Predator Configurations

[Fetterkey]

So, I've seen tons of posts and lists advocating the use of the "Dakkapred" (Autocannon turret, heavy bolter sponsons). Some of these also advocate adding a pintle-mounted storm bolter. I've also seen several posters advocate the tri-las Predator.

 

Why are either of these tanks considered good at all? To me, it seems that the lascannon turret is drastically overpriced and the Dakkapred is markedly inferior to the Whirlwind or Thunderfire.

[Grey Mage]

You mean why would you take either of these?

 

Well... that depends on your army. Do you already have alot of AT firepower? Then Tri-las probly isnt for you.

On the same Vein if your army is kitted out to destroy light tanks and hordes and really needs some anti-tank, then points on a Predator Destructor are probly wasted.

 

Inversely- do you need something to help pop enemy tanks at range and support your advance? Three lascannons on a relatively survivable platform surely couldnt hurt.

 

Do you need something with alot of decent AP shots to take on tau, gaurd, nidz, or orks and still have the ability to put some hurt on marine style opponents? The Destructor is for you- and its cheap. At 85-100pts this version is a steal, putting out about as much firepower as a five man devastator squad for half the price.

 

I personally run an Annihilator *TLLC* with Heavy Boltersponsons and a stormbolter. Why you ask? Because that TLLC allows me to pop heavier armor, on the move if need be, while the heavy bolters are cheap and add both survivability and versatility to the tank. The Stormbolter helps in that anti-infantry role that it sometimes plays, and gives me additional shots at range. Remember, it only has to kill two orks to make its points back.

 

Overall the Predator is what any tank commander in 40k could want- cheap, reliable, and packing a good range on every gun.

 

The fact that it distracts people from my Rhinos and helps my dreads soak the incoming AT fire is just icing on the cake.

[Fetterkey]

You look at 85 points for an autocannon and two heavy bolters and say that's a steal; I look at 85 points for an autocannon and two heavy bolters and say that's not good enough. Consider that, for 5 points less, you could have two Razorbacks with twin-linked heavy bolters; these Razorbacks perform almost as well (3.55555556 vs. 3.77777778 wounds per turn) against Toughness 4 opponents, perform just as well against Toughness 3 opponents, and do all that while moving every turn. If the Dakkapred moves, it gets outperformed by a single Razorback, since most of its anti-infantry firepower lies in the sponsons. When you factor in the Razorbacks' transport capacity, Force Organization slots (or lack thereof), improved resilience, improved mobility, and other "intangibles," it's obvious that the Dakkapred fails to perform efficiently, even in the role that it's supposedly best at-- the anti-infantry volume of fire unit. It may be better than a Devastator Squad, but that's because Devastators are the worst Heavy Support unit (and indeed, one of the worst overall units) in the Codex.

[Vaaish]

Consider that, for 5 points less, you could have two Razorbacks with twin-linked heavy bolters;

I think you are excessively abstracting this, 2 razorbacks don't just cost 80 points. Each costs you a minimum of 135 points because the marines have to be purchased. Second is how durable is it. Sure two razorbacks present separate targets, but each is only av11 which means a firewarrior can glance it with basic arms. The pred sports AV 13 which presents a much more difficult target. Third is what are you planning on doing with it. A razorback is leaving half your squad without transport or toting around a few men in the back yelling "are we there yet?" while you shoot. In either case you are only moving 6" to shoot it which isn't getting you to your objective and wasting most of your capabilities as a whole while the pred can move and shoot in support without need of moving farther than 6" because it doesn't carry troops.

 

So looking at it like an autocannon and two HB that can support your troops without slowing them down and present a difficult target to take down for 85 points is a pretty good deal. The next best thing is a thunderfire cannon and that needs to hug cover to live long plus it costs you 15 point more.

 

Razorbacks are good to boost your heavy firepower and get cheap transport for a specialist squad with a character, while preds are better used as a durable, mobile firebase to soften up targets for the guys up front or soak incomming AT fire. In the end, it's about your army composition and how the unit fits into your overall battle plan. If it doesn't work for you, we won't convince you it's the best thing since sliced bread.

[Fetterkey]

I don't see how a Dakkapred can be used as a mobile firebase unit when it wastes the majority of its already-limited firepower on any turn that it moves. In my opinion, the best Predator configuration is turret autocannon and sponson lascannons, and even that's only good if you don't have other units to provide long range anti-tank firepower. Though the Dakkapred isn't an awful choice-- it performs to some degree against almost any army, even though it's usually quite mediocre-- I don't think it's good enough to justify its inclusion. The Whirlwind and Thunderfire are much better against infantry, fill the same slot, and cost a roughly equivalent sum.

 

You won't cripple your list by taking Dakkapreds, but they simply aren't the most efficient use of your points and Heavy Support slots.

[River Black]

I play an all bike army with two Dakka Preds at 1750. There is no substitute for these tanks as the fill a very specific niche in the list. The autocannons can tear up the lighter tanks while my MM attack bikes hit the harder targets. If the there are no light tanks for the pred to bust then they wipe out anything that gets out of the freshly destroyed heavy tank that the bikes just nuked. In addition they work great at preventing light infantry from breaking cover to claim objectives and yet have a strong enough front armor so that the entrenched light infantry cant take them out. The majority of the time once the tank is placed in a decent fire lane I never move so I can keep all of the guns firing. Also at 85 points I have never cried when I lost one of these tanks. First off if they are shooting the tank they aren’t shooting at my bikes... that or the tanks are all I have left at which point it doesn’t really matter. Oh and with an all bike list a Razorback is not really an option.

[Koremu]

I'm more or less in agreement with the OP on the general Predator. Thankfully, I have opponents who are ok with allowing me to purchase a Machine Spirit for it for 30 points, which actually makes the tank playable IMO.

 

Since the changes to Defensive Fire STR, the Predator has basically been borked horribly - it doesn't fulfil the tactical role that fluff says it should fill. With a Machine Spirit, it's once again back to doing what it should be doing - acting as a rolling support fire tank, instead of its current sniper-only restricted role.

 

So, my advice is to get some sensible and mature opponents and get back to usng the tank how the fluff says it should be used.

[Giga]

Personally, I dont find the dakkapred too good. In order to shoot properly, it has to remain static, which means its targets will more often then not have cover saves. Those two autocannon shots and 6 heavy bolter shots just arent that good when even guardsmen get a 4+ cover save against it. Likewise, I dont find it good against MEQ, because everyone is mechanized where I play.

 

On the other hand, the sponsors and turret lascannon pred costs 165 points, if I remember correctly. Too much. Which is why I usually roll the predator with lascannon sponsors and autocannon turret. At 120 pts its a very cheap, very durable way to get long range antitank to your army. Its still outperformed by attack bikes and speeders, though, but at least its cheaper and wont die so fast.

[Vaaish]

I don't see how a Dakkapred can be used as a mobile firebase unit when it wastes the majority of its already-limited firepower on any turn that it moves.

 

mobile firebase: able to redeploy quickly to a new location if necessary to provide supporting fire. This doesn't always entail that it CAN provide as good support on the move just that is is capable of quickly moving to a new location. It's cheap AV13 to get an AC to hunt light armor so your better weapons can target more important enemy units.

[Fetterkey]

I generally use Dreadnoughts and Speeders to provide this long range anti-light armor capability, though your mileage may vary.

 

To sum up my views, I think that the turret autocannon is insufficient anti-tank and adding two heavy bolters still makes for insufficient anti-infantry, especially now that the heavy bolters can't move and fire. However, by purchasing lascannon sponsons, you can make a Predator a decent long range anti-tank vehicle. This sort of Predator should also stick with the turret autocannon-- the twin-linked lascannons, though appealing, are too expensive to merit their inclusion.

[Grand Admiral Thrawn]

Autocannons aren't supposed to be anti-tank, but anti-transport. Autocannons are more than sufficient to knock out trukks, rhinos or anything else AV11/10

[Fetterkey]

A single BS 4 autocannon is not sufficient to reliably take out an AV 11 vehicle; it has only a 25.9% chance of immobilizing or destroying it. A single BS 4 autocannon and two BS 4 lascannons, however, have a 74.1% chance of accomplishing the same feat, which is quite respectable, and that's before factoring in the chance of immobilizing or destroying the vehicle through multiple Weapon Destroyed results.

[Grey Mage]

A single BS 4 autocannon is not sufficient to reliably take out an AV 11 vehicle; it has only a 25.9% chance of immobilizing or destroying it. A single BS 4 autocannon and two BS 4 lascannons, however, have a 74.1% chance of accomplishing the same feat, which is quite respectable, and that's before factoring in the chance of immobilizing or destroying the vehicle through multiple Weapon Destroyed results.

Not everything is gauranteed in life... and frankly, your comment on the razorbacks was way way off. For that 5pts your gaining several important things-

 

1) The autocannon, wich gives you the ability to properly hunt light tanks.

2) Independence- if your playing a mounted force you dont have the razorbacks to spare hunting down enemy units.

3) The predator is vastly more survivable at range, where its role is. AV 13 is a huge advantage, especially when meltaguns will mostly be out of range.

 

Your comment on the Whirlwind vs Dakkapred is also only partially true- the whirlwind has advantages in its pie plate, but the Destructor has advantages in direct fire, wich I find to even out most of the time. Example- against a squad of Tyranid warriors the Whirlwind only gets one hit each, while the predator can stack wounds and actually remove the squad from play. When a unit is spaced out properly you end up with about 8 shots, possibly as little as six *not counting drift* wich again puts it closer to the predators fire rate. The whirlwind also loses out on survivability, requiring the use of cover to reach "tough" status... wich in turn reduces its accuracy, and thus kill rate.

 

But lastly, and most importantly- nothing in this game is gauranteed. Nothing. The high volume of shots from the dakkapredator gives you more chances to make something happen, so what it loses out on in statistical power it can make for in potential.

 

Dont understand? Let me put it another way- against a horde of tyranid gaunts a unit of 5 terminators can potentially do 15 wounds, assuming all hits and all wounds. A unit of 10 assault marines, similarly priced, can potentially do 31 wounds on the charge assuming all hits, wounds, and failed saves. Looking at statistics in this case, well find its likely that the assault marines are the better choice in statistical average aswell. Cool.

 

Now what happens when we put the same two units, assaulting again, against a unit of 9 tyranid warriors? Well the terminators are still doing at max 15 wounds, while the assault marines can wipe out the entire unit with their potential 31 wounds. Will they all the time? No. But it means sometimes theyre the better tool for the job- when the oppurtunity to get the job done now is more important that probly getting the job done in a few turns.

[Fetterkey]

But lastly, and most importantly- nothing in this game is gauranteed. Nothing. The high volume of shots from the dakkapredator gives you more chances to make something happen, so what it loses out on in statistical power it can make for in potential.

 

"Potential" is markedly inferior to statistical power; by the doctrine of "potential," the Leman Russ Punisher is an incredible vehicle. Through statistics, we can easily discern that this is not the case. Though there are benefits that can be derived from volume of shots, primarily torrent hazards against unique models, a Dakkapred does not output enough shots to take advantage from this in most cases.

[Grey Mage]

Its still an important tactical consideration. Far to many people forget the additional possibilities and dont push their units....

 

But thats just my opinion. I could talk about my winning streak blah blah blah but it wouldnt matter. Im just pointing out that "mathhammer" is a highly overrated exercise. If mathhammer was the be all end all thered be no need to fight the games... wed just throw the list into an equation and save ourselves several hundred dollars.

[Fetterkey]

I don't think that calculating the odds of killing your primary target is too much mathhammer.

[Grey Mage]

I think relying on it to closely is, but I understand this ideology isnt for everyone, and I understand the draw of statistics. My issue is that in the area of Mathhammer statistics people never put down what the variance is. To what degree of accuracy do you feel this is predicted? My own empirical evidence shows that statistics are a horrible way of finding more than a general idea of the outcome in a table top game, and that they fail to show the added effectiveness of tactical accumen on a situation, or the influence of positioning, terrain, other units, opposing force composition, dice weight and design *as dice are not physically perfect they wont roll perfectly... some are very bad at this though not purposely weighted* or any house rules that might effect the situation.

 

It is in short no better or worse than a rough translation into decimel places of simple fractions. And frankly, and just in my own opinion, worth perhaps an iota more.

 

I prefer to reason out the strengths of a unit by looking at its possibilities *the above being only an extreme example for sake of argument* and intuiting the rest by applying previous experiance and a only pinch of math to it.

 

That being said, Im a successful tournament player with my chosen armies *Primarily Eldar and Space Wolves* and so have no reason to change my ways. If yours are working for you then by all means continue on with them.

[Br.Pat]

Some things however are not explained by statistics. Most people see the Predator tank as more of a threat than a Whirlwind tank, atleast subconsciously (or atleast that's my opinion).

 

This is perhaps due to the fact that

 

a) The predator tank is used more agressively and often has to fight in the open, rather than behind cover.

:lol: The predator with the possibility of having 3 main weapons is seen subconsciously as more dangerous

c) Even the name of the tank itself denotes something that can cause damage. The Predator. Something that hunts, and kills.

 

Therefore I would choose a whirlwind over a predator any day. This is due to it's increased survivability and the fact that the barrage rule enables it to fire from behind terrain i.e. out of sight, out of mind. Furthermore pinning is also extremely useful.

[Gideon999]

I have to agree. I am not a skilled armour user at present, but in almost all the games I have fielded both of my tanks (and I only own two so far: whirlwind and a pred with TLLC and HB Sponsons w/pintle SB) the Pred makes a good showing firing all guns on my first turn, and generally makes 1-3 kills. Then my enemy turns all his guns on it and turns it into a pile of molten slag. The whirlwind on the other hand has only been destroyed once in all the games Ive used it in, and generally makes between 5-10 kills at least if I dont deviate too badly. And the Whirly costs about 60pts less. So I have given serious thought to adding one more of each to my army so I can field them in pairs, I think this will make the preds more viable, and the whirlies even better, but the whirlies will likely still come out on top overall.

[Kronk]

I'm OK with predators in 1500+ games. Less than that, not really worth the points.

 

However, I don't like mixing autocannon turrets with lascannon sponsons or heavy bolter sponsons with lascannon turrets.

 

Keep the lascannons together if you are going anti-tank and the heavy bolters with the autocannon for troops and transports.

 

Versitility for these points isn't worth the return on investment. If you put the lascannons with the heavy bolters, what are you going to shoot at? Rhinos? Not worth the points. Troops? Wasted lascannon shot. Dreadnoughts or heavy tanks? How are the Heavy bolters going to help?

 

If you put the lascannon sponsons with the Autocannon, the same issue arrises. Killing Rhinos? You might can justify it for transports, but I'm not a fan. Killing troops? Again, big waste of points. Killing heavy tanks or dreads? Good luck with that autocannon.

[Fetterkey]

The primary targets for any long-ranged anti-tank vehicle are going to be Rhinos, Land Speeders, Dreadnoughts, IG artillery vehicles, and other vehicles with AV 10-12. Autocannons perform acceptably against all these targets.

[Deathwing]

I'm a big fan of the combi-pred (AC & LC sponsons with pintle storm bolter).

 

The tank is very flexible and can perform a myriad of duties and is relatively inexpensive (DA one is less than 140). It has long range and high strength making it ideal for anti-transport and anti-MC and can cause a fair amount of casualties on infantry as well (potential 6 wounds at 24"). If a weapon is blown off it still has two others with 48" range and high strength so it's effectiveness isn't lost as quickly as say a TLLC & HB predator (which would then be delegated to strictly anti-infantry if the TLLC gets blown off).

 

But as with most armoured vehicles, it needs a partner of similar ability, either another predator or a vindicator or even a land raider. If anything this is to dilute your opponent's anti-tank and give you some redundancy in case a lucky shot gets through.

 

Whirlwinds are great for their price, but what they lack over a dakka pred is anti-MC ability. A dakka pred can perform both anti-infantry and anti-MC duty fairly easily (maybe not against a T7 fex, but at least it still has the potential to do 10 wounds as opposed to the whirlwinds 1). Mind you if your list already has enough anti-MC then the whirlwind might be the better option.

 

The annihilator pred is nice as it is almost garunteed to do something to a tank, but it is very much a pillbox and I'd use it only if I have the points to spare and already have other dedicated tank hunters (i.e. multi-melta attack bikes). I wouldn't use the annihilator pred as my only dedicated anti-tank.

[Br.Pat]

The autocannon is supposedly very good at popping light vehicles... on paper

 

A rhino however has AV 11 at the front. That would mean a 4+ to just glance and a 5+ to penetrate. Whilst the lascannon glances on a 2+ and penetrates on a 3+. I prefer one 3+ to two 5+. Anyone up for mathammer?

[Vaaish]

You are using the ac as a replacement for the lascannon. While yes your lascannon will likely penetrate more easily against the rhino, it's overkill and it means you aren't shooting at his heavier armor plus it still only gives you a 33% chance of killing the vehicle same as the AC. Having an AC pred gives you a cheap, fairly durable support platform to tag high toughness models and engage light vehicles to free up your heavier firepower to take down tougher AV13-14. The AC a versatile support weapon with greater odds of scoring a hit in the first place than a single lascannon. Weapons don't operate in self sustaining vacuums, look for how they form synergies to make your force more efficient.

[Br.Pat]

Lascannons aren't meant to be fired at heavy armour. They are too weak. They need a 5+ to Penetrate Av 13. Meltaguns or S10 weapons are the real heavy armour killers these days.

 

Ofcourse lascannons still do have the chance of doing damage to heavy armour, and if you have nothing else to shoot at you should go for it.