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 from my understanding, these tanks sucked in 5th because they could only indirect fire (says so in their codex entry), and thus their minimal range prevented them from being useful. Basilisks could at least direct fire, so minimum range didnt matter to them, right? This made Basilisks better because while they didnt *always* ignore cover, when they indirect fired they could still somewhat ignore cover partially depending on where the central hole landed.


In 6th edition the tables have been reversed and indirect fire is now permitted within a weapon's minimum range (and beyond) but direct fire is only permitted outside minimum range, correct?


In light of this, Basilisks and Colossi are viable again, with the latter being more deadly because even if the central hole scatters beyond some barrier, the target squad still doesnt get to take any cover saves. Do you use them? Have you encountered them? What are you tactics?

What is the point of the Colossus having a minimum range value if all it can do is indirect fire this edition both within and beyond its minimum range? I am assuming this minimum range value will get erased when the new IG codex comes out?

 Sir Arun wrote:
So from my understanding, these tanks sucked in 5th because they could only indirect fire (says so in their codex entry), and thus their minimal range prevented them from being useful. Basilisks could at least direct fire, so minimum range didnt matter to them, right? This made Basilisks better because while they didnt *always* ignore cover, when they indirect fired they could still somewhat ignore cover partially depending on where the central hole landed.


In 6th edition the tables have been reversed and indirect fire is now permitted within a weapon's minimum range (and beyond) but direct fire is only permitted outside minimum range, correct?


In light of this, Basilisks and Colossi are viable again, with the latter being more deadly because even if the central hole scatters beyond some barrier, the target squad still doesnt get to take any cover saves. Do you use them? Have you encountered them? What are you tactics?

What is the point of the Colossus having a minimum range value if all it can do is indirect fire this edition both within and beyond its minimum range? I am assuming this minimum range value will get erased when the new IG codex comes out?

I'm 99% sure the FAQ let it direct fire but I can't check right now.

The Collossus is an interesting beast, maybe when it doesn't cost a ton of my time or an arm and a leg in money to get some I will try it out. Being able to easily rip infantry out of cover with objectives on is quite invaluable, though the (pointswise) price tag makes me shudder when my general convention is to take double Executioners for anti-MC/infantry in my HS section.

From the Amendment section of the FAQ:

Page 53 – Ordnance Battery, Colossus Siege Mortar. Ignore the reference to direct fire.

The change to being able to fire inside minimum range is huge.
Basilisks went from poor to excellent.
Colossus has really benefited from it as well.

Now looking at the stats, it's an MEQ troop killer. No armour save, no cover.
Won't instant death a T4 model, nor will it worry vehicles much.
The AP is a bit overkill on things it can instant kill.
Multi wound battlesuits won't be hugely concerned.

It's not as flexible as a Basilisk. It has the Strength to instantly kill T4, the AP to kill MEQ, and being barrage will ignore a lot of cover as well (but not all). It can also worry vehicles.

It's a much more specialist vehicle than the Basilisk, far from useless.

so now, according to the FAQ, the colossus *can* both direct and indirect fire anywhere between 0" and 240" , correct?

 grendel083 wrote:
The change to being able to fire inside minimum range is huge.
Basilisks went from poor to excellent.
Colossus has really benefited from it as well.

In previous edition bassies could fire within minimum range, just not indirectly.

I much prefer the collussus to the basilisk. Ignores cover is crucial these days. It's a great answer to Tau troops with marker lights, ensuring that they get no armor or cover save and your wounding on a 2+. The problem with the basilisk is I get tempted to shoot it at armor since it is str 9 and hits on the side armor and is ordnance; if I am going to shoot artillery at armor (or MC) I think I would rather throw 1-3 manticore blasts at str 10.

 Sir Arun wrote:
so now, according to the FAQ, the colossus *can* both direct and indirect fire anywhere between 0" and 240" , correct?

Yes.
Out of Line of Sight or inside minimum range it fires indirectly, other times directly.

 grendel083 wrote:
The change to being able to fire inside minimum range is huge.
Basilisks went from poor to excellent.
Colossus has really benefited from it as well.

In previous edition bassies could fire within minimum range, just not indirectly.

Yes it could. Problem was that meant you had to see your target ie: it's not hidden, and can be shot at in return. This was in the days before you could buy an Aegis line. Getting a cover save wasn't guaranteed, and it's AV12 wasn't great. You may as well take a Leman Russ, as it will survive longer.
Also the large minimum range made hiding it difficult if you still wanted to fire.
They just weren't great in 5th, Leman Russ was way better.

There is no such thing as direct or indirect fire anymore as far as rules are concerned. This was a difference of barrage and non-barrage rules applying (a direct firing earthshaker was not a barrage weapon)

If a target is inside your minimum range, or out of LoS, you don't get the BS reduction on scatter. If you can see the target and it's in range, then you do. Thats it. A barrage weapon is always a barrage weapon.

The best lists right now abuse cover shenanigans on their main units, and Jetseer star is wounded by it on a 2+, as well as losing their rerollable 2+ cover, their rerollable 3+ armor, and is forced to fall back on their rerollable 4++ invulns.

The Colossus is king in the current meta.

There is no direct or indirect fire anymore. Within minimum range and or without LoS barrage scatters the scatter rolled. With LoS and outside minimum range you subtract BS from the scatter.

The colossus is good but the basilisk is more TAC.

 TheCaptain wrote:
The best lists right now abuse cover shenanigans on their main units, and Jetseer star is wounded by it on a 2+, as well as losing their rerollable 2+ cover, their rerollable 3+ armor, and is forced to fall back on their rerollable 4++ invulns.

The Colossus is king in the current meta.

Unless the Jetseer star casts protect and has a 2+ armor save. The only thing that really reliably shuts them down is a space wolf rune priest.

2 Griffons land 10 hits for every 3 hits a single colossus lands which will average more marine casualties. The only time the Colossus outperforms a griffon is when 2+ cover is involved, otherwise 10 hits with a 3+ or worse save is better than 3 hits with no saves.

Sir Arun wrote:...because they could only indirect fire (says so in their codex entry), and thus their minimal range prevented them from being useful.

It was only 24" though. That's not THAT big of a blind spot when you shove them in a corner. Usually your opponent leaves something within range, even for the basilisk, whose blind spot I never found particularly onerous.

Sir Arun wrote:In 6th edition the tables have been reversed and indirect fire is now permitted within a weapon's minimum range (and beyond) but direct fire is only permitted outside minimum range, correct?

Incorrect. There is no such thing as direct fire anymore - a barrage weapon always fires the same way. The only difference is if you get to use your BS to make the scatter less.

Sir Arun wrote:In light of this, Basilisks and Colossi are viable again, with the latter being more deadly because even if the central hole scatters beyond some barrier, the target squad still doesnt get to take any cover saves. Do you use them? Have you encountered them? What are you tactics?

Basilisks got worse with the change to 6th ed and the meta shift underneath them. They're now only 50% as likely to cause a vehicle explosion with a penetrating hit, and spending more than a hundred points on a flimsy, open-topped vehicle just to strip hull points isn't worth it. Plus, they can't shoot fliers and they don't really hurt monstrous creatures that much. The ability to sometimes "snipe" with their weapon doesn't cover this gap by a long shot.

Colossuses also run into all of these problems, but at least weren't very good against vehicles in the first place, so they didn't get hurt AS bad. Even though the colossus became relatively more worthwhile, they're still not very good. They still don't work well when your opponent displaces, they still don't work against targets in ruins, and they still don't do serious damage to TEq, MCs, fliers, or AV12+. Given their cost, they're not that great per-points against hordes either.

In a way, a colossus is a specialist weapon for handling Sv3+, like a helldrake, and like a helldrake, only really worthwhile if you're having a problem against this particular armor type. The thing is, though, you shouldn't really be having problems with mass Sv3+, all of your other weapons should already suffice. As such, there's no reason to bring a specialist weapon for something that you are already capable of handling.

If I absolutely had to pick, honestly, I'd still keep the old basilisk. The colossus handles one thing you don't need handled well, and everything else very badly, while the basilisk handles several things in at least a mediocre fashion.

Though really, I'd take neither, especially when you could have a hellhound with a multimelta that's better than a colossus against most infantry, and better anti-tank than either of the artillery options presented.

 Ailaros wrote:
Basilisks got worse with the change to 6th ed and the meta shift underneath them. They're now only 50% as likely to cause a vehicle explosion with a penetrating hit

How so? If I recall correctly Ordnance Barrage weapons still roll 2D6 armor pen and pick the highest; in fact they now received a vehicle damage boost due to AP2 granting +1. Also, another boost in 6th is that the weapon's S is no longer halved if the central hole doesnt end up on the enemy vehicle.

Basilisks aren't Ap2.

ah, right. I've been up too long today. But how were they better against vehicles in 5th?

Back in the day, regardless of Ap, a penetrating hit had a 1 in 3 chance of causing a vehicle explosion result. Now you only get that with Ap2 weapons, which the basilisk isn't. Going back to 4th edition, all penetrating results caused a vehicle stunned result, which meant basilisks were good at stun-locking enemy vehicles, what with their relatively good chance of getting a penetrating hit. Also, you used to be able to choose which weapon you wanted gone from your opponent's vehicle, whereas now it's random (so you could be knocking off storm bolters and heavy bolters instead of the real guns). Also, once again to reference 4th ed, you used to be able to cause a vehicle destroyed result on a glance on those occasions where you didn't pen (it's still possible to roll a 1 for damage).

They still do a decent job of getting pens, but the vehicle damage chart is a lot more forgiving than it used to be, so they're just not as good against vehicles.

And vehicles is what large blast weapons are supposed to be good against, given that infantry can displace, monstrous creatures can't be hit for more than one wound at a time, and fliers can't even be targeted at all. When they don't do that one thing well, then, well...

 Ailaros wrote:
Back in the day, regardless of Ap, a penetrating hit had a 1 in 3 chance of causing a vehicle explosion result. Now you only get that with Ap2 weapons, which the basilisk isn't. Going back to 4th edition, all penetrating results caused a vehicle stunned result, which meant basilisks were good at stun-locking enemy vehicles, what with their relatively good chance of getting a penetrating hit. Also, you used to be able to choose which weapon you wanted gone from your opponent's vehicle, whereas now it's random (so you could be knocking off storm bolters and heavy bolters instead of the real guns). Also, once again to reference 4th ed, you used to be able to cause a vehicle destroyed result on a glance on those occasions where you didn't pen (it's still possible to roll a 1 for damage).

They still do a decent job of getting pens, but the vehicle damage chart is a lot more forgiving than it used to be, so they're just not as good against vehicles.

And vehicles is what large blast weapons are supposed to be good against, given that infantry can displace, monstrous creatures can't be hit for more than one wound at a time, and fliers can't even be targeted at all. When they don't do that one thing well, then, well...

I always found that large blast weapons were more useful against infantry, since you get more wounding rolls against them. Blasts against vehicles just aren't that reliable, unless it's ordnance / low AP
Even in 4th ed that was the case.

Infantry can displace to reduce the number of hits all the way down to 3 (I do this myself, regularly), and if infantry are spread across levels of a ruin, this can drop even further.

Meanwhile, vehicles are big targets, and you no longer need the hole over them in order to cause full-strength hits on side armor (against which they can't use area terrain to boot).