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.

As mentioned the extra wound can make a great difference whether caused in an assault or by shooting, but exposing the Dreadnought to enemy fire makes the difference caused by shooting decidedly more risky (not to mention more costly).

So your proposal is to hide the Dread in the hopes that something will charge it or come close enough to be charged? Wow, what a plan. 100+ points that may well do nothing at all--or may spend a few turns doing nothing, then lurch out of its hidey hole against your will, get shot and die.

It is not even like Dreads are very easy to hide. 6 RRs in an IG list can hide 18" away and still do the job when needed. The Dread needs to be close to within 12" of whatever it is it's protecting.
-Tegeus Cromis

Thank you. I was beginning to think we weren't having the same conversation here.

Boss Salvage:So those dreads had ranged weapons(lascannons) then? That shows how much better they are when given the option to actually attack the enemy, rather than let themselves be manhandled by the enemy.

Railguns : No, that's not my plan. That's a silly straw-man that you've substituted for the tactics I've laid out.

Maybe if you actually addressed those tactics and the strategies they're embedded in you might get a constructive answer by which I can either offer a counter-argument or agree that your point is sound. Then we could have a conversation, and, you know, discuss the thread topic.

I said that. Railguns was only quoting me.

You said using the ML or whatever means exposing the Dread to return fire. What would you have to do to not expose it? If not hide it, what else?

You want to charge, countercharge or be charged by MCs. That means Flyrants or DPs (I'll be gracious enough to pretend you were joking when you talked about getting charged by a fex). Both of these move faster than you and can take their pick of targets. If not by keeping close to 12" of the unit you wish to protect, how else do you intend to achieve your aim?

I'm sorry if I've constructed a straw man. What I posted was an honest assessment of what I thought your proposed uses would entail. If you meant something else, please elaborate.

If your point is different, then I'm sorry for missing it? Tegeus Cromis seems to be repeating what I've said as well. I'm giving you my honest opinion of what I think of it, discussing the topic of the thread. I have addressed your tactics and given my reasons for believing otherwise. Not much I can do beyond that.
But before the thread gets derailed anyway, I let the others get in on it.

Something to consider when evaluating the potential of a CC dread is that the 5th edition playtest nerfed the mobile shooting of walkers and allowed them to "run". As far as ork dreads are concerned, if this is the case then I expect to see at least one if not both extra CC arms on the deff dreads since they can't be effective shooting one weapon a turn.

The other thing is, it's easy to say "oh a walker will never make it to combat, I'll just shoot it before it gets there." while in practice this is easier said than done. I run a Mek army with my orks and generally get at least one walker in combat, and usually more than one. The trick is screening and multiples. If you really want to go the CC dreadnought route then go all the way and take multiples.

Dakkalad, in 5th ed, you have a point. In 4th, I cannot agree. Yes, sometimes walkers do get into CC for various reasons (bad rolls for your opponent, great rolls for you, a list that isn't shooty or mobile enough, etc.), but even then, you'll still have spent some turns not shooting when you could have been. For Orks, it may be an okay trade-off, but not for Chaos.

tegeus-Cromis: Hiding and exposing are the two options on the table. I suppose you could call target saturation a form of hiding in a crowd. That's Dakkaladd's point, and it's a good one.

Incidentally I wasn't suggesting that a Carnifex would be able to charge a Chaos Dreadnought - I was suggesting that the Chaos Dreadnought charges an Elite Carnifex when said Carnifex closes to use its array of Devourers.

An honest assessment, by the way, does not dismiss possibilities because, in the face of it, they seem unlikely or irrelevant. That's the point of an honest assessment, to check all the possibilities rather than just the obvious ones. That's why your "honest assessment" comes across as a straw-man, because you dismiss out of hand precisely what requires more in-depth examination.

I meant what I wrote. Considering the amount that I wrote it doesn't look like I need to elaborate since I took the time to cover the bases.

Take the difference between a Chaos Dreadnought and a Defiler with Extra Close Combat Weapons (yes, I was being rude about that, I apologize). One important difference, and not the last important difference, is how you can saturate the number of targets if you use Defilers and fill up the Heavy Support slots that would otherwise contain Obliterator, Predators, and Vindicators to maximize the number of targets that anti-vehicle and anti-tank weapons would need to engage.

If you tried to do this with Defilers and Dreadnoughts with two Dreadnought Close Combat Weapons, you'd end up either wasting the Battle Cannons as the Defilers moved forward to support assaults, or you'd end up wasting Dreadnoughts that hang back to support the Defilers (provide moving cover, counter-assault Deep Strike and fast moving units, etc).

Chaos Dreadnoughts and Defilers all hanging back with Heavy Weapons, by comparison, might be able to pull it off if there's points left over for the other half of the army to move forward and capture objectives.

Wow, this thread has alot more posts than I ever thought it would. After reading everything, I think I will either only take a dread for fluff reasons in non-competitive games, or simply to take as many points as possible in APOC. When 5th edition comes around I might change my mind, but for now, more terminators seems like a better option.

"A Chaos Dreadnought with two Dreadnought Close Combat Weapons can be used to capture objectives, to escort infantry, and as a fire magnet. "
Nurglitch, I fail to see how having one more CCW makes a dread better at these roles than one with a shooty weapon of some manner.

I gotta say, Salvage's exceedingly uncommon game aside, I am not terribly scared of dreads, despite the fact that Sisters require getting pretty darn close with their anti-tank. I think they are cool, but if they are not going to shoot at me, I have all the time in the world to deal with them whether they run at me or hang back. Penitents are bad for the same reason, only they trade speed for control.

In general I would recommend using magnets on your dread's arms so you can put a weapon on them should you desire.

I think this thread is devolving away from the main issues:

1) Chaos Dreads can't deep strike or pod in, hence they have all the issues associated with being SLOW. Space Marine dreads can use these items and thus some what over come the issue.
2) Chaos Dreads have armor values, unlike the Wraithlord, and can thus be one shot or severely hampered with mild amounts of AT fire.
3) The Chaos Dread weapons load out is vastely inferior to the SM Dread due to the lack of an Assault Cannon. This may change in the future with the rending nerf, but holds true today.
4) The Chaos Dread will be uncontrollable 1/3 of the time. Of the 1/3 of the time, at least 1/2 the time it's no going to do what you want it to do. I want to shoot, it fire frenzies at my own troops, so much FAIL in this one rule.

The Chaos Dread is a SLOW VEHICLE with marginal weapons that has to roll on a frenzy table that will rarely benefit the player. The normal Dread is a bad unit, the DCCW is a worse unit. The points can be better spent else where on a more reliable unit.

Wehrkind: It's about the lack of a Heavy weapon, essentially. Without the cost of upgrading to a Heavy weapon, and without the incentive to use said Heavy weapon, they can not only use cover more effectively than Dreadnoughts with Heavy weapons, but they are cheaper.

As a fire magnet you can't beat a 100 point Chaos Dreadnought. They can pop smoke and look vaguely threatening, and since they are vehicles, they can not only explode at the first penetrating hit, but they can also do no more than suffer Shaken results for the entire game. If they are Shaken, so what? They can still move and fight in assaults.

As support for infantry, they add 4-5 I4 S10 attacks in the assault, which is very useful against I1 S8 attacks if supported by a squad. If you want to max out a squad's shooting capabilities, at the expense of their close combat abilities, you can defer those abilities to a Dreadnought. Even hanging around doing little, such a Dreadnought can block lines of sight and aid in line of sight sniping (admittedly morally wrong and going out with 5th edition).

For capturing objectives, the extra attack afforded by the extra Dreadnought Close Combat Weapon can make the difference beween killing a Power Fist wielding maniac or Monstrous Creature, and being destroyed. In the course of getting there the extra Dreadnought Close Combat Weapon provides a back-up for the usual one, requiring four Weapon Destroyed results before the Dreadnought is unarmed. The unit strength of 10 helps too.

Notice I say "capture", not hold. Dreadnoughts are too flimsy to hold objectives by themselves, but they can pack a punch. Since they are relatively slow, you don't have to worry about them sitting around on an objective like a sitting duck.

Also, keep in mind that I'm pointing out that they're a valid strategic option: that in the right army these units have an effective use that cannot be duplicated by non-Dreadnought units. They're like a poor man's Terminator squad - much more fragile, but commensurately cheaper and far more resistant to large volumes of anti-infantry fire.

And, as mentioned, a Dreadnought model with two close combat weapons is cool.

Chaos dreads are NOT fire magnets.

NO ONE fires at them until they get around to it.

EVERYONE who's ever played one, or against one, knows this about Chaos Dreads.

They suck.

100%.

I think Nurglitch has come as close to admitting that Close Combat Dreads aren't very good as he's going too. You can't argue that the dread does what he says it will. It's just that other things do them better or they're not worth doing very much.

The OP got his answer, and I think that any new player would be very cautious before building such a dread (especially as it involves a conversion), which is all I'm worried about.

Except I wasn't arguing that they were very good or any such unqualified hyperbole. I was just pointing out that they had three strategic roles, and what tactics they could use to perform them.

As for my Chaos Dreadnought, it doubles as a Furioso Dreadnought when I've playing my Marines as Blood Angels. It was pretty cheap since I bought a regular Dreadnought at a 20% and bits ordered a Furioso right arm with two Furioso Claws. The arm fits just fine on the mounting peg.

Nurglitch wrote:Except I wasn't arguing that they were very good or any such unqualified hyperbole. I was just pointing out that they had three strategic roles, and what tactics they could use to perform them.

As for my Chaos Dreadnought, it doubles as a Furioso Dreadnought when I've playing my Marines as Blood Angels. It was pretty cheap since I bought a regular Dreadnought at a 20% and bits ordered a Furioso right arm with two Furioso Claws. The arm fits just fine on the mounting peg.

I got and understood that, but this is the internet, where there are only two kinds of people: fanbois and haterz. I kid, of course, but if you want to avoid the confusion in the future, a simple disclaimer like "This isn't the best all around unit, but there are a few uses. Here are some of them..."

I've done this many times, and nobody has gotten confused.

Nurglitch wrote:They're like a poor man's Terminator squad - much more fragile, but commensurately cheaper and far more resistant to large volumes of anti-infantry fire.

Nurglitch:

Hiding and exposing are the two options on the table. I suppose you could call target saturation a form of hiding in a crowd. That's Dakkaladd's point, and it's a good one.

Yes, but if you expose or "hide" via target saturation, then your dual-DCCW Dread has no advantage over a standard one.

Incidentally I wasn't suggesting that a Carnifex would be able to charge a Chaos Dreadnought - I was suggesting that the Chaos Dreadnought charges an Elite Carnifex when said Carnifex closes to use its array of Devourers.

You said "Kill a Hive Tyrant or Carnifex or Daemon Prince that charges, for instance." Granted, it is possible to read this as [a Hive Tyrant] or [Carnifex] or [Daemon Prince that charges], but the more usual reading would be [a Hive Tyrant (that charges)] or [Carnifex (that charges)] or [Daemon Prince that charges].

But okay, fair point with your correction, although I am far from convinced that something with a 12" threat radius is going to be an effective deterrent or counter to something with an 18" weapon.

An honest assessment, by the way, does not dismiss possibilities because, in the face of it, they seem unlikely or irrelevant. That's the point of an honest assessment, to check all the possibilities rather than just the obvious ones. That's why your "honest assessment" comes across as a straw-man, because you dismiss out of hand precisely what requires more in-depth examination.

An honest assessment doesn't have to be a complete one. If I look out the window and declare that it isn't raining because I don't see any rain, that's my honest assessment even though it isn't thorough or complete (maybe it is raining just a few metres beyond the limits of my vision).

I meant what I wrote. Considering the amount that I wrote it doesn't look like I need to elaborate since I took the time to cover the bases.

I'm sorry to tell you this, but the length of your posts is seldom proportionate to their value.

I summed up your plan for dual-DCCW Dreads as such: hide them and charge/counter-charge/be charged by an enemy that comes close. You claim I'm putting words in your mouth. Explain, briefly, what your actual plan is, then, bearing in mind that it must be a plan which dual-DCCW Dreads can fulfill but DCCW + HW Dreads cannot.

Take the difference between a Chaos Dreadnought and a Defiler with Extra Close Combat Weapons (yes, I was being rude about that, I apologize). One important difference, and not the last important difference, is how you can saturate the number of targets if you use Defilers and fill up the Heavy Support slots that would otherwise contain Obliterator, Predators, and Vindicators to maximize the number of targets that anti-vehicle and anti-tank weapons would need to engage.

If you tried to do this with Defilers and Dreadnoughts with two Dreadnought Close Combat Weapons, you'd end up either wasting the Battle Cannons as the Defilers moved forward to support assaults, or you'd end up wasting Dreadnoughts that hang back to support the Defilers (provide moving cover, counter-assault Deep Strike and fast moving units, etc).

Absurd. It doesn't matter where the Defilers are. They still compete for the same lascannon/railgun/ML shots.

More importantly, the scenario you describe has nothing to do with what you were saying earlier, which was this:

"unlike different configurations of Chaos Dreadnoughts their [dual-DDCW Dreads'] battlefield roles are not better filled by units like Defilers and Predators"

Now tell me how this hypothetical tri-Defiler/Dread army backs up this claim.

Chaos Dreadnoughts and Defilers all hanging back with Heavy Weapons, by comparison, might be able to pull it off if there's points left over for the other half of the army to move forward and capture objectives.

Wait, so this is an argument against dual-DCCW Dreads? Did you forget what your argument was?

It's about the lack of a Heavy weapon, essentially. Without the cost of upgrading to a Heavy weapon, and without the incentive to use said Heavy weapon, they can not only use cover more effectively than Dreadnoughts with Heavy weapons, but they are cheaper.

Fail. ML + DCCW costs the same as 2 x DCCW.

As a fire magnet you can't beat a 100 point Chaos Dreadnought. They can pop smoke and look vaguely threatening

This is your idea of "a fire magnet you can't beat"? Something that "can pop smoke and look vaguely threatening"? Stop it, you're killing me. Who are your opponents, 10-year-olds?

As support for infantry, they add 4-5 I4 S10 attacks in the assault, which is very useful against I1 S8 attacks if supported by a squad. If you want to max out a squad's shooting capabilities, at the expense of their close combat abilities, you can defer those abilities to a Dreadnought.

Does not compute. Aside from things like Chosen, a squad's CC abilities come from their champ. "[Maxing] out a squad's shooting abilities" hardly ever does anything to reduce their CC options.

For capturing objectives, the extra attack afforded by the extra Dreadnought Close Combat Weapon can make the difference beween killing a Power Fist wielding maniac or Monstrous Creature, and being destroyed.

As can the 1-4 HW shots you would have had before then. Didn't I say this already? Your counter was something like "but that means I can't hide my Dread oh noes."

In the course of getting there the extra Dreadnought Close Combat Weapon provides a back-up for the usual one, requiring four Weapon Destroyed results before the Dreadnought is unarmed.

So after (a rather improbable) three Weapon Destroyed results, your dual-DCCW has a combi-bolter. Great, have fun!

The unit strength of 10 helps too.

A red herring. We're talking dual-DCCW vs single DCCW. Unit strength remains unchanged.

STOP TC DAMN YOU STOP THE MADNESS!

GIGGLING AT ODD HOURS MAKES THE WIFE ANGRY!



"This is your idea of "a fire magnet you can't beat"? Something that "can pop smoke and look vaguely threatening"? Stop it, you're killing me. Who are your opponents, 10-year-olds?"

GOOD LORD GET THIS MAN A SPOT ON 40K RADIO!

"So after (a rather improbable) three Weapon Destroyed results, your dual-DCCW has a combi-bolter. Great, have fun!"

Thank you t-C, you drove my points home more succinctly than I was able.

I think that if the extra DCCW was free, it would be worth considering, but since it costs the same as a ML at the loss of one melee attack only, it is hardly worth the points.

Wehrkind wrote:I am not terribly scared of dreads ... I have all the time in the world to deal with them whether they run at me or hang back.

This is quietly the most correct comment on dreads of all flavors. And hence why podding them in when able is the only competitive route to take.

- Salvage

yeah...
I think nurglitch has pointed out lots of viable tactical uses for a CC chaos dred.

I think he's on the money with the support options...
what else can you use to support a squad? unless your thinking of supporting a squad with another squad...who's supporting who?...

If you want to support a squad of marines with a dread... it's a pretty good deterant against charging.
you'd have to face the fact that if you charge my squad next turn you'll be countercharged with a dread.
second round of combat my units strength goes up 10 and has 5 DCCW attacks.
the fact that a HW Chaos dread may also do this is true but then yo have to deal with the fire frensy results, not ideal coming from a support unit...
the only way around the fire frensy is to remove the weapon and have a CC dread..

I often have a three strong chaos dread mob.
I have two HW dreads and one CC dread.
now you have three dred targets walking across the table.
The CC dreads job is to be shot by his buddys if they firefrenzy... not a great use of 100 points, maybe, but as the squad gets closer to the enemy he might even see combat.
(i never claimed to be a great tactician)

and whoever said magnatise your options is also right... personnelly i have loads of arms for my dreads...
that way you can try it out and see if it works for you? and throw it into the mix from game to game for fun... gaks and giggles...

Panic
yeah...

what else can you use to support a squad? unless your thinking of supporting a squad with another squad...who's supporting who?...

Maybe the squads can support each other? That way, instead of one squad that's useful and a unit that's useful only to protect the squad, you have two squads that protect each other and are in themselves useful. Novel thought, eh?

The CC dreads job is to be shot by his buddys if they firefrenzy... not a great use of 100 points, maybe, but as the squad gets closer to the enemy he might even see combat.
(i never claimed to be a great tactician)

You've got that right.

so, i have to put up my hand in favor of the no CC Dread vote.

But, I was wondering, doesn't it seem the best way to field one (not saying you *should*, but if for some reason you really had or wanted to) is to field at least 2-3 in a cluster with anti-infantry weapons?

give each a ml and hb, then there targets will only be each other...when you frenzy, your weapons won't hurt your other dreads (i assume you can choose to throw frags). Each is pretty cheap, and you still get S8 and hb shots for the enemy.

ok, I'll admit that it's just terrible. Just brainstorming.

You'd get more Anti-infantry firepower (and more durability) out a single elite slot used for Terminators with 2 Reaper Cannons, and there's no chance they'll fire frenzy on you anyway. I really wanted dreads to be worth it, because I like the idea and wanted to make one for my planned Nurgle/ Tyranid Infested marines, but they just aren't worth it. Better to play more of a strong unit and capitalize on its strengths than to play more of a weak unit to covers its weaknesses and give up that strength.

yeah, I definitely see chaos dreads as terrible. I was just throwing it out there.