Heavy bolters....

[DarkGuard]

I think I agree with ak-73 here, Devs are expensive enough in this Codex, especially if you're going to pump an extra 90pts into extra bodies. If you're getting them a Razorback anyway I'd also be tempted to keep them at 5 men strong, if it's good enough for Space Wolves then why not us? :D

 

But seriously, I reckon it's either Razorback with extra heavy, or just the extra bodies. I've run it with both before and it was ridiculously too expensive. I may be tempted to try this as well, as in DoW missions they can move 12", disembark 2" and run D6" to get into a good position for Turn 2, which was the main reason why I dropped them, DoW missions and not being able to set up properly.

[ak-73]

In DOW, it depends on who goes first, no? If I go second, the Razorback comes in 6'' and fires at something. The Devastators hopefully can run onto the table and get cover. That way the LasPlas is also less of a high-priority target (spreading my points over multiple seperate targets for the enemy).

 

Alex

[Project.2501]

Ther my favorite weapon of choice modeling wise, but what's the best way to utilize them tactically....especially in regards to sternguard,which I stubbornly wish to integrate. Thanks in advance...

 

Do NOT use heavy bolters with Sternguard, as it negates their access to wonderfull special ammo. If you MUST use heavy bolters (being toted by marines) I would simply put one in a 10man squad with a plasma gun (possibly a PF, combi-weapon and/or meltabombs on the SGT) as a 'camper' unit. Whether or not this unit should also have a rhino/razorback as well is up to you, however, I would not give it anything else as it's mission is to simply sit there and deny the area.

[Something Wycked]

(spreading my points over multiple seperate targets for the enemy).

Whereas I spend points into the same units to make them more survivable; with each loss you suffer, your damage output goes down. With each loss I suffer, my damage output remains constant.

 

Do my armies have a lower top-end damage output than yours? Yes. Are my armies rock solid and give up less KP's? Yes.

 

Done right, everything balances; it all depends on your playing style and your local meta.

[ak-73]

Unless you combat squad your damage output on one unit remains constant. If you do combat squad you have max 3 bodies as buffer, instead of 1.

 

2/3 missions are about maneuver warfare, the 3rd is attrition.

 

 

Alex

[Something Wycked]

Unless you combat squad your damage output on one unit remains constant.

Exactly. I don't combat squad, and my damage output remains constant. You only bring a demi squad, or divide into combat squads, or a vehicle to make up the extra points of a full squad. A certain amount of firepower inflicted evenly on both your army and my army will reduce your army's firepower but not mine.

 

2/3 missions are about maneuver warfare, the 3rd is attrition.

Unless you act on the mission with different tactics. I don't believe an IG parking lot player views 2/3 as maneuver-based :)

 

Even if you flatly accept the premise that 2 in 3 games are maneuver based and 1 in 3 are attrition, static firebases are valuable if correctly positioned. My Devastators create a zone of area denial for whatever enemy units are vulnerable to their weapons. I've now dictated a portion of my opponent's maneuvering with a static unit.

[DarkGuard]

I think that if you plan the unit to be a cornerstone of your firebase it'll be best to use 10 guys to keep that unit alive and pumping out heavy firepower. On the other hand, if its supplementary it may be better to run it with less men to save more points for other units.

[ak-73]

Unless you combat squad your damage output on one unit remains constant.

Exactly. I don't combat squad, and my damage output remains constant. You only bring a demi squad, or divide into combat squads, or a vehicle to make up the extra points of a full squad. A certain amount of firepower inflicted evenly on both your army and my army will reduce your army's firepower but not mine.

 

Except you are at best overloading the enemy's anti-infantry firepower, whereas I can field another vehicle. (Note that I still consider fielding 3 Dakka Preds is the best choice of HS.)

 

2/3 missions are about maneuver warfare, the 3rd is attrition.

Unless you act on the mission with different tactics. I don't believe an IG parking lot player views 2/3 as maneuver-based B)

 

Even if you flatly accept the premise that 2 in 3 games are maneuver based and 1 in 3 are attrition, static firebases are valuable if correctly positioned. My Devastators create a zone of area denial for whatever enemy units are vulnerable to their weapons. I've now dictated a portion of my opponent's maneuvering with a static unit.

 

Unless you think you can blow the enemy army off the table, the comparisons with the IG are off. :) And frankly I don't think 4xML at 240 points is going to help you wipe out most enemy armies. And correct placements only helps you so far. If the enemy advances his soft transports behind a screen of more heavily armed vehicles, you will find it hard to get a proper angle on them. Try to pull off such an advance against 3 Dakka Preds (or whatever) that have been spread out. Who btw can maneuver 6'' to get sideshots and still shoot. And who can put out 6xS7 at 6''.

 

AV 13 is still hard to get through. AV 10 is relatively easy to get through and chances are you have wasted some of those missiles (and all the Bolter shots). Spreading points over more units allows you to enhance the durability of your firepower (unless they are Long Fangs they can attack only 1 target), as well as having a finer grain at directing your own firepower.

 

A unit with 4xML isn't that scary. Even when they are able to split fire (although it does make them more scary, especially to Deldar and Orks with their light vehicles). I maintain that they are not worth the extra protection and that it's better to drown the enemy in one's own firepower, which means increasing your firewpower and spreading it over units.

 

I think that if you plan the unit to be a cornerstone of your firebase it'll be best to use 10 guys to keep that unit alive and pumping out heavy firepower. On the other hand, if its supplementary I may be better to run it with less men to save more points for other units.

 

That's what you have combat squads for. The Heavy Weapon squads as a whole bring heavy firepower. And you have them because they are more or less a necessity.

 

 

Alex

[Grizzly_bear]

If you face orks, 4x Heavy bolter devs with a razorback sporting TL heavy bolters....SORTED

[Hellios]

If you face orks, 4x Heavy bolter devs with a razorback sporting TL heavy bolters....SORTED

 

I don't know... some battle wagons lists will laugh at that...

[Grizzly_bear]

That's what drop podding sterngaurd with combi bolters are for and las/autocannon preds too

[greatcrusade08]

If you face orks, 4x Heavy bolter devs with a razorback sporting TL heavy bolters....SORTED

 

a single thunderfire will match thier kills

[Warp Angel]

If you face orks, 4x Heavy bolter devs with a razorback sporting TL heavy bolters....SORTED

 

a single thunderfire will match thier kills

 

I've got lots of games with both dakka preds and thunderfires and I concur. And unlike the dakka pred, there's a chance of being able to stop a battle wagon with a deff rolla cold, or if they're close together and the deviation dice are on your side, mutliples cold in a single turn of firing. You're almost guaranteed a hit and a 1 in 6 chance of inflicting an immobilized result is better than most other weapons have of doing anything at all.

[Something Wycked]

Except you are at best overloading the enemy's anti-infantry firepower, whereas I can field another vehicle.

And everyone and their mother brings a ton of melta because "bringing another vehicle" is the meta that people have to deal with ^_^

 

Unless you think you can blow the enemy army off the table, the comparisons with the IG are off. :)

The IG were merely a tactics example. Not all armies are formulated for maneuver warfare. ^_^

 

And frankly I don't think 4xML at 240 points is going to help you wipe out most enemy armies.

I never said my 10 Devs have MLs, did I? ^_^ I have... I forget exactly, but at least 7 full Devastator units. 2 full units of each weapon except MLs.

 

And correct placements only helps you so far. If the enemy advances his soft transports behind a screen of more heavily armed vehicles, you will find it hard to get a proper angle on them.

The assumption here is that I'm bringing weak AT weaponry- which is not the case ^_^ I actually had someone try this on me. In disabling the front vehicles, I created a road block, making his transports waste another turn just getting around the formerly screening vehicles, and effectively created a shooting gallery killing ground for me. That game was not pretty.

 

Spreading points over more units allows you to enhance the durability of your firepower, as well as having a finer grain at directing your own firepower.

I don't know that I'd call it a durability enhancement. Certainly, if your firepower is spread over a number of units, it has some inherent longevity in the number of available targets, but the problem with MSU is that each unit is so easily wiped out, and its firepower removed from your inventory.

 

A unit with 4xML isn't that scary.

Agreed :D

 

I maintain that they are not worth the extra protection and that it's better to drown the enemy in one's own firepower, which means increasing your firewpower and spreading it over units.

Here it becomes clear that we're arguing the same issue the same way, from opposite sides :lol:

 

I maintain that Dev squads are worth the extra protection and that its better to drown the enemy in one's own firepower, which means ensuring each special weapon remains firing for as many turns as possible.

 

Your method works in your meta, my method works in my meta. Cheers!

 

I think that if you plan the unit to be a cornerstone of your firebase it'll be best to use 10 guys to keep that unit alive and pumping out heavy firepower. On the other hand, if its supplementary it may be better to run it with less men to save more points for other units.

Golden!

[Amadeo]

could you run a heavy bolter devastator veteran squad(2 attacks each man) with master- crafted heavy bolters, and at what point cost?

[Something Wycked]

Amadeo, you may want to go down to your local hobby store and take a look at the codex :nuke: In the current codex, veteran squads come in two varieties- Sternguard and Vanguard. Neither are Devastators, but some people use Sternguard as Devastators-light. They do have 2 attacks each and they can bring a pair of Heavy Bolters, but they cannot be Master Crafted.

[Amadeo]

Gotcha....the codex is my friend....thanks for the response...

[Gideon999]

Yeah I have to concur that although I love HB's, I routinely find that the kills and versatility of the ML's is more valuable. I have run the 4x HB dev squad a few times, and its cheap and can whomp some smaller infantry units but I have found it of not much use beyond that.

 

The main reason is that my local meta is pretty savvy about using cover. So even when I face orks (and when I do its usually got at least 80 boyz in there) sure I kick out 12 HB shots a turn (or 15 when playing my Long fangs), they just dont hit that many. Figure out of 12 shots 8 will hit, and of those 6 will wound, and of those 3 will fail cover saves. So I just killed 3 orks in a band of 30 who are going to be in my face next turn. I get about the same number of kills with frags, and I can usually get in one more turn of shooting thanks to the extra range as well as threaten his vehicles.

 

Now thats not to say HB's can't wrack up some kills, but I have found that if your foe makes good use of cover they just arent going to make as much of a dent as the missiles will, and this has held true agains Orks (both horde, mechanized and Kan wall), mech-vet guard and Blood angel marines (both razor spam and death company with deepstriking LR and dreads).

 

Your milage may vary of course.

[Malthe]

The problem with heavy bolters is simply that they are dedicated anti-infantry...

And since we are obligated to employ either Tactical or Scout squads, both of which share that niche, there is usually little need to compliment these with heavy bolters.

Granted some may prefer the longer range of the heavy bolter, but the decrease in mobility compared to the regular bolter-squad means that the difference is minimal in most cases.

 

Also, Str 5 is ideal for nothing and sadly not flexible enough to make up for its lack of specialisation.

If a heavy bolter had 4 shots or was Str 6 (or counted as defensive weapons on veichles), maybe they would be more worthwhile, but as it is I find it hard to apreciate them game-wise.

 

Unfortunately, because they look amazing!

[Something Wycked]

Also, Str 5 is ideal for nothing and sadly not flexible enough to make up for its lack of specialisation.

I find this amusing, because I see S5 as ideal for many things and incredibly flexible. For an example, see Grey Knight Stormbolters with Psybolt ammo. B)

[Bartali]

The problem with heavy bolters is simply that they are dedicated anti-infantry...

And since we are obligated to employ either Tactical or Scout squads, both of which share that niche, there is usually little need to compliment these with heavy bolters.

Granted some may prefer the longer range of the heavy bolter, but the decrease in mobility compared to the regular bolter-squad means that the difference is minimal in most cases.

 

Also, Str 5 is ideal for nothing and sadly not flexible enough to make up for its lack of specialisation.

If a heavy bolter had 4 shots or was Str 6 (or counted as defensive weapons on veichles), maybe they would be more worthwhile, but as it is I find it hard to apreciate them game-wise.

 

Unfortunately, because they look amazing!

 

Malthe has it spot on here. Cover kills them as well - all AP4 does is strip an armour save for a cover save.

 

I find this amusing, because I see S5 as ideal for many things and incredibly flexible. For an example, see Grey Knight Stormbolters with Psybolt ammo

 

S6 id's multi-wound T3 and can pen Rhino/Razors in a pinch. S5 doesn't really do much.

[Something Wycked]

S6 id's multi-wound T3 and can pen Rhino/Razors in a pinch. S5 doesn't really do much.

ID'ing T3 is overrated. How many multi-wound T3 models are there? How many of those are scary? :( S5 does plenty. It glances AV11, pens AV10, and puts plenty of wounds on targets that are T5 or less. Heavy Bolters have lots of advantages over Psybolt Stormbolters, too; better AP, better range, and an extra shot fired.

 

Granted, you may not value S5 weapons in your local meta due to the armies and units you typically see, but that doesn't mean S5 weapons are factually bad. ^_^

[Laughingdagger]

I heard heavy bolters may become assault 3 in 6th, anyone with any possible evidence?

[Something Wycked]

Where did you hear that at? I'd be interested to read the rumor.

 

And no, no evidence; everything about 6th is pure rumor and speculation at this point.

 

That said, it would be weird for Heavy Bolters to be Assault weapons- rumored 6th rules say that charging with Assault weapons will add 1 attack, like paired weapons do now. A 10 strong Devastator squad, with 4 Heavy Bolters, that charges an enemy unit that gets too close will have 25 attacks on the charge- 26 if the Sergeant has paired weapons or an Assault weapon :lol: