My God! Was using it actually worth it or a mistake in hindsight?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I sued it every time i play (ok that is not often ) and once i was able to use its special abilty to success.

But else: It has brutal AP firepower

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

So a salamanders game next week.

Thoughts for the almost finished list.

Salamander Land Raiders
The normal Land Raider but with the extra Multi Melta they can now take. Not a replacement for the standard raider, but instead of the upgrade raider. Prob cost 85 points each.

Land Raider Redemer instead of crusaders.
Move 25cm, 4+RA TRA, FF2+, CC5+
Twin assault cannon 30cm AP4+/AT4+
2x Flamestorms 15cm AP3+ Ignore cover, FF Ignore cover
Multi melta 15cm MW5+, FF MW
Frag Launchers CC

Salamander infantry
Still undecided.
Which is better?
Devs 2xMM, MWFF4+ 2 for 100
Tacs MM, MWFF5+ 2 for 75
OR
Devs 2xMM, MWFF3+ 2 for 125
Tacs MM, MWFF4+ 2 for 100

The first lot are cheaper and encourage larger formations a bit more, but aren't that hot. THe second do pack more of a punch but would cost more. Currently I use the MM guys in front to take the first casualties as they are less effective than the regular troops. With the more expensive ones I guess the extra cost on air transports would have to come down, but would this then encourage them to be an air assault army which they are not supposed to be more than anormal marine force?

Oh and one last idea, should the Helios upgrade be for 1, 1-2, 1-3, or any number of units?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I'd rather use the Helios in units of 4 (like Whirlwinds), but that's me.

_________________
"For the Lion and the Emperor!"

With some random changes the list could look like this.

And after reading the marine change thread again are vindis still not worth it? Doesn't really matter here, you should be taking the pred instead! Also the scout upgrade may cost to much - is 200 or 225 right for four scouts with 30cm AP5+ Sniper?

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I Prefere Land Raider Helios as a 0-1 upgrade per formation. They add a bit more punch to a Land Raider Detachment but i don`t see the need for a heavy armoured artillery Detachment for the Salamanders. The already have Whirlwinds (which could have Ignore Cover on their Whirlwind Launchers).

I'm yet undecided about the FF-value of the Salamanders MM-infantry. But i tend to higher cost and better FF as they seldom hit anything in an assault.

A pure Hunter Detachment??? 4-6 Hunters in it?

The Terminators can take 6 Salamanders Land Raiders???

_________________
We are returned!
http://www.epic-wargaming.de/

In both cases yes - but the hunter formation would be 450 points. But is it worth it? Against air assaults it would cover your army if deployed over a diameter of 90cm, less if they are FF assaulters (80cm) and against shooting attacks its 60cm vs 30cm and 30cm vs 45cm. Of course el hunter lot could go, they were only there as an alternate way to pick whirlwinds and hunters! (Based on comments from a couple of wargamers who had bought only one pack each! ).
And the Terminator formation would then cost 870 points (effectively 875) for the 6 land raiders and 4 terminators who carry remember heavy flamers. And have no hunter (with a hunter they would cost 860 points (so still effectively 875). Thats a formation where half the firepower is at 15cm and its got a speed of 25cm.
More effective would be a lander, assault marines and armoured terminators. But here that costs 400 + 200 + 700 = 1300 points (half the army) for an assault of 8 CC3+, 10 CCMW3+, 4 FF3+, 6 FFMW4+ (8 normal hits and 9 2/3 MW hits and two chaplains). Hopefully it wouldn't get shot down!
But even so its a formation with a real mix of firing types (and ranges) and quite expensive as a formation to fight assaults, I'm not sure even as an air assault formation it could work that well beyond the first shock and awe attack (being down to just the terminator formation after the first combined assault).

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Tis easy enough to lose. Personally I wouldn't use it as it truely is all your eggs in one fairly mono use basket. Far better in a ground based army to have those hunters spread out in the formations.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

True but even 3 hits isn't enough to bring down something like a thunderhawk - and fighters are quite weakly armoured so one or two are a good deterent there. I'd rather fight the assaults at an advantage (being an assault army and the marine bm rules mean bm's on attacks are bad for them) than risk lead elements being out of cover, or the flak itself being taken out by something like a salvo of hellfire missiles or depleted by a warhound.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

I think that depends on your dice Hena

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x

Well had a game today trying to sort stuff out with brother today.
Still no idea on the salamander marines.
He commentted as I still haven't an easy way of making Multi Melta al the land raiders may as well be salamander ones, that way there no problems mistaking one for the other (which has entailed a small points increase). The potential Hunter formation is gone, no one was really keen on a mix of 3 hunter and one whirlwind or 3 whirlwind and one hunter and since Hena reckons it would be debilitating verse some armies aircraft it can go - it was certainly never intended to be a killer AA formation.
He reckons the vindies are still pants, but my arguement is so what, I've never thought of them as iconic Salamander vehicles and they have a cheap pred to add to formations if they so desire. At 250 I still don't think their is much of a role for vindies in the army because a) it isn't a tank army and b) you are so short of points throwing any amount away on these ain't worth it.

_________________
If using E-Bay use this link to support Tac Com!
'Abolish red trousers?! Never! Red trousers are France!' – Eugene Etienne, War Minister, 1913
"Gentlemen, we may not make history tomorrow, but we shall certainly change the geography."
General Plumer, 191x