Is a Landraider really neccessary for assault units

[Tanhausen]

I thinks what he means is that with say 2 MM/HF LS (150 points?) tank hunting...

 

If you know that the threat is in a raider, you'll throw them there.

 

If its a rhino, you'll also shoot there, but probably won't need to risk going into the 30 cm reach to get 2D6, since with 1D6 you are probably good to go.

 

Using the same tool, you attain the same objective: removing the transport for the assault unit.

 

On your side, you say "but hey, a rhino is a cheaper transport"...and I have to agree, believe it or not! :P

 

I think both of you guys agree, its just a matter of how you position yourself, attacking or defending :)

 

Another completly different issue is "but for the 200 points I save taking a rhino, I deploy 2 tanks"... to which we can say "instead of going for 2 MM/HF LS, I'll just take 1 MM Attack bike and save 100 points...so I take another 2 bikes and its 3 bikes vs 3 tanks" :)

[Koremu]

We have to assume that the opponent is building his list "blind" - with no knowledge of the list he is facing. Once you start getting into metagame there's no end to the possibilities. It's a plain fact that destroying 3 light and medium tanks takes more units firing than one.

[Captain Idaho]

This is an internet forum discussion. We always make assumptions here.

 

Indeed!

 

You mean, things like other vanilla marines? What do you do when you have to dish it out with things like space wolves, chaos marines, or blood angels, all of whom are just plain harder then us in the assaults/bolter shock range? Tacticals just don't cut it in those situations, I think, unless you completely control the battle.

 

Well those armies out-elite me, but then I either out number them or they have limited firepower to out shoot me (we are often about equal, even those Long Fangs only equal matters). As such I have other stuff to shoot back and equal things for my Tacticals. As an example, a Tyhphoon squadron with can take out a sizeable chunk from a Grey Hunters/Plague Marines squad, or Blood Angels assault squads. Then the reduced models have to take on 10 Tacticals at the same time.

 

See, this confuses me and makes me wonder about the quality of your opponents.

 

In this situation, obviously, the honor guard weren't the primary threat, as your opponent's army was hammered by your shooting, whether the honor guard could've - at best - killed a single enemy unit per turn.

 

Why then, didn't your opponent simply use his dual lash princes to keep moving your honor guard AWAY from his forces (with two lashes, he can statistically move them 12-18" per turn, effectively keeping them out of charge range of anything, and hence mostly useless + he'd be forcing two pinning tests per turn), and focused his obliterators on killing your firepower (your speeders and dreads, in this example) while his superior troops dealt with your tacticals?

 

Wasn't clear, but this was a hypothetical example.

 

I didn't want to make up a complete move by move account on this. Those DPs could be shot dead, or even gladly allow them to Lash my Honour Guard away, knowing that they aren't assaulting my Tactical Marines etc.

 

Either way, even with an extra unit of Obliterators, Chaos Marines cannot go toe to toe at long range with people for long, as they rarely have more than 6, and can only target a single target each turn (usually 2 but sometimes there are 3 units on the board). When return fire starts to reduce their numbers, their firepower becomes alot less substantial.

 

I'm saying here that Chaos Marines out-elite Space Marines, but they don't out-gun us. Their Obliterators are often their only long ranged fire support so cannot be relied upon to take down my Rhinos and Dreads within 2 turns.

 

And in that example, I was being generous with the Honour Guard Rhino being taken out turn 1. Likely this won't happen without at least 1 move from me, as if the opponent is going first the Rhino is behind another vehicle of mine and if not out of sight certainly has a cover save. Even 3 Lascannons will struggle to guarante it's destruction. If I go first I can still put the Rhino behind another vehicle as it moves, and certainly get the cover save. Firing more than a single unit's anti-tank at a Rhino with a 4+ cover save puts things in my favour as that is alot of resources for a single unit. Meanwhile, the big threats from my 2 Dreads (one Venerable), Typhoons and Tacticals are movining into position or shooting the hell out of the opponent.

 

It is all conjecture of course, I am just supplying an example of what I can do to use an assault unit with a Rhino.

 

Consider two lists; both have an identical 1000 point core. One has a Land Raider with Assault unit in it. The other has a Rhino with an Assault unit, a Vindicator and a Dakka Predator. If you kill the 'raider, you achieve both the stranding and the threat kill in one shot. Vs. the unit list, if you kill the Rhino, you get shot by both remaining tanks. It takes 3 times as many shooting units to take down the whole group, which in turn reduces shooting aimed at the rest of the force.

 

That's my point, said better than me!

 

Well, it'll prolly be good, but... Where else in the vanilla dex you can get dual twin-linked lascannons that can both shoot at different targets? On an AV14 platform, no less? The LR is hardly to be underestimated.

 

The LR offers the flexibility of being able to sit back and shoot your little heart out, being able to rush forward and precision-deliver the passengers into assault, and serving as a mobile LOS-denying wall, all while providing one heck of a lot of target saturation and having the ability to absorb tons of damage.

 

You know, I actually agree with the benefits of a Landraider here man. Is it hypocritcal to have a Landraider in my GT list? :)

[Giga]

The Vindicator is usually at the point of the wedge, so if you aren't firing something at the Vindicator, your bikes are likely dead next turn.

That sounds like large overestimation of your vindicator. Attack bikes can be kept in cover. In addition, on average, a vindicator's template will scatter 3", meaning it's likely it won't actually hit more then one or two bikes (out of a 3 bike squadron) and even less if you're unlucky.

 

Against speeders chances are even higher it won't do anything as, being ordnance, it needs to have the center of the pieplate over a vehicle's hull, or it hits with half-strength. A 3" scatter is more then enough to make it hit the speeders with a str5 pieplate. Even with a direct hit, it's still hitting only one speeder with a str10 pieplate, and the rest with str5. Add cover saves and "wound" allocation, and the vindicator looks even worse.

 

The only thing vindicator really has going for it is target saturation (people are real scared of it!), but against better players this isn't so effective.

 

Even so, if I need to kill an opponent's troops and I need to open rhinos before I can get to them, then losing my speeders/attackbikes to a vindicator is fine as long as the said rhinos die. :)

Pretty much. I don't tend to be subtle about my tactics. Identify where the primary Objective is, then roll an Armoured Wedge over it and dare the enemy to stop you. If I need a unit elsewhere on the battlefield, I would prefer to sweep past with a Land Speeder or three than break up the wedge - that's why I call them my Outriders.

You play vanilla? How do you deal with armies with a similar plan, but that are generally harder then you (like wolves, CSM, or the new BA) in the general shock/assault range?

 

EDIT:

Well those armies out-elite me, but then I either out number them or they have limited firepower to out shoot me

How come? Gray hunters are cheaper then tacticals. Long fangs are rather cheap seeing how effective they are. Their assault specialists (wolf lords, TFC, etc.) are also extremely powerful, and they have better psychic protection then we do. In addition, they have access to same units you have (predators, speeders, dreadnoughts, etc.) at either the same price, or cheaper.

 

Blood Angels aren't cheaper, but they have FNP and FC all over their armies, combined with general higher assault power + better tanks (their predators can move 6" and shoot everything) and assaultier troops with dual meltaguns, and, again, almost everything else you have (speeders, dreads, better command squads, etc.).

 

CSM you will probably outnumber, but again, the sheer eliteness of their troops is a big bonus they have.

 

Again, I can't see how you'll be outgunning and outnumbering things like SW and BA, unless they're running eggs-in-basket type armies. :/

Wasn't clear, but this was a hypothetical example.

Ah... Well, in that case, it wasn't such a great hypothetical example. I can't see why anyone would waste obliterator shooting on a honor guard unit when they could just murder the said unit with daemon prince assault.

[Koremu]

The Vindicator is usually at the point of the wedge, so if you aren't firing something at the Vindicator, your bikes are likely dead next turn.

That sounds like large overestimation of your vindicator. Attack bikes can be kept in cover. In addition, on average, a vindicator's template will scatter 3", meaning it's likely it won't actually hit more then one or two bikes (out of a 3 bike squadron) and even less if you're unlucky.

 

Against speeders chances are even higher it won't do anything as, being ordnance, it needs to have the center of the pieplate over a vehicle's hull, or it hits with half-strength. A 3" scatter is more then enough to make it hit the speeders with a str5 pieplate. Even with a direct hit, it's still hitting only one speeder with a str10 pieplate, and the rest with str5. Add cover saves and "wound" allocation, and the vindicator looks even worse.

 

The only thing vindicator really has going for it is target saturation (people are real scared of it!), but against better players this isn't so effective.

 

Even so, if I need to kill an opponent's troops and I need to open rhinos before I can get to them, then losing my speeders/attackbikes to a vindicator is fine as long as the said rhinos die. ;)

 

Well, firstly there's the possibility that I'm running two Vindicators...

 

It's quite hard for Bikes to stay in sufficient cover to actually get a Cover Save, due to how they work. And if they drive into area terrain, they are just asking for trouble.

 

You're also underestimating the power of the Demolisher Cannon vs. AV10 - remember that it is Ordnance, and hence rolls two D6 and picks the highest. That gives it about a 1/3rd chance to penetrate with an off-centre hit, and roughly 55% overall chance of some damage roll. From experience of firing at War Walkers, it really works vs. AV10 :)

 

Pretty much. I don't tend to be subtle about my tactics. Identify where the primary Objective is, then roll an Armoured Wedge over it and dare the enemy to stop you. If I need a unit elsewhere on the battlefield, I would prefer to sweep past with a Land Speeder or three than break up the wedge - that's why I call them my Outriders.

You play vanilla? How do you deal with armies with a similar plan, but that are generally harder then you (like wolves, CSM, or the new BA) in the general shock/assault range?

I haven't played wolves enough to really know, but from observation it seems that while the GH are cheaper and more killy, their army as a whole just doesn't seem to gel. CSM have great but expensive Troops, which is their main advantage in the game, but their support assets are mostly lacking or too costy. BA seem to get a lot of flood advantage, but they have to sacrifice a lot of that flood advantage if they want to deal with the abundance of Mech. Their Preds are what all Preds should be though (or at least we should get PotMS).

 

Also, if you do pop the Transports and spill my Tacticals or my Command Squad around, you still can't get to me because I've got wrecks and a still active Vindicator to hide behind.

 

Mostly though, I rely on messing the enemies battle plan up enough to stop him thinking about long-term advantage and force him to consider short-term immediate threat priority.

[Brother-Chaplain Gaius]

I would say LR is only necessary for assault terms, unless your using them as a counter charge. LR makes them offensive and dangerous

 

use rhinos/rbs and jumpacks for troops

[rat of vengence]

Is that supposed to be an argument? I said nothing anything about the LR "getting bored" or being "kept out of the fight". If an opponent was doing that out of fear, then yeah, that'd be a good thing for you, but why would anyone do that? Also, speeders & attack bikes being kept in cover will makes them easy to take out (they may have cover saves, but they're still AV10, or they get insta-killed by str8 or higher).

You did say it would be hanging back, and there is such a thing as cover and line of sight. I use it to avoid my antitank units dying before they have done their job (where the cover is available of course).

 

How does this happen, do say? The only times I see LRs/monoliths being killed first turn is when someone gets ultra-lucky with their lascannon/orbital bombardment rolls. The fast melta can't even reach the LR turn 1, unless we're talking things like droppoded sternguard or alpha strike LSS with scouts, and then there are ways to prevent these things from happening (the easiest of which is reserving).

You answered your own question. :) There is always a way to counter various tactics, but sometimes the counter suits the opponents plan more.

 

Doesn't fast melta, outflanking, and barrage mitigate this? Not saying it's a bad strategy, but it's not like there's no way around it.

I thought you said fast melta would die too fast, or is that only when it isnt used by you? :P Be consistent please...

 

RoV

[Giga]

Well, firstly there's the possibility that I'm running two Vindicators...

 

It's quite hard for Bikes to stay in sufficient cover to actually get a Cover Save, due to how they work. And if they drive into area terrain, they are just asking for trouble.

 

You're also underestimating the power of the Demolisher Cannon vs. AV10 - remember that it is Ordnance, and hence rolls two D6 and picks the highest. That gives it about a 1/3rd chance to penetrate with an off-centre hit, and roughly 55% overall chance of some damage roll. From experience of firing at War Walkers, it really works vs. AV10

Attack bikes are just fine in area terrain, seeing as they have 2 wounds each. Likewise, being small and being no taller then a regular marine, they can easily get cover saves by staying behind terrain.

 

As for the ordnance 2d6 roll, yeah, you're right, I forgot about it. That does make vindis a bit better. I still prefer facing two vindicators to two combipreds or two rifleman dreadnoughts, though.

I haven't played wolves enough to really know, but from observation it seems that while the GH are cheaper and more killy, their army as a whole just doesn't seem to gel.

If anything, the army gels better then we do. No need to discuss this really, tournament results speak for themselves.

 

@ rat

 

Dude, anyone can get lucky and pop a land raider in cover with a lascannon first turn. For that matter, anyone can get lucky and kill 3 tactical squads by popping their rhinos turn 1, then having the tacticals inside take casualties from exploding rhinos, then failing their morale tests and running off the board.

 

When such things do happen, they're statistical anomalies ie. if you pop a raider with a lascannon turn 1, that doesn't make lascannons shooting at raiders in cover turn 1 a valid raider-killing tactic. You just got helluva lucky.

 

The "argument" about your anti-tank being safe in cover is again pointless. They're AV10/T4 units. They can still be killed by just about any anti-tank weapon in the game and they can still fail their cover saves. They're basically glass cannons, it's the way they were designed (which is why they get turbo boosting and deep strike capabilities, and why they're cheap pointswise).

I thought you said fast melta would die too fast, or is that only when it isnt used by you? tongue.gif Be consistent please...

Multimelta platforms are a lot more survivable when they're shooting from ~24" away. You can't do this against raiders, but AV11 dies just fine to 1d6 melta penetration. :devil:

 

The point is - for whatever reason, you obviously dislike land raiders and possibly assault terminators as well. That's fine. Nobody's forcing you to use them or even play against them. But don't come to threads like this trying to belittle these units by telling us that a raider dies first turn to lascannons. They're valid, legit units that many of us like to have in our armies, and that - in addition - many of us feel are superior to other options in the dex.

[rat of vengence]

@ rat

 

Dude, anyone can get lucky and pop a land raider in cover with a lascannon first turn. For that matter, anyone can get lucky and kill 3 tactical squads by popping their rhinos turn 1, then having the tacticals inside take casualties from exploding rhinos, then failing their morale tests and running off the board.

 

When such things do happen, they're statistical anomalies ie. if you pop a raider with a lascannon turn 1, that doesn't make lascannons shooting at raiders in cover turn 1 a valid raider-killing tactic. You just got helluva lucky.

 

The "argument" about your anti-tank being safe in cover is again pointless. They're AV10/T4 units. They can still be killed by just about any anti-tank weapon in the game and they can still fail their cover saves. They're basically glass cannons, it's the way they were designed (which is why they get turbo boosting and deep strike capabilities, and why they're cheap pointswise).

I thought you said fast melta would die too fast, or is that only when it isnt used by you? tongue.gif Be consistent please...

Multimelta platforms are a lot more survivable when they're shooting from ~24" away. You can't do this against raiders, but AV11 dies just fine to 1d6 melta penetration. :)

 

The point is - for whatever reason, you obviously dislike land raiders and possibly assault terminators as well. That's fine. Nobody's forcing you to use them or even play against them. But don't come to threads like this trying to belittle these units by telling us that a raider dies first turn to lascannons. They're valid, legit units that many of us like to have in our armies, and that - in addition - many of us feel are superior to other options in the dex.

Geez, you lose track of a conversation easily don't you. A summary since you have forgotten;

 

 

Giga: I usually use this to keep my LR a bit in the back (not too far in the back, though, just far enough to make it hard for them to get into melta range, but close enough to serve as a juicy bait),

 

RoV: Cool, I keep my FA in cover and wait for your LR to get bored. 450+ points kept out of the fight is 450+ point advantage to me

 

Giga: Is that supposed to be an argument? I said nothing anything about the LR "getting bored" or being "kept out of the fight". If an opponent was doing that out of fear, then yeah, that'd be a good thing for you, but why would anyone do that? Also, speeders & attack bikes being kept in cover will makes them easy to take out (they may have cover saves, but they're still AV10, or they get insta-killed by str8 or higher).

 

RoV: You did say it would be hanging back, and there is such a thing as cover and line of sight. I use it to avoid my antitank units dying before they have done their job (where the cover is available of course).

 

 

And now you assume (which makes you look stupid) that I "obviously dislike land raiders and possibly assault terminators as well.". ;) Now if you could tell me where I said anything like "trying to belittle these units by telling us that a raider dies first turn to lascannons." at all, perhaps you would have a point. But you don't. :devil: I agree that our fast melta units are quite fragile, but I never claimed they weren't did I now.

 

Landraiders are tough, shooty and can carry our hardest hitting assault units. I never said they weren't. You just seem to have a problem with people suggesting a counter to your tactics however. Once again, you misquote and make innaccurate assumptions, as you usually do when out of your depth.

 

How about, we continue the discussion about tactics, and counter tactics, without the infantile misquoting and assumptions. I am sure we would all be happier for it ;)

 

RoV

[Giga]

Lol dude, read the bolded part again:

 

Giga: I usually use this to keep my LR a bit in the back (not too far in the back, though, just far enough to make it hard for them to get into melta range, but close enough to serve as a juicy bait),

 

And out of this you get the conclusion that I keep my LR out of the fight:

 

RoV: Cool, I keep my FA in cover and wait for your LR to get bored. 450+ points kept out of the fight is 450+ point advantage to me

 

I tell you that no, that's not what I said (again, look at the bolded parts), and you're like "yeah but then if you can keep your LR in cover then I keep my speeders out of LoS/in cover and hence safe". I was pointing out the faults in your strategy (speeders being held back in cover for a turn or two are much likelier to get killed by long-range shooting then a covered land raider moving slowly forward) and you're suddenly drawing a conclusion that I'm claiming my speeders are more resilient then other people's speeders because I suggested they might be used to blow up rhinos at ~24"? Dude...

 

Also;

And now you assume (which makes you look stupid) that I "obviously dislike land raiders and possibly assault terminators as well.". laugh.gif Now if you could tell me where I said anything like "trying to belittle these units by telling us that a raider dies first turn to lascannons." at all, perhaps you would have a point. But you don't. dry.gif I agree that our fast melta units are quite fragile, but I never claimed they weren't did I now.

Read your own posts. Quite often, you're the one throwing comments like "assault terminators in land raider are boring", hating on popular special characters, and - in this particular thread - arguing against land raiders with comments like "its killed turn 1 with a lascannon". That has nothing to do with logic or regular conversation, you're just coming off like someone who hates a particular unit combo and keeps arguing against it purely for the sake of arguing.

Landraiders are tough, shooty and can carry our hardest hitting assault units. I never said they weren't. You just seem to have a problem with people suggesting a counter to your tactics however. Once again, you misquote and make innaccurate assumptions, as you usually do when out of your depth.

You're not suggesting counters to my tactics (unless you honestly believe shooting lascannons at land raiders in cover, or holding one's fast melta in cover just so it can eventually tackle a raider is a valid counter), you're just arguing with me for the sake of arguing. I'm telling you that not everything is as black/white as you think and that no, properly used raiders aren't killed nearly as easily as you seem to believe, and then you say I'm making wrong assumptions and being out of my depth?

 

Now I'm gonna say screw it and take Sting's advice ie. stop replying to your posts, as you obviously got nothing to say and are just throwing "arguments" for the sake of keeping the "argument" going. Thank you & come again.

[rat of vengence]

Read your own posts. Quite often, you're the one throwing comments like "assault terminators in land raider are boring", hating on popular special characters, and - in this particular thread - arguing against land raiders with comments like "its killed turn 1 with a lascannon". That has nothing to do with logic or regular conversation, you're just coming off like someone who hates a particular unit combo and keeps arguing against it purely for the sake of arguing.

Landraiders are tough, shooty and can carry our hardest hitting assault units. I never said they weren't. You just seem to have a problem with people suggesting a counter to your tactics however. Once again, you misquote and make innaccurate assumptions, as you usually do when out of your depth.

You're not suggesting counters to my tactics (unless you honestly believe shooting lascannons at land raiders in cover, or holding one's fast melta in cover just so it can eventually tackle a raider is a valid counter), you're just arguing with me for the sake of arguing. I'm telling you that not everything is as black/white as you think and that no, properly used raiders aren't killed nearly as easily as you seem to believe, and then you say I'm making wrong assumptions and being out of my depth?

 

Now I'm gonna say screw it and take Sting's advice ie. stop replying to your posts, as you obviously got nothing to say and are just throwing "arguments" for the sake of keeping the "argument" going. Thank you & come again.

How about you reply one more time. I asked already, but you seem to have ignored it. Four times now you have claimed I said "its killed turn 1 with a lascannon", I bolded two of them in your last post for you. Go back through this thread, and tell me where I have even used the word 'lascannon', let alone suggested L'raiders are easy to kill. I have said they can be, that there are units to counter them, but never claimed it was easy. I am not just throwing up an argument, I am asking you to stop making crap up. I didn't say what you are claiming I said.

 

Put up or shut up mate. Get it right.

 

RoV

[Captain Idaho]

Wow, way to kill the thread...

[Warprat]

Time for something different... I reject your reality and substitute my own!

 

 

I like to use ten Tactical Terminators without any transport. Lack of transport does hurt some, and they have to be placed more centrally on defense. But, the squad has the range and mobility to shoot every turn. It can assault weaker armies well, and counter assault uber close combat units by softening up some of the enemy before hand. It has 10 men to (most often) easily absorb the faster striking power weapons, and then strike back with power fists. It does not always win, but it usually delays and weakens the enemy enough to do the job.

 

I like the cyclones and many times pair this unit up with a Librarian w/avenger and null zone (sometimes joining a seperate supporting tactical combat squad.) Null zone is useful when dealing with strom shields and whatnot.

 

Warprat ;)

[rat of vengence]

Well, that worked :angry:

 

@Warprat, I am going to have to try that, I like the idea of a unit that the enemy WILL have to deal with, that can shrug off most fire ans deal it out as it advances. I just get scared by the 400+ points it takes...

 

RoV

[Giga]

I like to use ten Tactical Terminators without any transport. Lack of transport does hurt some, and they have to be placed more centrally on defense. But, the squad has the range and mobility to shoot every turn. It can assault weaker armies well, and counter assault uber close combat units by softening up some of the enemy before hand. It has 10 men to (most often) easily absorb the faster striking power weapons, and then strike back with power fists. It does not always win, but it usually delays and weakens the enemy enough to do the job.

Do you keep them in one big unit or do you combat squad them?

 

I find tactical terminators die real fast nowadays, what with all these AP1 (massed melta), AP2 (lascannon vendettas, etc.) and sheer weight of fire/attacks (from just about any 5th ed codex). If they were cheaper they might be better, but as it is they just aren't survivable enough to justify their cost.

 

I'd say you could do the same thing with 10 th/ss terminators, and they'd draw (and absorb) a lot more shooting. Add shrike into the equation and things are getting really nifty. :wallbash:

[Grey Mage]

I like to use ten Tactical Terminators without any transport. Lack of transport does hurt some, and they have to be placed more centrally on defense. But, the squad has the range and mobility to shoot every turn. It can assault weaker armies well, and counter assault uber close combat units by softening up some of the enemy before hand. It has 10 men to (most often) easily absorb the faster striking power weapons, and then strike back with power fists. It does not always win, but it usually delays and weakens the enemy enough to do the job.

Do you keep them in one big unit or do you combat squad them?

 

I find tactical terminators die real fast nowadays, what with all these AP1 (massed melta), AP2 (lascannon vendettas, etc.) and sheer weight of fire/attacks (from just about any 5th ed codex). If they were cheaper they might be better, but as it is they just aren't survivable enough to justify their cost.

 

I'd say you could do the same thing with 10 th/ss terminators, and they'd draw (and absorb) a lot more shooting. Add shrike into the equation and things are getting really nifty. :(

That makes no sense.

 

Weight of fire doesnt care one iota if you have a 3++ or a 5++, as long as your 2+ is the same.

[spartan249]

I guess Giga was trying to say that TH/SS termies would absorb more AP1 and AP2 weapons fire.

 

In any case, I concur with just about everyone on this subject: Land Raiders are not essential to assault units. It's a really good idea to have something in the land raider, but they can be just fine by themselves. Assault Units can do just fine with Rhinos (other than Termies, of course). Land Raiders are usually a good idea because they are tactically flexible and can afford to be a little slower on the advance. Rhinos are usually stuck on the one-lane highway to hell. So, while Assault Units can do just fine with Rhinos, they can usually do better in a Land Raider. Do you pay for that ability? Yeah. Nothing's free in 40k. In my opinion, the 200 points extra I spend on the raider is totally worth it.

[Giga]

That makes no sense.

 

Weight of fire doesnt care one iota if you have a 3++ or a 5++, as long as your 2+ is the same.

It makes perfect sense.

 

When the only way to reliably kill something is with weight of fire, you need to focus a lot more resources to deal with it ie. you need more guns shooting at the said terminators simply because the guns that would've slaughtered 5++ termies are not as effective against 3++ ones. You can kill 5++ dudes with pretty much any gun handy. 3++ dudes, on the other hand, are a lot more resilient against everything short of weight of fire.

 

In addition, once you realize you need weight of fire to take a certain unit down, you start running into logistical problems. Getting 20-30 dudes into a position to rapid fire a single unit can be pretty hard due to cramped conditions on the table; impassable terrain, other units blocking the way, range and line of sight issues, limited mobility (your transports might be unable to move, you may have crappy difficult terrain rolls, etc.).

 

Anyway, an example: let's say you got two mechanized tactical squads and a 4 plasmagun command squad, and there's a unit of 5 termies, out of cover, you want to kill.

 

Against 5++ termies, the 4 plasmaguns rapid-firing get you 5-6 hits, and that translates into 5-6 wounds. After 5++ saves, that means ~4 dead termies. The tactical squad rapid firing (let's say they got only bolters, for simplicity's sake) will get 20 shots, meaning 14-15 hits and 7-8 wounds, meaning that statistically they kill 1-2 termies.

 

Against th/ss termies, the 4 plasmaguns will only kill 1-2 termies. If the tac squad then rapid fires it, you kill another 1-2 termies, meaning the termie unit is still there, still a big thread. Hence, you need the SECOND tac squad to come in and rapid fire to make sure those termies die. This is when you run into logistical problems, as you need to plan ahead to do this, and fitting 25 marines into a 12" range of a unit of 5 terminators can be a massive problem if your opponent knows what he's doing.

 

In reality it's even harder, because there are often 6-8 th/ss termies going around, or they might have a hard IC like lysander keeping them company, requiring you to devote even more resources to take them out and then logistical problems become even greater as fitting that much dakka in a 12" bubble around the said unit becomes quite hard in larger games (1750+).

 

So, in effect, th/ss termies require a lot more shooting to take down simply because you can't just throw anything at them and get results. You need to plan in advance and be ready to devote a huge part of your army to kill them (or pray to dice gods your opponent fails lotsa 3++ saves), while with 5++ termies you can be like "oh, two terminators left, let's kill them with my two mm attack bikes who are 20" away".

[spartan249]

While your argument is certainly valid when talking about Marines, it's not as persuasive when you talk about Eldar or Tyranids or any other army that uses weight of dice to drown opponents.

 

For Eldar, it's not particularly difficult to take down normal terminators with Scatter Lasers, Dire Avengers or Warp Spiders, especially with farseer support. With these units, the threat range increases by quite a bit, making tactical positioning not as important. TH/SS termies get no help here because the eldar player does not have to alter his/her plan at all to get the same results.

 

The same can somewhat be applied to Tyranids, but mostly because Tyranids now have anti-SS options in their dex.

 

This is why I think of marine "weight of fire" as a joke. Marines don't have weight of fire, they have precision fire that is not very precise. Eldar, IG, Tau, and even Tyranids have weight of fire. Hence, this increased ability to take short range fire becomes a metagame consideration rather than a true tactical consideration.

[Giga]

Well, yeah, those long-range weight of fire weapons sure can screw termies of any kind up. That's why land raiders and fast melta exist - so we can have reliable platforms that can go in and deliver those terminators into assault while giving the opponent as little chance to shoot us beforehand as possible. :)

 

Out of my own experience, unless the enemy is lucky and gets my LR immobilized/destroyed early in the game (this usually happens in turn 3-4, but by then it's usually irrelevant) my termies will get into the other part of the table and then, depending on situation, luck, etc. they may or may not get to be torrent-of-fired from long range.

[rat of vengence]

Anyway, an example: let's say you got two mechanized tactical squads and a 4 plasmagun command squad, and there's a unit of 5 termies, out of cover, you want to kill.

How many points is that versus only 220 points of terminators?

 

So, in effect, th/ss termies require a lot more shooting to take down simply because you can't just throw anything at them and get results. You need to plan in advance and be ready to devote a huge part of your army to kill them (or pray to dice gods your opponent fails lotsa 3++ saves), while with 5++ termies you can be like "oh, two terminators left, let's kill them with my two mm attack bikes who are 20" away".

True. But the 3++ termies can do absolutely nothing until they get into assault range.

 

RoV

[Race Bannon]

What the ... <_<

 

Why be afraid of spending 400+ on a single Terminator unit? You are spending 400+ points on a Land Raider with it's occupants.

 

The only issue I have with the mega-unit is the space it takes on a board. The footprint of this unit is HUGE in relation to the Land Raider. But I can see the advantages: cover use will be easier for one. Can tackle infantry better than a LR for another.

 

Captain Idaho: Maybe you have your answer ... no, it's not necessary. But I think Koremu has touched on a big part of the discussion (backed up by Giga in my analysis): that the reason LR use is so common is that the list-building phase is done without knowing the opponent, thus the LR is a superior choice to other options. Therefore it is an "average" choice. In a game where the reduction of variables equates to security and safety leading toward victory, the Land Raider simply is the guarantee some (maybe most) players look for, all other variables to the side.

 

Does that mean the LR is inherently better? In my opinion, no, because including all other variables (opponent, attacking units, terrain, dice rolls) doesn't improve it's value. What does improve it's value is to a large degree the opponent. I perceive players rarely choose a Land Raider for it's own sake; they are choosing it because of the opponent - especially if that is unknown. Some players, myself included, intentionally do not use the Land Raider for a variety of reasons that may include tactics, strategy, or plain stubbornness :P

 

Ultimately, I think Giga's post (#46) above speaks a simple truth: that is typically what happens when a Land Raider is used. :D

[Captain Idaho]

But I think Koremu has touched on a big part of the discussion (backed up by Giga in my analysis): that the reason LR use is so common is that the list-building phase is done without knowing the opponent, thus the LR is a superior choice to other options. Therefore it is an "average" choice. In a game where the reduction of variables equates to security and safety leading toward victory, the Land Raider simply is the guarantee some (maybe most) players look for, all other variables to the side.

 

Well said. Wargaming does end up as a fine art in trying to reduce the variables as much as possible.

 

Does this create another problem though? This could be better suited to another new discussion (or the competetive list thread), but reducing the variables essentially means you are reducing your chances of catching an opponent out in the list building.

 

When you think about it, if everyone reduces the variables in their armylist, then the game essentially boils down to paper-rock-scissors. I think we need to review this more in depth!

 

Ultimately I don't believe that a Landraider is essential for assault units, if you play the game to the variables and not in absolutes.

[Tanhausen]

As usual, there is no 100% answer... because there is no 100% question.

 

What is an assault unit? One that is geared to Close combat I understand would be a definition almost everybody would accept. So terminators, assault marines, veterans even tacticals with a tooled up sarge and a couple flamers.

 

Now that we have established what an assault unit is (yes, being ironic) we can discuss the usefullness of an AV14 box over... an AV11? AV12? (thinking stormraven)... AV0?

 

I've played quite a few games with a full Deathwing (36 terminators, no LR) and went the brave/fool way: DS and hold the line 'till you can get to CC. It was more fun when you could engage another unit after consolidation... but not anymore ;)

 

That said, I really don't see how you can get to a conclusion if the starting idea is flawed.

 

My humble opinion, of course!

[Captain Idaho]

Well I don't quite understand why you think a the starting idea in this thread is flawed? Surely the term assault unit is universal, in that it is a unit designed for assault, regardless of what unit it is?