You are Here:

+-

Ordnance Battery, not used much?

Author (Read 1139 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« on: July 28, 2010, 11:26:56 AM »
 

Elmacos

  • Newbie
  • *
  • 5
    Posts
  • Country: 00
  • Thatīs how we roll!
    • Awards
Hello forum,
first post from a new player to IG.

I have read the forum for a while now and I have tried to find any thread discussing the use of the different units in the ordnance battery but found nothing. The army lists also seems to fielding few if any of these units, my question is why? Are they just not good value for points?

So, in short, when would you use them and what type of army list benefits the most from them. ( Thats the list I am aiming for)
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #1 on: July 28, 2010, 03:21:35 PM »
 

evileyevirtue

  • Member
  • ***
  • 705
    Posts
  • Tastes like chicken...
    • Awards
Right now I'm using manticores... because they're awesome.  The choices in the Ord Batt aren't bad at all, and you can get 9 basalisks or what have you on the field, which is one hell of a battery.  I was thinking about adding some basalisks to my force, they aren't that bad.

You're not going to see a whole lot because these days people are taking lots of mech.  Might as well have something that can move around and shoot as well.  Plus, with the valks running around, they're an amazing option as well.
Friends don't let friends play Dark Eldar :)

Visit my BLOG!!!
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #2 on: July 28, 2010, 03:35:38 PM »
 

Bert_the_Turtle

  • Major
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • 2623
    Posts
  • Country: us
  • Rule #1: Pillage THEN burn.
    • Awards
Artillery is a great addition to infantry heavy forces. They need to be guarded and high numbers of infantry do it quite well. And an all or mostly infantry army lacks long range punch; you need to intice the enemy into coming into range of your infantry and having artillery doesn't give them an option; either they silence the arty or they get blasted off the board piece by piece trying to hidw.

An artillery heavy list (say three squadrons of two artillery pieces) packs a huge whallop but needs infantry to protect them. You're putting 80% of your offense in one fragile basket.


Artillery can be devastating and it can make a good addition to many lists. But its drawbacks means it needs more thought than throwing a battle tank into your list.

"You know the other team is f'd when we're using military hand signals to communicate  :P" -My Buddy Himitsu
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #3 on: July 28, 2010, 04:01:10 PM »
 

Elmacos

  • Newbie
  • *
  • 5
    Posts
  • Country: 00
  • Thatīs how we roll!
    • Awards
Of course if you could find place for 9 Basilisks then I assume that we are talking about a large point battle and all that Barrage is bound to hit a lot of models. ;)
Maybe I should rephrase my question.
Would you take a Basilisk instead of a Leman Russ for instance ( About the same points value and same gun).
Is the Basilisk and the other mortars a point sink compared to the tanks.

Which of the Ordnance Battery models is best?
Is the Manticore a better artillery unit? ( Who expects to shoot more than 4 times with artillery anyway?)
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #4 on: July 28, 2010, 04:01:30 PM »
 

Blazinghand

  • Master of the Ravenwing
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Member
  • *
  • 557
    Posts
  • Die for the Emperor or die trying!
    • Awards
I consider the Medusa to be a powerful medium-range vehicle. I don't own or use any, but just looking at the stat block and the (relatively) low price, I could see this tearing holes in many armies. I imagine a potential army as a wall of AV 12- mechanized units in Chimeras backed up by a hellhound or two, hydras, and a couple medusae.
Quote from: Howard Zinn
There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.
Old School.
2000 pts of mobile Eldar.
Imperial Guard a work in progress.
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #5 on: July 28, 2010, 04:48:09 PM »
 

evileyevirtue

  • Member
  • ***
  • 705
    Posts
  • Tastes like chicken...
    • Awards
Using a ordinance piece instead of a Russ is going to come down to preference.  If you have a mech type list, the russ would probably fit better as it's more mobile.  The arty, like Bert said, is great for heavy infantry lists.  So it depends on what a person likes more and what kind of list they are running.

As to which piece is best... that depends.  Really it's a balance of range vs. power and what you're willing to compromise to and what you think you're firing at.  I like the manticores right now, but like I said, I've been thinking about picking up a basalisk.
Friends don't let friends play Dark Eldar :)

Visit my BLOG!!!
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #6 on: July 28, 2010, 05:39:06 PM »
 

Underhand

  • Captain : Godfather of the Hivegangers
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • 1348
    Posts
  • Country: 00
    • Awards
I think one of the reasons that artillery pieces aren't seen as often as Russes is that they don't allow for the same flexibility of play. 

While a Russ can move about the battlefield, either taking the fight up to the enemy or hanging back and unloading with all of its guns, always ready to change position to deal with threat developments, there just aren't all that many different ways to use a Basilisk.  It basically sits there, with it's suppoting infantry squad dropping a template every turn on t's target of choice.

That's not to say that Artillery aren't effective (Manticore's are monsters), just that they don't offer the same variation in gameplay styles as other options.  By taking Artillery, you kind of commit yourself to playing a particular style of play (gunline) in a way that probably no other choice in the codex does.  It's easy to get bored doing the same thing in every game.

That's just me though - I'm sure other peple think differently, and aren't wrong to do so.
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #7 on: July 28, 2010, 06:58:34 PM »
 

Kedolan

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • 176
    Posts
  • Country: us
    • Awards
The main reason I chose a LR over a Basilisk, is the range/armor issue. To be able to fire indirectly, it has a very large deadzone, which I think I'd have trouble keep enemies out of. If it's firing directly, then that means the enemy can fire back, and I'd much rather have the AV 14 of a LR to the 12 of a Basilisk, as if nothing else it'll get shaken to easily, preventing it from dealing out the hurt. If GW still made models for the griffon I'd probably field a unit of 2-3 of those, but I don't have the cash to shell out for FW ones, and I don't think I could convert a convincing heavy mortar to put on a Basilisk body, myself.
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #8 on: July 28, 2010, 07:10:19 PM »
 

Underhand

  • Captain : Godfather of the Hivegangers
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • 1348
    Posts
  • Country: 00
    • Awards
If you want a Griffon, all you have to do is cut the barrel off the basilisk and it looks like a griffon.  A few guys at my local store have done it.  Without the long barrel, it just doesn't look like a basilisk anymore.
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #9 on: July 28, 2010, 07:35:56 PM »
 

Paraplegic

  • Captain
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Trade Count: (1)
  • Senior Member
  • *
  • 1950
    Posts
  • Country: us
    • Awards
Too many ways for an opponent to disrupt a static element these days. Whether it be drop pods, outflankers or just a really big bug (Mawloc). Russes are not only more mobile but they have a higher AV, otherwise I'd run a bassie but for the bassies stay on the shelf for now. I actually like the limited ammo option for the Manticore for that. Cause provide less of a psychological threat.
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #10 on: July 28, 2010, 07:42:04 PM »
 

McNulty

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • 196
    Posts
    • Awards
Russes are not only more mobile but they have a higher AV, otherwise I'd run a bassie but for the bassies stay on the shelf for now.

Why not mix artillery in with the russes? You can use the Russes' armor and closer range firepower to help protect the artillery, while the artillery lay down suppressing fire to help your force advance.
"'Mr. Bond, they have a saying in Chicago:
     "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Third time it's enemy action.
  Miami, Sandwich, and now Geneva. I propose to wring the truth out of you. Oddjob, The Pressure Room.'" -Goldfinger
Why are you using the 'enter' key instead of punctuation? It's a little hard to follow your post.
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2010, 08:09:28 PM »
 

Hymirl, Space Machine!

  • 40KO's Care Bear of Spite | Dolphin Death Dealer | 40K Oracle
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • 10574
    Posts
  • Country: gb
  • Str 4, AP 5, Assault 1, Template
    • The Bristol Vanguard Wargaming Club
    • Awards
I think the main problem is defence, a squadron of artillery is a high value target, its also has a large footprint meaning that its near impossible to hide, difficult to protect from assaults and the low armour values put it in danger of enemy firepower.
The advantage of the single manticore is that you're only trying to hide one vehicle.

Ultimately the biggest killer of the artillery in normal games is that your opponent's army is set up roughly 24" away, so why am I paying for the other 216" of range on my earthshaker cannon if I'm unlikely to use any of it? Secondly it means things like lascannons in the enemy army are generally in range to shoot back...

If you're planning on standing around trading fire with people then you're better off with a battletank I'm afraid. The additional advantage the Russ has is that it helps a mechanised army by acting as a bullet magnet, it can often take the hits that would leave troops' chimeras demobilised and ineffective.
Rules Expert 2007 | Kijayle Commemorative Award for Acid Wit 2008 | Most Notoriously Valuable Rules Expert 2009

http://www.bristolvanguard.co.uk
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2010, 09:11:26 PM »
 

Sheepz

  • Marshal: The beatings will continue until discipline improves!
  • Ancient
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • 7158
    Posts
  • Country: 00
  • Getting away with murder.
    • Awards
Hello forum,
first post from a new player to IG.

I have read the forum for a while now and I have tried to find any thread discussing the use of the different units in the ordnance battery but found nothing. The army lists also seems to fielding few if any of these units, my question is why? Are they just not good value for points?

So, in short, when would you use them and what type of army list benefits the most from them. ( Thats the list I am aiming for)

Hymirl made some brilliant points. I have one slight crevat from the established wisdom of the boards, in that I use paired - battery if you like - Griffons. They're already an underrated tank, but I get two for the price of most other IG heavy support, and their low danger profile against the tougher armies makes them a low target profile. Its very much a case of stat-hammer playing to your advantage here. If it isn't S8 AP3, quite  a few armies don't care. And thats where you capitalise laying down the suppression. Of course, against people like Eldar and Orks they have a different target priority. A griffon becomes just as dangerous as a basilisk or a main battle tank against T3 4+ armies. But power armour often makes the mistake of targetting something else, which is probably, to be honest, better at destroying them. While not as efficent, the griffons can plug away with  relative impunity and will do damage which I feel makes them a valuable asset to fixed list games. Of course, I'm totally against Squadrons wherever possible becuase of the immobalized rules and fixed fire, but they're cheap and if you want to save those heavy slots fo a demolsiher, there is no shame in grouping Griffons.
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #13 on: July 29, 2010, 08:40:55 AM »
 

Spectral Arbor

  • Major
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • 2597
    Posts
  • Country: ca
    • Awards
Well, points to points a pair of griffons beats a colossus vs marines.

Assuming that a "hit" from a template causes 6 hits, a colossus would wound 5 times. It pushes all wounds through. However, you'd only hit 1/3 of the time, so on a given shot would cause an average of 1.66 wounds. If you could fire for 6 turns, you'd output about 10 wounds in a game vs MEQ.

Assuming the same 6 hits, a griffon would wound 5 times, and MEQ's save would reduce that to 1.666 wounds, and a griffon "hits" 55% of the time thanks to "Accurate Bombardment", for an average of .926 wounds per turn. However, with two griffons you get two shots per turn, causing 1.852 wounds per turn. If allowed to fire for 6 turns that adds up to 11.112 wounds per game.

That's more than 10% increase in casualties for less than 10% more points. Vs non MEQ, the math gets better, especially if they're in the open. Additionally, the colossus is only likely to cause two pinning checks per game, while the griffons should cause 6.6 pinning checks, if you wound with each hit.

If you can afford an extra 10 pts, you get a much more reliable set of weaponry, with a more useful range of fire. Should the enemy close to less than the Griffon's minimum range, move up with a heavy flamer! :)

To the point of the original question, the above answers are correct. You need to have an infantry blob kept back to protect an ordinance battery, which is stuck in place and can't fire the turn it moves onto the field, such as in a DoW deployment type. I think the Griffon, for sure, is points efficient as you can kill a squad of marines with them in a game. I try to include at least one Griffon in every game, as I've converted a basilisk by removing the shield, shortening the barrel and removing the underslung sights [?]. If you play a balanced army, including them isn't tough as you'll already have some infantry hanging back as part of your static elements. You might have a tough time including more than a single griffon if you're also including a russ though.

For myself, I always try to fire a pie plate at an infantry squad. With readily available cover, the improved AP of the Basilisk is often negated, in my experience. As such, the Griffon still wounds on 2+, gets an extra "Hit" per game, and is about 60% of the points cost, if I recall [no codex handy].

To the best of my knowledge, a single Griffon can be added to any squadron of "Barrage" tanks. It's Accurate Bombardment rule can be used to help ensure the rest of the weapons are more accurate if you fire it first, as the remaining templates get placed touching the first shot or even on top of it. Think of it as a Pask upgrade for barrage, except it can kill things on it's own. :)

I haven't tried the other barage tanks, and I haven't run the math on them yet, so I don't have a valuable opinion on them.
« Last Edit: July 29, 2010, 10:41:36 AM by GreatBigTree »
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #14 on: July 29, 2010, 11:07:42 AM »
 

Bert_the_Turtle

  • Major
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • 2623
    Posts
  • Country: us
  • Rule #1: Pillage THEN burn.
    • Awards
Isn't your math based on the assumption that any shot that scatters hits nothing? If a shot scatters 7 inches, the most likely outcome of 2d6, you might still hit something.


Also you're ignoring the non-mechanical benefits of the Colossus. A Marine player isn't going to look at it and go "He's not going to hit that often." He's going to say "I need to kill that damn thing or its gonna blast me off the board because I can't save against it." The latter is what you want him to say in a infantry heavy army because you need him moving foreward into your firing range not hiding in the back waiting for you to come to him.

"You know the other team is f'd when we're using military hand signals to communicate  :P" -My Buddy Himitsu
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #15 on: July 29, 2010, 11:28:15 AM »
 

Spectral Arbor

  • Major
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • 2597
    Posts
  • Country: ca
    • Awards
I agree that I've used an all or nothing system in this example.

That said, if a colossus scatters, and then only hits 3 models, so could a griffon. However, if a colossus scatters 7 inches and hits nothing, a griffon could reroll and hopefully get a better result. I guess what I'm saying is that both can scatter and still hit someting, but a griffon is more likely, even if it scatters, to hit "something" and thus generate more casualties.

If I were a marine player, I'd be more concerned with a pair of griffons. As I demonstrated, they're a more dangerous threat, so I'd still want to run forward and kill them.

As an asside, you could deploy two Griffons on opposite sides of a board to make them that much more survivable. A colossus has all eggs in one basket, one vehicle destroyed and it's all over. Two Griffons on opposite edges, out of sight means an opponent must commit resources to two locations, dividing his forces and making for easier destruction of his army.
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #16 on: July 30, 2010, 04:09:02 PM »
 

Hymirl, Space Machine!

  • 40KO's Care Bear of Spite | Dolphin Death Dealer | 40K Oracle
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • 10574
    Posts
  • Country: gb
  • Str 4, AP 5, Assault 1, Template
    • The Bristol Vanguard Wargaming Club
    • Awards
The latter is what you want him to say in a infantry heavy army because you need him moving foreward into your firing range not hiding in the back waiting for you to come to him.

Surely you're having a joke? If someone wants to stand 48" away and have a gunfight with an IG army they're welcome to try it any day of the week, its going to end in tears, and not for the guard... :D

That said, if a colossus scatters, and then only hits 3 models, so could a griffon. However, if a colossus scatters 7 inches and hits nothing, a griffon could reroll and hopefully get a better result. I guess what I'm saying is that both can scatter and still hit someting, but a griffon is more likely, even if it scatters, to hit "something" and thus generate more casualties.

Additionally the second template vastly increases the number of hits you're likely to get. And its worth mentioning the resistance to damage, a single shaken or stunned results (or a weapon/vehicle destroyed naturally) with totally prevent a single colossus from harming the enemy next turn... against a griffon squadron firepower is halved but they're still in the fight!
Rules Expert 2007 | Kijayle Commemorative Award for Acid Wit 2008 | Most Notoriously Valuable Rules Expert 2009

http://www.bristolvanguard.co.uk
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #17 on: July 30, 2010, 04:25:32 PM »
 

Blazinghand

  • Master of the Ravenwing
  • Lazerous Penguin
  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Member
  • *
  • 557
    Posts
  • Die for the Emperor or die trying!
    • Awards
And its worth mentioning the resistance to damage, a single shaken or stunned results (or a weapon/vehicle destroyed naturally) with totally prevent a single colossus from harming the enemy next turn... against a griffon squadron firepower is halved but they're still in the fight!

It's also worth noting that if you immobilize a single Colossus it doesn't give an amphetamine parrot. Against a Griffon squadron, however, immobilization is an entirely different story.
Quote from: Howard Zinn
There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.
Old School.
2000 pts of mobile Eldar.
Imperial Guard a work in progress.
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #18 on: July 30, 2010, 06:00:43 PM »
 

Bert_the_Turtle

  • Major
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • 2623
    Posts
  • Country: us
  • Rule #1: Pillage THEN burn.
    • Awards
The latter is what you want him to say in a infantry heavy army because you need him moving foreward into your firing range not hiding in the back waiting for you to come to him.

Surely you're having a joke? If someone wants to stand 48" away and have a gunfight with an IG army they're welcome to try it any day of the week, its going to end in tears, and not for the guard... :D

That said, if a colossus scatters, and then only hits 3 models, so could a griffon. However, if a colossus scatters 7 inches and hits nothing, a griffon could reroll and hopefully get a better result. I guess what I'm saying is that both can scatter and still hit someting, but a griffon is more likely, even if it scatters, to hit "something" and thus generate more casualties.

Additionally the second template vastly increases the number of hits you're likely to get. And its worth mentioning the resistance to damage, a single shaken or stunned results (or a weapon/vehicle destroyed naturally) with totally prevent a single colossus from harming the enemy next turn... against a griffon squadron firepower is halved but they're still in the fight!



You're assuming an open board. We need the enemy coming into our killing zone. We don't want to have to go in and root them out from behind some giant LoS blocking terrain. Or digging them out of bunkers. A static gunline army only works if the enemy has to come to you. And with most of the missions being holding objectives, they might very well not have to. The presence of artillery, particularly the really damaging stuff, means they don't get to sit there and force us to come out and shift them off of their objectives. We can blast them off!

"You know the other team is f'd when we're using military hand signals to communicate  :P" -My Buddy Himitsu
 

Re: Ordnance Battery, not used much?
« Reply #19 on: July 30, 2010, 07:51:46 PM »
 

Spectral Arbor

  • Major
  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • 2597
    Posts
  • Country: ca
    • Awards
To Blazinghand,

Unless you've got two other HS choices, you don't need to deploy in a squadron. Like I mentioned, setting up on opposite sides of the board is a viable option.

As you've hopefully set up out of LOS, by the time someone can target your barragers you're likely getting hit with either MG's or PF's... and immobilized may as well be "destroyed".

In previous editions, half of your points would often be spent on HS as everything else sucked. Now, there's great choices everywhere but elites. :)

At 1500 points, I've never taken more than 3 HS tanks, so I've never had to make squadrons.
 

 


Powered by EzPortal

Facebook Comments