard time taking a russ without sponsons, they add firepower and keep the tank a viable weapons platform after a weapon destroyed result. Other people don't see the sponsons as worth it, and there's a point to that in that they are expensive.

Vanquishers are probably the least cost efficient tank killer in the IG army, for killing Land Raiders IG can field more meltaguns than any other army, we have Manticore's and Medusa's and Vendettas, etc. The only way I'd take a Vanquisher is if one was low on AT and you took them with PC sponsons, making them expensive, but able to potentially kill just about anything in the game that's 4W or less and any tank, albeit a really expensive tank.

[bebe]

A Primaris will get an average of seven, S6 shots per turn, hitting on 3+. That is pretty good for his points. Add to that his other ability of Nightshroud and teamed with PBS he is really good. Just join him to a squad you want to keep alive. Now, I'm not using the PBS at under 2000 points but I still use the Psyker and join him to my plasma toting PCS.

I like using sponsons. I have an Exterminator, Pask, Lascannon Hull, Multi-Melta Sponsons that I often field. Yes, it is expensive but it creates fear after the first volley of shots and takes pressure of my gunline. I never use EA. I guess there asre two fields of thought. Keep your Russses dirt cheap or create a big fire magnet and hope to cause some damage.

[Logarithm Udgaur]

Do most peopel just go for Russ/Executioner + Hull weapon?

That's how I roll. Typically with Lascannon, and sometimes with Hvy Bolter and Hvy Stubber.

Also, is a Vanquisher worth it, especially against lots of Land Raiders?

Survey says no. Go with a Manticore or two.

[CKO]

I play larger games so I can afford sponsoons and I love 4 plasma cannons on the move or 5 after turn one.

[Saturnman]

Manticore has become my new favorite tank. I have so far destroyed/immobilised + weapon destroyed at least three Land Raiders so far, without much effort.

It is good against ANY army, and just about any unit. I don't care if termies have a 2 up save, an average two STR 10 blasts is equally as viable as, say, a LRBT or even demolisher with plasma sponsons as far as shooting power (considering the manticore is 35 points less even, and the demolisher needs to be much closer and may not have the ability to fire on turn 1). Obviously these are not AP 2 shots, but the LRBT is *not* going to be damaging russes with the ease a manticore will.

Man, I forgot about the side armor for barrages. I remember the rule all the time, but not while playing. That being said, I have been shooting at a lot of Land Raiders with it...not many other tanks. (hooray for a lot of marine players)

[fishborne]

Also, is a Vanquisher worth it, especially against lots of Land Raiders?

Yes, almost every time in my case. People on forums swear by melta guns, but if your killing that transport, you want the guys inside of it as far away from you as possible when they disembark. Most opponents will put the beastie right on the line, ignoring whatever cover saves they may get for a straight shot at you. The 2 tricks to remember with the Vanquisher are (if you deploy first) place it with a firing lane to the spot the enemy will most likely put the thing and (if you go second) place it with a commanding view of the path the LR will most likely take.

Another thought on Vanquishers is Pask. I go by an easy rule of thumb, if you take one, upgrade it with pask (my gunner is named Faith, but thats another story ) And if you take 2 tanks, dont take Pask. I will only squadron 2 Russ' as it works best for me personally.

later,
fishborne

[Volandum]

Yeah, take the Manticore for AV14-smiting. As a bonus over the Vanquisher, it works on Monoliths and can fire indirectly for side shots against lighter vehicles like Russes and Predators.

[Juggalo]

But that's the point - there is absolutely nothing awesome about those firepoints. In order to melta anything, you will have to stand bumper to bumper with the vehicle in question. Getting out is much better than using the firepoint set waaaay back to the rear with a turret in front of it.

I never understood why everyone was so excited about having those firepoints when the codex came out. It's not that they are useless but they are extremely tricky to use IMO, what with the shorter range, limited field of vision and/or wishing not to present AV 10.

Then all I have to say to you is that you're doing it wrong. Why are you drawing LOS from "waaay back to the rear"? And also, you're obsessing too much about the melta rule. Sure, an extra D6 to armor pen. is nice, but 6" is not a lot of wiggle room, and frequently it's not even that necessary against <AV13 vehicles. The biggest value of the melta is the AP1. Then there are the squads wielding plasma/autocannons, who never need to be that close. Or the opportunity to do a 4-flamer drive by and still have a chance to survive to fire again since even AV10 is better than 5 T3 guys in flak armor.

I'd be tempted to say colossus over manticore personally, just because the Collssus ignores cover saves and it's also AP3. I know you wanted anti-hoarde but I'm thinking S6 is more then enough as you'll be wounding on 2s and the "no cover saves" is probably better then "D3 shots".

Obviously though the colossus fails a soon as they move forward more then about 32"

So wait, you're recommending a weapon that will become practically useless after one turn over one that can instakill T5, can destroy AV14 (even monoliths), and depending on number of shots (or if you're firing directly) can deliver way more wounds as to make the cover save discrepancy a non-issue, and can do it every turn with no range limitations?

Erm, so is Extra Armour worth it? I tend to always max out my Russes - Extra Armour, 2 side sponsons, the whole shebang. However, I've found that generally, people don't seem to buy sponsons or the extra armour (My gaming group has no Guard at all, so I'm kind of lost here ).. Do most peopel just go for Russ/Executioner + Hull weapon?

Also, is a Vanquisher worth it, especially against lots of Land Raiders?

I have to echo Vaktathi on these (he's one of the like five regular posters in this thread that I actually believe genuinely play this game ). Extra armor was practically mandatory in 4th, but now it's 3 times more expensive and only 1/6th as useful, so think of it as 18 times worse than before.

And the Vanquisher variant is on the level of the Punisher, so that should give you an idea of its quality. It's simply too inaccurate to do its job with any sort of certainty, especially considering the oodles of better options we have for killing tanks. Pask? ROFL.

[Badger[Fr]]

So wait, you're recommending a weapon that will become practically useless after one turn

How so? The minimum range is less of an issue that it may seem at first glance if you deploy the Colossus (or the Basilisk, in that regard) in a corner. The Manticore is still better, of course, but the Colossus remains a viable choice.