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.

Razerous wrote:
What about x number of hellhounds, doing much... ah they don't have the steel behemoth rule.

Got it

Neither does the malcador - tbh you could probably do it with either, but the explosion is smaller on the hellhounds and will backfire less with just 1 malcador. I also like the d2 on its flamer, and psychologically I imagine it's more annoying to have 1 malcador up in your grill than 3 hellhounds. Could be wrong though, and if one just wants to flame as many things as possible, the hellhounds are probably better.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
.

My Sororitas use Infernuses, and since they're in a Sororitas detachment they get no trait, but I was thinking Catachan myself to get that sweet sweet shots re-roll on the main armament and the HF sponsons.

Also, I do use it as a suicide bomber sometimes

I like the catachan re-roll of course, but I feel like keeping it moving (since it already auto-hits) seems more utilitarian. I hate the idea of losing a target through only being able to move 4...

 necrontyrOG wrote:
Anyone have any experience with a Marauder Bomber? I just started assembling mine and hot damn does it look fun. 2 Lascannons, and 4 heavy bolters is meh, but some sweet Mortal wound capabilities. Especially with those Hellstorm bombs.

Only the Marauder Destroyer. The hellstrikes were F'N SWEET but the bombs were a bit underwhelming. I think I got more mileage out of the tail and turret guns.

What have people's experiences been with the Hellhound? I've only used it a couple times, and the range is so short and the number of shots so random that it didn't feel super effective for the points.

I like hellhounds still. My primary use for them is as a psychological warfare unit though, not a point-effective unit. You might get your points back if you're lucky (or killing Rangers) but ultimately, the way to play them is to get them as close to multiple enemy units as possible and have them start dealing out the pain, and then watch the opponent try to get his stuff out of your 4+ death bubble before destroying you out of fear of the mortal wounds. It forces him to react to you, and it's cheap enough you can spare it.

Way I see it is any damage you do along the way before that happens is just gravy.

So an assault 16 gun, str6 ap -1 isn't any good? (Hellhound)

Razerous wrote:
So an assault 16 gun, str6 ap -1 isn't any good? (Hellhound)

Assault 16?

Razerous wrote:
So an assault 16 gun, str6 ap -1 isn't any good? (Hellhound)

Technically a Heavy 2d6 Str6 Ap -1 autohit weapon.

That being said it's an amazing threat when combined with it's armor and speed. It'll eat 3-5 MEQ a turn, which is just enough to force way more than 100pts to be dedicated to destroying it over a couple turns. It's the only fast attack option I've seen that actually flanks and does it well.

Perhaps it was just the games that I played. I am often presented with threats that it's not particularly effective against (vehicles, Daemon Primarchs, elite models with Invulns), or it gets killed quickly because it is short ranged and people have to go through it to get to my backline.

I think it's good, but the meta has made it feel less effective than I previously estimated it at.

Requizen wrote:
Perhaps it was just the games that I played. I am often presented with threats that it's not particularly effective against (vehicles, Daemon Primarchs, elite models with Invulns), or it gets killed quickly because it is short ranged and people have to go through it to get to my backline.

I think it's good, but the meta has made it feel less effective than I previously estimated it at.

I've been using two (one with Inferno and one with Chem Cannon) and they have been useful. They attract lots of fire, which sucks for them but is good for other things in my army. They can help guard a flank against assault since their auto-hits can be deadly in Overwatch. If they reach the enemy line, of course, they can dish out some pain.

Just getting into guard in 8th ed, and I wanted to double check on some clarification for the Catachan regiment, because it seems really, really awesome.

So re-rolling on flamers is pretty obvious, but then when I bring FW into it, I would get to re-roll the number of shots on a Earthshaker Carriage, or heavy quad launcher, as they both have the Vehicle and Regiment keywords.

An army filled with flamer scout sentinels, hellhounds and some artillery seems like a really good time.

 gwarsh41 wrote:
Just getting into guard in 8th ed, and I wanted to double check on some clarification for the Catachan regiment, because it seems really, really awesome.

So re-rolling on flamers is pretty obvious, but then when I bring FW into it, I would get to re-roll the number of shots on a Earthshaker Carriage, or heavy quad launcher, as they both have the Vehicle and Regiment keywords.

An army filled with flamer scout sentinels, hellhounds and some artillery seems like a really good time.

Yeah, but even better is the wyvern (4d6 attacks, reroll to wound, 93pts)

The Leman Russ Battle Cannon (D6 attacks, AP-2)

I'm not certain flamer scount sentials are worth it since they can't use them in melee, but the hellhound is defintly good with the 2d6 attacks and 16" range

So do people buy the metal Ratling models or convert them? I was thinking of getting some Skaven models for conversion fodder, what have other people done?

Requizen wrote:
So do people buy the metal Ratling models or convert them? I was thinking of getting some Skaven models for conversion fodder, what have other people done?

https://puppetswar.eu/product.php?id_product=720
use these i hate the GW ratling models

 ChargerIIC wrote:

 gwarsh41 wrote:
Just getting into guard in 8th ed, and I wanted to double check on some clarification for the Catachan regiment, because it seems really, really awesome.

So re-rolling on flamers is pretty obvious, but then when I bring FW into it, I would get to re-roll the number of shots on a Earthshaker Carriage, or heavy quad launcher, as they both have the Vehicle and Regiment keywords.

An army filled with flamer scout sentinels, hellhounds and some artillery seems like a really good time.

Yeah, but even better is the wyvern (4d6 attacks, reroll to wound, 93pts)

The Leman Russ Battle Cannon (D6 attacks, AP-2)

I'm not certain flamer scount sentials are worth it since they can't use them in melee, but the hellhound is defintly good with the 2d6 attacks and 16" range

Great to know they work as written! I was sure there was going to be some hidden line I missed or something. Have any suggestions for loadouts on sentinels? I have 10 of them... I like sentinels.

Requizen wrote:
So do people buy the metal Ratling models or convert them? I was thinking of getting some Skaven models for conversion fodder, what have other people done?

Honestly I'm using 10 old dwarf metal thunderers from WFB. These dwarfs were probably some of the best things I ever painted as a kid, so I've been trying to find reasons not to ebay them with the rest of my dwarfs.

But I may switch to my Ratskin gangers since I'm going to repaint them for Necromunda. Ratlings. . .ratskins. . .same difference right? They're largely inconsequential in most of my games anyway.

Requizen wrote:
So do people buy the metal Ratling models or convert them? I was thinking of getting some Skaven models for conversion fodder, what have other people done?

I know a lot of IG players who just use regular sniper models, and just make sure they never use snipers elsewhere in the list. That way they can point at all their snipers and say they're ratlings.

I personally would use the metal ones, I kind of like them personally.

Skaven seem like they'd be a bit too "beastly" to be in an imperial force personally, but who knows, you may be able to make them work.

 gwarsh41 wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:

 gwarsh41 wrote:
Just getting into guard in 8th ed, and I wanted to double check on some clarification for the Catachan regiment, because it seems really, really awesome.

So re-rolling on flamers is pretty obvious, but then when I bring FW into it, I would get to re-roll the number of shots on a Earthshaker Carriage, or heavy quad launcher, as they both have the Vehicle and Regiment keywords.

An army filled with flamer scout sentinels, hellhounds and some artillery seems like a really good time.

Yeah, but even better is the wyvern (4d6 attacks, reroll to wound, 93pts)

The Leman Russ Battle Cannon (D6 attacks, AP-2)

I'm not certain flamer scount sentials are worth it since they can't use them in melee, but the hellhound is defintly good with the 2d6 attacks and 16" range

Great to know they work as written! I was sure there was going to be some hidden line I missed or something. Have any suggestions for loadouts on sentinels? I have 10 of them... I like sentinels.

It's worth remembering that it only works on 1 dice per weapon, so catachan has the biggest statistical impact on 1d6 weapons such as the battle cannon. It also works great on earthshakers and you should always re-roll the lowest. Wyvern feel being catachan the least.

 ChargerIIC wrote:

Razerous wrote:
So an assault 16 gun, str6 ap -1 isn't any good? (Hellhound)

Technically a Heavy 2d6 Str6 Ap -1 autohit weapon.

That being said it's an amazing threat when combined with it's armor and speed. It'll eat 3-5 MEQ a turn, which is just enough to force way more than 100pts to be dedicated to destroying it over a couple turns. It's the only fast attack option I've seen that actually flanks and does it well.

Rough riders flank well

 Captain Roderick wrote:

It's worth remembering that it only works on 1 dice per weapon, so catachan has the biggest statistical impact on 1d6 weapons such as the battle cannon. It also works great on earthshakers and you should always re-roll the lowest. Wyvern feel being catachan the least.

That is a great bit of info to remember, thank you! Should help the malcador infernus be properly terrifying!

 Captain Roderick wrote:

It's worth remembering that it only works on 1 dice per weapon, so catachan has the biggest statistical impact on 1d6 weapons such as the battle cannon. It also works great on earthshakers and you should always re-roll the lowest. Wyvern feel being catachan the least.

The Catachan doctrine actually does very little for Earthshakers. They benefit less than basically anything else that benefits at all. Even the 4d6 Wyvern does about 13% better with the doctrine, whereas an Earthshaker only does 11% better.

So question. What would the consensus be on using triple flamer vet squads in twin heavy flamer chimeras for anti infantry and objective grabbing?

gendoikari87 wrote:
So question. What would the consensus be on using triple flamer vet squads in twin heavy flamer chimeras for anti infantry and objective grabbing?

As long as the triple flamer vet squads have a heavy flamer in addition (so 4 flamers) and have a Catachan regiment keyword for to issue the "Burn them Out" order, that'd be pretty badass.

Though IMO the chimera is a bad transport for its price, I think the dual heavy flamer loadout is so on theme that you're golden.

Have your fast attack be Hellhounds, your elite choices be lascannon Command Squads (so you can actually kill tanks with something) and your heavy support be Malcador Infernuses, and then BURN EVERYTHING.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
So question. What would the consensus be on using triple flamer vet squads in twin heavy flamer chimeras for anti infantry and objective grabbing?

As long as the triple flamer vet squads have a heavy flamer in addition (so 4 flamers) and have a Catachan regiment keyword for to issue the "Burn them Out" order, that'd be pretty badass.

Though IMO the chimera is a bad transport for its price, I think the dual heavy flamer loadout is so on theme that you're golden.

Have your fast attack be Hellhounds, your elite choices be lascannon Command Squads (so you can actually kill tanks with something) and your heavy support be Malcador Infernuses, and then BURN EVERYTHING.

sir I like the way you think!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also plasmacutioners for anti tank anyone trying this since plasma vents took it down to a single mortal wound now? Point for point they're awesome .... also you can still fire them afterwards now

 gwarsh41 wrote:

 ChargerIIC wrote:

 gwarsh41 wrote:
Just getting into guard in 8th ed, and I wanted to double check on some clarification for the Catachan regiment, because it seems really, really awesome.

So re-rolling on flamers is pretty obvious, but then when I bring FW into it, I would get to re-roll the number of shots on a Earthshaker Carriage, or heavy quad launcher, as they both have the Vehicle and Regiment keywords.

An army filled with flamer scout sentinels, hellhounds and some artillery seems like a really good time.

Yeah, but even better is the wyvern (4d6 attacks, reroll to wound, 93pts)

The Leman Russ Battle Cannon (D6 attacks, AP-2)

I'm not certain flamer scount sentials are worth it since they can't use them in melee, but the hellhound is defintly good with the 2d6 attacks and 16" range

Great to know they work as written! I was sure there was going to be some hidden line I missed or something. Have any suggestions for loadouts on sentinels? I have 10 of them... I like sentinels.

Cheap, Multilaser or Flamethrower and use Scout ability to push Deep Strike off the rest of your units.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 Captain Roderick wrote:

It's worth remembering that it only works on 1 dice per weapon, so catachan has the biggest statistical impact on 1d6 weapons such as the battle cannon. It also works great on earthshakers and you should always re-roll the lowest. Wyvern feel being catachan the least.

The Catachan doctrine actually does very little for Earthshakers. They benefit less than basically anything else that benefits at all. Even the 4d6 Wyvern does about 13% better with the doctrine, whereas an Earthshaker only does 11% better.

The catachan doctrine has a smaller percentage increase in firepower when multiple dice are rolled, but more dice increases the raw increase in shots. Earthshakers prefer the cadian doctrine (barely), but 2d6 blasts love being catachan, because the odds of rolling low with at least one die go up, so that reroll is very handy. You can check my math here: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/3120/725440.page#9644878

The gist is that under catachan, d6s gain .72 shots, 2d6 drop the lowest gain .5 shots, and 2d6 gain 1.23 shots. This is roughly a 20% bump in firepower. The key is to compare it to the other two relevant doctrines: tallarn and cadian. Tallarn give a 50% boost to heavy weapons on the move, which is really only relevant to sentinels, hull and sponson weapons on the LRBT, the Devil Dog, and transports. None of those are generally seen as heavy lifters, except maybe for the LRBT (assuming lascannon/HBx2, A tallarn LRBT gains 1/6 lascannon hit and 1 HB hit per turn over any other tank moving, while the catachan LRBT would gain .36 Battle Cannon hits) The Doctrines are just powerful enough to shape what you take. IF you like hellhounds, anything with heavy flamers, bare bones LRBTS, manticores, or even basilisks, Catachan is the favorite. Tallan love fully loaded but mobile LRBTs (but not with heavy flamers), Tauroxes, Devil Dogs, and armored sentinels. Cadian love static LRBTs, basilisks, Wyvverns, hydras (who rarely need to move).

gendoikari87 wrote:
So question. What would the consensus be on using triple flamer vet squads in twin heavy flamer chimeras for anti infantry and objective grabbing?

Why not just use a pair of flamer special weapon squads or flamer equipped command squads for more flamers per transport, then have a follow up transport with an officer and vet squad rocking something like plasma/melta as a contingency plan?

Takes more vehicles but gives you more firepower on target and is harder to stop.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
So question. What would the consensus be on using triple flamer vet squads in twin heavy flamer chimeras for anti infantry and objective grabbing?

Why not just use a pair of flamer special weapon squads or flamer equipped command squads for more flamers per transport, then have a follow up transport with an officer and vet squad rocking something like plasma/melta as a contingency plan?

Takes more vehicles but gives you more firepower on target and is harder to stop.

have you been reading my mind? Cause I've been thinking just that....

While getting the slightly extra firepower seems good, I'm considering making my vehicle detachment Valhallan. Too often my Basilisks or Manticores take a couple d6 hits and, while not dead yet, are essentially useless and ignorable since hitting on 5+ or 6+ is such a huge disadvantage. Being able to mitigate that seems just as useful as getting a smidge more damage out of random shots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also do you think we should shift away from Artillery given that there are now so many sources of "-1 to hit when far away" doctrines?

Requizen wrote:
While getting the slightly extra firepower seems good, I'm considering making my vehicle detachment Valhallan. Too often my Basilisks or Manticores take a couple d6 hits and, while not dead yet, are essentially useless and ignorable since hitting on 5+ or 6+ is such a huge disadvantage. Being able to mitigate that seems just as useful as getting a smidge more damage out of random shots.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also do you think we should shift away from Artillery given that there are now so many sources of "-1 to hit when far away" doctrines?

Not really, if -1 invalidated artillery it would invalidate most of our other units as well.

Big thing to remember is that if they chose that strategy they lose out on more offensive firepower in the opening turns for a more consistent long game. Just like you've chosen to drop say cadia/catachan for valhallan, they've chose to drop things like Mars, Ultramarines, etc.

This means your battle will be a little bit more of a slugging match than just focusing on the alpha strikes. Not a huge amount obviously, aloha strikes are still king, but it'll be noticeable.

IG are meant to deal with stuff like this by weight of fire anyways, which is what we specialize in. The massive amount of blast weapons we have alone ensure that. Not to mention high rof weapons like punishers and FRFSRF, and aggressive close quarters fire like Stormtroopers, hellhounds, and potentially vets dropped from Valkyries.

Like any other army trait, -1 requires some forethought going in. It's not a lost battle, just a different one.

Well, from what I'm seeing Tauroxes wont benefit from any Doctrines save Tempestus one, as they dont have <REGIMENT> keyword.