Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I see a lot of lists with one dreadnought. Over and Over I see people opting for the Iron clad. Why the Iron clad over the venerable?

Is it just that it's new and shiny or do they really think the AV13, is it the seismic hammer, or is it just a points thing?

Pete

Um, yes? Seems like those would all be good reasons to take an ironclad over ven....

Because AV13 is still relatively hard to punch with the new rules - and because Venerable is expensive.

The cost is not much more then a regular dread when you take into account what it would cost to put extra armor on.

The difference from AV12 to AV13 helps in shooting but is HUGE in close combat (Krak grenades have no chance of glancing, most power fists need to roll a 5 to glance instead of a 4)

Comes with extra armor standard

New Drop Pod Assault rules let it be up close and personal on the first turn, assaulting in the second turn (Unless the scatter is WAY off I'll be within 6 inches of some vehicle to use that melta gun to full effect after the drop).

Move through cover means terrain won't slow me down as much.

All this (base Ironclad with a drop pod) for 5 points more then a Venerable without a drop pod.

Replace the storm Bolter with a heavy flamer and have it in a Vulkan army and then you have even more twin linked fun.

IMO the ironclad is the biggest steal of the whole codex.

Totally valid question...

Most people are putting them in their lists 'from the hip' and have not playtested the guys yet. But I'm sure there's some guys out there that have played with both.

I haven't gotten around to testing them yet but. On paper, I think its a cost issue.

Armor 13 versus re-rolling the damage result- You know what this means I'm sure. Less weapons can hurt it, but those weapons are more likely to damage it. Looking through the meta-game filter... I see lootas and autocannon guardsmen having a problem with the higher armor value in particular.

2 attacks at weapon skill 5 versus 3 attack at weapon skill 4 with the +1 to vehicle damage table. I like the more attacks option myself. And if they do let you have that vehicle charge, the seismic hammer has a nice little bonus. I am a realist however, I won't expect a lot of charges where I'll need anything lower than a '6' to hit. I tend to assume competency in my opponent, and I don't expect 'ironclad assaults' to be my answer to enemy vehicles.

BS5 multi-melta and heavy flamer versus BS4 meltagun and heavy flamer. Advantage, venerable. Not by a massive margin, but noticeable. 6" more 'good' melta range, and 16.6% more accurate.

165 points naked versus 135 points with move through cover and free extra armor. This is really the crux of the decision. I don't think anyone is crazy for taking the venerable. I might even upgrade an ironclad to a venerable if, after finishing my list I ended up 30 points light. But the point is, 30 points is a lot to spend to basically side-grade your ironclad.

Unless you're fighting an army with no weapons over S5, or creatures with WS10, I don't see any situation where the cheaper Ironclad wouldn't be preferable over a Venerable.

Eldar, for example have a lot of s6 guns that the ICD would be immune to. Plus they are the new hotness.

If your opponents answer to vehicles is a meltagun, then armor 13 is not really anything special. Considering that 5/6th of the time a meltagun penetrates armor 13, then the extra point of armor is largely irrelevant. Especially considering the damage result re-roll is effective on any type of result, regardless of how devastating it was.

If I was putting a dreadnought in my list to kill tanks, I'd want a venerable. Unless i had Hestan.

I'm still in the ironclad camp. It's still my dreadnought of choice. But I think hyperbole about the 'uselessness' of the venerable is starting to come out in these discussions.

venerable is by no means useless, I just find the ironclad much more useful in the way I play the game.

It's interesting to me not a single person defended the venerable.

My immediate reaction was that Dreads die to S8 Pfs, melta guns, or S9 las cannons (or equivalent).

All of those items the venerable is considerabley better against.

Pete

Venerables are better IMHO, because they have a wider application for all builds. IronClads are nice, but I'd rather have the re-roll the damage than one point higher armor. Vens are more expensive, but I'd rather have a WS BS 5 dread any day. I wish my Templar vens had WS5...LOL. I guess I have to live with my Dreads having preferred enemy...LOL.

Capt K

I don't have 45 points (difference between an Ironclad and a Venerable w/ Extra Armor) to spend on a Damage Table Re-roll.

I'm not a big fan of trading 1A and 1AV for 1WS and 1BS either.

I'm a fan of Dreadnoughts in Close Combat. It keeps you out of Anti-Tank Shooting and it lets you actually use those points you paid for a S10 Power Weapon that strikes at Initiative 4. The Ironclad is much better equipped for that battlefield role than the Venerable Dreadnought can ever be.

With the Venerable Dreadnought you pay a lot more points for a vehicle that's talents are torn between shooting and assault. I think that's a waste of resources. Once I get up to the 180 point range (Venerable Dreadnought w/ Extra Armor) I have to ask myself the serious question: "Why aren't I using a Land Raider here?"

- Marty Lund

Slightly of topic, but I did a quick read over the Ironclad entry this morning at the store and I have 2 questions. If you guys can give me your opinion here, I won't have to open another thread for that.

1. The Seismic hammer can be replaced by a chainfist. Isn't that a lot better? 2D6s instead of +1 on damage tables or am I missing something?

2. This one really bugs me. I re-read the entry for drop pods. The moment they arrive on the tabel, they count as open topped vehicles, wouldn't that mean that a Dread or marine squad can charge out of it???


On topic: I would take an Ironclad, because it sounds frickin' cool

1. Getting a better result on the roll > getting better penetration.

2. No, because it used the Deep Strike rules to arrive.

Venerable are not in the "useless" camp by any means... they're just in the "expensive" camp.

stjohn70 wrote:Venerable are not in the "useless" camp by any means... they're just in the "expensive" camp.

I think that's the crux of the matter. New marines seem to be all about "pretty good rules for very good prices," and the Ironclad falls into that while the venerable does not. With long range shooting being far less valuable against vehicles, the venerable loses it's one big advantage: highly accurate las/mL shots.

I like the Ironclad. I really do. But as I'm playing Space Wolves, their Venerable is sooo much better than the loyalists its not even a consideration.

However if your looking at podding dreads, I think the the cheap alpha strike hotness is a normal dread with TL Heavy Flamer arm and the heavy flamer upgrade. Laying down twin flamer templates is just fun.

You still have the DCCW if something doesn't run away or you don't get blasted.

I can see the both the ironclad and ven being good at range. Not as many melta guns. However if your up close the 2D6 from meltas pretty much makes the +1 AV of the ironclad moot. And putting flamers on a BS5 dread seems wasteful, so stick the long range guns on the Venerable and stand back and shoot. Here the hard to kill ability helps when your only taking a few hits a turn over many.

Jayden63:

I think the Ironclad can do two Heavy Flamethrowers and two Hunter-Killer Missiles, as well as get more Dreadnought Close Combat Weapon attacks. Particularly if the Salamander's Forgefather is taken. The standard Dreadnought can do it cheaper though.

Anung Un Rama:

Regard the Chainfist, I think that also reduces that Dreadnought's attacks to I1, as well.

Any/All:

It's nice to see GW giving Dreadnoughts a range of options beyond just Dreadnought Close Combat Weapons, and exploring the idea of bonuses to damage (Meltaguns, Seismic Hammers).

Does the chainfist come with a built in weapon? I mean under Seismic it says it has a built in weapon. If you lose the seismic for a Chainfist do you lose the attached weapon?


I don't really see the point of taking a Chainfist.

I don't really see the point of taking a Chainfist

When you really really really need to pen another Walker, monolith, or Landraider. It doesn't help any against models with a T stat.

On the walker note, its really a bad idea to try to take out another dread with it. The chain fist will strike last, giving the other dread the first turn to swing and take out the Ironclad. My killa Kan squad learned this lesson a long time ago. Initiative really matters when two dreads are duking it out.

Shep wrote:If your opponents answer to vehicles is a meltagun, then armor 13 is not really anything special. Considering that 5/6th of the time a meltagun penetrates armor 13, then the extra point of armor is largely irrelevant. Especially considering the damage result re-roll is effective on any type of result, regardless of how devastating it was.

Its the multishot weaponry it stops, firing autocannon at Av12 is a good use of the weapon and is an outside shot for a multilaser.

I'm going to field a single Ironclad alongside a normal dread, just to satisfy my need to see a huge hammer

I think the overall decision has to do with the rest of the Marine army and typical opponents.

The Ironclad seems to be a great choice against Ork armies. I'm pretty confident I can get enough Melta weapons into my army w/o the need for this Dread. Twin heavy flamers and not a bad choice against the hordes (which are much more common now). Then add in the bonus from the Vulcan. Sure, Warbosses have S10 powerklaws, they the Dread gets to attack first. Nobz will charge in for a S9 hit, but that's the risk one takes. Note: I'm also assuming the dread goes in supported and not acting in a vacuum and I'd also strongly consider taking 2 if I take any at all.

The Venerable is still a good buy, but I'd prefer it as a shooting platform. Put it in cover with a Techmarine (or equivelant) and you've got a pretty decent firing platform with a great cover save.

I've a feeling I'll face more Ironclad dreads in Drop Pod styled Marine armies as well as Salamander themed armies.

Regard the Chainfist, I think that also reduces that Dreadnought's attacks to I1, as well.

O right, I didn't notice that. Now it makes much more sense, thanks nurglitch.

My experience of playing chaos dreads with close combat weapons and flamers only (and no long range weapons) suggests that most close-combat dreads can't successfully run into range to shoot or assault. Usually what happens is they get immobilized, then stand there for the rest of the game.

This won't apply so much to podding dreads, but without pods ironclads are not worth the cost IMHO.

Why would it reduce the init to 1??? I haven't ever seen anything that reduces a Dreds init. A normal Dred CCW is essentially a powerfist as it "doubles" the strength(to a max of 10) The siesmic hammer is essentially a Thunder hammer as it is the same as a normal DCCW but has an added effect.

Therefore, you can make the logical conclusion that the Dred Chainfist doesn't drop his init to 1. Its just a DCCW with an added effect, like the hammer. And since its a free option, it is not going to be inherantly better or worse than the weapon its replacing.

Dreds are big machines, pretty sure they compensate for big weapons.

But its not a DCCW. Its a chainfist, alla terminator weapon. A chainfist is a powerfist that rolls 2D6 for armor pen. Since powerfists go at I1, chainfists go at I1.

And the dccw is NOT a powerfist. A DCCW is a Power weapon that puts the strength up to 10.

Then the debate is:
Did GW mean "chainfist" as in "powerfist that gets 2d6 armor pen" or "chainfist" as in "DCCW that gets 2d6 armor pen?"

A DCCW is a weapon that "doubles strength (up to a max of 10) and ignores armor." sounds like a power fist on someone that can actually heft it at initiative....

They are exactly as survivable as defilers, so there is a good amount of experience in the pool to tell how hard or easy they are to kill. Honestly they aren't in the same spot as venerable dreads, I would sooner compare them to furioso or standard dreadnauts. Even with the additional armor they are going to be easier to kill than venerable dreadnauts, but for a good bit less pointage.