Author |
Message |
 |
|
 |
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/21 18:16:00
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Stinky Spore
U.S.A
|
I was wondering what dakka has to say about Griffon mortar tanks. I feel like they are going to be pretty useful in 6th edition now that ordnance hit at full strength against vehicles. It's barrage so back armour correct? and now that mechanized is on it's way out the Griffon seems great for taking out infantry using cover to march up the battle field.
any thoughts?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/21 20:23:42
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
It hits side armor.
S6 ordnance is okay for peeling off HP for some things, but that's about it.
The real problem with the griffon is that, individually, they're not doing much, and if you take two, you can basically afford a manticore, which is basically the same thing but S10.
That and the fact that the griffon has some serious effectiveness problems. It's not hurting heavy vehicles or monstrous creatures or MEq or TEq, and it doesn't ignore cover in area terrain. It's usually better to buy a bigger piece of artillery that actually kills what it shoots at.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/21 20:28:25
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Junior Officer with Laspistol
Manchester, UK
|
There are a few areas that the griffon excels at, although they may not be enough to overcome their weaknesses. They make very good T3 character snipers, so against an enemy like Guard they can really pile on the hurt. They suffer from being the wrong side of the ap3 hurdle though, as almost all units are gauged by their effectiveness against marine armies.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/21 20:36:38
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Or even comparatively. I think I'd rather have a hellhound or an eradicator than a pair of griffons. If you're going to be good against squishy infantry, it makes no sense to have your killing power crunched by cover. Yeah, you get two shots with a griffon to the eradicator or hellhound's one, but those camo cloak scouts come with a 2+ cover save...
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/21 21:02:06
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Douglas Bader
|
Ailaros wrote:It's usually better to buy a bigger piece of artillery that actually kills what it shoots at.
Except that's not really the case. Accurate bombardment is really that good, and the Griffon is half the cost of those bigger guns. Sure, you're not always denying saves, but you're getting a lot more hits and even against MEQs if you get enough hits they're going to fail saves. Meanwhile against things that don't have 3+ saves the Griffons are going to out-perform the bigger guns by a huge margin.
And of course even if you're only getting a small number of failed saves the Griffon's superior accuracy makes it a lot more likely that those failed saves are going on a specific target model. Barrage sniping might not show up in the math, but it certainly helps you win games.
|
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/22 07:02:53
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Forcing saves is not a panacea. It's why people bring plasma guns. Likewise, griffons are going to be junk at clearing pathfinders, or sniper scouts or camo cloak vets or even just gone to ground infantry out of cover off of objectives.
Accurate bombardment is pretty puny when stacked up against ignoring a 2+ cover save.
It also ignores jink, and cover saves from night fighting.
I mean, if we're going to think about killing enemy infantry only by means of applying armor saves, then we might as well all just be taking conscripts and naked PIS, as that's the best way to force the most saves on the most stuff.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/22 07:22:24
Subject: Re:Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Douglas Bader
|
And here's the problem: the only no-cover option is the Colossus, which costs twice as much as a Griffon and hits half as often. I'm sure you'll be happy with it when you have the rare case of 2+ cover save units that can't be dealt with any other way (such as assaulting and massacring them), but the rest of the time it's a terrible unit.
|
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/22 07:43:58
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Battleship Captain
|
Not a fan of the Griffon.
It's not bad, but there are better things to blow points on.
Like a Vulture.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/22 08:35:26
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Warp-Screaming Noise Marine
Canada!
|
I keep hearing about how cheap they are to throw (or ally) in. Indirect fire seems popular in this edition, though I don't see many people getting too many wound allocation tricks out of them. The artillery variants tend to be good at clearing objectives and forcing lots of saves on big clumps of garbage. People are a lot less into their msu mech these days and backfield campers are a super popular trick. Things that get around an aegis or cause shrouded units some concern are pretty good.
I was considering trying to ram a couple into my csm and guard list but of course csm often have enough objective clearing and harrier units that it won't add much. Hitting a unit with them before speedy assault units engage makes a dicey battle into a sure thing. Maybe throw a unit of 2 of them into a BA jumpers list?
|
It's just a show, I should really just relax... It's just a show, I should really just relax... It's just a show, I should really just relax... It's just a show, I should really just relax... |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/22 08:48:08
Subject: Re:Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Peregrine wrote:And here's the problem: the only no-cover option is the Colossus, which costs twice as much as a Griffon and hits half as often. I'm sure you'll be happy with it when you have the rare case of 2+ cover save units that can't be dealt with any other way (such as assaulting and massacring them), but the rest of the time it's a terrible unit.
If units hiding in cover on objectives is rare where you play, then I wish I had your opponents.
A colossus does hit more than half the time, though, and it isn't actually twice as expensive. Meanwhile, the difference between something making a 3+ save, cover or otherwise, and a unit not is pretty big. This is even more pronounced when we're talking about one of the many things that can get a 2+ cover save when behind aegises or in ruins.
I'd also note that it also ignores jink saves, and cover saves from night fighting.
Plus, if we're going to think about killing enemy infantry only by means of applying armor saves, then we might as well all just be taking conscripts and naked PISs, as that's the best way to force the most saves on the most stuff. And not bother taking russes or plasma guns, or other things that ignore saves.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/22 09:12:15
Subject: Re:Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Douglas Bader
|
Ailaros wrote:If units hiding in cover on objectives is rare where you play, then I wish I had your opponents.
You mentioned 2+ cover saves, which are limited to a very small number of units, not just any random area terrain.
A colossus does hit more than half the time, though, and it isn't actually twice as expensive.
I didn't say it hits half the time, I said it hits half as often as a Griffon, since it lacks the Griffon's re-roll. It may not be a literal 50%, but the Griffon has a decisive advantage in accuracy.
And it's 10 points less than twice the cost of a Griffon, so close enough.
Meanwhile, the difference between something making a 3+ save, cover or otherwise, and a unit not is pretty big. This is even more pronounced when we're talking about one of the many things that can get a 2+ cover save when behind aegises or in ruins.
Of course it's a big difference. But it's offset by the fact that the Griffon gets more hits and therefore more wounds (per point).
(And what does being behind an aegis line have to do with barrage weapons?)
I'd also note that it also ignores jink saves, and cover saves from night fighting.
But only at STR 6, which is weak at best against most of the things that have jink saves (Falcons, Hammerheads, etc) and can't be dealt with easily by other weapons (for example, just shoot a Land Speeder with autocannons).
Plus, if we're going to think about killing enemy infantry only by means of applying armor saves, then we might as well all just be taking conscripts and naked PISs, as that's the best way to force the most saves on the most stuff. And not bother taking russes or plasma guns, or other things that ignore saves.
That's a ridiculous argument and you know it. You take those save-ignoring weapons because they're more effective than volume of fire. The Colossus isn't.
|
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/22 10:03:28
Subject: Re:Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
I'd go for a Basilisk, or Medusa first.
Not saying they compare to the Griffon. I just see them as a better choice before it.
|
"But i'm more than just a little curious, how you're planning to go about making your amends, to the dead?" -The Noose-APC
"Little angel go away
Come again some other day
The devil has my ear today
I'll never hear a word you say" Weak and Powerless - APC
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/22 23:08:19
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Wrathful Warlord Titan Commander
|
Usually I would agree with Ailaros but on this occasion I'm not going to.
Firstly The problem with comparing it to other IG pie throwers is that it is only 75pts so half as expensive than most other options but I would posit is more than half as effective as them.
In terms of actual damage it performs well enough for its meagre points. With the ordnance rules it effective against low save/low LD units naturally but the strength is enough to make plenty of tests on higher save models as well. I'm not boring enough to do math hammer but would suggest it compares favourably with an equal points of lasfire which I would use in the same way to knock over meq targets for example.
The ordnance rules also make it a good bet to damage vehicles, though it is not quite the surprise rhino popper that it used to be under 5th. But landing a shell between two rhinos/chimeras will put a dampner on most opponents days now that it's full strength to the whole template.
What really make The Griffon a fine weapon is the monotonous crumping of S6 pie plates accurately every turn. Ive seen some players will literally get shell shocked into wanting to deal with this hidden menace quite often inspite of its actual in game effect. People fear pie plates and will send all sorts of units carreering about to get at it behind whatever terrain it is sitting.
I would often run 2 under 5th edition, now AA has become more important those points are also attracting the odd Hydra so I have to confess to actually using Griffons less inspite of my liking of them.
One othe place where they really help is in 1000pts and less games. Having an additional ordnance blast (on top of my obligatory LRBT) really allows you to add a leaf lower feel while still cramming a small game to the gunnels with expendable guardsmen.
If I can get past my current fetish for Ogryns then griffons will be going straight back in there.
|
How do you promote your Hobby? - Legoburner "I run some crappy wargaming website " |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2180/04/22 23:17:38
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Peregrine wrote:I didn't say it hits half the time, I said it hits half as often as a Griffon, since it lacks the Griffon's re-roll. It may not be a literal 50%, but the Griffon has a decisive advantage in accuracy.
A griffon is twin linked, which does not mean that it hits twice as often. The second shot is only triggered when the first one misses, which only happens about half the time (or under two thirds if you can't see your target).
Peregrine wrote:take those save-ignoring weapons because they're more effective than volume of fire
There, I'm glad we've come to an agreement. It is better to ignore saves than to just force more saves.
As the only thing the griffon does well is force more saves, you shouldn't take it, but instead take things that ignore saves.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/22 23:55:37
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Daemonic Dreadnought
|
The firepower of a Griffin isn't obvious.
It doesn't do well against dispersed meq/teq or stealthy units in area cover.
6 grey hunters spread out 2" not so good, clustered around the access hatch of a wrecked razorback and it will reliability dump 5 wounds on them. Gets even better if we are talking 10 guys out of a rhino or clustered around a chimera they just wrecked.
2 griffons cost nearly as much as a manticore, they both wound t4 on a 2+, they average the same number of shots, and the griffon is nearly twice as accurate.
Griffons dont do well against 2+ cover saves, unless it's because of an aegis wall...what about pathfinders? Screw em and murder fire dragons, dire avengers, or guardians instead. You're probably either killing troops or a squad of fire dragons behind an aegis with a tank hunter+ ignores cover save exarch,manning a quad gun. Yea umm that beardy turn needs to die, the path finders can stay around a while.
Griffons really tend to murder xenos and guard, and against meq I find them to ba a reliable unglamorous workhorse.
|
Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail, and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some are given a chance to climb, but refuse. They cling to the realm, or love, or the gods…illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is, but they’ll never know this. Not until it’s too late.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 00:05:28
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Battleship Captain
|
Alright.
I'm gunna lay it down for you guys, plain and simple.
Say you've got like, three hotties watching you play an 1850 game. You've got a 6, a 7, and a 9 (all out of 10).
You drop some wicked accurate shots from the griffon, kill a few non-elite troop choices, get the job done conservatively; that six and seven will be pretty damn interested. You've presented yourself as a reliable, consistent man worth their time.
But that sweet, 5'7", Blonde, Sub-100lb Southern Belle of a 9 isn't into that. No. You drop a couple shots with that Medusa; blow up some termie squads, she'll dig it. Powerful, unforgiving, commanding. The Medusa pulls, man.
Go with a Medusa.
You're welcome.
|
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/11/23 00:06:29
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 00:10:31
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Fixture of Dakka
|
TheCaptain wrote:Alright.
I'm gunna lay it down for you guys, plain and simple.
Say you've got like, three hotties watching you play an 1850 game. You've got a 6, a 7, and a 9 (all out of 10).
You drop some wicked accurate shots from the griffon, kill a few non-elite troop choices, get the job done conservatively; that six and seven will be pretty damn interested. You've presented yourself as a reliable, consistent man worth their time.
But that sweet, 5'7", Blonde, Sub-100lb Southern Belle of a 9 isn't into that. No. You drop a couple shots with that Medusa; blow up some termie squads, she'll dig it. Powerful, unforgiving, commanding. The Medusa pulls, man.
Go with a Medusa.
You're welcome.
You're ability to throw dating advice and tactical advice in the same post has to be a record.
I agree with your point, but I don't let my "other gun" make my tactical decisions.
|
"But i'm more than just a little curious, how you're planning to go about making your amends, to the dead?" -The Noose-APC
"Little angel go away
Come again some other day
The devil has my ear today
I'll never hear a word you say" Weak and Powerless - APC
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 00:28:15
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Battleship Captain
|
alarmingrick wrote:
You're ability to throw dating advice and tactical advice in the same post has to be a record.
I agree with your point, but I don't let my "other gun" make my tactical decisions.
But why play 40k if not to drown in Fluff-bunny tears, and cover yourself in the finest Honeys?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 01:15:17
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
TheCaptain wrote:Say you've got like, three hotties watching you play an 1850 game. You've got a 6, a 7, and a 9 (all out of 10).
Go with a Medusa.
One word:
I know which one the ladies are flocking to if you've got 160 points lying around.
That's right, ladies, when this one goes of, no one gets a cover save.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 01:20:06
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Rough Rider with Boomstick
|
*pseudohipstermodeon* To distract ourselves from the inevitable end that we must all face?
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 01:24:23
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
schadenfreude wrote:
The firepower of a Griffin isn't obvious.
It doesn't do well against dispersed meq/ teq or stealthy units in area cover.
6 grey hunters spread out 2" not so good, clustered around the access hatch of a wrecked razorback and it will reliability dump 5 wounds on them. Gets even better if we are talking 10 guys out of a rhino or clustered around a chimera they just wrecked.
2 griffons cost nearly as much as a manticore, they both wound t4 on a 2+, they average the same number of shots, and the griffon is nearly twice as accurate.
Griffons dont do well against 2+ cover saves, unless it's because of an aegis wall...what about pathfinders? Screw em and murder fire dragons, dire avengers, or guardians instead. You're probably either killing troops or a squad of fire dragons behind an aegis with a tank hunter+ ignores cover save exarch,manning a quad gun. Yea umm that beardy turn needs to die, the path finders can stay around a while.
Griffons really tend to murder xenos and guard, and against meq I find them to ba a reliable unglamorous workhorse.
+1
The Griffon is under appreciated and top notch in my book.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 01:41:37
Subject: Re:Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Thunderhawk Pilot Dropping From Orbit
The wilds of Pennsyltucky
|
First off...none of you have ever had a nine or two sixes....
Second... I'd usually take the griffin over the maticore. S10 AP4 is no more effective versus MEQ's and Teq's than S6 AP4. And the S6 is half the price of the s10..literally.
Third...at half the price, you buy 2 of the things and you have firepower that is twice as hard to shut down...because you have 2 targets to kill.
Fourth...A colossus is great but it really isn't any more than a very expensive target. If anyone is playing in an environment where a colossus is lasting more than a turn or two...well, playing against idiots really doesn't count as "experience."
Fifth....There are way better ways to kill vehicles than a maticores or colossus. If either of those are doing your vehicle jkilling...well, I think you have issues right there.
Griffon's are an all around good unit that kill MEQ's and TEQ's as well as a manticore. I say go for two.
ender502
|
"Burning the aquila into the retinas of heretics is the new black." - Savnock
"The ignore button is for pansees who can't deal with their own problems. " - H.B.M.C. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 01:54:10
Subject: Re:Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Battleship Captain
|
ender502 wrote:First off...none of you have ever had a nine or two sixes....
It was a six, seven, and a nine.
In College, anything can happen.
And second...no. S10 ID's MEQ's and TEQ's
Third...Also twice as hard to hide. And They will potentially get less shots per turn.
Fourth..."That army uses cover...Idiots"
Fifth...true
Griffons won't kill MEQ's or TEQ's well. The argument never said that, because its not true. It's just a matter of "Is the griffon good enough to not worry about those blaring weaknesses."
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 02:04:06
Subject: Re:Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Preacher of the Emperor
Hanford, CA, AKA The Eye of Terror
|
Ive had alot of success with teaming up griffons with basilisks. 2 basilisks and 1 griffon in a squadron is pretty nice, the griffon throws the first shot then you can scatter the basilisk shots off of it, sometimes its effective, sometimes not, but more often than not ive managed to kill that hunkered down Devastator squad in the aegis than if i didnt run the griffon, since scatter dice hate me. Its more of a range finder for your other aritllery, like a flare!
|
17,000 points (Valhallan)
10,000 points
6,000 points (Order of Our Martyred Lady)
Proud Countess of House Terryn hosting 7 Knights, 2 Dominus Knights, and 8 Armigers
Stormcast Eternals: 7,000 points
"Remember, Orks are weak and cowardly, they are easily beat in close combat and their tusks, while menacing, can easily be pulled out with a sharp tug"
-Imperial Guard Uplifting Primer |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 03:19:45
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Also, don't forget that the manticore can get up to three shots per turn. A third of the time it fires, it puts down 50% more pie plates, and two thirds of the time it puts down the same number or more. And it does anything against vehicles.
A single manticore is way better than two griffons.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 03:26:15
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Douglas Bader
|
Ailaros wrote:Also, don't forget that the manticore can get up to three shots per turn. A third of the time it fires, it puts down 50% more pie plates, and two thirds of the time it puts down the same number or more. And it does anything against vehicles.
Err, what?
A single manticore is way better than two griffons.
Except for that pesky little thing called accuracy. Remember the multiple barrage rules? You know, the part where your second and third Manticore shots have a 2/3 chance of missing the target no matter how low you roll on the scatter distance?
There, I'm glad we've come to an agreement. It is better to ignore saves than to just force more saves.
As the only thing the griffon does well is force more saves, you shouldn't take it, but instead take things that ignore saves.
Thank you for completely ignoring the point of that comment. Ignoring saves isn't some magic "most effective weapon ever" rule, it just means that you ignore saves. If an equally priced weapon that doesn't ignore saves generates enough wounds to produce more casualties in the end despite allowing saves then the save-allowing is the better choice. It's very simple:
An all-lasgun army doesn't inflict enough wounds compared to heavy/special weapons to make up for allowing saves.
A Griffon does inflict enough wounds compared to a Colossus to make up for allowing saves.
|
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 03:38:12
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Decrepit Dakkanaut
|
Peregrine wrote:Err, what?
If you go to page 54 of your codex, you'll notice this neat little rule for storm eagle rockets where they fire D3 large blasts, rather than just one. The same points in griffons puts down two large blasts per turn.
A third of the time, a D3 will show up with 2, the same number of large blasts a pair of griffons puts down. A third of the time, it gets to put down three. When this happens, it puts down 50% more large blast templates.
Peregrine wrote:Remember the multiple barrage rules? You know, the part where your second and third Manticore shots have a 2/3 chance of missing the target no matter how low you roll on the scatter distance?
A pair of griffons also uses the multiple barrage rule. A single griffon is a waste of an HS slot. Two seperate griffons is a HORRIBLE waste of HS slots.
There, I'm glad we've come to an agreement. It is better to ignore saves than to just force more saves.
As the only thing the griffon does well is force more saves, you shouldn't take it, but instead take things that ignore saves.
Peregrine wrote:An all-lasgun army doesn't inflict enough wounds compared to heavy/special weapons to make up for allowing saves.
For 150 points, I can get 30 lasgunners. 30 lasgunners kill 3.3 marines, or 10 guardsmen in a turn of shooting. A pair of griffons (let's assume for whatever horrible reason that they're separate), assuming 4 models per hit kills 2.2 marines, or 5 guardsmen.
If what was important for killing infantry was simply to apply armor saves, the griffon loses to its points in lasguns.
Waste of an HS slot.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 03:45:28
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Depraved Slaanesh Chaos Lord
Inside Yvraine
|
TheCaptain wrote:Alright.
I'm gunna lay it down for you guys, plain and simple.
Say you've got like, three hotties watching you play an 1850 game. You've got a 6, a 7, and a 9 (all out of 10).
You drop some wicked accurate shots from the griffon, kill a few non-elite troop choices, get the job done conservatively; that six and seven will be pretty damn interested. You've presented yourself as a reliable, consistent man worth their time.
But that sweet, 5'7", Blonde, Sub-100lb Southern Belle of a 9 isn't into that. No. You drop a couple shots with that Medusa; blow up some termie squads, she'll dig it. Powerful, unforgiving, commanding. The Medusa pulls, man.
Go with a Medusa.
You're welcome.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 04:07:40
Subject: Re:Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Thunderhawk Pilot Dropping From Orbit
The wilds of Pennsyltucky
|
TheCaptain wrote: ender502 wrote:First off...none of you have ever had a nine or two sixes....
It was a six, seven, and a nine.
In College, anything can happen.
And second...no. S10 ID's MEQ's and TEQ's
Third...Also twice as hard to hide. And They will potentially get less shots per turn.
Fourth..."That army uses cover...Idiots"
Fifth...true
Griffons won't kill MEQ's or TEQ's well. The argument never said that, because its not true. It's just a matter of "Is the griffon good enough to not worry about those blaring weaknesses."
Yes, s10 will instakill S4...but how many multi-wound MEQ's and TEQ's are you dealing with? I would hazard a guess to say that most MEQ's and TEQ'S you will meet are W1 and the S10 wont be all that important. Of course, if you DO face alot of multi-wound MEQ and TEQ then that is a different issue entirely. Of course, when dealing with multi-wound MEQ's and TEQ's then, as a guard player, I would be thinking Battle Cannon.
As Alairos pointed out the Manti CAN get more shots but on average, over 6 turns, will get 12 shots. Same as 2 Griffions over 6 turns. So, the idea that a manticore MAY get more shots isn't all that persuasive as on average, they get the same # of shots for the same # of points. And yes, twice the durability ( 2 griffins for 1 manti) means twice the vehicles to hide. Though I have found folks do have a habit of ignoring Griffins. Just an observation.
I think the question of looking past the Griffi's "Glaring weaknesses" is kind of a laoded question/statement. The Griffin doesn't have any glaring weaknesses. It is quite excellent for the points. But if you are saying that it has "glaring weaknesses" because it isn't a colossus is kind of silly. That's like saying a tac marine has a glaring weakness because he isn't a captain. Like so many conversations, the choice of vehicles really depends on your meta. My money, in an all comers list, is on the Griffin. For the points I think it offers more than the Manti. Compared to the coloussus...that is really a different question becaus eit is such a different kind of weapon.
ender502
|
"Burning the aquila into the retinas of heretics is the new black." - Savnock
"The ignore button is for pansees who can't deal with their own problems. " - H.B.M.C. |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2012/11/23 04:18:16
Subject: Griffon mortar tanks
|
 |
Daemonic Dreadnought
|
The meta changed going into 6th ed.
Multiple barrage rules changed slightly. Back in 5th the manticore had the option to direct fire and scatter the pie plates separately. That option is gone now in 6th, it's always flipping pie plates.
AP4 is no longer reliable for blowing up a vehicle.
Manticores can't pie plate flyers like they did in 5th
Flyers are fast and mobile enough that backfield artillery is harder to protect in 6th.
Unless IG has BA or SW allies to prescience a manticore I don't think it's a solid purchase anymore. It's just not as versatile as it was in 5th.
|
Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail, and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some are given a chance to climb, but refuse. They cling to the realm, or love, or the gods…illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is, but they’ll never know this. Not until it’s too late.
|
|
 |
 |
|