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.

So I had a thought presented to me: that a small unit of 4 ML devastators from C:SM can actually be a decent choice. I'm on the fence still, but I've done some number crunching, and some analysis and here's what I've found when comparing them to other ranged AT options available to the SM codex. This is in comparison to the Auto-las pred, the rifle dread, and 2 typhoon speeders. I'm not including the storm talon, as it fills a slightly different roll, but mostly cause I'm unfamiliar with how it handles. If people who do have experience with the storm talon works want to throw that into the pot though, please do

Incidentally, all of the units I have listed do the same amount of damage vs av 12, and I believe lower armor values as well, with the exception of the predator who has the nifty ap 2. (but that's really too much for me to mathhammer at this time cause lazy)

Pros:

cheaper than 2 landspeeders

gets cover more easily

takes at least 5 single shots to remove the unit entirely (whereas a single lucky shot can kill a pred, dread, and two for a squadron of 2 landspeeders)

versatile, they're better vs tanks, but aren't a total waste against infantry.

Uniformity, they can deal with vehicles, hordes, and other models with a 3+ or worse save (the pred has 2 shots at ap2, and two at ap 4)

I think they are actually more survivable vs s 4 than 2 landspeeders are, though if someone wants to run the odds on that and slap me with some mathammer, that'd be great

Cons:

Static: Once these guys have been deployed, any turn that you move means, in all likelyhood, that you've just lost a turn of shooting with these guys ( the pred isn't much better tbh, but at least you can get 1 shot in, and dreads and speeders can move around a lot more) Plus, the static nature of this unit means it is slightly easier to deal with, makes it easier to orient their vehicles to have the front armor take the worst beating. Finally, they can't stay away from danger and remain effective the way that speeders and dreads can

the AP 2 of predators gives them a slight edge when it comes to popping tanks

25 points more expensive than a rifle dread or a predator

vulnerable to small arms fire in a way that the predator and the dread really aren't ( i know i know, rear armor 10 but still)

So there yah go.

what do y'all think?

with my salamanders i run a Dev unit with three plasma cannons and one MM and if i have points spare i stick them in a bastion and just let them unload.

I know this can make for an expensive unit but i normal play a marine army who takes at least ten termys and a Land Raider and every game this unit has more than made its points back.

However against other army's i am not too sure how this would work. But as you have laid out above a very cheep unit could also work just as well if not better.

It really depends on what else you bring, you cant just analyze a unit and determine if its good seperately from the rest of the army.

I think that the regular devastator unit is good in a footslogging list, and not very good in a mech list for example.

I prefer the Pred w/ss LC myself. These units do different things for me. I'm a BA player so my Pred is fast, It makes a difference to me and is the reason I never use DevSqds.

They carry heavy weapons and can't shoot when they move. This pretty much means they are stuck in your deployment zone the entire game. Even with a 48" range, if you can't see it, you can't shoot it. Even if you do decide to move, you move out of cover into the open? At 6 inches a turn they are almost guarenteed to stay put.

ThePred has mobiltiy and while it has the chance of being blown up in a single hit, the chances are slim. We've all seen stupid things though.

+1 PRED here. Its cheaper. It moves further. It can blast things just as easily....and it looks totally bad a5$.

The ML is truly the big loser of 6th edition I think. Krak missiles are only marginally better at anti-tank than AC shots, but with 1/2 the rate of fire. You really can't stop a LR or LR with either weapon.

ACs also do anti-infantry and anti-monster better, especially for a BS 4 user. The ML is only more effective against a narrow range of AV and MEQs *with no cover*. If they have any cover, then the advantage is back to the AC. Basically, in my 6th edition experience, MLs just don't work.

Unfortunately, your mahreens and my BA aren't cool enough to get AC devastators. For BA, the fast vehicles are a no-brainer. For vanilla dex, I'm not sure. But I wouldn't arm my devastators with MLs. Since real weapons are kinda pricey on them, it will make them a big target. Not sure how good that really is.

Martel732 wrote:

Unfortunately, your mahreens and my BA aren't cool enough to get AC devastators.

We aren't really able to get a ton of AC's from any source I mean.. if we could get 15 point auto cannons in our DEV squads then yeah.. you'd see them all over the place.

You reminded me of something though, that the ap 2 of a las cannon does give the predator an edge when it comes to killing tanks, going to update the comparison accordingly.

Well the vanilla mahreens get the mighty riflemen dread, something that the BA can't afford to ever take.

Do not underestimate the standoff ability of the lascannon. Lascannons make things like vindicators very sad indeed. Vindicators are very scary if you are trying to kill them with assault cannons or meltaguns.

That being said, I think a lascannon devastator squad is very point inefficient. My BA list has them scattered around; mostly on mobile firing platforms.

I've seen DE abuse the 6" range increase field to great effect vs vindicator and assault cannon based armies. AC and LC armies don't care too much.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'll tell you that for my BA, my vanilla allies will have a Thunderfire in the heavy slot, mostly because the other choices kinda underwhelm me. And the cannon is a lot harder to kill now and effectively adds to armor saturation. T 7 is a lot like AV.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another thing I always keep in mind is that flamers of Tzeetch or fragnoughts from the BA in drop pods will make the devastators very, very sad.

Devestators were always decent. Anyone taking a Thunderfire Cannon can give them 3+ cover in ruins, giving them missile launchers make them a versatile and tough way of dealing with light armour.

Lascannons are too expensive for devestators though imo.

yes, sometimes more wounds is just as good if not better than more AV. Well said.

I mean it really depends. I think in terms of weapon vulnerability its a wash, and the vehicle is more mobile. They are super mobile for the BA, but even more the vanilla mahreens they have increased mobility over devastators.

It helps to look at the meta game of your area too. If AC spam is common, the AV 13 predator is going to suck down a lot of shots and never be suppressed or lose firepower until it is dead. The devastators will have to save large amounts of wounds and degrade over time.

However, against single shot, high STR weapons, the devastators are better. Don't forget with the changes to rapid fire, devastators will come under fire from things like pulse rifles much more easily now. That reduces their stock, because Tau was one foe that devastators were great against.

Martel732 wrote:
I mean it really depends. I think in terms of weapon vulnerability its a wash, and the vehicle is more mobile. They are super mobile for the BA, but even more the vanilla mahreens they have increased mobility over devastators.

It helps to look at the meta game of your area too. If AC spam is common, the AV 13 predator is going to suck down a lot of shots and never be suppressed or lose firepower until it is dead. The devastators will have to save large amounts of wounds and degrade over time.

However, against single shot, high STR weapons, the devastators are better. Don't forget with the changes to rapid fire, devastators will come under fire from things like pulse rifles much more easily now. That reduces their stock, because Tau was one foe that devastators were great against.

also note their are new things in the game like Helturkeys that rock devistators in ruins but arent nearly as good against predators.

I really like devs. I always take two squads of eight with four missile launchers. They can kill anything but 2+ or av 14, and even then they can be used to strip off the last hull point of a LR. One thing that's not in your comparison is that devs are one of the most weapon dense squads in the entire book, which is very important for gunlines.

Missile launchers are demonstrably garbage in my opinion. They aren't good against things that I want my high strength weapons to be able to make dead. AP 3 is a curse for anti tank work, and stripping hull points with a single shot weapon fired from an meq is silly.

Oh, yes the hellturkeys. I've only faced one that flamed 5 tactical dudes and then got evaporated by my stormraven. Those will definitely ruin devastators' days.

They're really "MISSile" launchers. Points could be spent better else where in my opinion.

The AP3 hasn't even been mentioned yet. That is a true downer about the ML. How would it be if they were AP2? I mean they are ML right?

The only upside I can see with Dev Sqds is the versatility of the unit. They can still have LC, HB, etc etc. Their only option isnt the ML. Its just the most versatile of the options. This group fills what you are lacking. For me. I fill the problem before it begins and therefore I don't have to take them.

For a few more points in the same slot you could have a StormRaven Gunship.

The StormRaven suffers from the curse of reserves, however. It should primarily be to counter other flyers, and do anti ground as back up.

Unfortunately, LC devastators and to a lesser extent PC devastators are hella expensive and draw tons of dakka. Your dudes *will* die. 6th edition, even more than 5th edition, is about stuff dying. Horribly.

CSM by far have the best devastator option: ACs. In a way, the most similar payload to this is PCs. Risky, I know, and only half as effective vs vehicles, but they can perform similarly if the dice gods smile on you. Even better vs things like teqs.

Devastators are competing with Thunderfire Cannons, Vindicators and, Predators for the Heavy Support slot. Heck, if you use a Master of the Forge, they are competing with Dreadnoughts, too.

The main reason speeders are brought more than Devastators is because Speeders take the Vanilla Marines much more useless Fast Attack Slot. All it's really competing with in there is Attack Bikes.

Thunderfire cannons have access to the precious "no cover save" mechanic as well. Say hello to all the squishy armies hiding in cover for me!

The real story of this thread: hull points make *Havocs* good, C:SM devastators........ I'm not sold.

The only unit I think that is worth taking with missile lauchers is Longfangs. I know they are not a SM unit and sort of sway from the topic but 3 missiles and 2 las cannons are very efficient and dont cost much more than the over priced devs.

Long Fangs are a bit of a different animal. I don't know their costs off the top of my head, but I'm willing to entertain the 2 lascannon 3 missile launchers combo being decent. Unfortunately, this doesn't help the codex astartes chapters :(

I'm not trying to be a jerkface here, either. I really wish the missile launcher did what it is advertised to do. But when the dice start rolling, it just kinda fails.

This game is always a balance of taking fun things vs taking things that win. I think that 6th edition helped make many units (tactical squads) better from 5th, but some things (like BA assault lists and krak missiles) got worse.

 g0atsticks wrote:


They're really "MISSile" launchers. Points could be spent better else where in my opinion.

The only upside I can see with Dev Sqds is the versatility of the unit. They can still have LC, HB, etc etc. Their only option isn't the ML. Its just the most versatile of the options.

For a few more points in the same slot you could have a StormRaven Gunship.

They don't miss any more than anything else in the dex that fires at BS 4 and isn't twin linked... I've seen this sentiment echoed amongst a lot of other people, and I don't quite understand it. Indeed, when firing at infantry (almost all infantry mind you, including space marines that are in the open, provided you can cover 3 models with the template, which is pretty common in my experience) the superior shot choice is, obviously, the frag missile. the odds of this totally missing a unit are rediculously small, and against t4(-) units in cover, the frag missile really shines.

Las is, imo, way too expensive for what you get.. were it 5 points more, ten points more even, then yes, I would probably take it... but for 20 points more?? what does that run up to... almost 200 points for 5 las cannon marines? no wait... 230... might as well just get a land raider . As far as heavy bolters go: if the heavy bolters were cheaper, i could again see that, but for 50 points less you can just get the T-fire, which... might be a little less durable..? but throws out so much more dakka it's not even funny.

I'd like to hear about the stormRaven/devastator comparison though

Las devastators for vanilla mahreens are indeed way too expensive, even with the AP 2 buff. For lascannons, look to razor backs and predators.

Unfortunately, the frag missile has low strength for a heavy weapon and allows cover saves.

Missiles aren't undesirable because of their accuracy, they are undesirable because of their lack of efficacy when they do hit.