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.

looking through various SM army lists and related discussions, I see a lot of love for MM/HF land speeders. the MM side of it I understand, as the speeder platform lets you get melta where you need it fast. I don't understand the HF side of it, though. it seems like the last thing you'd want is for your speeder to be in charge range, which is exactly where you'll be if you hope to get good coverage with that flamer template. so, why the HF over something with more stand-off range like the AC or HB?

Because if you toast a big squad behind an ADL its worth it

Assuming it dies in response

All about versatility, having said that moving 12 and firing both weapons im expecting to see more twin MM or HF now as the split is redundant in 6th

All about versatility, having said that moving 12 and firing both weapons im expecting to see more twin MM or HF now as the split is redundant in 6th

This. In 5th you could only fire one weapon if you moved 6-12" so there wasn't much point in taking double weapons (both melta and flamer tend to mean moving 12" a turn). Instead you paid the extra points to add a flamer that you could fire when you don't have a good target for the primary weapon. Sure, you could take an AC/HB, but those aren't really high-impact weapons, the flamer option maximized the damage you could do on the rare turn where you weren't using the melta.

In 6th this is no longer the case, and there will probably be a move to MM/MM or MM/typhoon setups.

MM/HF is one of those cases where a few extra points adds a whole lot of versatility to your unit. MM speeders are suicide unit to start with. It's primary job is to zoom up, plant it's nose against something that costs 4 times as much, and pull the trigger. Now if you survive, or your opponent is not fielding heavy armor, what are you going to do? The speeder gives you the maneuverability to lay the template down just right. Many armies field lightly armored guys who like to hide in cover. A heavy flamer will wreck their day. HFs remain the leading cause of death of my scouts.

The MM/HF Speeder has dual purpose, its anti-tank (or anti-TEQ) and anti-GEO or anti-horde. This makes it very useful in an allcomers list. If you're inclined to take such a Speeder, take two of them.

 wuestenfux wrote:
The MM/HF Speeder has dual purpose, its anti-tank (or anti-TEQ) and anti-GEO or anti-horde. This makes it very useful in an allcomers list. If you're inclined to take such a Speeder, take two of them.

If I were in a pinch for fast attack slots (and usually I am), I think I'd rather go with a unit of 2. One with 2 multi-meltas, the other with 2 heavy flamers.
That lets you use one as a meat shield for whichever one seems more critical for the job.

-Matt

so you expect to lose the speeder and aggressively position it for one or two good MM/HF shots before that happens? should speeders always be running ahead of your forces for disruption? why not park them in the deep flanks as mobile ML platforms with typhoons? not enough dakka for the points? if you take a pair of these MM/HF speeders, do you run them as a squadron or as independent units?

 varl wrote:
so you expect to lose the speeder and aggressively position it for one or two good MM/HF shots before that happens? should speeders always be running ahead of your forces for disruption? why not park them in the deep flanks as mobile ML platforms with typhoons? not enough dakka for the points? if you take a pair of these MM/HF speeders, do you run them as a squadron or as independent units?

I ran them in 5th with Typhoon/HB. Worked better than they should have, it's easy to use terrain to their advantage and take out something on a flank/side thats important

 varl wrote:
so you expect to lose the speeder and aggressively position it for one or two good MM/HF shots before that happens? should speeders always be running ahead of your forces for disruption? why not park them in the deep flanks as mobile ML platforms with typhoons? not enough dakka for the points? if you take a pair of these MM/HF speeders, do you run them as a squadron or as independent units?

I fully expect to loose them. They spend the first turn or so hiding behind terrain, moving up the board, creating a bubble of threat that makes my opponent move the way I want or risk getting toasted. At some point, they leap out, take their shot, and hope to live through the retaliation. If they do, it's target of opportunity time. This is where the extra few points for the HF shine though. If you have both a MM and a HF, you have all the tools you need to kill anything that's within range.

There are situations where you might want to make your first shot the HF and not the MM. If your opponent was doing the 5 man scout squad behind a ADL manning a quad gun, you might want to burn them out before your storm talon come onboard. Next game you can go back to hunting LRs. Flexibility is good.

Speeders are excellent disruption units. They are fast, and pack some very irritating weapons. Not very sturdy though. But if your foe ignores them, he will get stung.

The Typhoon/HB is a completely different beast then the MM/HF speeder. And you are correct, having them hang back at extreme range is a very good tactic. At 90 points, they are not so much a suicide unit, but steady, mobile, fire support. Try to keep them half behind cover, or just move them around a little and rely on the jink save. I find they do enough damage to justify their points, but not so much to get bumped up my opponent's fire priority list to get them shot down.

As for squadroning: If you have the spare FA slots, field them separately. There is no advantage in grouping up. It's not as bad as it used to be, but there is still no real reason to do it if you have the slots free.

I don't like MM/HF land speeders because they are a mite schizophrenic; multi-meltas are there to take on vehicles, while heavy flamers deal with medium/light infantry in cover. Ideally you'd take two heavy flamers or two multi-meltas instead of mixing them up and creating a unit that's wasting half its firepower every turn.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I don't like MM/HF land speeders because they are a mite schizophrenic; multi-meltas are there to take on vehicles, while heavy flamers deal with medium/light infantry in cover. Ideally you'd take two heavy flamers or two multi-meltas instead of mixing them up and creating a unit that's wasting half its firepower every turn.

Aye but if you take dual MM than come up against Horde schenanigans, or if you take Dual Flamer and you come across Mech. It makes it a nice jack of all trades.

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

Aye but if you take dual MM than come up against Horde schenanigans, or if you take Dual Flamer and you come across Mech. It makes it a nice jack of all trades.

I see those MM/HF flamers as 5th edition relics that people have had part of their list for a long time and so haven't considered upgrading them due to the change. They used to be good, now they can fire both weapons it makes more sense to run them with complimentary guns to ensure the job is done properly.

 Griddlelol wrote:

jdjamesdean@mail.com wrote:

Aye but if you take dual MM than come up against Horde schenanigans, or if you take Dual Flamer and you come across Mech. It makes it a nice jack of all trades.

I see those MM/HF flamers as 5th edition relics that people have had part of their list for a long time and so haven't considered upgrading them due to the change. They used to be good, now they can fire both weapons it makes more sense to run them with complimentary guns to ensure the job is done properly.

I agree that they are a 5th ed relic. Or even older, since it's the classic tornado pattern. But that does not mean it's useless. The double speeders do a better job at what they do. You pull a MM/MM speeder up next to a tank, it is going to be molten slag, barring atrocious dice luck. And nobody is arguing that two HFs won't totally BBQ some poor infantry unit. Paired HBs sounds nice as well, as like the typhoon, it lets you do your job from way back out of reach.

But the MM/HF gives you versatility and flexibility. If that didn't appeal to me, I'd be playing one of the specialist chapters, not a stock vanilla Ultramarine army. MM/HF didn't get worse in 6th, but the other options got a lot better. But you are right that people should consider them. If people are just blindly playing the same stuff they did in 5th without looking at the new options, they are missing out. But sometimes, the old options still work just fine.

I honestly have always run Typhoon speeders with my Dark Angels force, two missile launcher shots can handle pretty much anything that isn't a Land Raider reasonably well, and they can hide a long ways from the foe and pop out and snipe.

I still have three MM/HF speeders in need of upgrading.

Nevelon two posts above is right, they are still excellent, just the new rules means purebreeds are better.