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 think your opponent can influence your armament choice. I make my army lists with the models I have converted and painted. I try not to overly optimize, I don't play often enough to do that anyway, but I've been playing for a long time...

Adding the Missile Launcher is good value, the Havoc Launcher not so much, maybe I'll have to try one on a Rhino or a Landraider someday... The loss of the Dreadnought CCW and it's strength 10 attack isn't such a big deal, as at Str 6 the dread still has no trouble hurting manlings. Anything that wants to fight a dreadnought can probably hurt a dreadnought, it is when the dread goes crazy and runs forward pointlessly... I've had my two heavy weapon dread fight for extended periods of time in close combat even against Marine Assault squads, for the most part people don't seem to want to fight a dread in H2H.

Maybe Nid hordes or Orks will try and swarm everything, but with armor 12 you don't need an Lascannon, a dread is at it's best on the move, in some cover, Blastmarker Billy isn't efficient, maybe I should try and screen him with a Rhino, but it only takes a leadership test to shoot the Dread, I need to remember that rule more and at least force people to take the leadership test. Cityfight is where a dread is more effective than a large tank, especially if some of the streets/alleys are narrow and the tanks are fearful of failed difficult terrain tests...

The way I see it, the AC/ML Combination for the Loyalist Dreadnought is the most effective all-around unit, and it is currently the configuration I use on my single Venerable Dreadnought.

Standard AC/DCCW - Your basic close combat monster that can slowly tear through an enemy unit. It has a good weapon to soften up the unit it is about to attack, and can be further augmented with a Heavy Flamethrower to make it even more effective against horde units. This type is lacking seriously in the long ranged department, as it is too slow to catch a vehicle, and its Assault Cannon can only do so much at 24".

LC/DCCW - The addition of a Lascannon makes this Dreadnought a much more capable tank hunter. It no longer can deal with large enemy units at long ranges, but it can take enemy MCs and vehicles in stride. I don't really like this particular type simply because it has two very extreme tools for extremely opposite things. In my opinion, it is a mildly effective configuration that relies too much on the chance that it won't have to deal with numerous targets that can take it down, instead of going toe-to-toe with a vehicle or an MC.

AC/ML - My favorite of the four Loyalist configurations, the addition of the Missile Launcher to the basic Dread's armament is to me a less extreme example of the LC/DCCW layout. It is a good suppressive fire unit that can threaten medium to heavy armor with its rending AC and Krak Missiles, but it can also mow down infantry and light armor with the multiple shots attributed to the Heavy 4 AC, coupled with a Krak or Frag missile, depending on the armor save the enemy squad is fielding. It has almost as much of a chance of penetrating AV14 as a LC/DCCW Dread does in shooting, but also can take out infantry, something which the previously mentioned configuration has trouble with at range.

LC/ML - The ultimate fire support unit, this configuration works only at long range, and generally hunts armored targets. It has a mediocre anti-personnel capability, but can drop armor with greater ease than that of the LC/DCCW or the AC/ML. It is also the most expensive model though, and for that reason I stick to the AC/ML.

In Anti-Armor, I'd rate them as follows:
LC/ML
AC/ML and LC/DCCW
AC/DCCW

In Anti-Infantry:
AC/ML
AC/DCCW
LC/ML and LC/DCCW

Hope that helps.

"LC/DCCW - The addition of a Lascannon makes this Dreadnought a much more capable tank hunter. It no longer can deal with large enemy units at long ranges, but it can take enemy MCs and vehicles in stride. I don't really like this particular type simply because it has two very extreme tools for extremely opposite things."


I think the use of this configuration depends on the environment. It's the way I have my Dread.

I find it really comes into it's own in smaller games. At 750 or 1000 points, you're less likely to have tons of specialized units. The versatility can be very handy.

@Asmodai:

I probably should have mentioned that I'm considering their effectiveness when used in 1000+ points games. At smaller levels, where enemy units are less numerous and less less threatening, the LC/DCCW Dread is definitely a powerful machine, as the points restrictions enhances this relatively cheap model's tank-killing abilities, as it is likely to face only AV12, and much less of it. Infantry are also less numerous and less lethal.

You're definitely right though, in that the disparity between the AC/ML and LC/DCCW Dreads decreases at lower points levels, where they both can play the Jack-Of-All-Trades unit very well. Once you hit about 1200 points though, I've noticed that LC/DCCW Dreads become more specialized at anti-armor, making it worth the points to simply upgrade them to LC/ML. AC/ML Configurations suffer similarly, in that in larger games their guns are more needed for killing infantry, which can merit a reduction in cost to a DCCW from the ML if the terrain is dense and the enemies are assault-heavy.

CK