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.

Nurglitch wrote:Fetterkey:

So apparently you're wrong about whether Vendettas can have a cover save thanks to moving Flat Out during a Scout move: It can't because there is no movement phase prior to Turn 1. Kudos to sourclams for pointing that out.

See above post. Under the INAT FAQ, Vendettas/Valks get cover saves for their scout moves.

Nurglitch wrote:Similarly, why would I compare a Vendetta to a Predator? The Predator is not a transport, has AV13 to its front, has Smoke Launchers, can be easily obscured by terrain and other vehicles, and most importantly don't overlap in the same army list. They don't share the same capabilities, battlefield role, or army list.

Because they are similar in firepower and role?

Regarding the INAT, unless you're playing at Adepticon, most gamers go by RAW. RAW says they don't get it.

Believe me, I'd love it if they could claim cover, but the rules don't allow it.

sourclams wrote:Regarding the INAT, unless you're playing at Adepticon, most gamers go by RAW. RAW says they don't get it.

Believe me, I'd love it if they could claim cover, but the rules don't allow it.

I generally find that most people accept the INAT FAQ, even at "lesser" events. YMMV.

Fetterkey:

The INAT FAQ is no more relevant than any else's opinion, and typically less.

The Land Raider is more similar in firepower and role to the Vendetta than the Predator. At least it has a transport capacity and more than one Twin-linked Lascannon.

Nurglitch wrote:Fetterkey:

The INAT FAQ is no more relevant than any else's opinion, and typically less.

I'm not arguing for the INAT FAQ, I am simply saying that I observe it in use more often than not.

Nurglitch wrote:The Land Raider is more similar in firepower and role to the Vendetta than the Predator. At least it has a transport capacity and more than one Twin-linked Lascannon.

I disagree. The Vendetta is a dedicated anti-tank vehicle with secondary transport capacity. The Predator Annihilator is a dedicated anti-tank vehicle without secondary transport capacity. The Land Raider is an assault transport with secondary anti-tank capacity.

Fetterkey:

It doesn't matter what you observe in a discussion such as this, it only matters what the rules actually are.

Nurglitch wrote:Fetterkey:

It doesn't matter what you observe in a discussion such as this, it only matters what the rules actually are.

Obviously false. If I'm making an army list that might be influenced by the INAT rulings, it's in my best interest to determine whether those rulings are going to be in effect or not, and thus I observe to see in what cases they will and in what cases they won't.

Fetterkey:

Nope, true. We're discussing Warhammer 40k here, not INAT 40k.

Nurglitch wrote:Fetterkey:

Nope, true. We're discussing Warhammer 40k here, not INAT 40k.

I'm discussing 40k as it is played. INAT 40k is in my observation more commonly played than Warhammer 40k. In fact, many people who say they are playing Warhammer 40k are actually playing INAT 40k. Therefore, it is logical to make plans for INAT 40k, since you are more likely to see it. Fortunately this discussion is largely irrelevant, because Vendettas are undercosted with or without Scout saves.

Guys, this argument, aside from being completely off topic, is incredibly asinine.

shatnerclams:

It's relevant to how Veterans stack up to Tactical Marines: if they have access to a Vendetta, and a Vendetta gives them an advantage, then clearly it's relevant.

But Tactical Marines have access to Rhinos, Razorbacks, Drop Pods, and Land Raiders. Offhand I'd say that where both Land Raiders and Vendettas can move 12" and fire a Twin-Linked Lascannon, the AV14 tank that can claim obscurement certainly puts Tactical Marines over the top. A unit of Tactical Marines parked in a Land Raider makes a much better objective holder than a Vendetta full of Veterans, as well as a vehicle and tank hunter, troop carrier, assault vehicle, and Turn 7 survivor.

Nurglitch wrote:shatnerclams:

It's relevant to how Veterans stack up to Tactical Marines: if they have access to a Vendetta, and a Vendetta gives them an advantage, then clearly it's relevant.

But Tactical Marines have access to Rhinos, Razorbacks, Drop Pods, and Land Raiders. Offhand I'd say that where both Land Raiders and Vendettas can move 12" and fire a Twin-Linked Lascannon, the AV14 tank that can claim obscurement certainly puts Tactical Marines over the top. A unit of Tactical Marines parked in a Land Raider makes a much better objective holder than a Vendetta full of Veterans, as well as a vehicle and tank hunter, troop carrier, assault vehicle, and Turn 7 survivor.

Yes, but for the same price you can almost get two Vendettas with Veterans. While I'd still put my stock in the Landraider surviving, the Vendettas put out dramatically more fire.

Darkhound:

Do they? The Land Raider can split its fire, and have a Multi-Melta. The Land Raider can engage the same number of targets as two Vendettas. If the Vendettas want to stay still long enough to shoot they'll have to stay still long enough not to get a cover save. AV12 without a cover save means that they will be vulnerable, and their contents will be vulnerable.

If they do move Flat Out then they can be destroyed on glancing hits...

Don't get me wrong, they're pretty good, but the way they get hyped really doesn't reflect their actual utility on the table top.

A squad of veterans in a Vendetta is arguably better at grabbing an objective during the latter stages of the game since it can move farther/faster. A tactical squad in a landraider is more expensive as a whole and that should be held in account for the purpose of comparison.

G

I think the fact that people actually take Veterans in Vendettas and not Tactical Squads in Land Raiders says a lot about this particular comparison. It turns out that paying 340 points at minimum for an objective-claiming unit is not a very good deal. The shooting power of the Land Raider isn't enough to justify its inclusion if you aren't going to use it on the offensive somehow. In fact, I'd say that if you aren't going to use the assault ramp, the Land Raider isn't worthwhile. Another question is why you would have Tacticals in the Land Raider at all. If you really only care about holding objectives with the unit and they aren't going to leave the Land Raider, Scouts will do the same job for cheaper. I like Tactical Marines, but I don't think they're well-suited for Land Raider duty at all.

I agree with your analysis Fetterkey.

G