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.

Are IG weapon team with a mortar worth the 20pts to field ?
What about Sentinels ?

No, from what I have been told/ read they just aren't very effective. I wish though because i love the look and idea of mortars but their performance just isn't there. Maybe you would have better luck!

Sentinels are personally only good outflanking with lascannons. But even then they are very fragile and can be killed by rapid firing bolters. Have to use them very smartly.

I'd say both are not the most competitive options but you could make them work for you.

 iheartlargeblasttemplates wrote:
No, from what I have been told/ read they just aren't very effective. I wish though because i love the look and idea of mortars but their performance just isn't there. Maybe you would have better luck!

Sentinels are personally only good outflanking with lascannons. But even then they are very fragile and can be killed by rapid firing bolters. Have to use them very smartly.

I'd say both are not the most competitive options but you could make them work for you.

Pretty much this.

If you're going to use mortars, you're going to be unimpressed, but no one can stop you except for yourself. Lascannons are the best option for HWT's. And make sure to attach them to Infantry Squads. They're too fragile otherwise.

Sentinels aren't good, too fragile, but if you're going to use them; outflank 3 with lascannons and kill something before they're killed.

Mortars can be situationally pretty decent, but anything they do artillery can do only a few points more in the Griffon.

Think of them this way: they are frag missles that shoot indirectly. Is that worth much to you? Maybe it is, but not to me.

Mortars aren't overcosted (they are about as cheap as can be made) they are just not very good. Give them a second shot, make them large blast, or even nudge up the strength, and they'd be worth it.

Well, HWS's are pretty terrible in general (except in Infantry Squads, then they are pretty okay. Few situations exist where having HWS are worth it)

Mortars are...tricky...

They need numbers to be effective, 3-4 of them isn't going to work. And at that point, you might as well have bought something that can do it's job (which, im not even sure what that is) but better and cheaper. So no, they aren't worth the points.

Sentinels are interesting. The Armored Variant sucks, but a squad of outflanking lascannons or multilasers if you are really tight on points but still want to try this strategy can be a nice thorn in the side if you get them into cover. 3 Lascannon shots into a vehicle's side/rear armor does wonders sometimes.

If they really did only cost 20 points they might be worth it.

I've used mortars very often in 5th and through 6th and I can tell you that they're really not worth it. I use them because I like the idea of them but pretty much anything else in the book is more worth the points, apart from Techpriests and maybe sniper rifles.

edit: By my first comment I meant the Heavy Weapons Squad with 3x mortars. I've never even considered using them outside of dedicated squads.

Mortars are worthless. STR 4 small blast will rarely ever kill anything, and for just a few more points you could take the far superior ACs instead.

Sentinels are bad. They're a fragile unit with mediocre guns and a high price tag, and they take up the same slot as the Vendetta. The Vendetta gives you much better durability, better firepower per point, flyer mobility, and can transport a unit. The only reason to take Sentinels is if you care more about using Sentinels than you care about winning.

 Peregrine wrote:
The only reason to take Sentinels is if you care more about using Sentinels than you care about winning.

Sad but true!

With the 6th ed barrage rules, mortars can occasionally do something really useful, sniping out a heavy or special weapon or a sgt from an enemy squad. The Griffon does the job better, though, and is quite cheap at 75pts.

 Mannahnin wrote:
With the 6th ed barrage rules, mortars can occasionally do something really useful, sniping out a heavy or special weapon or a sgt from an enemy squad. The Griffon does the job better, though, and is quite cheap at 75pts.

Emphasis on "occasionally". STR 4 AP 6 is bad at causing wounds and even worse at getting through armor saves, and with only a 3" blast they're rarely hitting more than one model per shot so they're terrible at generating the huge volume of hits necessary to overcome poor STR/AP. Add in their poor accuracy and potentially LOS your chances of sniping something are pretty bad. Just spend those points on better guns and 'snipe' the target by killing the entire unit.

This is an area where table experience can add additional data beyond just the math.

In actual play on the table, there are often situations where models are forced or encouraged to bunch up for one reason or another; whether because they've popped out of a transport, or are maximizing use of LOS-blocking terrain, or what have you. In those situations, barrage blasts can often take advantage and put your opponent in a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't position, where he'll get punished if he spreads out and exposes more of his unit to LOS, and punished if he bunches up to hide.

Now, if all you have for blasts is Plasma Cannons or Collossi, your opponent is usually going to prioritize them highly as targets, and/or decide that spreading out is the better approach. Conversely, if the only barrage you have is (relatively) less-scary, poor-AP stuff like the Griffon or Mortars, he's more likely to chance bunching up. Then if you land a shot you're more likely to be hitting 6+ guys with even a small blast, at which point even against marines you're averaging 3W and 1 dead guy right under the hole.

Does it come up all the time? No. But with an IG army where you're opponent's likely trying to stay out of LOS where he can, it's more likely.

Not to say Mortars are great, by any means (though it does mean Griffons are WAY better than a lot of people credit, especially due to their Scatter re-roll), but they are cheap and this dynamic of cover and movement does give them more value than the math alone suggests.

 Mannahnin wrote:
In actual play on the table, there are often situations where models are forced or encouraged to bunch up for one reason or another; whether because they've popped out of a transport, or are maximizing use of LOS-blocking terrain, or what have you. In those situations, barrage blasts can often take advantage and put your opponent in a damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't position, where he'll get punished if he spreads out and exposes more of his unit to LOS, and punished if he bunches up to hide.

Except the mortars don't really punish you. Even in the ideal situation it's still just STR 4 AP 6 with accuracy problems. Unlike, say, a LR Executioner that can remove entire bunched up squads and legitimately force a hard decision between spreading out to stop blast weapons and bunching up to make use of cover, mortars just aren't that much of a threat. You can completely ignore them in making your decisions and usually the worst that will happen is you lose a model or two.

Then if you land a shot you're more likely to be hitting 6+ guys with even a small blast, at which point even against marines you're averaging 3W and 1 dead guy right under the hole.

But you only have a 33% chance of hitting your ideal target, and with a bunched-up target if you scatter at all you're going to be hitting someone else first. And, again, this is the ideal situation.

Does it come up all the time?

And this is the problem. Why take mortars, which are situational and not even very impressive in their ideal situation, when you can take other guns that are far more consistent?

It's the same as the melta vs. grenade launcher argument. GL advocates can propose the rare situation when the blast gets lots of hits, but if you look at the consistent average the melta guns win decisively.

I face Orks and 'Nids, mortars works fine for me; either he bunch up and is easy targeting with the mortars, or he spreads out, got most models our of cover and get focused fired by my other units. They also pin, which is not something to count on, but when it happens, it is always a bonus.

Sentinels with autocannons. They are cheap, outflank, and my 2 Scout Sentinel squad always end up blowing a transport and killing a couple of guys in it, every time, all the time. More reliable than Marbo even.

Sure, they rarely get pass the opponent's shooting/assault phases, but by that time, they are well worth their points, get'em back and can draw fire for a turn while my troops still lives (and occupy an objective, or fire at something else)

Oh, come on people. I've got to defend the sentinel at least a little bit. Well, at least the scout sentinel.

For 150 points, you can get 6HP of AV10 and 1.5 lascannon hits on the opening volley compared to 130 points for 3HP of AV12 on a flying frame and 2 lascannon hits on the opening volley. So yes, we start with the vendetta doing a little more damage, and certainly being a bit and a half more durable.

However, there are three things which can make the scout sentinel worth taking. Firstly, the sentinel can outflank, and the vendetta can not. Against predators or chimera-chassised vehicles you will do more damage by attacking side or rear armor than taking a vendetta and throwing it at the front. Furthermore, if the squad survives, the sentinel can get into close combat against vehicles, which it's not THAT bad at killing, or at least finishing off.

Secondly, as mentioned, sentinels can get into close combat. Combine that with the previous outflanking, and you can offer a reasonable strategic threat for a pretty low points footprint. If your opponent is holding a backfield objective with a 5-man tac or scout squad, for example, you can get into a close combat that will drag them away from an objective and likely stick them in for turn after turn. Turn after turn of not scoring. Even better if there's no way that they can hurt the sentinel and so they decide to break and run. Few things that can't hurt a sentinel have an I of better than 3, which means you've got a half chance to catch that one scoring unit in a sweeping advance. A vendetta will never have this kind of a strategic impact. Not by itself, at least.

Thirdly, on scouring missions, they can score. Much more easily than a vendetta at least.

Then you add in a bunch of little things. For example, vendettas are way harder to hit from most things, but sentinels don't care about the ever-growing list of things with skyfire. Also, vendettas are harder to hit, but they're also much, much more difficult to get cover saves for.

What really puts the vendetta over the top is that it's also a transport. To say that you should only take sentinels if you want to lose is more than unnecessarily harsh.

 Ailaros wrote:
Oh, come on people. I've got to defend the sentinel at least a little bit. Well, at least the scout sentinel.

For 150 points, you can get 6HP of AV10 and 1.5 lascannon hits on the opening volley compared to 130 points for 3HP of AV12 on a flying frame and 2 lascannon hits on the opening volley. So yes, we start with the vendetta doing a little more damage, and certainly being a bit and a half more durable.

However, there are three things which can make the scout sentinel worth taking. Firstly, the sentinel can outflank, and the vendetta can not. Against predators or chimera-chassised vehicles you will do more damage by attacking side or rear armor than taking a vendetta and throwing it at the front. Furthermore, if the squad survives, the sentinel can get into close combat against vehicles, which it's not THAT bad at killing, or at least finishing off.

Secondly, as mentioned, sentinels can get into close combat. Combine that with the previous outflanking, and you can offer a reasonable strategic threat for a pretty low points footprint. If your opponent is holding a backfield objective with a 5-man tac or scout squad, for example, you can get into a close combat that will drag them away from an objective and likely stick them in for turn after turn. Turn after turn of not scoring. Even better if there's no way that they can hurt the sentinel and so they decide to break and run. Few things that can't hurt a sentinel have an I of better than 3, which means you've got a half chance to catch that one scoring unit in a sweeping advance. A vendetta will never have this kind of a strategic impact. Not by itself, at least.

Thirdly, on scouring missions, they can score. Much more easily than a vendetta at least.

Then you add in a bunch of little things. For example, vendettas are way harder to hit from most things, but sentinels don't care about the ever-growing list of things with skyfire. Also, vendettas are harder to hit, but they're also much, much more difficult to get cover saves for.

What really puts the vendetta over the top is that it's also a transport. To say that you should only take sentinels if you want to lose is more than unnecessarily harsh.

Probaly my favorite thing about Scout Sentinels is that they're really cheap searchlight carriers. I find searchlights to be actually fairly important in 6th and if I'm only exposing a walker that's cheaper than the cheapest infantry squad rather than an expensive Russ to return fire during the Night Fight that happens so often on turn 1 I'm a lot happier.

I don't mind fielding a HWS of mortars. They're cheap, they're a scoring unit, and they can fire indirect. Hide them out of LOS holding an objective (or deep inside ruins, or in a building) and once per turn plop 3 small Blasts anywhere within 48". Yes, unless the scatter dice gods are on your side they can be wasteful, but when you land them they can be really annoying for your opponent. If you happen to get a wound, they may also pin.

Snapshot wrote:
I don't mind fielding a HWS of mortars. They're cheap, they're a scoring unit, and they can fire indirect. Hide them out of LOS holding an objective (or deep inside ruins, or in a building) and once per turn plop 3 small Blasts anywhere within 48". Yes, unless the scatter dice gods are on your side they can be wasteful, but when you land them they can be really annoying for your opponent. If you happen to get a wound, they may also pin.

The issue is that there are so many better things to spend 60 points on.

For goodness sake, give two Plasvet sergeants dual plasma pistols. That's awesome, and practical.

Snapshot wrote:
I don't mind fielding a HWS of mortars. They're cheap, they're a scoring unit, and they can fire indirect. Hide them out of LOS holding an objective (or deep inside ruins, or in a building) and once per turn plop 3 small Blasts anywhere within 48". Yes, unless the scatter dice gods are on your side they can be wasteful, but when you land them they can be really annoying for your opponent. If you happen to get a wound, they may also pin.

Why take a unit that can annoy your opponent when you can spend those points on a unit that can hurt your opponent?

Sniping an important model out of the middle or back of a unit is hurting an opponent. I don't think 60pts is a lot to pay for three barrage blasts in a scoring unit which can hide while throwing that barrage.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Sniping an important model out of the middle or back of a unit is hurting an opponent. I don't think 60pts is a lot to pay for three barrage blasts in a scoring unit which can hide while throwing that barrage.

Except that, as I already pointed out, the chances of successfully sniping anything are pretty bad. Taking ACs or LCs (or even HBs) will do more on average.

 Ailaros wrote:
So yes, we start with the vendetta doing a little more damage

Only because we start off with bad math. You can't keep the Sentinel squad's 1.5 average hits unrounded and simultaneously round down the Vendetta's 2.25 hits on average to only 2. That's an extremely dishonest comparison.

Also, once we scale up the Vendetta's firepower to match the point difference we're up to 2.58 average hits for the Vendetta vs. 1.5 for the Sentinels. That's way beyond "a little more damage".

Against predators or chimera-chassised vehicles you will do more damage by attacking side or rear armor than taking a vendetta and throwing it at the front.

Flyers should almost always be able to get side armor.

If your opponent is holding a backfield objective with a 5-man tac or scout squad, for example, you can get into a close combat that will drag them away from an objective and likely stick them in for turn after turn.

Unless they have krak grenades, in which case a mere 5-man tactical squad averages 1.6 HP per turn of combat. If they have melta bombs or a powerfist it's even worse.

And then there's the problem that you're spending 150 points on a unit to tie up a sub-100-point tactical squad. How exactly is it a good idea to buy LCs for your Sentinels and then lock them in combat where they can't shoot?

For example, vendettas are way harder to hit from most things, but sentinels don't care about the ever-growing list of things with skyfire.

Err, no. Any skyfire unit that is a serious threat to a Vendetta will also wipe Sentinels off the table effortlessly.

TheCaptain: "For goodness sake, give two Plasvet sergeants dual plasma pistols. That's awesome, and practical. "

Peregrine: "Why take a unit that can annoy your opponent when you can spend those points on a unit that can hurt your opponent? "

For all the reasons I stated, but mainly 'cause I enjoy annoying opponents.

Edit: Oh, and it's an extra 6 wounds in my FOC and a unit that opponents either ignore or can't hit. Buffing my plasma sqauds more (for example), and they become an even bigger target than they are already.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:
Sniping an important model out of the middle or back of a unit is hurting an opponent. I don't think 60pts is a lot to pay for three barrage blasts in a scoring unit which can hide while throwing that barrage.

Except that, as I already pointed out, the chances of successfully sniping anything are pretty bad. Taking ACs or LCs (or even HBs) will do more on average.

Except that, as I already explained, the chances are better than you credit, because your underlying assumption that you're never going to cover more than one or two models is unfounded. The premise is not granted, which means the conclusion isn't either.

Taking ACs or HBs for 25% more points may indeed average more damage against non-clumped targets, but that's ignoring the specific capabilities the mortar squad has that the AC squad does not- sniping models out of the backs of units, hitting units out of LOS, and hiding out of LOS itself while still firing (which is particularly nice in a scoring unit with 3 models and LD7). If you're going to ignore the rest of the game in favor of damage per point calculations, you're going to draw faulty conclusions based on incomplete data.

 Mannahnin wrote:
Except that, as I already explained, the chances are better than you credit, because your underlying assumption that you're never going to cover more than one or two models is unfounded. The premise is not granted, which means the conclusion isn't either.

I didn't say never. I said that:

1) You will usually only get one, maybe two models per shot. The lucky situation where you get 6+ hits with a single 3" blast template is a very rare one.

and

2) Even in the most favorable possible situation it's still only STR 4 AP 6 which means your chances of doing anything really impressive are pretty low. Hitting a perfect tightly-packed squad doesn't do awesome damage, it just removes a marine or two.

Taking ACs or HBs for 25% more points may indeed average more damage against non-clumped targets, but that's ignoring the specific capabilities the mortar squad has that the AC squad does not- sniping models out of the backs of units, hitting units out of LOS, and hiding out of LOS itself while still firing (which is particularly nice in a scoring unit with 3 models and LD7). If you're going to ignore the rest of the game in favor of damage per point calculations, you're going to draw faulty conclusions based on incomplete data.

I'm not ignoring the rest of the game. Those are powerful advantages on units that can make use of them. A Griffon or Colossus is potentially a powerful unit because it can barrage snipe and averages enough wounds to really hurt a target, and that means they have value beyond a strict "average kills per point" analysis. I dismiss mortars because they just aren't any good at those things, not because I don't understand how they work.

I know HWS with mortars is an un-sexy choice, but it's better than it looks on paper. I've found them to be a thorn in my side when I face against them, and now that I'm starting my own IG force they were one of the first things I've bought. I remember one time too many when facing the old Catachan codex where mortars raining down on my Blood Claws would wreck way more havoc than a simple S4 blast would suggest on paper.

Some reasons why the HWS with mortars is an okay expenditure of 60 points:
1) It needs no line of sight and thus can be tucked into some corner behind cover, most likely to be free to shoot all game. This can help when there's simple not enough space to place models (i.e. you're able to ignore their footprint when deploying)
2) It's scoring. I've had games where the enemy doesn't take them into account and they're able to run over the last two turns and claim an objective.
3) Assuming that you already have a infantry platoon, they take up no force org slots. This is a good reason why to take them over a Griffon.
4) Point vs point, they'd only have to kill 4 marines to "make their points back". I know that's a bad way to measure units, but in this case they'd only need to kill 4 whole marines with 3 blasts that will probably be firing multiple turns. Even if you average 2 marine per blast (which I consider too low), it'd be a marine a turn. I've found the mortars to be around turn 4, so that's "points back" right there.
5) Pinning. 'nuff said
6) Barrage rules for taking out those special weapons in the back.
7) Synergy/Redundancy with artillery. Fielding autocannons/lascannons/missiles synergizes well with the rest of the line of sight shooting. Mortars are the only troop that synergizes well with firing barrage, perhaps along with a Basilisk/Colossus/etc.

 HidaSeku wrote:
4) Point vs point, they'd only have to kill 4 marines to "make their points back". I know that's a bad way to measure units, but in this case they'd only need to kill 4 whole marines with 3 blasts that will probably be firing multiple turns. Even if you average 2 marine per blast (which I consider too low), it'd be a marine a turn. I've found the mortars to be around turn 4, so that's "points back" right there.

First of all, two marines per hit is optimistic. A 3" blast can only hit one model when they're spaced out at maximum 2" coherency, and you don't always have a hit (or good scatter). Sometimes you will hit two or more marines, of course, but the average is probably going to be less.

5) Pinning. 'nuff said

With very low chances of successfully pinning anything you care about pinning.

6) Barrage rules for taking out those special weapons in the back.

And, again, with low chances of success.

7) Synergy/Redundancy with artillery. Fielding autocannons/lascannons/missiles synergizes well with the rest of the line of sight shooting. Mortars are the only troop that synergizes well with firing barrage, perhaps along with a Basilisk/Colossus/etc.

Synergy means more than "two similar things". It means the two working together do better than the sum of each working individually. But barrage weapons don't work like that, adding additional barrage weapons to a list doesn't make the ones you already have perform any better. Similarly, the contribution of a mortar HWS in a barrage-heavy list is, if anything, less than in a list with no other barrage weapons since the much more threatening Griffons/Manticores/etc have already forced your targets to spread out while an opponent facing mostly single-shot weapons might be tempted to bunch up and take the hits from the mortars in exchange for better cover against the plasma guns.

 Polonius wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
The only reason to take Sentinels is if you care more about using Sentinels than you care about winning.

Sad but true!

Exact same reason I take them! But mine always have ACs, and are always lower on the target priority list so they end up killing a few things before being destroyed.

As far as mortars go, they're only good for (randomly) pinning and annoying people, which in itself makes them fun.

Both units are very fun, look cool, etc., but they have no place in a competitive list.

It's a real shame about sentinels too... they are such cool models but are entirely worthless!

Why would I pay 150 points for three BS3 lascannons on flimsy 2HP AV10 frames?

I can have those same three lascannons, twin-linked, on a *FLYING* AV12 frame which can transport 12 models for (wait for it) 15 points *LESS!*

The existence of the flying Vendetta makes sentinels completely obsolete.

Cheesedoodler wrote:
I can have those same three lascannons, twin-linked, on a *FLYING* AV12 frame which can transport 12 models for (wait for it) 15 points *LESS!*

The existence of the flying Vendetta makes sentinels completely obsolete.

Not completely obsolete.
Sentinels don't have to be sent to Outflank. They can be on the table from the start, getting you 1-2 extra turns of shooting in.
With LCs, that's quite useful, and can get you a first-turn-kill on the quad-gun that would stop the Vendetta coming on at all.

Also, you don't have to take LCs on them. Taking cheaper guns makes them more useful in other roles.

Cheesedoodler wrote:
It's a real shame about sentinels too... they are such cool models but are entirely worthless!

Why would I pay 150 points for three BS3 lascannons on flimsy 2HP AV10 frames?

I can have those same three lascannons, twin-linked, on a *FLYING* AV12 frame which can transport 12 models for (wait for it) 15 points *LESS!*

The existence of the flying Vendetta makes sentinels completely obsolete.

Outflanking Lascannons CAN be better than Lascannons in the front arc. Sometimes.