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 am putting together a Salamanders army list and want to take full advantage of vulkan. I would like some advice from other Sal players as to the preference of which FA choice you would rather take. A squadron of 2-3 landspeeders with MM or 2-3 attack bikes with MM? Which and why, what are the advantages or disadvantages, thanks.

moving to tactics

Both are good but If your taking LS then take one per FA slot and also give them a heavy flamer. As for the Attack bike I'm more a fan of those in bike squads as they give you some extra wounds and they can also have meltas guns.

Ditto, both are good.

It comes down to preference and what else is in your list.

this question gets asked like once a month. just do a topic search. its been discussed in thorough, exhausting detail. by people who are still posting regularly, no less.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
short answer land speeders are better all the way.

AbaddonFidelis wrote:
short answer land speeders are better all the way.

No they are not, it depends heavily on your army. Both are good though, so you can't do too wrong

ok so potentially just a matter of preference, tactics, and what the rest of my list looks like...I think that is probably the info I was looking for....just wanted to know if there was a severe disadvantage to take either one. I would love to have tornados ripping it up with MM and flamers, but I think im gonna go with bikes

The attack bikes would fit better with the fluff but can not move as well.

Landspeeders:
str 3 weapons/assaults have no effect
str 4 require 6's to glance
cannont be tied down in an assault
str 8+ requires at least 2+ to glance/pen, but then a chance of only getting a shaken/stun/weapon destroyed
can carry more weapons
AP 2/3 has no effect
harder to get cover, unless you go flat out
cannot be tank shocked, but can be rammed? (avoid ona 2+)
can deep strike
more expensive

Bikes:
str 3 require 6's to wound
str 4 require 5's to wound
str 8+ require 2's, then instant death if no armour or cover save
can be tied down in an assault
only 2 choices of weapons i think
AP 2/3 ignores thier save
easier to get into cover, can also turbo boost
can be tank shocked
cannont deepstrike
cheaper

thats how I see it, depends on your army and playstyle.

Dear Nurgle.

I agree with AF on the first part.

As for the second part, he will suggest what works for him. Though what works for him does not always work for everybody (in both a competitive and friendly environment).

So yea, please do a search because this discussion has gone beyond beating the bones of a decomposed horse.

Awesome, very nice analysis Mr. DK. I like the metrics of the land speeders much better....dammit, I dont know which to go with

@Mr. DK:

Being able to tie other things in combat is not always a 'con'.

Sanctjud wrote:@Mr. DK:

Being able to tie other things in combat is not always a 'con'.

Also there are things that a SM can easily kill in CC. As an eldar player i loose more models to CC then to ranged fire from space marines.

One Landspeeder with MM/HF is never a bad choice.

Try a list with 1, then 2, and have the remainder as Attack Bikes.

Sanctjud wrote:@Mr. DK:

Being able to tie other things in combat is not always a 'con'.

I take it someone uses a lot of deffkoptas...

My preference for a Vulkan marine force would be the speeders. For 20 pts more you could also give them heavy flamers (twin-linked) which would diversify their role on the battlefield. Or you could give them dual MMs and just giggle when an enemy tank comes within 30".

Illumini wrote:

AbaddonFidelis wrote:
short answer land speeders are better all the way.

No they are not, it depends heavily on your army. Both are good though, so you can't do too wrong

ok fine.... I'll bite.
it doesnt depend on anything but the individual capabilities of the units in question. you make a good army by selecting good units. the synergy between good units is whats called "awesome" right? dont take 2nd best units and you wont end up with a 2nd best army.

Land speeders are the better choice because they are
1. more resilient to small arms and to heavy weapon fire
2. more flexible when it comes to targetting options (MM/HF vs just MM)
3. more maneuverable because they can deep strike and fly over intervening terrain
4. more survivable in close combat (you need 6s to hit, usually 6s to wound, and you can leave in your movement phase)
5. only slightly more expensive.

Arguments for the Attack Bike tend to go:
1. they cost less (true, but not much less. the large difference in quality more than makes up for the smalld difference in price)
2. they get a turbo boost save vs. heavy weapons, whereas land speeders only get a 4+ (true, but they tend to suffer instant death if they fail it.)
3. they can get into close combat to set up a charge next turn (true again, but why do you need to throw away 1 unit in order to assault with another?)

For a land speeder, in short, you're getting more maneuverability, more fire power, more survivability, for only a 20 point upgrade (for the MM/HF variety, which is 1 you want)
AF




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Element206 wrote:ok so potentially just a matter of preference, tactics, and what the rest of my list looks like...I think that is probably the info I was looking for....just wanted to know if there was a severe disadvantage to take either one. I would love to have tornados ripping it up with MM and flamers, but I think im gonna go with bikes

no. it is not a matter of preference. or opinion. people retreat to positions like that when they don't want to look at the numbers and accept what they mean. for 70 points a landspeeder is a vastly better buy than an attack bike.

MekanobSamael wrote:

Sanctjud wrote:@Mr. DK:

Being able to tie other things in combat is not always a 'con'.

I take it someone uses a lot of deffkoptas...

My preference for a Vulkan marine force would be the speeders. For 20 pts more you could also give them heavy flamers (twin-linked) which would diversify their role on the battlefield. Or you could give them dual MMs and just giggle when an enemy tank comes within 30".

Nope, SMurf Attack bikes. I love to nom nom on pathfinders, rangers, dark reapers, lootas, non combat stuff.
If not to nom nom, then to tie down, crisis/broadsides, devestators, wraithguard, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

no. it is not a matter of preference. or opinion. people retreat to positions like that when they don't want to look at the numbers and accept what they mean. for 70 points a landspeeder is a vastly better buy than an attack bike.

I'm looking at the numbers, and they say nothing. Your OPINION of those numbers puts you into your position.

I like keeping costs low... so when looking between the Speeder and the Attack Bike, Attack Bikes win out.

AF, you run Vulkan(something that new posters may not know). There is a benefit to both MM and HF. Both weapons you can get on the Speeder. That weights heavily on the speeders.
Now, what reality suggests is that: not everybody runs Vulkan. Nor do they run MM/HF or even HF.

You know what, I will agree to disagree, we have been over this too much.
Search function works well enough for the OP.

Oh Abbadon, always with the absolutist comments. Are you truly unable to see shades of gray or do you just ignore them?

First off, let me say that I also prefer the Landspeeders.

However, that is not to say that attack bikes don't have a place in some builds. Attack bikes are much easier to hide, and won't be stopped from shooting by a single wound from a s3-s7 hit. By contrast, if a speeder suffers a single glance from S4+ weaponry, it will be unable to shoot the next turn. This has many tactical implications.

When you say slightly more expensive, do you realize that you are referring to a 40% increase in cost to purchase a HF/MM speeder over a MM attack bike? If you are going purely for MM platforms, the attack bikes are more efficient than the HF/MM speeder. 40% increase in cost is not negligible. (for 150 points you get 3 attack bikes, and 140 points gets you 2 HF/MM speeders).

Certainly both have their advantages and disadvantages. But to say that one is categorically better than the other is misleading.

Are you truly unable to see shades of gray or do you just ignore them?

LAWL, don't get him started....he absolutely hates that saying... I know very well.
Though I do agree with you Dracos, there is plenty of grey.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
To Elemental206.

If you are running bike heavy Vulkan, then I suggest Attack Bikes.
If you are running mech heavy Vulkan and want the Fast Attack Support, then I would suggest speeders.

Though, the Typhoon varient is also very juicy, less synergy with Vulkan, but it adds something that is normally lacking in a Vulkan oriented list.
Best way to know is to proxy and find out.

sanctjud wrote:
You know what, I will agree to disagree, we have been over this too much.
Search function works well enough for the OP.

I'm so proud of you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dracos wrote:Oh Abbadon, always with the absolutist comments. Are you truly unable to see shades of gray or do you just ignore them?

First off, let me say that I also prefer the Landspeeders.

However, that is not to say that attack bikes don't have a place in some builds. Attack bikes are much easier to hide, and won't be stopped from shooting by a single wound from a s3-s7 hit. By contrast, if a speeder suffers a single glance from S4+ weaponry, it will be unable to shoot the next turn. This has many tactical implications.

When you say slightly more expensive, do you realize that you are referring to a 40% increase in cost to purchase a HF/MM speeder over a MM attack bike? If you are going purely for MM platforms, the attack bikes are more efficient than the HF/MM speeder. 40% increase in cost is not negligible. (for 150 points you get 3 attack bikes, and 140 points gets you 2 HF/MM speeders).

Certainly both have their advantages and disadvantages. But to say that one is categorically better than the other is misleading.

I'm truly unable to see them. really. I have shade-blindness
20 points represents a 1% force allocation in a 2000 point game. So yes, it's a slight increase in points cost.

That reduction of points could be enough to fit a raider in or something else important.
That 1% can be a huge deal, though you make it sound like it never is.

I would suggest, Elemental, to put up a list/link it so that there is more information for us to work with.
Right now, the open endedness is too wide to work with and will result in 'this.'

land speeder