Attack bikes and Landspeeders

[Mudpuppet]

Hi all,

 

Are these units tank hunters when fitted with multimeltas? Or maybe i should rather ask, how good are these units at being tank hunters when fitted with multimeltas? And which ones are better?

 

The speeders are slightly more expensive but also fast skimmers meaning moving flat out on the first turn they get a nice bonus cover save. I have seen people talking about bikes as anti tank before, and just wanted to know if anyone thinks they can compare these two and has used both to any kind of effect etc.

 

Thanks,

 

Mudpuppet

[Ozybonza]

As pure anti tank, attack bikes are better. With 3++ when turbo boosting, being easier to hide and IMHO, generally more survivable, they win out.

 

Landpseeders with MM/HF however are fnatastic all round units. You will very rarely use both weapons in the same turn, but being able to move 12" and fire either multi melta or heavy flamer makes them great "opportunistic" units that can adapt to the threat at hand.

 

Personally, I use 2 x MM/HF speeders as "all round" units and then use DoA jump pack squads with double Melta as my dedicated anti tank. Nothing like dropping next to a land raider with 2 Meltas on turn 2.....

[Dingareth]

Jawaballs breaks the units down well, but keep in mind this was before the Feel no Pain extravaganza that is the new book, which in my mind sets the Attack Bike a bit ahead.

 

Also, Ozybonza, if you Deep Strike you can only shoot 1 weapon, as you're moving at cruising speed.

[Malthe]

Both of these units can be very efficient tank hunters indeed!

A unit of two or three attack bikes with MM's comes in at between 100 and 150 points and excels at taking out enemy armor.

Remember that they can turbo-boost for an impressive +3 cover save, which is even better than the speeders'.

Also they can engage devastators and the like in hand-to-hand, thus eliminating the threat of them shooting you to bits...

Of course I would only recommend this if there is no enemy tanks in sight.

Also they have twin-linked bolters, for even more firepower, although only at Str 4/ Ap 5 (which actually is enough to take down a land speeder).

 

Speeders' are slightly more mobile, given their ability to jump across obstacles.

Also they are impervious to Str. 3 and below (meaning they're not going to be taken down by las guns).

Another advantage is that speeders can't be engaged in hand-to-hand and thus tar-pited, like the bikes can if you get them too close to the enemy forces.

I would kit each speeder out with MM/HF clocking in a 70 points a piece. Then run them in squadrons of twos and watch things burn, be it armor or infantry.

I've seen some people hiding speeders behind rhinos for a +4 cover save, without obstructing their firing lines. Haven't tried it myself, but it seems a clever trick.

 

Don't really know what I prefer, though if it's dedicated anti-tank you're looking for I suppose the bikes are more cost-efficient.

But if you're low in the anti-horde department (or the anti-cover department!) do take the speeders!

[JamesI]

I love multimelta attack bikes. For speeders, I prefer going for range with typhoon missiles.

[Redfinger]

It is all about the bikes for me. The 3+ cover save, the fact that they can hide, and the stalling tactic they can be employed for, assaulting a target and holding it up for a round, they suck in assault, but T5 sure helps them survive a little longer! I find that speeders are fire magnets, they rarely last longer than a round, and are not very reliable for me.

 

Ashton

[Redfinger]

Both of these units can be very efficient tank hunters indeed!

A unit of two or three attack bikes with MM's comes in at between 100 and 150 points and excels at taking out enemy armor.

Remember that they can turbo-boost for an impressive +3 cover save, which is even better than the speeders'.

Also they can engage devastators and the like in hand-to-hand, thus eliminating the threat of them shooting you to bits...

Of course I would only recommend this if there is no enemy tanks in sight.

Also they have twin-linked bolters, for even more firepower, although only at Str 4/ Ap 5 (which actually is enough to take down a land speeder).

 

Speeders' are slightly more mobile, given their ability to jump across obstacles.

Also they are impervious to Str. 3 and below (meaning they're not going to be taken down by las guns).

Another advantage is that speeders can't be engaged in hand-to-hand and thus tar-pited, like the bikes can if you get them too close to the enemy forces.

I would kit each speeder out with MM/HF clocking in a 70 points a piece. Then run them in squadrons of twos and watch things burn, be it armor or infantry.

I've seen some people hiding speeders behind rhinos for a +4 cover save, without obstructing their firing lines. Haven't tried it myself, but it seems a clever trick.

 

Don't really know what I prefer, though if it's dedicated anti-tank you're looking for I suppose the bikes are more cost-efficient.

But if you're low in the anti-horde department (or the anti-cover department!) do take the speeders!

 

 

Sorry for double post, but when you mentioned running them in pairs I had a a rather nasty thought, could you imagine 2 Baal's with flamestorm cannons and 2 Speeders w/ HF running up the same flank, that would be a deadly combo.....I would not want to face that, run the preds w/ the AV13 facing your opponent and the speeders behind them to block LOS....ouch.

 

I might make a change to my 1250 list :mellow: thanks for the idea!

 

Ashton

[Wildfire]

In terms of pure anti-tank, bikers probably are the best thing loyalists have available. I find they're generally more survivable than speeders, as well. I'd pretty much always take at least one squadron.

 

However, bikes and speeders each have their own advantages, as other people have noted in this thread. They're both very useful units, depending on what capabilities you need in your army.

[Redo]

In terms of pure anti-tank, bikers probably are the best thing loyalists have available. I find they're generally more survivable than speeders, as well. I'd pretty much always take at least one squadron.

 

However, bikes and speeders each have their own advantages, as other people have noted in this thread. They're both very useful units, depending on what capabilities you need in your army.

 

Tend to aggree here. I find that with the FNP possibility it makes Bikes that liitle more survivable and negates the advantage that Speeder have being impervious to S3 weapons. That being said I think Speeders look cooler and and I like the dual mission capability. Still with this codex I'm leaning towards Bikes.

[Mudpuppet]

Wow, thanks for the replies all. very good oppinions there, some nice ideas too.

 

Okay, bearing in mind what has been said i am im the situation of being able to put either 2 MM/HF speeders and 2 MM attack bikes in my army if i give my assault squads meltas. But if i dont give my assault squads meltas it frees up 40 points so i could have 2 x 2 MM/HF speeders.

 

I think you guys are probably right that bikes are better pure anti-tank so i think ill stick with 2 of each and not 4 speeders.

 

Mudpuppet

[Hannibal]

Great posts here! It´s exactly what I asked myself these days. Nice to see that my opinion on bikes is shared by most veterans who posted in this thread.

 

Thanks all!

 

HTG

[ImperialReaper]

Jawaballs breaks the units down well, but keep in mind this was before the Feel no Pain extravaganza that is the new book, which in my mind sets the Attack Bike a bit ahead.

 

Also, Ozybonza, if you Deep Strike you can only shoot 1 weapon, as you're moving at cruising speed.

 

Jawaballs states that a Land Speeder can turboboost and block a tank using the resulting 3+ cover save. I heared that before - but according to the rules a fast skimmer does not have a turbo boost. Skimmers if fast can go flat out and therefore get a 4+ cover save - but they do not have turbo boost as far as I know.

[Dingareth]

They don't. They only get a 4+ save from moving Flat Out; however, they do actually get a 3+ save against rams, which is what I think he meant by block a tank.

[Mudpuppet]

I think the article in question is well out of date, it has several things wrong in it, only small things like points and so on but its not current rulebook anyways. Overall a good read though, the discussion underneath it is good too.

 

Mudpuppet