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.

As much as I have traditionally detested multilasers, it's been pretty clear even to me that the multilaser is the actual better turret weapon in 6th ed. That said, everybody always says that the best weapon to compliment it is the hull heavy flamer. I was just thinking about this, and wondering... why?

6th ed means that moving around causes you to snap fire. You can't snap fire a flamer at all. At least you could score a hit or two with a heavy bolter. 6th ed gave us slowly glancing vehicles to death, which the heavy bolter is much, much more likely to do than a heavy flamer (and better compliments the turret weapon, which is likewise fishing for glances at range). We also now have focus fire, which means that you can actually use a heavy bolter's Ap. We also have fliers, which heavy bolters are crummy against, but at least you get to SHOOT them at fliers. 6 shots from a chimera, which means you usually get at least A hit against a flier, rather than it being a complete waste half the time. Furthermore, it's now easier to hit vehicles in close combat, which makes a 0" range weapon seem awfully risky.

I guess if your opponents can't see them coming, a heavy flamer could be useful, or if you have literally nothing else to clear off an enemy objective with (and they didn't shoot the chimera before it got there), then I guess I could see a few uses for it, but it really does seem to me that the heavy bolter is a lot better than the heavy flamer.

In 5th edition, it allowed you to plow through troops, and fire that heavy flamer.

In 6th edition, it is probably less useful.

One word: potential. A BS 1 HB will get to shoot consistently, but it will consistently fail to do any meaningful damage and will never do anything game-changing. Even when it hits it's still just a HB, which means poor effectiveness against MEQs, near-uselessness against vehicles (and completely useless against the flyers people actually use), and too little volume of fire to do anything against hordes. It's a weapon that might as well not exist.

A HF, on the other hand, will only rarely get to fire, but when it does it will do a lot of damage. You give up a tiny amount of average firepower in exchange for the potential to do game-changing things (for example, multiple tank shock + flamer to clear an objective) occasionally.

Peregrine wrote:will get to shoot consistently, but it will consistently fail to do any meaningful damage and will never do anything game-changing.

But you could make the exact same argument about the multilaser. What you're arguing for here is a 2x HF chimera, if the chance to do big damage is more important than doing a small amount consistently.

Peregrine wrote:A HF, on the other hand, will only rarely get to fire, but when it does it will do a lot of damage.

I don't see how this makes it better.

If a hull heavy bolter only kills one marine per game, while the heavy flamer goes three games without firing a shot, and then, every fourth game lands its template on an astonishing 6 marines, the heavy bolter still did three times as much damage over the course of four games.

I mean, what you're talking about is the same thing behind the deathstrike - game after game of not getting a shot off in the hopes that every once in awhile, it will do something cool. There's a reason you don't see many deathstrikes, compared to other HS options that do less damage, but do it consistently.

IMO better synergy with a mech list.

What doesn't happen what you assault a vehicle? Consolidation. What happens when you're bunched up in the shape of a heavy flamer template, and there's a vehicle with a heavy flamer near by? Usually it flames your nuts off.

The heavy bolter is good and all, but you can be incredibly opportunistic with heavy flamers in a way that heavy bolters don't really allow...



If I play a mech army, the last thing I want is bad guys getting close to me. I've got no shortage of things with which to shoot things at range. When targets are at range < Manticore, a significant bulk of my long range shooting ceases to work and I need a new tool. Enter heavy flamers.

 Ailaros wrote:
But you could make the exact same argument about the multilaser.

Not really. The multilaser is +1 STR, and fires at BS 3 (so 3x more effective just from BS). It's not an amazing weapon, but it's way better than the BS 1 heavy bolter.

What you're arguing for here is a 2x HF chimera, if the chance to do big damage is more important than doing a small amount consistently.

Except that:

1) The second HF gives up the more effective full-BS ML, not the worthless snap fire HB.

2) Flamers usually require moving, and moving means only shooting one of them. So the second HF is almost always redundant.

If a hull heavy bolter only kills one marine per game, while the heavy flamer goes three games without firing a shot, and then, every fourth game lands its template on an astonishing 6 marines, the heavy bolter still did three times as much damage over the course of four games.

You're assuming the HB kills even a single marine. Let's say the Chimera is alive and shooting for three turns. The HB is killing 0.3333 MEQs, or 1.3333 over the four games which is the same as the HF. Except the HF does it all at once and probably in a situation where it really counts (for example, tank shocking with multiple Chimeras and removing an entire squad from an objective) while the HB probably just occasionally kills a random tactical marine.

And of course there's the predictability factor. You might rarely choose to use the HF, but when you do it is extremely consistent (no to-hit roll, usually gets enough hits for the wound/save dice to be fairly average). This means you have full control over how well it performs. The HB, on the other hand, is completely unpredictable. It will occasionally kill something, but you can never count on it. It's a nice bonus to having a Chimera around, not a tool you can actually count on using when you need it.

I mean, what you're talking about is the same thing behind the deathstrike - game after game of not getting a shot off in the hopes that every once in awhile, it will do something cool. There's a reason you don't see many deathstrikes, compared to other HS options that do less damage, but do it consistently.

The difference is opportunity cost. Taking a Deathstrike means giving up a HS slot (incredibly valuable for IG) and a lot of points. Taking a HF on a Chimera means giving up a HB that is pretty much worthless anyway.

Peregrine hit nearly every single point. The only comment I have to add is this.

The Chimera is not a fast vehicle. It has two weapons, and the primary advantage lies in its ability to fire whichever weapon will be more effective on a turn-by-turn basis. The ability to snap-fire does not substantially change this, and that is why the dominant Chimera configuration has not changed.

The only advantage a heavy bolter has over a multi-laser is its ability to ignore 4+ and 5+ armor. If the target is in cover, this advantage is often completely irrelevant. As a template, the Heavy Flamer gets to actually capitalize on its AP advantage. The Heavy Bolter will struggle to do the same. So if we're trying to decide which weapon is more likely to outperform the Multi-laser and make it worth snap-firing its turret weapon...that decision is clear. We bring a Heavy Flamer.

TL;DR: We bring the ML/HF Chimera for the same reasons we always have, and snap firing isn't a significant enough reason to switch.

The tactics for the arguement on what your weapon load-out is actually still the same in 6th ed as it is for 5th. If your not moving/camping, ML+HB. If your attacking, ML+HF.

The 3 shot Str 6 weapon is your best weapon, You should always have it, specially since the only location to have one is the turret.

The Hull weapon is only going to be a choice between 2 weapons. If you /could/ take a hull mounted multi-laser, I think everyone would run it over the HB or the HF, just to do the Scatter Laser War Walker effect. But since it is not an option and cover saves are so important to so many foes (ADL anyone???), you should have an option to negate that advantage while the HB, at BS 1 OR BS 3 (if you get squirrly and make the ML snap fire) will just plink off.

End of the day, it is about options and what gives you the most versitility to win. Scarabs coming at you? HF. Enemy troops going to ground in cover? HF. Enemy AV 12 you have to kill (flyer or not) or at least try to glance to death? ML. Big scary MC? ML. Terminators? HF.

Everything the HB can fire at, the ML does better. Everything else the HF is better than the HB /UNLESS/ your not moving. THEN you get synergy of fire, even if one is lower Str.

To put this into context a snap-firing HB has the same average MEQ kills as a single lasgun. So, if you had an option to pay zero points to upgrade a single basic lasgun model from your squad to carry a HF, would you do it? Of course you'd do it, without even thinking about it. So why, when we're talking about a Chimera, does the lasgun suddenly become a "better" option?

Peregrine wrote:The multilaser is +1 STR, and fires at BS 3 (so 3x more effective just from BS). It's not an amazing weapon, but it's way better than the BS 1 heavy bolter.

So if direct shots are better, why not the heavy bolter?

If you're talking about a BS1 heavy bolter, then you're talking about something that's still better than a BS0 heavy flamer.

Even then, you're missing my point. What is better, a weapon that consistently does a little bit of damage, or a weapon that does nothing most of the time, but has the chance of doing decent damage on rare occasion?

Peregrine wrote: Let's say the Chimera is alive and shooting for three turns. The HB is killing 0.3333 MEQs, or 1.3333 over the four games which is the same as the HF.

Well, shoddy math won't help. A HB firing for 3 turns kills 2 MEQ. Tell me, just how many shots is a HF going to get if the chimera doesn't manage to make it until turn 4?

And that's something big. The heavy bolter will start shooting turn one. It will have the chance to do ANY damage right away. A HF has a pretty serious chance of being killed before it even gets a single shot off.

Plus, come on. Let's say that a heavy bolter fires for three turns per game. Let's say that EVERY GAME, your heavy flamer gets to hit TEN space marines with a single flamer blast (which is wholly preposterous). Even in this ridiculous set of circumstances, the heavy flamer still does EQUAL damage to the heavy bolter.

Peregrine wrote:The difference is opportunity cost.

That's also true for the chimera. You're giving up taking a heavy bolter. If the heavy bolter is better, then you should just take the heavy bolter.

NuggzTheNinja wrote:What doesn't happen what you assault a vehicle? Consolidation. What happens when you're bunched up in the shape of a heavy flamer template, and there's a vehicle with a heavy flamer near by? Usually it flames your nuts off.

But this sounds like 5th ed thinking. Seriously, how many armies are there out there that are going to both be able to seriously hurt your tanks AND give any amount of a damn about a heavy flamer?

Corollax wrote:The only advantage a heavy bolter has over a multi-laser is its ability to ignore 4+ and 5+ armor. If the target is in cover, this advantage is often completely irrelevant.

Firstly, I'm talking more about the hull weapon.

Secondly, welcome to 6th edition. You get to focus fire with weapons. You snap fire at fliers. Etc. I feel like I went over this pretty well in the OP.

BlkTom wrote: cover saves are so important to so many foes (ADL anyone???), you should have an option to negate that advantage while the HB, at BS 1 OR BS 3 (if you get squirrly and make the ML snap fire) will just plink off.

But let's get realistic. How often are you going to be able to just drive your chimera straight up to troops behind an ADL completely unmolested? How often are you going to get that non-torrent flamer into a really great position against troops that are likely going to be deployed perpendicular to your vehicle.

Yes, it is possible to come up with a situation or two where this might be possible, but let's be honest, you could go through all of 6th ed without having an opponent grant you such a set of circumstances.

BlkTom wrote: Everything else the HF is better than the HB /UNLESS/ your not moving.

But this is really untrue.

The HB wins at time, being able to fire first turn at most of the targets on the board, rather than often firing never. It wins in the damage profile, always getting to fire, rather than usually never getting to fire. It works best against fliers, and against things that practice displacement.

Really, the chances of the HF doing anything are pretty rare, as your opponent has to have Sv4+ units right next to the chimera without spreading out or doing anything to damage the vehicle. Seems like that would only work on dumb opponents.

Am I the only one that thinks the HB is useful because, when stationary, it nearly doubles the Chimera's firepower?

While the HF literally forces you to be in the opponent's charge-range to even hope of getting a shot off.

 Ailaros wrote:
Even then, you're missing my point. What is better, a weapon that consistently does a little bit of damage, or a weapon that does nothing most of the time, but has the chance of doing decent damage on rare occasion?

The weapon that does decent damage on rare occasions. Because we aren't talking about a little bit of damage, we're talking about "every few games it might kill a marine". That's so close to "no damage at all" that it isn't even worth considering. A single lasgun does as much damage (granted, in rapid fire range) than a snap fire HB.

Well, shoddy math won't help. A HB firing for 3 turns kills .66 MEQ.

You're right. Shoddy math doesn't help, so you shouldn't use it.

3 shots per turn * 3 turns = 9 shots. 6s to hit = 1.5 hits. 3s to wound = 1 wound. "5s" to fail a save = 0.333 failed saves.

That's also true for the chimera. You're giving up taking a heavy bolter. If the heavy bolter is better, then you should just take the heavy bolter.

No, you're giving up nothing. A BS 1 heavy bolter is so close to nothing that it doesn't even get considered.

You snap fire at fliers.

STR 5 does nothing to AV 12, which means you can't even attempt to fire at the flyers anyone actually takes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 CaptainGrey wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks the HB is useful because, when stationary, it nearly doubles the Chimera's firepower?

Probably. In my experience Chimeras are rarely stationary.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ailaros wrote:
Really, the chances of the HF doing anything are pretty rare, as your opponent has to have Sv4+ units right next to the chimera without spreading out or doing anything to damage the vehicle.

Of course this is also valuable. Creating a "do not enter" zone around a Chimera is way more useful than a BS 1 heavy bolter, even if the flamer never does anything but scare light infantry into staying at a safe distance.

And don't forget that you can move 6" before firing the HF, and potentially tank shock your target into a better formation.

CaptainGrey wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks the HB is useful because, when stationary, it nearly doubles the Chimera's firepower?


Probably. In my experience Chimeras are rarely stationary.

Disagree there, you can use highly successful stationary Chimeras

There have three main pros to me :
1) decent firepower with 6 S5-6 shots
2) give a big boost in survivability to the HWT inside (actually making it decent as well)
3) give a big boost in survivability to the CCS inside (and upgrading the range of the orders / banner)

It doesn't work with a Vet/Vendetta spam, but it's very good with a gunline base

I posted my points, you simply refuse to acknowledge them. Seriously, your not giving /us/ any evidence to think the HB is better either. You have no math and no real practical situations (seriously, AV 10 flyers?). Tossing out 3 dice a turn till you get destroyed and hoping now and then it is a 6, that you wound, and that they fail a save is not a tactic, it is a way to kill time and nearly an afterthought. HBs sucked in 5th, they didn't magically get better in 6th. But /soooo/ many armies in 6th depend on cover saves it is pretty much being pig headed to not give yourself an ability to get around that. There is a reason why the Helldrake is considered a decent flyer...because it can burn stuff out of cover. That is simply the best example I can give. I can give you 3 foot lists alone that depend on cover... IG, Orks, Eldar.

Your point about weather you can get to a ADL or not is not the point. The point is that it is /THERE/, and that /EVERYONE/ is using them and that it gives a freaking COVER SAVE. I don't know what /your/ tactics are, but if your in a Chimera and your attacking, it is because you /WANT/ to get within 12" for double plasma shots, Melta shots, or heaven forbid, Flamer shots!


Automatically Appended Next Post:

TanKoL wrote:

CaptainGrey wrote:
Am I the only one that thinks the HB is useful because, when stationary, it nearly doubles the Chimera's firepower?


Probably. In my experience Chimeras are rarely stationary.

Disagree there, you can use highly successful stationary Chimeras

There have three main pros to me :
1) decent firepower with 6 S5-6 shots
2) give a big boost in survivability to the HWT inside (actually making it decent as well)
3) give a big boost in survivability to the CCS inside (and upgrading the range of the orders / banner)

It doesn't work with a Vet/Vendetta spam, but it's very good with a gunline base

As I stated, a camping Chimera is the only time I consider the HB to be worth it, so youg et full BS 3. Placing a Chimera behind a ADL for 25% LoS blockage is a very reasonable tactic. But the discussion here is having the HB on the hull as you move forward so you can take 3 BS 1 snap shots a turn vs taking a Flamer that you may only use 1-3 Turns in a game. As I keep mentioning, the Flamer gives you versitility that the HB doesn't give you to fight different targets the HB really can't effect. Because when your snap firing the HB, it is no longer a synergy weapon with the Str 6 ML.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Heck, you know what, if you love the snap fire HB that much on your Chimera, you should seriously consider putting a HB HWT in every Vet squad or in each Infantry squad you have in those Chimeras so you have 6 dice to roll every turn for snap-fire.

If your going to do it, go big or go home. I wouldn't do this, but you seem really set in your ways. I might as well offer you constructive advice to make what your doing work better.

heavy flamers are better. They allow you to counterattack troops that try to assault your guardsman. a heavy bolter is just a bit... useless. I only use them when I could have more than 1 (i.e. heavy weapon squads).


commisar - anyone got anything actually bad to say about the IG?

'me sir-'

*BLAM*

thought so sergeant...

Peregrine wrote:STR 5 does nothing to AV 12, which means you can't even attempt to fire at the flyers anyone actually takes.

And S6 does practically nothing to AV12. Once again, you're making an argument against the multilaser, not for the heavy flamer.

Peregrine wrote:In my experience Chimeras are rarely stationary.

I'll believe in a chimera highland charge when I see one.

In reality, those chimeras are going to be spending the beginning of the game being more or less stationary. Which is when you get to shoot a 36" weapon at full BS.

Peregrine wrote: A BS 1 heavy bolter is so close to nothing that it doesn't even get considered

And a BS0 flamer that never gets to shoot is even LESS than nothing.

Either you're talking about the weapon not snap firing, in which case the heavy bolter is much better than you say it is, or you're talking about snap firing, in which the heavy flamer never even gets to fire.

General Annoyance wrote:They allow you to counterattack troops that try to assault your guardsman.

Name one infantry unit that you're likely going to see on the table that will both be able to survive a cross-field charge against your guardsmen AND would actually care about a heavy flamer AND wouldn't care about a heavy bolter.

BlkTom wrote:Your point about weather you can get to a ADL or not is not the point. The point is that it is /THERE/, and that /EVERYONE/ is using them and that it gives a freaking COVER SAVE. I don't know what /your/ tactics are, but if your in a Chimera and your attacking, it is because you /WANT/ to get within 12" for double plasma shots, Melta shots, or heaven forbid, Flamer shots!

Here's the problem, though. You're talking about a heavy flamer being useful only in a situation where your opponent brings and ADL and then hides models with a 4+Sv or worse behind it, AND they don't shoot at your chimera which is barreling down on them with a heavy flamer AND they don't disperse against an immanent flamer attack AND they allow you to outflank them and hit them from the side.

Put another way, the only situation in which your argument is valid is if your opponent is an idiot. My opponents aren't idiots, therefore your statement has no use to me.

BlkTom wrote:Seriously, your not giving /us/ any evidence to think the HB is better either. HBs sucked in 5th, they didn't magically get better in 6th.

Umm,,,

Ailaros wrote:6th ed means that moving around causes you to snap fire. You can't snap fire a flamer at all. At least you could score a hit or two with a heavy bolter. 6th ed gave us slowly glancing vehicles to death, which the heavy bolter is much, much more likely to do than a heavy flamer (and better compliments the turret weapon, which is likewise fishing for glances at range). We also now have focus fire, which means that you can actually use a heavy bolter's Ap. We also have fliers, which heavy bolters are crummy against, but at least you get to SHOOT them at fliers. 6 shots from a chimera, which means you usually get at least A hit against a flier, rather than it being a complete waste half the time. Furthermore, it's now easier to hit vehicles in close combat, which makes a 0" range weapon seem awfully risky.

I guess if your opponents can't see them coming, a heavy flamer could be useful, or if you have literally nothing else to clear off an enemy objective with (and they didn't shoot the chimera before it got there), then I guess I could see a few uses for it, but it really does seem to me that the heavy bolter is a lot better than the heavy flamer.

I see you've abandoned your mistaken math. Thanks for not apologizing for accusing me of shoddy math when YOU were the one who was wrong.


PS: I see you also ignored the part where a snap fire HB is only equal to a single lasgun against marines.

 Ailaros wrote:
And S6 does practically nothing to AV12. Once again, you're making an argument against the multilaser, not for the heavy flamer.

Which would be a relevant point if a second multilaser was an option for the hull. It's very simple:

Step 1: Choose the turret weapon. ML > AC > HB, and dual HF doesn't work. So the ML is the clear choice, unless you desperately need another AC in your list. But either way you aren't taking a HB.

Step 2: Choose the hull weapon. Of the two choices HF > HB.


Also, STR 6 might not do much to AV 12, but STR 5 does nothing. Claiming improved AA ability for a Chimera if you take a hull HB is nonsense when the flyers people actually use (outside of the most casual games) are all AV 12.

In reality, those chimeras are going to be spending the beginning of the game being more or less stationary. Which is when you get to shoot a 36" weapon at full BS.

Except that's not true at all. Ignoring your "highland charge" strawman Chimeras are moving constantly. If you're 25" away you move to 24" away to fire single plasma shots. If you're too close you move back. If your opponent's anti-tank threat is in a different position you move back into cover, or change where your AV 12 is pointing. If you don't have a good shot right now you move into a position to set up a better shot next turn. Etc. You're rarely staying perfectly stationary, and moving even 1" means snap fire for the HB.

And a BS0 flamer that never gets to shoot is even LESS than nothing.

Either you're talking about the weapon not snap firing, in which case the heavy bolter is much better than you say it is, or you're talking about snap firing, in which the heavy flamer never even gets to fire.

WTF are you talking about. If you are in a position to use the HF you snap fire the turret weapon. It's really not that hard to understand:

Outside of flamer range you always fire the ML at full BS (regardless of hull weapon) and snap fire the hull gun.

Inside flamer range you fire the flamer and snap fire the turret if you have a HF, or you fire the ML at full bs and snap fire the HB if you don't.

Ailros let me use an argument you have used;

The HF is better the same reason the Lascannon is better than the autocannon. You may put down more kills over a theoretical infinite time frame with the HB but not all kills are equal.

The HB will virtually never make that game breaking move but the HF has the ability to be that weapon where you get that perfect bunched up deep strikers which you flame into oblivion, This game changer opportunity is what you pay for not the mediocre damage output over infinite turns.

There is also the deterrent factor. Mech guard are probably one of the most vulnerable armies to assault. Anything that makes an assault unit not want to get within 20" of you is fantastic.

It is also not rare for your own destroyed vehicles to pile up and start providing pretty juicy cover saves. The HF helps a little with this.

Just ask yourself would you rather have 3 bunts or a homerun? Having read your battle reports I know you understand the general concept really well with your love (some may say obsession, but don't mind the heretics) of lascannons.

Ailaros - ork stormboyz, large boy mobz, anything (probably) in a transport, howling banshees, termegant or hormagaunt hordes, OTHER GUARDSMAN, wyches, anything in mobs. This is just from my experience - i play on 48" by 48" boards. If they were bigger then I would agree with you.

Of course here's a better analogy:

A snap fire HB does the same damage as a lasgun within 12", or two lasguns from 12-24". So, I just edited your codex, and now every platoon infantry squad and veteran squad has the following option:

*Replace two lasguns with a heavy flamer ..................... free

Would you take this upgrade? Or would you rather have the two lasguns? And, if you would take the upgrade, why would you rather have the two lasguns on a Chimera?

I would tend to agree with the view that although you can snap fire the hull HB when moving, its not likely to do very much. Therefore if your chimera is likely to be spending most of its time moving closer to the enemy (melta vets for example) you take the heavy flamer as this changes the threat type of the vehicle. It might not ever actually fire, but the threat of the weapon can lead your opponent to do different things, hopefully including staying out of easy combat range with the clanky tin can. What you're losing by not taking the heavy bolter is a largely ineffective weapon.

I mixed and matched. Two of my chimeras have heavy flamers, the rest have HBs.

 Ailaros wrote:
[

General Annoyance wrote:They allow you to counterattack troops that try to assault your guardsman.

Name one infantry unit that you're likely going to see on the table that will both be able to survive a cross-field charge against your guardsmen AND would actually care about a heavy flamer AND wouldn't care about a heavy bolter.

Ork mobs, and enduranced/Telekined genestealers/AG hormigaunts/AG gargoyles all are going to be more concerned about a HF than a HB. Just using an AG gaunt charge as an example, it is normally around 20 bodies and takes 2 turns to arrive, so ML+HB is going to do a max of 12 wounds. A ML+HF can do a max of 15, as soon as it starts moving the ML+HF becomes a much bigger threat because the HB goes on snapfire with the ML+HB, VS snapfire ML + template.

IF you are chimera rushing, which I do see a lot coming at me, why would you be "snapfiring"/not firing the HF when in range of viable targets. Seriously snapshot the multilaser and cook the hordes with the HF. I hate having that done to me.

 labmouse42 wrote:
I mixed and matched. Two of my chimeras have heavy flamers, the rest have HBs.

No! You cannot do that! There can be only one true way!

 Peregrine wrote:
Claiming improved AA ability for a Chimera if you take a hull HB is nonsense when the flyers people actually use (outside of the most casual games) are all AV 12.

Not that I disagree with your point overall, but...
Flyrants.
Demon Princes.
Cron-Air
Dakkajets

You don't see those outside of "the most casual games"? You play some crappy Nid players then.

Heavy flamers are much scarier to me then a measly heavy bolter. I play dark eldar and i rely on cover so much and that heavy flamer has a zone of fire i carnt afford to get into. I wont get my reavers anywhere near them and my haliquins poop there clown pants. But if a heavy bolter shot at me i would laugth as it bounces of my 3+ and 2+ respecitely.

Deepstrikes that choose to shoot are bunched up for the flamer. And hey, are you lacking in long range firepower as guardsmen? Are you lacking close range, hell yes! Say first turn i turbo boast all my raiders inches behind all your best tanks, what do you do? carnt hit me with blasts or risk harming your tanks, while i get a 4+ cover. next turn my wyches would jump out and shred any tanks in range, then charge your guardsmen hoard. Unless you have heavy flamers which would wipe entire squads before they get to the guardsmen.

A heavy flamer kills every 1 wound dark eldar, 1 wound IG, 1 wound ork, nearly every 1 wound eldar, and all 1 wound space marine scouts by denying an amour save or a cover save.

The versatility of the Heavy Flamer allows you to move the chimera and chose to fire either the HF or the multi-laser.

As Peregrine said, I rarely see a stationary chimera, so you're "practically" always moving it and snap firing the HB. That has a rather poor chance of hitting anything, but at least it gets to shoot, where an HF does not. To further this point, the HB/Multi-laser loadout can shoot at and potentially damage an AV11 or lower flier with BOTH guns, where a HF/ML chimera cannot.

Is there a right answer? I don't think so. I think it comes down to play style and what else is in your army.

The HF/ML chimera seems like the choice for a melta-vet squad. Move the squad up to a transport, get out, shoot the transport with the meltas, HF the guys that spill out while snap-firing the ML. But what do I know? I don't play guard.

So does it seem the HF Chimera has a more psychological edge than a math-hammering one?

That seems to be what the argument is shaping up to be.

Guard arent so good at assault. Generally they want the enemy to be as far away as possible. However, as they get closer you have to start moving your chimera. That BS1 heavy bolter does nothing essentially. The heavy flamer is also useless until that instance where an enemy is within 6" of you. At that point, the option to move, fire the flamer (for a guaranteed ~4-7 hits)

With the heavy bolter, moving means the heavy bolter is the backup weapon. With the heavy flamer, moving means you may have the ability to use it as the main weapon for far increased ability to alpha strike a unit off the board. It is not always the backup, which is where a lot of the assumptions in this thread fall apart.

Also, after the chimera has unloaded, most people ignore it. With HF you cannot ignore it as it will kill things, even marines or terminators if allowed to run as it wishes. IF an enemy has to shoot or assault a chimera instead of my guardsmen, it has done its job.

 Peregrine wrote:
Of course here's a better analogy:

A snap fire HB does the same damage as a lasgun within 12", or two lasguns from 12-24". So, I just edited your codex, and now every platoon infantry squad and veteran squad has the following option:

*Replace two lasguns with a heavy flamer ..................... free

Sign me up! Too bad heavy flamers actually cost 20 pts, if I could remove 2 lasguns for a heavy flamer..... Say hello to walking wall of flame!

I vote Peregrine writes the next guard codex.