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 have two Griffons and two Leman Russ (one with HB sponson - don't ask ), but only three heavy support spots.

What two vehicles to squadron together?

The remainder of my force is comprised of infantry and some sentinals. Time prevents me from choosing any differant models so please don't suggest getting anything else, ta.

Personally I'd squadron the Griffons and let your MBT's roam free. Accurate Bombardment rule will help get the Griffons first blast template exactly where you want it and then the barrage rules will make sure your target is properly saturated.

Squadroning Russ's is generally a bad idea unless you have to due to the ease they can be taken out with the squadron rules.

Hope this helps you decide

I agree with Konort. Since the griffon has such a weak attack making both fire at the same target is no real loss of fire power and the Russ really does shine as a lone wolf.

Squadron the Griffons out of LOS so you can use their accurate bombardment rule to good effect. Keep the Russes seperate.

L. Wrex

Holy crap, someone who uses Griffons?

Seriously: I'd go with grouping the Griffons and letting the tanks go alone.

Griffons aren't that bad. They're cheap, reliable, accurate and drop S6 barrage which *murder* horde armies and force MEQ armies to take lots of saves. I'm pleased to see people doo include them in their lists

L. Wrex

I would maybe look to turn one griffon into a bailisk, medusa or similar by getting a longer barrel. Use the griffon then as a range finder for the more powerful artillery unit.

ruminator wrote:I would maybe look to turn one griffon into a bailisk, medusa or similar by getting a longer barrel. Use the griffon then as a range finder for the more powerful artillery unit.

Don't try this, it really is pretty terrible. With a combination of different range brackets, different target priority annd wound allocation shenanigans it turns out to be a big waste of points. Has anyone ever used this and then recommended it?

I would go with a squad of griffons to create an artillery barrage.

Who cares about the griffon's hitting power. it's there to ensure the basilisk does it's fullest. Griffon has range of up to 48" anway which covers most targets on a normal board.

Trickstick wrote:

ruminator wrote:I would maybe look to turn one griffon into a bailisk, medusa or similar by getting a longer barrel. Use the griffon then as a range finder for the more powerful artillery unit.

Don't try this, it really is pretty terrible. With a combination of different range brackets, different target priority annd wound allocation shenanigans it turns out to be a big waste of points. Has anyone ever used this and then recommended it?

I would go with a squad of griffons to create an artillery barrage.

Bad ruminator, -1 intanetz for not listening

I think the GW ruling was that this didn't work like this but I haven't got any other Arty available so not an issue at the moment.

I was planning to use the LR's as infantry support, to shot my blobs onto the target so to speak and have been put off by the squadron rules as well, just not sure how effective 2 Griffons togethr would be.

Griffons are the dusters nuts by the way. Many people will say that they do not hit hard but a consistant accurate rain of S6 ordnance will do the trick to a suprising number of targets; all for the princely sum of 75pts.

Although the consensus seems to be with the Griffons [my original thought also] this is still open for more opinion.

edit - oooo triple post, a new low for me!

ruminator wrote:I would maybe look to turn one griffon into a bailisk, medusa or similar by getting a longer barrel. Use the griffon then as a range finder for the more powerful artillery unit.

*Slaps hand* BAD ruminator! Bad!

I'm pretty sure this has been FAQ'd and disallowed. It sounds a strikingly familiar concept to the 'Mortar + MoO' trick people used to pull and I *know* thats been ruled against.

I'd also argue that this is bending rules to their breaking point, is against the spirit of the game and is generally just looking to try and exploit wordings to their fullest.

L. Wrex

But its realistic using spotting rounds before committing heavy artillery

of course this is 40k though

yes, but MOO and the mortar were not in the same squadron, unlike the griffon and basilisk ...

The mortar/MoO were in the same 'unit' using two barrage weapons. That falls under the 'multiple barrage' rule; in much the same way that the Basilisk and the Griffon are in the same 'unit' and using the 'multiple barrage' rule.

Ergo, if a ruling has been made that the mortar can no longer spot for the MoO, I'd be highly inclined to believe that the same is true for the Griffon/Basilisk combo.

L. Wrex

I believe that it is fine to use a griffon and basilisk together and has no ruling against it. The problem is that it is terrible. You can only use the trick at 36-48" because of the different ranges. The two weapons should be shooting at different things, with griffon for hordes and basilisk for harder targets. You would be far better off just having two basilisk.

Back on topic, i'm going to be giving russ squadrons another go this weekend. I know people always go on about the immobilisation problem but the fact you get extra armour for free is worth considering. It is good for tanks you need to keep mobile, like demolishers and hellhounds. Also, having to fire at the same target is not too much of a problem because one will probably miss anyway.

@Trickstick - Extra armour for free, could you explain?

notprop wrote:@Trickstick - Extra armour for free, could you explain?

Vehicles in a squadron treat stunned results as shaken, which is what extra armor does, at the cost of having to fire at the same target, sharing glances and pens like a normal unit shares wounds, and treating an immobilized as a wrecked.

Squadrons turn all Stunned results into Shaken to offset dieing on a Immobilized, and to keep the whole unit moving together.

EDIT: Blast, ninja'ed.

Lycaeus Wrex wrote:The mortar/MoO were in the same 'unit' using two barrage weapons. That falls under the 'multiple barrage' rule; in much the same way that the Basilisk and the Griffon are in the same 'unit' and using the 'multiple barrage' rule.

Ergo, if a ruling has been made that the mortar can no longer spot for the MoO, I'd be highly inclined to believe that the same is true for the Griffon/Basilisk combo.

L. Wrex

But there is no such ruling for a Griffon and a Basilisk, so by that the combination and sillyness/ pseudo effictveness is quite legal. Just remember that the Medusa isn't barrage so that wouldnt work at all

The MOO + Mortar was too cheap for GW to justify imo ...

I think they got it spot on. Ranging a barrage with a local mortar just seemed silly. +1 for common sense.

Thanks for the responses fellers, think Iit will be the Griffons that squad up.

notprop wrote:I think they got it spot on. Ranging a barrage with a local mortar just seemed silly. +1 for common sense.

Thanks for the responses fellers, think Iit will be the Griffons that squad up.

From people who apparently worked with artillery in the military, that's often part of range finding. It doesn't, however, mesh very well with the idea of all the weapons in a squad being fired at once, because that would mean the shells already coming in from distant artillery were homing in on where the mortar landed. Not to mention the balance problem of a 30 point piece of heavy ordnance having it's only downside mitigated. Since it would normally scatter 3d6, or 2d6 on a hit, making it scatter just over an inch off the center of the mortar is just kind of insane.

As far as I'm aware in the military, you don't use mortars at *all* as a part of range finding. Rather, you have a fire team on the ground who requests the assistance of the GMLRS/artillery and provides co-ordinates and a grid reference as a target. These are clarified, double checked and then inputted into the GMLRS itself and away the missile goes.

Not sure where people are getting the 'use mortars for larger artillery' from. Though I'll admit such things *did* occur waaaaay back in history before, y'know, technology improved past muskets.

L. Wrex

It would also reduce the effectiveness of Arty. When you want a stonk to land amongst an unprepared target, dropping a piddly warning shot before the big gunz might limit their effectiveness.