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.

Alairos-

I think what we're seeing is a basic difference in how the chimeras are used and not the shot potential or stat versus stat of either weapon.

If the Chimera is just an add on to get a Multi Laser and a heavy bolter for a gun line... which from your last battle reposrt SEEMS to be how you use your IS...then the heavy bolter is the better weapon. But I think very few people actually us ethe Chimera as a way to get a few more heavy weapons (though that may be a great idea...not making an judgments on that). It seems like you see more folks advocating for Chimeras with the PCS 4x flamer combo. Basically, as an attacking tool designed to kill of mass infantry on the move or to tackle things in cover. For either of those roles the flamer in the hull becomes arguably the better weapon.

I guess it is a bit of self fulfilling prophecy for the chimera. Those that use the hull flamer will almost always get more chances to shoot because they are using the chimera in such a manner they will get that option.

ender502

The problem with the hull HB is a problem of redundancy. For anyone who plans to be constantly moving their Chimera, only one weapon can ever be fired to full effect. Under these circumstances, it makes little sense to take two copies of the same, or very similar weapons, as you are only ever making effective use of one of them at a time. Better to take two completely different weapons, and use the one that is the most effective under the circumstances. Hence pairing the mutli-laser with the heavy flamer as opposed to the all to similar HB.

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.

Snap fire the ML and fire the hull HF as your main weapon. Odds are, since you only hit on a 6, your getting 1 hit every 2 turns. Marines are benchmark, so on average your wounding and on average they are making thier cover save. So your failing to have any effect what-so-ever snap firing your HB, on average.

Ailaros wrote:
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).

Ummm. 95% of the Vehicles your facing in this game are not AV 10 or 11. The Heavy Flamer is also Str 5, so your point makes no fricking sense since they are both Str 5... fact is, neither will glance a vehicle to death, because your Lascannons/melta guns and ACs/plasma guns should be killing them and doing the job ten times better due to the higher Str.

Ailaros wrote:
We also now have focus fire, which means that you can actually use a heavy bolter's Ap.

Not really, because if we use the benchmark Marine, he still gets his armor save. If your not firing on a 3+ save fig, you still need to hit. If your not firing on a 3+ save fig and it is completily in the open, this would be the only case where snap-firing the ML and putting full BS on the HB is worthwhile. To be frank, this situation is even less likily to happen then what you claim is an opportunity to use the HF to completily ignore cover. There are plenty of attacking units and defensive units that rely on cover saves, from Clowns to units that use Invisibility to units behind a ADL that are not expose for Focused Fire... and the First two are attacking units most times, so you may be facing them Turn 2 as you advance on each other... much less Orks using KFF and Bikes getting Jink or smoke screen (both cover saves).

Ailaros wrote:
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.

This is a rare moment you have a valid point, as rolling BS 1 to get 6s doesn't matter if your snap-firing or not and it is impossible to use a template weapon against a Flyer. This is where just hitting them can bring down a Swooping Flying MC, no damage required. But again, there are better units for this and really one should have a dedicated AA unit anyway. You do not rely on rolling 6s to deal with Flyers. If the Flyer is not a swooping MC, your shots are wasted and useless 95% of the time.

Ailaros wrote:
Furthermore, it's now easier to hit vehicles in close combat, which makes a 0" range weapon seem awfully risky.

I fail to see your point or why this matters. Besides, a template has a range. But I will point out if your Vets pop a transport, you can then have your Chimera HF the passangers since they are all clusered up and thier cover save is now null and void.

Ailaros wrote:
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.

Your opponent should always see them coming, since they can look at your list. I do not see it as one being better than the other, I see which one is the better fit for the tactics being used. If your camping behind a ADL with Camo-netting, the HB is the best weapon to take for that tactic. If your advancing on the foe, I see the HF as the best weapon for that tactic because your goal is to get close to your foe. Your more likily to face units with cover saves and you have the option to snap-fire the ML /and/ fire the HF as the main weapon. Your also more likily to face destroyed enemy transports where the troops are still using the cover of the wreckage.

I am not saying this tool is the superior tool over that tool. But I am saying that you use the right tool for the right job and use that tool properly. Can someone argue for having hull HFs on a rear camping unit to counter DSing units? Sure, that is a valid point. But more often than not they are sitting back using the HB to fire on units across the board because not every list is a DSing list. Can you have a Hull HB for an attacking Chimera? Sure, but if you realize that all your hitting on is 6s and maybe getting 2 hits a game in a 4 Turn game. But if your also saying that you will never be in a posistion after moving 6" a turn to run into a unit that is using a cover save (which means your at thier deploy edge by Turn 4) except for maybe 1 Turn, or that you will never use it because your destroyed...well, your not using the HB either if your destroyed (and thus down to 0-1 hit a game) and if your not able to use that HF at least 1-2 times a game... your doing something wrong. Your placing the terrain too and you should be using that to your advantage, offensivily and defensivily.

I see the desicion between the HB and HF as a quite simple one. If the Chimera will be moving, because the squad inside has short range weapons and/or needs to capture objectives (meltavets) it should have a HF. If the Chimera can allow its passengers to remain stationary, for example if it acts as a bunker for a CCS, it should have a HB. All my chimeras are intended for assault and capturin objectives, because tatical marines and terminators slaughter regular guardsmen, so all of them have heavy flamers.

Both tempt players into a potential bad move. The HF can tempt players into closing range when they should back off. The HB tempts players into not moving when they should. In the end what matters most is positioning and movement not nickel and dime differences between 2 weapons.

 schadenfreude wrote:
Both tempt players into a potential bad move. The HF can tempt players into closing range when they should back off. The HB tempts players into not moving when they should. In the end what matters most is positioning and movement not nickel and dime differences between 2 weapons.

So it seems the best choice is secret choice three, take no hull weapon at all!

 TheLionOfTheForest wrote:

 schadenfreude wrote:
Both tempt players into a potential bad move. The HF can tempt players into closing range when they should back off. The HB tempts players into not moving when they should. In the end what matters most is positioning and movement not nickel and dime differences between 2 weapons.

So it seems the best choice is secret choice three, take no hull weapon at all!

It's an asset and liability. The main job of the chimera is to protect and move troops so they can score and win games. When IG players go into 4 pages of debate over the effectiveness if HB V HF it's a sign that players commonly take their eye of the ball. It's 1 low end heavy weapon, don't get greedy at the expense of your troops.

I dunno. Counting on the Chimera to protect troops for more than a turn or two is... optimistic.

I mean, you're overall point that picking hull weapon isn't a big part of strategy is a good one, but lets not pretend that AV12 and 3HP are dead 'ard.

I never use it. Maybe in a small game, on a 4x4 when your enemy has no anti tank. Maybe in that situation and other such situations it can be useful. Otherwise, the heavy bolter has more chance of killing anything out of hf range.

I personally would use a ML + HF combo on my Chimeras.

I would move them up firing the ML and when i get up close to my objective throwing out a flamer and watching everything burn.

I kinda hate that my SoB have to use Rhinos ... cant even put a Flamer or Melta gun on it.

(Question that may have been covered can a Vehicle with a Flamer deal the D3 wounds when charged?)

Tyrs13 wrote:

(Question that may have been covered can a Vehicle with a Flamer deal the D3 wounds when charged?)

Vehicles cannot overwatch, sadly.

Tyrs13 wrote:


(Question that may have been covered can a Vehicle with a Flamer deal the D3 wounds when charged?)

Vehicles cant overwatch

This thread reminds me of the Seinfeld episode where he has to take Bania out to a nice meal. Bania keeps going over the pluses and minuses of either going to Mendy's where the meal will be good but they have been there before; or going to a new restaurant where they can try a new place but the meal might no be as good.

I think we have covered all bases where the Hflamer is better than the HBolter and vice versa. I can't really see anymore tactical data to be added to this discussion.

But you have to leave space for those who come late to the discussion and need to have their opinion heard without bothering to see if their key points have already been made... at length... repeatedly