Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Requizen wrote:

Just because you don't like change doesn't mean they shouldn't do it.

Honestly to me, this style feels much more organized, even if it is a little more limiting.

Why does it have to be a zero sum choice? Why do I have to lose so you can win?

Zewrath wrote:

Erh. Can't you just run the Deathwing detachment that has been leaked a few pages back?

Maybe I don't understand formations fully, so correct me if I'm wrong. I take the Deathwing formation, but I want to run two dreads in the force as separate units. Since the DW formation only allows for 0-1 units of dreads, I have to run an Unbound army: the DW formation plus a dread by itself.

Again, what was so difficult about simply allowing termies as Troops by taking a HQ in termie armor? Somehow, Space marines manage this with HQ on bikes without taking detachments and formations.

 Zewrath wrote:

Erh. Can't you just run the Deathwing detachment that has been leaked a few pages back?

That detachment isn't allowed to deploy any models on turn 1, and will thus lose.

 the_Armyman wrote:

Requizen wrote:

Just because you don't like change doesn't mean they shouldn't do it.

Honestly to me, this style feels much more organized, even if it is a little more limiting.

Why does it have to be a zero sum choice? Why do I have to lose so you can win?

Zewrath wrote:

Erh. Can't you just run the Deathwing detachment that has been leaked a few pages back?

Maybe I don't understand formations fully, so correct me if I'm wrong. I take the Deathwing formation, but I want to run two dreads in the force as separate units. Since the DW formation only allows for 0-1 units of dreads, I have to run an Unbound army: the DW formation plus a dread by itself.

Again, what was so difficult about simply allowing termies as Troops by taking a HQ in termie armor? Somehow, Space marines manage this with HQ on bikes without taking detachments and formations.

They mean this one:



Take an HQ with the Deathwing special rule (so, a Terminator HQ) and 2 Elites (so, Deathwing). Then add in more Elites (Deathwing Termies, Ven Dreads) until you're full on points. Mix and match with Ravenwing if you like.

Is the list for the deathwing strike force out in the open yet, as I understand that is another way to field only deathwing? Mine atm was to be allied with another army but want to try a full army with them now with the new codex. I wonder if dreads and land raiders will be on that detachment bit I imagine they will be.

So its best to put knights in a land raider and DS everything else?
How do yall feel about putting dreads in a dw list?

Edit: speak of the devil, thanks for posting that

The trouble Armyman is you can, you just have to make an unbound army. Then no one will play with you because Unbound army's are cheesy and OP. Unlike all the assorted detachments with free upgrades or tanks / transports.

Have some Ravenwing with them too then? They're not going to spontaneously combust on turn 1.

Requizen wrote:

They mean this one:



Take an HQ with the Deathwing special rule (so, a Terminator HQ) and 2 Elites (so, Deathwing). Then add in more Elites (Deathwing Termies, Ven Dreads) until you're full on points. Mix and match with Ravenwing if you like.

So, I don't get to take separate Land Raiders as HS choices now. And I still don't get ObSec. I think you're trying way too hard to explain why GW's appraoch is superior to my common sense approach. As a bonus, my common sense approach doesn't invalidate your way of wanting to play the game. Isn't that cool?

 the_Armyman wrote:

Requizen wrote:

They mean this one:



Take an HQ with the Deathwing special rule (so, a Terminator HQ) and 2 Elites (so, Deathwing). Then add in more Elites (Deathwing Termies, Ven Dreads) until you're full on points. Mix and match with Ravenwing if you like.

So, I don't get to take separate Land Raiders as HS choices now. And I still don't get ObSec. I think you're trying way too hard to explain why GW's appraoch is superior to my common sense approach. As a bonus, my common sense approach doesn't invalidate your way of wanting to play the game. Isn't that cool?

I'm not trying to start a fight, I'm just saying you can still take a pure Deathwing army (well, sorta, since they need to start in DS so you need something on the tabletop now). It's not the same, no. But there's no real reason to flip out, just adapt. This is how 7th edition has been going for pretty much every other army.

 the_Armyman wrote:
So, I don't get to take separate Land Raiders as HS choices now. And I still don't get ObSec. I think you're trying way too hard to explain why GW's appraoch is superior to my common sense approach. As a bonus, my common sense approach doesn't invalidate your way of wanting to play the game. Isn't that cool?

The game/army changed. That's really the way it goes (and has for many editions). As a plus, you don't have to take a special character if you don't want now.

the_Armyman wrote:Is there a good reason why this isn't part of army selection?

Step1: Choose a HQ in terminator armor.
Step 2: Units of Terminators are now Troops.
Step 3: Enjoy your game of 40K.

Is it that hard? A few lines of text in a little gray box tucked in a corner of a bloated codex? Let the people who want to play Formationhammer have their special rules and face-melting combos, while the minority of us just want to play with our termies, dreads, and land raiders like the good old days. For feth's sake.

I agree, honestly. :/
No problem with these formations being available and I might even be able to adapt to them but I'd be MUCH happier if they just kept the FOC-shifting as an option.
And I really don't see why they couldn't just have both...

 pretre wrote:

 the_Armyman wrote:
So, I don't get to take separate Land Raiders as HS choices now. And I still don't get ObSec. I think you're trying way too hard to explain why GW's appraoch is superior to my common sense approach. As a bonus, my common sense approach doesn't invalidate your way of wanting to play the game. Isn't that cool?

The game/army changed. That's really the way it goes (and has for many editions). As a plus, you don't have to take a special character if you don't want now.

See, the problem is that the choices GW makes are arbitrary. Put a Space Marine Captain on a bike and *poof* bikes as Troops. Why can this not be applied in this case. The game didn't change for some, but it did unnecessarily for others. So, you can use that old saw that "things always change," but in actuality, they don't for everyone.

Inb4 "life is tough, wear a helmet"

 the_Armyman wrote:
See, the problem is that the choices GW makes are arbitrary. Put a Space Marine Captain on a bike and *poof* bikes as Troops. Why can this not be applied in this case. The game didn't change for some, but it did unnecessarily for others. So, you can use that old saw that "things always change," but in actuality, they don't for everyone.

Except, if you've played DA for any length of time every unit has changed and the way the army works has changed significantly. This is the same for every army.

edit: And I completely agree that it is arbitrary. That being said, change is predictable since you know that it will happen with each edition and each new codex.

I wouldn't say it's arbitrary. They've decided to make DW play a certain way. They obviously decided that C:SM bikers as troops was something they wanted to do but didn't want to give them the special rules inherent to formations/detachments.
By mainting that level of restriction on how certain builds play it gives them some room to distinguish the various biker specialists/ TDA specialists/ knitting enthusiasts across the various chapters.

I'm excited about the DW Knights' Mace rule.

AP3 is a godsend.

The ability to switch on "smite" at any turn is pretty danged sweet too!

I won't drag things further off-topic. Just saying, there's the easy way that makes everyone happy and there's the GW way that turns more people away than it draws year-by-year. I'll go back to being a bitter curmudgeon in the shadows while you kids talk about your lollipops and rainbows

 whembly wrote:
I'm excited about the DW Knights' Mace rule.

AP3 is a godsend.

The ability to switch on "smite" at any turn is pretty danged sweet too!

Apparently they only get 1 attack each when using smite. Nerfed hardcore

Just play SM then if having Obj secured is so important to you. I'm with you in that it doesn't make much sense, but If DA had the same rule set as options as vanilla marines what would be the point.

As it stands, the leaked rules are and improvement and should make them fun to play. I know I'm looking forward to turbo boosting my way across the board to unload some terminator fury.

 pretre wrote:

 the_Armyman wrote:
See, the problem is that the choices GW makes are arbitrary. Put a Space Marine Captain on a bike and *poof* bikes as Troops. Why can this not be applied in this case. The game didn't change for some, but it did unnecessarily for others. So, you can use that old saw that "things always change," but in actuality, they don't for everyone.

Except, if you've played DA for any length of time every unit has changed and the way the army works has changed significantly. This is the same for every army.

edit: And I completely agree that it is arbitrary. That being said, change is predictable since you know that it will happen with each edition and each new codex.

So how would you go about allowing a force to take Bikes, Tacticals and Scouts (and only those three units) as the core of the force and leave everything else unchanged with an alternate Detachment? Changing Bikes to Troops is the simplest way to do so short of a Bike Squad Formation (which would still require two squads of Tacticals and/or Scouts).

It was almost certain that they were going to remove DW and RW as Troop choices, so no real surprise at all.

 jokerkd wrote:

 whembly wrote:
I'm excited about the DW Knights' Mace rule.

AP3 is a godsend.

The ability to switch on "smite" at any turn is pretty danged sweet too!

Apparently they only get 1 attack each when using smite. Nerfed hardcore

I disagree.

I've play DWK quite a bit in 6th ed. You have to be really judicious to pop that Smite mode since you only have it on your turn, once per game. Then, you're just a str 6, ap 4 maul'n terminator that you're just hoping to disrupt the enemy backline. Post smite, tough units can tie you up.

I'd rather have AP3 always, and choose to flip on smite (one attack at str 10, ap 2, at initiative) at any sub-fight phase. On a WS 5, T5, 2+/3++ model to boot!

I'll take that tradeoff any day.

To me, I'm fielding at least two units of knights!

 jokerkd wrote:

 whembly wrote:
I'm excited about the DW Knights' Mace rule.

AP3 is a godsend.

The ability to switch on "smite" at any turn is pretty danged sweet too!

Apparently they only get 1 attack each when using smite. Nerfed hardcore

I honestly cannot agree with this at all.
before, they were a one trick pony...either they died before they did their smite (because no one wanted to be the victim of that), or they killed that one thing and then were ignored/murdered.
Now, they are a reasonable threat to almost all types of opponents, but not crazy scary as to the enemy force focusing all firepower to kill them before getting Smite off. They have become far more tactically flexible, and with RW getting your face very quickly, the target choice/threat is more balanced. I think the new DA book will be more about army synergy that having a few "gimmicks" to get them by (Smite on DW knights, SoD banner etc)

@Whembly, I think the new smite is at S8 AP2, not S10.

Small buffs one does not notice as easily:

Darktalon lost Hover Strike, gained Strafing Run
Ezekiel lost his Traitor's Bane, got a Master Crafted Force Sword.
Terminators gained Hatred(CSM) instead of Preferred Enemy,
most IC have Preferred Enemy instead.

Seems like we lost Deathwing Vehicles though, which is pretty bad.

 whembly wrote:

 jokerkd wrote:

 whembly wrote:
I'm excited about the DW Knights' Mace rule.

AP3 is a godsend.

The ability to switch on "smite" at any turn is pretty danged sweet too!

Apparently they only get 1 attack each when using smite. Nerfed hardcore

I disagree.

I've play DWK quite a bit in 6th ed. You have to be really judicious to pop that Smite mode since you only have it on your turn, once per game. Then, you're just a str 6, ap 4 maul'n terminator that you're just hoping to disrupt the enemy backline. Post smite, tough units can tie you up.

I'd rather have AP3 always, and choose to flip on smite (one attack at str 10, ap 2, at initiative) at any sub-fight phase. On a WS 5, T5, 2+/3++ model to boot!

I'll take that tradeoff any day.

To me, I'm fielding at least two units of knights!

Smite is now s8.
15 s10 vs 5 s8

 jokerkd wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 jokerkd wrote:

 whembly wrote:
I'm excited about the DW Knights' Mace rule.

AP3 is a godsend.

The ability to switch on "smite" at any turn is pretty danged sweet too!

Apparently they only get 1 attack each when using smite. Nerfed hardcore

I disagree.

I've play DWK quite a bit in 6th ed. You have to be really judicious to pop that Smite mode since you only have it on your turn, once per game. Then, you're just a str 6, ap 4 maul'n terminator that you're just hoping to disrupt the enemy backline. Post smite, tough units can tie you up.

I'd rather have AP3 always, and choose to flip on smite (one attack at str 10, ap 2, at initiative) at any sub-fight phase. On a WS 5, T5, 2+/3++ model to boot!

I'll take that tradeoff any day.

To me, I'm fielding at least two units of knights!

Smite is now s8.

You sure about that? I thought Smite is now just strength x 2.
Doesn't the mace +2 come into play? (s4 x 2 for smite, then +2 for mace = str10 smite dmg)???

15 s10 vs 5 s8

Again... I'd rather have 5 s8 attackes at any time, than 15 s10 in only one subfight phase.

 Ghaz wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 the_Armyman wrote:
See, the problem is that the choices GW makes are arbitrary. Put a Space Marine Captain on a bike and *poof* bikes as Troops. Why can this not be applied in this case. The game didn't change for some, but it did unnecessarily for others. So, you can use that old saw that "things always change," but in actuality, they don't for everyone.

Except, if you've played DA for any length of time every unit has changed and the way the army works has changed significantly. This is the same for every army.

edit: And I completely agree that it is arbitrary. That being said, change is predictable since you know that it will happen with each edition and each new codex.

So how would you go about allowing a force to take Bikes, Tacticals and Scouts (and only those three units) as the core of the force and leave everything else unchanged with an alternate Detachment? Changing Bikes to Troops is the simplest way to do so short of a Bike Squad Formation (which would still require two squads of Tacticals and/or Scouts).

Which is why Dark Angels should be able to do it too.

5 s8 that you can use at any time with a mace that is always AP3 versus a one use only, always AP 4 mace. I think it's a fair trade off. Throwing in a termy chaplain makes them even more fun.

Smite has its own profile at x2 strength.

We obviously play them differently. I now have to choose between your tactics or leaving them in the case.

Being ap3 is definitely a big bonus against most units, just not the units I'm used to pitting them against

CrashGordon94 wrote:

 Ghaz wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 the_Armyman wrote:
See, the problem is that the choices GW makes are arbitrary. Put a Space Marine Captain on a bike and *poof* bikes as Troops. Why can this not be applied in this case. The game didn't change for some, but it did unnecessarily for others. So, you can use that old saw that "things always change," but in actuality, they don't for everyone.

Except, if you've played DA for any length of time every unit has changed and the way the army works has changed significantly. This is the same for every army.

edit: And I completely agree that it is arbitrary. That being said, change is predictable since you know that it will happen with each edition and each new codex.

So how would you go about allowing a force to take Bikes, Tacticals and Scouts (and only those three units) as the core of the force and leave everything else unchanged with an alternate Detachment? Changing Bikes to Troops is the simplest way to do so short of a Bike Squad Formation (which would still require two squads of Tacticals and/or Scouts).

Which is why Dark Angels should be able to do it too.

Just because it was necessary for one army to do so doesn't make it necessary for other armies. The Deathwing Detachment does not have Troops, Fast Attack or Heavy Support slots. That's why Deathwing are not Troops.

 the_Armyman wrote:
I won't drag things further off-topic. Just saying, there's the easy way that makes everyone happy and there's the GW way that turns more people away than it draws year-by-year. I'll go back to being a bitter curmudgeon in the shadows while you kids talk about your lollipops and rainbows

The problem with the easy way that makes everyone happy is that it only sells the books...or not if you are less than scrupulous. We all know why it changes (in most cases). They need to shake things up and get you to spend more money on even more models. This new 'Take our $40 to $80 vehicle kits in units of three!! so you can get access to some special rule that is legitimately cool' strategy is all about getting you to drop more money to put even more stuff down on the table. Instead of a FoC selection to unlock one or more units of your choice, it's 'take this apocalypse style formation thing to be able to take this other apocalypse style formation thing'

I was looking for an excuse to come back to playing my green marines, and thus 40k....but I'm just not getting the 'feelz' as the kids say these days.

I still don't get the arbitrary reason the Land Speeder Storm is not an option for Dark Angels Scout Squads (I can't read German, so couldn't see if that changed or not) . They seem to be freely handing out the Grav tech to everyone....you'd think the chapter with arguably the most Land Speeders on hand would/could spare a couple for Storms (stretch limo convertibles) for the 10th company....

I get that you can ally (brothers in arms) and unbound and all that, but I don't want to have to go outside of the 'box' to field a unit that has no reason for not being there except to give the vanilla marines something the other chapters cant have. I'll pass. I'm getting closer and closer to not caring any more and it may soon be time to get the old stuff up on ebay to help buy stuff for games I actually still enjoy playing...

I feel like there's not much else to talk about in here now. Can't we lock this sucker and take all the decurion mutterings to discussions etc?.