Hellhound in Warhammer 40K - HOT OR NOT? Codex Astra Militarum Unit Review

[@Bluecho4]

Another thing to consider about the Devil Dog vs Demolisher is that the two units don't compete for the same unit type slots. If your list is already glutted with Heavy Support choices, but is light on Fast Attack, you can fit the Devil Dog in where another Demolisher couldn't. For example, if your list uses a lot of artillery, a cheap tank like a Hellhound variant may be exactly what the job requires.

[@jasongarfitt1147]

This point needs to be emphasized more. This edition the heavy support slot is the most crowded. Elites were pretty bad with the old codex but now I'm actually struggling to fill out elites as all my options either got removed from the codex (special weapons squads, veterans) or are slotless (commissars, astropaths, MoO)

[@shakyrob6512]

It's a shame the flamer template went the way of the dodo with the rest of the templates. I personally felt it made flamers better than they have been since.

[@dmeep]

the arguments of how many models were actually under the template with both leaning over the table and having different angles could get tiresome

[@acinomnottarts]

My buddy and I have decided to bring back templates to our in-house games if 10th ed doesn't.

[@vilnish2377]

@@dmeep this my guard army had so many templates and peeps were always so salty the worst by far were the ones taking ages to space their models to exactly 2 inches from each others so i couldn't kill more than 3 models even with a hit

[@shadowsift]

@@vilnish2377 God I hated that, took forever!

[@arbiters487]

@@dmeep I will say the hellhound really felt the flamer template go, but that's not the worst hit vehicle by the removal of templates. That honor has to go to the deathstrike

[@kevlonk]

We didn't start the fire It was the Hellhound lit it when it took a direct hit We didn't start the fire But we were incinerated when the tank got 'naded

[@Ipwn477]

Gotta say, I love "hot or not" as a unit review name

[@roys.1889]

subtle genius that

[@thewindowsmaaane]

@@roys.1889 Haha

[@palimpalim4443]

Started with one (chem cannon) in a new Crusade campaign and it absolutly devastated everything. Quite solid for quite low points and its not reliable on orders. 10/10 would recommend, maybe not top tier but always top fun!

[@briansteiner2886]

Another regiment trait Auspex left off was blitz division. Getting these short ranged, explosive vehicles in your opponents lines as early as turn one will force them on the defensive, giving you the momentum to push for the mid and gain early board control.

[@commissarlegion1413]

I was going to run a very memey hellhound list basically my fast Attack slot is used up by 3 squads of 3 Hellhounds meaning nine on the table as well as the Malcador Infernus Unfortunately however GW said no and removed it's ability to be in squads. Fuck you James for ruining my meme list and for taking away my shotgun vets

[@michaelkasubaski9426]

Agreed. They killed a lot of my memes. Had 30 ratlings for a storm lord and forward deploy, hellhounds only wanted 3 but still that was one slot :/ bullgryns got expensive again just..... chimera catachan flamer ball got killed with command squad and specials getting nerfed/squated. Just damnit all

[@cousinzeke4888]

This is a toy soldier game, the rules are what we say they are. As long as your opponent agrees you can do whatever you want.

[@commissarlegion1413]

@@cousinzeke4888 yeah but I wanted to throw it at a tournament for a meme

[@michaelkasubaski9426]

@@cousinzeke4888 the problem is finding enough people in the area who both play, and are willing to agree to that

[@stevenschnepp576]

@@StevenZagaris Did Arks get rid of the Rule of Three?

[@Nikolaijuno]

Fun fact. The turret weapon slots in. You don't need to magnetize it.

[@andrewamann2821]

You need the magnet for the turret's mantlet, not the turret, itself. Edit for misreading... Magnetizing saves plastic-on-plastic wear....

[@NonApplicable1983]

I've always been a fan of the Devil Dogs. I'm glad they're even better this edition with the turret rules.

[@Chloe34876]

Armoured Superiority doesn't give it Ablative Plating, it's the Armoured keyword. So it needs to have Armoured tracks.

[@theholyemu3716]

You forgot the main use, cooking corpse starch for the guardsmen.

[@GradeAMolvanian]

These things would REALLY benefit from a small points drop, so they can compete better with similar options without being super niche. Also the Hellhound would love an extra 2 or so shots. 2d6+2 shots wouldn't go amiss. I think even with a +4 shots, it still wouldn't out-compete the Chem Cannon for Space Marines and Terminators, though that might be a bit much (unless they make the Chem Canon also 18 inches?). It's worth noting the Chem Canon absolutely butchers monsters (~7 wounds vs the hellhounds 1.55, assuming T7 or higher, and a 3+ armor. It actually competes very well with the Devil Dog against those).

[@PelinalDidNothingWrong]

I feel old just looking at the Hellhound. It was one of the first 40k models I ever saw as a 12 year old....

[@2077fallout]

The doctrine born soldiers states in the bottom, that anything that auto hits count as a hit roll of six so it would auto wound

[@michaelritzen8138]

I am sad that they can't be taken in units of 3 anymore and lost the 4+ explodes. I used to run 4 of them, and get them into the enemy lines as fast as possible. This made the dillema for my opponent to focus these annoying little buggers, who have a 50/50 to explode and take some of his army along with it, or focus my longer range heavier units, like TCs and Pask. Either way, something was gonna fuck him over, and the threat of having a unit contesting objectives and taking out chaff units or heavy support options was usually a lot scarier than 4 tanks raining down heavy fire from afar (even though those were a more important threat). And they were surprisingly hard to get rid off. With track guards they kept hitting automatically and could keep racing along at 12" a turn. How many times my opponent left 1 on a single wound, who would then just race off and delete another unit of infantry.

[@richard_n]

I think having a couple with the chem cannon and a melta on the body is great. You are effective into any army since you can damage hordes or vehicles.

[@2310luke]

I’ve always thought they are a little over costed for what you get, especially when you can get a double heavy flamer chimera, that also can transport and has the lasgun arrays for 25 points cheaper

[@richmcgee434]

Lower chance of exploding when it dies in your setup zone too. OTOH, you need something to put in it since it's a dedicated transport, whereas you can just buy the hounds naked. The chimera and crago will wind up being a bit more expensive overall, albeit hopefully with utility to match.

[@robertlowe4784]

I usually only use the melta type for 500-1000 point games for the other 2 versions an all flamer chimera isn't far off damage wise for a cheeper cost and more practical in any sized game, pity the hellhounds lost squads too

[@Chloe34876]

The turret weapon choices are push-fit so you don't need to magnetise them.

[@cyanideinmycereal1077]

Tbh they’re probably weaker but if at any point like Orks or Tyranid hordes get really good (they never will be btw) maybe they’d be a little better.

[@jasongarfitt1147]

Banewolf wounding a carnifex on 2+ though seems nice

[@curtisbrown547]

​​@@jasongarfitt1147 this. Bane wolf seems like a good surprise pick against armies that field monsters. Imagine the look on your opponents face when you tell them the chem cannon wounds a great unclean one on a 2+.

[@markdorn8873]

I'll probably field a Hellhound, but not for us effectiveness. I built an Artemia variant and converted to a half-track using a kit from the Blood and Skulls Ebay store, gave it mud, battle damage, and a freehand hellhound and name on the flank. It probably won't be helpful, but it will look amazing!

[@richmcgee434]

0:01 Going to guess the inability to group up to three in a force org slot is fatal to whatever interest they might have. Let's see. 2:20 Okay, paying MSRP is a dealkiller right there. Still, easy enough to find on the real secnodray market and not too hard to trade for. 6:00 Unmentioned strength of the auto-hit variants is that their offense cannot be reduced at all by damage. Other vehicles can be degraded into near-uselessness as they're bracketed, so the last half or so of their wounds aren't as helpful as top half. The spray-hounds are going to be killing just as effectively till they hit zero, although reduced movement might limit their target options pretty badly at times. 9:40 And there it is, the no-grouping thing is the death knell. Also, the narration doesn't mention it while the slide does, the greater vulnerability to small arms of the 'hound chassis makes those track guards more appealing for them. Similar for the dozer blade - these thing have really short ranges and the dozers will help avoid being slowed down a bit, something longer-ranged vehicles don't care as much about. Also note that if GW had the sense god gave a gnat all flamer weapons would ignore cover effects entirely the way they did in 3rd. Flamethrower vehicles exist for clearing bunkers and fortifications more than anything else and hiding in a building or huddling behind some barricades will not help you survive at all. They're not urban combat vehicles unless you enjoy out of control conflagrations, which real armies do not.

[@EpicDoom80]

"pinning fire" is -2 movement, not -1 to hit. You're getting it confused with the regimental order. "Ablative plating" can be used by any "armoured" unit or battle tank, not "armoured superiority" units.

[@richmcgee434]

Which is arguably more useful for these since it gives a slightly better chance to avoid getting charged by whatever you just failed to kill with your flamethrower, and if they try at least you can fire again on OW. Even the myopic chem-sprayer firing at just under 12" against a base 5" move threat has pushed them up to needing about an 8 to reach you, which isn't hopeless odds in your favor.

[@Knights_Oath]

The biggest winner is the Bane Wolf, the 8" range made it pointless. I am so happy they are usable now. And the Devil Dog is a viable anti armor option now. I do miss the Atema pattern Hellhound that blew up on a 4+ for D6. I killed A LOT of Custodes with them and some good rolls.

[@MrSkillcap]

I mean there are benefits to being on a hellhound crew. You are far less likely to be captured and tortured for all eternity by dark elves or chaos if you are ash.

[@liamholt5623]

Wait a second... With the 4+ range to weapon trait the melta cannon gets melta range at 14, which is actually longer than the vanilla Chem Cannon (wich with the same boost have 16, so a tiny bit longer). But still - a fun thought imo

[@dovakiin296]

I think it's quite a fluffy vehicle to run with Catachan or to use against Tyranids. I'm not sure if you really want to use it against horde ranged armies like the Tau or the Guard though since they'll blast the thing in T1 and potentially cause it to explode in your lines.

[@primalreversion7034]

I love Devil Dogs, I put them in Strategic Reserves and when my opponent least expects it, boom - melta cannon and multi-melta right behind their big tough unit

[@redmondthealien7840]

Given GW's been sold out for about 3 weeks they're at least selling well.

[@RSBurgener]

It seems risky, pretty dangerous, though. Maybe it's a good distraction unit? I bet it's fun as hell to roll it out and watch it wreak some havoc, though. Might make for some memorable games.

[@Stormandreas]

A 12" move and 18" inferno cannon I wouldn't exactly class as "short range" at a 30" threat range. That's faster than a Tyrannofex, with NEARLY the same profile as the Acid spray (2D6 vs D6+6, -1 AP, -1 damage), but you can nearly afford 2 Hellhounds for 1 Tyrannofex (especially if the fex has a physiology)

[@almostpainted]

I’m glad templates are gone (gosh the spacing of models exactly 2” to avoid templates…) but flamer weapons NEED blast equivalent. Scoring one hit vs 20 termagaunts is not funny 😑

[@ChrisJohnson-vb9hr]

If I was designing these, I'd drop them down to 8 or 9 wounds and 80-90 pts. They're in that awful spot where they're worth 2 for bring it down, but only just barely.

[@alexandercain8904]

Honestly, the Hellhound variants seem to be 10-15% overcosted for what they can do.

[@jasongarfitt1147]

They should be 100pts not 110 to be really viable

[@blackvalordragoon]

Unless im missing something why go full anti tank or anti infantry with the melta cannon and multi melta or flamer and other cannons? If the Melta cannon is better then multi melta why would you ever use it? Same with flamer and other two turret weapons. I'd think the small gun should try to cover for the opposite deficiency ?

[@jirokoshibailey2052]

As guard: Can't go wrong with a hellhound

[@xtrasquish]

I have 3 of them, so I'll probably use them anyway. Sucks I can't squadron them any more though...

[@ComissarYarrick]

I still miss they days of 24" range hellhounds...

[@NornQueenKya]

Your title game is on.... "fire"

[@lupusprimealpha6198]

So if i use a chem cannon on space marines with the super human ‘cant be woundedon less then 4+’ which rule wins? Auto wound on 2+ or 4+?

[@cousinzeke4888]

4+ I believe.

[@WeOnlyEatSoup]

Now I do want one

[@miles_1199]

Wait so I have to pull my storm bolter off then?

[@hardrockfreak1337]

Previous book they were better. Being able to squadron made the base version surprisingly effective against flyers for an army that traditionall struggled against them.

[@JohnGi106]

I’m loving these videos!

[@ericmats4662]

How does the hellhound compare to the Hydra? Same cost and purpose i guess?

[@richmcgee434]

No. While auto-hitting spray weapons are still not a terrible counter to aircraft's -1 hard to hit mechanic, the actual damage output from these things is anemic - the inferno would be lucky to get six wounds on most flyers, and the chem cannon struggles to do one. By comparison a Hydra pretty reliably blows a skyshark or similar frame out of the air in one burst of fire, and even against its worst matchup orks with ramshackle will still be bracketed once on average, and twice if you're really lucky. Even in a ground role, the Hydra has much better range and doesn't have to expose itself to charge threats the way the sprayer hounds do. The melta hound is a much better tank-killer than the Hydra, but the Hydra mops up lighter vehicular targets (eg speeders like many of the eldar vehicles) better than any of the hounds do. The Hydra does suffer from eating a precious heavy support slot, though. That's often a lot more crowded than fast attack in guard lists. So very different purposes but similar costs.

[@TheVoloch]

The Hellhound lost my interest in this edition, but that's because the Sentinels got buffed. Competeting for the same slot and not able to take them in squadrons is sad bunny. However I think the Banewolf would be a good screen vs first turn chargers like Death Company

[@snufflebunny539]

Used a hellhound in my first game and deployed it with the rest of my army, single HVC shot instantly caused it to explode and destroyed half my army

[@richmcgee434]

You took a grand total of d3 MW on whatever units were near the explosion. How is that "half your army" in any meaningful way? Or was this an earlier edition when vehicle explosions were a real threat instead of a small attrition effect?

[@miafillene4396]

@@richmcgee434 they were a real threat before. Damage was based PER MODEL, not unit. So just imagine taking that D3 mortal wounds per figurine. Instant death for infantry within the radius of explosion.

[@richmcgee434]

@@miafillene4396 Sure, but it hasn't worked that way in multiple editions now. In fact, I'm pretty sure mortal wounds and per-model explosions never overlapped at all in any edition. So he's talking about some incident from an earlier edition, probably 2nd?

[@Guardsmen4]

@@richmcgee434 has too be 2nd ed I've bin playing since 3rd and In 3rd/4th tank deaths had a hard time killing 6+ orks much less guardsmen

[@richmcgee434]

@@Guardsmen4 3rd ed explosions were usually d6 chances at 4+ to do what were effectively mortal wounds (ie no armor saves) on each unit in range. Usually worked out to 1-2 wounds on everything in range, although multi-wound figs were much less common back then so it hurt high-save armies much worse than today's booms do. But yeah, nothing to compare to 2nd ed's explosion rules.

[@harlankovacs6276]

i just would like to see a "blast" rule on the hellhound inferno

[@richmcgee434]

Actually giving it blast would prevent it from firing in melee, which would be very bad. A similar rule that made it more effective against large units would be fine though. Rather see it going back to ignoring all cover effects like all teardrop template weapons did in 3rd.

[@harlankovacs6276]

@@richmcgee434 yeah ,if i could bring one template from the past it would be the flamer one. I still consider that the hellhound inferno should remain an anti infantry (and anti sub-elite) tank. The "ignore cover" rule on it gave it an identity and a precise role. Im a little bit sad because in 9th edition flamers are most of the time underwhelming and do not fill any specific role that an other weapons could do (and better).

[@michaelkasubaski9426]

Squadron keyword but cant take more than 1 as a selection, because that makes sense 🤔

[@Svejir]

I hope 10th brings back templates. Hear me out, uses templates for squads (5 or more), 3 models or less take D6 auto hits. Keeps it fluffy and ensures that flamers aren't total garbage against smaller units.

[@SWIFTO_SCYTHE]

Horus Heresey 2.0 still uses flamer and blast templates. Its fun and makes you think about positioning.

[@Knights_Oath]

If the Hellhound still blew up on a 4+ the dozer blade would be way more useful.

[@Tehquall]

Would take these if I could squadron them as before, will just pass for better options now

[@calonfire]

Congrats on going undefeated!

[@Lomhow]

Did this get Armor of Contempt or not?

[@Ktotwf]

Banewolf!

[@Sirilere]

I'll be using a Hellhound and 2 Devil Dogs...

[@tybaltmarr2158]

Best AA in the game!

[@ourcommonancestry6025]

I have played 40k since 1993... And hybrid campaign rules is why I still have 40+ players under my campaign... Rules are nice but a campaign of scale , broken up into parts or chapters keeps the tension of heroes alive... Hell, two players have for as inquiries who will remove portions of an army for questions to help Intel gathering in future scarios...I should submit the campaign to be and sees at they thik

[@hideshisface1886]

Is it just me, or chem cannon is objectively a better option than inferno cannon pretty much against all targets, except vehicles? Except range, it seems flat out better: - same max number of hits - more reliable average number of hits - you have guaranteed at least 5 hits minimum - chem cannon is far less swingy - a lot of common infantry is T4 or even T5 these days - inferno cannon would be wounding on 3+, while chem wounds any non-vehicle on 2+, no matter the toughness. And it has good AP value - this is some very nasty, very reliable damage - which is pretty important considering it also bypasses very mediocre Guard ballistic skill, because it autohits. [crap, I was convinced chem fired 3d3, not 1d3 - no idea how I misread that - deleted my previous rambling]

[@richmcgee434]

"With 3d3+3 - your number of shots is 6 at absolute minimum." It's 1d3+3. Your math is based on a false start. Also, "Except range..." is not trivial. A hellhound can fire at a target from 18" away, making it very difficult to (say) charge it with the survivors. Dropping to max 12" range means even 5" slowboys only need about a 6 (7 in a perfect world) to reach you, going up by 2 if they had the pinning order effect running. You'll also be more limited in your choice of targets throughout the game, and especially if you wind up bracketed and needing to move into range.

[@hideshisface1886]

@@richmcgee434 Damn I misread - I have no idea how did I see 3D3 and not just a D3. Shit. Ok that makes more sense. With that said - I'd say chem cannon is still la pretty good option considering Space Marines run around with 2 wounds each these days and are by far the most popular army anyway. And firepower against monsters is also not something I would ignore - usually things good against monsters are also effective against vehicles, not infantry, so that might create some interesting overlap. That said - a good comparison would be plasma cannon sentinel vs those options. As for range - yes, 18 is very low, but boards are also smaller these days and Hellhound chasis is reasonably quick. Lack of squadron deployment is a pain though.

[@richmcgee434]

@@hideshisface1886 Sure, the two sprayers are best against different types of targets. Chem is much better than fire against harder infantry, but not against anything with -1 damage. Fire's a bit better against lighter targets and some light vehicles where it's wounding on 4+ or even 3+ rolls, plus it has that 6" greater range. The issue of range isn't so much reaching the target as it is avoiding whatever wants to kill you on your next turn. Even if you avoid serious melee threats, so many armies have some equivalent to melta weapons that voluntarily moving so close is just asking to die.

[@Nikolaijuno]

As usual not enough fast attack slots.

[@tlotig]

How do I upvote a video but downvote the title?

[@michaelkasubaski9426]

Wish they'd bring back the downvote count. Only seeing the ups doesnt give the full picture

[@dote9079]

Makes me mad the immolator tank is just worse in comparison

[@owenrice5510]

always was been

[@balzaak4803]

Whenever I look at the new rules I'm reminded that the game officially died after 5th edition

[@damienthecadian8164]

Empty the tanks!

[@leekent3587]

Burn Them All! >:D Fire Inferno!

[@trikk9964]

... Imma "turret-deep" into the Rogal... but imma pass instead smash that 'hound...

[@shadowdragon243]

second

[@bubbaphilmon7375]

First😂

[@Damnedlegion40k]

30