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've brought this up briefly in a couple of other threads, but it quickly gets buried under a more pressing topics. So here's the question in its own thread for anyone with the time or interest to input: what are the more solid artillery choices for guard in the new codex?

My preivious artillery list was 2 bassies, but now I'm not certain id 4 griffons for nearly the same price would be a better option. I've heard people toying with the idea of 4-6 bassies, though I'd think thats overkill with only 2-3 targets to shoot them at. The colossus looks even better, though, not only with ap3 and wounding marines on 2+, but denying cover saves(!) with a shorter minimum range. The medusa looks like a decent tank buster as well as anti-infantry, though I'm hesitant to stray too far from meltagun suicide squads for reliable tank busting.

Assuming you aren't building a list to specifically counter either MEQs or 4+ armor armies, what seems best to you?

Personally, I am leaning towards a unit of 2 Griffions. Yes the Colossus looks good, but for that price you can bring 2 griffions. The griffions will be more accurate and put more wounds on target.

I am still pretty set on taking two squads of LRBT (w/ variants), so 1 squad of arty is all I am going to bring atm.

But perhaps later on i'll try a squad of griffions and a squad of bassies... would be fun

This has come up in some other threads I've subscribed to. The griffon will get twice as many wounds, but against marines will kill only 1/3 of them. That makes then worse against marines, right? Then against anythign else in cover, griffons still get twice as many wounds but only kill 1/2 of them. Colossus kills them all.

Well, the Griffon is more likely to hit, fairly substantially.

The extra wounds also helps alot againts targets with an invulnerable save or a 2+ save.

As for lighter troops, don't forget that cover is drawn from the center of the template when firing barrage, so the target needs to be in terrain to get the cover save.

Good discussion...

Well, LOTS of people are saying exactly what Boxant said... its almost creepy how similar a lot of peoples builds are starting.

2x leman russes of some variety and one squadron of griffons.


Colossus looks cool, but it has a kind of a large restriction on targeting. I'm guessing that space marines will want to get intimately close with my IG, and they certainly have the means to do so.

Guard probably have the redundancy required to set up a dual firebase. A tactic that was pretty successful in the salad days of 4th edition. If you had two large platoons both supported by artillery, then at least one colossus will have a good shot at an attacking force. If that setup is viable, then colossus all the way.

Bassy remains a decent if a little underspecialized alternative. But i prefer a more specialized vehicle, then my addled brain won't get tempted to shoot it at something it shouldn't be shooting at. the standar leman russ has that same problem.


double firebases huh? hmm... gonna be thinking about that during lunch

I don't think you want to use a dual firebase, if you're an artillerist style army, because of outflankers. This is one of the reasons I don't see the artillerist build being that viable. Yes the Fleet Officer can handicap their reserve roll, but both flanks are vulnerable.

sourclams wrote:I don't think you want to use a dual firebase, if you're an artillerist style army, because of outflankers. This is one of the reasons I don't see the artillerist build being that viable. Yes the Fleet Officer can handicap their reserve roll, but both flanks are vulnerable.

This is the main reason why I see the Basilisk being phased out of IG lists.

The minimum 36" range *forces* you to set up in a corner, so you can still hit the opposite 2/3 of the board. Not only does this often leave the basi alone and unprotected (vulnerable to DS) but it is a prime target for an outflanker.


I see the standard Arty being either a single Colossus or a pair of Griffions. It will depend on your local metagame. They will be positioned at the center of your firebase, behind LRBTs and surrounded by your gunline platoon(s). This will keep them safe from outlfank/DS, and will give them free reign of the board. If anything comes within your minimum range, they will be in rapidfire range of your firebase.

Of course, the 3rd option is the highly controversial Griffion+Colossus squadron Use the Griffion to get range on a unit (since it is more accurate) and then blast it with a Colossus Imagine that at the center of your firebase!

I just really can't get past the inability to direct fire with the colossus. My thinking is that for 15 points less I can just get a basilisk that has 3 points higher strength, same AP, also ignores most cover (since it is a barrage weapon), also has infinite range, BUT also has the ability to direct fire on things that get close.

It really seems like it should do a similar job of clearing guys off of objectives and can occasionally stand in for a lascannon in a pinch all for 15 points less (and there is a lot that guard can do with 15 points).

I'm also not thinking that having to put it in a corner isn't such a bad deal. Just put the rest of your army around it and throw in master of the fleet and from there watch a little over half (55%) of your opponents' outflankers come in on the wrong table edge.

tomguycot wrote:I just really can't get past the inability to direct fire with the colossus. My thinking is that for 15 points less I can just get a basilisk that has 3 points higher strength, same AP, also ignores most cover (since it is a barrage weapon), also has infinite range, BUT also has the ability to direct fire on things that get close.

It really seems like it should do a similar job of clearing guys off of objectives and can occasionally stand in for a lascannon in a pinch all for 15 points less (and there is a lot that guard can do with 15 points).

I'm also not thinking that having to put it in a corner isn't such a bad deal. Just put the rest of your army around it and throw in master of the fleet and from there watch a little over half (55%) of your opponents' outflankers come in on the wrong table edge.

Ordnance Barrage does NOT ignore cover. If a unit is in area terrain they will still get cover. If the center of the hold lands on the other side of any piece of terrain, the unit will get cover. Yes, you can get around cover with a good shot, but it is by no means a sure thing. But a basilisk firing a unit that's on an objective in dense cover will most likely not bypass the cover. The colossus will.

We have LRBT to punish MEQ outside of cover.
We have Colossus to punish MEQ inside cover.
Griffions are cheap as hell and accurate.
And anything that gets within the minimum range is going to be shot to pieces by the rest of your army

Guys, as I see it, the Deathstrike, Basilisk and other extreme-range weapons are mostly for Apoc, and should be fielded as batteries.

The Colossus is a great Marine killer, but you're paying Leman Russ points for it without the armor or mobility. Like the Basilisk, it's an Apoc weapon.

For regular 40k on 4x6 board, Griffon gives 3+ armor vs Russ giving 4+ cover saves, plus, Russ is AV14/13 and a mobile threat. Griffon is good for cheapness, but if you're doubling up, then you look at re-rolled 3+ armor, which is 4/9 instead of 4, but again, you lose armor and any mobility.

So I'm thinking:
1x Demolisher
2x Demolisher
2x Russ (artillery / utility role)

I like to armored Bassies for artillery, supported by one Hydra. I like the Bassies for armor busting as opposed to infantry killing. Str 9 with 2d6 (pick the highest) is a great tank buster. Armored tops will keep them around longer. As for the flankers, it will depend on what they are, but most IG armies can cover that side with something to keep them off the Bassies for a turn or two.

Sure, but Demolishers are S10, with 2d6 should reliably bust AV14, along with anything else out there...

The thing with Bassies and such is that you're forced into static play.

sourclams wrote:I don't think you want to use a dual firebase, if you're an artillerist style army, because of outflankers. This is one of the reasons I don't see the artillerist build being that viable. Yes the Fleet Officer can handicap their reserve roll, but both flanks are vulnerable.

Nice catch and a good point. IG is certainly bringing outflank back into the limelight. Orks everywhere are buying Black Reach boxes!

I think I might be springing 10 points free for a couple fusion blasters on my stealth team.

JohnHwangDD wrote:Guys, as I see it, the Deathstrike, Basilisk and other extreme-range weapons are mostly for Apoc, and should be fielded as batteries.

The Colossus is a great Marine killer, but you're paying Leman Russ points for it without the armor or mobility. Like the Basilisk, it's an Apoc weapon.

For regular 40k on 4x6 board, Griffon gives 3+ armor vs Russ giving 4+ cover saves, plus, Russ is AV14/13 and a mobile threat. Griffon is good for cheapness, but if you're doubling up, then you look at re-rolled 3+ armor, which is 4/9 instead of 4, but again, you lose armor and any mobility.

So I'm thinking:
1x Demolisher
2x Demolisher
2x Russ (artillery / utility role)

I am not certain Colossus is only for APOC, but I agree that I personally feel that two Griffions is usually a better choice.

Demolishers, nakid I assume? They are nice, S10 ap2 ordnance is very adaptable (well, more like it hurts everything!).

But not taking any indirect in a standard list? I think in KP missions you may have a hard time finishing off hiding units. This is one of the best things about indirectk, those last 2 marines can not hide I think two squads of Russes (with some form of ap2 variant in the mix) and a squad of Griffions gives the best utility.

I cant bring myself to use ordinance to bust av14 anymore. Even against landraiders, they aren't amazingly reliable (especially if smoked). With 24" range you only get a max of 2 chances to kill that thing before it disgorges its terminators, and by that time the damage is already done.

The fact is that there are no really reliable weapons for busting armor 14 more than 12" away right now outside of apocalyptic weapons. Lascannons are the closest we've got, and you have to buy way too many of them to blow up a land raider in 2 turns.

That being said, I'll stick with meltas as they are a cheaper and more reliable way of doing what a demolisher does, and use the demolisher and artillery for killing the heavy infantry.

And the colossus - if what boxANT posted on librarium online is true and you can mix artillery pieces in squadrons like russes can, then i'm feeling a griffon and a colossus will be a nice combo. The griffon will make up for the inaccurracy of the colossus, and the colossus will do all the real killing.

There was some talk a few days ago about using an ablative Russ to soak up damage in vehicle squadrons. I think the ablative Griffon in a Griffon/Colossus squadron is actually much more useful. The synergy between these two is nice. You get 24" of range where the minimum of the Colossus and the maximum of the Griffon overlap. The Griffon does the "spotting round" for the squadron, then the Colossus lets loose to smoke the enemy squads on the objective. When the squadron starts taking fire, the Griffon always takes it first, so that Colossus gets some survivability and accuracy with only a 75 point Griffon upgrade (along with the usefulness of the Griffon itself).

@Boxant: I agree that 2 Griffons will generally be better than a Colossus.

yeah, nekkid Demolishers (and nekkid Russes).

I'm not sure I need Indirect in regular games, due to the board being so small. In a KP mission, I'm thinking to just drive the Demolishers down their throat, supported by the Russes... Worst case, I can even send the Russes out to help flush people out of hiding, lobbing pie all the while!

I think Griffons are fine for regular game, probably what they're designed for. As I primarily play Apoc, I want Apoc Bassies and Russes & Demolishers.
____

Kujo wrote:I cant bring myself to use ordinance to bust av14 anymore

That being said, I'll stick with meltas as they are a cheaper and more reliable way of doing what a demolisher does, and use the demolisher and artillery for killing the heavy infantry.

If there isn't anything better to fire at, and the Meltas failed, then S10 Ordnance might as well fire at AV14 for a lack of anything better to do - the difference is that you *can* do something, whereas Colossus / Griffon are points that do nothing due to being S7 or less.

The Medusa Looks pretty good as well. A 36" Indirect Demolisher round is pretty terrifying.

AdeptSister wrote:The Medusa Looks pretty good as well. A 36" Indirect Demolisher round is pretty terrifying.

Medusa isn't a barrage weapon.

Any thoughts on the manticore? D3 templates is nice, but if they're only AP4 I'm thinking griffons are a better investment for their price - especially if you can't take manticore squadrons.

Instakill T5 4+, better than even chance of penning AV14. Niche, but useful. I don't see myself using one but wouldn't discount it entirely.

It all depends on if it keeps the forgeworld rules or not. If you can fire off all 4 rockets in a single turn for potentially 12 templates from a single round of shooting, than I say this is almost a default pick. However if it is only one rocket per turn with 4 shots max..... well then it could go either way.

I thought we were pretty sure it was d3 templates a turn, four shots per game, and that's it. Average of eight templates if it gets to fire all four times before game ends.

The weapon profile sounds like a great anti-nid weapon in particular, since they depend on their toughness and wounds over an armor save (I'm thinking of warrior squads in particular). Still wouldn't use it against armor 14 unless I had no other infantry targets to shoot at or I was really desperate to pop a transport.

It's an Apoc weapon that you don't take unless you're pretty sure that you can use the templates.