Attack Bike Squadron Weapon Choice

[Storm Dragons 3rd Company]

I've been toying with adding an squadron of Attack Bikes into my army to see how they do in 6th and I'm trying to work out how to arm them. My numbers all assume that this is a squadron of three identically armed attack bikes all firing only their heavy weapon (because the twin linked bolters will be the same for all configurations).

 

I've done some math, possibly even correctly and it appears to me that the Heavy Bolter bikes are vastly better against enemies with 4+ or worse armor at all toughnesses from 3 to 6. In that case, the HB squadron kills from 5-2 enemies while the multi-melta kills 1 & 2/3 enemies at 12" shorter range.

 

However against anything with an armor save of 3+ or better, in all toughness ranges, the multi-melta outperforms the heavy bolter. The multi-melta continues to turn in a solid 1 & 2/3 (1.66) kills while the heavy bolter ranges from 1.65 to 0.34 kills (1.65 is against a T3 enemy with a 3+ armor save).

 

Against TEQ, the multi-melta kills 1.10 baddies while the heavy bolter kills 0.85 to 0.34 enemies, making the multi-meltas better.

 

If you assume cover, then the heavy bolter is best against targets who would rely on the cover save against it as well as against T3 and T4 opponents with a 3+ armor save. Otherwise the multi-meltas produce a better result.

 

Against AV10 targets, the heavy bolter will cause on average two results, one glance and one penetration. Against the same target, the multi-melta will glance 0.34 and penetrate 1.32 for an average result of 1 & 2/3 hits in a turn of shooting. Thus the multi-melta has a better chance of penetrating, but the heavy bolter has better odds of doing something. Since most AV10 targets have 2HP this means the heavy bolter will likely kill an AV 10 target UNLESS this is a rear armor shot, something bikes can do reasonably well. This does not include a jink save which would reduce the result by something like 1/3 in most cases (but would still not change which result is better because the reduction would be uniformly proportional). If you assume that the multi-melta is within 12" of the target, then the multi-melta will get much better, causing a glance 1/36th of the time and penetrating in ALL other cases.

 

Against AV 11 targets however, the multi-melta out performs the heavy bolter in all aspects, and against anything with better armor than Av11, only the multi-melta has a chance of doing anything.

 

 

Based on the above, it seems that the ONLY time I would ever want to run heavy bolters is against things with no save against it or who are relying on cover to save against it. Against MEQ, it is rather iffy since the heavy bolter is only better against them if they are in cover and even then, not by a lot (a heavy bolter squardon will kill 1.32 MEQ in cover while a multi-melta squadron will kill only 1.1 MEQ). Thus, it seems that against orks, guard, nyds, the heavy bolter squadron is good, but against the MEQ that is half the game, the multi-melta is better.

 

Presently I field a thunderfire cannon and am about to finish painting my second which I will also field. I usually field a land speeder typhoon as well. They work pretty well against things like orks, guard, and nyds, but are less effective against MEQ. Multi-melta attack bike squadrons fill in a weakness in my army while heavy bolter squadrons give me more of the same as far as I can tell. Given that, does anyone see a reason why I would want to field the attack bikes with heavy bolters?

 

(As another aside, I recently switched my Typhoon to a heavy bolter. I did this because I only have one to field and thus, usually kept it in my backfield firing missiles. That meant the multi-melta on it was often out of range of the things I was shooting missiles at. I didn't want to suicide it (save that for the non-typhoon versions). So I added a heavy bolter there because it gets to shoot more. Assuming that was the right choice, this seems another argument for me to bring in the attack bikes with multi-meltas, isn't it?)

 

Thanks for your thoughts!

 

Dan

[ShinyRhino]

Heavy bolter attack bikes are typically not run in squadrons unless you're tailoring for a specific opponent.

They're more useful when put into a bike squad instead. This is because the AB is essentially 2 extra wounds in a bike squad, but for 10 points less than two actual bikers. It can also soak up a single S9 or less AP3 shot for your squad without croaking, unlike the single wound bikers.

For squadrons, stick to multimeltas. As extra beef for a bike squad unit, take the heavy bolter unless fielding that bike squad with the intent to kill tanks and heavy infantry. The heavy bolter attack bike is more useful crammed into a flamer-armed bike squad than it wouldbe in a plasma or melta armed bike squad.

[Storm Dragons 3rd Company]

Heavy bolter attack bikes are typically not run in squadrons unless you're tailoring for a specific opponent.

They're more useful when put into a bike squad instead. This is because the AB is essentially 2 extra wounds in a bike squad, but for 10 points less than two actual bikers. It can also soak up a single S9 or less AP3 shot for your squad without croaking, unlike the single wound bikers.

For squadrons, stick to multimeltas. As extra beef for a bike squad unit, take the heavy bolter unless fielding that bike squad with the intent to kill tanks and heavy infantry. The heavy bolter attack bike is more useful crammed into a flamer-armed bike squad than it wouldbe in a plasma or melta armed bike squad.

 

Thanks. The logic here seems pretty sound, though based on my calculations (my tables are posted in my blog), I wonder if the single heavy bolter is better than the single multi-melta against any enemy other than the thing that get no save vs the heavy bolter or 3+ armored opponants with 4 or less toughness in cover.

 

Also, why wouldn't you put a heavy bolter in a squadron with plasmaguns? I can see the argument for the meltas which are primarily an anti-tank weapon, but plasmaguns have good anti-infantry abilities against MEQ (and others), especially within rapid fire range. Against MEQ, I might even want to have 2 rapid firing plasmaguns instead of 2 rapid firing twin-linked bolters, but I admit I've never run the math on that.

[ShinyRhino]

Also, why wouldn't you put a heavy bolter in a squadron with plasmaguns? I can see the argument for the meltas which are primarily an anti-tank weapon, but plasmaguns have good anti-infantry abilities against MEQ (and others), especially within rapid fire range. Against MEQ, I might even want to have 2 rapid firing plasmaguns instead of 2 rapid firing twin-linked bolters, but I admit I've never run the math on that.

 

Range bands and threat profiles. Multimeltas match the plasmaguns in range and ideal targets. You're pointing plasma at light armor, Marines, Terminators, and monsters. You don't point plasma at Guardsmen (except Heavy Weapons Teams, for instakills) or Gaunts. A multimelta works just as well against every one of those ideal plasma targets. A heavy bolter is a step down against them all.

[DarkGuard]

You run multi-meltas on your attack bike squadrons. The logic is that between numerous boltguns etc you probably have a lot of anti-infantry. You won't have as much anti-tank though, especially not relentless MMs. That's what attack bikes bring, fast melta, and it's incredibly valuable as well as cheap.

[Excubitor]

I guess I'm in the minority that loves my HB AB squadron, but then my most regular opponents besides SM are Orcs, Tyranids, Daemons and Henchmen heavy GK, with necrons propbably being added to that soon. Plus, there's the fact that without Vulkan I cannot hit at all with any melta weapon!

 

I like the HB AB because they're extremely cheap, have a great volume of fire and they're tough. I also find them to be a decent roadblock if you have nothing else small and cheap to use. With the math, yes MM are more likely to kill a marine/terminator equivalent each turn, but the HB have the potential to kill more, especially if you take in things like Storm Shield terminators. It depends entirely on your lists, I've once run a bike-heavy list with 2 3-man units of MM AB and a 3-man HB AB unit. I prefer my MM AB in my bike units, as I run them mainly with plasma, with 1-2 units with melta. Flamer isn't something I run as I find the bolters plenty good enough for that.

 

I rarely find I wish I'd spent the extra points on MM, while I often wish I'd taken the HB, to the point where I only pick the MM if I need the AT.

 

I can see the point of the above posts, and agree with many points, but in my experience I just like my HB unit more. One of my regular opponents, after reading up on the MM AB craze, asked me why I didn't use them and switch my Devs from 10 w/ 4x ML to 4x HB. I pointed out I can get 2 units of AB for the same cost, with more wounds, speed, and firepower!

 

I'll finish with yes, by the math MM AB are better, but from experience I love my HB AB and would never replace them with MM!

[Storm Dragons 3rd Company]

I guess I'm in the minority that loves my HB AB squadron, but then my most regular opponents besides SM are Orcs, Tyranids, Daemons and Henchmen heavy GK, with necrons propbably being added to that soon. Plus, there's the fact that without Vulkan I cannot hit at all with any melta weapon!

 

I like the HB AB because they're extremely cheap, have a great volume of fire and they're tough. I also find them to be a decent roadblock if you have nothing else small and cheap to use. With the math, yes MM are more likely to kill a marine/terminator equivalent each turn, but the HB have the potential to kill more, especially if you take in things like Storm Shield terminators. It depends entirely on your lists, I've once run a bike-heavy list with 2 3-man units of MM AB and a 3-man HB AB unit. I prefer my MM AB in my bike units, as I run them mainly with plasma, with 1-2 units with melta. Flamer isn't something I run as I find the bolters plenty good enough for that.

 

I rarely find I wish I'd spent the extra points on MM, while I often wish I'd taken the HB, to the point where I only pick the MM if I need the AT.

 

I can see the point of the above posts, and agree with many points, but in my experience I just like my HB unit more. One of my regular opponents, after reading up on the MM AB craze, asked me why I didn't use them and switch my Devs from 10 w/ 4x ML to 4x HB. I pointed out I can get 2 units of AB for the same cost, with more wounds, speed, and firepower!

 

I'll finish with yes, by the math MM AB are better, but from experience I love my HB AB and would never replace them with MM!

 

You raise some interesting points that I had not considered:

 

1) The cost difference (a points per kill question perhaps)

2) The potential kills, probability aside -- if your dice get hot and your opponent's go cold, the HB can kill more in absolute terms

3) The results if we assume a 3++ save -- I predict HB become better

4) The fact that target selection (and the composition of the rest of your army) plays a large part in how effective the two options will be

 

I also had another friend point out to me that a Multi-melta can insta-kill a 2+ would T4 enemy (Screamers?). That is also worth thinking about.

[ShinyRhino]

3) The results if we assume a 3++ save -- I predict HB become better

 

I also had another friend point out to me that a Multi-melta can insta-kill a 2+ would T4 enemy (Screamers?). That is also worth thinking about.

 

Those Hammernators will have a 2+ save versus your heavy bolters, not a 3++.

Pointing a MMAB and an HBAB squadron of three each at Hammernators would result in 4 heavy bolter wounds and .67 dead Terminators; .54 dead from multimeltas. Interesting...

 

Screamers cannot be instakilled. Daemons are Eternal Warriors.

[Storm Dragons 3rd Company]

3) The results if we assume a 3++ save -- I predict HB become better

 

I also had another friend point out to me that a Multi-melta can insta-kill a 2+ would T4 enemy (Screamers?). That is also worth thinking about.

 

Those Hammernators will have a 2+ save versus your heavy bolters, not a 3++.

Pointing a MMAB and an HBAB squadron of three each at Hammernators would result in 4 heavy bolter wounds and .67 dead Terminators; .54 dead from multimeltas. Interesting...

 

Screamers cannot be instakilled. Daemons are Eternal Warriors.

 

Right but the 3++ does change the MM. I wasn't sure about demons, hence the "?" but I knew it worked on like Captains and stuff.

[DarkGuard]

3) The results if we assume a 3++ save -- I predict HB become better

 

I also had another friend point out to me that a Multi-melta can insta-kill a 2+ would T4 enemy (Screamers?). That is also worth thinking about.

 

Those Hammernators will have a 2+ save versus your heavy bolters, not a 3++.

Pointing a MMAB and an HBAB squadron of three each at Hammernators would result in 4 heavy bolter wounds and .67 dead Terminators; .54 dead from multimeltas. Interesting...

 

Screamers cannot be instakilled. Daemons are Eternal Warriors.

 

Not too surprising IMO. Quantity of fire has always been one of the better ways to take out Terminators, with MMs you're going to score less hits and therefore less wounds against Hammernators, whose save is near equal to when hit by a heavy bolter. Run the numbers with Tactical Terminators though, and they'll probably be different.

 

I like the idea of HB ABs, but I can't justify them over my MM ABs. :whistling:

[ShinyRhino]

1.08 multimelta kills on Tac Termies.

[thelordcal]

My problem with HB attack bikes is why not take dual HB land speeders instead? For 60 points you've double your heavy bolter output! Plus if they can manage to stay out of bolter range they're going to by more durable compared to the attack bike.

[Storm Dragons 3rd Company]

My problem with HB attack bikes is why not take dual HB land speeders instead? For 60 points you've double your heavy bolter output! Plus if they can manage to stay out of bolter range they're going to by more durable compared to the attack bike.

 

But also more likely to garner an anti-tank shock. I manage to keep my typhoon around sometimes, but it can stay at 48". Otherwise, a single land speeder tends to go down before an attack bike has been my experience. I was thinking of fielding the MM on the bikes and then putting HB on my typhoons... mostly because the HB range is more compatible with missile range.

[Gideon999]

Definitely use the HB on any Typhoon. it is the only speeder weapon that synergizes at all with the missiles thanks to range. Sure a MM can pop a tank better than missiles, but that makes it a suicide unit, and a heavy flamer will crisp more infantry than a HB, but again - suicide unit. Over time the HB Typhoon, if used carefully, will kill more and be more useful.

[carnosaur93]

i think its worth pointing out that the MM's range synegize perfectly with the range of the attack bike's twin-linked bolters, that you may in this edition fire in the same shooting phase as the MM, even at a different target if i remember correctly. also, the AB's seem very good at being an upclose and personal unit, being able to get there easily, having T5, and at minimum a 3+/5++ save at two wounds so that they can actually survive there...

and even if not, they will take quite abit of fire to bring down, something your opponent will HAVE to do with 3 relentless 12" movement multimelta's at BS4

 

so thanks to speed and durability, aswell as alot of damage potential, the MM bikes seems to be very very good shocktroopers, causing either disruption or killing whatever target you would pretty much like

 

my point is, the range and high S of the MM seems to synegize not just well with the AB's other weapons, but with the unit and its functions in general

[ShinyRhino]

i think its worth pointing out that the MM's range synegize perfectly with the range of the attack bike's twin-linked bolters, that you may in this edition fire in the same shooting phase as the MM, even at a different target if i remember correctly.

 

Negative. All of the unit's weapons must fire at the same target.

 

also, the AB's seem very good at being an upclose and personal unit, being able to get there easily, having T5, and at minimum a 3+/5++ save at two wounds so that they can actually survive there...

and even if not, they will take quite abit of fire to bring down, something your opponent will HAVE to do with 3 relentless 12" movement multimelta's at BS4

 

I've be careful about using the term "5++" in regard to the Jink save. 5++ is typically used to denote an invulnerable save, which Jink is not. It cannot be used in melee, which attack bikes will find themselves locked in if operating at that "up close and personal" range. In melee, they'r just a 3+ armor save unit.

[carnosaur93]

good point with the save... in terms of being in melee, one should really just combat tactic their way out of it, though...

[ShinyRhino]

good point with the save... in terms of being in melee, one should really just combat tactic their way out of it, though...

 

Just remember that to use Combat tactics to brak out of a melee fight, you have to lose the round. Attack bikes can be held up for a while by chump units like Fire Warriors and Grots. Being held up in melee for even a single Shooting phase is a win for the enemy, as MMABs are often key anti-armor assets in a Marine army.

Be careful!

[Ming]

HBs are far more efficient in devastator units than on attack bikes. MMs are more efficient on attack bikes than devastators. It was probably designed that way on purpose for generic marines.

 

Attack bikes create a great anti-tank or MC killing platform, especially in squadrons. Fast, redeployable, etc. And it goes with my concept that you need three dice to really make sure you get the job done.

 

I'd keep massed HBs either on Typhoons or in dev squads.

 

Overall, there is a good point about making sure you look for the most point-efficient means to add meaningful firepower to a list. See Shiny's comment above about adding on attack bikes to bike squads.

 

I think the overall theme might be to (1) math hammer out the means to get the most firepower you can in your list (see the Bringer of Victory blog elsewhere for his take on DIPT, DPT, DLRPT), but take it at least qualitatively further with (2) grouping like / similar weapons so that you cross the threashold of 1 (whatever) target dropped per turn by that unit. If the mathhammer does not suggest you can get 1 target down, it probably is not worth it.

 

Example: you have a unit that can wreck 0.83 rhinos per turn. Odds are, that is very bad, because you need to add the firepower of additional units to reliably take that target out. If you have 2 units of the same, then you start wasting firepower, and can only take on half of the opponent's units at any one time, which may be an issue.

 

An interesting conundrum becomes when you barely dent a particular unit class such as "1.08 multimelta kills on Tac Termies". If it was a unit of 5 chaos terminators, you do not cross the threshold to cause a morale check. Depending on your location, you'd still have 4 chaos termies, +/- a character, potentially in charge range of the attack bikes. Not a good thing.

 

Nuff said...

[ShinyRhino]

HBs are far more efficient in devastator units than on attack bikes. MMs are more efficient on attack bikes than devastators. It was probably designed that way on purpose for generic marines.

 

"Far more" is debatable. Raw points, they're barely more efficient. Three heavy bolters in the AB squadron costs 120 points, and you get three twinned bolters as well. Three heavy bolters in a Dev Squad is 135 points, and you get two non-twinned bolters as well. That's 45 points per heavy bolter, more than the Attack Bike. Now, if you take the full 4 heavy bolters, you knock the per-gun cost down to 37.5 points, and only one non-twinned bolter. If you decide to take a full 10-man Dev squad for abaltive wounds, you inflate the cost per heavy bolter to a whopping 57.5 points. The stockbolters of the meatshield Marines are a wildcard, as they may or may not have range or Strength to threaten what the HBs are firing at.

The Dev Squad has T4 and 5 wounds, morale checks after 2 unsaved wounds, Ld 9, no movement before full-BS shooting.

The Attack Bikes are T5 and 6 wounds, morale checks after 2 unsaved wounds, Ld 8, movement allowed before full-BS shooting.

 

Each unit occupies a different FOC slot, which affects how the rest of your list is built. Attempting to compare their efficiency across FOC slot is almost futile.

[Giga]

Unless you're tailoring a list to fight a particular army, multimelta attack bikes are pretty much the only option.

 

 

 

On a related note, if you think you need anti-horde, you're much better off getting dakkapreds (autocannon + heavy bolter sponsons), flamer+combiflamer tacticals, sternguard, vindicators, whirlwinds, vulkan, etc. Heavy bolter attack bikes are just a subpar choice overall.

[ShinyRhino]

Heavy bolter attack bikes are just a subpar choice overall.

 

"Overall" is a big word to sling around in the tactica forum ^_^.

Each unit you listed fills a specific niche, including the attack bikes. None of the other units you rattled off can move 12" and fire 9 heavy bolter and up to 6 bolter shots in a turn. The ability to maneuver is a significant asset in 6th Edition, and attack bikes have tons. HBABs are a viable selection and far from "sub par overall."

[Giga]

"Overall" is a big word to sling around in the tactica forum :).

Each unit you listed fills a specific niche, including the attack bikes. None of the other units you rattled off can move 12" and fire 9 heavy bolter and up to 6 bolter shots in a turn. The ability to maneuver is a significant asset in 6th Edition, and attack bikes have tons. HBABs are a viable selection and far from "sub par overall."

Let me reframe this:

 

As a space marine player, you basically HAVE to get stuff that can reliably perform multiple roles and be useful in most situations, because we're an elite army and our stuff is too expensive to be heavily specialized. Certain specialist choices such as Lysander and assault terminators are exempt from this rule simply because they're extremely good at what they do and they fill a niche our dex otherwise lacks, but overall specialized units are a bad choice.

 

Some examples of overly specialized choices in vanilla dex: 3 lascannon pred, land raider redeemer, whirlwind, heavy bolter attack bikes, ironclads etc.

 

Now compare the heavy bolter attack bikes with dakkapreds. 2 heavy bolter attack bikes and a dakkapred cost about the same. Attack bikes get 6 heavy bolter shots, 2 twinlinked bolters, and increased mobility. Dakkapred gets 2 autocannon shots, 6 heavy bolter shots, andless mobility, but is more survivable because it's stationed far away from melta/plasma/assault. Overall, we can agree that they're more or less same efficiency-wise when it comes to hitting infantry.

 

Now this is the crux of the problem: attack bikes are specialized anti-infantry that can't really do anything vs vehicles or MCs. The dakkapred on the other hand can pretty reliably harm light vehicles and put wounds on MCs. The dakkapred therefore has the huge advantage of being useful no matter the situation.

 

This is why I strongly advise new players not to take super-specialized stuff like heavy bolter attack bikes or 3-las preds or droppoded ironclad dreadnoughts, but rather to stick with the stuff like dakkapreds, rifleman dreads, vindicators, combipreds, etc. that's going to have a spot in pretty much every list, regardless of whether they're just fooling around or aiming for #1 on a tournament.

 

 

 

EDIT: In other words, the units I mentioned earlier as better alternatives to hb attack bikes do not "fill a specific niche". Quite to the contrary, they are versatile and that's one of the best things about them. HB attack bikes are not.

[Storm Dragons 3rd Company]

Just a note: The question was not whether, as compared to other units, the attack bikes are a better or worse option. The question assumes a squadron of attack bikes is being fielded and asks the best way to equip said unit to take advantage of what it does bring to the table. Bikes offer improved toughness, improved mobility, jink saves, and a potential distraction of enemy forces/fire. Bikes are weapons to move in early and makes shots on priority targets or to harass flanks. Bikes are potentially good at getting shots at weaker parts of armor. (Regular bikes with the right kind of HQ are also good for last minute objective claiming and line breaker.)

 

Priority targets in early game (which is when the Bike's ability to get in quick hits is most valuable) are most likely to be either fast moving enemy troops or vehicles/armor/heavy support. For vehicles and armor, multi-meltas will be more effective. Against any kind of infantry, it depends on its armor save, but for about half the 40K world, we have to assume an armor save of 3+.

 

Thus, I'm thinking multi-meltas are better most often and probably more versatile. That choice makes them primarily anti-armor early in games. Hence, what I want the unit to do is to destroy enemy vehicles as far from my gunline as possible so as to make the bastards walk and stop shooting big tankish weapons at me. I have to allow for the fact that there may be no or few vehicles in my opponent's list and so consider how the various weapons might perform as against other targets. Sure killing only one terminator is not that great, but it is still one terminator who won't be smashing into my lines. Assuming I have no better targets, I'll take that. If I have a more optimal target (say an enemy Vindicator), I shoot at that instead of a terminator squad. This obviously depends on where things are on the board. The closer to my lines the terminators get, the higher their target priority becomes. Still, they are never going to be a multi-melta attack bike squadrons primary prey, but once all enemy vehicles are removed, they are an acceptable secondary target. (By comparison, they will never be the best prey for a HB unit either. However, they are primary prey for Vindicators, Plasma Cannons, and things like that.)

 

I also think that a squadron of three multi-melta attack bikes is more "dangerous" from the enemy's point of view precisely because the melta hits like it does. They might, depending on their army design, feel they can ignore 3 HB ABs. I think it is much harder to ignore 3 MM ABs. That means they will feel they need to devote resources to killing the ABs which causes several nice tactical results. First, it takes pressure off of other units. Second, accomplishing this against units as mobile and tough as ABs means the opponent may get distracted. Third, I don't think many weapons are good at killing ABs. The higher strength weapons do the job, but no one has that many that shouldn't be shooting at tanks instead. Lower strength weapons are less effective given the ABs toughness. The biggest problem comes from weapons like Dark Eldar spinter rifles. Fourth, this gives the enemy target priority issues and saturates their guns. They have to choose between 2 thunderfires, a unit of tactical terminators, 2 typhoons, and this unit of ABs in their face. All of those are good enough to be problems, but none clearly outshines the others so as to make it the obvious priority.

 

EDIT: However, it occurs to me that if you were shooting at a flyer out of desperation, assuming the HB can hurt it, you might be better off with the HB.

 

Dan

[Tribalminer]

As far as I've seen, MM is the best choice for Attack Bike Squadrons. The mobility (and size) of the attack bike makes it far better for hunting tanks, which are usually rather slow, unless they are some variety of Eldar.

 

The HB can't provide the same level of anti-armour, as usually most vehicles only have AV10 on the rear (Orks and Dark Eldar being the main exception), and so the extra range of the HB will not come into play. Due to the extra distance required to physically move around the tanks, it can be argued that the HB is likely to be a shorter ranged anti-armour weapon, which removes the main advantage of HB over MM.

 

The only time the HB will out perform the MM is against Dark Eldar, a crafty player with night shields will be able to stay the equivalent of 42" away, which with move and shoot the HB can reach.

 

As an anti-infantry weapon, HB's are poor in most respects anyway, unless massed in large numbers, except against 4+ T4 (or worse) units. Unless you face a lot of Infantry heavy 4+ armies, I can't see any reason for the HB over MM