Welcome to Librarium Online!
Join our community of 80,000+ members and take part in the number one resource for Warhammer and Warhammer 40K discussion!
Registering gives you full access to take part in discussions, upload pictures, contact other members and search everything!
Lets presume that one is intending to take a squad of terminators, an hq choice in terminator armour, and a land raider in one army list. Normally this is a scoring heavy support choice, a scoring elites choice, and a non-scoring hq choice. However, it can also be combined into one scoring HQ choice.
The question is, is it worth it? It is undeniably an advantage to be able to deploy heavy support choices later in the deployment scheme, but is it worth both tying your Commander to your terminator squad as well as losing the Land Raider as a scoring unit?
The first disadvantage, making the terminator squad a dedicated retinue, thus limiting the protection as well as the usefulness of your commander, doesn't seem like too much of a downfall, as you don't actually lose that much, and space marine commanders are pretty good wherever they are on the board (well, the Captains and Masters anyway) and your terminators are likely to end up in the thick of things anyway.
The second disadvantage seems worse, since losing a scoring unit altogether is never good (especially one as resilient as a Land Raider), but since it is the land raider whose perfomance is being increased (by being able to deploy later) it seems like less of an issue.
So what do you think? Is the HQ choice land raider better than the Heavy Support Land Raider or not?
I don't like putting terminators in Land Raiders for two very simple reasons.
1. Your opponent is going to shoot every heavy weapon he has at your land raider until it's destroyed. That's a lot of points being shot at, say 265 for a LRC plus around 300+ for the command squad.
2. With the new rules, it can be very dangerous to ride in a transport. If the tank takes a penetrating hit, you have to get out and have a chance of being pinned. Also, there's a 50/50 chance of taking wounds. That means that the enemy can possibly kill a 265pt tank and kill a few terminators also with one shot. The first time this happened to me, I lost 3 of my 5 terminators, yes I rolled three out of six 1's.
My opinion is if you are going to put termies in a land raider, you need to do two things.
1. Get the first turn (venerable dreadnought for the rerole)
2. Get the raider across the table as soon as possible and deliver the terminators. Oh, and they really ought to be lightning claw termies, or else there's no point.
Well, Jaileint, luckily your concern is not even terribly relevant to the discussion at hand . Just because you bring a landraider as an attached transport for a terminator command squad does not, in any way, require you to ever have those terminators actually in the Land Raider.
Anyway, the question wasn't 'should the landraider be used to haul around a termi command squad'.
Rather, the question was, 'is the benifit of deploying your landraider in the HQ position in the deployment order worth scrunching your HQ and Termis together and having the Landraider not be a scoring unit.'
I'd agree with you that actually having them ride in the thing will very rarely be valuable.
The main disadvantage of taking a LR as a dedicated transport is that it can no longer pick up any other units. In a game where your oponent does not have the necessary firepower to easilly take it down, the best ability of the LR is to fery your units around.
I would never think of fielding one in anything less then a 2k game if not larger as the point sink into a single target is a gamble you dont want to take. You shoudl only take them as part of your HQ if you have already used up all your heavy slots.
Mentor of Space Marine Commanders far and wide.
Efficiency VS Point Cost VS Ease Of Use - Your best bets:
1) Chaplain led Assault squad - 2 plasma pistols, powerfisted sergeant
2) 8 man Devastator squad - 4 missile launchers
3) Land Speeder Tornado - HB + AC
Yes, and if you take them, FOR GOD'S SAKE MAKE SURE YOU KILL ALL THE ENEMY'S LASCANNONS!
They are not that useful (from my limited experience) at transporting troops around, I use them for two reasons: One) they can kill anything relatively easily, Two) they scare the crap out of the enemy and absorb almost all their fire for a turn or six. If they stay alive taking all the hits then they're not so bad (so you can wreak havoc with your other troops). I wouldn't use them as a transport in a normal game, but possibly in a huge multi-detachment force I would consider it. All in all I'd keep them as a firing platform and fire absorber (Everyone thinks of them as the ultimate power and throws all their guns at them but they really can't kill that much in a turn (7 with a PM storm bolter).
Umm... lascannons aren't really the worst thing that a Land Raider can be exposed to. Tau railguns are far worse than lascannons, since if they achieve a glancing hit then they auto-penetrate. Lance weapons are murder for the Land Raider as well. Ordnance of at least strength 8 with a hefty amount of range is also a threat. EMP grenades, haywire grenades, meltabombs, and tankbusta bombz all stand a fairly good chance of turning a Land Raider into salvage yard scraps. Monsterous creatures are heinously effective against it, especially the 'Nid Carnifex. Necrons can, with a little lucky rolling, wreck a Land Raider with just the basic Warrior or a swarm of Scarabs. I seriously see no reason to take a Land Raider or any of its varients in any game short of a mega-battle. Of course, that's just my oppinion.Originally Posted by The Forum Idiot