looking for Anti-Armour support for GK

[Adeptus Templar]

I am looking for some anti-armour support for my GK army. I was thinking either a Vendetta w/ stormies that have meltas inside or a Vulture with Hellstrike missiles & TLLCs. Would this be a good idea? Or are there better options than the two I have listed? more likely to be for apoc games but I would also like to use the anti-armour support for normal games also.

 

EDIT: my current army list \/ \/ \/

 

:D

GKGM w/ MCW, psycannon, ungents and holocaust

4 GKT retinue w/ psycannon

 

:D

7x PAGK

Justicar w/ targeter, melta

 

7x PAGK w/ 2x psycannon

Justicar w/ targeter, frag, melta

 

:huh:

GKLRC w/ search & smoke

2x GKLR w/ EA, search & smoke

 

^_^

7x PAGK w/ 2x Incinerator

Justicar w/ artificer, refractor, frag & melta

 

should be exactly 2k

 

just realized it, but would one of the mods move this to the correct section if it's in the wrong place?

 

2nd EDIT: I meant Anti-Armour

[Eddie Orlock]

In apocalypse, The top hardpoint on a Landraider is considered an AA mount. Curiously, vendettas, being the equivalent to helicopters, have no AA mounts. You're better off inducting Lightning fighters, as they've been recently updated to make their autocannons AA capable. That or Hydra.

[number6]

Unless you're using IA, there's no way to get Valks/Vendettas in a DH army.

 

And even with IA, I'm not certain you can get Hydras. To the best of my knowledge, they're IG only. Perhaps those of you who use IA would know for sure...?

 

Otherwise, you're going to have to ditch pure GK and get 2+ IST melta units for Troops and possibly even inducted IG platoons. There's no other legitimate way to do it. I would also exchange your normal raiders for LRCs, which are far superior vehicles. Not least because they carry multi-meltas. A single multi-melta is superior than a pair of TLLCs in 5th edition 40K. Plus the rest of the superior dakka that tank shoots out.

[Eddie Orlock]

Depending on how far your group is willing to stretch the fluff and accommodate you, you could take a Grey Knight Landraider Helios, and refit the Whirlwind launcher into a Hyperios variant. This would be how I would expect the grey knights to field a semi-dedicated anti-air vehicle if Thunderhawk support was unavailable.

[Adeptus Templar]

:unsure: probably should have specified. Sorry 'bout that I meant Anti-Armour.

 

I saw it the other way around AA = Anti-Armour

[Chengar Qordath]

For tank-killing, a squad of Rhino-mounted ISTs with a pair of meltaguns seems to be a popular choice.

[templargdt]

Agreed, 5 ISTs + 2 meltas in a rhino. Alternatively, an allied Squad of SOB with a pair of meltas in a rhino. I actually prefer this option since they are a much better point value then the IST's in my opinion, but YMMV.

[skarn]

I would also exchange your normal raiders for LRCs, which are far superior vehicles. Not least because they carry multi-meltas. A single multi-melta is superior than a pair of TLLCs in 5th edition 40K. Plus the rest of the superior dakka that tank shoots out.

A MM is only better than a TLLC from less than 12" (ie the enemy charge range), and then only against AV14.

[number6]

A MM is only better than a TLLC from less than 12" (ie the enemy charge range), and then only against AV14.

Which is where you want to be when you're packing GKs/GKTs inside AND you've spent points on expensive land raiders and need a way to increase your overall firepower to compensate. :rolleyes:

[Adeptus Templar]

A MM is only better than a TLLC from less than 12" (ie the enemy charge range), and then only against AV14.

Which is where you want to be when you're packing GKs/GKTs inside AND you've spent points on expensive land raiders and need a way to increase your overall firepower to compensate. :P

 

True, I am always trying to get my LRC out as far as possible and just and unload on the enemy. And if I am close enough disembark my GKGM & retinue and start hacking away :)

[Adeptus Templar]

So my best bet, if I want to stay pure GK, would be to go 3 GKLRC, correct?

[jeffersonian000]

Depends. Before taking LRC's, you need to consider what you are putting in them and how you intend to support them. Three LRC's seem like a great idea until you fail to hit with the MM and realize that you don't get a re-roll. From a pure GK stand point, if you take three LR's and two are LRC's, the third should be a GHLR as this will allow you to camp on an objective and/or support the LRC's with longer ranged firepower. Two LRC's should do fine if kept within range of mutual support of each other, yet until they get within weapons range they are not killing anything while still being in range of any opponents long range anti-tank. That's why the inclusion of a GHLR is a bit more balance in an already out of balance list.

 

Of course, I still prefer three GHLR’s in my Tri-Raider list. But if I did take more than one LRC (or LRR) in a 3+ Raider list, I’d still keep at least one GHLR (if not two).

 

SJ

[skarn]

A MM is only better than a TLLC from less than 12" (ie the enemy charge range), and then only against AV14.

Which is where you want to be when you're packing GKs/GKTs inside AND you've spent points on expensive land raiders and need a way to increase your overall firepower to compensate. :)

But you don't start there.

 

In any case, I agree that crusaders are good, but I usually mix them up with godhammers. Usually 2 godhammers per crusader. IMO Redeemers are the best though, sure they have little AT, but they are the best assault boat in this game by an absolute mile.

[jeffersonian000]

But you don't start there.

 

In any case, I agree that crusaders are good, but I usually mix them up with godhammers. Usually 2 godhammers per crusader. IMO Redeemers are the best though, sure they have little AT, but they are the best assault boat in this game by an absolute mile.

 

Here's a question: Did FW give us Heavy 4, Rending Assault Cannons? If so, we can deal with the loss of the pintle Multi-Melta. If they didn't, then both our LRC's and our new LRR's will require Mech IST melta squads; this marks the end of pure GK as we know it (not to mention the fact that our LRC's are no longer the kings of the battlefield).

 

SJ

[skarn]

But you don't start there.

 

In any case, I agree that crusaders are good, but I usually mix them up with godhammers. Usually 2 godhammers per crusader. IMO Redeemers are the best though, sure they have little AT, but they are the best assault boat in this game by an absolute mile.

 

Here's a question: Did FW give us Heavy 4, Rending Assault Cannons? If so, we can deal with the loss of the pintle Multi-Melta. If they didn't, then both our LRC's and our new LRR's will require Mech IST melta squads; this marks the end of pure GK as we know it (not to mention the fact that our LRC's are no longer the kings of the battlefield).

 

SJ

The Redeemer has a twin-linked psycannon. It isnt an AT vehicle. It does hawever have two ap3 ignore cover and inv save flame templates and makes the GK inside count as I10 in the first round of combat.

 

I'm still not sold on the massive need for melta. What exactly are they better than a TLLC at killing? Other LR, yeah sure if you get close enough. Monoliths? Nope. Eldar vehicles? The TLLC re-roll to hit makes them at least even IMO. IG vehicles? Again, if you get close enough the MM is better, but PAGK can take out IG vehicles just as well. And LR generally suck against the IG (esp suicide ST squads) anyway. The TLLC also lets you stay back and pick off threats like dreads and defilers that you don't want to get too close too.

 

There is certainly a place for the LRC (I wish out normal raiders could replace their HB with tMM tho), but I still believe a mix of the two is better. And I admit that it greatly depends on the rest of the force you bring.

[jeffersonian000]

The GK LRC has a Twin-Linked Assault Cannon. The codex and rulebook have its Assault Cannon as Heavy 3 (non-Rending). I have a copy of IA7 as well as the current IA2update1.3 PDF. If the GK Crusader has a Marine equivalent Assault Cannon, then cool. If the Assault Cannon is still non-Rending, then the loss of our only non-Dreadnaught Multi-Melta is a huge reduction in out meager anti-AV14 armoury. I have yet to locate an entry on either document that states the Assault Cannon on the GK LRC is Heavy 4 (Rending); the IA2update1.3 document does remove the Multi-Melta as an available weapon to the GK Crusader while IA7 does not list an MM at all for the GK Redeemer. This is a problem.

 

As to Twin-Linked Lascannons, S9, AP2 is just not is reliable versus AV14 as at 12" or less than S8, AP1 (melta). From 0"-24", S6, AP4, Heavy 4 (Rending) out-performs Lascannons versus Horde, and can still take down an AV14 vehicle. Of course, outside of 24", the TL Lascannon has to contend with all the IG ways of popping AV14 at range.

 

Where the TL Lascannon shines is that 2 are attached to a Godhammer LR, the most flexible of the LR patterns due to its ability to stand off or rush in as necessary (LRC and LRR patterns most rush in to be useful; a GHLR is useful all the time).

 

SJ

[number6]

A MM is only better than a TLLC from less than 12" (ie the enemy charge range), and then only against AV14.

Which is where you want to be when you're packing GKs/GKTs inside AND you've spent points on expensive land raiders and need a way to increase your overall firepower to compensate. :)

But you don't start there.

Give yourself a single turn, and you should be no farther than 24" away maximum. And it's entirely possible, given any of the standard deployments, that you'll be within 12", too. And if you're NOT ending up within 12" of the enemy, that means you've pushed him back into his deployment zone with FEAR. Just as good as actually being right there to begin with.