# How to kit Defiler with other options?



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

I've just assembled my first Defiler and was very excited, but then became disheartened :no: when I discovered that there was no options for replacements for the Reaper autocannons.

After this I searched and searched all over this site and some others to find out how to make these weapon option customizations. :search: All I could find were remodeled ones and most were 2 CC ones anyway.

Yes, yes I know people will say, "why would you want to put lascannons or heavy bolters on there anyway?" :angry: But since I haven't played with a Defiler yet, (let alone one with these options) I want to try it out and see how poorly or well it performs. Especially since most of my friends play eldar and guard, it seems like having twin-linked lascannons or twin-linked heavy bolters may not be _terrible_.

So I was sort of thinking the side sponsons from the predator kit? Since I've never really seen the sprue I don't know if, or how, this conversion could be performed. Also, since the right side hole is bigger than the left side hole, I was also wondering if there was a way to make a CC upgrade for both sides.

After some more consideration, it seems like the main lascannon from the predator would fit in the right side hole (since the Reaper one fits in the hole of the roof piece that comes with the rhino kit). The problem with that option is that it is really big and only has one barrel( although it is supposed to be twin-linked). Hmm... :scratchhead:

I was thinking about magnetizing them anyway, with a support made out of extra sprue so that I could use any options if I wanted.

The other thing I wanted to mention was that I think I understand what the CC weapon that comes on the sprue is supposed to be. I think the flails are normally rigid but then it spins really fast and they spread out like that. I could understand that being a devastating weapon worthy of fear not ridicule.


----------



## Deneris (Jul 23, 2008)

I used the twin-linked Las from a dreadnought on one of my Defilers, and it worked quite well. I assume the heavy bolter arm would be equally effective. For plastic heavy weapons try the Space Marine Devestator squad, and possibly make your own twin-linked guns. Come to think of it, a converted twin-las Pred turret might also look good on a Defiler.

For the extra close combat arms you have a few options;
-Buy a 2nd defiler for another set of those nasty front claws, and use the ball and socket join as a "shoulder.
-Furioso arms mounted on plasticard "plugs"
-Get another flail-arm from a Bitz site


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

a lot of my chaos customers buy imperial guard heavy weapons to mount on the defilers.


----------



## neilbatte (Jan 2, 2008)

The Razorback comes with both twin link hvy bolters and lascannon options with the added bonus of a Rhino kit to chaos up for your troops.


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

Yeah it looks like the Razorback Rhino Upgrade sprue would do the job quite well. Just need to Chaos them up a bit.

I was thinking about taking the TL autocannon mount bit from the defiler sprue and the usual left arm close combat weapon to make the right arm close combat weapon. Just need to greenstuff the two holes (where the linked bullets go into body).

Is there a good way to set up the magnets inside? I was thinking about setting up a "web-network" of sprue that ends up putting the magnet in the center of the arm hole.

EDIT: Also, I was wondering if it was legal to magnetize the "body" part so that it could turn the main battlecannon? Is the battlecannon supposed to shoot "forwards" or is it allowed to shoot backwards too? For example, you might want to shoot backwards at a group of infantry while keeping your front armor facing an enemy tank.


----------



## Deneris (Jul 23, 2008)

Mud213 said:


> EDIT: Also, I was wondering if it was legal to magnetize the "body" part so that it could turn the main battlecannon? Is the battlecannon supposed to shoot "forwards" or is it allowed to shoot backwards too? For example, you might want to shoot backwards at a group of infantry while keeping your front armor facing an enemy tank.


By the rules as written, that would probably be illegal, as I recall the defiler description saying nothing about the "torso" being a turret. Of course, I built my defiler in such a way that the torso COULD rotate. Just clear it with your opponents first.


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

I was talking about this with my friend today and we got into the rules and it seems like the direction that the torso part is facing is the only important part. So in my example, you could have the battlecannon facing the troops and the arm side facing the tank, but it would be treated as the back armor facing the tank and the front armor facing the troops. In other words, the legs don't really matter.

After that I asked about the turrets on the sides. Since they can turn freely, it seems like you could do a similar situation as before, but you face the front (the battlecannon side) toward the tank and the Reaper autocannon and Havoc Launcher can face backwards to shoot at the troops. This is because the rules say that you take line of sight from the individual weapons on the vehicle and that they can shoot in any direction that they can rotate to (or should be able to if glued down). So in this example the defiler could move and keep the "front" towards the tank and shoot the Reaper and Havoc "backwards" at the troops.


----------



## Lord of Rebirth (Jun 7, 2008)

I'd say grab a razorback for the heavy bolters and lascannons though a predator turret might be more interesting then you could modify the arm section that holds the flail to be a more complete arm or just scratch build something. The left side is the same side as a hatch so you can use pretty much anything that fits a hatch.

I have a future project of designing and building fram scratch some relatively ubiquitous "arms" for such a use with a variety of "hand" options which might help but I'm still in the planning stage of the project.


----------



## omgitsduane (May 14, 2008)

I don't think the lascannon is a good idea, or any upgrades besides more close combat arms simply because, he can only fire that cannon each turn, and a st8 ap3 large blast is far more effective than a single twin linked lascannon shot, at least in my opinion, and with the more close combat weapons, if someone does get into range, they will have to deal with a lot of st 10 attacks


----------



## moo (Aug 12, 2008)

I thought the defiler was ST 6? but i totally agree with duane. If you need to fire the defiler's other weapons something must be wrong. Well thats just my opinion anyway. Also for other weapon arrangements the razorback options are really good imo.


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

omgitsduane said:


> I don't think the lascannon is a good idea, or any upgrades besides more close combat arms simply because, he can only fire that cannon each turn, and a st8 ap3 large blast is far more effective than a single twin linked lascannon shot, at least in my opinion, and with the more close combat weapons, if someone does get into range, they will have to deal with a lot of st 10 attacks


I will split this into two topics, Lascannon and flamer/heavy bolter responses:

1) The reason you might want to put a twin-linked lascannon on a Defiler is so that if you want to shoot a specific HQ or something else very tough, you can use an AP 2 (rerolling to hit) weapon verses a template (scattering) AP 3 weapon. Using it for its AP will not really come into play all that often since the only thing that really needs AP 2 for are things in Terminator armor. Also if it's a squad of Termis, then the template would give you a better chance of killing more than one anyway. (definitely 1, or maybe a few)

But the lascannon has another benfit, since it's strength 9 verses strength 8, your chances of armor penetration (or glancing) are just _that_ much better. I can see this being useful by "sniping" a specific important vehicle or troop. Although there are many times when a battlecannon will do more damage overall, if your goal is to take a specific tough target, then a TL-lascannon is better for the job.

I agree though that using it against an HQ or other troop choice probably isn't all that helpful. Since a strength 8 or strength 9 will both Instant Death a Toughness 4 unit, it's not necessary for that. _But,_ you do get to reroll to hit. If the battlecannon scatters too far, then you completely miss, but the TL-lascannon _almost_ guarantees that you do hit.

2) As far as the TL-heavy flamer and TL heavy bolters go, if you are fighting a horde army, like Ork or Tyranids (or IG troops), having a twin-linked heavy flamer and/or TL heavy bolter can be way more useful than +1 (or+ 2) attack(s). For either weapon, by taking out at least 2 enemies before charging into Assault makes up for the fact that you didn't get one extra attack in Assault with the extra CCW. So the benefit may be more useful for the flamer since you may be able to position the template over more than 3 troops (which is the most number of things you can hit with the bolters.

Obviously, using either of these two options is not as useful against SMEq armies since they get armor saves against both, so the Dreadnaught weapons would be more useful. Since most people you play are probably SM's then this tactic is not as useful. Sure the battlecannon will probably do the same amount of pre-Assault casualties as the flamers and bolters, but if you have more spread out troops or have taken at least one weapon destroyed, then the two weapons are better than the one.

Clearly using the options will not come into play all that often unless you know which army you are playing against. There's my opinion on the subject, what do you think?


----------



## omgitsduane (May 14, 2008)

I think that 20 points for a chance to snipe a single target of opportunity seems a bit rich, but if you HAVE the points floating around then why not.

All good points you make, I am not sure anymore, but I remember that if ordnance struck a vehicle it rolled 2d6 and picked the highest for pen, so even if you don't have the extra digit, you have 2 chances with one shot, plus you'd have to almost get a direct hit on a tank as the hole has to be over the hull, making it that little bit harder.

I guess its all about personal preference, I'd be happy to have a defiler without a single weapon besides the cannon and kitted out with massive claws coming from every orifice, but that can't be unfortunately with the lack of arms supplied.


----------



## Lord of Rebirth (Jun 7, 2008)

Looking at it I'm starting to think two extra close combat arms might be better.


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

lord of rebirth said:


> Looking at it I'm starting to think two extra close combat arms might be better.


Did you read what I said? I didn't say that 2 CC is bad or anything, I was just saying why you would want to use other options. For the most part you are right since you'll be bashing your opponents troops or ripping up his vehicles, but if the off-chance that you know you will be fighting a horde or you want to take out a specific Termi HQ, or you don't plan on charging your opponent then you might want to reconsiter.

If you know that you will be using it for the ordinance weapon, then having 2 CCW is not practical since if it is immobilized and/or one weapon destroyed, then you now have a _very _dangerous piece of terrain instead of a walker. _But,_ if you are planning on charging in ripping opponents limb from limb, then it would be a bad idea to _not_ have the extra CCW. It really depends on your overall goal for your Defiler. Also, if you want to be cautious you might want one CCW and a "side arm" in case your battlecannon gets exploded.

Another thing to keep in mind is that it does have Fleet, so even if you only have CCW's and no battlecannon, then you can still rush into combat. This restricts the times when you are screwed by not having a backup (basically the previous situation where you are immobilized as well as no battlecannon).

IN CONCLUSION, for the most part, having 2 extra CCW is a better bet, unless you plan on just using for a ranged beast of a vehicle.


----------



## omgitsduane (May 14, 2008)

With a full kit of close combat weapons the defiler has a stunning 6 st10 attacks on the charge (if I read it properly) which means a 3-5man squad of space marine terminators has a lot to worry about when it comes to punching a hole in it. Because of the assaulting vehicle rules too, the marine would need 5+6 to penetrate, which seems a slim chance with only one or two marines left.

Could be very useful, and if you decide to make it, please let us see, as I love home made CCW for the defiler.

EDIT:
I rolled the same scenario (taking out the defilers cannon shot for speed) and sadly rolled very bad 7 times, with an average of 2 marines dying and immobolised the most popular result, a few explosions happened and the defiler did once wipe out the entire squad but it's not looking as safe and sound as I thought.


----------



## Critta (Aug 6, 2008)

I pretty much came to the "CCW are best" decision a little while back for my defilers. With the battlecannon for shooting and fleet to use if that gets blown off, you're pretty much sorted


----------



## Wraithian (Jul 23, 2008)

I've recently purchased two defiler kits that I'm going to do a modular set up for. The side plate and axle mounting for the reaper autocannon, I've got a couple spares left over from a couple Brass Scorpion models I made, so I'm using those (though you do have to cut off the top part of the axle, right above the two nubs that fit into the the weapons to allow them to pivot in and out as they are too long to allow proper fitting of a heavy flamer or the close combat arm). After the plates are done with a close combat arm for each, and a heavy flamer for each, I plan on rigging a magnet to it, then creating a socket in the defiler hull to recieve the other magnet, allowing a modular arrangement for each, allowing either 2 close combat arms per defiler, or one close combat arm and one heavy flamer.

The last couple games I've played with defilers, I've noticed that the heavy flamer probably has a use, even over the extra CC attack. Hitting a squad with a heavy flamer (even terminators) might soften the squad up enough for the defiler to have a better chance in cleaning said squad up in CC, or at the very least, reducing the amount of stuff swinging back at it.

*edited to clean up grotesque spelling abominations.


----------



## Lord of Rebirth (Jun 7, 2008)

Sorry sorry. I just meant before I had kinda disliked the idea of two close combat weapons since I like to have the guns. I think I'm gonna put together two of mine with 2 additional close combat weapons then hold off on two others and my 5th kit is going to be used for some strange conversion I came up with the other day involving dropping the front claws totally and the battle cannon then putting a whirlwind turret on each side of the torso....


----------



## Mud213 (Nov 20, 2008)

After my final exams, 2 this Saturday and 2 on Monday, I will figure out how to post pictures on here to show you how I did the magnet holding "webbing." Also with Christmas coming up, I probably won't be buying anything new (like the razorback upgrade sprue). I'll update this thread once I get around to it.

I'm glad that people are thinking more about other options besides the standard "2 CCW ftw" mentality that appears to be so prevalent on this forum.


----------

