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.

Anyone using fast attack slots for these? I feel like there's alot of cover saves in 6th and colo snd eradicators aren't that good in my opinion.

I feel that hellhounds are still good.

Torrent is what makes them good though, its hard to get bane wolves close enough, and if you do, they end up being a suicide unit.

Sometimes I run 2 hellhounds, both with hull multimeltas. You're primarily using them for clearing out light to medium infantry on objectives or in cover. I see the melta as insurance: If you lose the flamer, you've still got a multi melta on a fast platform. It's not great, but it means the unit isnt totally useless if it loses its primary weapon.

banewolves have always been hideously awful. A weapon with no range and a high threat rating against some armies means it will die before it gets a chance to shoot, and a weapon with no range and a low threat rating against other armies means that it will only ever do pyrrhic damage, or just be flat-out ignored. Anything that can be so easily ignored or destroyed before it gets a shot off isn't worth taking.

The hellhound isn't as bad, what with being torrent. The problem is that there are other things in the codex that do the job much better. If you really want to flush stuff out from cover, use a colossus, or an eradicator, or flamer stormtroopers, or some flamer/demo vets piling out of a vendetta, or something.

Awestrn wrote:
Anyone using fast attack slots for these? I feel like there's alot of cover saves in 6th and colo snd eradicators aren't that good in my opinion.

Hellhounds are decent, Bane Wolves are awful.

But for pushing stuff out of cover, Colossi are the best choice.

I don't like AV12 tanks that have to go close. But Hellhounds could be situational awesome against massive ADL abuse by a non-MEQ opponent.

 TheCaptain wrote:

But for pushing stuff out of cover, Colossi are the best choice.

Btw. is there a thread here that recommends a model for the Colossus? As there is no official one I'd really like to know of somebody who fields them. The only models that comes to my mind is the Imperial Bombard from FW.

Cyberian wrote:
I don't like AV12 tanks that have to go close. But Hellhounds could be situational awesome against massive ADL abuse by a non-MEQ opponent.

 TheCaptain wrote:

But for pushing stuff out of cover, Colossi are the best choice.

Btw. is there a thread here that recommends a model for the Colossus? As there is no official one I'd really like to know of somebody who fields them. The only models that comes to my mind is the Imperial Bombard from FW.

It's pretty much either Scratchbuild one, or the Imperial Bombard.

The Hellhound does a reasonable job for its point cost. The Banewolf is worse than it was in 5th edition, which is truly a feat since it was NEVER good. The big problem is that the Hellhound competes for slots with the Vendetta.

Why does everyone think that the Colossus is so good? Was there some subtle change in 6th that I'm missing?

 daedalus wrote:

Why does everyone think that the Colossus is so good? Was there some subtle change in 6th that I'm missing?

He is better in MEQ killing than a LRBT for less points and can do indirect fire in combination with a griffon for more precision.

Cyberian wrote:
I don't like AV12 tanks that have to go close. But Hellhounds could be situational awesome against massive ADL abuse by a non-MEQ opponent.

 TheCaptain wrote:

But for pushing stuff out of cover, Colossi are the best choice.

Btw. is there a thread here that recommends a model for the Colossus? As there is no official one I'd really like to know of somebody who fields them. The only models that comes to my mind is the Imperial Bombard from FW.

Actually pretty much any barrage weapon is better at ADL abuse. Area terrain or bastions are the only thing that the hellhound is better at.

I've just used my Medusa as a Colossus, people don't seem to care or know the difference.

Cyberian wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

Why does everyone think that the Colossus is so good? Was there some subtle change in 6th that I'm missing?

He is better in MEQ killing than a LRBT for less points and can do indirect fire in combination with a griffon for more precision.

The Colossus is min range 24", S6, and only 10 points cheaper than an LRBT. Kill zone for the weapon just seems bad.

Adding a Griffon gets you a d6 less scatter for 75 points in the 24-48" kill range. I'm less sure that's worth it.

Cyberian wrote:
I don't like AV12 tanks that have to go close. But Hellhounds could be situational awesome against massive ADL abuse by a non-MEQ opponent.

 TheCaptain wrote:

But for pushing stuff out of cover, Colossi are the best choice.

Btw. is there a thread here that recommends a model for the Colossus? As there is no official one I'd really like to know of somebody who fields them. The only models that comes to my mind is the Imperial Bombard from FW.

Are there IA rules for a Bombard? I have virtually no knowledge of the IA books but just looked on FW site and the Bombard model looks identical to me to the Colossus side view in the IG codex. Even the support strut on the the cannon (and the cannon itself) are identical. As is the chassis and crane (albeit positioned at a different angle)

@Daedalus

You can do indirect fire inside min range.

Min range just means that BF isn't subtracted which does not matter if you score a hit. Plus the griffon helps you with that and with non-MEQ horde.

Ah.. that would make them a good deal better than they were in 5th edition, actually...

Cyberian wrote:

 daedalus wrote:

Why does everyone think that the Colossus is so good? Was there some subtle change in 6th that I'm missing?

He is better in MEQ killing than a LRBT for less points and can do indirect fire in combination with a griffon for more precision.

Would someone mind explaining how a Griffon helps other Ordnance Battery units be more precise? I'm very new to Guard and have read about it a couple of times but cannot find any reference in the Codex or FAQ's. The rule states Griffons only, so what am I missing?

Back OT I like the idea of a Hellhound and currently only have 1 Vendetta so my FA slots are pretty free. I may get one and magnetize the turrets to try out all the 3 options. I have read and appreciate the above points about the Banewolf but my good friend plays Drop-Pod SW and keeping a Banewolf in reserve to hammer some Grey Hunterswould be nice. Just need to find a reason to justify taking against the CSM that my brother plays and find a role for it.

Griffons make barrage better by resolving the scatter from their gun first. Since you can reroll the scatter, you're more likely to hit with that first shot. The next guns in the battery a just flip off that first shot.

rigeld2 wrote:
Griffons make barrage better by resolving the scatter from their gun first. Since you can reroll the scatter, you're more likely to hit with that first shot. The next guns in the battery a just flip off that first shot.

I see, cheers for clearing that up. I just took it that they should be all of the same type per unit, didn't even think to look at mixing them. Thats good news, I'll put that Medusa back on my FW wishlist....

"The Hellhound does a reasonable job for its point cost. The Banewolf is worse than it was in 5th edition, which is truly a feat since it was NEVER good. The big problem is that the Hellhound competes for slots with the Vendetta."

Exactly. get those pesky tanks out of the Fast Attack Slots. Flyers baby!!!

"Why does everyone think that the Colossus is so good? Was there some subtle change in 6th that I'm missing?"

No. They are silly and only outweigh other heavy slots in a few circumstances.. For all-comers lists, they should be left at home!

 somecallmeJack wrote:
I feel that hellhounds are still good.

Torrent is what makes them good though, its hard to get bane wolves close enough, and if you do, they end up being a suicide unit.

Sometimes I run 2 hellhounds, both with hull multimeltas. You're primarily using them for clearing out light to medium infantry on objectives or in cover. I see the melta as insurance: If you lose the flamer, you've still got a multi melta on a fast platform. It's not great, but it means the unit isnt totally useless if it loses its primary weapon.

I like this MM idea, gives it something at least, you can also be sneaky and fire it at a vehicle with infantry near by and still hit the infantry with the Inferno cannon, so long as part of the template is touching both units.

 wildboar wrote:
Are there IA rules for a Bombard?

There used to be. Now (as of IA1 second edition) it is a Colossus and has no special rules.



As for the Hellhound variants:

Hellhound: decent. Fast and can do a lot of damage to anything that depends on a cover save, but fairly limited otherwise. Unlike the Colossus it has an auto-hit weapon.

Devil Dog: decent. 6th's fast vehicle rules let it move 12" and fire the main gun and hull multimelta, so it's a decent anti-vehicle threat with some ability to hurt heavy infantry if you can get them in a packed formation.

Banewolf: awful. Zero range on the template means very few hits once you finally get in range, so even against 3+ save targets the Hellhound probably wins through quantity of hits.


The main problem with the Hellhound is that it occupies a fast attack slot but isn't a Vendetta. It doesn't have enough of an advantage over competing units (Colossus, HF Chimeras, etc) to justify giving up a Vendetta, so it only has a place in non-competitive lists where you have some reason for taking a Hellhound besides winning games.

rigeld2 wrote:
Griffons make barrage better by resolving the scatter from their gun first. Since you can reroll the scatter, you're more likely to hit with that first shot. The next guns in the battery a just flip off that first shot.

You're paying 75 points to guarantee a 5" scatter 66% of the time.

Adding a Griffon does not make your artillery more accurate. This is a myth based in misinterpretation.

If I fire a griffon, and then a Colossi, and I roll a scatter of 3" on the Colossi, doesn't matter, the colossi shot is flipping completely off of the main targeted blast.

If I just fire a Colossi, and roll a scatter of 3", the Colossi stays put right on target.

The only time a Griffon is more accurate is when it is fired alone or when compared as Griffon + Artillery piece X, vs. 2 of Artillery Piece X

Take a griffon with another artillery tank, and you are paying 75 points to make your second artillery shot have a 66% chance of missing its intended target.

The only accuracy the Griffon increases is its own.

(PLEASE READ: Why adding a Griffon doesn't make Artillery more accurate.)
Edit; to put it in mathhammer terms:

Griffon hits directly 55% of the time, and its scatter is only 3" (and thus still a technical hit) 8% of the time. So 63% chance to hit. That's 37% chance to scatter an inch or more.
Then, in the same battery, you fire a Colossi. It scatters 66% of the time, scattering it 5" (a full flip of a large blast) So the Colossi is a direct hit 33% of the time. Except, if the griffon scatters, even if the Colossi directly hits, it is off target. So the Griffon+Colossi is dead on 20% of the time.

If you just fire the Colossi, you directly hit 33% of the time, and on a scatter, scatter 0 inches 8% of the time, for a dead-on accuracy of 41%.

 TheCaptain wrote:
If I fire a griffon, and then a Colossi, and I roll a scatter of 3" on the Colossi, doesn't matter, the colossi shot is flipping completely off of the main targeted blast.

You don't roll a distance when scattering with the second gun in a barrage battery. The barrage markers will always be at worst touching.
edit: and if you roll a direct hit with the Colossi you pick where you scatter the second gun - so it can scatter back onto your original target.

Seriously, it does make things more accurate.

rigeld2 wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:
If I fire a griffon, and then a Colossi, and I roll a scatter of 3" on the Colossi, doesn't matter, the colossi shot is flipping completely off of the main targeted blast.

You don't roll a distance when scattering with the second gun in a barrage battery. The barrage markers will always be at worst touching.

Exactly. When you fire the Colossi alone, and scatter, you still "don't scatter" if you roll 2 or 3".

If you fire it after a griffon, you are always going the full 5" flip.

 TheCaptain wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:
If I fire a griffon, and then a Colossi, and I roll a scatter of 3" on the Colossi, doesn't matter, the colossi shot is flipping completely off of the main targeted blast.

You don't roll a distance when scattering with the second gun in a barrage battery. The barrage markers will always be at worst touching.

Exactly. When you fire the Colossi alone, and scatter, you still "don't scatter" if you roll 2 or 3".

If you fire it after a griffon, you are always going the full 5" flip.

No, hits will always be dead on (you can overlap).

The only time a Griffon is more accurate is when it is fired alone or when compared as Griffon + Artillery piece X, vs. 2 of Artillery Piece X

How is that different from what I'm saying?

rigeld2 wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 TheCaptain wrote:
If I fire a griffon, and then a Colossi, and I roll a scatter of 3" on the Colossi, doesn't matter, the colossi shot is flipping completely off of the main targeted blast.

You don't roll a distance when scattering with the second gun in a barrage battery. The barrage markers will always be at worst touching.

Exactly. When you fire the Colossi alone, and scatter, you still "don't scatter" if you roll 2 or 3".

If you fire it after a griffon, you are always going the full 5" flip.

No, hits will always be dead on (you can overlap).

I am saying on a scatter, you always scatter the full flip. Considering we are discussing scattering here.

The only time a Griffon is more accurate is when it is fired alone or when compared as Griffon + Artillery piece X, vs. 2 of Artillery Piece X

How is that different from what I'm saying?

Because in this thread the Griffon is suggested as an addition to the Colossi to make it more accurate. (Griffon + Colossi VS. Colossi Alone) That is what my mathhammer addresses.

Not comparing a Griffon and a Colossi to 2x Colossi.

I don't really think that w the question being asked, because that's a horrible question - but okay.

rigeld2 wrote:
I don't really think that w the question being asked, because that's a horrible question - but okay.

I'm not sure what you're saying here, but all I am saying is that adding a Griffon doesn't make the second shot more accurate than if it were fired alone.

If you disagree, I urge you to read the mathhammer under the above post's red-text. I think you'll find it clears up a very common misunderstanding.

I hope I don't seem attacking; this is sincere advice, it's just that I've seen this idea thrown around and I'd hope to clear it up.

Cheers,
-Capt

No, I'm saying I agree with the math hammer but you're addressing something that I wasn't (trying) to state and would be a dumb premise overall.

We agree.

I do not think you can overlap the first barrage shot with any shot following. It is place the template and flip off of the edge. Rolling a hit just means you get to choose where it flips off of. That is all to my knowledge. Also.... I think the Colossus does have its merits, but I would probably never take more than 1. There is so much cover abuse now days though. I don't think anyone does it better than Eldar and or Dark Eldar. One template landing can make all the difference.

As far as the original question goes. No, I think as long as the flamer tanks compete with the Vendetta there will be no place for them unless you are running Sabres galore. 3 squads of 3 minimum probably. Maybe more. I bet that would be a fun and competitive army to play though (maybe not as fun for your opponent lol).

 Living Still wrote:
I do not think you can overlap the first barrage shot with any shot following. It is place the template and flip off of the edge. Rolling a hit just means you get to choose where it flips off of. That is all to my knowledge.

Sorry, but incorrect.

If you roll a hit, you place it anywhere you like, as long as it is at least slightly in contact with the original shot. Overlapping, on the edge; wherever.

Thanks for clearing that up. Went and checked the brb and yep.... barrage is even better than I thought. Good thing I'm packing a ton of it ;-).