As a minor side note, we get to test one of this forum's biggest bold claims with the GSC codex. That claim being "are infantry squads actually super OP just because of their defensive bodies"?

If rumors are true, GSC will get infantry squads with no regimental doctrine and no orders as a troop choice. (several sources say BBs will be unable to receive orders from any source, so presumably BB company commanders are available but would just sit around).

Will we still see infantry squads taken in competitive GSC lists? Or is it Orders and the Catachan/Cadian doctrines that put them over the edge into tournament meta-makers?

I'm curious to see. I'm also curious to see whether we get GSC Basilisks (Are basilisks actually tournament pieces without Catachan and Harker) or GSC Leman Russes (is it the Russ or the Catachan doctrine that is competitive).

All are available, and all can be taken while avoiding the CP nerf (by putting your IS in your GSC detachment and by putting Basilisks/LR Commanders in supreme commands and Spearheads). Will they be? Or will they be passed up?

Hey, I'm taking a trio of GSC Manticores Mmmmm. Alpha Strike lols!

the_scotsman wrote:
As a minor side note, we get to test one of this forum's biggest bold claims with the GSC codex. That claim being "are infantry squads actually super OP just because of their defensive bodies"?

If rumors are true, GSC will get infantry squads with no regimental doctrine and no orders as a troop choice. (several sources say BBs will be unable to receive orders from any source, so presumably BB company commanders are available but would just sit around).

Will we still see infantry squads taken in competitive GSC lists? Or is it Orders and the Catachan/Cadian doctrines that put them over the edge into tournament meta-makers?

I'm curious to see. I'm also curious to see whether we get GSC Basilisks (Are basilisks actually tournament pieces without Catachan and Harker) or GSC Leman Russes (is it the Russ or the Catachan doctrine that is competitive).

All are available, and all can be taken while avoiding the CP nerf (by putting your IS in your GSC detachment and by putting Basilisks/LR Commanders in supreme commands and Spearheads). Will they be? Or will they be passed up?

Wyverns/Manticores and Bassies will likely make the cut, as they are something missing from the GSC roster. Indirect fire or heavier suppressing fire is something they could use to cover the first turn and subsequent turns to support the onslaught of Acolytes.

 Carnikang wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
As a minor side note, we get to test one of this forum's biggest bold claims with the GSC codex. That claim being "are infantry squads actually super OP just because of their defensive bodies"?

If rumors are true, GSC will get infantry squads with no regimental doctrine and no orders as a troop choice. (several sources say BBs will be unable to receive orders from any source, so presumably BB company commanders are available but would just sit around).

Will we still see infantry squads taken in competitive GSC lists? Or is it Orders and the Catachan/Cadian doctrines that put them over the edge into tournament meta-makers?

I'm curious to see. I'm also curious to see whether we get GSC Basilisks (Are basilisks actually tournament pieces without Catachan and Harker) or GSC Leman Russes (is it the Russ or the Catachan doctrine that is competitive).

All are available, and all can be taken while avoiding the CP nerf (by putting your IS in your GSC detachment and by putting Basilisks/LR Commanders in supreme commands and Spearheads). Will they be? Or will they be passed up?

Wyverns/Manticores and Bassies will likely make the cut, as they are something missing from the GSC roster. Indirect fire or heavier suppressing fire is something they could use to cover the first turn and subsequent turns to support the onslaught of Acolytes.

I can absolutely see wyverns. I think a lot of competitive armies focusing on GSC are going to be jonesing for a turn 1 chaff clearing tool and maybe we'll see wyverns maybe we'll see something nids like stealers+swarmy. I am a bit more skeptical on bassies/manticores just because I think the turn 2 charge with aberrants or sawcolytes is going to be such a powerful anti armor tool that really all you need for success is the ability to shift aside 60ish GEQ bodies to ensrue they don't get screened.

Tyel wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:
It was the more competent groups I follow that recognised the codex as strong, but on here I just heard a lot of whining about how weak the new Ork codex was. I notice that it's quite a few Ork posters in this thread too making quite a few very bold declarations once again. Lol.

[Citation needed]

I guess is bad because its prolonging a fight - but citation, I was there. Dakka was incredibly negative about the Ork codex. Any post to the tune of "this unit looks good" got a hostile response, typically followed by three more lamenting that the Stompa still sucks.

Englishman himself literally is the [citation] on that one lol. Hell in the next line complains that Orks are just a gatekeeper army and manufactures quotes lol

Tyel wrote:

Still, back on GSC, not really convinced the Nexos is problematic. Its 50 points. Sure if there is a warlord trait/artifact you value at more than 50 points (since this is how most armies get this ability) then its a good exchange but I am not convinced there is - or at least not for GSC/Tyranids. (Okay you are getting a guy as well, but he has an autopistol, he isn't doing much aside from providing the ability). A lot of codexes have a CP farm ability and then a list of clearly inferior options (Tau, DE). Since CP farming is near mandatory he is going to be played - but I don't think he's dramatically too low.

I guess there is a significant commitment to be made to unlock his bonuses - however 50 pts for CP farm like that which doesn't even use a warlord trait or relic? its nice man

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
the_scotsman is quite right.

There's more to a model's worth than it's durability. What role does it perform? What sort of firepower is it packing? What sort of damage can it feasibly do in HTH? How does it interact with the rest of the army? How common are they in the FoC? What alternatives are there? Do they buff other units? Are they recipients of buffs?

The whole reason they separated out wargear costs the way they did was to allow for easier tinkering. If the actual model is too good, up it's points, but leave the wargear be, and vice versa, including when something is actually a bit bobbins and not really performing the role they intended for it. Giving the weapon a separate cost, even if it's zero gives them wider options.

Take Bolter Drill. My word Marines needed that. It helps them. But it doesn't make the humble Bolter so much better it needs a points boost. Yet in the future, they may also grant Bolters -1 AP - which could entail upping their cost to 1pt to reflect it's a significant boost to the damage output of the wider army.

You're making some tenuous assertions not backed by data.

One dynamic we can observe is the effect of hull points for vehicles on their base cost - e.g. Predator / Rhino / Razorback.

This is not broadly apparent in infantry models.

Tacs get 1 per 5 special weapons - 13 points.
Devastators get 4 per 5 special - 13 points.
Assault marines? 13 points. (+3 with jump packs, which is a whole different world -- fly, double the move, and deepstrike --than a 1" difference between a Kabalite and other 6" move models)
-- All different FOC, roles, weapon options, etc --

Breacher Team - 7 points.
Strike Team - 7 points.
Warp Talons? No bolter - forced into LC - 12 points. Ergo bolters are possibly worth 1 point to GW. Why? A Warp Talon is not wildly more effective than an assault marine with dual LC.

Is a Wych paying for 2 points for 1 extra attack and a worse save? I don't think so.

You do get exceptions to the rule. Tankbustaz for one. Why are they like this?

A rokkit is more valuable on a killa kan than it is a deffdread, but GW didn't treat it like a variable BS weapon as in the codex (see Scion Plasma). Why? Were they being nice or considering that the rokkit isn't inherently spammable like scion plasma is? So, why is a Tankbusta 5 points and not 7? Is it because they figured they wouldn't use their melee profile like boyz? That doesn't make sense, because they get full rerolls to hit on shooting - that's pretty useful, so why doesn't it have a point value assigned? Likely because they didn't want 3 profiles for the rokkit and TBs as they exist typically need help getting to a target. So, instead of discounting the weapon for them and keeping their base cost up they got a base cost reduction.

And at that moment points become more about the feel of the unit rather than a hard calculation.

CSM terminators are no different in stats or slot than loyalist terminators, but they're 5 points more. Is it because they can double tap? Is it because they have a wider selection of weapons? Did GW just make a mistake? How can you be certain you know that answer?
Aberrants and Nobz are not wildly different in weapon options - in fact Nobz have more options. Shouldn't they cost more if that's GW's logic? Are we sure it's the same?

Now if you want to handwavium and say Aberrants are fine for their cost (and maybe they are), because of the army they're in that's fine, but at some point you're going to need to deal with the fact that the buffs available to them are about twice as good for the about the same cost that Orks pay and that there is also the issue of soup (of which I am a proponent).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
As a minor side note, we get to test one of this forum's biggest bold claims with the GSC codex. That claim being "are infantry squads actually super OP just because of their defensive bodies"?

If rumors are true, GSC will get infantry squads with no regimental doctrine and no orders as a troop choice. (several sources say BBs will be unable to receive orders from any source, so presumably BB company commanders are available but would just sit around).

Will we still see infantry squads taken in competitive GSC lists? Or is it Orders and the Catachan/Cadian doctrines that put them over the edge into tournament meta-makers?

I'm curious to see. I'm also curious to see whether we get GSC Basilisks (Are basilisks actually tournament pieces without Catachan and Harker) or GSC Leman Russes (is it the Russ or the Catachan doctrine that is competitive).

All are available, and all can be taken while avoiding the CP nerf (by putting your IS in your GSC detachment and by putting Basilisks/LR Commanders in supreme commands and Spearheads). Will they be? Or will they be passed up?

Personally I think Loyal 32 do nothing for a list other than provide CP and not be terrible. The real meat is in the Catachans.

I find it incredibly interesting that Brood Brothers are 4 points. Is it because of the lack of CT or is it because they don't offer full CP?

 Carnikang wrote:
Wyverns/Manticores and Bassies will likely make the cut, as they are something missing from the GSC roster. Indirect fire or heavier suppressing fire is something they could use to cover the first turn and subsequent turns to support the onslaught of Acolytes.

Vultures also appear to be a popular choice, specifically for clearing a lane for the DS charge when it comes in on turn 2.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
As a minor side note, we get to test one of this forum's biggest bold claims with the GSC codex. That claim being "are infantry squads actually super OP just because of their defensive bodies"?

If rumors are true, GSC will get infantry squads with no regimental doctrine and no orders as a troop choice. (several sources say BBs will be unable to receive orders from any source, so presumably BB company commanders are available but would just sit around).

Will we still see infantry squads taken in competitive GSC lists? Or is it Orders and the Catachan/Cadian doctrines that put them over the edge into tournament meta-makers?

I'm curious to see. I'm also curious to see whether we get GSC Basilisks (Are basilisks actually tournament pieces without Catachan and Harker) or GSC Leman Russes (is it the Russ or the Catachan doctrine that is competitive).

All are available, and all can be taken while avoiding the CP nerf (by putting your IS in your GSC detachment and by putting Basilisks/LR Commanders in supreme commands and Spearheads). Will they be? Or will they be passed up?

Personally I think Loyal 32 do nothing for a list other than provide CP and not be terrible. The real meat is in the Catachans.

I find it incredibly interesting that Brood Brothers are 4 points. Is it because of the lack of CT or is it because they don't offer full CP?

Probably because they don't get Regiments, Orders, are half CP when in an Astra Militarum BB detachemnt, and have no access to Specialist Detachments....

They're literally just Unquestioning Loyalty and Screen Fodder for GSC.

 Carnikang wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Personally I think Loyal 32 do nothing for a list other than provide CP and not be terrible. The real meat is in the Catachans.

I find it incredibly interesting that Brood Brothers are 4 points. Is it because of the lack of CT or is it because they don't offer full CP?

Probably because they don't get Regiments, Orders, are half CP when in an Astra Militarum BB detachemnt, and have no access to Specialist Detachments....

They're literally just Unquestioning Loyalty and Screen Fodder for GSC.

Nope. They get Orders. They don't get Regimental traits or Regimental Orders.

They're 4 pts because they're meant to be an Infantry Squad analogue. Infantry Squads are 4ppm.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Carnikang wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Personally I think Loyal 32 do nothing for a list other than provide CP and not be terrible. The real meat is in the Catachans.

I find it incredibly interesting that Brood Brothers are 4 points. Is it because of the lack of CT or is it because they don't offer full CP?

Probably because they don't get Regiments, Orders, are half CP when in an Astra Militarum BB detachemnt, and have no access to Specialist Detachments....

They're literally just Unquestioning Loyalty and Screen Fodder for GSC.

Spoiler:

Nope. They get Orders. They don't get Regimental traits or Regimental Orders.

They're 4 pts because they're meant to be an Infantry Squad analogue. Infantry Squads are 4ppm.

Are there any Regimental Orders? To be fair, I don't play AM, and all the interactions are lost on me for the most part. As far as I know, Orders are Regiment specific because you can't use them on something that doesn't have a regiment.

But hey, if they can, it is odd. Probably will get cleared up in the week 2 FaQ.

 Carnikang wrote:


Are there any Regimental Orders? To be fair, I don't play AM, and all the interactions are lost on me for the most part. As far as I know, Orders are Regiment specific because you can't use them on something that doesn't have a regiment.

But hey, if they can, it is odd. Probably will get cleared up in the week 2 FaQ.

Yea, for example Catachans reroll attacks with flamers and ignore cover.

 Carnikang wrote:
Are there any Regimental Orders? To be fair, I don't play AM, and all the interactions are lost on me for the most part. As far as I know, Orders are Regiment specific because you can't use them on something that doesn't have a regiment.

But hey, if they can, it is odd. Probably will get cleared up in the week 2 FaQ.

Yes there are.

I doubt this will change.

Neophytes are fired since they are 5ppm. Honestly, as a Chaos player, if I could take Guardsmen under the same conditions I'd take them even at 5ppm over Cultists, hell, I'd take them over Cultists even if they couldn't be targeted by Stratagems and Psychic powers.

Honestly, all but the most biased AM apologists agree that Guardsmen are undercosted.

Cue apologist rant.

 SHUPPET wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 SHUPPET wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

Tyel wrote:
If it breaks the game GW will nerf it fairly quickly.

Like they have nerfed knights...oh wait they haven't.

You are assuming GW wants balance. They don't. They want opposite.

at what point were they able to nerf Knights?

tneva82 wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Assuming your numbers are accurate, Daedalus, even with triple Battalions, you're probably out by the end of three.

So about same as orks. And as by then game is pretty much done with winner just mobbing up no big deal. Even optimal

Is that genuinely how all your matches go?

Did you forget that Chapter Approved was released not too long ago?

Knights missed the cut off date for Chapter Approved. Literally the entire team was unanimously in agreement that Knights need nerfs.


But I guess you missed that.

Oh please. They managed to fit Space Wolves in there, as little as they did. You can't defend them on this one.

 Carnikang wrote:

Are there any Regimental Orders? To be fair, I don't play AM, and all the interactions are lost on me for the most part. As far as I know, Orders are Regiment specific because you can't use them on something that doesn't have a regiment.

But hey, if they can, it is odd. Probably will get cleared up in the week 2 FaQ.

Every Regiment got an Order, Trait, Stratagem and Relic.

Orders are "Regiment specific" in the same way auras are "<Insert Thing Here> specific". You can't have someone with different keywords giving Orders to different.

Thanks to this wording though, GSC seemingly do Guard better than Guard do as they can give Orders to Ogryn/Bullgryn, Ratlings(units that have "Auxilia" as a keyword--one that CAN'T be replaced), and you don't need a Tempestor Prime to order Scions.

TwinPoleTheory wrote:Neophytes are fired since they are 5ppm. Honestly, as a Chaos player, if I could take Guardsmen under the same conditions I'd take them even at 5ppm over Cultists, hell, I'd take them over Cultists even if they couldn't be targeted by Stratagems and Psychic powers.

No, you wouldn't. You'd likely just keep complaining that Guardsmen are undercosted and fielding the same cookie-cutter nonsense while ignoring your army's strengths.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Carnikang wrote:
Are there any Regimental Orders? To be fair, I don't play AM, and all the interactions are lost on me for the most part. As far as I know, Orders are Regiment specific because you can't use them on something that doesn't have a regiment.

But hey, if they can, it is odd. Probably will get cleared up in the week 2 FaQ.

Yes there are.

I doubt this will change.

Neophytes are fired since they are 5ppm. Honestly, as a Chaos player, if I could take Guardsmen under the same conditions I'd take them even at 5ppm over Cultists, hell, I'd take them over Cultists even if they couldn't be targeted by Stratagems and Psychic powers.

Honestly, all but the most biased AM apologists agree that Guardsmen are undercosted.

Cue apologist rant.

Haha, nope, not from me. If BB infantry squads get orders, neophytes are a fluff choice only. Every competitive list that features any GEQ bodies at all will have BB infantry squads backed up by BB company commanders from a Supreme Command detachment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Carnikang wrote:

Are there any Regimental Orders? To be fair, I don't play AM, and all the interactions are lost on me for the most part. As far as I know, Orders are Regiment specific because you can't use them on something that doesn't have a regiment.

But hey, if they can, it is odd. Probably will get cleared up in the week 2 FaQ.

Every Regiment got an Order, Trait, Stratagem and Relic.

Orders are "Regiment specific" in the same way auras are "<Insert Thing Here> specific". You can't have someone with different keywords giving Orders to different.

Thanks to this wording though, GSC seemingly do Guard better than Guard do as they can give Orders to Ogryn/Bullgryn, Ratlings(units that have "Auxilia" as a keyword--one that CAN'T be replaced), and you don't need a Tempestor Prime to order Scions.

TwinPoleTheory wrote:Neophytes are fired since they are 5ppm. Honestly, as a Chaos player, if I could take Guardsmen under the same conditions I'd take them even at 5ppm over Cultists, hell, I'd take them over Cultists even if they couldn't be targeted by Stratagems and Psychic powers.

No, you wouldn't. You'd likely just keep complaining that Guardsmen are undercosted and fielding the same cookie-cutter nonsense while ignoring your army's strengths.

Neophytes in a Goliath? Why no, this is my BB infantry squad in a taurox prime, silly.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Carnikang wrote:
Are there any Regimental Orders? To be fair, I don't play AM, and all the interactions are lost on me for the most part. As far as I know, Orders are Regiment specific because you can't use them on something that doesn't have a regiment.

But hey, if they can, it is odd. Probably will get cleared up in the week 2 FaQ.

Yes there are.

I doubt this will change.

Neophytes are fired since they are 5ppm. Honestly, as a Chaos player, if I could take Guardsmen under the same conditions I'd take them even at 5ppm over Cultists, hell, I'd take them over Cultists even if they couldn't be targeted by Stratagems and Psychic powers.

Honestly, all but the most biased AM apologists agree that Guardsmen are undercosted.

Cue apologist rant.

Can we please stop with this?

Your not convincing the people who disagree, and the people who already agree already agree. It's just a constant whine.

Please, stop.

Anyone know what a web pistol does now? Is it still garbage?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Anyone know what a web pistol does now? Is it still garbage?

S4 AP-1 and you choose to wound against Strength or Toughness. Still garbage, yes.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Anyone know what a web pistol does now? Is it still garbage?

1pt, same special ability with S4, single shot at 12" but now it auto-hits.

A regular webber is also 1pt, D3 shots, 16" range autohits.

Both are quite good IMO! Best neophyte squad setup is 2 webbers 1 web pistol with autoguns.

 Kanluwen wrote:
No, you wouldn't. You'd likely just keep complaining that Guardsmen are undercosted and fielding the same cookie-cutter nonsense while ignoring your army's strengths.

It's true, I live in a bubble of repetitive banality. But you've played against my lists so often, you know what's it's like. Oh, wait...

I have a truckload of garishly painted Mordians just waiting for the day when Renegades cease to suck.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
No, you wouldn't. You'd likely just keep complaining that Guardsmen are undercosted and fielding the same cookie-cutter nonsense while ignoring your army's strengths.

It's true, I live in a bubble repetitive banality. But you've played against my lists so often, you know what's it's like. Oh, wait...

I have a truckload of garishly painted Mordians just waiting for the day when Renegades cease to suck.

why mordians though of all regiments?

Want a laugh? Compare Abberrants to Thunderwolf Cavalry.

Not Online!!! wrote:
why mordians though of all regiments?

They were cheap at a local game store when one of the guys in our league was dumping his Mordians to switch armies.

Since I'm cheap and lazy, they hit all the key breakpoints.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
why mordians though of all regiments?

They were cheap at a local game store when one of the guys in our league was dumping his Mordians to switch armies.

Since I'm cheap and lazy, they hit all the key breakpoints.

But mordians seem like a terrible choice, with all the heraldry

the_scotsman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Anyone know what a web pistol does now? Is it still garbage?

1pt, same special ability with S4, single shot at 12" but now it auto-hits.

A regular webber is also 1pt, D3 shots, 16" range autohits.

Both are quite good IMO! Best neophyte squad setup is 2 webbers 1 web pistol with autoguns.

Well, that makes Neos more interesting.

2.05 MEQ at 12" as compared to 2.0 for IS with FRFSRF. No real help from Cults - Rusted Claw will make them harder to shift. What are the heavy weapon options?

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What are the heavy weapon options?

Heavy Stubber, Mining Laser, Seismic Cannon on heavy, Flamer, Grenade Launcher, Webber on special, Autocannon, Heavy Bolter, Lascannon, Missile Launcher, Mortar on heavy weapons team.

Largely similar to Guard, a bit more variety available to them, but lower LD since BB get +1 LD.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
Anyone know what a web pistol does now? Is it still garbage?

1pt, same special ability with S4, single shot at 12" but now it auto-hits.

A regular webber is also 1pt, D3 shots, 16" range autohits.

Both are quite good IMO! Best neophyte squad setup is 2 webbers 1 web pistol with autoguns.

Well, that makes Neos more interesting.

2.05 MEQ at 12" as compared to 2.0 for IS with FRFSRF. No real help from Cults - Rusted Claw will make them harder to shift. What are the heavy weapon options?

If people are going to claim that every single cult list in the universe is going to be CTFAE with Vect or Twisted Helix for busted aberrants, I don't think it's fair to say those neophytes are going to get to be rusted claw. That's 2 detachments, 1 for your souped nid/guard detachments.

I get 1.60 for the neophyte squad, 2.0 for the guard squad. 5 hits from webbers * .5 wound *.333 save + 7 hits from autoguns * .333 wound * .333 save.

HW options for neophytes is 2x/squad, three options: Heavy Stubber, Mining Laser (heavy 1 24" S9 Ap-3 D3D) and Seismic Cannon (1-12" heavy 3 S6 AP-1 2D, 13"-24" Heavy 6 S3 Ap- 1D). Given their new CA points cost the best choice is probably stubbers or nothing, the other options are quite pricy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:
What are the heavy weapon options?

Heavy Stubber, Mining Laser, Seismic Cannon on heavy, Flamer, Grenade Launcher, Webber on special, Autocannon, Heavy Bolter, Lascannon, Missile Launcher, Mortar on heavy weapons team.

Largely similar to Guard, a bit more variety available to them, but lower LD since BB get +1 LD.

I am guessing they don't get the HWT now that BB infantry squad is its own unit, but maybe.

the_scotsman wrote:
I am guessing they don't get the HWT now that BB infantry squad is its own unit, but maybe.

Wouldn't surprise me given that the Neophyte box doesn't have HWT models.

the_scotsman wrote:

I am guessing they don't get the HWT now that BB infantry squad is its own unit, but maybe.

This is correct. Neophytes get Mining stuff, Broodbrothers get HWTs.

the_scotsman wrote:


If people are going to claim that every single cult list in the universe is going to be CTFAE with Vect or Twisted Helix for busted aberrants, I don't think it's fair to say those neophytes are going to get to be rusted claw. That's 2 detachments, 1 for your souped nid/guard detachments.

I get 1.60 for the neophyte squad, 2.0 for the guard squad. 5 hits from webbers * .5 wound *.333 save + 7 hits from autoguns * .333 wound * .333 save.

HW options for neophytes is 2x/squad, three options: Heavy Stubber, Mining Laser (heavy 1 24" S9 Ap-3 D3D) and Seismic Cannon (1-12" heavy 3 S6 AP-1 2D, 13"-24" Heavy 6 S3 Ap- 1D). Given their new CA points cost the best choice is probably stubbers or nothing, the other options are quite pricy.

Yea, I don't foresee that either. I'm just musing over the interesting stuff. Overall it's a really interesting and characterful book.

Are webbers AP1 or was Slayer wrong on that part?

Thanks to this wording though, GSC seemingly do Guard better than Guard do as they can give Orders to Ogryn/Bullgryn, Ratlings(units that have "Auxilia" as a keyword--one that CAN'T be replaced), and you don't need a Tempestor Prime to order Scions.

Waaaaaiit . That is really a thing?

 SHUPPET wrote:

 An Actual Englishman wrote:


Note that competitive players, including your favourite Geoff Robinson are placing Orks as a 'gatekeeper' army at best. Aka - mid tier.

My favorite? Lel yeah don't listen to breakdowns from GT winners who have been playing an army for months, instead listen to the wisdom and insight that is dakka's outrage having never even put hands on the dex yet. Otherwise YOU'RE PICKING FAVORITES

BTW what Geoff actually said about Orkz was that they are one of the best armies in the game, openly mocked Paulo for "predicting" that they'd be top 8 at LVO as if it's not even in question, and the entire podcast agreed, even Paulo going back to admit "yeah thats not really a prediction at all".

But I guess just flat lying about it is cool too, you do you.

InControl is easy to get in contact with, if you're curious about his opinions on Orkz just swing him a message, rather than inventing false statements on other people's behalf.

I've listened to the podcast. Obviously you haven't as Paulo actually said he believed them a gatekeeper army. He also said that maybe they'd break top 8. Geoff admitted that they struggle with Knights. The meta. He also put his predictions down to players of those Ork armies (rather than the strength of the army itself) and don't exaggerate 'the rest of the podcast'. There was one other person on who believes that the very specific LVO terrain rules favor Orks. Cool story you got there though.

After listening to InControl's 'review' of the GSC codex I have very little interest in his opinion. His bias, like your own, is palpable.th

 SHUPPET wrote:
Hmmmmmm I guess unlike some of the more vocal players in this community, they chose to wait until the dex is actually been played competitively and see if anything was too strong before nerfing it. Why would they nerf something when nothing has changed from release state lol? You know well and truly that 2 week FAQs are for fixing editor mistakes and clarifying rules.

Big FAQ's aren't for points changes anymore. They are deliberately trying to keep them to Chapter Approved, and overall game changes to FAQ to keep everything in as minimal places as possible, which even still has people complaining about too many loose ends. Anyway the point was made as they made a conscious decision not to nerf Knights in CA2018, that was factually incorrect, so let's just take that and move on.

Weird that they nerfed multiple things in the Ork dex in the 2 week FAQ. Get Stuck In became trash for example.

Ah the Big FAQs aren't for points changes huh? Weird I could have swore 1 of the last 2 had them in? I agree though, they are keeping the changes in CA to try and squeeze more money out of their clients. Let's not pretend otherwise. We are literally paying for patches.

What are you talking about when you state 'the fact that they made a conscious decision not to nerf Knights is factually incorrect'? They can nerf Knights any time they want, that is the most correct and true statement I have ever seen. They had ample time to sort the Castellan as well as other units.

The point was made because one of the primary defences of this insane GSC dex is 'if it turns out to be broken after 100000000 games they will fix it though!' Which, given the state of the game right now is patently false. Need I remind you that 4 ppm Catachan Infantry still exist? Do I need to highlight that they got buffed with the Vigilus detachments? The concerns around balance are not only valid but also evident.

 SHUPPET wrote:

Englishman himself literally is the [citation] on that one lol. Hell in the next line complains that Orks are just a gatekeeper army and manufactures quotes lol

Falling back on the old straw man huh? That's a shame. Your claims are bogus.

I've yet to see all those tournaments dominated by Ork wins? 45%. That is the current Ork win rate. That is lower than many, MANY factions. Deathwatch beat Orks more times than not when the two factions go against each other. A marine dex of all things. Without bolter discipline.

We will see how well Orks perform in the LVO, if the best player in the world in NN can take them far (I'll be interested to see the reaction if he doesn't, whether it will be blamed on poor dice rather than faction). But the LVO meta is already out of date and nobody seems interested in discussing the meta post bolter discipline, post GSC dex or provide proof that Orks are a top tier army. All of the stats literally show otherwise. Look on 40k stats at the performance of Orks pre and post codex. Please someone explain to me how they are considered top tier.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


If people are going to claim that every single cult list in the universe is going to be CTFAE with Vect or Twisted Helix for busted aberrants, I don't think it's fair to say those neophytes are going to get to be rusted claw. That's 2 detachments, 1 for your souped nid/guard detachments.

I get 1.60 for the neophyte squad, 2.0 for the guard squad. 5 hits from webbers * .5 wound *.333 save + 7 hits from autoguns * .333 wound * .333 save.

HW options for neophytes is 2x/squad, three options: Heavy Stubber, Mining Laser (heavy 1 24" S9 Ap-3 D3D) and Seismic Cannon (1-12" heavy 3 S6 AP-1 2D, 13"-24" Heavy 6 S3 Ap- 1D). Given their new CA points cost the best choice is probably stubbers or nothing, the other options are quite pricy.

Yea, I don't foresee that either. I'm just musing over the interesting stuff. Overall it's a really interesting and characterful book.

Are webbers AP1 or was Slayer wrong on that part?

Nope. We have an image of the wargear page - must have gotten it mixed up with their new cost of 1?

Also on second look, web pistols are S3, not S4. I'm not sure if the web pistol is worth it tbh. Basically, it's like having 2 autopistols instead of 1? Maybe not worth one point. Since neo leaders can have autoguns in the index I think they probably stick with that.

budget neo squad lets say 2 webbers 2 stubbers that'd be 56 points. on the move, puts down 6 S4 AP- hits and 6 S3 Ap- hits. Versus 18 S3 Ap- hits from a FRFSRF lasgun squad for 40pts, or "55pts" if you count the 1/2 of a company commander that gives the order.

I think if you have detachments to spare its a no-brainer for the company commander+BB infantry squad setup. The company commander gives you 1/3 of a CP and is also at least a warm body who can be irritating to kill. FRFSRF has you outputting more fire and at a longer range - the webbers cap out at 16" range.

Not Online!!! wrote:

Thanks to this wording though, GSC seemingly do Guard better than Guard do as they can give Orders to Ogryn/Bullgryn, Ratlings(units that have "Auxilia" as a keyword--one that CAN'T be replaced), and you don't need a Tempestor Prime to order Scions.

Waaaaaiit . That is really a thing?

RAW(but probably not RAI) the following:


The wording is that if you do not have <Regiment> or Militarum Tempestus, you just have "Brood Brothers" added to you. Ogryn, Bullgryn, and Ratlings have Auxilia as a keyword and thus can never be Ordered by a <Regiment> or Tempestus officer...but they can by Brood Brothers apparently.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Thanks to this wording though, GSC seemingly do Guard better than Guard do as they can give Orders to Ogryn/Bullgryn, Ratlings(units that have "Auxilia" as a keyword--one that CAN'T be replaced), and you don't need a Tempestor Prime to order Scions.

Waaaaaiit . That is really a thing?

RAW(but probably not RAI) the following:

Spoiler:

The wording is that if you do not have <Regiment> or Militarum Tempestus, you just have "Brood Brothers" added to you. Ogryn, Bullgryn, and Ratlings have Auxilia as a keyword and thus can never be Ordered by a <Regiment> or Tempestus officer...but they can by Brood Brothers apparently.

man, Kanluwen, you must really be

brooding

over this change.

(it's a goofy unintended rule interaction, im betting it gets got in the 2-week faq.)

Not Online!!! wrote:

Thanks to this wording though, GSC seemingly do Guard better than Guard do as they can give Orders to Ogryn/Bullgryn, Ratlings(units that have "Auxilia" as a keyword--one that CAN'T be replaced), and you don't need a Tempestor Prime to order Scions.

Waaaaaiit . That is really a thing?

Possibly. Based on the wording of the Brood Brothers rule, any Astra Militarum unit that has the <Regiment> keyword replaces <Regiment> with the Brood Brothers keyword, but any AM unit the doesn't have the <Regiment> keyword still gets the Brood Brothers keyword. This means that, assuming we are able to use Orders on Brood Brothers units, things that would normally be able to be given orders (like Bullgryn) can now be given Orders. It's not quite clear whether or not this is the case, but I expect this to be answered in the codex FAQ.

*edit* ninja'd. The bottom line is, this doesn't seem to be an intentional, and it'll like be FAQ'd. I wouldn't build my strategy around it.

the_scotsman wrote:
man, Kanluwen, you must really be

brooding

over this change.

(it's a goofy unintended rule interaction, im betting it gets got in the 2-week faq.)

Honestly, it just highlights for me that the Orders system needed to get overhauled far more than it was. I said this in the Tactica thread, but I'm wondering if the 2-week FAQ will just restrict Orders to "squads with vox-casters"(Scions, Veterans, Command Squads, and Infantry Squads).

Call me cynical if you want, but given the knee-jerk nonsense of the Commissar change...I feel like they'll make the minimum effort.

EnTyme wrote:
Possibly. Based on the wording of the Brood Brothers rule, any Astra Militarum unit that has the <Regiment> keyword replaces <Regiment> with the Brood Brothers keyword, but any AM unit the doesn't have the <Regiment> keyword still gets the Brood Brothers keyword. This means that, assuming we are able to use Orders on Brood Brothers units, things that would normally be able to be given orders (like Bullgryn) can now be given Orders. It's not quite clear whether or not this is the case, but I expect this to be answered in the codex FAQ.

You can use Orders. The only thing you can't do is use <Regiment> specific Orders or Stratagems(read: the Cadian, Catachan, etc Orders).

Since Orders are given from a model with <Regiment> (or Militarum Tempestus in the case of the Tempestor Prime) to a targeted Infantry unit(note: It is not specifying Infantry Squads, it specifies an Infantry keyworded unit) within 6".

*edit* ninja'd. The bottom line is, this doesn't seem to be an intentional, and it'll like be FAQ'd. I wouldn't build my strategy around it.

I'm expecting that if it's FAQ'd, it'll be detrimental to the Guard side of things not the GSC.

What's odd to me is that if they had just left the units without <regiment> or with Militarum Tempestus the same, the rules for Brood Brothers would have allowed them to be incorporated into the BB detachments anyway. The Brood Brothers rule allows GSC to include an Astra Militarum detachment in their list with half CP. Technically speaking, they could have just used that rule and GSc would just be able to include MT and Auxilia units per the normal rules.

The way they worded it here just seems to add the following strange interactions:

-Regular officers can order Militarum Tempestus units, and vice versa with Tempestor Primes ordering regular units.

-Auxilia units can now be issued orders

-Regular units can now embark on Taurox Primes

Those are, as far as I can tell, the only three differences. Just strange to me because the whole "add Brood Brothers if you don't have it" section of the rule was seemingly totally unnecessary.

This is why I'm guessing the 2-week errata will simply erase that section of the rule.

Maybe it's because theoretically if the MT units didn't exchange MT for BB you could have an entirely MT detachment and gain that doctrine?

 Kanluwen wrote:
You can use Orders. The only thing you can't do is use <Regiment> specific Orders or Stratagems(read: the Cadian, Catachan, etc Orders).

Since Orders are given from a model with <Regiment> (or Militarum Tempestus in the case of the Tempestor Prime) to a targeted Infantry unit(note: It is not specifying Infantry Squads, it specifies an Infantry keyworded unit) within 6".

I'm expecting that if it's FAQ'd, it'll be detrimental to the Guard side of things not the GSC.

It's badly worded for sure, especially given that the rule doesn't call out the BB keyword as a Regimental designation, which is further supported by the fact that Scions, Ogryns, etc get the keyword also. RAW, yes, you can make a solid argument that they can use orders.

But honestly, I suspect that's just the tip of the unintended consequences iceberg. Do Ogryn Bodyguards get to roll for Unquestioning Loyalty and Bodyguard when they're within range of a BB Company Commander?

the_scotsman wrote:
What's odd to me is that if they had just left the units without <regiment> or with Militarum Tempestus the same, the rules for Brood Brothers would have allowed them to be incorporated into the BB detachments anyway. The Brood Brothers rule allows GSC to include an Astra Militarum detachment in their list with half CP. Technically speaking, they could have just used that rule and GSc would just be able to include MT and Auxilia units per the normal rules.

The way they worded it here just seems to add the following strange interactions:

-Regular officers can order Militarum Tempestus units, and vice versa with Tempestor Primes ordering regular units.

-Auxilia units can now be issued orders

-Regular units can now embark on Taurox Primes

Those are, as far as I can tell, the only three differences. Just strange to me because the whole "add Brood Brothers if you don't have it" section of the rule was seemingly totally unnecessary.

This is why I'm guessing the 2-week errata will simply erase that section of the rule.

Maybe it's because theoretically if the MT units didn't exchange MT for BB you could have an entirely MT detachment and gain that doctrine?

Honestly, it just strikes me as a Cruddace thing...he wanted to make it so that Brood Brothers could "infiltrate every layer of the Guard" or some such crockery, but in the end result we now have:

GSC Techpriests, Servitors, Priests, Crusaders, Commissars, and Psykers...any and all of which can also receive Orders to boot!

I know I'm making a bit of a silliness over it but it just highlights, to me, the half-cocked "fix" that the Orders system received to make it 'comparable to auras' or some such silliness.

 Kanluwen wrote:

EnTyme wrote:
Possibly. Based on the wording of the Brood Brothers rule, any Astra Militarum unit that has the <Regiment> keyword replaces <Regiment> with the Brood Brothers keyword, but any AM unit the doesn't have the <Regiment> keyword still gets the Brood Brothers keyword. This means that, assuming we are able to use Orders on Brood Brothers units, things that would normally be able to be given orders (like Bullgryn) can now be given Orders. It's not quite clear whether or not this is the case, but I expect this to be answered in the codex FAQ.

You can use Orders. The only thing you can't do is use <Regiment> specific Orders or Stratagems(read: the Cadian, Catachan, etc Orders).

Since Orders are given from a model with <Regiment> (or Militarum Tempestus in the case of the Tempestor Prime) to a targeted Infantry unit(note: It is not specifying Infantry Squads, it specifies an Infantry keyworded unit) within 6".

*edit* ninja'd. The bottom line is, this doesn't seem to be an intentional, and it'll like be FAQ'd. I wouldn't build my strategy around it.

I'm expecting that if it's FAQ'd, it'll be detrimental to the Guard side of things not the GSC.

The argument I've seen (and I don't really agree with it) is that Brood Brothers replaces <Regiment>, but isn't actually a <Regiment>, and therefore, the Orders rule doesn't allow it to be used as one, so Orders can't be given. I think it's pretty obvious that Brood Brothers are supposed to be able to use Orders given by Brood Brothers units, though. I'm sure the FAQ/Errata will clarify it.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Thanks to this wording though, GSC seemingly do Guard better than Guard do as they can give Orders to Ogryn/Bullgryn, Ratlings(units that have "Auxilia" as a keyword--one that CAN'T be replaced), and you don't need a Tempestor Prime to order Scions.

Waaaaaiit . That is really a thing?

RAW(but probably not RAI) the following:

Spoiler:

The wording is that if you do not have <Regiment> or Militarum Tempestus, you just have "Brood Brothers" added to you. Ogryn, Bullgryn, and Ratlings have Auxilia as a keyword and thus can never be Ordered by a <Regiment> or Tempestus officer...but they can by Brood Brothers apparently.

As a renegade player i have no dog in that fight, but that seems just fething slowed.

"A cult has infiltrated our military, Sir!"

"Then do something about it!, Comissar"

"but Sir, they are better commanding officers then you."

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
What's odd to me is that if they had just left the units without <regiment> or with Militarum Tempestus the same, the rules for Brood Brothers would have allowed them to be incorporated into the BB detachments anyway. The Brood Brothers rule allows GSC to include an Astra Militarum detachment in their list with half CP. Technically speaking, they could have just used that rule and GSc would just be able to include MT and Auxilia units per the normal rules.

The way they worded it here just seems to add the following strange interactions:

-Regular officers can order Militarum Tempestus units, and vice versa with Tempestor Primes ordering regular units.

-Auxilia units can now be issued orders

-Regular units can now embark on Taurox Primes

Those are, as far as I can tell, the only three differences. Just strange to me because the whole "add Brood Brothers if you don't have it" section of the rule was seemingly totally unnecessary.

This is why I'm guessing the 2-week errata will simply erase that section of the rule.

Maybe it's because theoretically if the MT units didn't exchange MT for BB you could have an entirely MT detachment and gain that doctrine?

Honestly, it just strikes me as a Cruddace thing...he wanted to make it so that Brood Brothers could "infiltrate every layer of the Guard" or some such crockery, but in the end result we now have:

GSC Techpriests, Servitors, Priests, Crusaders, Commissars, and Psykers...any and all of which can also receive Orders to boot!

I know I'm making a bit of a silliness over it but it just highlights, to me, the half-cocked "fix" that the Orders system received to make it 'comparable to auras' or some such silliness.

Meh. You attribute malice, I attribute ignorance. I suspect it was originally added to avoid GSC being able to "Backdoor" in to a regimental bonus via having an entirely Militarum Tempestus detachment.

the_scotsman wrote:

Meh. You attribute malice, I attribute ignorance. I suspect it was originally added to avoid GSC being able to "Backdoor" in to a regimental bonus via having an entirely Militarum Tempestus detachment.

But that's the thing(at least IMO) the wording clearly is that it replaces Militarum Tempestus with Brood Brothers...so unless you're playing fast and loose with what "replaces" means, you'd not be able to ever do so.

And yeah, maybe I am attributing malice to what could be in fact ignorance but something about it just isn't sitting right with me. And it's not just "waaaah, Guard don't get to do it!". It makes me wonder if they've got something planned to address this further down the road via Guard.

The sad part is the whole damn thing could have been avoided from the outset if Guard had retained a 4+, Hellgun armed <Regiment> unit.

the_scotsman wrote:


Nope. We have an image of the wargear page - must have gotten it mixed up with their new cost of 1?

Also on second look, web pistols are S3, not S4. I'm not sure if the web pistol is worth it tbh. Basically, it's like having 2 autopistols instead of 1? Maybe not worth one point. Since neo leaders can have autoguns in the index I think they probably stick with that.

budget neo squad lets say 2 webbers 2 stubbers that'd be 56 points. on the move, puts down 6 S4 AP- hits and 6 S3 Ap- hits. Versus 18 S3 Ap- hits from a FRFSRF lasgun squad for 40pts, or "55pts" if you count the 1/2 of a company commander that gives the order.

I think if you have detachments to spare its a no-brainer for the company commander+BB infantry squad setup. The company commander gives you 1/3 of a CP and is also at least a warm body who can be irritating to kill. FRFSRF has you outputting more fire and at a longer range - the webbers cap out at 16" range.

Hmm. I'm thinking more along the lines of firing squads with the Alphus. That Seismic Cannon looks pretty fun. Webbers might as well be taken if they're only 1 point.

Bladed Cog - No move & shoot penalty
Alphus
Iconward
3x10 Neos, 2 Webbers, 2 Seismic or 2 HStubbers

5+/6++/6+++

That could be fun and way more durable than IS - saving 54% instead of 33% against AP0 and 31% vs 0% against AP2, buuut you have to shoot just one unit at a time.

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Meh. You attribute malice, I attribute ignorance. I suspect it was originally added to avoid GSC being able to "Backdoor" in to a regimental bonus via having an entirely Militarum Tempestus detachment.

But that's the thing(at least IMO) the wording clearly is that it replaces Militarum Tempestus with Brood Brothers...so unless you're playing fast and loose with what "replaces" means, you'd not be able to ever do so.

And yeah, maybe I am attributing malice to what could be in fact ignorance but something about it just isn't sitting right with me. And it's not just "waaaah, Guard don't get to do it!". It makes me wonder if they've got something planned to address this further down the road via Guard.

The sad part is the whole damn thing could have been avoided from the outset if Guard had retained a 4+, Hellgun armed <Regiment> unit.

No, what I'm saying is in the absence of the "replaces MT" clause, then GSC would have access to MT, and they would be able to get the MT regimental doctrine if they took a whole detachment of only units with the MT keyword.

So rather than an attempt at giving them "better MT" I suspect that clause first was put into place in order to prevent Brood Brothers from being able to access the MT reigmental doctrine.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

Meh. You attribute malice, I attribute ignorance. I suspect it was originally added to avoid GSC being able to "Backdoor" in to a regimental bonus via having an entirely Militarum Tempestus detachment.

But that's the thing(at least IMO) the wording clearly is that it replaces Militarum Tempestus with Brood Brothers...so unless you're playing fast and loose with what "replaces" means, you'd not be able to ever do so.

And yeah, maybe I am attributing malice to what could be in fact ignorance but something about it just isn't sitting right with me. And it's not just "waaaah, Guard don't get to do it!". It makes me wonder if they've got something planned to address this further down the road via Guard.

The sad part is the whole damn thing could have been avoided from the outset if Guard had retained a 4+, Hellgun armed <Regiment> unit.

No, what I'm saying is in the absence of the "replaces MT" clause, then GSC would have access to MT, and they would be able to get the MT regimental doctrine if they took a whole detachment of only units with the MT keyword.

So rather than an attempt at giving them "better MT" I suspect that clause first was put into place in order to prevent Brood Brothers from being able to access the MT reigmental doctrine.

I don't think there was any concern about Brood Brothers getting MT Regimental Doctrine; it gets replaced with Brood Brothers on the datasheet. They don't get any of the Detachment abilities, regimental Doctrines, Stratagems, Orders etc. It makes it abundantly clear that you don't get anything:


It seems very well thought out...until you get to the part I have issue with.

But where my concern keeps coming back to is the caveat of "If a unit does not have either of these[meaning <Regiment> or Militarum Tempestus] keywords, it simply gains the Brood Brothers keyword". That's an unnecessary caveat and if ever there were a time I felt a "money grab" was in effect, this is it.

My last bit is just taking a shot at Scions even needing to be included since they screwed Veterans up so badly over the years.

Heh.

I forgot about BRB WL trait of +1LD plus the Clam and Broodsurge is LD13. Stormraven is LD9.

~1 in 3 to obliterate it. No crouchling though...so tremendous shame if you fail WC6.

DE flyers are LD7...lol

I'd expect mental onslaught to be Faqed.

Not sure on everything else. Its clear creep - but if DE are, post-CA, meant to be the yardstick I dont think overwhelmingly so. Its a glasshammer army, the issue is that bad armies will be swept away and not have enough punch to respond.

Be interesting to see how rusted claw shakes out versus twisted helix.

Tyel wrote:
I'd expect mental onslaught to be Faqed.

Not sure on everything else. Its clear creep - but if DE are, post-CA, meant to be the yardstick I dont think overwhelmingly so. Its a glasshammer army, the issue is that bad armies will be swept away and not have enough punch to respond.

Be interesting to see how rusted claw shakes out versus twisted helix.

In what way do you think they'll change it?

I expect Mental Onslaught to be changed like this:

-Use the Unmodified Leadership of both models-

This will prevent most situations where something could be insta-killed without participating in the little roll-off minigame.

Also, the Brood Brothers is so needlessly complicated. They could have said 'Replace the 'Regiment' keyword with the 'Brood Brothers' keyword.' There. Done. No more orders shenanigans for ordering psykers and ogryns, no mixing things up BS. It would be so simple and elegant, but by being extra verbose, they went and botched it.

 EnTyme wrote:

The argument I've seen (and I don't really agree with it) is that Brood Brothers replaces <Regiment>, but isn't actually a <Regiment>, and therefore, the Orders rule doesn't allow it to be used as one, so Orders can't be given. I think it's pretty obvious that Brood Brothers are supposed to be able to use Orders given by Brood Brothers units, though. I'm sure the FAQ/Errata will clarify it.

But <blood brother> isn't a regiment though, it's another keyword. You swap the keyword <regiment> with <blood brother>, they wouldn't have bothered if it was the same thing.

drbored wrote:
I expect Mental Onslaught to be changed like this:

-Use the Unmodified Leadership of both models-

This will prevent most situations where something could be insta-killed without participating in the little roll-off minigame.

Also, the Brood Brothers is so needlessly complicated. They could have said 'Replace the 'Regiment' keyword with the 'Brood Brothers' keyword.' There. Done. No more orders shenanigans for ordering psykers and ogryns, no mixing things up BS. It would be so simple and elegant, but by being extra verbose, they went and botched it.

No more orders at all, no more transports (?) No more models interacting via any rule that affects orders, Genestealer cult can get the military tempestuous doctrine by taking a full detachment of them...

dhallnet wrote:

 EnTyme wrote:

The argument I've seen (and I don't really agree with it) is that Brood Brothers replaces <Regiment>, but isn't actually a <Regiment>, and therefore, the Orders rule doesn't allow it to be used as one, so Orders can't be given. I think it's pretty obvious that Brood Brothers are supposed to be able to use Orders given by Brood Brothers units, though. I'm sure the FAQ/Errata will clarify it.

But <blood brother> isn't a regiment though, it's another keyword. You swap the keyword <regiment> with <blood brother>, they wouldn't have bothered if it was the same thing.

I'm sure this will get an FAQ. Everyone is asking for clarification on Brood Brothers.

 TwinPoleTheory wrote:

 Carnikang wrote:
Are there any Regimental Orders?

Neophytes are fired since they are 5ppm. Honestly, as a Chaos player, if I could take Guardsmen under the same conditions I'd take them even at 5ppm over Cultists, hell, I'd take them over Cultists even if they couldn't be targeted by Stratagems and Psychic powers.
Cue apologist rant.

rusted claw neophytes at 5 ppm made fearless by patriarch may induce rivers of salt in our opponent's eyes, but I guess we'll w8 and see