Terminators

[Unforgiven2544]

Good evening fellow Gamers,

 

I am interested in the general consensus of the use of heavy flamers in a deathwing army. I have at least 2 squads of TH/SS terminators (which are widely regarded as the best option in this neck of the woods). and at least 4 squads each ot Assault Cannon and Cyclone Missile Launcher squads.

 

We have a bit of terrain so cover saves are plentiful as well as limiting long range firepower.

 

What are your opinions on heavy flamers? I prefer my shooty 'tactical' terminators. (Though I hope that when we get revised we have the option of taking power weapons on our terminators.)

 

Right now, the only heavy flamers I have are on my dreadnoughts (and two land speeder tornadoes)

 

I've seen grey knight incinerators just 'wreck face' but I know that the incinerator and heavy flamer are very different beasts.

 

Thank you for your input.

 

Very Respectfully,

--Unforgiven

[Master Avoghai]

We have a bit of terrain so cover saves are plentiful as well as limiting long range firepower.

 

To me, terrain has few importance, it depends of what you face the most.

If your opponents play IG, nids or orks (all in a mass infantry style), sure, it can be helpul.

 

But in this meta game, we rather see SMeq => cover save < armour save

 

Hence I prefer use assault canons/ML which wound more easily against this kind of army (3+ for HF/2+for ass cannon and ML). The auto hit of the flamer is compensated by 3 things :

 

- The range : HF is a one shot weapon you can use only juste before assault. On the opposite, you can use theML/AC while advancing.

- The S : less hit but more wound per hit

- The AP/rending : while a Meq will allways use his 3+ save against HF, the reding or AP3 shots of AC/ML will force him to sue a cover save hence more chance for him to fail his armour roll.

 

To me, HF is a fine weapon on dread cos they can be easily blocked by a squad of gaunts with a synapse creature nearby ; they have to be equiped to avoid this. Moreover, the choice is rather SB OR HF... so it's not really a HF vs AC/ML

 

For termi : I have 5 squads of termis : 3 are equipped with AC, 1 with ML, 1 with HF.

I'm on the way for painting 2 additionnal ML to have more options when building my army lists.

 

I think I'll tend to this organization :

 

If I take 3 squads : 2ML/1 AC

If I take 4 squads : 2ML/2AC

If I take 5 squads : 3ML/2AC against Meq, 2AC/2ML/1HF against hords

 

Hope this helps

[pueriexdeus]

I have a HF in all my dedicated CC (TH/SS, 3xTLC, HF/PF) Squads, they always roll up in a LR of some sort and work just fine for me.

 

In the DWA/DS mode I don't use them at all.

[riddles]

the cml allows you to play a ranged game against armies that are going to come at you - blood angels, nids, khornite lists, orks. You can sit 48 inches away and still bring the hurt. the heavy flamer ensures that you are going up close and personal, no matter what your enemy. you lose tactical flexibility.

 

on the command squad is the only place I'd put one in a footslogging army. It's more viable to use them in a raider based army, but even then, it can be advantageous to have cyclones for when (inevitably) the raider bites the dust.

[march10k]

The heavy flamer is my favorite, and IMNSHO, the second fluffiest (a terminator's place is in the thick of things, especially in dense terrain, like a hive or...boarding operations. There's no room to get proper use out of a CML) heavy weapon, after the assault cannon. In terms of meta-game ultility, CML>HF>AC.

 

What I end up doing is equipping my mounted squads with HF, my DWA squads with a mix of HF and AC (a RW-guided DWA can indeed drop a flame template on enemy infantry on turn one!), and my footsloggers with CML. usually, I'll give the reserve squads (not DWAing) CML. If they're DSing, the enemy will have spread out and moved around enough that I can land safely without RW guidance and still ensure LOS to pump two krak missiles into the rear armor of something juicy...and if they're walking on, they'll need the range!

 

In other words...there's no one size fits all weapon, although the CML comes close due to its ability to lay down two frag templates. The ability to step off an assault ramp and stick the business end of "ole toasty" through the firing slit of that 'impregnable' bunker...well, that gives the heavy flamer something that the CML doesn't have...which the AC can't really claim.

[captain Angel]

The first is that if the squad has lc's and THss's i would give a guy a heavy flamer and chain fist, as he will do nothing else with another weapon. But for a squad that has storm bolters as a majority, it depends on what they will do. Are they going to sit in one place and just open fire, than take the missile. if they will be advancing forward take the cannon.

[Brother Kovash]

I have one terminator equipped with HF on the side for use in some games, but for the most part I stick with AC and CML. If you're using Ravenwing support and can ensure where your squads are going to teleport in, then the HF can be a great weapon. Against horde armies I've toasted up to 7-8 guys before assaulting, which helped me out big time.

[Chaplain Lucifer]

I would only use HF on a transported squad or deepstriking via DW assault. A footslogging squad is missing shots because of HF short range. One needs 3-4 turn of slogging to get within HF range, to deliver just one template... those 3-4 turns can be spent shooting an AC or CML.

By DS-ing or disembarking near opponent the H_F can be used several times thus mitigating its short range.

[rathianfire]

Deathwing terminators have a farely wide array of weaponry. I decided to use them like tactical squads. Give each squad a role in the army. Like give one squad assault cannons and a cyclone missle launcher, for use of ranged support. Flamers on the otherhand are difficult to put in a role. I usualy dont use them for that specific purpose.

[Tengo]

With my assault terminators, Mixed LC and TH/SS (lovingly called 'Rip 'em, Crush 'em' Terminators) Which either zoom around in a Tank, or DWA and then Run inside a tank once they've obliterated their enemy to quickly get to the next one, I always include a guy with a HF and Chainfist, a Jet of flame right into the heart of the enemy squad before the rippin' and crushin' begins is the perfect way to let the enemies of the Lion know that you mean business!

 

With Belial, and scoring termies, an Assault Cannon/CML, are great for holding down objectives and will thin down any hopeful enemy before they get near, aswell as contributing to the fight from a safe distance.

 

If you're using your terminators as hard as rock gun platforms than thin down the enemy and are a constant thorn in their side, then CML/AC is the way to go, but if you're using terminators the way they're supposed to be used, getting into the thick of the fighting and destroying heretics and xenos, then the HF is a natural choice.

[march10k]

if you're using terminators the way they're supposed to be used, getting into the thick of the fighting and destroying heretics and xenos, then the HF is a natural choice.

 

I agree in sentiment, but in this role, the AC is also pretty good. Only the CML fails.

[templarphoenix]

I have 1 heavy flamer in my 1500 pts deathwing army.

 

It's just because I converted Space Hulk's terminator to DA, but it do kick some ***** as necrons and dark eldars player getting more and more...

[Tengo]

if you're using terminators the way they're supposed to be used, getting into the thick of the fighting and destroying heretics and xenos, then the HF is a natural choice.

 

I agree in sentiment, but in this role, the AC is also pretty good. Only the CML fails.

 

 

That's very true, but I think the assault characteristic of the flamer fits the role better than Heavy 4, I like to get my rending glory from Dreads, Speeders, and the LRC that goes hand in hand with the Termies ofc :P

[march10k]

You put assault cannons on dreads? What a waste... It's plasma cannons or twinlinked autocannons for me. After all, that's the only way to get either weapon into a deathwing army, and they're both soooo useful. I do love the twinlinked assault cannons on my brace of crusaders, though! When they roll up side-by-side with Belial and squad stepping off of one ramp, and Interrogator Chaplain Orestus and squad stepping off of the other, yes, it's 1200 points for 14 models, but it's like a planet just dropped on that poor enemy! 32 twinlinked shots...followed by a pair of heavy flamers and a massed terminator charge... yum!

[Master Avoghai]

I really feel that this topic gently slips into a "what if I were a space marine in real life" topic rather than being an analysis of what if, gameswise, the HF would be a viable choice.

 

No offense here but the OT was really a question about game mechanics, not about the smell of burned xenos in the morning. So yes, maybe burning xenos every battle would be nice it tends not to occur that much in real life

 

Fact is, you'll face more SM or SMC than massive gaunt or eldar guardians footsloggers.

Moreover you will rarely play on a cityfight terrain... So are cover save THAT important?

Finally, don't forget the point cost limit. At 1500 you'll field either 4 squads and a LR or 3 quads and 2 LR in a pure DW list. This doesn't leave much space to field a variety of weapons. Every choice must be abble to deal with all kind of menace.

 

I read lots of good points about the fact that an embarked AC/CML is useless... But does a battle last 3 turns? Of course not. I've lost the count of the battles where my squads vaporized opposition at turn 2 and pass the 4 following turns defending an objective and preventing enemy to approach at long range. I wouldn't habe been able to do so with a HF

 

I'm not arguing HF is crap. 5pts for its use is fine after all. But it's'too much of a specific weapon ton include it in an all. comer list.

 

I'm totally opened to counter arguments but please guys, get rid of the "yeah it's cool to burn heretics" arguments. Provide GAME facts ;-)

[krewl]

To be honest I think heavy flamers are pretty much not worth it in Deathwing armies.

The one occasion where you cn use it pretty well reliable (I'm not talking about the one in a lifetime odd things happening) is when you use a landraider (crusader) to charge from with Belial, and attached commandsquad with the banner for plenty of attacks on the charge. Even then situations can and will arise where you do not want to inflict casualties before you charge as that can remove the front models needed to get the charge off. So by design the weapon prevents usage sometimes in the only situation where you could reliable get it in a good position to hit a lot of targets.

 

But if you want to do this, I'd take a heavy flamer on the chainfist guy and the others with TH&SS (or 50/50 TH&SS and twin claws).

 

I'm a firm believer that DW need all the twin missile launchers they can get their hands on as it's not only cheaper then the AC it also has more range so your footsloggers will impact the game while moving up, instead of just walking and taking hits for 2 turns. Even worse when playing against the many opponents who have more reach then your 24" guns, they'll fly circles around you. Bonus points for the fact that a CML can be taken on top of other weaponry like TH&SS, claws or a chainfist/powerfist and stormbolter.

 

Also very important about the CML is that it's "hidden" in a squad of 5 termies which are hard to remove. As you refrain from putting wounds on the CML guy as often as possible that means your 2 ML shots keep flying whether you are moving or not, you can not be shaken/stunned and it's hard to hide from LOS as I can keep repositioning for different fire lanes. Using cover wisely even enhances that durability. Granted the other heavies have that same advantage, but a heavy flamer will not be in range for most of the game and suffers from the same issue as above but more so, cause when you are walking your termies smart opponents will walk away from you as long as possible, so it's even harder to get a charge off (Where you use the real killing potential from your termies.) making it an even bigger risk that when you flame you'll lose a charge oppertunity.

 

All of this is based on my exprience with pre faq deathwing, deathraven (duo-wing) and new post FAQ deathwing. Only the post FAQ deathwing with multiple CML's has been a competative succes that actually brings me in top 3 end rankings. (No first yet sadly, except one smaller tournament. :D )

[march10k]

Provide GAME facts ;-)

 

 

I thought I had...albiet with some colorful language.

 

Moreover you will rarely play on a cityfight terrain... So are cover save THAT important?

 

You must be joking. A proper game board in a non-cityfight game is >25% terrain...the majority of which is going to give cover saves. Moreover, when your opponent sees a significant quantity of weapons that deny him an armor save, he's going to hug cover, whether that's 50% of the board or 10%. Yes, cover saves matter in this edition more so than ever in the past.

 

Anyway, my argument wasn't that flamers PWN all, it was that there is no one-size-fits-all weapon for deathwing. Assaulting from the ramp of a crusader...if you're in charge range, you're in flame template range. Yes, if you're an idiot, and there's exactly one enemy model within 6" of you, you're going to lay that template and allow your opponent to prevent you from charging by removing that model. That's not a flaw in the heavy flamer, that's a flaw in your pea-sized brain (if you do that!). If I'm about to charge a horde, a template that I'm required to place where it hits the greatest number of models (not to mention the much-mo-betta S/AP) soundly trumps a pair of randomly scattering templates.

 

DWAing (guided by RW telehomers), I like a mix of HF and AC...with RW to prevent scatter, if the enemy's got infantry at the front of his deployment zone (they always do), I can put a template on them on turn one 100% of the time. The AC is more for side shots on tanks when I DWA. Without ravenwing, I'd DWA with AC only.

 

CML I use for walkers and non-DWA deepstrikers...the second group almost always drops in on an OBJ, and can't be guaranteed to have a priority target within 24"...so for OBJ-camping, it's missiles all the way.

 

Anyway, my primary consideration is a weapon's range, which would weigh against the heavy flamer, but accurate first-turn deepstrike or land raiders mitigate that as a downside.

 

Since my army is model-poor and melee-oriented with plenty of capacity to crump both tanks and heavy infantry in hand to hand, my second consideration is how many enemy can be hit in one shooting phase. The heavy flamer has the most potential, followed by the CML, but the AC comes up short at a max of 4, with a "norm" of three hits.

 

The strength and AP of the weapon is a very distand tertiary consideration. Nothing but a krak pens power armor, and only the flamer pens cover, so you can pretty much assume that most targets get a save most of the time. For strength, when targeting infantry, all of the weapons wound most things on a 3+ or 2+, so that's pretty even all around (the glaring exception being the relatively weak S of the frag template). So there's not really much to differentiate the weapons in this (usually the most important consideration!)

 

 

If I had to choose just one, it would be the CML, but that's not really the question, is it? Happily, I'm/we're free to take any or all of them, with the result that I usually take 1-2 HF, 1-2 CML, and 0-1 AC.

[Isiah]

It's horses for courses.

 

For me heavy flamers have never really cut it in a DW squad where ideal killing zone is 11-24" in front of you after moving, OK less if intending to assault. Heavy flamers are too situational and actually might never get to be used. Their only endearing factor is their dirt-cheapness.

 

On the other hand, heavy flamers on Dreadnoughts in a supporting role within a DW army are epic.

 

 

Cheers

I

[Droma]

I have to agree with Isiah on this one. I'd only put a heavy flamer on a dreadnought body.

 

On a deathwing squad I want them either at max range shooting away or in someone's face in which case a TH/SS is strictly better.

 

I'd only ever put a heavy flamer on a deathwing squad in a cities of death game.

[Master Avoghai]

Provide GAME facts ;-)

 

 

I thought I had...albiet with some colorful language.

I wasn't specifically talk about you :tu:

 

Moreover you will rarely play on a cityfight terrain... So are cover save THAT important?

 

You must be joking. A proper game board in a non-cityfight game is >25% terrain...the majority of which is going to give cover saves. Moreover, when your opponent sees a significant quantity of weapons that deny him an armor save, he's going to hug cover, whether that's 50% of the board or 10%. Yes, cover saves matter in this edition more so than ever in the past.

 

Sure but you forgot one point : most of the armies in this meta game are composed of 3+ armor save (marines, SMC, eldar motojet spam, and now necrons immortals -cos' I don't really see the point of necrons warriors now-).

You're totally right about weapons that negate armor save. The main problem I have with that is HF AP4 is not the kind of weapon that will negate most of the armor i'll face.

 

Hence my reasonning is this one : Why would I take a weapon that leave my opponent his 3+ save when I can field weapons that can force him to roll a 4+ (or 5+) cover save?

Of course you can argue that the number of hits under the flamer template (+no roll to hit)can compensate but in the other way, it can be answered that the higher S combined to the fact that you'll be able to shoot at long range compensate the number of hits in a single battle. Finally the 2 other weapons allow you to take care of enemy tanks whild HF must be in range and attack rear armour to be efficient.

 

If your argument wasn't that HF pawn all, mine isn't the HF is crap. I just find that in an all comer list he has only its place on dreads. Now I still have one or 2 HF in case I have to build an army for facing nids or orks ;)

[rathianfire]

Some of you may disagree with me on this.... but im gonna say it anyway. Try Privateerpresses Menoth Base, then highlight the edges with Menoth Hightlight. It worked for me, ill post a pic soon

[march10k]

Some of you may disagree with me on this.... but im gonna say it anyway. Try Privateerpresses Menoth Base, then highlight the edges with Menoth Hightlight. It worked for me, ill post a pic soon

 

 

Nani???

 

 

On the topic of the HF, I think those who "would never put a HF on a terminator" don't employ them the same way that I do.

 

OK less if intending to assault.

 

...which is virtually always the case for me. Your choice of words indicates that's not the case for you. So we don't use termies the same way, and therefore what works for you won't necessarily work for me, and vice versa. The only termies of mine who aren't looking for a melee fight are objective campers, and I give those CMLs.

 

Heavy flamers are too situational and actually might never get to be used.

 

Goes back to the assault thing. If you're about to charge, the only time you wouldn't fire the flamer is if doing so brings with it a relatively high risk of killing your way out of charge range... I'd say that, assuming you're intending to charge (in which case the flamer is automatically in range), not firing the flamer is, as you say "situational, and actually might not ever happen." Especially if you're charging out of a crusader, as I usually do.

 

Hence my reasonning is this one : Why would I take a weapon that leave my opponent his 3+ save when I can field weapons that can force him to roll a 4+ (or 5+) cover save?

Of course you can argue that the number of hits under the flamer template (+no roll to hit)can compensate but in the other way, it can be answered that the higher S combined to the fact that you'll be able to shoot at long range compensate the number of hits in a single battle. Finally the 2 other weapons allow you to take care of enemy tanks whild HF must be in range and attack rear armour to be efficient.

 

I agree with that, to a point. You brought up metagame. It is dominated by power armor (which is not to say that it's anywhere near universal, In my shop, only around half of the armies are 3+, there are a fair few guard, ork, and DE players!), and that's one reason that I play deathwing...they kick the living daylights out of power armor in melee. If I'm about to charge 5-10 space marines, the slightly better mathhammer of the other two weapons versus the heavy flamer isn't really a big deal, I'm going to do bring the real pain in the melee that's about to kick off. Killing a marine outright with a krak missile versus making three or four of them roll a 3+ save isn't really going to determine the outcome. But on the other hand, if I'm about to charge a mob of guardsmen, gaunts, or whatnot, removing eight of them beforehand beats the living daylights out of removing 3-4....or, if I'm charging into cover, perhaps none! As for tank-killing, you do have a very strong point there...I'd never try to kill a tank with a heavy flamer, I'd just use the chainfist on the model's other arm. But, yea, a CML or AC is undeniably superior for tank-busting at range... Thing is, that's not the role I give my termies (I use vennies and godhammers at range, chainfists up close), so that's not relevant to my calculus.

 

I think the problem here is that flamer advocates and flamer detractors are talking past one another precisely because they don't use their terminators in the same role... If you say "in the role of tank-buster, the flamer fails," well, then of course I agree with the statement, but I don't consider it relevant!

 

Anyway, the way you employ your termies, the flamer probably isn't a good choice...the way I employ mine, the assault cannon isn't a good choice...but the CML works extremely well for pretty much any purpose.

[Cylu]

It's horses for courses.

 

For me heavy flamers have never really cut it in a DW squad where ideal killing zone is 11-24" in front of you after moving, OK less if intending to assault. Heavy flamers are too situational and actually might never get to be used. Their only endearing factor is their dirt-cheapness.

 

Tend to agree. The only time I can see a use for the HF is a DW squad in a non-DW army - where they can fulfill a dedicated role.

 

On the other hand, heavy flamers on Dreadnoughts in a supporting role within a DW army are epic.

 

Damn straight.

[Master Avoghai]

%march10k : I don't think it deals with the way we use termies in general. My analysis is based on the sum of different opponent and point out the problem you'll face with each

 

When you make the count j'

 

- against Meq : AP too weak.

- against hords : risk of exterminating all the model in range -> in this case you recognize you won't use the only shoot of flamer you'll be allowed of.

- against hords : risk of eliminating too many models -> morale check failed -> flee out of range -> same as above.

- against all : use at turn 2 when charging but what about the 4 following turns? What will your HF do after that?

 

You can say that it's'only 5 pts wasted for an useful weapon comaprimg to the higher cost of CML or AC but since a DW army as few powerful range weapon IMO it's'also wasting an "HW slot"

 

Again I'm reasonning in building an all comer DW list... If an IG player propose me a battle -'d'surely include an HF or 2 ;-)

[riddles]

DWAing (guided by RW telehomers), I like a mix of HF and AC...with RW to prevent scatter, if the enemy's got infantry at the front of his deployment zone (they always do), I can put a template on them on turn one 100% of the time. The AC is more for side shots on tanks when I DWA. Without ravenwing, I'd DWA with AC only.

 

 

You must be a better player than me then. 24 inchs between deployment zones. RW have a 12 inch scout (so assuming you start on the front line), that's 12 inches to cover. deepstrike happens before movement on your turn so you get another 6 inches. let's say you get another inch by using the circular deployment to get your flamer at the front.

 

your heavy flamer is still 5 (or being generous, 4) inches away from the enemy's deployment zone. the flamer template is, what, 8 inches long? that's 2 or 3 hits, if you're lucky. i don't see that being worth losing the cml slot, tbh. especially as it pretty much commits you to that move.

 

please explain where i've gone wrong here?