Spera wrote:
Yup as i said, they are there to be versatile, not specialized. They are good, just not as good as other specialized options. I rated them 7,5/10 when Onagers are 8,5/10 and Dakkastelans are 10/10 in my opinion.

I'll work on that entry to clarify that. Thank you on your insights and opinions.

I'd wager they're mor efficient using the autocannon option, 4 str 7 -1 2D shots at 3+ is a more reliable option to the sink or swim of lascannons.

Also another decent point to add is that for 2cp (rage against the machines, protector doctrine) you can advance them and still hit something that's -1 on a 2+ And for another 1cp you could advance them 2d6 and do the same. Quite why you'd need them to move so much with 48" weapons is probably a very good question, but the option is there.

Also if you don't have the option of a second detachment, or don't want the associated HQ tax, you can't field 3 onagers AND robots in a batallion. If you needed more heavy firepower you can field 12 lascannon or 24 autocannon shots for a single fast attack entry. Leaving you the remaining two fast attack slots in your batallion for more dragoons

Spera wrote:
I just find this mistake incredibly funny and wanted share my reason to laugh with you guys.

I'm glad for you, i really am. but it pisses me off. because it fundamentally shows the level of not giving a gak they put into the admech codex. probably going to get some triarios or other admech transports and run them as chimeras until GW gets off it's ass and fixes this. maybe get some vorax and run them as..... feth if i know.

It's a shame we don't have an advance and charge strategm, you'd be able to pull the same shenanigans with dragoons as well. Move 10 + 2d6 + 2d6 charge and hit on a 2+ with 4+ explodes. It's almost like that would be pretty synergistic...ya know having abilities that work with the strength of our units.


Unlike The Ryza dogma...that we have a canticle that replaces it -_-

Octovol wrote:


I'd wager they're mor efficient using the autocannon option, 4 str 7 -1 2D shots at 3+ is a more reliable option to the sink or swim of lascannons.

5.33 average wounds vs 7.777 being generous and saying T7 with a 3+ all for the same points (4 autocannon balistarii vs 3 lascannon balistarii) it does okay against infantry but it's still only 4 shots on a 75 point model.... it's got it's places but it's not more efficient mathhammer wise.

gendoikari87 wrote:

Octovol wrote:


I'd wager they're mor efficient using the autocannon option, 4 str 7 -1 2D shots at 3+ is a more reliable option to the sink or swim of lascannons.

5.33 average wounds vs 7.777 being generous and saying T7 with a 3+ all for the same points (4 autocannon balistarii vs 3 lascannon balistarii) it does okay against infantry but it's still only 4 shots on a 75 point model.... it's got it's places but it's not more efficient mathhammer wise.

That's a shame. I suppose if you were trying to shift infantry you'd give that task to your robots anyway. Be nice to have another option for massed light firepower other than robots. Eradication Beamer d6 shots or plasma culverin d6 shots maybe. shame destroyers are so expensive, I'd take cognis culverins on an iron strider in a heart beat lol

Yeah. I mean i'm sure there's some secret use for auto cannon balistarii where they aren't entirely outclassed by other options in an otherwise sub par codex. the whole line of chicken walkers is really just let down by being 6w and thus well over 60 points they should have been closer to 4 wounds and much cheaper. could almost say the same for the kataphrons. except they could do with a point decrease at their current statline.

And I concur concerning Ballistarii, so I guess the aye's have it. Triple stamped and it is law now.

Plus... They suffer from being a kit that is a pain in the ass to build and paint, so any excuse to avoid them is good in my book.

I'd just ordered 5 ironstriders and 3 of them are definitely dragoons. Considering changing my order and swapping the other 2 for something else though. i don't have enough models to split into a dual detachment so ATM I have 2 onager, 2 robots, some vanguard/rangers couple of TPD and infiltrators.

I may consider a sextuplet of breachers. aiming for 1500pts for the time being and even though robots are more durable and just all round better at massed gunfire breachers are more flexible. Plus robots are OOS for repackaging ATM. Those heavy arc rifles are a bargain points wise, especially if you're shooting at vehicles, which is what you'd be doing with your lascannon balistarii. And breachers don't just roll over in CC, arc claws are still pretty decent.

Hmm 2 *2 dragoons and 3 breachers. Or 1*3 dragoons and 2 * 3 breachers.

torsion cannons even worth taking?

gendoikari87 wrote:
torsion cannons even worth taking?

Not unless they become cheaper. Range is too short and the still-absence of their lost special rules from 7th makes them short range expensive lascannons.

I just don't get why Balistarii don't have the same cloud effect Dragoons do. They're like basically the same model.

Main benefit of the Autcannon is it does the whole Advance and Shoot better than the Lascannon due to number of shots. That's about it though.

I'm disgusted by the new Astra Militarum upcoming codex, it just looks like the most well-written and most powerful of all codexes for now. They have free orders that should be stratagems, most of their <Regiments> traits aren't totally unusable like us, and they most likely got point decreases on stuff that will shot 40 times at S5. How could they half-piss our codex and then release a broken codex like that ? It's not out yet of course but I'm not holding my breath.

Fires of Cyraxus better be good, and better be soon.

Ah yes the mythical world of Cyraxus
Where GW hold an annual bonfire festival to burn the hopes and dreams of all Ad Mech players

 Rolsheen wrote:
Ah yes the mythical world of Cyraxus
Where GW hold an annual bonfire festival to burn the hopes and dreams of all Ad Mech players

*Soldier 76 voice* I've got you in my signature

 Aaranis wrote:
I'm disgusted by the new Astra Militarum upcoming codex, it just looks like the most well-written and most powerful of all codexes for now. They have free orders that should be stratagems, most of their <Regiments> traits aren't totally unusable like us, and they most likely got point decreases on stuff that will shot 40 times at S5. How could they half-piss our codex and then release a broken codex like that ? It's not out yet of course but I'm not holding my breath.

Fires of Cyraxus better be good, and better be soon.

I don't even play AdMech, and I can see just how shafted they got by GW. Their codex was a copy/paste joke, with no creativity or real changes.

The upcoming AM Codex is a slap in the face of anyone that plays Warhammer40k; especially those who have received their codexes already.

Autocannons are okay against T6 and lower vehicles or two wound infantry. Some armies run those but a lot don't. Whereas there is almost always something worth shooting with lascannons. They are not much worse versus basic MEQ.

Breachers seem like the worst unit in the roster. Far too expensive for what they do. 3 attacks on WS 4+ is terrible for a minimum of 47 points. The Hydraulic Claw should also have been AP -3 but as it is you just add insult to injury. So they are not a melee unit, just not quite as bad in combat as other choices.
So are the guns good? No, not really.
Unlike most I don't hate the Torsion cannon. It has a good stat line its just stupidly overcosted. Should be about half the points cost. Same for Heavy Arc. The base model should be about 10 points cheaper. Still probably wouldn't get picked for lack of synergy but at least it wouldn't be an auto-skip.

The top 3 trash ones are:
Breachers
Ruststalkers
Servitors

in any order. The 4th ones are Destroyers.
Everything else is just straight better than these 4.

Speaking of Breachers, even against the most optimal target, they do less damage than: Balistarii, Kastelans, Onagers. How did that get past the testing. AND they're about 2x more vulnerable per point. I don't get it.

 Aaranis wrote:
I'm disgusted by the new Astra Militarum upcoming codex, it just looks like the most well-written and most powerful of all codexes for now. They have free orders that should be stratagems, most of their <Regiments> traits aren't totally unusable like us, and they most likely got point decreases on stuff that will shot 40 times at S5. How could they half-piss our codex and then release a broken codex like that ? It's not out yet of course but I'm not holding my breath.

Fires of Cyraxus better be good, and better be soon.

Yeah... if I played Guard, I honestly would have a hard time choosing between all these new regiments. My only solace is that WYSIWYG probably will apply more strictly to Guard, so a lot of people can't just change their armies willy-nilly, whereas we can just use stickers to mark Forge Worlds.

Anyway, we needed some relic to give our infantry a bubble shield of some sort, and we need Forge World synergies that make better sense. Ryza, for example, should have Graia's warlord trait (Plasma Vanguard with Sicarians), and Agripinaa should have Graias's dogma (synergizes with Servitors/Kataphrons, makes sense that you need a tech-priest to make them stand down).

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
The top 3 trash ones are:
Breachers
Ruststalkers
Servitors

in any order. The 4th ones are Destroyers.
Everything else is just straight better than these 4.

Speaking of Breachers, even against the most optimal target, they do less damage than: Balistarii, Kastelans, Onagers. How did that get past the testing. AND they're about 2x more vulnerable per point. I don't get it.

Yeah im over second guessing my 5 iron strider purchase. for 1cp i dont need to take an icarus onager at all. flexibility.

Incidentally warlord traits: is monitor malevous an auto take for anyone else? I guess you're all going Cawl anyway. So many chances to roll a 6 and get CP back though. Also all those 1cp strategms we have on a 6 we get them free. There's not a huge number of good warlord traits outside cawl

Lascannon balistari compare to onagers neutron. And in order to see a big differnce you gotta take more than 4 subbing 2 onagers. Not really good. And that would even close if we didnt get 2 x stubbers for 145 new codex neutronagers.

Autcannon balistarii vs icarus. Same seem close 8 shots str 7 vs 12 mixed shots. Its mobility they get same buff bla bla onagers are more resilient but.

What i try ti pinpoint some time now. In a good list now Reece already confirmed it if you going to invest in onagers take 3.

Since i cant find any optimal detachment for ad mech i ll say this.

Onagers reroll ones only if same dogma. So pairs work better.
We need 3 neutronagers to be antitank efficient.
Robots are also heavy slot.
And a dragoon unit 3+ is vital.
Cawl has worth only if you give him enough to buff so.

Since i want dragoons stygia no matter what. And since the tax is so big.

I believe i see a reason for balistarii.

Mars spearhead
Heavy slots
Robots
Neutronager
Neutronager

Stygia outrider
1*3-4+ dragoons
1-2 balistarii lasc
1-2 balistarii lasc. Or autoc.

With an extra battalion seems to have 8-9 command point if you se graia +1 cp as i am.

Octovol wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
The top 3 trash ones are:
Breachers
Ruststalkers
Servitors

in any order. The 4th ones are Destroyers.
Everything else is just straight better than these 4.

Speaking of Breachers, even against the most optimal target, they do less damage than: Balistarii, Kastelans, Onagers. How did that get past the testing. AND they're about 2x more vulnerable per point. I don't get it.

Yeah im over second guessing my 5 iron strider purchase. for 1cp i dont need to take an icarus onager at all. flexibility.

Incidentally warlord traits: is monitor malevous an auto take for anyone else? I guess you're all going Cawl anyway. So many chances to roll a 6 and get CP back though. Also all those 1cp strategms we have on a 6 we get them free. There's not a huge number of good warlord traits outside cawl

Cawl is locked with mars trait, but I used Monitor on Stygies TPD. In last game it gave me 3 cp, i think this is huge value and people underestimate it. Thing is that This trait scales with game size. But I argue that on 2000 its it is one of best. Anything above that and we have clear winner.And it will be even better with time, since codex armies go for cp heavy lists.

I can't agree that Ruststalkers are bad. They are mediocre, but not bad. Clue is that other Melee options are clearly superior. so there is no point to take them when you have fulgurites, dragoons and infiltrators to choose from.

"I can't agree that Ruststalkers are bad. They are mediocre, but not bad. Clue is that other Melee options are clearly superior. so there is no point to take them when you have fulgurites, dragoons and infiltrators to choose from."

Which makes them terrible. Because of the "streamlining" of 8th and removing of special rules, it is a lot clearer which units are just straight up better than others. Ruststalkers compared to the other 3 are just straight up worse and therefor terrible.

BTW, I actually did the math and they should be TWICE as cheap to be viable... It's a joke

Breachers i like wish arc was str 7 but it wont. I already tried to fit them in my list its just so much tax . For having enginseers healing dogma specific units and troops doing zero that we cant even pay for nothing? If even consider taking anything but bare troops ranger your list is done.(cometitive with mars)

Kataprhins need to be in par with their points.

Cant invest 76 points for d6. Make it 4 shots. Make it 3/6 move or stationary. Make it rapid 2-3 all i care. But not that.

Same goes for wounds or invu. Either give the fnp or a 5+invu.
Some factors need to be resolved. Either we pay points for a complete unit or we pay for paper but heavy hitter.

And risk 3 wound plasma kill and low armor and low invu ans d6 shots and 76 points. Grav 5 shot is better but still need lower cost to be a cheap option that we can Risk taking just in case we benefit from an enemy army suitable.

Once more another unit nerfed but not fixed. Same crap gw for most ad mech.

Rustalkers are in the same category. They forgot they nerfed their scout dunestrider fearless abilities and they are trash.

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
"I can't agree that Ruststalkers are bad. They are mediocre, but not bad. Clue is that other Melee options are clearly superior. so there is no point to take them when you have fulgurites, dragoons and infiltrators to choose from."

Which makes them terrible. Because of the "streamlining" of 8th and removing of special rules, it is a lot clearer which units are just straight up better than others. Ruststalkers compared to the other 3 are just straight up worse and therefor terrible.

BTW, I actually did the math and they should be TWICE as cheap to be viable... It's a joke

Competitively not viable sure, but that not makes them bad. I assume this guide will be also for new and casual players. They aren't willloseyougamebad as servitors are in even casual play. Yeh, in in tournaments and other competitive environment you want to take units that i would rate at least 7,5/10, but if you don't have other options Ruststalkers will do fine in FLGS matches.

I have to say it winds me up the way people talk in such black and white terms as if everyone is fighting for top table at tournaments and only ever want to play the most ruthlessly efficient min/max units. Surely these tactica threads are for two purposes:

1) to discuss which units to purchase and play that are the most efficient and theoretical "best", AND
2) to discuss how to use ALL the codex units effectively rather than dismiss them out of hand because mathhammer says they are "not viable".

Ruststalkers are very good against MEQ or elite infantry. If used against the right target they are effective.
The problem is: they don't do enough wounds for hordes which are the current meta, and they aren't very survivable to get into CC with no tranports.

Are they top tier? Of course not - they lack one additional special rule - e.g. a better FNP or a better move like they had before.

But: 100 pts for 5 as a counter assault unit to hang in your backfield and defend your kastelans isn't terrible - particularly if you don't have or don't like the Electropriests. Alternatively, use them to charge up the table straight at an enemy unit that the opponent values and doesn't want to lose. They will probably get shot to death - maybe without even killing anything - but it's something the opponent needs to deal with and every bullet hitting them is not hitting your army's all-stars.

5 ruststalkers act like far more of a threat than 10 vanguard for pretty much the same points.

No they wont if they dont get a way other than cp to work.
Run charge .
Fearless
survive
All of the above

No you cant compare vanguard with rustalkers cause they cant shoot.has nothing to do one units utility with comparison you nonmcompetitive to do.

Rustalkers suck bad . And if you take them you cant hide them you cant charge them you can sacrifice them theyndont cost 45 they cant shoot. Priets do it with 6" better since they sit where you said near your Robots. Cheaper again. Sorry they suck. The story of competitive and fluffy games need to stop. You dont want to win? What you bubbling about competitive. The unit has issues its worse than all other options so dont take it. What is this offensive vs competitive we are form the moon we dont play with our friends. None plays to loose so cut it. Its tactis threat and this unit sucks badly

Even if you talked friendly games only still a lot more fun easy to play same model better utility take inflitrators . Or dragoons or priests

Sure, you talk about the obviously subpar units. I'll continue to dismiss them as they're not worth my time.

Also "I don't like <model>" is not an argument in a tactics thread
Fulgurites crap all over Ruststalkers . I use mine as Infiltrators now, who despite being not the best, actually have a role in the army, while Ruststalkers are just playing second fiddle to Fulgurites.

If you use Ruststalkers over Fulgurites, you are objectively making your army worse. And that's what I want to inform people about so they don't make bad purchase decisions.
Heck, they were buried into the ground by InControl during the FLG podcast

So what we're agreeing is that this "tactics" thread is not actually about "how to use the units you have in a tactically sound way", it's just about buying the best units. Yes?

 Silentz wrote:
I have to say it winds me up the way people talk in such black and white terms as if everyone is fighting for top table at tournaments and only ever want to play the most ruthlessly efficient min/max units.

not to mention such a list does not exist. warhammer can be very rock paper scissors and so even if you come up with a theoretical best list something can and will come along to crush it.

 Silentz wrote:
So what we're agreeing is that this "tactics" thread is not actually about "how to use the units you have in a tactically sound way", it's just about buying the best units. Yes?

Like I said, you can feel free to discuss them all you want. I will not.
And, yes, I do think that to a degree is what this thread is about. Using bad units is a bad tactic.

No we saying in tactis we try to give the best advice . In the end none is forced to obey nothing. Play what you like sure.

But we try here to gather healthy advice. And suggesting a unit is good when in any cas worse than any other optio is bad why?? Before codex i strongly agreed theyr 8" move gave them an optio n to be better if you wanted to rush the table. In a afast moving army. Now they are not. Cause they doing worse what all other can do.

If they get buffed by default like inf. That are not generally good vs other armies but got a usage. Sure we can talk about usage. Atm Rustalkers are zero

If you have pure Skitari army from 7th, and you don't have fulgurites or more dragoons , russttstalkers will do fine. They don't synergize with army super well, don't have fancy special rules that would give them niche, but are priced reasonably.

I'm not saying that you should play them, but you can without gimping yourself. Yes, GW tok wrong route with them, not buffing them but instead nerfing infiltrators.

But don't put the in one bag with servitors and kataphrons who have their prices taken out of ass so badly than even specially dedicated stratagems and dogmas didn't helped them.

Its not logical to give advice or talk in a forums anout units you got. As i said we try here to give healthy advice. None is the emperor himself. If tou dont have models then play what you got.

Tactics and this generall thrat we need to pinpoint the usage. Usage not fluff not model looks nor how we paimt oir armies or what to buy next. We can talk all you like but the fact remains rustalkers and inflitrators need to be worked. Infiltrators got a usage already talked. Rustalers yes tney benefit from +1 hit and skitarii buf in generall yoi can drop the with an hq mask for rerolls but they suck badly. Badly. Elite killing how? Not fearless no deep strike no run charge no furious charge something. You wont reach melee most likely with the tney will die from lasguns or equal they dont have fnp or exttra attacks to deal with serious important chars. They just cant deliver. 100 points might not be extremely bad but if the unit does not do what its made for?

Even if you got sparemodels make them 10 infltrators. With wrath or skitarii buff or any plan focused on them from dragoons and hq teaming till just obj camping or screen transports will deliver even if not optimal

Don't misunderstand me. I'm not defending Ruststalkers. I'm certainly not suggesting people starting AdMech go out and buy any.

I'm just saying that this thread should not be overrun with people just repeating the mantra of "play Cawl, Kastelans, Onagers and Dragoons or don't even bother unpacking your models" over and over and over and over.

We have talked about all and everything. I wrote 2 strats for agripinna and Ryza. For kataprhons and troops. All players in here contribute as mucha s possible.
7 will say rustalkers suck 2 will say they got usage 1 will not agree with none. Conclusions are to be made in the table. None can factor their playstyle local meta
Experience in forums. There are info atm in here for weeks of reading and playing. All units most tactics. Maybe not so much in warlord traits or relics but still.

You got enough info and go try. If you can win with rystlakers if they suit you then who cares what 20 others say. Still cant advice none to take them. Even if you got the model make them inflitrators or be patient and lets see faq and errata. Whatever the case i dont believe anyoneia here reading tons of informations just to hear gw talking about the best balanced edition and all units are usable. Ok unless you are gw representative and even so imdont agree rustalkers suck. Thats about it.

 Silentz wrote:
Don't misunderstand me. I'm not defending Ruststalkers. I'm certainly not suggesting people starting AdMech go out and buy any.

I'm just saying that this thread should not be overrun with people just repeating the mantra of "play Cawl, Kastelans, Onagers and Dragoons or don't even bother unpacking your models" over and over and over and over.

Whilst I agree with your sentiment, the problem is that the "play Cawl, Kastelans etc....." advice, is actually the best advice - and I don't play AdMech, but was thinking about it. I might still do - it all depends on the FAQ/Errata.

Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

Even with months of tournament testing all that will tell you is if cawl/mars works at all or is competitive. It will say nothing about combinations that are not tested. And if cawl or go home is the advice tossed around like gospel there may be a better option that goes by the wayside untested. I mean it's probably the best but we should keep an open mind that just because something isn't the chapter approved carbon copy of the list ex machina it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand

MarkM wrote:

 Silentz wrote:
Don't misunderstand me. I'm not defending Ruststalkers. I'm certainly not suggesting people starting AdMech go out and buy any.

I'm just saying that this thread should not be overrun with people just repeating the mantra of "play Cawl, Kastelans, Onagers and Dragoons or don't even bother unpacking your models" over and over and over and over.

Whilst I agree with your sentiment, the problem is that the "play Cawl, Kastelans etc....." advice, is actually the best advice - and I don't play AdMech, but was thinking about it. I might still do - it all depends on the FAQ/Errata.

Yea, that is the sad truth. That really is the best advice for competitive AdMech. Everything else is going to be semi-competitive or worse.

Next big shake-up I hope is our FAQ, which should be soon. After that, most of our discussion will likely revolve around how we cope with new releases instead of hashing out our own Codex. I think we got that covered rather well.

I think we are going to struggle against Guard, who look like they will out-artillery us. That is a major worry, because that is all we really have. We might wind up splashing them in to augment, which is a disappointment because right now aside from one or two builds, our army seems reliant on other factions to really have a competitive option. GW really dropped the ball on our 'Dex.

The thing with Ruststalkers is that first round combat 7th vs 8th is the same, arguably better in 8th because the target gets no saves. But in 7th subsequent combat rounds every attack was resolved at AP2, so you didn't need the 6s. What we have in 8th is an opening gambit where you need your 6s to do any real damage and then subsequent rounds are no better. They were always a glass cannon, sure they had FNP but no invulnerable save so durability wise they're more or less the same when mortal wounds arent in the mix. But losing that second round onward penetration bonus is what makes them ineffective now. They also had grenades...which they now dont.

I would much rather use Ruststalkers but i'll only be including them to fill points.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

MarkM wrote:

 Silentz wrote:
Don't misunderstand me. I'm not defending Ruststalkers. I'm certainly not suggesting people starting AdMech go out and buy any.

I'm just saying that this thread should not be overrun with people just repeating the mantra of "play Cawl, Kastelans, Onagers and Dragoons or don't even bother unpacking your models" over and over and over and over.

Whilst I agree with your sentiment, the problem is that the "play Cawl, Kastelans etc....." advice, is actually the best advice - and I don't play AdMech, but was thinking about it. I might still do - it all depends on the FAQ/Errata.

Yea, that is the sad truth. That really is the best advice for competitive AdMech. Everything else is going to be semi-competitive or worse.

Next big shake-up I hope is our FAQ, which should be soon. After that, most of our discussion will likely revolve around how we cope with new releases instead of hashing out our own Codex. I think we got that covered rather well.

I think we are going to struggle against Guard, who look like they will out-artillery us. That is a major worry, because that is all we really have. We might wind up splashing them in to augment, which is a disappointment because right now aside from one or two builds, our army seems reliant on other factions to really have a competitive option. GW really dropped the ball on our 'Dex.

Unfortunately, currently all true.

And it seems that GW have taken the current top army, and just made it plain better. I hope I am wrong and surprised with what they do to IG, but from what we've seen I doubt it.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:


Next big shake-up I hope is our FAQ, which should be soon. After that, most of our discussion will likely revolve around how we cope with new releases instead of hashing out our own Codex. I think we got that covered rather well.

Mmmm... not hopeful for major changes here.


My hopes for the FAQ:
- Clarifying when/how often Litany of the Electromancer triggers
- Fixing the wording of a couple of stratagems
- Torsion Cannon points drop
- Ruststalkers to 15-17 pts
- Power fist points drop to match marines
- Targeting Relay (?) stratagem applies to Kataphron breachers as well as destroyers

My fears/expectations for the FAQ:
- Heavy Arc Rifles errata'd back up to 18
- No other changes

I don't expect much from the FAQ. I just want foc yesterday and am hoping it fills in the missing link in the codex.

But this is all wishful thinking

I don't think Ruststalkers are trash (but then I don't think a 52 point Servitor squad with 2 HBs is "trash") but its fair to say there are better options (not sure on the servitors actually - they compare alright with troops, but the thing is there is a troops tax and not an elite tax).

Fulgurites do a lot more damage. Against MEQ its nearly twice as much on the charge. On the down side you are a one wound 5++/5+++ (until you wipe a unit). This is typically less protection than two wounds and almost certainly a 3+ save on the way in.

In this circumstance 5 bolter shots will kill a Fulgurite while you need 13.5 to kill a Ruststalker. Obviously stalkers do worse against things like autocannons and overcharged plasma (but if they are shooting this at your stalkers they are not shooting your dakkabots or dragoons).

The problem is in a game all about alpha striking survivability tends to be overpriced. If you are using Fulgurites you pretty much have to deep strike or infiltrate them in. You can be more flexible with Stalkers - although they are still not great. They would be incredible at 10-12 points.

gendoikari87 wrote:
Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

Even with months of tournament testing all that will tell you is if cawl/mars works at all or is competitive. It will say nothing about combinations that are not tested. And if cawl or go home is the advice tossed around like gospel there may be a better option that goes by the wayside untested. I mean it's probably the best but we should keep an open mind that just because something isn't the chapter approved carbon copy of the list ex machina it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand

So getting two canticles and rerolls on all shooting with a super durable model doesn't scream most competitive to you? Do you want to be taken seriously in this thread?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

Even with months of tournament testing all that will tell you is if cawl/mars works at all or is competitive. It will say nothing about combinations that are not tested. And if cawl or go home is the advice tossed around like gospel there may be a better option that goes by the wayside untested. I mean it's probably the best but we should keep an open mind that just because something isn't the chapter approved carbon copy of the list ex machina it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand

So getting two canticles and rerolls on all shooting with a super durable model doesn't scream most competitive to you? Do you want to be taken seriously in this thread?

On top of Wrath of Mars, which is by far one of the nastiest Strategems out there right now. Not many armies can - with one unit's round of shooting - kill Magnus.

Unless the FAQ/Errata or future releases shake things up, Mars is still top dog.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

Even with months of tournament testing all that will tell you is if cawl/mars works at all or is competitive. It will say nothing about combinations that are not tested. And if cawl or go home is the advice tossed around like gospel there may be a better option that goes by the wayside untested. I mean it's probably the best but we should keep an open mind that just because something isn't the chapter approved carbon copy of the list ex machina it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand

So getting two canticles and rerolls on all shooting with a super durable model doesn't scream most competitive to you? Do you want to be taken seriously in this thread?

you either entirely skipped over the point or willfully ignored it. Either way not responding to this straw man

gendoikari87 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

Even with months of tournament testing all that will tell you is if cawl/mars works at all or is competitive. It will say nothing about combinations that are not tested. And if cawl or go home is the advice tossed around like gospel there may be a better option that goes by the wayside untested. I mean it's probably the best but we should keep an open mind that just because something isn't the chapter approved carbon copy of the list ex machina it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand

So getting two canticles and rerolls on all shooting with a super durable model doesn't scream most competitive to you? Do you want to be taken seriously in this thread?

you either entirely skipped over the point or willfully ignored it. Either way not responding to this straw man

That isn't a strawman, it is a direct refutation of your claim that Cawl/Mars is not the most competitive. He makes the case that it is.

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

Even with months of tournament testing all that will tell you is if cawl/mars works at all or is competitive. It will say nothing about combinations that are not tested. And if cawl or go home is the advice tossed around like gospel there may be a better option that goes by the wayside untested. I mean it's probably the best but we should keep an open mind that just because something isn't the chapter approved carbon copy of the list ex machina it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand

So getting two canticles and rerolls on all shooting with a super durable model doesn't scream most competitive to you? Do you want to be taken seriously in this thread?

you either entirely skipped over the point or willfully ignored it. Either way not responding to this straw man

That isn't a strawman, it is a direct refutation of your claim that Cawl/Mars is not the most competitive. He makes the case that it is.

except at no point did I say that. You need to work on your reading comprehension relevant part bolded


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe if you guys want to be taken seriously you should read people's whole posts not just the first sentence before you start flaming.

https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/740860.page#9624941


What you believe the faq should change for ad mech

gendoikari87 wrote:
Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

I feel the same way. You are gambling on the alpha strike and the enemy being within 36". In a super competitive environment (like Nova, Adepticon, las Vegas Open) you'll probably only get to shoot with them maybe 1 turn.

gendoikari87 wrote:

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

Even with months of tournament testing all that will tell you is if cawl/mars works at all or is competitive. It will say nothing about combinations that are not tested. And if cawl or go home is the advice tossed around like gospel there may be a better option that goes by the wayside untested. I mean it's probably the best but we should keep an open mind that just because something isn't the chapter approved carbon copy of the list ex machina it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand

So getting two canticles and rerolls on all shooting with a super durable model doesn't scream most competitive to you? Do you want to be taken seriously in this thread?

you either entirely skipped over the point or willfully ignored it. Either way not responding to this straw man

That isn't a strawman, it is a direct refutation of your claim that Cawl/Mars is not the most competitive. He makes the case that it is.

except at no point did I say that. You need to work on your reading comprehension relevant part bolded


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Maybe if you guys want to be taken seriously you should read people's whole posts not just the first sentence before you start flaming.

...bro. You absolutely said "Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive." BOLDED, just in case you forgot what you wrote. He refuted that claim.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 D6Damager wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

I feel the same way. You are gambling on the alpha strike and the enemy being within 36". In a super competitive environment (like Nova, Adepticon, las Vegas Open) you'll probably only get to shoot with them maybe 1 turn.

As someone who plays in a super-competitive environment, this isn't the case. I have had plenty of rounds of shooting pre-Codex. Adding Wrath only makes them better. Adding a second Canticles too. And being able to actually shoot in Protector on T1 via BO is amazing, since that was usually the biggest handicap was waiting an entire turn to get in your good shooting.

It isn't an alpha strike at all - it is a load of solid artillery. Much like IG, really. We screen our guns and blast the enemy.

 D6Damager wrote:

gendoikari87 wrote:
Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive. On paper sure it looks like it but until we get a few months with the codex I think it's not responsible to say any thing is the best. Hell meta changes and changes what the best is all the time.

I feel the same way. You are gambling on the alpha strike and the enemy being within 36". In a super competitive environment (like Nova, Adepticon, las Vegas Open) you'll probably only get to shoot with them maybe 1 turn.

dont get me wrong I'm not convinced it's not either. Just saying a little reservation and caution goes a long way. Dogmatic "x is best" is the enemy of innovation


Automatically Appended Next Post:

...bro. You absolutely said "Still not convinced cawl/mars is the most competitive." BOLDED, just in case you forgot what you wrote. He refuted that claim.

saying you aren't convinced it is and saying it's not are entirely different things. ThAts why I suggested you brush up on reading comprehension. It will help I promise.

Tyel wrote:

The problem is in a game all about alpha striking survivability tends to be overpriced.

Quoted for truth.

There are so many examples of this it's insane. Custodes for example. A Custodian guard with sword and shield has T5, 3W, 2+, 3++ and costs 54 points. Super tough. But that model's ranged output is a 12" Pistol 2 S4 AP0 D1. A bolter. With a shorter range. They're good in combat but getting them there is either a long jog across the table, or a further 400 points for a land raider?!

What would you choose, two custodes, or a twin lascannon razorback?

I feel like durability is way overpriced and mobility tends to be undervalued.

Personally I'd go twin assault cannon razor but that's me xp

text removed.

Reds8n

It's not semantics it's called nuance, subtlety. I get inyour world everything is binary. Good, bad. Yes no. But that's not how things work. Let me introduce you to the concept of maybe. There is often not a best anything in anything. Quantifying how an army will fare is only part of a huge equation you can't ever fully calculate and if you could there's no point putting models on the table in the first place.

Sometimes the correct answer is: undefined. That's perfectly fine. I get this is a new concept for you.

gendoikari87 wrote:
It's not semantics it's called nuance, subtlety. I get inyour world everything is binary. Good, bad. Yes no. But that's not how things work. Let me introduce you to the concept of maybe. There is often not a best anything in anything. Quantifying how an army will fare is only part of a huge equation you can't ever fully calculate and if you could there's no point putting models on the table in the first place.

Sometimes the correct answer is: undefined. That's perfectly fine. I get this is a new concept for you.

This is not acceptable to the Omnissiah.

There is 1. And there is 0. There is nothing in between!

Everything else is heresy!

lol except the concept of 1 and 0 arises from quantum states of semi conductors being sacred in the eye of them omnissiah. That's a quantum state which means quantum uncertainty to the omnissiah is sacred. Thus both deductive and inductive logic are both sacred rationales

Does make me sad how little thought and care went into writing our dex compared to whats being released about the Astra dex.

Sad beep boop

 Silentz wrote:
So what we're agreeing is that this "tactics" thread is not actually about "how to use the units you have in a tactically sound way", it's just about buying the best units. Yes?

This thread is for advice and tactics, which usually go hand in hand. Why would you recommend someone a sub par unit to use?

Anyway back to tactics: infoslave skull. Seems good but it's 2cp thoughts?

I ll take guard unf cant play competitive with out. Especilly after new codex

Righto, you were warned before.

Thread, no new one allowed for now, certain users can look forwards to a suspension coming up.