casvalremdeikun wrote:
Confirmation that Regular Space Marines can't ride in a Repulsor. Also, Aggressors lack AP on everything but their fists. That is pretty lame.

They have no AP, but they get 24 shots per Marine if they stand still, thats 144 Shots for a full squad, not including the Frag Launchers. They get those 144 Shots, when firing on overwatch.

I suspect they won't get to fire twice on Overwatch if they stand still (as that seems pretty terribly broken), but if they haven't worded it correctly, people will do that. It is an absurd amount of shots, regardless of the lack of save modifiers.

 Elbows wrote:
I suspect they won't get to fire twice on Overwatch if they stand still (as that seems pretty terribly broken), but if they haven't worded it correctly, people will do that. It is an absurd amount of shots, regardless of the lack of save modifiers.

It specifically says that they can fire twice during Overwatch. And their Flamers are 2d6 shots. They will wreck anything that charges them.

It says on their entry it counts for Overwatch. Now imagine if Bolter Drill Strategem works on them.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
It says on their entry it counts for Overwatch. Now imagine if Bolter Drill Strategem works on them.

It does. Anything that has the word Bolt in the name is affected (Boltstorm Gauntlets are listed as an example).

Those guys are gonna be good regardless of AP

Quantity is a quality all on its own etc etc etc.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:
Those guys are gonna be good regardless of AP

Yeah, I am warming up to them. I just wish that missile launcher was better. Should have been able to fire krak grenades too.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Confirmation that Regular Space Marines can't ride in a Repulsor. Also, Aggressors lack AP on everything but their fists. That is pretty lame.

They have no AP, but they get 24 shots per Marine if they stand still, thats 144 Shots for a full squad, not including the Frag Launchers. They get those 144 Shots, when firing on overwatch.

Looks like it's only 12 shots per marine if they stand still, as they are called "Gauntlets" rather than "Gauntlet". That's still a hefty amount of firepower though.

I can't wait to have my 10-Man Sternguard Squad use Bolter Drill and Masterful Marksmanship for a total of 2 CP. If they are within 15", 20 shots, 6s generate an additional hit. +1 to Wound Rolls (maybe they need an LT nearby for funsies). AP-2. Lots of stuff is going to die to that.

 JJ wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Confirmation that Regular Space Marines can't ride in a Repulsor. Also, Aggressors lack AP on everything but their fists. That is pretty lame.

They have no AP, but they get 24 shots per Marine if they stand still, thats 144 Shots for a full squad, not including the Frag Launchers. They get those 144 Shots, when firing on overwatch.

Looks like it's only 12 shots per marine if they stand still, as they are called "Gauntlets" rather than "Gauntlet". That's still a hefty amount of firepower though.

Nevermind maybe I am wrong

Still 72 shots.

Machine Empathy: I can't read those images at all, so I assume it's for 1 unit each time it's played?
Still, a Stormtalon hitting ground units on 2s is pretty nice.
I may just have to get a box of those Aggressors...
I see the Stormhawk is up a power level, really itching to know which point values have changed now.

 Flood wrote:

I see the Stormhawk is up a power level, really itching to know which point values have changed now.

Probably none, or got a reduction.

 Flood wrote:
Machine Empathy: I can't read those images at all, so I assume it's for 1 unit each time it's played?
Still, a Stormtalon hitting ground units on 2s is pretty nice.
I may just have to get a box of those Aggressors...
I see the Stormhawk is up a power level, really itching to know which point values have changed now.

One vehicle


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:


Nevermind maybe I am wrong

Still 72 shots.

Well, it's D6 on the frag, so 9.5 shots each, right? So 57-ish. Very short ranged, but they can run and shoot and punch well.

Best thing about them is CS into squads of 1. Hard to tell if they are 2 or 3 W. And a 3+ save?

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Confirmation that Regular Space Marines can't ride in a Repulsor. Also, Aggressors lack AP on everything but their fists. That is pretty lame.

They have no AP, but they get 24 shots per Marine if they stand still, thats 144 Shots for a full squad, not including the Frag Launchers. They get those 144 Shots, when firing on overwatch.

I think re Agressors we need to revise our thoughts on them, we initally thought they where gonna be the heavy anti armor etc units of the Primaris Marines, this appers to not be the case (unless one of the hellblaster options is a much power powerful plasma gun Primaris Marines seem to lack dedicated anti tank infantry) rather agressors seem to be the premier anti-horde option for Primaris Marines. Agressors are what we're gonna want to use against guard infantry lists etc.

 Desubot wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 NorseSig wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
The relic is better than a Relic Blade. I don't see how it is garbage.

I hate all relics that are simply a better melee weapon. I want something that is a force multiplier or somehow affects more than the model using it. Was not a fan of the Gorgon Chain either. Though my meta forced me into it because i like to win once and a while.

This basically. Sword+1 is bland and boring, especially if every relic is some variation of that or armor+1.

Sometimes it's the oddball items or the ones with odd tactical applications that are the most fun. From the Veil of Darkness to the Astral Grimoire, or (my personal favorite) the Scrolls of Magnus, relics that do something different rather than the same thing + 1 are more memorable!

You guys cant complain

IF got a bolt pistol.

They are all going to be boring it looks like which is fine.

I actually LIKE the Spartean :(
Two damage, ignores cover, AP-1, and can target characters? AND fits the whole Bolt theme? What's not to like?

Nothing not to like at all. though was hoping for a relic boltgun so i could use those master crafted boltgun bits.

Well it does look like the Primarchs Wrath is still there, so that has to count for something. I don't know the stats for it though.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:

 NorseSig wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
The relic is better than a Relic Blade. I don't see how it is garbage.

I hate all relics that are simply a better melee weapon. I want something that is a force multiplier or somehow affects more than the model using it. Was not a fan of the Gorgon Chain either. Though my meta forced me into it because i like to win once and a while.

This basically. Sword+1 is bland and boring, especially if every relic is some variation of that or armor+1.

Sometimes it's the oddball items or the ones with odd tactical applications that are the most fun. From the Veil of Darkness to the Astral Grimoire, or (my personal favorite) the Scrolls of Magnus, relics that do something different rather than the same thing + 1 are more memorable!

You guys cant complain

IF got a bolt pistol.

They are all going to be boring it looks like which is fine.

I actually LIKE the Spartean :(
Two damage, ignores cover, AP-1, and can target characters? AND fits the whole Bolt theme? What's not to like?

Nothing not to like at all. though was hoping for a relic boltgun so i could use those master crafted boltgun bits.

Well it does look like the Primarchs Wrath is still there, so that has to count for something. I don't know the stats for it though.

proably be pretty good given that storm bolters are pretty win this edition

BrianDavion wrote:
(unless one of the hellblaster options is a much power powerful plasma gun Primaris Marines seem to lack dedicated anti tank infantry

Heavy plasma incinerators are S8 AP -4 D1 and OC for S9 AP-4 D2.

BrianDavion wrote:

I think re Agressors we need to revise our thoughts on them, we initally thought they where gonna be the heavy anti armor etc units of the Primaris Marines, this appers to not be the case (unless one of the hellblaster options is a much power powerful plasma gun Primaris Marines seem to lack dedicated anti tank infantry) rather agressors seem to be the premier anti-horde option for Primaris Marines. Agressors are what we're gonna want to use against guard infantry lists etc.

Yeah, both options for their Gauntlets seem good vs horde.

And as Prete says;

pretre wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
(unless one of the hellblaster options is a much power powerful plasma gun Primaris Marines seem to lack dedicated anti tank infantry

Heavy plasma incinerators are S8 AP -4 D1 and OC for S9 AP-4 D2.

Heavy Plasma Incinerators will be good vs vehicles.

Ooo agressors seem like a great counter to conscript, brimstone horror, and razorworwing flock spam.

I gotta say I appreciate how the primaris stuff is all lateral and not just marines +1 so far.

Agressors seem to be anti horde while centurions remain anti tank. Revilers and scouts don't occupy the same slot. Intercessors are more individually powerful but arnt flexible like tactical marines who get special and heavy weapons. Repulsor is a gunboat but not a better land raider. Etc.

 buddha wrote:
Ooo agressors seem like a great counter to conscript, brimstone horror, and razorworwing flock spam.

I gotta say I appreciate how the primaris stuff is all lateral and not just marines +1 so far.

Agressors seem to be anti horde while centurions remain anti tank. Revilers and scouts don't occupy the same slot. Intercessors are more individually powerful but arnt flexible like tactical marines who get special and heavy weapons. Repulsor is a gunboat but not a better land raider. Etc.

It feels like the repulsor is stepping on the predators toes a bit. roughly the same amount of shots for the dakka variety, same amount of las cannons for the las pred. but better T and 10 transport cap. i wonder how many points its going to be.

Centurions in dakka mode is close to the agressors i feel. 6 heavy bolter shots and 6 hurricane bolter shots per guy.

the main difference is one gets to ignore cover while the other gets double shots when not moving. and i play IF so the ignore cover is wasted on the centurions :(

Someone mentioned PL 16. That's around 310-330 points since PL roughly 20 points/PL

 Desubot wrote:

 buddha wrote:
Ooo agressors seem like a great counter to conscript, brimstone horror, and razorworwing flock spam.

I gotta say I appreciate how the primaris stuff is all lateral and not just marines +1 so far.

Agressors seem to be anti horde while centurions remain anti tank. Revilers and scouts don't occupy the same slot. Intercessors are more individually powerful but arnt flexible like tactical marines who get special and heavy weapons. Repulsor is a gunboat but not a better land raider. Etc.

It feels like the repulsor is stepping on the predators toes a bit. roughly the same amount of shots for the dakka variety, same amount of las cannons for the las pred. but better T and 10 transport cap. i wonder how many points its going to be.

Centurions in dakka mode is close to the agressors i feel. 6 heavy bolter shots and 6 hurricane bolter shots per guy.

the main difference is one gets to ignore cover while the other gets double shots when not moving. and i play IF so the ignore cover is wasted on the centurions :(

If you're just going off shots, the Dakka Repulsor has more than the Predator (mind you the Pred does get S7). But the Onslaught Heavy Cannon is 12 Shots vs 2d3, then it can have the twinlinked heavy bolter (so your 6 HB shots), you can put the regular Onslaught Cannon on top for a further 6 shots.

So that alone is 24 S5 AP -1 1 damage shots, then there is all the other weapon systems it can take.

Holy crap...did you guys see the other stuff marines are getting in the IF Chapter Focus article this morning?

So, it looks like the chapter tactics are just the first part of a trinity of awesome and are counterbalanced by their chapter stratagem and warlord trait.

IF:

Tactic: Ignore cover and reroll failed wounds against buildings.
Stratagem: Bolter Drill - Reroll 1's when firing any bolter weapon (I can't find an official source for bolter drill, but this definition has been floating around the internet)
Trait: Friendly IF units in 6" of your warlord that are in cover gain an additional armor bonus of 1 when targeted by weapons with AP -1.

Just...holy crap. My IF list may have just gained an Aegis Defense Line so I know I'll have cover in every game I play.

What do people think the stratagems and traits might be for some of the other chapters?

The source for bolter drill IIRC was from their livestream.

 NorseSig wrote:
I am looking at how they can be used. Look at the list I used today. So far it looks like they are quite limited, and ultimately based on current info a low mid tier. The IH ARE at a disadvantage compared to other chapters for the most part.

So I'd just like to point something out: The current info about the IH tends to indicate they have a great deal of synergy with existing powerful space marine lists.

Firstly, the CT makes your infantry harder to kill, and thus better at holding objectives. That's 75% of what most marine armies use infantry for at this point, along with snipers for enemy characters it seems. I highly doubt any of the tactics I've seen so far will change that, so generally the boost is more useful than anything related to dealing damage etc, if we are discussing actual tiers.

Secondly, depending on how the stratagem works, it may apply to flyers as well as tanks. Suddenly stormtalons and stormhawks can move without a firing penalty, which is one of the big draws of the stormraven. Given how popular the stormraven is, that's again a kinda big deal.

So... as far as actual tiers go, IH currently looks like it could benefit the best current marine builds more than any other. Which could change when point costs are adjusted, maybe some of the other tactics are some powerful they end up creating new best builds even (though none of the builds shown so far seem that good).

We know from an image of the stratagem page that Bolter Drill gives a unit's bolters the ability to generate extra hits on hit rolls of 6+. This works out to be basically the same thing as re-rolling 1s to hit, but it stacks with re-rolls. It doesn't strike me as being particularly good.

I don't think Imperial Fists are getting a whole lot that's that worthwhile, really. The Warlord trait is neat but ultimately it's only protecting you from AP -1 shooting.

The standout Chapter stratagems are Raven Guard (1 CP for infiltrate) and White Scars (1 CP to advance a bike 8", shoot, and charge). Maybe Black Templars with Abhor the Witch (1 CP to deny on a 4+ within 24"). The others make a unit do a few more wounds.

SilverAlien wrote:

 NorseSig wrote:
I am looking at how they can be used. Look at the list I used today. So far it looks like they are quite limited, and ultimately based on current info a low mid tier. The IH ARE at a disadvantage compared to other chapters for the most part.

So I'd just like to point something out: The current info about the IH tends to indicate they have a great deal of synergy with existing powerful space marine lists.

Firstly, the CT makes your infantry harder to kill, and thus better at holding objectives. That's 75% of what most marine armies use infantry for at this point, along with snipers for enemy characters it seems. I highly doubt any of the tactics I've seen so far will change that, so generally the boost is more useful than anything related to dealing damage etc, if we are discussing actual tiers.

Secondly, depending on how the stratagem works, it may apply to flyers as well as tanks. Suddenly stormtalons and stormhawks can move without a firing penalty, which is one of the big draws of the stormraven. Given how popular the stormraven is, that's again a kinda big deal.

So... as far as actual tiers go, IH currently looks like it could benefit the best current marine builds more than any other. Which could change when point costs are adjusted, maybe some of the other tactics are some powerful they end up creating new best builds even (though none of the builds shown so far seem that good).

Yes, the IH stratagem appears to work on flyers. Of course, it only means they get 25% more hits when shooting the things they each want to be shooting at.

Dionysodorus wrote:
We know from an image of the stratagem page that Bolter Drill gives a unit's bolters the ability to generate extra hits on hit rolls of 6+. This works out to be basically the same thing as re-rolling 1s to hit, but it stacks with re-rolls. It doesn't strike me as being particularly good.

Uhh no.

Rerolling ones is 14/18 hits per dice rolled.
Exploding 6's is 1/2 Hit plus 1/6 chance of 2 Hits. Which is 5/6 (I think) or 15/18. A little better.

And you mentioned the stacking rerolls, which will increase it a bit more.

edit: Well, you did say basically the same and 1/18 difference is basically the same. I thought it would be more dramatic. It probably is with rerolls.

Rerolls
1/2 Hit plus 1/6 chance of 2 hits. 15/18 hit.
Then
Rerolls
1/6 Misses get rerolled, with 1/2 hit is 1/12 more hits. Then 1/6 of 1/6 get 2 hits.

So 3/36 and 2/36 plus 30/36 is 35/36 per shot. So basically, you hit with every bolter.

Hmmm, so looks like I am positioning Pedro Kantor near the Sternguard for maximum effect. I could also put a Lieutenant near them for even more wounds from Masterful Marksmanship.

 pretre wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
We know from an image of the stratagem page that Bolter Drill gives a unit's bolters the ability to generate extra hits on hit rolls of 6+. This works out to be basically the same thing as re-rolling 1s to hit, but it stacks with re-rolls. It doesn't strike me as being particularly good.

Uhh no.

Rerolling ones is 14/18 hits per dice rolled.
Exploding 6's is 1/2 Hit plus 1/6 chance of 2 Hits. Which is 5/6 (I think) or 15/18. A little better.

And you mentioned the stacking rerolls, which will increase it a bit more.

edit: Well, you did say basically the same and 1/18 difference is basically the same. I thought it would be more dramatic. It probably is with rerolls.

Rerolls
1/2 Hit plus 1/6 chance of 2 hits. 15/18 hit.
Then
Rerolls
1/6 Misses get rerolled, with 1/2 hit is 1/12 more hits. Then 1/6 of 1/6 get 2 hits.

So 3/36 and 2/36 plus 30/36 is 35/36 per shot. So basically, you hit with every bolter.

Sorry, I misspoke. Bolter Drill says: "Each time you make a hit roll of 6+ for a model firing a bolt weapon, that model can immediately make another hit roll using the same weapon at the same target". Infantry alone, standard caveat about extra attacks not generating extra attacks. You're right that actually generating an extra hit would be a bit better -- this would be like getting +1 to hit.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Hmmm, so looks like I am positioning Pedro Kantor near the Sternguard for maximum effect. I could also put a Lieutenant near them for even more wounds from Masterful Marksmanship.

Rerolls
1/2 Hit plus 1/6 chance of 2 hits. 15/18 hit.
Then
Rerolls
1/3 Misses get rerolled, with 1/2 hit is 1/6 more hits. Then 1/6 of 1/3 get 2 hits.

Pedro makes it so you reroll all misses which is even better.

3/18 plus 2/18 plus 15/18 is 20/18 hits. You actually hit more than you shoot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, it's extra hit roll? Ugh. That's a lot more work.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That wasn't right.

If you're hitting on a 3+, re-rolling all misses, and you get to make a new hit roll on a 6+, then I believe you expect:

4/3 * (2/3 + 1/6*2/3) = 1.04 hits per shot

 Melissia wrote:
The source for bolter drill IIRC was from their livestream.

Is there a link to the stratagem descriptions?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dionysodorus wrote:

Sorry, I misspoke. Bolter Drill says: "Each time you make a hit roll of 6+ for a model firing a bolt weapon, that model can immediately make another hit roll using the same weapon at the same target". Infantry alone, standard caveat about extra attacks not generating extra attacks. You're right that actually generating an extra hit would be a bit better -- this would be like getting +1 to hit.

That makes a stock 6-man centurion devastator squad with primaris rhino support absolutely bonkers in rapid fire range...

Extra Hit Roll, not extra Hit, without rerolls:

2/3 Hit, plus 1/6 Chance of 2/3 hit is 14/18 Hit, same as reroll ones.

Extra hit roll, not extra hit with reroll 1's:
Still 14/18 plus
1/6 * 2/3 = 14/108
So 98/108 Hits.

Extra hit roll with reroll all:
14/18 plus
1/3 * 14/18 = 14/54
56/54. Every shot hits, basically.

 Arandmoor wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
The source for bolter drill IIRC was from their livestream.

Is there a link to the stratagem descriptions?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Dionysodorus wrote:

Sorry, I misspoke. Bolter Drill says: "Each time you make a hit roll of 6+ for a model firing a bolt weapon, that model can immediately make another hit roll using the same weapon at the same target". Infantry alone, standard caveat about extra attacks not generating extra attacks. You're right that actually generating an extra hit would be a bit better -- this would be like getting +1 to hit.

That makes a stock 6-man centurion devastator squad with primaris rhino support absolutely bonkers in rapid fire range...

I'm going off of the images in the review here: https://ttgamingdiary.wordpress.com/2017/07/21/review-codex-space-marines-datacards/

Dionysodorus wrote:
If you're hitting on a 3+, re-rolling all misses, and you get to make a new hit roll on a 6+, then I believe you expect:

4/3 * (2/3 + 1/6*2/3) = 1.04 hits per shot

So then it becomes the question of the Masterful Marksmanship adding 1 to wound rolls. How does that modify the math? Obviously that is dependent on Toughness, but it basically means that even against T8 or better, you are still wounding on a 5+.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
If you're hitting on a 3+, re-rolling all misses, and you get to make a new hit roll on a 6+, then I believe you expect:

4/3 * (2/3 + 1/6*2/3) = 1.04 hits per shot

So then it becomes the question of the Masterful Marksmanship adding 1 to wound rolls. How does that modify the math? Obviously that is dependent on Toughness, but it basically means that even against T8 or better, you are still wounding on a 5+.

These are independent. If you're wounding on a 4+ against whatever-it-is, then you expect half of your hits to wound, however many hits you had. Masterful Marksmanship means the Sternguard do 100% more wounds vs T8, 50% more vs T5-7, 33% more vs T4, and 25% more vs T3. So percentage-wise the best case scenario for them is re-rolling failed hits and using both stratagems against T8, where they're expecting to do 3.11 times as many wounds as they'd have done without all those things. So a rapid-firing squad of 10 expects to put about 3.5 wounds on a Land Raider or about 7 on a Razorback.

It's certainly a big boost, but it strikes me as being pretty expensive for what you're getting. Using 1 CP to re-roll a failed lascannon wound on a Land Raider is worth just over 1.5 expected wounds. Using it to reroll a d6 damage roll of 1 is worth an expected 2.5 wounds on whatever.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
If you're hitting on a 3+, re-rolling all misses, and you get to make a new hit roll on a 6+, then I believe you expect:

4/3 * (2/3 + 1/6*2/3) = 1.04 hits per shot

So then it becomes the question of the Masterful Marksmanship adding 1 to wound rolls. How does that modify the math? Obviously that is dependent on Toughness, but it basically means that even against T8 or better, you are still wounding on a 5+.

We didn't take the wounds into account, just hits.

Dionysodorus wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Dionysodorus wrote:
If you're hitting on a 3+, re-rolling all misses, and you get to make a new hit roll on a 6+, then I believe you expect:

4/3 * (2/3 + 1/6*2/3) = 1.04 hits per shot

So then it becomes the question of the Masterful Marksmanship adding 1 to wound rolls. How does that modify the math? Obviously that is dependent on Toughness, but it basically means that even against T8 or better, you are still wounding on a 5+.

These are independent. If you're wounding on a 4+ against whatever-it-is, then you expect half of your hits to wound, however many hits you had. Masterful Marksmanship means the Sternguard do 100% more wounds vs T8, 50% more vs T5-7, 33% more vs T4, and 25% more vs T3. So percentage-wise the best case scenario for them is re-rolling failed hits and using both stratagems against T8, where they're expecting to do 3.11 times as many wounds as they'd have done without all those things. So a rapid-firing squad of 10 expects to put about 3.5 wounds on a Land Raider or about 7 on a Razorback.

It's certainly a big boost, but it strikes me as being pretty expensive for what you're getting. Using 1 CP to re-roll a failed lascannon wound on a Land Raider is worth just over 1.5 expected wounds. Using it to reroll a d6 damage roll of 1 is worth an expected 2.5 wounds on whatever.

Fair enough. I don't think I would be going after Land Raiders. But going after a Riptide (T7) would be a pretty good use. Using MM and Bolter Drill on the same squad would generate 10 AP-2 wounds on a Riptide. That is pretty potent.

With Bolter Drill it's roughly 0.78 hits:



With Bolter Drill and reroll 1's to hit it's roughly 0.93 hits:



With Bolter Drill and reroll to hit it's roughly 1.09 hits:



From this we can calculate how many extra hits you get with bolter drill:

No reroll gets 0.11 extra hits: (7/9)-(4/6)=1/9

Reroll 1's to hit gets 0.15 extra hits: (301/324)-(7/9)=49/324

Reroll to hit gets 0.20 extra hits: (88/81)-(8/9)=16/81

Weird that the land speeder can't do double flamers any more...

Now that we know all tactics, some relics and stratagems has anyone's opinion changed?

This is the internet, no one changes their mind.

Gibs55 wrote:
Now that we know all tactics, some relics and stratagems has anyone's opinion changed?

Yes. Raven Guard went from Broken to LOL! Broken.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Gibs55 wrote:
Now that we know all tactics, some relics and stratagems has anyone's opinion changed?

Yes. Raven Guard went from Broken to LOL! Broken.

whats the ravenguard relic?

BrianDavion wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Gibs55 wrote:
Now that we know all tactics, some relics and stratagems has anyone's opinion changed?

Yes. Raven Guard went from Broken to LOL! Broken.

whats the ravenguard relic?

A jump pack that allows Advance and Charge in the same turn with Rerolls to charge. In short, they are getting to where they need to be. But that isn't the half of it. Their Strategem allows deep strike along with a move. So units that want close combat can basically autocharge

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Their Strategem allows deep strike along with a move. So units that want close combat can basically autocharge

It does have a big weakness in that you have to "deep strike" the unit before the first turn starts, meaning that if you don't have the first turn then the unit has to be deployed right before your opponent's first turn. You won't know who gets the first turn until after you have already used the stratagem.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Gibs55 wrote:
Now that we know all tactics, some relics and stratagems has anyone's opinion changed?

Yes. Raven Guard went from Broken to LOL! Broken.

whats the ravenguard relic?

A jump pack that allows Advance and Charge in the same turn with Rerolls to charge. In short, they are getting to where they need to be. But that isn't the half of it. Their Strategem allows deep strike along with a move. So units that want close combat can basically autocharge

pretty solid. also allows discount reivers assuming the deep strike rules is an upgrade they need to buy

Double post.

BrianDavion wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Gibs55 wrote:
Now that we know all tactics, some relics and stratagems has anyone's opinion changed?

Yes. Raven Guard went from Broken to LOL! Broken.

whats the ravenguard relic?

A jump pack that allows Advance and Charge in the same turn with Rerolls to charge. In short, they are getting to where they need to be. But that isn't the half of it. Their Strategem allows deep strike along with a move. So units that want close combat can basically autocharge

pretty solid. also allows discount reivers assuming the deep strike rules is an upgrade they need to buy

It is an upgrade. Both options cost 2 pts per model. And unlike jump packs, Grav Chutes don't grant Fly, so their one and only bonus is superceded.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

Gibs55 wrote:
Now that we know all tactics, some relics and stratagems has anyone's opinion changed?

Yes. Raven Guard went from Broken to LOL! Broken.

whats the ravenguard relic?

A jump pack that allows Advance and Charge in the same turn with Rerolls to charge. In short, they are getting to where they need to be. But that isn't the half of it. Their Strategem allows deep strike along with a move. So units that want close combat can basically autocharge

pretty solid. also allows discount reivers assuming the deep strike rules is an upgrade they need to buy

It is an upgrade. Both options cost 2 pts per model. And unlike jump packs, Grav Chutes don't grant Fly, so their one and only bonus is superceded.

then yeah, it;s an option to get a minor points discount on a squad of reivers.

 NorseSig wrote:

Time to shut you down.
1. Terminators as Sergeants is stupid. Fluff makes it look neat, but you can't fit anything in a Rhino because of it, and with Pods you won't be able to get your second bought weapon.
2. You can get a Dread as an HQ and it does buffing. Chaplain Dreads. Yeah everyone has then available, but it's still thematic enough for you, yes? A Dread inspiring units?
3. Most Chapters don't have unique units. One can argue Blood AND Dark Angels don't need their special units, and that most rules can be sent to Chapter Tactics. As someone using Iron Hands I don't really care.
4. The Axe Of Medusa doesn't fit what we want to do? It doesn't if you don't build your army for melee. I'm using melee Captains and Librarians, and with the new codex presumably Chapter Masters. Relic Blades are a good choice, so getting one with consistent damage is an even better choice.

I think these are the weakest Chapter Tactics, but there's a lot to be said for the fact the army can be built as you wish, rather than being forced into a specific style with all other revealed choices (outside Salamanders of course, but I suppose that's more around MSU, though not entirely forced...)

1. Sergeants in Terminator armor. Is that worded better for you. It may be silly and pure fluff, but it is something IH had and it was taken away. I more than anything want the OPTION to do what we used to be able to do. If SW can do it, then why can't the IH?
2. Except IH aren't supposed to have Chaplains (or a Chapter Master though IH have HQs with their experience and ability, so Chapter Masters in all but name and rank). They are supposed to have Iron Fathers. Which again is a Unique model we had that was taken away. And the Iron Father
unit was Iconic of the Chapter (And was our chaplain tech marine love child of sorts). Plus it is a FW model and they still aren't accepted by everyone.
3. Again, IH used to have a Unique unit. They may not need special units, but their armies are usually made better by using them. This one doesn't bother me as much as the others. I just want a level playing field

I'm sorry to tell you this but... these are no longer fluff.
Iron Hands are now 100% Codex-complaint and Iron Father is no longer a rank but now an honourific title any of the command staff can get (including Chaplain, Captains, Librarians, Techpriests, Apothecaries, etc.)

Hate it all you want, but your fluff changed to make you no longer unique, like how GW are now ignoring the fact that White Scars 'aren't meant' to have Dreadnoughts - they changed the fluff so they DO.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

 NorseSig wrote:

Time to shut you down.
1. Terminators as Sergeants is stupid. Fluff makes it look neat, but you can't fit anything in a Rhino because of it, and with Pods you won't be able to get your second bought weapon.
2. You can get a Dread as an HQ and it does buffing. Chaplain Dreads. Yeah everyone has then available, but it's still thematic enough for you, yes? A Dread inspiring units?
3. Most Chapters don't have unique units. One can argue Blood AND Dark Angels don't need their special units, and that most rules can be sent to Chapter Tactics. As someone using Iron Hands I don't really care.
4. The Axe Of Medusa doesn't fit what we want to do? It doesn't if you don't build your army for melee. I'm using melee Captains and Librarians, and with the new codex presumably Chapter Masters. Relic Blades are a good choice, so getting one with consistent damage is an even better choice.

I think these are the weakest Chapter Tactics, but there's a lot to be said for the fact the army can be built as you wish, rather than being forced into a specific style with all other revealed choices (outside Salamanders of course, but I suppose that's more around MSU, though not entirely forced...)

1. Sergeants in Terminator armor. Is that worded better for you. It may be silly and pure fluff, but it is something IH had and it was taken away. I more than anything want the OPTION to do what we used to be able to do. If SW can do it, then why can't the IH?
2. Except IH aren't supposed to have Chaplains (or a Chapter Master though IH have HQs with their experience and ability, so Chapter Masters in all but name and rank). They are supposed to have Iron Fathers. Which again is a Unique model we had that was taken away. And the Iron Father
unit was Iconic of the Chapter (And was our chaplain tech marine love child of sorts). Plus it is a FW model and they still aren't accepted by everyone.
3. Again, IH used to have a Unique unit. They may not need special units, but their armies are usually made better by using them. This one doesn't bother me as much as the others. I just want a level playing field

I'm sorry to tell you this but... these are no longer fluff.
Iron Hands are now 100% Codex-complaint and Iron Father is no longer a rank but now an honourific title any of the command staff can get (including Chaplain, Captains, Librarians, Techpriests, Apothecaries, etc.)

Hate it all you want, but your fluff changed to make you no longer unique, like how GW are now ignoring the fact that White Scars 'aren't meant' to have Dreadnoughts - they changed the fluff so they DO.

Because GW is going to force us to follow their fluff.

I know that's not your point but it's still not true.

 NivlacSupreme wrote:


Because GW is going to force us to follow their fluff.

Well it seems like IF are probably the weakest. The Black Templar relic is pretty good, that extra 3" will be pretty handy.

Raven Guard still tops dogs I guess


Automatically Appended Next Post:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qpvAr9DRmgQ

This is the first time RG has ever been top dog. WS have been for like... the last two or three editions.

In fact, RG used to be the garbage tier one. The character didnt work, the chapter tactic sucked...

Does it seem likely that the units deploying with the strategem being able to move and charge turn 1 was an oversight? I thought almost every ability that allowed "infiltrate", or even the deceiver's redeployment stipulate that those units can't charge if they deploy with this method.

I wonder if it's something that's going to be swiftly FAQ'd. It could be for consistency as much as because the rule itself is completely bonkers.

Asura Varuna wrote:
Does it seem likely that the units deploying with the strategem being able to move and charge turn 1 was an oversight? I thought almost every ability that allowed "infiltrate", or even the deceiver's redeployment stipulate that those units can't charge if they deploy with this method.

I wonder if it's something that's going to be swiftly FAQ'd. It could be for consistency as much as because the rule itself is completely bonkers.

Don't forget that there's there's at least a 35% that the stratagem doesn't work as intended in the ITC format. You declare that you are using the stratagem during your deployment, so you don't know who gets turn 1. If your opponent gets turn 1 you still have to deep strike your unit before his turn starts.

Well, ITC will obviously have to change as stratagems come out, because they seem to interact with in-game events.

Having to decide in advance cuts off the whole point of "making flexible tactical decision and introduce skilled decision making"

I mean, for the love of god GW actually do something right and create a system where pure skill is the main factor, and you can't "netlist" or "know the result before the game started"-and you shut it down?

Asura Varuna wrote:
Does it seem likely that the units deploying with the strategem being able to move and charge turn 1 was an oversight? I thought almost every ability that allowed "infiltrate", or even the deceiver's redeployment stipulate that those units can't charge if they deploy with this method.

I wonder if it's something that's going to be swiftly FAQ'd. It could be for consistency as much as because the rule itself is completely bonkers.

Genestealer Cults can infiltrate 9" away, move and then charge you on turn 1, and that's without the need for a Command Point.

I doubt it's an oversight that RG can do the same once for 1 CP.

 MinscS2 wrote:

I doubt it's an oversight that RG can do the same once for 1 CP.

Is it once though? It's a strategem that's used before the first turn, so you can use it as many time as you like. Provided you spend the command points to do so, you can infiltrate your whole army, right? Also, cult ambush is a randomly rolled rule, this is guaranteed. I'm sure GSC players would gladly pay a CP to choose which result they wanted. The other differences between this and Cult ambush is that ambush is on any turn, not just before the first turn, and that quite fankly SM units are a lot scarier than the GSC ones able to make use of this power (besides perhaps purestrains).

I'm pretty sure the intent is that you can use it once.

Asura Varuna wrote:
Is it once though? It's a strategem that's used before the first turn, so you can use it as many time as you like. Provided you spend the command points to do so, you can infiltrate your whole army, right?

You can use it as many times as you like since deployment happens before the battle has started. You still need to deploy half of your units on the table, that rule is universal.

Asura Varuna wrote:
Also, cult ambush is a randomly rolled rule, this is guaranteed. I'm sure GSC players would gladly pay a CP to choose which result they wanted. The other differences between this and Cult ambush is that ambush is on any turn, not just before the first turn, and that quite fankly SM units are a lot scarier than the GSC ones able to make use of this power (besides perhaps purestrains).

The Raven Guard stratagem is also random in the sense that you have to deep strike before the first turn starts, meaning that if you don't get the first turn you still have to deploy your units before your opponent plays his turn. If your opponent is willing to spend a CP reroll on the seize that's at best a 69% chance of getting turn 1, if you have fewer drops.

In matched play though you can only use the stratagem once per turn. So one unit can do that.
Even if you can use it multiple times, it's 1CP each time.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
In matched play though you can only use the stratagem once per turn. So one unit can do that.
Even if you can use it multiple times, it's 1CP each time.

Once per phase. And you are not in a phase when you're using the Raven Guard stratagem.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
In matched play though you can only use the stratagem once per turn. So one unit can do that.
Even if you can use it multiple times, it's 1CP each time.

"The same stratagem cannot be used by the same player more than once during any single phase. This does not affect stratagems that are not used during a phase, such as those used 'before the battle begins' or 'at the end of a battle round'."

Huh, I did not know that.
That's weird. I guess they can spam it a bunch of times then.

sossen wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
In matched play though you can only use the stratagem once per turn. So one unit can do that.
Even if you can use it multiple times, it's 1CP each time.

"The same stratagem cannot be used by the same player more than once during any single phase. This does not affect stratagems that are not used during a phase, such as those used 'before the battle begins' or 'at the end of a battle round'."

Okay, then yeah that is pretty nuts. I feel like it should cost a lot more now, lol.

Infantry only for the Raven Guard Stratagem. Just for reference.

Not dreads?

 Melissia wrote:
Not dreads?

Not according to the leak which is a pic taken from the book.

Huh. Guess the previous rumors saying it was about characters, infantry, and dreads for CTs was wrong.

Not quite, the CT seems to affect all three but this particular stratagem does not.

Ah, that makes more sense.

Regular Space Marine Lieutenants are now a thing. Yay for putting them in transports with the regular guys.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Regular Space Marine Lieutenants are now a thing. Yay for putting them in transports with the regular guys.

I'm thinkinbg a razorback with a devestator squad + Lt would be a decent grouping

BrianDavion wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
Regular Space Marine Lieutenants are now a thing. Yay for putting them in transports with the regular guys.

I'm thinkinbg a razorback with a devestator squad + Lt would be a decent grouping

Definitely. I am putting one with Pedro Kantor and his Command Squad (or Honour Guard and an Ancient if I can find the points). A Lieutenant is pretty fluffy to have for me since Pedro Kantor is the Captain of the 1st Company in addition to being Chapter Master. Having him roll with his Second in Command for the Company is great.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On a side note, per the MWG Codex preview, named Characters MUST take the Warlord Trait associated with their Chapter. So...Rampage for Pedro Kantor it is, I guess.

Has anyone heard or seen exactly how the Iron Hands Strategem, Machine Empathy works?

I tested it as a freebie, working all game, on all tanks; but after seeing a few of the other strategems, that is probably wrong.

I feel what it will probably end up being 1cp for one tank for one phase. Which really doesn't sound very good to me, but I just have no clue ultimately what it will be.

I don't think I will be pre-ordering, or ordering a codex right away. I will probably dl a pirated copy first to find out if the book is even worth getting for me.

I feel I will ultimately sit this edition out with the way things have been going. There are obvious inbalances in the CTs and Strategems and they are not all evening things out. And not just for my army, though that is my main concern.

With the exception of the RG Stratagem (which happens before the first turn aka outside of a Phase) all of them are X CP for one unit, once per phase.

So RG get the best CT and Strat?

If you watch the video you can easily pause and screen print.

And an awesome relic too, its basically a "yes, you get to pull off the charge" jump pack (advance+charge+reroll charge range)

 NorseSig wrote:
Has anyone heard or seen exactly how the Iron Hands Strategem, Machine Empathy works?

I tested it as a freebie, working all game, on all tanks; but after seeing a few of the other strategems, that is probably wrong.

I feel what it will probably end up being 1cp for one tank for one phase. Which really doesn't sound very good to me, but I just have no clue ultimately what it will be.

I don't think I will be pre-ordering, or ordering a codex right away. I will probably dl a pirated copy first to find out if the book is even worth getting for me.

I feel I will ultimately sit this edition out with the way things have been going. There are obvious inbalances in the CTs and Strategems and they are not all evening things out. And not just for my army, though that is my main concern.

if its one CP for 1 use on a single unit for one turn then yeah won't be that great, but it'll be situationally handy

Well, I guess if you are tank-heavy (especially vindis) the situation will happen more often.

But...tanks don't benefit from CT.


Dreadnauts however, gain from both, so a dread-heavy IH list could potentially be efficient.

we'll have to wait and see, compared to some of the old codgers here I'm newish to 40k, and even I've seen stuff that was previously dismissed as not that great, becoming the key to the "next hot broken thing"

BrianDavion wrote:
we'll have to wait and see, compared to some of the old codgers here I'm newish to 40k, and even I've seen stuff that was previously dismissed as not that great, becoming the key to the "next hot broken thing"

Indeed we have not seen how all the possible combinations work and how powerful they are. It is however certain that for a few months only Marines (Loyal and Chaos) will have these - hopefully a few other factions will be part of the next ten "Chosen" codexes before Christmas.

Gibs55 wrote:
Well it seems like IF are probably the weakest.

Only for trait. Their tactic is pretty good if you play on a board with good terrain (or in a cityfight), and their stratagem is bone-breakingly good with the right unit combos.

Salamander trait is definitely awesome, but their warlord trait sucks, and I can't think of any way to combo their stratagem with anything.

The Ravenguard trait is godly, but IIRC they're a chapter that likes to get in close. Also, it's not going to save you against any kind of assault army since they tend to be shooting-light.

I've only seen a few reviews about all this on youtube (which means I've nearly read the entire codex, but I can't reference anything) and they balanced the chapter abilities around everything. So some traits are going to be good, and some are going to be bad. But the bad traits make up for it elsewhere (unless you're Ultramarines, in which case you're just not allowed to ever have anything bad.)

RG has an awesome tactic, an awesome relic, a darn good stratagem, and a warlord trait that combos with the relic.
Honestly, RG are pure awesome.


IF have a great trait and tactics for city-fight or fortification heavy lists, and a decent stratagem, the relic is decent.

CF have a subset that is slightly less awesome in siege/city warfare, and have a smash-face warlord. I'd prefer the IF to go all-in on one style.


UM have a meh relic, possibly broken trait, rather good stratagem, and decent tactics. seem to lend themselves to infantry-heavy lists who milk a lot of command points.


BT has a weird relic, not sure if useful, but the tactics are good, the stratagem is potentially useful (shuts down a weakness), poor trait is poor though. not a fan.


Sally tactics, I personally like. the relic is meh (toughness isn't as important these days) the trait is meh (likewise strength) and the stratagem is decent, but has counter-synergy with the tactics.
Sorry sally, you got the short stick.


WS have a pretty good tactics, a decent trait, rather lousy relic but a stratagem that is both great, and combos with the tactics-so I'd rather them pretty good as well.

last, IH, good tactics, decent trait, decent relic, and decent stratagem. relic and trait slightly combo, but nothing extraordinary.



Overall rating them
Top: Ravens, Scars, Ultras
Mid: Imperial fists (super-top in city fight/siege mission), Crimsons, Iron Hands
Bottom: Sally, Templar (despite great tactic)

The UM relic is basically the old Shield Eternal without using an arm slot. It is literally free for a Captain. I don't see how that is meh other than the fact it is Captain only. I would say that is pretty darn good. It is better than the actual Shield Eternal for a Captain.

Its meh because 3++ isn't hard to get and a deny attempt isn't impressive.
The actual shield gives the ability to resist multi-damage better, and that's a better ability.

When you got two similar relics, the value of the lesser one drops significantly.

 BoomWolf wrote:
RG has an awesome tactic, an awesome relic, a darn good stratagem, and a warlord trait that combos with the relic.
Honestly, RG are pure awesome.

Personally, i find the Raven Guard relic pretty meh and pointless.

If i want to re-roll a charge, i'd just bring Shrike and have it as a bubble and a better re-roll bonus.
Sure, the advance and charge might come in handy every so often, but, for me, the whole point of taking the jump pack to begin with, is the deep strike option.

With everything in mind (Chapter Tactics, Warlord Traits, Relics and Stratagems), and not just the CT's, Ravenguard went from a solid #1 to a laughably solid #1.

Their CT is probably the best, their Warlord Trait is good, their Relic is good and synergises with their trait, and their stratagem is good eventough it has no synergy with their CT.

Salamanders however, still have the (imo) second best CT, but got one of the the shorter ends of the stick when it comes to the rest of the chapter-specific thingys:

Their Relic is "meh". +1T isn't all that in 8th, and as a defensive item it's outperformed by both The Shield Eternal and the Armour Indomitus.

Their Warlord Trait is also crap compared to many of the others. +1S again isn't all that in 8th, and since you add modifiers after doubling, you get S9 Fists/TH's which are barely better than S8. Their Relicblade becomes S7...yay?

Flamecraft is nice, and has potential, but on a unit with 1-2 Flamers it won't do much on average.
On 1 flamer, shooting something with T4, you'll go from 1,75 wounds average to 2,33 wounds average.
On 2 flamers, shooting something with T4, you'll go from 3,5 wounds average to 4,67 wounds average.
...yay?
The only time I'd consider it worth spending 1 CP on Flamecraft is when you got several flamers (like in a command squad, 5) or when you go from wounding something on 6+ to 5+.
Otherwise you're probably better of spending that CP on the Hellfire(?)-stratagem which actually synergises with their CT, giving a reroll to that one important shot.

Is there a consolidated list of all the new stuff somewhere? I can't seem to find info on most of the relics.

I will say I'm not sure any of the chapter specific warlord traits matter unless you can double up or something, I think some AoS armies have mechanics like that. The chapter specific ones just aren't that good by comparison, excepting maybe ultramarines which could be good depending entirely on how it works with stratagems used before the battle and multi cp stratagems. If it only works during the battle and you can only get a single cp back regardless of how many spent per strat, it'd be merely okay imo.

The relics I have seen similarly seem low impact for a single per army. They aren't awful, but I've yet to see anything I'd consider essential. The aura boosting helmet is the only one that looks particularly interesting, not sure if that's chapter specific or generic though.

do we have a list of point reductions and increases ?

SilverAlien wrote:

The relics I have seen similarly seem low impact for a single per army. They aren't awful, but I've yet to see anything I'd consider essential. The aura boosting helmet is the only one that looks particularly interesting, not sure if that's chapter specific or generic though.

The Shield Eternal is pretty bonkers on a Bike-Captain with the Warlord Trait that grants +1W 6+ FNP.

He moves 14" and for defense he has T5, 7(!) Wounds, a 3++, 6+ FNP and any multiwound attack he suffers is halved, so at the most he can suffer 3 wounds from Damage D6 attacks, 2 wounds from Damage D3 attacks, and 1 wound from Damage 2 attacks. Heck, even a Shadowsword can't kill him in one hit.

Add a Thunder Hammer or Relic Blade and he's pretty killy as well, especially since he has his reroll-aura.

Edit: That Helmet is also chapter specific, it's for Black Templars only.

 MinscS2 wrote:

SilverAlien wrote:

The relics I have seen similarly seem low impact for a single per army. They aren't awful, but I've yet to see anything I'd consider essential. The aura boosting helmet is the only one that looks particularly interesting, not sure if that's chapter specific or generic though.

The Shield Eternal is pretty bonkers on a Bike-Captain with the Warlord Trait that grants +1W 6+ FNP.

He moves 14" and for defense he has T5, 7(!) Wounds, a 3++, 6+ FNP and any multiwound attack he suffers is halved, so at the most he can suffer 3 wounds from Damage D6 attacks, 2 wounds from Damage D3 attacks, and 1 wound from Damage 2 attacks. Heck, even a Shadowsword can't kill him in one hit.

Add a Thunder Hammer or Relic Blade and he's pretty killy as well, especially since he has his reroll-aura.

Edit: That Helmet is also chapter specific, it's for Black Templars only.

Shield eternal and those honor guard type things that take wounds for you are going to interact like insane.

take a 6 wounder from a lascannon... nope 3. let me start eating these on my honor guard. seems like the best way to deal with shield eternal is to just bury him in # of shots.

Yes, small arms fire will be probably be the best counter to him, since he doesn't have a 2+ Armoursave, and it bypasses both his 3++ and TSE.

Still, making 7 wounds go trough a 3+/6++ on a character with T5 will take quite afew boltershots.

But is that needed or even useful now? Sure you take a ton of punishment to kill, but with just the wound and the 6+ you weren't exactly in danger so long as you keep your warlord in range of his troops, boosting them with his aura.

SilverAlien wrote:
But is that needed or even useful now? Sure you take a ton of punishment to kill, but with just the wound and the 6+ you weren't exactly in danger so long as you keep your warlord in range of his troops, boosting them with his aura.

Troops can be killed or the Captain has drove of to kill something on his own/capture an objective.

He's not exactly a pushover in CC with a Thunderhammer, so sometimes it's a waste to not use his profile in combat.

Well, they gave a full reveal of the IH Stratagem "Machine Empathy". Definitely not good. One model, before the attack phase, one cp. Does nothing to make up for the CT. No way I can get enough CP to make this useful for me. I don't think a mostly Dread army would even work well. A case of too few models and not enough dakka anyway.

Before I opened the thread and not looking at who posted last, I thought to myself "I wonder if it is going to be the IH guy complaining about every single thing about his army again".

That said, I do agree though that the Machine Empathy stratagem is pretty garbage.

Do chapter tactics pertain to flyers?

 perilsensitive wrote:
Before I opened the thread and not looking at who posted last, I thought to myself "I wonder if it is going to be the IH guy complaining about every single thing about his army again".

That said, I do agree though that the Machine Empathy stratagem is pretty garbage.

I dont even play iron hands and kinda feel bad. they honestly got the most lack luster kit

not aweful. a 6+ ward save is nothing to sneeze at. its just not all that flashy.

usmcmidn wrote:
Do chapter tactics pertain to flyers?

i dont think anything else came up but so far no. all chapter tactics apply to infantry bikes and dreads.

I dont even play iron hands and kinda feel bad. they honestly got the most lack luster kit

not aweful. a 6+ ward save is nothing to sneeze at. its just not all that flashy.

While it isn't the worst CT imo, it is near the very bottom. I don't know how they would do the IH ability to make it flashy. My main issue is it isn't a CT I can build my army around to make the most of. It is too unreliable, and outside of two units one that is Forge World, it can't be modified or buffed. I am glad I didn't get what the BT got. It wouldn't be so bad if the CT buffed all vehicles. It would certainly be something I could sorta use by using as many dreads and vehicles as possible. As is, IH can't even take dreads in the heavy slot anymore. To even consider using the Stratagem I feel I would want at least 12 cp. I just can't figure out a list that will work and give 9 cp let alone 12. If the CT was a 5+ I think it would make things just resilient enough that they could accomplish things. I feel while the IF CT is situational and the fortification part useless for 99% of games, their bolter drill will probably make up for it. More shots seems to end up being better than slightly more accurate shots. If the IH stratagem worked on at least 3 vehicles at a time it would be something you would use.

Or maybe 6+ to all IH models and Infantry, dreads and bikes can move and shoot heavy weapons without taking the penalty. Then you could use the Stratagem for a vehicle.

I think the IH CT can be built around, by making your army tank heavy with some troops (tacticals or scouts) backing them.

I'm not saying it is super flashy, but it makes the IH better at the two things you actually want your troops to do in a tank heavy list. It makes them better objective holders by being harder to kill (and now that obj secured is back they have a real role there). It also makes them better at keeping things away from your tanks, by lasting longer against enemy melee and deepstrike units, which means more time for your tanks to fire unmolested.

They may not be top tier, but the CT is exactly what you'd want in a vehicle heavy list, which is fluffy for the IH. The strategem is garbage though, sadly.

 NorseSig wrote:

I dont even play iron hands and kinda feel bad. they honestly got the most lack luster kit

not aweful. a 6+ ward save is nothing to sneeze at. its just not all that flashy.

While it isn't the worst CT imo, it is near the very bottom. I don't know how they would do the IH ability to make it flashy. My main issue is it isn't a CT I can build my army around to make the most of. It is too unreliable, and outside of two units one that is Forge World, it can't be modified or buffed. I am glad I didn't get what the BT got. It wouldn't be so bad if the CT buffed all vehicles. It would certainly be something I could sorta use by using as many dreads and vehicles as possible. As is, IH can't even take dreads in the heavy slot anymore. To even consider using the Stratagem I feel I would want at least 12 cp. I just can't figure out a list that will work and give 9 cp let alone 12. If the CT was a 5+ I think it would make things just resilient enough that they could accomplish things. I feel while the IF CT is situational and the fortification part useless for 99% of games, their bolter drill will probably make up for it. More shots seems to end up being better than slightly more accurate shots. If the IH stratagem worked on at least 3 vehicles at a time it would be something you would use.

Or maybe 6+ to all IH models and Infantry, dreads and bikes can move and shoot heavy weapons without taking the penalty. Then you could use the Stratagem for a vehicle.

I am not sure if you realize you can only use the stratagem on one vehicle per turn. If not, i'm not sure what you want all of those CP for? I definitely think the IH got the worst of the CT. At least you can build an army around the BT's CT if you really want to. The IH CT is just too random to be that useful in a normal marine list with small squads that are likely to get evaporated with or without it. It is better on Primaris, i think, but not as good as the RG CT or the IF warlord trait, so all in all i can't see too many reasons to bring IH vs the other options.

Their relic is actually pretty okay. though, and I'm not sure i know what their warlord trait is yet...does anyone know that? Edit: never mind, it is also pretty terrible, lol.

MarkM wrote:
With the exception of the RG Stratagem (which happens before the first turn aka outside of a Phase) all of them are X CP for one unit, once per phase.

So RG get the best CT and Strat?

If you watch the video you can easily pause and screen print.

From the text, once can argue the IF stratagem is not limited to one unit, unless that has been clarified somewhere.

General Hobbs wrote:

MarkM wrote:
With the exception of the RG Stratagem (which happens before the first turn aka outside of a Phase) all of them are X CP for one unit, once per phase.

So RG get the best CT and Strat?

If you watch the video you can easily pause and screen print.

From the text, once can argue the IF stratagem is not limited to one unit, unless that has been clarified somewhere.

What makes you think that?

The rule is quoted here, the emphasis mine:

"Use this stratagem just before an Iron Hands Vehicle attacks in the Shooting phase. Until the end of the phase that vehicle can ignore the penalties..." etc

Seems pretty clear it is a single, specific vehicle.

I think he meant one vehicle per turn, and didn't realize that there is a global rule about no repeat stratagems. Just guessing though.

jcd386 wrote:

General Hobbs wrote:

MarkM wrote:
With the exception of the RG Stratagem (which happens before the first turn aka outside of a Phase) all of them are X CP for one unit, once per phase.

So RG get the best CT and Strat?

If you watch the video you can easily pause and screen print.

From the text, once can argue the IF stratagem is not limited to one unit, unless that has been clarified somewhere.

What makes you think that?

The rule is quoted here, the emphasis mine:

"Use this stratagem just before an Iron Hands Vehicle attacks in the Shooting phase. Until the end of the phase that vehicle can ignore the penalties..." etc

Seems pretty clear it is a single, specific vehicle.

Go back and slowly reread what I posted.

Uh, the Iron Hands chapter tactics are obviously intended to be used with Dreadnought armies. Venerable Dreadnoughts especially will be very difficult to kill with multiple FNP rolls.

Arachnofiend wrote:
Uh, the Iron Hands chapter tactics are obviously intended to be used with Dreadnought armies. Venerable Dreadnoughts especially will be very difficult to kill with multiple FNP rolls.

It's literally no different than the other units which gain it. It's the same increase in longevity. It benefits dreadnoughts no more than any other unit. I do not understand why people keep insisting it is more useful with venerable dreadnoughts. It isn't. It's the exact same. Saying it is "more reliable" just illustrates an absolute failure to understand the basics of probability.

It's a solid chapter tactic which negates 1/6 wounds, that is useful for every single unit that has it.

SilverAlien wrote:

Arachnofiend wrote:
Uh, the Iron Hands chapter tactics are obviously intended to be used with Dreadnought armies. Venerable Dreadnoughts especially will be very difficult to kill with multiple FNP rolls.

It's literally no different than the other units which gain it. It's the same increase in longevity. It benefits dreadnoughts no more than any other unit. I do not understand why people keep insisting it is more useful with venerable dreadnoughts. It isn't. It's the exact same. Saying it is "more reliable" just illustrates an absolute failure to understand the basics of probability.

It's a solid chapter tactic which negates 1/6 wounds, that is useful for every single unit that has it.

You are right. But with a 1W model you only have one shot to prove that CT useful; you may be lucky or not. While on Dreadnoughts (models with many wounds) it is more likely to average the negation of a 1/6 of wounds.
You can argue that for the the price of Dreadnoughts you can field many marines; but that is a different story (on average across your army of many marines, you should also average the negation of 1/6 wounds but partial losses on 1W models can affect leadership tests... etc)

So a bit of maths to explain the better on venerables thing.

If you have a single 6+ FnP you have a 5/6 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 20% 1/(5/6) = 6/5 = 1.2. You would need, on average, 12 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

If you have 2 6+ FnP you have a 25/36 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 44%! 1/(25/36) = 36/25 = 1.44. You need, on average, 14.4 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

So the second FnP has a greater effect than the first, giving more effective wounds. If you have a model with more wounds this effect is magnified, because of the all or nothing nature of losing your last wound.

I would also point out that the addition of a second FnP does not give the 16.6% increase in survivability mentioned by many (a different measure to average wounds % required to kill) if it did, then it would be an effective 48% increase in wounds. Probabilities are not additive.

Drager wrote:
So a bit of maths to explain the better on venerables thing.

If you have a single 6+ FnP you have a 5/6 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 20% 1/(5/6) = 6/5 = 1.2. You would need, on average, 12 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

If you have 2 6+ FnP you have a 25/36 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 44%! 1/(25/36) = 36/25 = 1.44. You need, on average, 14.4 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

So the second FnP has a greater effect than the first, giving more effective wounds. If you have a model with more wounds this effect is magnified, because of the all or nothing nature of losing your last wound.

I would also point out that the addition of a second FnP does not give the 16.6% increase in survivability mentioned by many (a different measure to average wounds % required to kill) if it did, then it would be an effective 48% increase in wounds. Probabilities are not additive.

Good explanation, thanks!

Drager wrote:
So a bit of maths to explain the better on venerables thing.

If you have a single 6+ FnP you have a 5/6 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 20% 1/(5/6) = 6/5 = 1.2. You would need, on average, 12 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

If you have 2 6+ FnP you have a 25/36 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 44%! 1/(25/36) = 36/25 = 1.44. You need, on average, 14.4 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

So the second FnP has a greater effect than the first, giving more effective wounds. If you have a model with more wounds this effect is magnified, because of the all or nothing nature of losing your last wound.

I would also point out that the addition of a second FnP does not give the 16.6% increase in survivability mentioned by many (a different measure to average wounds % required to kill) if it did, then it would be an effective 48% increase in wounds. Probabilities are not additive.

I agree with this, but before this gets misinterpreted and misapplied by other people I want to add:

This is really just a specific case of how, in terms of the absolute number of additional shots you need to kill something, you get more out of a percentage increase in durability on things that already took a lot of shots to kill. Venerable dreads are harder to kill than regular dreads and so giving them an additional 6+ FNP is a larger absolute increase in what it takes to kill them (though the same percentage increase). Likewise a squad of 10 marines gets twice as much out of a 6+ FNP than a squad of 5 marines, but obviously this isn't really a reason to take the squad of 10 marines over the squad of 5 marines -- it costs twice as much.

So, first, it's still pretty silly to talk like IH venerable dreads are really durable on the basis of this. Obviously what people care about is something more like how durable things are for their cost. An IH venerable dread has an effective 11.5 wounds, compared to a non-IH ven dread with 9.6 and a regular dread with 8. They're still in the neighborhood of 15 points per wound on a multi-wound model (making them very vulnerable to things like lascannons). Razorbacks remain far more durable for their cost.

Second, it's actually because venerable dreads are relatively fragile that the IH tactic is valuable on them. The main drawback of the two defensive tactics -- the Raven Guard and Iron Hands ones -- is that unless your entire army has the Tactic your opponent will often have the option to shoot something that doesn't benefit from it. If you bring a quad-las Predator and a venerable dread, your opponent is just going to shoot the Predator. But dreadnoughts are actually pretty fragile for their cost. A venerable dread is paying 18 points per effective wound without the IH tactic, which is actually quite a lot. Regular dreads are paying 19. Many of the non-flyer vehicles people are using are 15 or even lower (many transports are more like 10). So in a typical Marine list the dreadnoughts are a priority target, because they're actually very fragile relative to their shooting. The IH tactic makes them more durable relative to all of the stuff in your list without the tactic, but even then they might still be something that your opponent starts shooting at very early on. Though it's still not the case that the venerable dread benefits noticeably more than a regular dread -- going only off of their point costs, a regular dread is a more tempting target than a venerable dread and so is actually the one that benefits most from the protection (it's the one that your opponent will want to shoot).

 MinscS2 wrote:
With everything in mind (Chapter Tactics, Warlord Traits, Relics and Stratagems), and not just the CT's, Ravenguard went from a solid #1 to a laughably solid #1.

Their CT is probably the best, their Warlord Trait is good, their Relic is good and synergises with their trait, and their stratagem is good eventough it has no synergy with their CT.

Salamanders however, still have the (imo) second best CT, but got one of the the shorter ends of the stick when it comes to the rest of the chapter-specific thingys:

Their Relic is "meh". +1T isn't all that in 8th, and as a defensive item it's outperformed by both The Shield Eternal and the Armour Indomitus.

Their Warlord Trait is also crap compared to many of the others. +1S again isn't all that in 8th, and since you add modifiers after doubling, you get S9 Fists/TH's which are barely better than S8. Their Relicblade becomes S7...yay?

Flamecraft is nice, and has potential, but on a unit with 1-2 Flamers it won't do much on average.
On 1 flamer, shooting something with T4, you'll go from 1,75 wounds average to 2,33 wounds average.
On 2 flamers, shooting something with T4, you'll go from 3,5 wounds average to 4,67 wounds average.
...yay?
The only time I'd consider it worth spending 1 CP on Flamecraft is when you got several flamers (like in a command squad, 5) or when you go from wounding something on 6+ to 5+.
Otherwise you're probably better of spending that CP on the Hellfire(?)-stratagem which actually synergises with their CT, giving a reroll to that one important shot.

If i'm honest, while i think the Raven Guard, with all things combined, are very very good, i don't think they are at the top.

The thing with the Raven Guard chapter tactic, is that it not only doesn't synergies well with their stratagem, but it will also only be useful against certain armies. Tau for example will hate this with the majority of their units, but their spammed commanders deep striking in with crisis suits won't care. Orks, tyranids, khorne etc won't care about the CT at all, guard will just cry.
Our stratagem. Now, this is extremely useful, but, extremely risky to use. If you know that the only way your opponent is getting first turn is via a seize, then, this is fantastic. If however, you need to seize in order to go first then suddenly the things you deploy via the stratagem need to be extremely well placed or they will probably die first turn. That said - there is still the idea of a distraction carnifex unit of TH/SS termies 9" away, where the opponent uses everything to kill them, or they survive and go on a rampage.
The relic - i don't really care about. If i wanted that kind of buff i'd just take Shrike. Sure he is more points, but he does way more than an other JP character will do. Plus, who needs the advance part if you are either deep striking in, or using the stratagem to deploy?
The warlord trait is nice.

When we consider what the Ultramarines get overall, then they have a lot more to give. +1 Ld is always useful, especially if you want bigger squads or as an additional save guard against some of the psychic powers. Their warlord trait is just insane as well. Getting command points back, is fantastic, especially when you are starting with 6-8. Their relic... Lol. DTW and a free 3++? And the re-rolls to hit stratagem is always useful, if not "stand out amazing".

As for the Salamanders, their CT is also super strong. 4 "CP" re-rolls per squad per turn is fantastic. A squad with a captain and/or a lieutenant nearby is suddenly doing a lot! Sure, it massively promotes the spam of plasma instead of melta or flamers, but, it's still fanastic. I'd also argue that the relic is very strong as well. Bolters now need 5's to wound. Lascannons now need 3's to wound instead of 2's. If you are on a bike or with gravis armour, suddenly things like assault cannons need 4's to wound. So so so much more survivable, especially if you then pair it with a stormshield. Their warlord trait, not too thrilling, but again, useful. Wounding marines on 3's with a power sword is tasty. Still, might be better taking one of the generic ones. Again, the stratagem has to be built around, but, how about a super powered Landraider Redeemer?

Just some thoughts.

Yeah I wasn't very clear in my post about the 12 cp thing. I kinda missed a portion of my thought. Blame it on lack of sleep due to extra hours at work and helping with some volunteer stuff with the fires in my state (helping with some local donations). While I can only use the Stratagem once I can use other general stratagems too unless I read things wrong. I want to have at least 3 to 4 cp available to use per turn for the first 3 to 4 turns. Critical rerolls (offensive and defensive), ect. I WISH I could use Machine Empathy multiple times in a turn. One vehicle just doesn't amount to much.

Drager wrote:
So a bit of maths to explain the better on venerables thing.

If you have a single 6+ FnP you have a 5/6 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 20% 1/(5/6) = 6/5 = 1.2. You would need, on average, 12 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

If you have 2 6+ FnP you have a 25/36 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 44%! 1/(25/36) = 36/25 = 1.44. You need, on average, 14.4 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

So the second FnP has a greater effect than the first, giving more effective wounds. If you have a model with more wounds this effect is magnified, because of the all or nothing nature of losing your last wound.

I would also point out that the addition of a second FnP does not give the 16.6% increase in survivability mentioned by many (a different measure to average wounds % required to kill) if it did, then it would be an effective 48% increase in wounds. Probabilities are not additive.

Oh sweet Jesus. No. Everyone who quoted this saying it made sense, please stop.

Let me see if I can explain this: you are not getting more mileage out of this, you are misapplying basic probability.

A dreadnought or any normal 10 wound unit with a 6+ fnp takes 12 wounds to kill on average. With two fnp rolls of 6+ it takes 14.4. That is correct.

So the venerable dreadnought is going from 12 wounds to kill to 14.4 wounds to kill. That's a 20% increase yes, 2.4/12=.2. A normal squad or dreadnought with 10 wounds goes from 10 to 12 which is also a 20% (2/12=.2) increase.

The 6+ fnp blocks 1/6 wounds which is a 20% boost to the number of wounds required to kill the unit. Getting 2.4 wounds from a venerable dread is not it being more efficient, it's simply a venerable dreadnought already has a higher effective wounds than a 10 man SM squad. It will gain the same as any 12 wound squad would. This doesn't make it better on the dreadnought, you are gaining the same relative boost for both units. The only way it could be more efficient is if it payed a lower cost for the 12 effective wounds than most models, which it doesn't.

SilverAlien wrote:

Drager wrote:
So a bit of maths to explain the better on venerables thing.

If you have a single 6+ FnP you have a 5/6 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 20% 1/(5/6) = 6/5 = 1.2. You would need, on average, 12 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

If you have 2 6+ FnP you have a 25/36 chance of taking a wound (for each unsaved wound) this means you have an increase in effective wounds of 44%! 1/(25/36) = 36/25 = 1.44. You need, on average, 14.4 successful wounds to down a 10 wound model.

So the second FnP has a greater effect than the first, giving more effective wounds. If you have a model with more wounds this effect is magnified, because of the all or nothing nature of losing your last wound.

I would also point out that the addition of a second FnP does not give the 16.6% increase in survivability mentioned by many (a different measure to average wounds % required to kill) if it did, then it would be an effective 48% increase in wounds. Probabilities are not additive.

Oh sweet Jesus. No. Everyone who quoted this saying it made sense, please stop.

Let me see if I can explain this: you are not getting more mileage out of this, you are misapplying basic probability.

A dreadnought or any normal 10 wound unit with a 6+ fnp takes 12 wounds to kill on average. With two fnp rolls of 6+ it takes 14.4. That is correct.

So the venerable dreadnought is going from 12 wounds to kill to 14.4 wounds to kill. That's a 20% increase yes, 2.4/12=.2. A normal squad or dreadnought with 10 wounds goes from 10 to 12 which is also a 20% (2/12=.2) increase.

The 6+ fnp blocks 1/6 wounds which is a 20% boost to the number of wounds required to kill the unit. Getting 2.4 wounds from a venerable dread is not it being more efficient, it's simply a venerable dreadnought already has a higher effective wounds than a 10 man SM squad. It will gain the same as any 12 wound squad would. This doesn't make it better on the dreadnought, you are gaining the same relative boost for both units. The only way it could be more efficient is if it payed a lower cost for the 12 effective wounds than most models, which it doesn't.

A 20% increase on a value already gaining a percentage increase is a greater increase from the base value. It is in fact, as I said, a 44% increase. Everything I said was true. You are also correct in your explanation, but, honestly, you are repeating what I said after saying no.

Drager wrote:
A 20% increase on a value already gaining a percentage increase is a greater increase from the base value. It is in fact, as I said, a 44% increase. Everything I said was true. You are also correct in your explanation, but, honestly, you are repeating what I said after saying no.

Because you seemed to be saying it was overall better/more efficient. If that wasn't the intent my apologies.

SilverAlien wrote:

Drager wrote:
A 20% increase on a value already gaining a percentage increase is a greater increase from the base value. It is in fact, as I said, a 44% increase. Everything I said was true. You are also correct in your explanation, but, honestly, you are repeating what I said after saying no.

Because you seemed to be saying it was overall better/more efficient. If that wasn't the intent my apologies.

I wasn't meaning to, I was just explaining what the argument was for people who thought it was a 16% increase over base wounds and, particularly those who thought two gave a 32% increase. I was just correcting the bad maths, I didn't express an opinion on whether it was better.

The closest I got was pointing out that on a 10 wound model as compared to a one wound model you have a magnification of the effect. Not that over a large number of trials you get a different effect, but that you get more trials on that one model, so you are more likely to get a result nearer the average. This increases reliability and predictability, which can be useful. It is also different to a squad with the same number of wounds as the squad loses firepower with each casualty so the swinginess of the single trial on a model by model basis is relevant.

Is the increased cost of the venerable worth it? No idea, I don't play marines. I don't even know their cost or wounds (I used 10 in my example because it is easy to see how the maths works and it was an example). There would need to be a further analysis done to determine if that cost is worth it. I would look at increased longevity of firepower compared to a similar dread, so how many extra turns of shooting could you expect. I'm guessing if you compared 3 dreads to 3 venerables, then compare this with and without the IH tactic and ask the question with regards to preservation of firepower and/or weapons required to remove it would be a more useful comparator. I don't have the data to do that at this time and as such have no strong opinion on whether venerables are better or not. I just don't like people to be using poor maths when thinking about things, so I provided the correct values.

I might look up the stats and work it out at some point as an academic exercise. Only if I have time though, not strongly motivated to do so as I don't play marines.