Getting rid of heavy weapons

[Wildfire]

....although I feel Blood Angels do Razorback lists better than Space Wolves.

 

I think they just do it differently. You'd probably take an AssCan (or even Flamestorm cannons ) on BA Razorbacks instead of Las/Plas for Spacewolves for instance

 

SW do get asscan razorbacks, and BA do not get flamestorm razorbacks.

[Bartali]

....although I feel Blood Angels do Razorback lists better than Space Wolves.

 

I think they just do it differently. You'd probably take an AssCan (or even Flamestorm cannons ) on BA Razorbacks instead of Las/Plas for Spacewolves for instance

 

SW do get asscan razorbacks, and BA do not get flamestorm razorbacks.

 

Apologies, I meant the Flamer Razorback, couldn't remember what it was called :)

 

SW do indeed get asscan Razorbacks too. However Asscans really need the fast Razorback that BA get to do them justice to a, Close the range down and b, Get sideshots on armour

[Wildfire]

I'd disagree, actually. I think that the asscan razors are one of the better options for SW. They can still move 6" and fire everything, which the las/plas can't. I like the tlhf and las/plas better on BA, and asscan and tllc for SW.

[Guest Drunk Guardian]

The main reason not to take a 2nd special weapon with the Grey Hunters is so that you can stick a Wolf Guard Pack Leader on to the group which has way more value for the points than a Tactical Sergeant. You lose the heavy weapon with the Grey Hunters but your also far more point efficient and can do more.

 

Maybe its because I usually play Tau but I've had almost no success with trying to use LasPlas Razorbacks.

[Grey Mage]

I find the exact opposite is true in my experiance.

 

I use those special weapons 3-4 times in a 6 turn game. I cant do that with a combi-weapon.

 

Im in combat on average about 2 rounds with any one pack, so I lose out on all of 2 attacks by not taking a wolf gaurd.

 

I have better things to spend my points on then mini-heroes. Particularly when theyre in my hotly contested elite slots.

 

I take the second special weapon every single time on my GHs, it doesnt dissapoint.

 

That being said, I think having more than 1, maybe 2 razorbacks in a force is a serious liability in all honesty. Why on earth would I want to throw out more fragile, expensive, gun platforms?

 

If I wanted to pay alot of points for something that can die quickly but packs a serious punch Id shell out for somelandspeeders. Costs around the same as an upgraded razorback but far more flexable in their use, far more survivable when used right, faster, and carry better firepower. Oh, and I dont have to make one of my squads footslog to do it.

 

If Im taking a razorback its for a wolf gaurd bodygaurd or long fangs.

[Cyprus]

I myself usually forego heavy weapons IF the squad is mechanises. But sometimes if I plan to hold objectives, I might take a free HW, can't hurt right?

[DarkGuard]

I myself usually forego heavy weapons IF the squad is mechanises. But sometimes if I plan to hold objectives, I might take a free HW, can't hurt right?

 

It should be because you're mechanised that you take a heavy weapon. Consider this, a Tactical squad in a Rhino with a flamer as its only upgraded weapon. This unit has only one weapon worthy of note shooting out of the top hatch, and for full effect you need to take them out. If you replaced a boltgun with a multi-melta, then your Rhino can shoot a multi-melta, kind of. But you can make your unit operate at full effectiveness vs one type of target while staying in the Rhino. With the right heavy weapon, you can hold vast swathes of the battlefield, one of those weapons is the multi-melta, another is the plasma gun. These make your Rhinos armoured, moving bunkers which count as scoring.

 

On the other hand, if I wanted a Tactical squad to babysit an objective in my backfield, it would have no specials, with maybe a combi on the Sergeant, and I'd have them in a las plas Razorback. They don't need the heavy weapon, they need protection and the ability to survive. My midfield squads do need the heavy weapon. I used to use Tactical Marines with no heavy, figuring I wanted them moving and therefore the extra bolt shot would be better. I was wrong, and the extra bolt shot is never worth passing up the chance to take a heavy weapon, especially a free one.

[Cyprus]

Rules Check: If you move the tank, can a heavy weapon still fire from the hatch, or since they "moved" is such an action impossible.

[Brother Valerius]

Models in a transport which moved count as having moved.

[Grey Mage]

Rules Check: If you move the tank, can a heavy weapon still fire from the hatch, or since they "moved" is such an action impossible.

They count as moved.

 

Also, if the vehicle takes a shaken-stunned result they are unable to fire.

 

Using your rhinos as mobile bunkers seems... dumb. I just cant see it working against any moderately intelligent opponent.

[Hellios]

Rules Check: If you move the tank, can a heavy weapon still fire from the hatch, or since they "moved" is such an action impossible.

They count as moved.

 

Also, if the vehicle takes a shaken-stunned result they are unable to fire.

 

Using your rhinos as mobile bunkers seems... dumb. I just cant see it working against any moderately intelligent opponent.

 

I have found a rune priest using LL out the back of Rhino he is in works pretty well. The role of my rhino is that of a transport but I don't always want to rush straight into combat with my enemy.

[DarkGuard]

Rules Check: If you move the tank, can a heavy weapon still fire from the hatch, or since they "moved" is such an action impossible.

They count as moved.

 

Also, if the vehicle takes a shaken-stunned result they are unable to fire.

 

Using your rhinos as mobile bunkers seems... dumb. I just cant see it working against any moderately intelligent opponent.

 

Not exactly, while in the Rhino your squad is protected from enemy fire, and if you are stunned or shaken you can simply disembark and fire at an infantry squad. Plus, you should be using other units to help provide target saturation. Your Rhino is less likely to be shot at while your Vindicators are still running around.

[Arkios]

Or if you have 4 of them in a position when he can only apply enough firepower to stop one...

[BearersOfSalvation]

I agree with Jackelope. Having the heavy weapon does have a cost associated with it (mobility, firepower on the move), and some may think that cost is too high for the POU the tac squad is in. Someone like me, for instance.

 

What's the actual cost? you lose one bolt shot when you're moving and firing but aren't charging. That's it, if you're charging then you have to fire bolt pistols, if you're standing still then you get the better heavy weapon shot. The heavy weapon has ZERO effect on mobility - you move exactly the same distance with or without it. I think that giving up one bolt shot when you're not charging and are moving is worth adding the ability to affect high armor and high toughness creatures, and to either extend your range to 48" or be really scary to armor within 12".

 

I think you may be mis-estimating the actual cost.

[Captain Idaho]

I think the cost is harder to narrow down and one people often forget when building lists. The biggest problem that can occur from using Heavy weapons in Tactical squads is the decision making process of when to fire and when to move etc. The more decisions you make on the table the more possibility that one will be incorrect.

 

As an example, you might decide to stay put for a couple turns to fire your heavy weapon but now are behind the attack and are too far from the objective, especially as return fire has eliminated your transport.

 

So while I would always take the heavy weapon, for players who like to have a strong role for each of their units, I can see why they will be happy not to have one.

[Grey Mage]

I think the cost is harder to narrow down and one people often forget when building lists. The biggest problem that can occur from using Heavy weapons in Tactical squads is the decision making process of when to fire and when to move etc. The more decisions you make on the table the more possibility that one will be incorrect.

 

As an example, you might decide to stay put for a couple turns to fire your heavy weapon but now are behind the attack and are too far from the objective, especially as return fire has eliminated your transport.

 

So while I would always take the heavy weapon, for players who like to have a strong role for each of their units, I can see why they will be happy not to have one.

So, instead of becoming a better player by tactically analyzing the situation one will simply deny themself the option to make the correct decision?

 

Im sorry... how is this a good idea?

 

Thats like saying because you had 50 bucks in cash instead of 50 bucks in food stamps you werent sure if you should buy something to eat or not.

[Shadowstalker Grim]

I can see what Idaho is saying, some people prefer to deny themselves options for certain squads so that they HAVE to stick to a role and the squad doesn't get side tracked.

 

I agree with Idaho in that as an option it exists and it has valid reasons for existing (not that i consider them important enough to not take the heavy, flexibility is king) I think it would be rare to pass up the heavy weapon, but I suppose some people like to play in certain ways :lol:

[Captain Idaho]

Thats like saying because you had 50 bucks in cash instead of 50 bucks in food stamps you werent sure if you should buy something to eat or not.

 

I'm not saying I agree with that approach because I too would prefer to have the option and instead make the tactically correct decision. I mean, I did say earlier in this thread that I would always advise a player to take the free weapon but that doesn't always mean I don't recognise people do have their reasons for not doing so and that is their choice. It's just the wrong one :)

 

But if it helps their game then they haven't the choice I suppose. Sometimes you just can't make the right decision, even the best of us.