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.

Who has the best Lords of War and whose are lack luster ? And this question applies to apoc as well as general 40k escalation.

Well, I think some of the worst LoW will be the tanks from the Malcador family. That Malcador Defender is pretty ace with its 5 limited traverse heavy bolters.

Best is probably one of the titans. Like the Revenant or somesuch.

you know that models like Ghazghkull is now a lord of war... So iam going to say he is one of the worst compared to a Titan

 Chute82 wrote:
you know that models like Ghazghkull is now a lord of war... So iam going to say he is one of the worst compared to a Titan

In a discussion of best vs worst, you can't just say something worth 750 points is more powerful than something worth 240ish....that's obvious....the real discussion is "What is most worth it's points cost and occupying the LoW slot"?

Personally, I'm not a huge fan of super duper expensive stuff and prefer a more min/max building process, so I don't use LoWs very often, but my favorites are the Typhon (7" S10 blast that ignores cover....lewl) or one of the knight variants, probably the Errant for double battlecannon loving.

As for worst, the malacador and it's variants are basically slightly upgunned Lemun Russes that chew your LoW slot but cost more than twice as many points.

Let's not forget the Transcendent C'tan, I think everyone fears that model.

Okay the best and worst lord of war that is either a super heavy or a gargantuan creature.

And ghazgkull isn'that bad, I watched him wreck a lord of skulls before. Evidently 100 tons of khornes rage was no match for a mad ork with a twitchy power claw.

Warhound with a pair of Turbolasers? 4 SD Ap2 Large Blasts.

I would say top Lords of War are;

Harridans
Transcendent Ctan

 Crazyterran wrote:
Warhound with a pair of Turbolasers? 4 SD Ap2 Large Blasts.

Revenant titan does the same, being a bit more costly - but is way more survivable and agile.

 Vector Strike wrote:

 Crazyterran wrote:
Warhound with a pair of Turbolasers? 4 SD Ap2 Large Blasts.

Revenant titan does the same, being a bit more costly - but is way more survivable and agile.

Well the Revenant is only AV12/12/10, it might have the titan holo fields, but the AV14/13/12 on the Warhound is very nice since it's immune/almost immune to a plethore of weaponry.

 Unyielding Hunger wrote:
I would say top Lords of War are;

Harridans
Transcendent Ctan

Agreed. Harridan has all the benefits of a Gargantuan creature and a flier, and a lot of wounds. Plus, it is a rather small target, as wings and tail are ignored (for some reason) when drawing line of sight to target it.

Transcendent C'Tan was balanced against the insanity that was Apoc II, but now the Destroyer weapons it would face have been toned way down, it is still a BS6 S9 T9 model that is about the size of a dreadnought, saves 2/3 of wounds that do manage to wound it, can put out 6d6 krak missiles, an AP1 Destroyer hellstorm, and can stomp with the large blast marker to clear out even swarms in an assault. Now it breaks the meta almost as badly as the Wave Serpent.

I'd argue that the Hierophant is better than the Harridan, slightly higher Toughness, 2+ and 6++, as well as Regeneration on top of the Gargantuan Rules.

Not to mention you can purchase an upgrade that lets you use it as a transport, so put a Venomthrope in and suddenly you've got a huge range for Shrouded (and if I'm not mistaken, easy access to a 3+ cover save given it's size)

Harridan is still nifty though Transcedent C'Tan makes me weep when I see it on the table.

On paper (not used one yet) a typhon looks excellent as mentioned above.
With ceremite it's 370pts. Which is worth far more than 120pts better than a base godhammer. 2 extra hp, ignores melta usr, super heavy usrs and a st10 ap1 7" (primary weapon too lets not forget) blast, all for the cost of 120pts, 2 tl lascannons a tl hb and 10 trans cap. Totally worth it!

Poly Ranger wrote:
On paper (not used one yet) a typhon looks excellent as mentioned above.
With ceremite it's 370pts. Which is worth far more than 120pts better than a base godhammer. 2 extra hp, ignores melta usr, super heavy usrs and a st10 ap1 7" (primary weapon too lets not forget) blast, all for the cost of 120pts, 2 tl lascannons a tl hb and 10 trans cap. Totally worth it!

Typhon heavy seige tank.

370 pt super land raider with that godamn redonculous blast template.

worst is definitely the dark eldar tantalus

winterwind85 wrote:
worst is definitely the dark eldar tantalus

Not a lord of war or even a super heavy.

The Imperial Guard have a lot of objectively bad Lords of War, in fact, that was one the reasons I thought that the whole idea of Lords of War would be point capped or limited in selection, to encourage the use of those super-heavies which don't get fielded much.

But that would imply GW has any sense whatsoever. Our group more or less works that way, so you never see anything bigger than a Baneblade, and that's rare. I personally use a Macharius Battle Tank quite often, as it's just a slightly more upgunned basic Russ than the Malcador with better armour for too many points.

Worst overall definately belongs to the standard Malcador Battle Tank. The defender at least has a hull mounted demolisher and the 5 HBs; it can't focus fire worth a damn due to traverse issues, but it can demolish one thing, and take pot shots at a bunch of softer targets. The battle tank literally is a Leman Russ with worse armour, more HP, no turret and worse sponson options for over twice the price.

Best is entirely subjective, for the most part, but I'd put the Eldar Revenant Titan as the most obscene I've faced, edging out the Reaver, which while having better armour and weapons, is super-expensive , isn't made of pure shenanigans.

isnt the tantalus an low in new apo book?

 Frozocrone wrote:
I'd argue that the Hierophant is better than the Harridan, slightly higher Toughness, 2+ and 6++, as well as Regeneration on top of the Gargantuan Rules.

Not to mention you can purchase an upgrade that lets you use it as a transport, so put a Venomthrope in and suddenly you've got a huge range for Shrouded (and if I'm not mistaken, easy access to a 3+ cover save given it's size)

Harridan is still nifty though Transcedent C'Tan makes me weep when I see it on the table.

The problem with the Hierophant is that it just isn't a flier. Slightly higher toughness just doesn't sell as well as needing 6s to even hit it, if the weapon in question doesn't have skyfire. Also, using the rules on drawing LOS, you can negate the wings and tail, and suddenly a bastion can head on block a Harridan while you cannot get away with that with the much larger Hierophant.