Latest posts for the thread "Why the Hellhound Hate?"

Why the Hellhound Hate?

AdeptSister — GMT

While I know that the loss of range for the Hellhound is pretty bad, its still a good tank. And with the ability to squadron, you can do some serious damage. A squadron of 3 will get a LOT of hits, which can cripple a horde quickly. Even if they are really close to the enemy, they will likely wipe it out. Plus, they will draw AT from the russes and artillery.

So, why no love?

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Nofasse 'Eadhunta — GMT

It can put out hits, but it can't take hits.

pewpewpew.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Death By Monkeys — GMT

What Nofasse 'Eadhunta said. While you can take more of them, the squadron rules make them more fragile - immobilized results = destroyed, not to mention the fact that in a squadron you have to spread the hits around (although you can use this to your advantage in certain situations - like using cover against ranged attacks). The other problem is, that the Hellhound not only lost range, it went up in points.

The other issue is that, frankly, while the Hellhound isn't terrible like, say, Ogryns, there are enough things in the Fast Attack slot for a similar price (Valks w/ Missile Pods, Vendettas) that are much better than the Hellhound - consequently, the HH gets kinda left in the dust.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Lordhat — GMT

Having NOT seen a copy of the new dex yet, this is a surprise to me. Does one of the new LRBT variants ignore cover now? Just seems silly that SM's can do it with the Whirlwind, but the IG (who 'invented' the ranged cover denial tank) can't anymore.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Death By Monkeys — GMT

Yes, the Eradicator ignores cover - S6 AP4 36"-range pieplate, with standard Russ armor values - for only 30 points more than the Hellhound.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Lukus83 — GMT

I personally like the look of the poison hellhound, though I'm not so sure my MC's will like it as much.

Re:Why the Hellhound Hate?

Razerous — GMT

Get creed & an astropath

Give a squad of 2 banewolf hellhound vairents scouts, equip them with h.stubbers & h.flamers.

Outflank.

Wait a turn or three. Your weaker tanks arent being shot @ & enemy armor is being taken down but your variour weapons.....

Come in from a board egde of your choice & deicate basically any standard troop-type all while moving @ 12".
====

Got some cover-saving termies or oblits in cover? Get that plasma-gun/cannon/melta wielding infantry squad, open fire & use orders to force re-roll.

Im glad that orders can effect vehicles/mounted infantry as that would become overpowered x lots and lots.

(A hellhound can operate at longer ranges so wouldnt require outflanking to be completely effective & the same goes for the even longer range multi-taskable firefox thing (whatever its called).)

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Biophysic — GMT

Death By Monkeys wrote:Yes, the Eradicator ignores cover - S6 AP4 36"-range pieplate, with standard Russ armor values - for only 30 points more than the Hellhound.

Worth noting, however, is that the Hellhound is Fast, not competing for a Heavy Support choice (admittedly not as big a deal as it used to be), and always hits.

So basically, if you take a Hellhound, take it because you can do something with it's speed, and because it's reliable, not just because it's a template that ignores cover. So if you need a tank that can operate on the flanks and attack with extreme reliability, then the Hellhound is probably what you want. It can hose down an objective for several turns before running up to contest towards the end of the game.

I'm not sure if it would be worth the points, but that usage plays to the Hellhound's strengths.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Redbeard — GMT

Right, now it's competing for slots with Valkyries and Vendettas.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

ricekake87 — GMT

I paid a fair amount of cash for mine....so its going to be played whether I like it or not!!!!!

Re:Why the Hellhound Hate?

Ralzeki — GMT

Played a few games using the new codex and if used right banewolf is a realy nice +3sv squad killer. One game I killed an entire necron warrior squad with a single one and another game took out 2/3 of an 10 man assault squad and wounded his chap. The key is shield them or if you are up against assault armys keep them in reserve and watch the look on thier face when they reach your lines and they pop out and crush a squad .

Why the Hellhound Hate?

AdeptSister — GMT

Thanks for all the responses. I just looked at the GW website and realized for $13 more, I could get the Valk. Maybe with converted Chimeras.

I can just see a squadron of Hellhounds supported by some Tanks doing some serious damage. I mean, its one of the few weapons that auto-hits at range. That is pretty good.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Kasrkinlegion — GMT

Getting light tanks within' 12" of anything in 40k is instant death. The hellhound also doesn't have enough firepower to wipe people out. This is why hellhounds utterly suck now.

Vendettas on the other hand are great at keeping the hurt off and putting the hurt on for very similar points. Make Hellhounds a waste of time if you ask me...

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Iago — GMT

But hellhounds can move like no other... Granted the vendettas and valks are probably better, because of the whole "new model" syndrome. But being able to moe 12" and then foire up to another 12" with a good flamer is not too bad. And if you do get charged you are getting hit on 6es.

As for variants tho, the melta-cannon is just cool.

Re:Why the Hellhound Hate?

Ralzeki — GMT

Yes just about anything now adays can kill a a12 one but if used right they can cause alot of chaos. One of the best tactics with the new codex is take them as a squad of 2 with creed in your command. Give the unit scout with creeds special order if you have first turn pregame scout move them all out 18inch foward then turn 1 go 12 and burn out all the enemy range troops sitting in cover. Works very well and especially makes ork lootas cry

Re:Why the Hellhound Hate?

Kasrkinlegion — GMT

Ralzeki wrote:Yes just about anything now adays can kill a a12 one but if used right they can cause alot of chaos. One of the best tactics with the new codex is take them as a squad of 2 with creed in your command. Give the unit scout with creeds special order if you have first turn pregame scout move them all out 18inch foward then turn 1 go 12 and burn out all the enemy range troops sitting in cover. Works very well and especially makes ork lootas cry

They kill one unit, then you lose two KP's when they get slaughtered. Where you could have a valk getting KP's the whole game.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

willydstyle — GMT

Having seen the rules for the new hellhound, and having played against them, I can assure you that they do not "suck."

With the old hellhound rules the template had to be placed fully within 24" of the tank.

With the new rules, only the narrow end of the template has to be within 12", and the fat end has to be farther away from the tank than the narrow end, so you're looking at something that stretches up to 20" from the tank (as the flame template is 8" long) combine that with the fast movement, and the fact that it no longer has to roll to hit... and you're looking at a well-used FA slot, although I would not recommend putting them in a squadron.

Re:Why the Hellhound Hate?

BoxANT — GMT

Kasrkinlegion wrote:
Ralzeki wrote:Yes just about anything now adays can kill a a12 one but if used right they can cause alot of chaos. One of the best tactics with the new codex is take them as a squad of 2 with creed in your command. Give the unit scout with creeds special order if you have first turn pregame scout move them all out 18inch foward then turn 1 go 12 and burn out all the enemy range troops sitting in cover. Works very well and especially makes ork lootas cry

They kill one unit, then you lose two KP's when they get slaughtered. Where you could have a valk getting KP's the whole game.

Squadrons only give up 1 KP.

Hellhounds can still be effective, but they need to be used with care.

Either keep them back as a counter unit, or move them forward screened by other tanks/terrain.

But yeah, Valk with missile pods seems rather superior.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

LunaHound — GMT

Guys, semi OT question i have.

Will people have problem with using hell hound count as
for heavy flamer chimeras?

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Polonius — GMT

The hellhound is simply too expensive for what it does.

It's vulnerable when it gets into firing range and struggles to kill enough MEQs to make a difference. It competes with some genuinely good options in the Fast attack slot, which will likely be maxed by many if not most IG players. It's role (shooting light to medium infantry) is not a particularly rare or difficult role to fit. And finally, the IG can take nearly as many russ hulls or artillery as it wants.

I think it was priced overly conservatively, which while not uncommon in the new codex is still very annoying.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Polonius — GMT

LunaHound wrote:
Guys, semi OT question i have.

Will people have problem with using hell hound count as
for heavy flamer chimeras?

I can't imagine they would, if you didn't take any hellhounds, just Chimeras.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

LunaHound — GMT

Thanks, thats a breath of relief then xD
(dont like how fragile hellhound is , and take up sentinel / valkyrie slot when chimera is soooooo much cheaper and troop choice)

Why the Hellhound Hate?

willydstyle — GMT

Eh, my pathfinders are honestly just not scared of any of the other options that people are talking about using instead of Hellhounds. Cover saves are a big part of the metagame, so units that can deny them are very valuable.

I also think that a hellhound could see some good use agaisnt a ork player that is using a KFF to protect trukks. Str 6 against AV 10 open-topped is pretty decent, and it doesn't strike me as too hard to hit multiple trukks with one shot.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

LunaHound — GMT

Chimera with 2 heavy flamer cost 55 points while

hell hound with +1 str flamer costs 133.

some how it really doesny seem to be worth fielding ><

Why the Hellhound Hate?

willydstyle — GMT

LunaHound wrote:
Chimera with 2 heavy flamer cost 55 points while

hell hound with +1 str flamer costs 133.

some how it really doesny seem to be worth fielding ><

The chimera can only fire both heavy flamers if it doesn't move at all... which makes that pretty useless, and can only fire one heavy flamer if it moves up to 6".

The Hellhound can fire a flame template to hit things up to 20" away after it moves 12".

Heavy flamer chimeras don't really seem worth fielding...

Why the Hellhound Hate?

LunaHound — GMT

Sorry for asking , which page describe that mode of firing ? i cant find anything on p50

Do you mean that extra 12" you are allowed to place away from the fire point?

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Polonius — GMT

I don't think anybody would argue that there aren't times when the Hellhound is ideal. What I think we would argue is that those times are much less common than setting up across from a player with plague marines/deathwing/assault terminators/mech eldar, and realizing that if you ever actually shoot the inferno cannon you will probably lose your tank and accomplish very little.

The chemical cannon looks more interesting to me, if only because it's more generally useful and can still scoot around contesting.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

willydstyle — GMT

LunaHound wrote:Sorry for asking , which page describe that mode of firing ? i cant find anything on p50

Do you mean that extra 12" you are allowed to place away from the fire point?

The small end of the template has to be within 12" from the gun, and the template is 8" long. In the old version, the entire template had to be within 24", but with this version you only have to have the small end "in range."

It's honestly not that much lost range, and the fact that it auto-hits, and is mounted on a fast vehicle really makes up for it.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Polonius — GMT

willydstyle wrote:
LunaHound wrote:Sorry for asking , which page describe that mode of firing ? i cant find anything on p50

Do you mean that extra 12" you are allowed to place away from the fire point?

The small end of the template has to be within 12" from the gun, and the template is 8" long. In the old version, the entire template had to be within 24", but with this version you only have to have the small end "in range."

It's honestly not that much lost range, and the fact that it auto-hits, and is mounted on a fast vehicle really makes up for it.

Not to beat a dead horse, but there's no way to shoot the weapon against a canny opponent and not leave an enemy unit within 12" of your tank. That means that barring bad terrain rolls, they will be able to assault it. Sure, only being hit on 6's helps, but all it takes is one krak grenade to hit to make it so that the hellhound probably never fires again. It also gives an a extra assault move to an enemy squad that you may want to keep back longer.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

willydstyle — GMT

Polonius wrote:
willydstyle wrote:
LunaHound wrote:Sorry for asking , which page describe that mode of firing ? i cant find anything on p50

Do you mean that extra 12" you are allowed to place away from the fire point?

The small end of the template has to be within 12" from the gun, and the template is 8" long. In the old version, the entire template had to be within 24", but with this version you only have to have the small end "in range."

It's honestly not that much lost range, and the fact that it auto-hits, and is mounted on a fast vehicle really makes up for it.

Not to beat a dead horse, but there's no way to shoot the weapon against a canny opponent and not leave an enemy unit within 12" of your tank. That means that barring bad terrain rolls, they will be able to assault it. Sure, only being hit on 6's helps, but all it takes is one krak grenade to hit to make it so that the hellhound probably never fires again. It also gives an a extra assault move to an enemy squad that you may want to keep back longer.

You can easily hit a unit that is 13-19.5 inches away... the entire template does not have to be within 12". The small end has to be within 12" and the fat end just has to be farther from the tank than the small end. I believe the rules for the gun are in the actual army list section, rather than the unit description section of the codex, but I could be wrong. I read most of the codex, and the pertinent section several times over the weekend (played a friend using the new guard rules) and it's pretty clear that's how Hellhounds fire.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Polonius — GMT

Well, if that's the case than it's slightly better. I like that the IG finally have fast vehicle, and so I psyched about using my hellhounds, but I just can't think of a time I wouldn't rather have something else than a hound.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

willydstyle — GMT

Eh, as an Eldar player that relies on a unit of pathfinders to be one of my scoring units, hellhounds scare the piss out of me. Also, a unit can never gain a benefit from going to ground against a hellhound, which is really good against units from many armies:

Scouts from SM (or any unit that is in ruins reinforced by a tech marine)
Daemons from CSM
Most of the units in Codex: Daemons
Nearly any unit in the Ork codex.
Anything without a 3+ save in the Eldar codex.
Nearly anything from the Tyranid codex.
I'm sure there's more too, but I don't want to think of it right now

If I played Guard, I think my FA choices would be two hellhounds and a banewolf (the melta one... could be getting the name mixed up) but NOT in a squadron.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Polonius — GMT

willydstyle wrote:

If I played Guard, I think my FA choices would be two hellhounds and a banewolf (the melta one... could be getting the name mixed up) but NOT in a squadron.

I'm not trying to be a jerk, but the bolded phrase is the most important part of your post.

Guard aren't scared of eldar pathfinders. Sure, we'll lose 2-4 models a turn from them, and take a pinning check, but they'll fire all game and probably not earn their points back. Sure, they can sit on an objective, that's what deep striking squads with flamers (in the old codex) or veterans in Valks (in the new codex) are for!

Nobody wins by trying to out shoot guard. I'd rather have the mobility of the valk than the burning of the hellhound any day, to actually take the fight to the opponent.

Add in the colossus, which is the same price, admittedly as a heavy, but also ignores cover, and the poor hound keeps falling away. A barebones Valk with a SWS and three flamers is only 20pts more than a hellhound, more durable, faster, can scout, outflank, score, and can still take pot shots at vehicles with the hell strike missiles.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

willydstyle — GMT

I realize that guard aren't too afraid of the destructive power of pathfinders (although mine did kill a HH in the last game I played) but if you just let them sit on an objective in a Capture and Control or Seize Ground mission, or if you try to remove them with non-cover-save-denying means, then you're already fighting an uphill battle.

Also, a Valkyrie, since it's not a tank, will never, ever, ever be able to tank shock troops off of objectives.

Just because I'm not currently a guard player doesn't mean that I don't know their list and capabilities very well.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Kasrkinlegion — GMT

willydstyle wrote:Also, a Valkyrie, since it's not a tank, will never, ever, ever be able to tank shock troops off of objectives.

Who needs to tank shock models off objectives when a valk/vend has several large blast templates (one that ignores cover saves), heavy bolters, and lascannons to get them off objectives.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Biophysic — GMT

Kasrkinlegion wrote:
willydstyle wrote:Also, a Valkyrie, since it's not a tank, will never, ever, ever be able to tank shock troops off of objectives.

Who needs to tank shock models off objectives when a valk/vend has several large blast templates (one that ignores cover saves), heavy bolters, and lascannons to get them off objectives.

Cover? It's pretty much standard procedure to go to ground with a unit on an objective, so 3+ saves against everything on that list except the Vendetta's missile pods, and those are one use only, AP5 weapons. I see the Hellhound as the unit you have in your back pocket to contest the enemy objective that you can't get to otherwise. The low profile (compared to the skimmers) makes it a lot tougher to take down as you can get more plentiful cover saves and/or block line of sight totally. If someone wants to kill a skimmer, they will, the same cannot be said of the Hellhound.

Also, the Hellhound keeps fighting longer. An immobilized result leaves the skimmers weapons trapped in the 45 degree arc that they were in last turn. The Hound has a turret, so remains more flexible in target selection.

I think both are reasonable choices, I just don't think that you take a Valk/Vend every time over the Hellhound.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Polonius — GMT

willydstyle wrote:I realize that guard aren't too afraid of the destructive power of pathfinders (although mine did kill a HH in the last game I played) but if you just let them sit on an objective in a Capture and Control or Seize Ground mission, or if you try to remove them with non-cover-save-denying means, then you're already fighting an uphill battle.

Also, a Valkyrie, since it's not a tank, will never, ever, ever be able to tank shock troops off of objectives.

Just because I'm not currently a guard player doesn't mean that I don't know their list and capabilities very well.

My point with the valk comparison was that it can transport any unit, not just melta'd up vets. A SWS or PCS with flamers can ride in one very easily, and burn out pathfinders with ease. Running into stealthed light infantry holding objectives is something that will happen once every three games or so, and tkaing a 130 unti that struggles against other lists to deal with it is silly, when you can more easily field a solution with units that will already be in a take on all comers list (valks and flamer heavy squads). In addition, both the Eradicator and the Colossus ignore cover altogether as well, and they do so with longer range.

The hellhound simply suffers in comparison to the other units in the codex. It's harsh, but it's true.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Smashotron — GMT

What do you guys think of the Devil Dogs? Easily a waste of points or questionably decent unit?

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Polonius — GMT

Smashotron wrote:What do you guys think of the Devil Dogs? Easily a waste of points or questionably decent unit?

the latter. It has a roughly 24" threat range against AV14 (12" move + 12" of melta bonus), and will hit a landraider 1/3 of the time, and scatter but stay on a landraider roughly 45% of the time, for a pretty good chance of hitting. I'm not sure it's appreciably better than a PCS with four meltas in a chimera, but it has it's uses.

Why the Hellhound Hate?

Death By Monkeys — GMT

Polonius wrote:
Smashotron wrote:What do you guys think of the Devil Dogs? Easily a waste of points or questionably decent unit?

the latter. It has a roughly 24" threat range against AV14 (12" move + 12" of melta bonus), and will hit a landraider 1/3 of the time, and scatter but stay on a landraider roughly 45% of the time, for a pretty good chance of hitting. I'm not sure it's appreciably better than a PCS with four meltas in a chimera, but it has it's uses.

Having run the numbers to compare the PCS melta squad and the Devil Dog, the PCS melta squad is considerably better. However, a Devil Dog armed with a hull Multi-Melta is the best tank-killing vehicle the IG can field right now.