Is a Landraider really neccessary for assault units

[Captain Idaho]

You're throwing waaaaaaay too much theoryhammer, man. Mowglie gave you all the good arguments, and the only valid argument you gave him is the capability of the rhino to, in some situations, claim a 3+ cover save by driving behind a vindicator (and even that isn't too reliable, as any semi-mobile opponent can move to get better line of sight and chances are he's gonna see at least a tiny part of your front hull

 

40K is not just a wargame on a featureless landscape, where units line up and have at it. If you consider the Landraider and Assault Terminators compared to power armoured assault units in a Rhino, all in a vaccuum, then sure the Landraider wins hands down. This provides skewed results of course, as there are many other factors to consider which affect a unit's worth on the table.

 

So you are mistaken. I have supplied plentiful balanced arguments and no theoryhammer:

 

I have pointed out that having more than a single Rhino and armoured threats on the table results in target saturation, which combined with the smaller size of the Rhino enables you to gain a cover save more regularly, thus creating a situation where taking down the assault unit’s transport is not easy enough to justify the resources spent doing so.

 

This is exaggerated with the fact an opponent’s target priority will not necessarily mean the assault unit is even a target for the 1st couple of turns, baring in mind the opponent should be more afraid of my Dreadnoughts and Landspeeders that are eliminating their own transports and the assault unit can’t hurt opposing infantry until that has happened. I haven't been beaten by a player yet who has targeted my Honour Guard over the rest of my army, with my losses coming from someone who keeps their head and chooses their target selection carefully.

 

I pointed out that there are plentiful units in each Codex that can take down a Landraider at range, which is a fact not theory.

 

I also pointed out that opponents need to take or at least contest objectives and that means, if I have targeted the faster moving elements in their army as a priority, they have to be to move towards me before turn 4.

 

It is apparent also that there is an increased cost involved with using a Landraider. I have pointed this out and it is fact. That is not theoryhammer.

 

I don’t think you can dismiss my opinion on the basis it is theoryhammer in favour of things like this:

 

In any situation where the Land Raider is going to die, the Rhino is going to die more easily (3.5x more easily in the situation I called out. More in some situations, less in others). If your opponent has the ability to kill a land raider at range, your opponent has the ability to kill a rhino at range with more than enough firepower left over to kill whatever you bought for the 115 points of change

 

Which in itself is pure theory. It says that as the Rhino is less armoured than a Landraider, the theory is it will die more easily, but like I pointed out this doesn’t take into account a myriad of variables that mean a 35pts transport are not completely vulnerable.

 

Offering multiple targets isn't necessarily better for overall survivability then having one hard target. A single hard target can be surrounded and kept safe, as the opponent needs to maneuver to get his melta into melta range of a single LR. A bunch of light targets spread out (and they WILL be spread out - certainly more then a single supported LR) and are easier to take down by long-range shooting and single units.

 

Of course it isn’t always necessarily better, but on the whole and in most situations it is an important factor in whether a Landraider is expensive for what it does. It requires a minimum of 3 anti-tank weapons to take out 3 Rhinos, yet a single anti-tank weapon to take down a Landraider.

 

By taking a Landraider, you have made the decision for the opponent, as he needs to dedicate his melta weapons at your Landraider and use the other weapons for your lighter vehicles. There is no doubt in his mind what he needs to do.

 

On the other hand the opponent would have to make a decision on what he has to target with his resources, and there is no guarantee he can cause the damage with a single shot in any one turn.

 

In an example; fast multimeltas need to get within 12" of a LR to take it down. Their movement can be blocked and they can be shot from far away. Pretty much every other weapon short of massed/lucky lascannon fire can barely scratch a LR. This means the enemy has to rely on suicide units in hopes that LR wouldn't pass it's cover saves or that they wouldn't be shot down as they try to close in.

 

You say this and then say the following which completely contradicts your point on the Landraider’s invulnerability:

 

Also, I don't know why your battleplan would be too unbalanced by a LR being destroyed. My LR dies in most battles, and I still win most of the time. It's fine for as long as the LR has done it's job (absorbed lots of shooting and delivered the termies into assault *and* possibly killed something with its guns, but that last is situational). In fact, opponents wasting shooting on my LR after it has delivered the terminators (usually turn 2 or 3) is always a good thing.

 

So you lose your Landraider in my battles yet it is invulnerable?

 

Anyway, if you are happy to lose your Landraider than that’s up to you, but I doubt a Terminator squad will eat through an army on it’s own, especially as the enemy is likely hiding in transports (nullifying their attack somewhat), so I don’t really see where you can be happy to lose a Landraider just to get the Terminator squad up the table, it's a big points investment.

 

A rhino can be reliably taken down by these same multimeltas from 24" away. It can also be murdered by just about any anti-tank shooting. Even if does have it's 3+ cover save, it's still far easier to kill at range. There's a lot less need for the enemy to maneuver, get into position, get into melta range, get clear lines of sight etc. with a rhino, then there is with a land raider. If you know how to do this, you can get a huge advantage.

 

I dispute the word reliable at the begining of that paragraph. I think you are giving too much credit to anti-tank firepower. A multi-melta cannot reliably take down a Rhino with a cover save. It needs to hit, roll a 4+ to penetrate, cover saves need to be failed and then you need to roll a 3+ on the damage table. Remember the Rhino only has to survive for 2 turns for the squad inside to be in position to assault on the 3rd. Rhinos don’t die as easy as you seem to believe, that is why Mech army lists are so well thought of after all.

 

Hell, last year’s GT I only had 2 Rhinos and a Razorback and a lot less armour than I take now, and I finished every game apart from one with 2 on the table at the end.

 

I'm a bit late to the party. Have we assumed that we're only using 1 assault squad in our entire army? Also, are we talking strictly vanilla marines.

 

Late but entirely welcome. It's friendly discussion, where (I like to think) we all learn something.

 

Yes we are mainly talking about having a single Assault unit in the list, though not exclusively. We are leaning towards Space Marines, mainly because Blood Angels have super fast Rhinos, Chaos Marines and Space Wolves have greater saturation of assault capable units and everyone seems to agree that they most certainly do get away without a Landraider.

 

I ask because, as a Chaos player, I feel very uncomfortable with the first assumption. A single assault squad is not nearly enough at 1500+ pts. It will either get shot to pieces by massed firepower or get dogpiled by multiple enemy units.

 

I kind of agree with you, but not quite. To prevent the assault unit being shot to death before doing a thing, you need to have other threats on the table that can threaten the opponents plans. These other units don't have to be assault based, like a solid couple of Tactical squads or Sternguard in transports on objectives or about to pound away at the opponents own units, Dreadnoughts provide reasonable counter charge capacity and decent firepower and are able to hold up advances or contest objectives by being unkillable by opposing units in combat, Typhoons lay down withering amounts of fire etc.

 

An army with stuff like this will have a threat factor to opponents that can be hard to ignore, therefore the assault unit won't always be be singled out so easily.

[Giga]

40K is not just a wargame on a featureless landscape, where units line up and have at it. If you consider the Landraider and Assault Terminators compared to power armoured assault units in a Rhino, all in a vaccuum, then sure the Landraider wins hands down. This provides skewed results of course, as there are many other factors to consider which affect a unit's worth on the table.

That's all nice and fine, but that doesn't really help us much in an internet conversation like this, wouldn't you agree?

 

If you're gonna start throwing arguments of the "but my rhino is going to be supported by this this and this etc." then we may as well just stop making threads about units and start making threads where we theoryhammer how battles between lists would go.

 

As for you giving us the possibility of land raiders dying to single weapons as facts, and then saying that the simple statistical fact that a rhino will die faster then a land raider to just about anything is theory... Well, that's more of the "rhino is survivable, land raider is easily killed" drivel. Sorry, it don't work that way and it has already been explained in this thread.

Of course it isn’t always necessarily better, but on the whole and in most situations it is an important factor in whether a Landraider is expensive for what it does. It requires a minimum of 3 anti-tank weapons to take out 3 Rhinos, yet a single anti-tank weapon to take down a Landraider.

Dude, we're not talking about 3 rhinos or 3 vindicators or 2 dreadnoughts. We're discussing assault units and whether they need a land raider or not. What we're telling you here is that, when riding in a rhino, your expensive assault unit is much more likely to end up walking/dying before they get to fulfill their purpose, while at the same time the points saving you gain from not taking a land raider (115 pts in the current example) doesn't net you much additional firepower/target saturation.

 

And don't start again with the "this is not a vacuum". As I said already, if you insist on not discussing particular units and trying to make us understand the bigger picture of your list, then you're better off providing us your lists and telling us what does what and why those honor guard in rhino work better in your list. As it is, you're just - as mowglie put it - arguing in circles.

 

 

 

 

Also, nobody ever said Land Raiders are invulnerable. We're talking about how they work with the assault units they transport. The fact of the matter is that, once you get the said assault unit where you want it, their transport (a land raider or a rhino, it doesn't matter) is very likely to be vulnerable to enemy assault and/or shooting. This comes down to the mini-games difference between turns 1-3 and turns 3-7. In short; if your assault unit is damaged/not-killing-stuff-in-assault by turn 3, it's likely something has gone wrong. By turn 3, you either should've engaged the enemy (if you want to get close to him) or the enemy should've gotten within counter-assault range (if they want to get into assault with you). Land Raider makes it a lot easier for your assault unit to safely reach this turn 2-3 assault. AND it's got great guns to help you out with.

 

Either way, it's likely your assault unit is going to be close-and-personal with the enemy and that means their transport is gonna be endangered, too. But guess what? It doesn't matter. The transport has fulfilled its purpose. If it survives past this, that's great. If it doesn't, in nine times out of 10 that's fine, it has fulfilled its purpose.

 

There are many people who don't understand this, though. I've had a lot of opponents shooting tons of firepower into my LR long after it has delivered the terminators.

[Captain Idaho]

That's all nice and fine, but that doesn't really help us much in an internet conversation like this, wouldn't you agree?

 

So basically we can't discuss anything because we aren't allowed to include any other factors that may influence the usage and performance of a unit/vehicle/whatever, only a direct comparison of 2 vehicles and how they fair when standing there taking shots from 24" away?

 

The whole point of the Tactica Astartes forum is to discuss theory, essentially. What you propose regarding the Landraider is theory until proven, just as much as what I have said. Why is what I say theory and to be discarded and your opinion fact?

 

And of course it is helpful in a tactical discussion of 40K! The question; "Is a Landraider really neccessary for assault units" and part of the reason I believe it is not neccessary is because of the variables.

 

Are there no variables in your games of 40K to consider? Do you use terrain? Does your opponent line up in perfect symetry to your own army? Is every army you face built the same way?

 

The things I have brought up are based upon my own experience, as well as watching other people play. It is not baseless theory.

 

Seems to me that you can't accept that perhaps a Rhino isn't as aweful at transporting an assault unit as you have committed yourself to, so you are trying to discredit my arguments instead. Sorry if that offends you, but it's the way your coming across right now.

[Aidoneus]

I ask because, as a Chaos player, I feel very uncomfortable with the first assumption. A single assault squad is not nearly enough at 1500+ pts. It will either get shot to pieces by massed firepower or get dogpiled by multiple enemy units.

 

I kind of agree with you, but not quite. To prevent the assault unit being shot to death before doing a thing, you need to have other threats on the table that can threaten the opponents plans. These other units don't have to be assault based, like a solid couple of Tactical squads or Sternguard in transports on objectives or about to pound away at the opponents own units, Dreadnoughts provide reasonable counter charge capacity and decent firepower and are able to hold up advances or contest objectives by being unkillable by opposing units in combat, Typhoons lay down withering amounts of fire etc.

 

An army with stuff like this will have a threat factor to opponents that can be hard to ignore, therefore the assault unit won't always be be singled out so easily.

Target saturation helps, but not as much as another assault unit. Here's the thing; assault units cripple the enemy's ability to operate far more than anything else possibly can. This is because an assault unit will lock his unit(s) in close combat, rendering them unable to move or shoot. Nothing else in the game can do that (except maybe pinning weapons, but FAR less reliably).

 

What this means is that an entrenched shooty player will prioritize killing the assault unit well above killing anything else, because that's the only way he'll be allowed to continue shooting. So now target saturation only works if you're talking about presenting multiple assault units for him to shoot; other units don't do the job. And then we're back to my original point.

 

On the other hand, if you're talking about an army capable of swallowing a single assault unit (like Chaos, 'Nids, Orks, Blood Angels, or Space Puppies), target saturation doesn't really even come into play. Frankly, if you were driving towards my 'Nids with a single assault unit, I wouldn't bother shooting it one bit! I'd grin and let you come, knowing full well you'd get the better of one squad when you charged, but then 3-4 of my units would consume you the following turn. Meanwhile, I'd spend my time shooting other things, which would no longer benefit from your Land Raider soaking fire for them. If, however, you were running 2+ assault units my way, I'd be more concerned. They could deal me more of a crippling blow the turn they charged, and would last longer when I counter-assaulted. So again, I'd have to play very differently.

 

So I guess I still don't have faith in a lone assault unit, no matter what it's mounted in. Now, don't get me wrong, I have nothing against list with multiple Raiders. I also play Grey Knights, and own 2 Raiders and a Crusader, all of which see tabletop use together in 1750+ games. But like I said, at that point you have to build your entire strategy around the Raiders and their contents; they cease to be merely one aspect of a balanced list. And anyway, it just means that Raiders have their place in some builds, not that they are necessary for every single assault squad.

[Captain Idaho]

Maybe you are right, I mean I would like more Assault units in my army, but I don't mind the solo assault unit being singled out if the rest of my army survives. I use it as a counter charge unit against assault heavy armies and against armies that aren't so hot in assaults they act as a black hole for weapons fire, allowing my Tacticals to get close against infantry they outclass anyway.

[Corby]

Maybe you are right, I mean I would like more Assault units in my army, but I don't mind the solo assault unit being singled out if the rest of my army survives. I use it as a counter charge unit against assault heavy armies and against armies that aren't so hot in assaults they act as a black hole for weapons fire, allowing my Tacticals to get close against infantry they outclass anyway.

 

I'm the same. I have a unit of assault Terminators in the standard land raider that I use for charging/counter charging walkers , monstrous creatures, and other close combat specialists.

[Mysticaria]

While I have no 'facts' to bring to the table, I can make a comment about my feelings during games of 40k. I am much more afraid of an opponent who brings an assault unit in a landraider then I am of one whose unit(s) are in rhino(s). Personally, I'd rather shoot at rhino's all day long, even with a 3+ cover save. The simple fact that missile spam takes out rhinos but doesn't hurt landraiders is key. To take out a landraider requires specific weaponry, which tends to be limited in the all comer lists in this area. With nids (MCs, intakill warriors), orks (trukks, biker nobs), and rhino's being big around here the missile spam is very prevalent.... so metagame dictates landraider for asault unit transport.

 

-Myst

[Koremu]

Of course it isn’t always necessarily better, but on the whole and in most situations it is an important factor in whether a Landraider is expensive for what it does. It requires a minimum of 3 anti-tank weapons to take out 3 Rhinos, yet a single anti-tank weapon to take down a Landraider.

Dude, we're not talking about 3 rhinos or 3 vindicators or 2 dreadnoughts. We're discussing assault units and whether they need a land raider or not. What we're telling you here is that, when riding in a rhino, your expensive assault unit is much more likely to end up walking/dying before they get to fulfill their purpose, while at the same time the points saving you gain from not taking a land raider (115 pts in the current example) doesn't net you much additional firepower/target saturation.

Well in that case there's no argument - the Land Raider is the best Assault Vehicle you can take.

 

Now that you've written all the possible options out of the debate we can all just acknomledge that and move on.

 

You yourself have just said that the Land Raider is more of a threat on its own than many Unit+Transport options. That means it is a firepower magnet compared to an Assault Unit in a Rhino. Put other units on the table and the transport is less of a priority, and garners less firepower.

 

That's not theory, that's hard practical fact.

[mowglie]

Whoah! Lots of posts!

 

I'll start at the top:-

 

I'm a bit late to the party. Have we assumed that we're only using 1 assault squad in our entire army? Also, are we talking strictly vanilla marines.

 

Yes, that's the assumption I've been making. I think I mentioned it (though it probably got lost in a wall of text!) but if you have many assault units, the rhino hull does just fine for you. As you say, your opponent can't stop them all.

 

Idaho: You're still contradicting yourself. You're saying "My opponent can kill a LR easily" yet "My opponent can't kill my Rhino". Don't you see the problem there? You say it's about being a firepower magnet, but your opponent doesn't somehow end up with less total firepower just because your army is less threatening. He might choose to allocate more of it to the rest of your army, but assuming he does so correctly that is not a good thing for you. I'm saying that if you replace a LR with a Rhino is can definitely allocate more firepower to the rest of your army.

 

You have 435 points in an AV11 box.

 

I have 450 points in an AV14 box.

 

In what situations can you replace the latter with the former without losing survivability? In what situations do you gain survivability? In what situations do you lose survivability? Do the 15 points make up for the difference? Even assuming I make the mistake of putting the Librarian in the LR (or am forced to due to the rest of my list), do the 115 points make up for the difference?

 

You haven't addressed that. All you've done is call out a single scenario (3+ saves) where the difference isn't quite as pronounced.

 

Let's go through what we know - considering survivability only:-

 

Rhino > LR

Gauss Weapons against a 3+ save

Terrain piece large enough to completely hide a Rhino but not large enough to hide a LR, and your opponent can't move to get LoS with anything S5+.

 

Rhino = LR

Gauss Weapons against 4+ save, or no save

 

LR > Rhino

Melta weapons at 1/2 range vs any save.

 

LR >> Rhino

Lascannon, Lance, and similar high-S single-shot antitank vs any save.

 

LR >>>> Rhino

Any normal S8 vs any save

Assault Cannon vs any save

 

LR completely immune

Anything less than S8.

 

In addition, an LR is a threat all on its own - even if immobilised.

 

What's the source of your disagreement? Do you dispute my reasoning in coming up with the above? Do you claim that the situations where the Rhino is better occur more often than those where the LR is better? Do you claim that 15 points makes up for the difference? Or do you claim that 115 points makes up for the difference? Which one, so we can address it without talking in circles?

 

Addressing another of your points: If your opponent is "more scared" of other things in your list, why don't you take more of those instead and leave the assault unit at home?

 

Target saturation helps, but not as much as another assault unit...

 

What this means is that an entrenched shooty player will prioritize killing the assault unit well above killing anything else, because that's the only way he'll be allowed to continue shooting. So now target saturation only works if you're talking about presenting multiple assault units for him to shoot; other units don't do the job...

 

I agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, the vanilla codex can't really play an assault-based army. As you say, unless you prevent your opponent from singling out your assault unit, then it cannot do its job. My opinion is and has always been that vanilla mech is better off not taking an assault threat. If you do play an assault threat, then you must prevent your opponent from singling it out - hence the LR.

 

You yourself have just said that the Land Raider is more of a threat on its own than many Unit+Transport options. That means it is a firepower magnet compared to an Assault Unit in a Rhino. Put other units on the table and the transport is less of a priority, and garners less firepower.

 

Not quite sure what you're getting at here. It only gets less firepower directed at it if something else on the table is a bigger threat. If something else on the table is always a bigger threat, wouldn't you be better off dropping the assault unit and taking more of other things instead? Did you see the three lists I compared earlier?

 

On another note, we should discuss armoured wedge tactics with Rhinos in a separate thread. I think it needs discussed in detail (there are a number of pitfalls that need to be avoided and we should address them), but since it's relevant to all mech (not just mech with a single assault unit) I think we should discuss it elsewhere.

 

*hugs*

[Giga]

So basically we can't discuss anything because we aren't allowed to include any other factors that may influence the usage and performance of a unit/vehicle/whatever, only a direct comparison of 2 vehicles and how they fair when standing there taking shots from 24" away?

The problem with the way you discuss things is that you throw in variables & theoretical situations that don't really help an internet discussion. I told you that already in the past post, and I said that if you want to talk about your assault unit with rhino and you want to mention how it works with other units in your list, then show us your list, explain how and/or why the rhino unit works in your list better then an equivalent LR+termies unit would, and maybe then we can have a meaningful discussion.

 

Again, I could do the exact same thing as you do. You tell me my LR will be blown by fast melta, I'll tell you I'm gonna use my rifleman dreadnoughts and my str8 or higher weapons to slaughter those speeders and attack bikes long before they get anywhere near my LR. This sort of theoryhammering doesn't help the discussion, and doesn't lead anywhere. If I wanted to get into the particulars of it, I'd just show you a list and tell you what's supposed to do what, and then we can pick it apart. This thread isn't about that, this thread is intended to look at one particular facet of armybuilding.

 

As it is, this discussion is no longer going anywhere. You're just throwing variables and talking about multiple threats etc. Mowglie already refuted that by explaining that no, you don't get "many points to spend around" by not taking a LR. You get 15-115 pts, depending on whether you take a librarian or not. Mowglie even gave you a couple example lists showing that no, you aren't achieving a noticeably greater target saturation.

 

Yet you still keep talking about all the other units in your army, target saturation, etc. while ignoring the central question: why would the assault unit be better off with a rhino - in your particular army - then it would be with a land raider? We've already concluded that points aren't a problem (it's a 15 pts difference, as not taking a libby in all-comers lists is playing at a disadvantage, in my opinion), so I want to know why you insist on the rhino over a LR? The 3+ save is nice when you can get it, but it's hardly something that can make up for the fact you're vulnerable to every anti-tank weapon in the game.

That means it is a firepower magnet compared to an Assault Unit in a Rhino. Put other units on the table and the transport is less of a priority, and garners less firepower.

The reason people shoot land raiders is because they're scared of what's being transported in the land raider. The assault specialist unit can and will wipe out entire units or vehicles in single turns of assault. The only LR that can dish out that sort of damage is the redeemer. Players who keep shooting at a LR even after the assault terminators are already slaughtering their way through their army are usually bad players.

[Koremu]

That means it is a firepower magnet compared to an Assault Unit in a Rhino. Put other units on the table and the transport is less of a priority, and garners less firepower.

The reason people shoot land raiders is because they're scared of what's being transported in the land raider. The assault specialist unit can and will wipe out entire units or vehicles in single turns of assault. The only LR that can dish out that sort of damage is the redeemer. Players who keep shooting at a LR even after the assault terminators are already slaughtering their way through their army are usually bad players.

By the point either unit is disembarked the question is irrelevant.

 

The point is as follows;

 

A Land Raider is very expensive, thereby precluding the use of other choices. A Land Raider is very threatening (moreso than a Rhino with equivalent contents).

 

This means that the following are true;

 

There is more available firepower to direct at the Land Raider, there are fewer eligible targets for that Firepower to be directed at, and there are fewer equivalent threats among the army.

 

Add to this the facts that the Rhino takes only 66% of the post-penetration damage that the Land Raider does (in an idealised situation - really the Rhino takes less than that), and that a big CC unit in a Land Raider is (inevitably) a unit which is central to your chances of winning the game, whereas the unit in a Rhino doesn't have to be...

 

All experience thus far has shown me that Land Raiders with CC units go down quicker than does the Razorback with Captain and Command Squad.

 

Also, talking about Terminators in this thread is irrelevant. Terminators cannot be carried in a Rhino, therefore there is no debate to be had. If you are using Assault Terminators, you have to take a Land Raider (more or less, anyway), and they have to be the kingpin unit of your plan.

[Captain Idaho]

@ Giga:

 

It’s because of the variables that using a Rhino as a transport for an assault unit is viable. You are right, if you take the variables away then yes you win this discussion, but the whole point of thread is to highlight that those variables to people. How can you have a viable tactical discussion if you don't talk about the variables that are likely to affect the usage of the units and tactics you are proposing?

 

So when you prepare for a game of 40K, creating a list and developing a strategy, you don't take into account any of the variables that could happen?

 

Of course not! Your whole position on a Landraider is based upon variables, but a different set of variables to that of a Rhino.

 

Yet you still keep talking about all the other units in your army, target saturation, etc. while ignoring the central question: why would the assault unit be better off with a rhino - in your particular army - then it would be with a land raider? We've already concluded that points aren't a problem (it's a 15 pts difference, as not taking a libby in all-comers lists is playing at a disadvantage, in my opinion), so I want to know why you insist on the rhino over a LR?

 

It isn’t a 15pts difference, as I have already explained. A Librarian is not essential to a Marine army, in my opinion. Its 115pts plus you have to find a place to put the Librarian (since Mowglie has stated he isn’t prepared to put him in the Landraider so needs to find a viable alternative). That increases the points difference substantially, as seen in the 2 army lists we discussed earlier, one that was his example and one that was my alternative.

 

I have repeatedly answered the question and aren’t dodging it. I insist on using a Rhino for Honour Guard because it saves points for other things and I don’t struggle to get a decent usage out of them, for the reasons mentioned at length earlier.

 

A Land Raider is very expensive, thereby precluding the use of other choices. A Land Raider is very threatening (moreso than a Rhino with equivalent contents).

 

This means that the following are true;

 

There is more available firepower to direct at the Land Raider, there are fewer eligible targets for that Firepower to be directed at, and there are fewer equivalent threats among the army.

 

Add to this the facts that the Rhino takes only 66% of the post-penetration damage that the Land Raider does (in an idealised situation - really the Rhino takes less than that), and that a big CC unit in a Land Raider is (inevitably) a unit which is central to your chances of winning the game, whereas the unit in a Rhino doesn't have to be...

 

All experience thus far has shown me that Land Raiders with CC units go down quicker than does the Razorback with Captain and Command Squad.

 

Koremu puts it succintly.

[mowglie]

It isn’t a 15pts difference.

 

There are 435 points in the Rhino.

There are 450 points in the LR.

 

Whichever way you look at it, for the purposes of target priority, the difference is 15 points. In the former case, you neutralise 435 points of the army. In the latter you neutralise 450. (actually the numbers are a bit off since an immobilised LR is a much bigger threat than an immobilised HB Razorback, but we're ignoring that for now)

 

My librarian (riding elsewhere) does not change the points value of the stuff riding in the assault tank!

 

(Actually I disagree with Giga a little bit in that taking the 2nd HQ at 1,500 points probably isn't a good idea. Although tbh I'd start with the librarian and then extrapolate that taking the CM is a bad idea! - Offtopic!).

 

Sorry to be pushy, but could you identify the stage at which you start disagreeing with me from my 9:42 post? I really think that might help clear things up.

 

All experience thus far has shown me that Land Raiders with CC units go down quicker than does the Razorback with Captain and Command Squad.

 

Do you believe that the reason for that is due to the greater resilience of the Rhino, or to the greater threat value of the hammernators resulting in the LR being prioritised?

 

In my experience, the only reason a singular assault unit in a Rhino survives turn 2 is because your opponent had something more important to kill.

 

If you're arguing that the Rhino is superior, then you'd better hope that your "more important thing to kill" came from the 115 points you saved (slightly more in your case since Captain + Command Squad is cheaper than CM+HG). At that point I ask, "why play the captain + command squad at all? why not play 2 more of your 'more important thing'?" instead? (which has been my argument all along).

[Koremu]

All experience thus far has shown me that Land Raiders with CC units go down quicker than does the Razorback with Captain and Command Squad.

 

Do you believe that the reason for that is due to the greater resilience of the Rhino, or to the greater threat value of the hammernators resulting in the LR being prioritised?

 

In my experience, the only reason a singular assault unit in a Rhino survives turn 2 is because your opponent had something more important to kill.

 

If you're arguing that the Rhino is superior, then you'd better hope that your "more important thing to kill" came from the 115 points you saved (slightly more in your case since Captain + Command Squad is cheaper than CM+HG). At that point I ask, "why play the captain + command squad at all? why not play 2 more of your 'more important thing'?" instead? (which has been my argument all along).

Stop talking about hammernators, it's pointless when the discussion is LR vs. Rhino to discuss a unit that can't fit in a Rhino.

 

115 points is (handily) a Vindicator - and you're damn right the Rhino survives longer because of it's presence. Remember that the Land Raider is a threat in and of itself, meaning that the enemy gets 2-for-1 if they destroy it - successfully destroying a powerful vehicle and stranding an Assault Unit. It's not just the contents nor is it just the tank, but the "all eggs, one basket" factor.

 

Remember here too that the Captain fulfils your mandatory HQ choice - by contrast if you are using a Land Raider and Assault unit you almost certainly want a Charlie with them, which is another 125 points (assuming Cassius). The addition of a Command Squad (roughly 225 points including Transport) compares more than favourably with the Assault unit in Land Raider.

 

Also, it's worth noting that I don't tend to have "an important thing" in my Space Marine armies. I have a lot of different units, with multiple overlaps between them covering all the required roles - if I lose one, I can shift priorities and cover the gaps a lot easier than a list that spams a single choice repeatedly. Again here, the all eggs in one basket routine doesn't do it for me.

[Aidoneus]

It seems like a lot of people are saying, and I fully agree, that taking a single powerful CC unit in a firepower-based Space Marine army is not the best idea. Instead, you should try to have some degree of reactionary CC (powerfist Sergeants, a character or two, maybe shooty termies or a dreadnought, etc...) rather than one full-on CC specialist unit to push forward in isolation.

 

To me, that point makes this whole conversation moot. We're arguing which of two options is better when clearly the answer is "neither." Instead of paying 435-450pts for one unit that will most likely get singled-out and destroyed, you should buy 2-3 more shooty threats that will synergize better with the rest of your army.

 

Now, if you really must have assault terminators for some reason (want to make use of Vulkan's rule, or just really love 'em), then of course you're gonna need a Raider. There's no comparing the two, since only one can carry the squad.

 

Other than assault termies, there's really no especially scary assault unit worth speaking of, with the one exception of the Honor Guard. However, how many people actually field a unit of honor guard? I've never seen them on the board. Idaho seems to use them, but he seems to be the only one here who does. So why argue with him about how to field a unit only he fields? It just seems kinda pointless.

 

At the end of the day, the choice of which transport to use for which units seems to be determined more by the units available to you in your codex, and less by a direct comparison between the two transports themselves.

[Koremu]

It seems like a lot of people are saying, and I fully agree, that taking a single powerful CC unit in a firepower-based Space Marine army is not the best idea

I wouldn't say that at all. I would only say that if you are taking such a unit, your entire tactics and battle plan will revolve around that unit, making it a highly polar proposition - you will either win or lose on the performance of that unit.

[Captain Idaho]

Sorry to be pushy, but could you identify the stage at which you start disagreeing with me from my 9:42 post? I really think that might help clear things up.

 

No need to apologise, it's a fair request. Besides I'm sensing an element of confusion here!

 

You said:

 

You're still contradicting yourself. You're saying "My opponent can kill a LR easily" yet "My opponent can't kill my Rhino".

 

I am saying that a Landraider is not invulnerable, whilst the Rhino is not so easy to kill. I know Landraiders are tough old dogs, but they don't like Melta weapons, as well as the other specialist weapons in other armies (Rail guns, Vanquisher cannons, Orbital Bombardments, Dark/Bright Lances etc) and are awefully expensive to lose even after delivering their cargo.

 

Rhinos on the other hand are not as weak as to be useless and easily killed, with a bit of thought. Their loss after delivering their cargo is not that big a deal to the army either.

 

To explain myself further, the list of weapons that can threaten a Landraider are undoubtably going to be focussed on doing such, where as the weapons that threaten the Rhino also have to target the rest of the army. The Landraider is a specific threat and the opponent know this, therefore it has to go in many opponents game. However, many opponents won't waste firepower on the 1st couple turns to take down an assault unit across the table in a Rhino when it is being screened and there are other choices to eliminate that are more immediately a threat (Dreadnoughts and Landspeeders firing across the table for example).

 

In this way, despite being tougher, the focus of weaponary and the customer's desires mean the Landraider's life expectancy is limited.

 

Whichever way you look at it, for the purposes of target priority, the difference is 15 points.

 

We seem to have our wires crossed somewhat, as my reference to the points cost was in regards to overall army selection, reasoning I can get more into the list for the reasons I have outlined earlier (whether everyone agrees is a different matter, I won't re-post it here though as it's only a couple posts up!).

 

However I just caught on that yourself and likely Giga too are refering to the actual in game targeting of the Landraider + assault unit and the Rhino + Assault unit + Chapter Master. In this case yes the difference is 15pts, but there is more to 40K than these direct match ups. No unit exists in a vacuum, and for Space Marines that should work together to make up for their short comings, this is doubly true!

 

I'm looking at it from an army building perspective and the army working together as a unit.

 

Remember that a Chapter Master doesn't have to be with the Honour Guard, depending on opponents as assault armies likely won't have the threatening firepower whilst shooty armies the Honour Guard can fight without him. But also remember that we are talking about other assault units like Vanguard etc that aren't in Landraiders, and they would fulfill your preference to have a Librarian as the HQ :)

 

Addressing another of your points: If your opponent is "more scared" of other things in your list, why don't you take more of those instead and leave the assault unit at home?

 

Well I like to have a fairly balanced list and enjoy having assault power as a weapon in my arsenal. And often the Honour Guard (and their Rhino) take the lion's share of the opposing firepower, disproportionate to their value, and the rest of my army often performs very well since they are unscathed.

 

Again said better by Koremu (not sure why I bother, just let him do my work for me! :P )

 

Also, it's worth noting that I don't tend to have "an important thing" in my Space Marine armies. I have a lot of different units, with multiple overlaps between them covering all the required roles - if I lose one, I can shift priorities and cover the gaps a lot easier than a list that spams a single choice repeatedly. Again here, the all eggs in one basket routine doesn't do it for me.

 

On another note, we should discuss armoured wedge tactics with Rhinos in a separate thread. I think it needs discussed in detail (there are a number of pitfalls that need to be avoided and we should address them), but since it's relevant to all mech (not just mech with a single assault unit) I think we should discuss it elsewhere.

 

Agreed. (at last ;) )

 

Other than assault termies, there's really no especially scary assault unit worth speaking of, with the one exception of the Honor Guard. However, how many people actually field a unit of honor guard? I've never seen them on the board. Idaho seems to use them, but he seems to be the only one here who does. So why argue with him about how to field a unit only he fields? It just seems kinda pointless.

 

I know people on this board who make regular use of 8 Vanguard in a transport, whilst about 5 people from the Ultramarines section that make use of Honour Guard, 2 of which as regular as myself.

 

It depends on your area, I guess. Maybe if I win this years GT then we will see more people taking them ;)

 

I wouldn't say that at all. I would only say that if you are taking such a unit, your entire tactics and battle plan will revolve around that unit, making it a highly polar proposition - you will either win or lose on the performance of that unit.

 

Yep and having a Landraider is exasperating the need for the super assault unit to achieve alot due to the increased costs involved.

 

At least having a Rhino equivilent ensures that the unit is not as essential to your capacity to win the game.

[mowglie]

I'm feeling that finally there's a bit of a consensus coming out!

 

Let's see:-

 

115 points is (handily) a Vindicator - and you're damn right the Rhino survives longer because of it's presence.

 

So why not drop the 435pt assault unit and buy more Vindicators instead? See the list I posted on page 3. But - read the rest of this post first because I agree with you.

 

I realised that I'm assuming you run your command squad as an assault squad? Is that a correct assumption?

 

Remember here too that the Captain fulfils your mandatory HQ choice - by contrast if you are using a Land Raider and Assault unit you almost certainly want a Charlie with them, which is another 125 points (assuming Cassius).

 

I think a Chaplain with the assault unit in a LR is overkill. You do certainly, as Idaho points out, need to find room for a HQ elsewhere, and granted finding room for him in a transport is often just as difficult as finding the points for him - especially at 1,500 and less. If you have no other options you can put him in the LR but then you really are putting all your eggs in one basket.

 

Also, it's worth noting that I don't tend to have "an important thing" in my Space Marine armies. I have a lot of different units, with multiple overlaps between them covering all the required roles - if I lose one, I can shift priorities and cover the gaps a lot easier than a list that spams a single choice repeatedly. Again here, the all eggs in one basket routine doesn't do it for me.

 

I absoloutely agree with you.

 

However, given the premise of this thread if I am going to put all my eggs in one basket, then I definitely want my basket to be solid.

 

Compare the lists from page 3:-

 

Mine:-

165 - 5 Sternguard + Razorback

165 - 5 Sternguard + Razorback

230 - 10 Tactical, PF + Rhino

205 - 10 Tactical, Rhino

180 - 2x Typhoons

100 - Librarian

450 - TH/SS + LR

 

Idaho's:-

230 - 10 Tactical, PF + Rhino

205 - 10 Tactical, Rhino

180 - 2x Typhoons

435 - CM, HG, Razorback

115 - Dreadnought - Plasma Cannon

135 - Dreadnought - Twin Linked Lascannon

75 - Scouts

70 - Landspeeder - MM & HF

 

Are saying that my list is eggs-in-basket and Idaho's isn't? I'm saying that they're both eggs-in-basket. The LR is only a few more eggs, and is a much stronger basket. That's worth it, especially if your plan revolves around getting the unit inside into combat (which we both agree it shouldn't).

 

However I just caught on that yourself and likely Giga too are refering to the actual in game targeting of the Landraider + assault unit and the Rhino + Assault unit + Chapter Master.

 

Yes, that's correct. For the purposes of target priority. I.e. in either situation a lucky opponent can still take out almost a third of our army in a single shot on their first turn.

 

You're correct that it gets worse for the LR if the libby is inside (or even worse if we've got Vulkan, charlie, +7 hammernators in there... eep! I actually took that out with a Scout/LSS alpha strike once. As I'm sure you can imagine the rest of the game was pretty easy!)

 

You're also correct that assuming you don't take a Librarian, you've got 115 points elsewhere in the army. (However, I have a LR and a Librarian to balance against that). As I've been saying, if you can kill a LR on turn 1 reliably, that implies that you can instead kill a Rhino (even with a 3+ save) plus a Vindicator on turn 1 reliably. Your opponent's fast melta doesn't go away just because you're not playing a LR!

 

The flip-side of my argument is, if something else in your list is so threatening that I should be targetting it with my melta instead of your HG, why not drop the HG and take that instead? You've already addressed that though:-

 

Well I like to have a fairly balanced list and enjoy having assault power as a weapon in my arsenal. And often the Honour Guard (and their Rhino) take the lion's share of the opposing firepower, disproportionate to their value, and the rest of my army often performs very well since they are unscathed.

 

- which is fair.

 

One thing I'd caution though:-

 

When you say things like "take the lion's share of the opposing firepower, disproportionate to their value", that makes me think you're relying on your opponent making mistakes and then capitalising on them. I think earlier in the thread you mentioned something about presenting a wide choice of targets to your opponent being a good thing? (presumably on the assumption that he might screw it up and shoot the wrong ones).

 

The problem with that logic is that assuming you and your opponent as equally good, you will make as many mistakes as he does. I think the only situation where you can comfortably present a choice to your opponent and expect him to choose poorly is when you are a much better player than your opponent - in which case you don't need anyone's advice!

 

I don't like to rely on my opponent making target-priority mistakes.

 

Importantly your HG seem to have gained some kind of legendary status in your gaming group which leads to your opponents overestimating them - reducing the game to "I need to stop Idaho's HG or they'll gank me", and while they're distracted you're taking them to bits with your dreds. Obviously if that's working for you in your local game then it's not for any of us to tell you otherwise. Clearly if you play a LR your opponents will wisen up and ignore it! I'm not sure those considerations are appropriate in a tactica discussion... but then maybe they are. I generally consider psychological tricks like that outside the bounds of "tactics", but I certainly can't deny that they're important (e.g. we have a player here who always targets the best painted model in your army). Perhaps we should write "Tactica: how to give your opponent tunnel vision!"

[Giga]

This thread seriously is running in circles and becoming more and more of a timewaste, to be honest. So I will keep this short and explain why, if you want to have an assault specialist unit in a vanilla marine army, it is almost always better to give them a LR over a rhino.

 

All non-terminator assault specialists in the marine dex are overpriced for what they do. Honor Guard, assault squads, Vanguard, and close combat command squads can all be made good, but they're simply not cost-efficient when compared to assault terminators.

 

Honor Guard are expensive + they require a chapter master. Close Combat command squads are extremely expensive + they require a captain. Vanguard are overpiced for what they do. Assault Squads suck (especially in this age of Gray Hunters, Swarmlord, the new BA, nob bikerz, etc.).

 

With that, we now come to the conclusion that no, you are NOT actually saving lots of points by taking a vanguard/honorguard/commandsquad in a rhino over a LR with terminators. The increased cost of having to take a chaptermaster/captain means that at best you're saving like 100 points. In Idaho's example, you're saving 115 pts. Hence, no matter what you do, your target saturation is increased by a single target (a dread, or a vindicator, or a predator, etc. something that costs ~100 pts), whlie your assault specialist is made much easier to deal with.

 

In my book, that is not a good tradeoff. In fact, if I wasn't going to take an assault unit with a LR, I would simply say "screw it" and omit a counter-assault unit completely and just spend those ~450 pts on shooty stuff.

 

Hence, my final conclusion to this thread is: no, I'm not convinced. A rhino isn't a good way to transport an expensive assault specialist. Not in the vanilla dex, anyway. Take a LR, or don't take an expensive assault unit at all.

 

With that said, I'll address a couple more points and be done with this thread:

Remember here too that the Captain fulfils your mandatory HQ choice - by contrast if you are using a Land Raider and Assault unit you almost certainly want a Charlie with them

I don't take Charlies in competitive lists. They aren't good enough, Cassius or otherwise.

 

My HQ choices in competitive 1750+ games are always a barebones libby and whatever special character I fancy the most at that moment (currently it's Lysander). Either way, I don't think either honor guard or assault command squads are worth taking in competitive lists.

Stop talking about hammernators, it's pointless when the discussion is LR vs. Rhino to discuss a unit that can't fit in a Rhino.

Stop talking about assault units that are not ass terminators. It's pointless when discussing vanilla codex, especially in a thread that's discussing LRs and assault units. :lol:

 

This thread seriously is running in circles and becoming more and more of a timewaste, to be honest. So I will keep this short and explain why, if you want to have an assault specialist unit in a vanilla marine army, it is almost always better to give them a LR over a rhino.

 

All non-terminator assault specialists in the marine dex are overpriced for what they do. Honor Guard, assault squads, Vanguard, and close combat command squads can all be made good, but they're simply not cost-efficient when compared to assault terminators.

 

Honor Guard are expensive + they require a chapter master. Close Combat command squads are extremely expensive + they require a captain. Vanguard are overpiced for what they do. Assault Squads suck (especially in this age of Gray Hunters, Swarmlord, the new BA, nob bikerz, etc.).

 

With that, we now come to the conclusion that no, you are NOT actually saving lots of points by taking a vanguard/honorguard/commandsquad in a rhino over a LR with terminators. The increased cost of having to take a chaptermaster/captain means that at best you're saving like 100 points. In Idaho's example, you're saving 115 pts. Hence, no matter what you do, your target saturation is increased by a single target (a dread, or a vindicator, or a predator, etc. something that costs ~100 pts), whlie your assault specialist is made much easier to deal with.

 

In my book, that is not a good tradeoff. In fact, if I wasn't going to take an assault unit with a LR, I would simply say "screw it" and omit a counter-assault unit completely and just spend those ~450 pts on shooty stuff.

 

Hence, my final conclusion to this thread is: no, I'm not convinced. A rhino isn't a good way to transport an expensive assault specialist. Not in the vanilla dex, anyway. Take a LR, or don't take an expensive assault unit at all.

 

With that said, I'll address a couple more points and be done with this thread:

Remember here too that the Captain fulfils your mandatory HQ choice - by contrast if you are using a Land Raider and Assault unit you almost certainly want a Charlie with them

I don't take Charlies in competitive lists. They aren't good enough, Cassius or otherwise.

 

My HQ choices in competitive 1750+ games are always a barebones libby and whatever special character I fancy the most at that moment (currently it's Lysander). Either way, I don't think either honor guard or assault command squads are worth taking in competitive lists.

Stop talking about hammernators, it's pointless when the discussion is LR vs. Rhino to discuss a unit that can't fit in a Rhino.

Stop talking about assault units that are not ass terminators. It's pointless when discussing vanilla codex, especially in a thread that's discussing LRs and assault units. ;)

Yep and having a Landraider is exasperating the need for the super assault unit to achieve alot due to the increased costs involved.

 

At least having a Rhino equivilent ensures that the unit is not as essential to your capacity to win the game.

Not true.

 

Having a rhino and another vehicle (you can't buy much for those 115 points, lol) makes it more likely that your assault unit will end up footslogging and shot to death, meaning it's more likely you'll waste the ~400 points you spent on your assault unit. With a LR you're at least making it very possible that your assault unit WILL reach combat and do some damage.

 

Also, transport isn't what makes a unit essential. The unit itself is. ;)

[rat of vengence]

@ Giga:

 

It’s because of the variables that using a Rhino as a transport for an assault unit is viable. You are right, if you take the variables away then yes you win this discussion, but the whole point of thread is to highlight that those variables to people. How can you have a viable tactical discussion if you don't talk about the variables that are likely to affect the usage of the units and tactics you are proposing?

 

So when you prepare for a game of 40K, creating a list and developing a strategy, you don't take into account any of the variables that could happen?

 

Of course not! Your whole position on a Landraider is based upon variables, but a different set of variables to that of a Rhino.

He doesn't listen to tactics that disagree with his own. And then he invents things that you said to prove his point -_-

 

RoV

[Captain Idaho]

This thread seriously is running in circles and becoming more and more of a timewaste, to be honest.

 

It's going in circles because people can't agree and keep refuting what each other is saying, yourself included. It's late now, but tomorrow I will try to draw some conclusions and a summary of (roughly) both sides of the argument, perhaps to establish for any newcomers to the thread where we all stand on things so they can draw their own conclusions.

 

In Idaho's example, you're saving 115 pts

 

It's more than that, as you don't have to find a place for the Librarian. You get those points back for more firepower and target saturations, as opposed to small and vulnerable units.

 

Now I want to show why the comparison in points values is not a mere 115pts. Look below:

 

Idaho's:-

230 - 10 Tactical, PF + Rhino

205 - 10 Tactical, Rhino

180 - 2x Typhoons

435 - CM, HG, Razorback

115 - Dreadnought - Plasma Cannon

135 - Dreadnought - Twin Linked Lascannon

75 - Scouts

70 - Landspeeder - MM & HF

 

Now in this list I was actually being quite generous! If you look at the points there, you will notice it is actually 55pts short of 1,500pts. My current list I have been planning looks very similar with swaps consisting of Melta gun in a Tactical, a Plasma cannon in the other, no Powerfist and the Dreadnought is a Venerable with Assault cannon instead of plasma cannon.

 

Let's count up the amount of units on that basis:

 

3 Scoring units

31 Infantry models

8 Vehicles (consisting of 3 AV10, 3 AV11 and 2 AV12, one being Venerable)

 

165 - 5 Sternguard + Razorback

165 - 5 Sternguard + Razorback

230 - 10 Tactical, PF + Rhino

205 - 10 Tactical, Rhino

180 - 2x Typhoons

100 - Librarian

450 - TH/SS + LR

 

This list has:

 

2 Scoring units

36 infantry models

7 Vehicles (2x AV10, 4xAV11 and 1x AV14).

 

Numbers seem even enough right? Well, wrong. My list above has more assault potential thanks to the Dreadnoughts and Honour Guard, it has much more firepower and if you remove the Honour Guard and their Rhino from the above the firepower is still there. The army has more mobility, in that it's Dreadnoughts can move and shoot and it has an extra Landspeeder. There is more redundancy. There are more scoring units.

 

On the other hand, remove the Landraider, or stun it, or it moves over 6", and the firepower drops dramatically. The assault potential drops right off also if removed, with just the Sternguard and Librarian being left to hold their own.

 

If you want to change things round because you don't believe the units or army list are efficient etc, then you can do that alot easier in my list but not the Landraider list which is type cast into a particular theme. You will still find there is more redundancy in my list, more staturation and less reliance on the Landraider.

 

More indepth tomorrow.

[Giga]

It's more than that, as you don't have to find a place for the Librarian.

No, actually, if you get a librarian, then it's a 15 points saved. Without the librarian, it's a 115 pts "saved".

 

If you meant the HQ in general, I feel generic chapter masters are an inferior HQ choice in general. Getting a special character instead is IMHO invariably more points-effective.

 

 

 

 

As for your lists, I don't play 1500 much (I don't think 5th edition is really fun at lower then 1750 pts), but I'm seriously not impressed by those lists.

 

The first list has what, 2-3 meltas in the entire army (and then only if you give your tacticals those meltas)? It's also got two dreadnoughts (my Lysander LOVES dreadnoughts :huh:) and virtually no long-range shooting (two typhoons?). It's like a jack of all trades, but master of none, except it isn't good. I can't imagine how badly it'd end up if it fought a proper IG 1500 pts list, or a green horde, or well-played dual lash, etc.

 

The second list is even worse. It doesn't have ANY meltas, lol. Also, what's with the 5 men sternguard units in TLHB razors? You don't even have pedro to make them scoring. Hell, the razorbacks aren't even LAS-PLAS. No offense, but that list seems like... Well, a strawman list you made to enforce your argument. :/

 

Anyway, I don't think vanilla marines are really designed for 1500, but, just for the sake of the argument, here's the first thing that comes to my mind right now:

Lysander - 200

Command Squad (rhino, 2x melta, 2x plasma) - 200

Tac Squad (rhino, melta, combimelta, missile launcher, powerfist) - 245

Tac Squad (rhino, melta, combimelta, missile launcher, powerfist) - 245

Assault Terminators (2x LC, 3x th/ss) - 200

Land Raider Crusader (extra armor, multimelta) - 275

MM/HF speeder - 70

MM/HF speeder - 70

20 scoring dudes

31 infantry model

6 vehicles

 

The list has lots of melta (it can shoot 9 melta shots in a turn + lysander's str10 hammer counts as AP1 for the sakes of killing vehicles), lots of bolters and heavy flamers for anti-infantry, some heavy target saturation going (the LR is huge and scary, but the other elements are all packing a considerable short-range punch), two powerful assault units (a lysander is an assault unit in his own right, he can freely go around engaging entire units, walkers and monstrous creatures, all on his own) and has great potential for being fun as hell.

 

Ofc, it's plagued by a lack of a dedicated scoring unit, the fact that LR suffers from an eggs-in-basket syndrome, no real long-range shooting, and the lack of a librarian. Sadly, that's just something one needs to accept at 1500 - you just can't make a proper all-comers vanilla list at that points cost. Which is the main reason why I don't play 1500.

 

On the other hand, if I was taking a shootier 1500 approach and didn't want to dish out 475 pts on a LR with termies, I'd do something like this:

Master of the Forge (conversion beamer, bike) - 155

Tactical Squad (las-plas razorback) - 165

Tactical Squad (las-plas razorback) - 165

Tactical Squad (las-plas razorback) - 165

Tactical Squad (las-plas razorback) - 165

Land Speeder x2 (multimelta, heavy bolter) - 140

Land Speeder (multimelta, heavy flamer) - 70

Land Speeder (multimelta, heavy flamer) - 70

Dreadnought (TL-lascannon, heavy flamer) - 145 pts

Dreadnought (TL-lascannon, heavy flamer) - 145 pts

Dreadnought (multimelta, heavy flamer) - 115 pts

20 scoring models in 4 units

21 infantry model

11 vehicles

 

A total of 6 lascannons (two twinlinked), 5 heavy flamers, 5 multimeltas, a conversion beamer, 4 twinlinked plasmaguns, two heavy bolters, and 3 AV12 walkers with dreadnought close combat weapons. Oh and, all of these units can keep moving at least 6" per turn while still being able to keep shooting. Dreads create a wall, the speeders keep moving and shooting over them or giving dreads cover saves/blocking enemy movement/deepstriking. Tacticals huddle in razorbacks or sit at ~24" and shoot one bolter shot per turn. One tac squad can also camp in a bolstered ruin, lol.

 

BTW, the same list can also remove the last two dreads and get 3 dakkapreds instead, in case you're gonna be fighting some hordes. Awesome, eh?

 

The point of all this is; I believe there are armies that profit from having a dedicated assault unit because it fits their overall strategy, and there are armies that don't really need expensive assault units. I feel the expensive-assault-unit-inside-a-rhino idea is neither here nor there - it doesn't save enough points to justify gimping your expensive assault specialist, and yet the assault specialist inside becomes much easier to kill. So I say screw it, get a LR or get more shooting specialists. ^_^

He doesn't listen to tactics that disagree with his own. And then he invents things that you said to prove his point wacko.gif

 

RoV

Obvious troll is obvious.

[rat of vengence]

Troll? Noooo, just pointing out the obvious.

 

I shy away from armies that rely on an uber assault unit getting to where it needs to be as the lynch pin of the plan. A Landraider is a tough shell to carry a tough cc unit, but we all know that there are several ways of taking it down, depending on what army you are facing and what they brought. Eldar and Dark Eldar, and Tau, are a couple of examples of armies that would not break a sweat nullifying your very expensive transport/cc unit combo. Alpha strike marines can also do the job with a fraction of the points dedicated to the assault unit/transport. CC termies walking across the board are not a threat for at least a couple of turns, meaning they can be safely ignored leaving an imbalance in the amount of points left to take the fire. I much prefer to run a more balanced list that does not crumble when one part dies unexpectedly.

 

That said, if the uber expensive/powerful cc unit is your weapon of choice, a LR is the most reliable way to get it to where it needs to be. I just think it needs to be said that it often isn't the best use of points.

 

RoV

[Aidoneus]

I much prefer to run a more balanced list that does not crumble when one part dies unexpectedly.

Quoted for truth. This is why it's simply common wisdom over in the Ordos forum that you never take a single Land Raider, ever. If you want Grey Knights in Raiders, you need precisely that... plural Raiders. We all know that Land Raiders die. Maybe not first turn, maybe not even every game, but often enough that you simply can't rely on 1 to win you the game. So either you double, or triple, up on them so that losing 1 isn't a game-loser, or you don't take 'em at all and invest the points in 2-3 smaller units, any one of which can be lost without killing your entire game plan.

[Giga]

I much prefer to run a more balanced list that does not crumble when one part dies unexpectedly.

That's the whole point. LR lists don't crumble if the LR dies. They only do when they're played by poor players.