Devastators or Typhoons

[fredbob524]

This has had me wondering for a while, I hear people talk about bout rifleman dreads and typhoons as the best fire support While I personally love rifleman dreads I feel that the often insulted devastators can put out better bang for their buck then typhoons outputting the same amount of fire, so lets break it down

 

Dev squad:

150 pts

1 sergeant

4 marines with mls and bolt pistols

The sergeant has a signum

 

Pros:

More men so more redundancy ( I feel like this will be a point of contention)

30 pts cheaper

one missile can be bs 5

better if not that good assault clout

 

Cons:

Lack of mobility

Susceptibility to morale checks

still pretty bad in assault

Heavy slots are very valued by players for other things

 

Typhoons

180

2 not necessarily in the same squad

one typhoon ml launcher each

skimmer, fast

deepstrike

 

Pros:

great mobility can move 12 in and shoot to full power

av ten eliminates lasgun equivalents from being trouble

ability to move flat out to grab objectives

FA is one of the last sections to fill up in a lot of armies

 

Cons:

cost a sternguard with a combi weapon more

on a pen only and immobilized allows them to possibly use their only weapon the next turn

av ten is still pretty weak to the likes of autocannons

 

I would like to hear what others have to say on this subject this is just between these two please do not drag any other vehicles or squads in this will hopefully just be a discussion about these two, but please tell me what you think and what you run

 

 

if the posting of the point values is bad just say so and they will be gone,

[Frosty the Pyro]

If your taking the dev squad you realy ought to spring for some extra guys, there is a big diference between having 5 models and every loss being a lose of a heavy weapon (or signum) and having 8+ models so that the first casulties will likely be bolter marines. Though devs are just not as cost effecent as preditors or whirlwinds in general, and are only good choices when you have points left over for the extra toughness of a squad(as a 10 man squad tends to be harder to kill than a tank), but if your only using 5 men dev squad then you are geting the point ineffecentcy without the added toughness. Just my 2c

[Chengar Qordath]

Another point to be considered in the Typhoon's favor is that it has a heavy bolter (unless, for some reason, you replaced with a Heavy Flamer or Multi-Melta) in addition to its Typhoon missiles. Those heavy bolters can be a boon when your Typhoon is on anti-infantry duty, and have a chance of doing damage against lightly-armored vehicles. Also, two landspeeders can engage two different targets; particularly if your Typhoons are transport-hunting that can be a very big advantage.

[Koremu]

To a certain extent it's down to the mission types. Devastators in Dawn of War are a complete waste - they miss the most important turns of firing and can't deploy in the best vantage point.

 

Typhoons mobility increases their effective firepower - there's fewer ways to hide from a skimmer that can move 12"

 

Typhoons have more guns than the 5 man Devastator Squad. A Heavy Bolter is equivalent to about 2.5 Boltguns, so the pair of Typhoon are equal to a full 10 man Devastator Squad - and are cheaper besides.

 

Devastators are just too expensive - they are arguably the worst choice in Heavy Support, while their main competitors - Typhoons and Sternguard - are the best in their FO sections.

 

 

Also, I dispute your assertion that FA is the last section of the FOC to be filled. You obviously don't run enough Land Speeders.

[mowglie]

This has had me wondering for a while, I hear people talk about bout rifleman dreads and typhoons as the best fire support While I personally love rifleman dreads I feel that the often insulted devastators can put out better bang for their buck then typhoons outputting the same amount of fire, so lets break it down

 

Initially, on paper, you're right. Devastators get more bang for their buck.

 

The Typhoon is very expensive for its firepower. It is also relatively fragile (although, AV10 with a 4+ cover save is surprisingly good against e.g. Krak missiles, Lascannons). It has a particular weakness to Autocannon and similar that Devastators don't have due to their 3+ save.

 

However. That level of math-hammer only applies if you're playing killpoints on a terrainless table against a homogeneous, stationary enemy.

 

The primary reason that Devastators are unpopular is their lack of mobility. They must be stationary to be useful. This hurts them badly in Dawn-of-War (1/3 of your games!), their usefulness in objective games depends on LoS to objectives, and if your opponent can effectively neutralise them by staying out of their LoS.

 

In contrast, Typhoons can enter from reserve and still fire. they can zoom up flanks and hit side-armor, as you say they can move flat out and contest objectives. They can move 12" and still fire either Kraks, or HB + Frags, so it's very difficult to remain out of LoS.

 

The devastators might have more bang on paper, but on the board many people find you get more bang from the typhoons.

 

I do think we could use some discussion on using both Devastators and Typhoons effectively though. There seems to be quite a lot of "people who favour one don't know how to use the other".

[Giga]

I'd take typhoons any day.

 

Another option would be to just get a pair of combipreds for 240 pts. 4 lascannon shots + 4 autocannon shots per turn, with front AV13, is a great value for points if you've got some free FoC slots.

 

Another option is a 5 men sternguard unit with 2 missile launchers and a razorback (comes out at 175 pts). These guys can also be scoring if you get pedro, and they got a special ammo with 30" range, making them actually pretty good as a static shooting platform.

[Tanhausen]

Since the original post only wants to hear of devastators vs typhooons (must have his reasons), my quick thoughts:

 

- A stationary infantry with today's metagame is almost suicide... unless you have a countercharge unit to guard them or they are proficient in close combat. Long Fangs are an exceptional unit in this sense: they can pack up to 6 heavy weapons (sarge in terminator armour with a cyclone), they have counter charge AND they can split objectives. When combined with rune priest with the "crow"... we all know what happens!

 

- AV10 vehicles are shot down by bolters. Not only tactical squad's bolters, but drop pod bolters, vehicle pintle bolters and basically anything short of a smelly old sock can potentially bring them down.

 

Conclusions:

 

- in 2/3 games (bases and objectives), typhoons are probably a better option, since they can contest far away objectives and basically help you drive the opponents tactica.

 

- in 1/3 games (anihilation), devastators are harder to obliterate, hence being a tougher killpoint.

 

Personally, as much as I love devastators (which I used combat squaded, with 2 ML in each back in 4ed), today you simply cannot get your points back: too many DR units, way to vulnerable to fast assault (orks, nids and even mech marine spam) and the are too one-dimesioned.

 

Bear in mind that you only talk about antitank uses...I don't think any of these options are THE BEST for the function (I'd rather use a multimelta/heavyflamer speeder).

 

I'd suggest better AT alternatives but... you only wanted to read about these two options :D

 

P.S. Giga gives you a good idea of what today seems the best HS options for an all comers list...though I run 1 AC/LC and 1 AC/HB

P.S.S. DAMN, I did suggest alternatives... naughty me! :D

[DarkGuard]

I used to use a 10 man Devastator Squad with lascannon and 3 missile launchers. Combat squadded them to have the Sergeant with the lascannon in one squad, and the missile launchers in the other. However, while I did love the firepower they could put out, in missions such as DoW they didn't do much due to needing to deploy in the first turn and set up. For this reason I prefer Typhoons. OK they may be more fragile, but for their points they have more weapons (2 missile launchers and 1 heavy bolter), and are able to move 12" and fire their heavy bolter and frags at infantry or kraks at tanks. Truly an amazing little vehicle.

[Giga]

Typhoons are in no way more fragile then devastators. As far as cover goes, the typhoons can easily get it since they have 36" range and can move 6" a turn and still shoot everything, thus keeping themselves covered while remaining at maximum efficiency. In addition, they're either immune to small arms fire or they might as well be (bolters can glance them on 6, not really scary). They also don't suffer from morale or pinning tests.

 

Finally, they're more cost-effective. 3 typhoons cost 270 pts. A 10 men dev squad with lascannon and 3 missile launchers costs 250 pts. For meager 20 points one gets superior mobility, greater firepower, greater survivability, immunity to morale and pinning checks, and a whole bunch of other benefits.

 

Devastators really aren't worth it as far as competitive play goes.

[Gothical]

I try to take both.

 

The main reason that I use Devastators are that they are very fluffy for Salamander armies (they have 3 squads per company, IIRC).

 

I also like the ability to have a squad dug into cover and putting powerful weapons down-range. I sometimes even take them with Lascannons (ridiculously expensive, I know - but the short-range nature of the Salamanders means the fire-support is very handy, and I think the squad is superior to a tri-Las Predator in that role).

 

Usually I only field 5 men, even at 2000 points (Terminators, Dreadnoughts and Command Squads are my main CC unit as Assault Marines are more limited, thus points are tight) - though usually I only take 3 weapons if this is the case, to minimise points and to give me an extra wound that doesn't remove a heavy weapon.

 

As a Mech player I also throw them in a Razorback - if I upgrade that to a Twin-Linked Lascannon, I usually stick with Missile Launchers in the squad (though maybe 1 Lascannon to benefit from the Signum, otherwise a Multi-Melta for the short-range BS5 fun and reduced cost). This also negates their inability to move somewhat, though you still miss out on a turn or two of firepower - however that is sometimes beneficial if it gets you into a better position.

 

I agree that other units in the army are more cost-effective, but some are unavailable to me (preferring fluffy armies over hyper-competitive...though I disagree with the notion that the force isn't competitive so long as it's built well to the background and used properly). Including multiple options can be fun - a Typhoon and the Devastators means the enemy has a harder time prioritising targets, particularly in the Mech build with Rhinos and other tanks on the board too. Having both allows you to move either at maximum speed and still maintain some degree of ranged firepower too.

 

Mind you, they work in my army build but perhaps not others' - as most of my army advances on the offensive I am getting up into the enemy's grill early on. Should they send any of the fast/alternate-deployment options to take out the Devastators, these units are not targeting the units that I see as "key" to my victory, such as my mechanised Tactical Marines trying to take-and-hold objectives or my Command Squad and it's support flanking the enemy to crush them in combat. So the main weakness of the small Infantry platform turns itself into somewhat of an advantage for me personally.

[DarkGuard]

Typhoons are in no way more fragile then devastators. As far as cover goes, the typhoons can easily get it since they have 36" range and can move 6" a turn and still shoot everything, thus keeping themselves covered while remaining at maximum efficiency. In addition, they're either immune to small arms fire or they might as well be (bolters can glance them on 6, not really scary). They also don't suffer from morale or pinning tests.

 

Finally, they're more cost-effective. 3 typhoons cost 270 pts. A 10 men dev squad with lascannon and 3 missile launchers costs 250 pts. For meager 20 points one gets superior mobility, greater firepower, greater survivability, immunity to morale and pinning checks, and a whole bunch of other benefits.

 

Devastators really aren't worth it as far as competitive play goes.

 

What I meant about fragility is that one lucky heavy bolter shot, or a pinpoint lascannon shot, which has the same range as the Typhoon, can take it out completely. On the other hand, I'm not too worried if you fired your lascannon at my 10 man Dev Squad sitting in cover with 5 bolters I can happily allocate wounds onto. Yes Typhoons are more or less practically immune to small arms weapons, but then on the flip side I feel larger weapons like lascannons are more of a threat to them.

 

I agree with everything else you say, and vastly prefer Typhoons in competitive play as it stands.

[Koremu]

Typhoons are in no way more fragile then devastators. As far as cover goes, the typhoons can easily get it since they have 36" range and can move 6" a turn and still shoot everything, thus keeping themselves covered while remaining at maximum efficiency. In addition, they're either immune to small arms fire or they might as well be (bolters can glance them on 6, not really scary). They also don't suffer from morale or pinning tests.

 

Finally, they're more cost-effective. 3 typhoons cost 270 pts. A 10 men dev squad with lascannon and 3 missile launchers costs 250 pts. For meager 20 points one gets superior mobility, greater firepower, greater survivability, immunity to morale and pinning checks, and a whole bunch of other benefits.

 

Devastators really aren't worth it as far as competitive play goes.

 

What I meant about fragility is that one lucky heavy bolter shot, or a pinpoint lascannon shot, which has the same range as the Typhoon, can take it out completely. On the other hand, I'm not too worried if you fired your lascannon at my 10 man Dev Squad sitting in cover with 5 bolters I can happily allocate wounds onto. Yes Typhoons are more or less practically immune to small arms weapons, but then on the flip side I feel larger weapons like lascannons are more of a threat to them.

 

I agree with everything else you say, and vastly prefer Typhoons in competitive play as it stands.

Lascannon should have more important things to fire at than a Land Speeder. Also, it's still only 50% likely to kill you per shot, and because Lascannon are not common, the shots tend to come singly, allowing you to stack shots on the already damaged/stunned speeder and retain firepower from the other one.

[DarkGuard]

Lascannon should have more important things to fire at than a Land Speeder. Also, it's still only 50% likely to kill you per shot, and because Lascannon are not common, the shots tend to come singly, allowing you to stack shots on the already damaged/stunned speeder and retain firepower from the other one.

 

It was just an example of how one shot can take out a Typhoon and those 3 heavy weapons, while maybe taking out one Marine and still leaving 4 heavy weapons and 4 meatshields. I know that in an army the lascannon will likely be shot at something else than a Typhoon, but it was just an example of putting the Typhoon and the Dev squad together.

[Ming]

Well....

 

I wish I had more speeders to be sure. I'd probably use more of them if I did. However, I look using devastators, especially the demi-squads. One with 4 MLs and one with 4 HBs. I've had to play vs alot of hordes, and having lots of marines on the table with as many dice throwing as possible, is very important. Everybody has alot of long-range, S5 and better heavy weaps for putting speeders down. I look to my FA slots if possible to be jump pack troops, melta/flamer speeders, and vanguard. I like my heavies to be...heavy.

[Captain Idaho]

Once you experience the joy of fielding 2+ Typhoons in a single list, or witness someone using them, you won't turn back :)

[DerekLee688]

My army is armor heavy, so I run Typhoons for target saturation. I have what I need to make a 4xML devistator squad, but never have tested it, C:SM is the most expensive one to test it with.

 

I can't always promise a building for the devistators to set up in and would rather not spend the 35pts. for a Rhino. Land speeders on the other hand can take advantage of most terrain with their superrior mobility. Typhoons come with max firepower and survivalbility, more bodies add more firepower. Devistators start with nothing and a balance of bodies and weapons has to be made. Dev's have more versitility though, two of any weapon fired from a rhino can be done.

 

In my last game I fielded 2x2 units of typhoons without any threats to them. What they do to mech marines is bad, 180pts of typhoons kill more marines per turn than 205pts of rhino and marines. If 4 kraks and 6 heavy bolter shots thin down a MEQ , I'd love to see what 4 FRAGS and 6 AV:4 shots do to guard, firewarrior, eldar, ork, gaunt, etc.

[Ookami_81]

Well it seems everything has been said already, so...

I began my non-troops specialist army by painting a full 10 men deva squad with one lascan, one missile launchers, two heavy bolter, and it was just because I loved the minis.

 

Then I had to play them, being my only HS choice in my small army.

 

Then I bought ravenwing boxes and assembled typhoons as well as bikes.

 

Now I love my devas on my shelf, they are really nice indeed. On the table, therefore, it's Typhoon Kingdom. They gave me many victories with their outstanding firepower usefull against nearly everything from light to heavy infantry, to transports and MCs. The only thing they cannot blow is a landraider eq, but I have other toys for that... :P

[DarkGuard]

Once you experience the joy of fielding 2+ Typhoons in a single list, or witness someone using them, you won't turn back :D

 

I went back, just didn't like two floating burning wrecks in my list. I might go back and not look back, it depends on how well my rifleman does. But at the moment a maximum of one is cool for me.

 

Just a quick question, do most people try and run their Typhoons separately for maximum target selection, or do they run them as one choice to free up more Fast Attack slots?

[glsn]

Personally, I run 4 Typhoons, broken into two squads, and 2 Multi-Melta/Heavy Flamer Tornados. I find the Tornados not all they're cracked up to be and the Typhoons godly. The trick is to stay out of small arms range and destroy his mobility first.

[Captain Idaho]

Once you experience the joy of fielding 2+ Typhoons in a single list, or witness someone using them, you won't turn back ;)

 

I went back, just didn't like two floating burning wrecks in my list. I might go back and not look back, it depends on how well my rifleman does. But at the moment a maximum of one is cool for me.

 

Just a quick question, do most people try and run their Typhoons separately for maximum target selection, or do they run them as one choice to free up more Fast Attack slots?

 

There's always one! :D :P

 

I see the virtue of 2 floating solo, but 2 in a squadron are good pieces of kit as it plays the odds. We all know statisically that one a certain amount of weapons does a certain amount of damage, but many times we all see a unit under achieve. Throwing 4 Krak missiles at something stacks the odds in your favour a little more.

[DarkGuard]

Once you experience the joy of fielding 2+ Typhoons in a single list, or witness someone using them, you won't turn back ;)

 

I went back, just didn't like two floating burning wrecks in my list. I might go back and not look back, it depends on how well my rifleman does. But at the moment a maximum of one is cool for me.

 

Just a quick question, do most people try and run their Typhoons separately for maximum target selection, or do they run them as one choice to free up more Fast Attack slots?

 

There's always one! ;) ;)

 

I see the virtue of 2 floating solo, but 2 in a squadron are good pieces of kit as it plays the odds. We all know statisically that one a certain amount of weapons does a certain amount of damage, but many times we all see a unit under achieve. Throwing 4 Krak missiles at something stacks the odds in your favour a little more.

 

Well I may go back considering manoeuvrability issue with my Dread and the ability to keep 4 shots plus a TL-lascannon. The one thing I can see going for Typhoons is to be able to more easily run in separate slots. I need be you can combine your fire on that one target, and if you don't have to then you can split fire. I did this for a couple of games, one game they zoomed around the Daemon army together combining fire, the other they split fire on two units of penitent engines. I'd people split them if they have FA slots remaining, and combine if they don't.

[Sternguard sergeant McColl]

I consider the Typhoon squad of two a wild card version of the riflenaught. It's a little less survivable, but way meaner and it frees up an elite slot. They're also very unassuming to the opponent, just two speeders, right? But the looks on their face when they start knocking out transports, battle tanks and monstrous creatures, and then turning their frags and HB's on infantry is great. I find they perform marvelously in a very mech list where the heavy fire isn't concentrated on them, most of the time they spend the game completely unmolested. Can't say the same for my riflenaughts :D

[Bay]

Neither! :lol:. I find that my typhoons blow up to fast to do any real damage and that my Devastators are way to expensive for most of my lists to field.

 

If I had a choice.. I would go with my devastators just because I had better luck with them. IMO I would rather take plain land speeders with MM. If they blow up, not a problem.

[Captain Idaho]

Neither! :lol:. I find that my typhoons blow up to fast to do any real damage and that my Devastators are way to expensive for most of my lists to field.

 

If I had a choice.. I would go with my devastators just because I had better luck with them. IMO I would rather take plain land speeders with MM. If they blow up, not a problem.

 

Consider though that fire directed at Landspeeders is not directed at anything else :tu:

[smurf_m4n]

Personally i don't have any speeders (might try some now though ;) ) but my devastators seem to be able to put out enough killing power to down just about anything. yes they are expensive as i play C:SP but i like the opportunity to throw a few BS5 heavy bolter shots at the enemy infantry while still being able to squash a transport easily and melta a land raider if it gets too close.

 

Most of the time i play against tau, yep you know what that means. So i get used to using very few vehicles, usually a land raider and nothing else, to make his railguns kind of useless, but it seems as if were i to field a couple of speeders they would get popped easily by the lovely S10 magnetic disc thrown at them. Especially in a squadron since even an imobilised result is a wrecked speeder, and with AP1 thats 3+ after an auto penetrating hit.

 

Overall i think it depends what you are facing. If you are up against something like a full mech list then yeah go for the typhoon cos it will make your opponent cry when all his units have to slog across to your tanks. However if you are against something like tau, then don't bother unless you can take out his railguns in turns 1 or 2, otherwise he will rip those speeders to bits.

 

On a slightly off topic suggestion, i don't usually use dev's to go after armour i usually fill a FA slot with attack bike toting multi-meltas, does the job quick and is quite durable against most firepower due to T5 and 3+ sv.