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.

So i'm thinking about how i'm going to build that new amazing model for my executioner with plasma sponsons and I have to ask myself if the flamer is worth it. Ideally things like orks will be sprinting like a mofo trying to get at this thing.

Now obviously this choice is marginal at best but I always strive for the best. Now if something gets in close, i'm obviously going to move away. As long as I was not assaulted last turn I could save myself by cruising. However, given the russ and its rules for shooting, moving 6 and firing 4 plasma blasts at the offenders seems very viable. At BS 3 the HB seems extremely marginal even when not being assaulted while the flamer auto hits stuff that gets in close.

Like I said I know this decision is probably void in the large scale of the game but i'm looking for any reasoning you guys might have that I havent considered.

I run heavy flamers for the hull weapons on all of my tanks and have found solid success with this. My mech list is a bit light on tanks though, as it only puts 3 Chimeras and 3 Russes onto the table. At this point, I consider my mechvet list to be rather subpar to be honest, so I'm not sure how much merit my choice torun all HFs really has.

Heavy bolter.

If enemy infantry are that close to your Russes, you're doing it wrong.

Cheese Elemental wrote:Heavy bolter.

If enemy infantry are that close to your Russes, you're doing it wrong.

Or, if you have heavy flamers then when infantry are that close, you go on to win the game.

The type of army being played is important to this decision. In an army like mine there are no troops on the ground, everything is mounted up. I don't have a buffer between my tanks and the opposing player, so I have heavy flamers instead. I've had devastating success with this as well, much more success than having 6 heavy bolters average 9 hits per turn aginst things that tend to get armor or cover saves.

Caffran9 wrote:

Cheese Elemental wrote:Heavy bolter.

If enemy infantry are that close to your Russes, you're doing it wrong.

Or, if you have heavy flamers then when infantry are that close, you go on to win the game.

The type of army being played is important to this decision. In an army like mine there are no troops on the ground, everything is mounted up. I don't have a buffer between my tanks and the opposing player, so I have heavy flamers instead. I've had devastating success with this as well, much more success than having 6 heavy bolters average 9 hits per turn aginst things that tend to get armor or cover saves.

Thanks.

Yes I should have mentioned I run mech IG

Heavy flamers on Hound varients? Absolutly
Heavy flamers on Chimera Hull Arty? Sure
Heavy flamers on Chimeras? Depends on what they are carrying
Heavy flamers on Russ Hulls? Absolutly not!

There are plenty of ways to screen your russes and keep them from being assaulted. Don't give up a heavy bolter for a weapon that is only used if you are doing things wrong.

No offense intended but your opponents really shouldn't be getting that close to your tanks.

I have ran LRDemo w/ hull HF many times and it is awesome. Being able to pull up to an Ork mob and unleash pie and flame is solid combo. In addition, even if you loose your cannon, AV14 w/ a heavy flamer is not something easily ignored.

As for my LRBT w/ Plasma sponsons, I had them with Heavy Bolters. However, I decided to switch them Heavy Flamers.

Kicking out a few extra HB shots in a game is nice, but not game changing. Having a Heavy Flamer at the key moment can win the game. So just like my Chimeras, I decided to switch to HF.

Having over 10 mounted Heavy Flamers in a list can be devastating to your opponent, especially considering that you do not get to consolidate after assaulting a vehicle.

BoxANT wrote:I have ran LRDemo w/ hull HF many times and it is awesome. Being able to pull up to an Ork mob and unleash pie and flame is solid combo. In addition, even if you loose your cannon, AV14 w/ a heavy flamer is not something easily ignored.

As for my LRBT w/ Plasma sponsons, I had them with Heavy Bolters. However, I decided to switch them Heavy Flamers.

Kicking out a few extra HB shots in a game is nice, but not game changing. Having a Heavy Flamer at the key moment can win the game. So just like my Chimeras, I decided to switch to HF.

Having over 10 mounted Heavy Flamers in a list can be devastating to your opponent, especially considering that you do not get to consolidate after assaulting a vehicle.

You hit it right on the head.

You average 1 1/2 hits, so taking things like MEQ and cover into consideration. On a grand scale the heavy bolter may inflict 1 wound a turn. Which I find very marginal, but the HF when they are close matters big time.

between a little ump all the time and a nasty weapon rarely, I think I prefer the later. As the HF doest care about BS and will always inflict multiple hits, and str and ap equal to a bolter I forsee every tank in my army being HF.

It makes alot of sense when you look at fighting horde with a mech list as I fear not having the classic IG bulk of weak weapons to deal with it. My awesome amount of plasmas and meltas wont matter when I'm looking at 200 ork/nids. And that is the only gap I worry about with my list so HF on almost everything seems to fill that nicely.

Ok, I stand corrected. I will be sure to NOT tell my iG opponent the general consensus on the issue, lol.

Yeah, I've always been underwhelmed by the Heavy Bolter compared to the damage a Heavy Flamer can wreak, especially when it's mounted on an armored platform. As has been said before, if you have a Heavy Flamer, the POINT is that the enemy is going to get close. It also allows you to roast units in cover, giving the Leman Russ another untility.

Oddly, the heavy bolter gets a little problematic when mixed with all those plasma blasts. Stop paying attention and fire it with everything else, and suddenly your opponent can allocate the easy to save wounds from the HB to the critical troops and let the plasma kill the regular ones.

The HF seems odd, but many armies will be assaulting towards the IG lines. Once they get close, it may be a bit dangerous to shoot a bunch of plasma blasts that could scatter onto your own troops of vehicles. The HF is guaranteed to hit, murders light/horde troops...not something you want to use, but if the situation arises, it can be devastating. The HB might get a little action in every game, but its overall impact will be minimal at best.

I think it also depends on what the tank is doing.

For example, if you have a vanilla LRBT that is going to hang back, 3x bolters would be a nice addition to deal with hordes.

But if the tank is already going to be used aggressively, like the demolisher, than the heavy flamer might be worth it. I dunno about the sponsons being heavy flamers, though because it seems like it would be hard to cover an entire squad adequately and there are very very few situations where you'd even be in a position to fire (and hit!) with both.

The concept of using a flamer on a russ makes me a little nervous; they're still only AV10/11 as far as assaults are concerned which means a lucky krak hit could knock out your expensive tank. Personally I'd rather hang back and make the most out of the AV14 and superior range of some of the variants.

It's sad that it got to Jerjare's post before somebody made the critical point.

It depends on the tank. On a Battle Cannon Russ, which is just standing back and pounding on stuff, HBolter.

On the Demolishers, Punishers, clearly a Flamer makes a lot more sense.

In general, I'd say the Flamer should only show up when you've got a very good reason. HBolter is the default choice.

A template gives you 8" range, but a lot more like 7" if you want to hit anything. A lot of assault troops can cover 18" in a turn. Fleet ones can do that, but average more like 15.5". In either case, the Russ can't drive far enough to get them before they get the Russ, meaning the Flamer most likely won't ever get used. A good opponent is going to know these distances, and lay up in cover to use them to his advantage. He's not going to strand his assault guys 12" from your Russ so you can motor over and smoke him.

The exception here would be if the Russ is mopping up after an assault unit has finished off some of your infantry, but that points to a gun line type army, where you really should just be supporting your gunline with HBolter fire, rather than posthumously, especially since there's a lot more luck going that route (ie. if he wins assault during your turn, your tank is out of luck).

The only way I can see the HFlamer being of use, is on assault tanks that are moving up to hit the enemy, and intend to use the Flamers offensively. Flamers do not work defensively. Which is nice, because that's actually exactly how they work in real life.

I say this based on experience playing Sisters. They literally NEVER get to use their Flamers, except when they're dictating the pace, and are on offense. Sitting back, in cover, a Flamer will never be used.

Phryxis wrote:g

The only way I can see the HFlamer being of use, is on assault tanks that are moving up to hit the enemy, and intend to use the Flamers offensively. Flamers do not work defensively. Which is nice, because that's actually exactly how they work in real life.

I have to disagree here. The point of putting HF on your LRBT is primarly to use them defensively. Yes, if you have a HB you will get a few HB hits while advancing your LRBT. However, with a HF you will be able to destroy units that get close and start killing/threatening your vehicles (ie your chimeras).

A LRBT w/ plasma sponsons does not need the extra shots of a HB, it does its real damage basted on its blast weapons and honestly is more likey to be hurt by low ap wound application. I have had situations where I wished my LRBT had HF as it would of saved me a lot of hurt, a HF can change the game in a defensive application (read: countering enemy assaults).

A heavy bolter that shoots a full 6 turns will hit 9 times. It won't come even close to doing the same damage that a heavy flamer does firing twice. Further still, the heavy flamers fill a gap in the lsit and are a very cheap and easy way to deal with a major army type (hordes) and allows the overwhelming majority of the army to focus on things that it is more effecient at killing than any of the other weapon choices for hull weapons.

It is situational, but IMO heavy flamer is overall the better option. As many have said, the heavy bolter will have little impact on the game, while the HF will generally have opportunities to do horrific damage. Many armies have "warmachine-hunters", extremly fast units, that often rely on turboboost etc, and that are usually in small enough numbers that a heavy flamer would cripple them. As someone said, an AV14 hull with a HF is also hard to ignore, I had a tank with only a HB left my last battle, and it ended up contesting the enemy objective, with a HF, it may have cleared the objective. Im currently converting two of my three russes to HF's after watching what my chimera flamers have done, and how little the heavy bolters have done.

Heavy. Flamer. IMHO Vehicles should be nude apart from a HHF. Why spend points on sponson weapons when you could potentially get another vehicle? Even Hydras and Medusas benefit from HHF. Kommandos will be surprised when they get 3 HHF from the seemingly "easy" prey the hydras were.

Soo... should I replace HHB AND Multilaser with HHFs for my chimeras? for two bouts of 8" death?

My Russes are magnetized but Hull heavy Flamer is the current configuration for all of them. If you spread out the opponent can not assault all your tanks and there will be some that will be able to flame for devasting effect while the heavy bolter is somewhat underwelming.

2 Flamers on chimeras is redundant. Chimera only fire one when you move and they multi laser can insta kill heavy weapons teams and although unlikely actually damage a Rhino or Chimera if shooting side armor.

Soo... should I replace HHB AND Multilaser with HHFs for my chimeras? for two bouts of 8" death?

NO, you will never fire them both, keep the ML and swap the HB for a HF

The point of putting HF on your LRBT is primarly to use them defensively.

Ok, you can say this, but I don't know why you're saying it.

As I mentioned in my previous post, the measurements tend to stack up against using the HFlamer in defense.

I have a problem with building a list around things that will work against bad players. I also have a problem with building lists around the idea that your plan will fail, and you'll need something to bail you out. And those are the only cases where a HFlamer will be of use on a gunline tank.

If you're a gunline tank, sitting in the backfield chucking Battle Cannon shots, the enemy has a long way to go to reach you. As Illumini points out, it's going to be a fast unit that gets into your backfield to hunt these tanks. However, contrary to his suggestion, a HFlamer won't help you. As I've already pointed out, a fast unit will simply NEVER be in a position to be flamed. They will be too far away, then they will be assaulting the tank.

Can you please give some examples of games you've played here the HFlamer helped you out?

It won't come even close to doing the same damage that a heavy flamer does firing twice.

Ok, and have you ever seen that happen? Again, I go back to my expeirences with Sisters, where the squads tend to fire their Flamers once per game. And that's with them going hunting for something to shoot it at. If a tank is sitting back, trying NOT to get engaged, why would it fire its HFlamer more than once? Or at all?

Again, examples... How many times have you had a HFlamer on a gunline Russ fire more than once in a game? How did it happen that you fired more than once?

I've had scarabs zoom up on me on the first turn several times, and my chimera flamers have then mauled the unit badly, taking it out as a threat to my infantry. The necron player eventually learned that there were no safe spots to turbo-boost for a second turn charge with the scarabs, and now play them much more defensively

15 Ork kommandos with the special character came on behind my lines and blew up a tank, then ate a heavy flamer and some other gunfire, lost something like 7-8 orks from the heavy flamer (bunched up around the dead tank), ran and died later

A seer-council lost its ride, ate a lot of small arms, lots of infantry flamers, and then got a chimera heavy flamer in the face, taking them down to two guys, same battle, the same chimera cleaned out the last remaining storm guardians from one objective

I've also had instances where I wished I had heavy flamers on my russes, where I had to drive away from attacking infantry instead of just flaming them to death

My chimera flamers have done very well, I am yet to want my HB's back on those.

It can also work as a deterent to deep-strikers etc

Then again, I'm pretty aggressive with my russes, they rarely stay in my DZ, often, they often lead the charge of the mechanized part of my army, shielding the vulnerable chimeras, so maybe I'm biased My one stationary russ will keep it's heavy bolter, but that is because I have 6 others around too, and it will be shielded by infantry

Phryxis wrote:

The point of putting HF on your LRBT is primarly to use them defensively.

Ok, you can say this, but I don't know why you're saying it.

As I mentioned in my previous post, the measurements tend to stack up against using the HFlamer in defense.

I have a problem with building a list around things that will work against bad players. I also have a problem with building lists around the idea that your plan will fail, and you'll need something to bail you out. And those are the only cases where a HFlamer will be of use on a gunline tank.

If you're a gunline tank, sitting in the backfield chucking Battle Cannon shots, the enemy has a long way to go to reach you. As Illumini points out, it's going to be a fast unit that gets into your backfield to hunt these tanks. However, contrary to his suggestion, a HFlamer won't help you. As I've already pointed out, a fast unit will simply NEVER be in a position to be flamed. They will be too far away, then they will be assaulting the tank.

Can you please give some examples of games you've played here the HFlamer helped you out?

It won't come even close to doing the same damage that a heavy flamer does firing twice.

Ok, and have you ever seen that happen? Again, I go back to my expeirences with Sisters, where the squads tend to fire their Flamers once per game. And that's with them going hunting for something to shoot it at. If a tank is sitting back, trying NOT to get engaged, why would it fire its HFlamer more than once? Or at all?

Again, examples... How many times have you had a HFlamer on a gunline Russ fire more than once in a game? How did it happen that you fired more than once?

Yeah sorry friend, I see what your saying but in your example the HB ist much better.

I'm not arguing that the HF is awesome. What I'm saying is combared to the few negliable shots from a HB is it rather worth having the HF for those few occastions where they are awesome.

And i'm thinking yes, yes it is. Especilly because the two tanks in question for me are the chimera which almost seems like a no brainer when I have plasma totting vets on board and the plascutioner where the HB ist really worth anything but pepper on top.

I've had scarabs zoom up on me on the first turn several times, and my chimera flamers have then mauled the unit badly, taking it out as a threat to my infantry.

Well, no question that Scarabs with Disruption Fields can threaten a tank (or at least they could last time I played my Necrons). However, I think this makes my point... Scarabs can go 12", assault 6". A Russ can only move 6" and shoot 7". That leaves a 5" window where your opponent can place his Scarabs, still get to your Russ, but never be flamed. The fact that he couldn't hit that 5" window, or wasn't even aware of it, suggests he's not the best player. As I said, I wouldn't build a list to beat weak players.

My chimera flamers have done very well, I am yet to want my HB's back on those.

Totally different case. As I said, Russes that are moving to assault can get great use out of HFlamers. Similarly, if you're moving up with close range squads (Flamers, Meltas), then the HFlamer on the Chimera is a great choice.

I see what your saying but in your example the HB ist much better.

I don't mean to suggest that the HBolter will be a better defense against backfield raiders... Not at all...

What I'm saying, is that specialization is a good idea in 40k, so if you're going to sit back and shoot with your Russes, set them up to sit back and shoot. That means HBolter.

How does the HBolter deal with the backfield raiders? It either gets them before they get there, or it leaves that task to other units.

In the end, this choice is fairly minimal in its impact, so we're really splitting hairs here, but what's not splitting hairs, what's actually important, is understanding the listbuilding/gameplay decisions that the HBolter/HFlamer choice captures.

One thing I think is a mistake, is to plan for ways to "rescue" your army if things go wrong. 40K is a game won by extremes. Bring too much of something for your enemy to deal with, and overwhelm him. Figure out your plan, go 100% at it. Don't go 90% at it, and 10% at preparing to mitigate losing. If you're trying to keep him from beating you, you've already lost.

I agree completely with your last point, I call it contingency and I always tell people to stay away from it.

As to your first points about splitting hairs please see my original post heh. I really did marginal lol.

And yes I see the point your trying to make however I believe this is one of the few situations where that thinking doest take priority. As I said the Plascutioner doest need the bolter, and although the flamer is straight up contingency which is something i'm usually against, if I have to pay for the hull mounted weapon, I believe the heavy flamers will serve me better in those odd random occurances opposed to the heavy bolters shots at things with T5/+2sv .

Looking at it in your way (the common way I outfit as well) neither weapon will help against the intended target but I have to take something and the HF could indeed burnate those assault troops, or scarabs that sneak up there.

I thank you for everyones opinion, I believe I'm going to magnetise anyway but will definitly be lookg at the HF as my prefered choice.

Scarabs can go 12", assault 6". A Russ can only move 6" and shoot 7". That leaves a 5" window where your opponent can place his Scarabs, still get to your Russ, but never be flamed

Lets say he placed his scarabs 14" away. Then I move my russ 6" away from him, whoops, he's out of assault range, and if he doesn't turboboost again, he will die to normal weapons. A heavy flamer on the russ makes it extremly hard for him to actually get a charge in, a fact my opponent now has realized, and as such, his scarabs now play a different role.

Russes that are moving to assault can get great use out of HFlamers

Yeah, as I said, I may be biased by an aggressive use of Russes

is to plan for ways to "rescue" your army if things go wrong

Not what I'm doing at least, I plan to mount them on my russes because I feel it will lead to greater damage dealt overall. An armoured group consisting off a russ and 2x chimera, all with heavy flamers, should also be able to detterent assaults, an ork mob charging the lead vehicle would f.ex. suffer greatly from the remaining two vehicles after the assault. Tankshock + heavy flamer can also be absolutely devastating

eh, against horde type armies those heavy flamers become useful at around turn 3. I can think of a few situations in which those heavy flamers became a really big deal in my army. Besides, if they only need to fire once to win the game, then what is wrong with that?

To be completely honest, it all comes down to the composition of the rest of your list and what aspect of it needs the most improvement. If you're light on anti-horde weapons then Heavy Flamers will likely be your top choice because they slaughter hordes. The horde has to get close, but you can bet they're going to try to if they're playing against IG (plus th epopular horde armies... Orks and Tyranids, are both assault armies so they rely on closing the distance). Basically I don't think there is a "right" answer to this question because different lists ill make better use of the different weapons. That said there is no real "wrong" answer either for the same reason.

My personal list uses the hull heavy flamers as its trump card against horde armies because it is simple to set up and much more devastating than shooting the heavy bolters for a couple of turns before they close in. If you have a bunch of flamers elsewhere in the army then the bonus to your ranged firepower from the heavy bolters becomes much more attractive.

The reference to sisters is a stretch of a comparison at best because the vast majority of your flamers are in units of troops or on weak 11/11/10 armor, so of course they fire once (because then they probably get assaulted and/or blown up). When the template weapons are mounted on high AV tanks (especially on vehicles with rear armor 11+ to mitigate a lot of potential cc damage) they don't get tied up by cc and become unable to fire again.

Lets say he placed his scarabs 14" away. Then I move my russ 6" away from him

Sure. But if moving 6" away will solve all your ills, then why do you have a Flamer? You're not using it.

You're making my argument for me here. Even when you can get away, your best option is to NOT use a Flamer.

When the template weapons are mounted on high AV tanks (especially on vehicles with rear armor 11+ to mitigate a lot of potential cc damage) they don't get tied up by cc and become unable to fire again.

No way... A 10 girl Sisters squad will stick around a lot longer in CC against an assault unit than a Russ with AV10. All it takes is one Fist, and that tank is very often done. Meltabombs? No tank stands a chance. CC is VERY bad for tanks in 5e.

As you point out, it's less bad for the Russes with AV11 rear armor. Not a coincidence those are the very ones I said should have a HFlamer.

Heavy Bolters or nuthin'.