| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
 |
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/17 17:24:31
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Angry Blood Angel Assault marine
Tampa Bay area, FL
|
The other night me and a friend were discussing ways to either stop or delay enemy armies. I came up with the idea of using Armored Sentinels to get the job done. First, you would keep them cheap, give them just an autocannon, so that they can potentially pop transports. If an enemy assault unit is in range, charging them could bog down an assault army, especially if they don't have powerfist/chainfist/thunder hammer/melta bomb.
Against regular marines, regular attacks have no change to even penetrate the armor, they would need to use their crack grenades, which would be each marine getting a single attack and needing 6's and 6's to get a glance. It would take 2-3 glances minimum before the sentinel would go down.
Add in a vindi assassin to put paid to any troublesome powerfists and you have a stronger mix even. A troublesome squad is causing you shooting issues, run a sentinel into them, and you can tie them up for a good part of a game.
With the number of assault armies nowadays, it could come in handy to have something that could cause them some trouble and potentially stomp a few into the ground (and force a break test and run them down)
Viable?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/17 17:32:41
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
The only problem I see is that while the Space Marines are locked in combat with an Armoured Sentinel you can't shoot them, and Combat Tactics was pretty much designed to prevent them from being tar-pitted by Walkers like that.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/17 19:39:13
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Slaanesh Veteran Marine with Tentacles
|
I don't have the IG codex on me but can these ones scout?
Either way I think this is a good idea, its what I do with my defiler half the time, except that my defiler will probably kill more stuff. I've used the walker to my benifit, both in keeping a unit in CC long enough to widdle it down meanwhile blocking LOS to anything behind it. I've also seen 1-2 sentinels trap a unit of Dire Avengers for a couple of rounds.
I wouldn't rely on this tactic but I definately think its something to keep in mind as far as an in game tactic to capitalize on if the situation arises.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/17 19:50:54
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Junior Officer with Laspistol
|
Nurglitch wrote:The only problem I see is that while the Space Marines are locked in combat with an Armoured Sentinel you can't shoot them, and Combat Tactics was pretty much designed to prevent them from being tar-pitted by Walkers like that.
The thing is that they actually have to lose the combat to get away with combat tactics. Two str 5 WS3 attacks isn't likely to actually kill any marines.
|
Why did the berzerker cross the road?
Gwar! wrote:Willydstyle has it correct
Gwar! wrote:Yup you're absolutely right
New to the game and can't win? Read this.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/17 20:22:01
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Billie_Joe:
No, Armoured Sentinels do not have Scout.
willydstyle:
It's not likely, but it's not that unlikely (0.33 expected casualties in the round that the Sentinel charges), protects the Space Marines, and locks the Sentinel down for something like a Space Marine Dreadnought to come in and annihilate the Sentinel.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/17 21:54:01
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Junior Officer with Laspistol
|
The dreadnought has to be able to make base to base. Not real likely if 10 marines are surrounding it.
Am I saying it will work every time? No, of course not, but it's not a tactic you should discount if you need to use it.
Whether or not it's something that you should purchase an armored sentinel specifically for is more doubtful, however.
|
Why did the berzerker cross the road?
Gwar! wrote:Willydstyle has it correct
Gwar! wrote:Yup you're absolutely right
New to the game and can't win? Read this.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/17 22:16:37
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
willydstyle wrote:The dreadnought has to be able to make base to base. Not real likely if 10 marines are surrounding it.
Am I saying it will work every time? No, of course not, but it's not a tactic you should discount if you need to use it.
Whether or not it's something that you should purchase an armored sentinel specifically for is more doubtful, however.
that's the problem for me. the odds i'd have either version of Sentinel in a list is so remote.....
that said, if i did happen to have one, it would be a tactic on my list of things to do if need arose.
|
"But i'm more than just a little curious, how you're planning to go about making your amends, to the dead?" -The Noose-APC
"Little angel go away
Come again some other day
The devil has my ear today
I'll never hear a word you say" Weak and Powerless - APC
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 03:42:33
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Hurr! Ogryn Bone 'Ead!
CT
|
I generally run a squad of 3 Plasma Cannon Sentinels. Yea I know they are expensive. They are however very resilient in CC against most units. I've had them stall Berserkers for 3 game turns before. Yes I would rather have been shooting their guns. This did help keep them out of my lines though.
Unless you can get more mileage out of Armored Sentinels than tarpits for assault units I don't think they are worth the addition. If you can use them to fill a role in your list then their CC resiliency against anything less than s6 is just a bonus.
Cheers,
~Volkan
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 04:31:24
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter
Grand Rapids Metro
|
Personally...those sentinels would be gone in a turn.
But then I play GK.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 04:39:50
Subject: Re:Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
don't under estimate them.
just 2 weeks ago Stern was stuck in CC with 2 of them for 4 TURNS. hammerhand went off every time, alway rolled 1s and 2s to damage them
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 04:41:58
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter
Grand Rapids Metro
|
Stern alone?
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 04:42:37
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers
Well I kind of moved near Toronto, actually.
|
This beat my Eldar once but Marines can take em'!
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 04:46:54
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
ductvader wrote:Stern alone?
yes, don't ask what happened to the termies.
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 04:55:38
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter
Grand Rapids Metro
|
Grey Templar wrote:ductvader wrote:Stern alone?
yes, don't ask what happened to the termies.
Oh noes...just bad rolling I assume then...4 S8 attacks a turn should wreak some sentinel havoc.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 04:58:42
Subject: Re:Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
yeah, bad rolling.
did i mention demolisher cannons hurt?
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 05:01:27
Subject: Re:Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Monster-Slaying Daemonhunter
Grand Rapids Metro
|
Grey Templar wrote:yeah, bad rolling.
did i mention demolisher cannons hurt?
I usually find it's the Plasmacutioners.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 13:11:35
Subject: Re:Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Stalwart Strike Squad Grey Knight
|
This is a tactic I enjoy pulling.
I run a barebones squad of 3 Armored Sentinels in my 1850 list with multilasers and simply move them towards a unit that I'd like tied up for a while. Those multilasers can pour out a lot of shots on the way, too, so they're useful even when the opponent avoids them and getting into charge range.
I remember this one game against orks where a squadron of 3 tied up a squad of Stormboyz and Bikers (Regulars, not nobs) and by the time the sentinels were dead from the 2 powerclaws most of the orks were as well, mostly from 2 of the sentinels exploding while in b2b.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 13:36:53
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
I usually have one armored sentinel in the list just to tie up Bloodcrushers in combat that get to close. It is a good problem solving unit to have in a guard list.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 16:29:00
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Slaanesh Veteran Marine with Tentacles
|
I think walkers are always nice to throw into assault, since most things will have to use their grenades to damage it, wihich requires a 6 to hit. Like i said before, don't make this part of your batle plan, but definately use it when the chance arises. I don't think many people will expect it, esp out of guard
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 18:15:44
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Angry Blood Angel Assault marine
Tampa Bay area, FL
|
Q: What is between a Sentinel's toes?
A: Slow Orks
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 18:57:58
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
The problem isn't that sentinels are bad. They are actually quite good.
The problem is that Vendettas are superior.
|
All in all, fact is that Warhammer 40K has never been as balanced as it is now, and codex releases have never been as interesting as they are now (new units and vehicles and tons of new special rules/strategies each release -- not just the same old crap with a few changes in statlines and points costs).
-Therion
_______________________________________
New Codexia's Finest Hour - my fluff about the change between codexes, roughly novel length. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 20:32:10
Subject: Re:Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Revving Ravenwing Biker
|
The problem isn't that sentinels are bad. They are actually quite good.
The problem is that Vendettas are superior.
Ya and if you give them plasama cannons the executioner gets 2 more shots for the same price. So the only real use I see is if you have your heavy support slots filled up with something other than an executioner and you still want 3 plasma shots
|
-Any terrain containing Sly Marbo is dangerous terrain.
-Sly Marbo once played an objective mission just to see what it was like to not meet every victory condition on his own.
-Sly Marbo bought a third edition rulebook just to play meat grinder as the attacker.
-Marbo doesn't need an Eldar farseer as an ally; his enemies are already doomed
-Sly Marbo was originally armed with a power weapon, but he dropped it while assaulting a space marine command squad just so his enemies could feel pain
-Sly Marbo still attacks the front armor value in assault, for pity's sake. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 21:48:47
Subject: Re:Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Snivelling Workbot
Hastings
|
I lost my rulebook a while back, and my friend has told me that "in an assault infantry will automatically strike against the back armour
of vehicles...
I didnt beleive him
can someone disprove his theory
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/18 22:21:54
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Junior Officer with Laspistol
|
It's only true against vehicles without a WS value. Against a walker, CC attacks always strike the front armor, even if it assaulted from behind.
|
Why did the berzerker cross the road?
Gwar! wrote:Willydstyle has it correct
Gwar! wrote:Yup you're absolutely right
New to the game and can't win? Read this.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/19 01:57:00
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Morally-Flexible Malleus Hearing Whispers
Well I kind of moved near Toronto, actually.
|
Honestly I don't know why anyone would put Plasmacannons on their Russ when they can have a good ol' fashioned Battle Cannon. Only good Russ variant is the Vanquisher.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/19 02:17:15
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Angry Blood Angel Assault marine
Tampa Bay area, FL
|
Tacobake wrote:Honestly I don't know why anyone would put Plasmacannons on their Russ when they can have a good ol' fashioned Battle Cannon. Only good Russ variant is the Vanquisher.
5 str 7 ap 2 small blast templates is nothing to sneeze at.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/19 02:53:38
Subject: Re:Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Revving Ravenwing Biker
|
Only good Russ variant is the Vanquisher.
Oh I love my Pask Vanquisher, but I am certainly having an affair with two executioner sisters
|
-Any terrain containing Sly Marbo is dangerous terrain.
-Sly Marbo once played an objective mission just to see what it was like to not meet every victory condition on his own.
-Sly Marbo bought a third edition rulebook just to play meat grinder as the attacker.
-Marbo doesn't need an Eldar farseer as an ally; his enemies are already doomed
-Sly Marbo was originally armed with a power weapon, but he dropped it while assaulting a space marine command squad just so his enemies could feel pain
-Sly Marbo still attacks the front armor value in assault, for pity's sake. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/19 02:56:30
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Norsehawk:
Unless you're a Land Raider, or another Leman Russ, or a Battlewagon, or a Monolith, or in a bunker.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/19 03:04:17
Subject: Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
The Conquerer
Waiting for my shill money from Spiral Arm Studios
|
Tacobake wrote:Honestly I don't know why anyone would put Plasmacannons on their Russ when they can have a good ol' fashioned Battle Cannon. Only good Russ variant is the Vanquisher.
the answer is, no "Gets Hot"
its mobile
and it requires more then a pebble to take it down.
|
Self-proclaimed evil Cat-person. Dues Ex Felines
Cato Sicarius, after force feeding Captain Ventris a copy of the Codex Astartes for having the audacity to play Deathwatch, chokes to death on his own D-baggery after finding Calgar assembling his new Eldar army.
MURICA!!! IN SPESS!!! |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2010/04/19 03:17:45
Subject: Re:Viability of Armored Sentinels as delaying tying up enemy units?
|
 |
Stalwart Strike Squad Grey Knight
|
EDIT: Nevermind, question answered already.
|
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2010/04/19 03:20:15
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|