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.

So with all that is unholy coming out of the woodwork and ignoring cover I have to ask, is the ADL still worth it for an IG army featuring a lot of Chimera's and some LR variants???

I've never played with one before, and for 50 points it's a deal, but I could take a lot of things in Codex IG for 50 points.

Need some advice from people that have been using it with this kind of list, or people who have armies that totally lol at the ADL as their cover ignoring shots make it a waste of 50 points.

Still seems like a cheap way to protect a parking lot.
Not many of the cover ignoring weapons are high enough strength to concern AV14

It's still well worth it; still not that much ignores cover. Need to throw a Quad gun into it to get the interceptor and skyfire rules. Don't forget you can buff your humble guardsman (or Ogryn) by defending it properly and getting to attack first in close combat.

Definetely worth it.

Pass.

You didn't REALLY need one before, what with your armor (with its new ease of getting cover saves) and mobility being able to get into places of relative safety. And that's nothing to say about chimeras getting cover saves from those russes.

Meanwhile, an ADL seems like a great way to make 100% of your army have to take at least one dangerous terrain check. If you don't move your tanks around due to fear of self-immobilization, then... well... what's really the point of taking tanks in the first place?

50 points plus immobilized vehicles or a screwed up strategy doesn't seem worth it to increase the cover save from 5+ to 4+ on boards where you're not bringing ruins or hills.

Pretty much mandatory still. You're going to have something camping on an objective in your own deployment zone, and you can't guarantee that you'll have 4+ terrain in the right place. Meanwhile the quad gun is still a very good deal even if you don't care about AA.

 Ailaros wrote:
Meanwhile, an ADL seems like a great way to make 100% of your army have to take at least one dangerous terrain check.

Why are we assuming that we're talking about a stupid player who puts the ADL in front of things that don't need a cover save instead of in a corner of the table to protect an objective and leave the rest of the table free for the tanks to move up?

50 points plus immobilized vehicles or a screwed up strategy doesn't seem worth it to increase the cover save from 5+ to 4+ on boards where you're not bringing ruins or hills.

It's not just a 4+ when you're talking about infantry scoring an objective behind it. It's the difference between a 3+ (GTG in normal area terrain) and a 2+ (GTG behind ADL), which makes a huge difference in durability.

ADL is amazing. I prefer to run the lascannon (because at the end of the day its still a lascannon and it punches the flyers a bit harder). Dont always use it myself but it works great when used with a bit of thinking. dont huddle your whole army behind it for example.

It's really good, especially for artillery. Camo netting may seem over priced but combined with the Ageis gives you a 3+ exactly were you need it. I group of Av 14 russ with a 3 up cover save is extremely difficult to dislodge.