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!
I have played a few games with some sentinals...they seem effective in the right circumstances (especially the scout move). I had some people suggest putting H/K missiles on them...which is something I had not thought about before...guys at my store do not care...but WYSIWYG modelling of the H/K missiles...not sure I want to do that.
I have not seen a Hellhound in action. I understand its stats...seems like it could be a more effective alternative depending on the enemy army...and it has better armor.
Any thoughts on the trade offs between these two? Or...are fast attacks a waste of points...and should be substituted for more infantry and heavy weapons teams?
Thanks in advance...
it all depends i suppose, sentinels can be extremely effective anti armour especially when deep striking and hellhounds are brilliant for dealing with those horde armies whilst still keping a distance. depends on what you need really but to be honest a hellhound should be droped in favour of a leman russ at the first chance but i suppose if youve filled all your heavy support choices then its pritty good
Where there's a will there's a weapon
Sentinels are more versatile than hellhounds, in that you can equip them to either deal with armor or troops. Hellhounds on the other hand are strictly for troops (or rusty ork jalopies, if you can even classify them as "armor")Originally Posted by Die Staffel
I respect the hellhound a lot more than the sentinel, it has much better armor and at least double the firepower. Then again, I mostly play against orks, whom the hellhound is perfectly armed to deal with...
You should really try the hellhound. As for taking russes over hellhounds, they are pretty much the same thing except that russes are built for taking care of heavier troops. Really, all 3 choices are ideally suited for a different enemy: hellhounds, light hordes and some really light vehicles; russes, heavier troops and most vehicles; and sentinels, which can be fitted to deal with any foe, but are really only effective in sufficient numbers.
Tyranids: 2500 pts
Imperial Guard: 1000 pts
Witch Hunters: 1000 pts
I'd have to say that the Russ trumps either the Sentinel or the Hellhound in practically every regard.
The Russ is much more durable than either of the other two, and the battle cannon will engage any unit in the game better than either of the others' main weapons. The one exception would be a lascannon or multimelta Sentinel being a better tank-hunter, but the Russ has the option of a hull lascannon which puts it on equal footing.
Between the Sentinel and the Hellhound, the Sentinel is only theoretically more versatile. That is, the Sentinel is only more flexible when it's sitting in the codex, before you choose its equipment and put it on the table. Once you commit to a configuration, it becomes a single-purpose vehicle (with the exception of a heavy flamer or multilaser variant with an H-K; although this version is equal as a tank-hunter and less effective as a troop-killer than an H-K equipped Hellhound).
I'd have to opt for the Russ over either of the other two, except when facing an opponent that shreds armor (like Tau), in which case anti-armor Sentinels get the edge. As much as I like the Hellhound, they only really make sense if you don't have enough points for a Russ or have filled your heavy slots. The Russ has too many advantages (armor value, range, template size, ordnance, strength, flexible hull and sponson configs).
This depends on situation. Sentinel is a proffesional harass unit. I can be a great pain for an enmy with heavy armor to get his units blaster to pices with suchj a quick and lethal unit like sentinel. Its fast, lightly armored and packs a powerful weapon. used mostly to annoy the enemy and distract fire from the rest of your army, very good vs swarms if you give it heavy flamers. Deadly against tanks when equiped with lascannon while autocannon and multilaser take down heavy infantry. I dont think HKs are worth it, they are really expensive when it comes to some stupid crack missile
Hellhounds are a lot different from sentinels. It houses the inferno cannon which is death for anything with armor less then 3+, its performance is godly against swarms but relatively horrible against powerful foes like necrons. Hellhound is descently armed so it can withstand a few punches before going down. Also hellhound is the best unit when it comes to city fight as well as harlequins wich get no cover save vs its inferno canon.
Both units are good but used in different times. Picking one of them depends on the battle circumstances.
Sentinels are an excellent addition to an already armour heavy force... and any armour heavy force should contain a hellhound.
However, unless you're playing a drop troop army or an armour heavy force I would leave the Sentinels at home. In an all drop troop army they are your only option when it comes to firing lascannons on the turn you land and in an armour heavy force the ability to move and will let your other tanks move more freely because then they don't have to worry as much about blocking line of for your fireline.
But then, if you're got an armour heavy force, you should also have a Hellhound. If you don't play drop troops or an armour heavy force, I'd go for the Hellhound. It fits in better in any other type of guard army much better methinks. I assure you, if you get a hellhound you'll learn to love it. It's a wonderful tank that no guard commander should be without.
I love the hellhound, here's why:
The inferno cannon is brilliant, and what makes it even better is that if you mount a heavy stubber and have a hull mounted heavy bolter, they can still shoot. That's 6 shots AND the inferno cannon. And you know what? That's pretty sweet. The inferno cannon is death to hoarde armies (especially guard, this insta kills anything we've got to offer, with no save possible) but it's strong enough that it can still consistantly wound marines on a 2+. And once they bunch up, it's quite easy to land 5 or 6 wounds, some of which are going to fail their saves. And the inferno cannon's best feature is that EVEN IF IT MISSES, IT STILL CAN HIT! That is awesome! And it's a blast to remind your opponents when they sigh with relief when you rolled a 3 to hit with the ic. Because it's a flame weapon, there are no partials to be rolled for, everybody's in on it, which is just delicious.
With all that, I see no reason to not take at least one in each guard army. I mean, why not? And they still get 6 shots after the cannon? Compared to a sentinel squadron, I think this would do much more damage. And if you wanted sentinels with heavy flamers, you have absolutely no reason to pick them over the hellhound.
Don't forget that you can take both... these aren't mutually exclusive. If you're only got 1 fast attack slot left then consider taking a sentinel squadron as part of your HQ and then the hellhound as your fast attack choice.
Of course, the best use of the fast attack slots, imho, is the following: 10 rr's with lances, 1 hellhound, and 10 seraphim w/ meltabombs, but that's a whole 'nother discussion right there
Last edited by Ubernyaw; April 4th, 2006 at 21:50.
"And any man who comes through this fight mostly unharmed will be my sister! It'll be free frocks and jollies for ever, you'll see!"
- Rome: Total War
9th Black Watch (Imperial Guard) 4000 points
Red Corsairs of Khorne 2000 points
Space Wolves 13th Company 2000 points
Some very good responses here, so not too much to add.
You should only take either of them if you already have a couple of Russes already in the force to draw fire, but a smart Tau, Eldar, Nids or IG player will kill the Hellhound first, as it is that good against those armies.
Even against Meq armies the Hellhound will get a lot more more wounds than a Leman will, (but they can be saved).
If you don't have adequate amounts of HWs in your infantry (Platoons, Veterans or HW squads), or your prefer mobile HWs then you NEED to have Sentinals. The trick is to keep them by more attractive "tragets" (like a Russ) and then they last better. I'm not a fan of deep stiking them, except for the Heavy Flamer version.
Neither is better or worse, but both need to picked with the right mix of other weapons to be made effective and usefull.
"A love for tradition has never weakened a nation, indeed it has strengthened nations in their hour of peril."
Sir Winston Churchil
well i personaly like the sentinals because:
1. it fits with my special infintry force
2. it's very useful to deepstrike behind enemy lines and even better when they have lascannons
3. they look cool
This pretty much sums up why the hellhound is a good deal. Sometimes my ordnance does amazing things, one game against my SM friend I got direct hits with EVERY ordnance shot I fired... but that was just once. Some games my ordnance does horribly, and I wonder if it's really all that much better than BS3.Originally Posted by Ubernyaw
So, the hellhound sacrifices power for accuracy, which is a nice option to have. Also, it's a little cheaper in case you don't want to go full-blown tanks.
Tyranids: 2500 pts
Imperial Guard: 1000 pts
Witch Hunters: 1000 pts