The 3 fast attack brigade tax has a lot of options that are good. What's best is completely dependent on the regiment doctrine and the rest of the army, and even then it's not obvious.
Catachans have to choose between s4 rough riders that can balloon up to 3 attacks or scout sentinels that have a reroll on their heavy flamer.
Tallaran have to choose between adding rough riders to an already considerable out flank force or lascannon armored sentinels that can move and fire without penalty.
Cadians have to choose between static armored sentinels with considerable bonuses to hit or rough riders to fill in a mobility gap.
Right now I'm actually thinking of doing 60 point rough rider units with 2 plasma guns (Cadian Doctrine) the extra 2 lances on 5 rough riders won't make much difference in CC if I go up agaist a really nasty assault army, but they can still bully weak backfield units with 3 lances. Their dakka can get beefy with the overlapping fields of fire strategem hitting on 3+ and being immune to plasma guns overheating. 7 ablative wounds before plasma gunners die and a 22" threat range on their double tap.
This is a good codex with a lot of viable options.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but Catachan rough riders aren't going to be S4. As a Catachan player, I shed tears over this every evening. They're still totally awesome though so I keep fielding them.
Ya roughriders aren't infantry.
If you're looking for fast attack choices choose a Taurus venerator with twin linked lascannons that can move and fire w/o penalty And a 5++ invul.
Yeah, only Cadian or Vostroyan regiment bonuses can affect Rough Riders, and you're not likely to use the Cadian ones ever (rough riders that don't move?).
Plasma Gun wielding rough riders could get the benefit of the Vostroyan regiment however, it doesn't specifiy infantry. And 30" plasma guns on rough riders. . . has potential. That's only 50 points for a 5 man squad with 2 plasma guns, which can flank and rapid fire at 15". Might be worth investing in some big hats for your horsemen.
Automatically Appended Next Post: With regards to Chimeras, I want to make up a unit of 10 Crusaders and a priest, stick them in a double heavy flamer chimera, and go smack them into someone's face as a relatively cheap but hard as nails distraction.
Rough riders will often miss out on Cadian Doctrine from moving but Overlapping fields of fire works for the entire army, and it will likely be used every turn until command points are exhausted. The 22" double tap threat range can get them in range of the planned target for overlapping fields of fire and they can still charge something if needed.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
gungo wrote: Ya roughriders aren't infantry.
If you're looking for fast attack choices choose a Taurus venerator with twin linked lascannons that can move and fire w/o penalty And a 5++ invul.
It would still lose Cadian Doctrine for moving, it's expensive, and Cadians are already loaded with lascannons. I'm also not convinced lascannons need speed due to their long range.
A Catachan tauros with a heavy flamer is way faster than a scout sentinel. Those would be scary.
Blacksails wrote: I want to like the chimera because it looks so much better than the god awful Taurox, but the weapon loadout and cost of the Taurox is much more attractive.
Waiting on the right Taurox alternative model from somewhere.
Automatically Appended Next Post: With regards to Chimeras, I want to make up a unit of 10 Crusaders and a priest, stick them in a double heavy flamer chimera, and go smack them into someone's face as a relatively cheap but hard as nails distraction.
Bullgryns can do the same thing of course.
Yeah I'm interested in converting up some crusaders but S3 power swords aren't very enticing. With a priest they'd get 30 attacks vs Bullgryns 3 Bullgryn + priest getting 16?
Crusaders can reroll all misses AND use acts of faith. It's a tough call.
Automatically Appended Next Post: With regards to Chimeras, I want to make up a unit of 10 Crusaders and a priest, stick them in a double heavy flamer chimera, and go smack them into someone's face as a relatively cheap but hard as nails distraction.
Bullgryns can do the same thing of course.
Yeah I'm interested in converting up some crusaders but S3 power swords aren't very enticing. With a priest they'd get 30 attacks vs Bullgryns 3 Bullgryn + priest getting 16?
Crusaders can reroll all misses AND use acts of faith. It's a tough call.
The thing I like best for Crusaders is their acts of faith giving them a 12" move most turns. That's more than rough riders!
Mathmatically, 1 Priest doesn't do anything good for a unit of 3 bullgryns, you're better off buying another bullgryn (in a chimera or Valkyrie anyway, obviously not in a taurox). Especially now that the priest is stuck with a lousy chainsword. If he could have a powerfist maybe.
edit: The main thing I like about crusaders is that they're just different. I like variety.
Automatically Appended Next Post: With regards to Chimeras, I want to make up a unit of 10 Crusaders and a priest, stick them in a double heavy flamer chimera, and go smack them into someone's face as a relatively cheap but hard as nails distraction.
Bullgryns can do the same thing of course.
Yeah I'm interested in converting up some crusaders but S3 power swords aren't very enticing. With a priest they'd get 30 attacks vs Bullgryns 3 Bullgryn + priest getting 16?
Crusaders can reroll all misses AND use acts of faith. It's a tough call.
The thing I like best for Crusaders is their acts of faith giving them a 12" move most turns. That's more than rough riders!
Mathmatically, 1 Priest doesn't do anything good for a unit of 3 bullgryns, you're better off buying another bullgryn (in a chimera or Valkyrie anyway, obviously not in a taurox). Especially now that the priest is stuck with a lousy chainsword. If he could have a powerfist maybe.
edit: The main thing I like about crusaders is that they're just different. I like variety.
The act of faith is very versatile. I really like it. I'm thinking about using Scions as crusaders. Maybe use the brute shield as the storm shield? Not sure how to make a shield arm/hand though yet ...
I used to give my priest a power maul. Sad he's not a sneaky melee threat anymore. I only have 3 Bullgryn at the moment so that's why I just added a priest in.
I totally agree about variety. That's part of the draw for the imperial guard.
Colonel Cross wrote: Sorry to burst your bubble, but Catachan rough riders aren't going to be S4. As a Catachan player, I shed tears over this every evening. They're still totally awesome though so I keep fielding them.
I'd allow it, if I were playing against you. Its in the spirit of the game.
The act of faith is very versatile. I really like it. I'm thinking about using Scions as crusaders. Maybe use the brute shield as the storm shield? Not sure how to make a shield arm/hand though yet ...
I used to give my priest a power maul. Sad he's not a sneaky melee threat anymore. I only have 3 Bullgryn at the moment so that's why I just added a priest in.
I totally agree about variety. That's part of the draw for the imperial guard.
Yeah I agree, I've also been thinking Scions with Skitarii vanguard heads is probably the most straight forward. I've got power sword hands leftover already, so I should be able to get up enough for a whole squad. The small ogryn shields would probably look the best for their stormshield, but I've also got old Empire Knight shields that would look nice as well I think. Or there's always shapeways bits. I have lots of spare left arms, so I think I can figure something out.
The elaborate scion armor will make more sense on crusaders than it does on scions too. Just need to greenstuff up some flowing capes.
Because I Can, i've worked up a simulator which runs the Cadian and Catachan doctrines on Russ tanks to see which works better.
Attached are the results of a non-overcharge non-moving Executioner Commander w/ Pcannon &LCannon shooting at a primaris marine 1 million times with Cadian reroll 1s and columns showing 1,2,3 and 4 reroll random shots for the Catachan .
The top-sheet result is that the cadian tank outperforms the catachan in almost every field, so long as it doesn't move, by 10-20~%.
Proves what we knew; Cats are better for general purpose; Cads are the static gunline of choice, and when I do it, Tallarn are best for mobile assault.
If you're worried about getting into a static mindset and want russes; it would appear Catachan are for you. If you want to reduce your opponent to fine radioactive fog in 1 turn of shooting, Cadians are where its at.
Requests for other simulations welcome - i'm going to go through the whole armory eventually, but if there's a community favorite to evaluate i'll do it sooner.
Trickstick wrote:Interesting read Polonius. One thing I have been thinking about is using scout sentinels in squadrons to reduce the chances of giving away first blood. They are one of the only vehicles which doesn't separate when you deploy them, so you can get a 12 or 18 wound unit that would be much harder to kill. I was mainly thinking about this because I was taking 2 hellhounds and thought 4 sentinels worked pretty well.
I think you answered your own question, which is why take two sentinels when you can take a hellhound? I know you lose scout, but if your opponent can wreck a scout sentinel turn one, he can probably wreck a hellhound turn one. Or an infantry squad. If that's something you worry about, then go ahead, but especially with scouts I feel that there's some raw inefficiency baked into them to account for the scout move. Doubling down on that might not make a lot of sense.
vipoid wrote:I've got another question for you guys. I tend to play infantry-heavy armies, with a few sentinels (to make up a Brigade) and, at most, 2 Leman Russ.
My question is, aside from Cadian, what doctrine do you think would be best for this sort of army?
Tallarn could be fun, especially if you like moving. Vostroyan will help more than you think, especially with FRFSRF and plasma. Valhallan is tough, and can regenerate squads
That was a fantastic read and very insightful. Great work.
Are you planning to do writeups like this for any other units?
thanks!
Trickstick wrote:[Well Polonius wrote this great article, so we may get the whole thing again this time.
I was working on a similar article for the index, and got everything done but the lords of war: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/730110.page I'll be working to update that for the codex, and eventually turn it into an article.
Concerning the Milatarus Tempus (or Storm Troopers Doctrine)
Can't I create a Regiment (Bob's Boisterous Ballers) and then choose the Storm Trooper Doctrine (since that's what I feel represents the 3xB Regiment pg.132) and then make all my Battle Tanks, Basilisks, and HWT LasCannons that same regiment?
Thus giving my Army 1/2 range full of dakka?
In short I can make my Army "any" of the doctrines I see fit?
RegulusBlack wrote: Concerning the Milatarus Tempus (or Storm Troopers Doctrine)
Can't I create a Regiment (Bob's Boisterous Ballers) and then choose the Storm Trooper Doctrine (since that's what I feel represents the 3xB Regiment pg.132) and then make all my Battle Tanks, Basilisks, and HWT LasCannons that same regiment?
Thus giving my Army 1/2 range full of dakka?
In short I can make my Army "any" of the doctrines I see fit?
Page 84:
...the MILITARUM TEMPESTUS keyword cannot be used to replace the <REGIMENT> keyword on any other datasheet.
1. You have to bring it in turn 3 or lose it; it's still 'in reserve' unless you're playing a 'counts as destroyed isn't actually destroyed' game.
2. If the enemy is CC focused and they're in combat, in most cases you'll be happier firing the death strike anyway. There's actually value in forcing the issue by sacrificing a unit to maximise your AOE benefits.
Personally I stick mine behind a pair of bastions in the corner, and let the Big Red Tank (Shadow sword) provide the distraction grief until the missile is good and ready.
I don't have the rulebook to hand but why do I have to bring them on turn 3 rather than turn 4? Its not that much of an issue, If I brought him on turn 3 I'd pop smoke, maybe use an astropath to give him +1 save and then use take cover. All while keeping him in cover. They don't lose any BS until they lose 6+ wounds.
When you used the deathstrike what kind of return on your investment did you get?
With my Tallarn Outrider detachement, its a choice between the Deathstrike + a company commander or a Tank commander in a Punisher Tank. (I'd be ambushing either the tank or the deathstrike alongside 2 x 2 Hellhound equivalents) I like the idea of mixing things up but I don't want to waste 165 points on a useless vehicle.
I don't have any superheavies in my army and don't really intend to get any.
Colonel Cross wrote: Sorry to burst your bubble, but Catachan rough riders aren't going to be S4. As a Catachan player, I shed tears over this every evening. They're still totally awesome though so I keep fielding them.
I'd allow it, if I were playing against you. Its in the spirit of the game.
I’d probably let it go too. I certainly would if they were converted Catachans on Cold Ones.
I understand i cannot make my Basilisk "Militarus Tempus" but i can make it "The Super Awesome Dudes" Regiment and then choose the "MT:Stormtrooper" Doctrine as my Regiments Doctrine based off of pg 132 ?
I don't believe there is anything that limits the Doctrine based off of your Army? Just that I Cannot have MT Basilisks, but i can have "TSAD" Basilisks with MT Doctrine?
I understand i cannot make my Basilisk "Militarus Tempus" but i can make it "The Super Awesome Dudes" Regiment and then choose the "MT:Stormtrooper" Doctrine as my Regiments Doctrine based off of pg 132 ?
I don't believe there is anything that limits the Doctrine based off of your Army? Just that I Cannot have MT Basilisks, but i can have "TSAD" Basilisks with MT Doctrine?
That's an interesting question. I'm not sure exactly how I should read it, but it does seem like you can pick any Doctrine. The Militarum Tempestus: Storm Troopers is a regimental doctrine. If you did this, obviously you could not include Tempestus Scions with your Super Awesome Dudes and have them both match Regiment-wise.
My strict reading of the rule right now would be that you could do that. Seems like something GW probably didn't intend, but a FAQ would tell us the truth on that.
I understand i cannot make my Basilisk "Militarus Tempus" but i can make it "The Super Awesome Dudes" Regiment and then choose the "MT:Stormtrooper" Doctrine as my Regiments Doctrine based off of pg 132 ?
I don't believe there is anything that limits the Doctrine based off of your Army? Just that I Cannot have MT Basilisks, but i can have "TSAD" Basilisks with MT Doctrine?
I don't know. I think that the intention of the rule is to let me use my "Tvashtan 422nd" army with Tallarn rules, as that doesn't actually change the balance of the game in any way. Giving Tempestus rules to <regiment> units seems like gaming the system. If the wording of the rules allows it, I imagine that it is unintentional and will be FAQed. Like many rule interactions, I would file it under "I guess you can but don't go waste money building an army around it and crying when it disappears".
I have been wondering about the super-heavies. Is the Shadowsword just the best? Why would you want to take a banesword or stormsword? I can see merit to the transport versions but those two just seem bad. I guess they do more shots, which could help. I can imagine the banesword actually being ok with the special rule I guess. Would need to mathhammer it.
vipoid wrote: Oh, something else I was thinking recently. Let's say I'm using an Armgeddon or Tallarn list where virtually all the infantry is in transports.
Aside from Tank Commanders, which HQs do you think work best with that sort of list?
Well you would still want company commanders for when you jump out.
Twoshoes23 wrote: Can special weapons squads still take demo charges??
Not the ones in the Codex. However, if you take the entry from the index then you can. It's a weird position really.
If i do that can i still give them doctrines? My idea here is 2x SWS in a Chimera with ML, HB and maybe a Stubber. one squad has 3 demo charges, the other one and two plasma guns ( or whatever you want, except snipers obviously). They are Tallarn, so that is 12 + d6 turn one. Then 6 + d6 turn to the put out 12 lasguns, 2 special weapons, and 4D6 strength 8 shots wherever you want. A little contingent on the Tallarn trait though to get there...oh and 1CP for the grenades stratagem. All for pretty cheap too.
Twoshoes23 wrote: Can special weapons squads still take demo charges??
Not the ones in the Codex. However, if you take the entry from the index then you can. It's a weird position really.
If i do that can i still give them doctrines? My idea here is 2x SWS in a Chimera with ML, HB and maybe a Stubber. one squad has 3 demo charges, the other one and two plasma guns ( or whatever you want, except snipers obviously). They are Tallarn, so that is 12 + d6 turn one. Then 6 + d6 turn to the put out 12 lasguns, 2 special weapons, and 4D6 strength 8 shots wherever you want. A little contingent on the Tallarn trait though to get there...oh and 1CP for the grenades stratagem. All for pretty cheap too.
It's almost like the grenade stratagem was designed for use by demo charge SWSs and yet, doesn't necessarily seem legal to use. I'd like an FAQ on it. I have legit pewter Catachans with demo charges from back in the day I'd love to use. If you could throw them all at once they would actually be viable. Precodex I would use 2 meltas or a heavy flamer and a demo charge. But obviously 3 demo charges at once is more optimal.
I have been wondering about the super-heavies. Is the Shadowsword just the best? Why would you want to take a banesword or stormsword? I can see merit to the transport versions but those two just seem bad. I guess they do more shots, which could help. I can imagine the banesword actually being ok with the special rule I guess. Would need to mathhammer it.
The Hellhammer and Banesword are *slightly* better options for killing terminators and really any 'large number of high toughness models in one unit' units of which there are like 3 in the whole game. The Shadowsword is genuinely just the best one - though I haven't exhausted the mathhammer yet - as it combines range, damage and , surprisingly, weight of shots into one package. It's the guard's simple answer to lone big scary models, which was basically the only thing missing from the armory.
Sadly the Stormsword is the runt of the litter, although it's improved on its original index incarnation. It's a shame as my StormSword was the best painted of the three SHTs i've got and i don't have the heart to remodel it :|
Henimann wrote: This. While I love bolter Sergeants, it would be nice to just make my Sergeants riflemen if I need to.
As an aside, anyone have suggestions for which regiment to use when you have an urban/Cityfight Army? Mostly infantry, some armor and Sentinels?
Krieg can take lasgun sergeants, if you want to give them a shot.
As for cityfight I would suggest:
- Tallarn have the speed to get about and can Ambush.
- Catachan have good flamers and melee.
- Mordian can overwatch if the enemy charges round a building.
Razerous wrote: Any suggestions on what to equip an Inquisitor?
With an AM army, his purpose is to unlock 3 psykers without loosing doctrines (using a Vanguard elite deatchment).
If you're talking about the AM psykers, then you equip him with whatever looks coolest and put him back on the shelf, and then look at page 132, under "Advisors and Auxilla, and see where you can take Scholastica Psykana without preventing other units in the detachment from losing their doctrine.
Razerous wrote: Any suggestions on what to equip an Inquisitor?
With an AM army, his purpose is to unlock 3 psykers without loosing doctrines (using a Vanguard elite deatchment).
If you're talking about the AM psykers, then you equip him with whatever looks coolest and put him back on the shelf, and then look at page 132, under "Advisors and Auxilla, and see where you can take Scholastica Psykana without preventing other units in the detachment from losing their doctrine.
Maybe. In that case, I'd go cheap as possible, and then stick him in a corner somewhere. I've been pretty disappointed with the lack of potential that Inquisitors have had this edition.
Assassins are pretty cool though.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Actually, in THAT case, I'd probably just use a Primaris Psyker for the HQ, and then soup in the assassins that way.
The inquisitor costs 25% more than an AMHQ Psyker.. any reason to take the inquisitor? I could spare a few points but is it worthwhile? Is the Inquisitor powers table worthy?
The inquisitor costs 25% more than an AMHQ Psyker.. any reason to take the inquisitor? I could spare a few points but is it worthwhile? Is the Inquisitor powers table worthy?
Inquistor's psyker powers aren't anything to write home about. Primaris or astropath really gets the job done. If you don't mind a little list tailoring of his inquisitor power, he can be an ok beat stick. Bring him along and put him with a unit of Crusaders and a priest in a chimera. Point him at your enemy's daemon prince or whatever and fire away.
Twoshoes23 wrote: Can special weapons squads still take demo charges??
Not the ones in the Codex. However, if you take the entry from the index then you can. It's a weird position really.
I'm not sure that's legal... I know there's that FAQ thing that lets you use models or wargear options that are no longer supported in the new codex, such as Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts, which were in the Index but not in the Codex... but that's a whole models' datasheet that was left out of the codex, but people have the models for so GW has said "You can still play them, but use the datasheet from the Index".
People have argued that this also covered things like Sergeants with Axes (which were removed from the IG codex, they can only have swords now), which would seem to be covered, but comes to be a pretty grey area. But a single axe vs sword isn't going to make a huge difference on average so it'll probably slide.
But it then gets to the point where you can say "In the index this unit was allowed to take 3 lascannons, but now it can only take 2 lascannons, so I'll use the Index version". How is that different to choosing between codex sword or index axe? It's not, not really. But it effects the way they (tried) to balance the book.
What if they dropped the toughness of a unit from 8 to 7? Not unlikely, as they just increased Wraithlords from 7 to 8. But If you can freely choose to use the Index datasheet for a weapons option, but not for stats options too?
Someone will reply with "Well no, because they say you should always use the most recent rules, datasheet and points values for a unit, from the most recent codex or index update!" Which is totally true. Which means no axes on sergeants, and no demolition charges on HWTs. But you can field a Chaos Lord on a Juggernaut, because that had it's own datasheet in the index, and it hasn't been superceded by a newer one.
Anyone been trying out the cyclops demolition vehicles with Catachan doctrine? Seems like a pretty sweet combo, just by 3 and use them the same way you would scout sentinels only they don't give away VP's when you lose them. The rerolls for the blast seem really solid too if you take Catachan, I could see a few of these actually tearing through another guard armies screen really quickly and for very cheap.
The idea of come jungle vets bushwhacking the enemy with a powder keg on tracks just seems like classic Catachan to me as well
Seems better than no doctrine for sure. Tallarn could certainly be interesting ...
I have one but keep forgetting to try it out. I'm concerned about the D6 range. You can only detonate it in the shooting phase so you can't sling shot it in with a charge then blow it.
Twoshoes23 wrote: Can special weapons squads still take demo charges??
Not the ones in the Codex. However, if you take the entry from the index then you can. It's a weird position really.
I'm not sure that's legal... I know there's that FAQ thing that lets you use models or wargear options that are no longer supported in the new codex, such as Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts, which were in the Index but not in the Codex... but that's a whole models' datasheet that was left out of the codex, but people have the models for so GW has said "You can still play them, but use the datasheet from the Index".
People have argued that this also covered things like Sergeants with Axes (which were removed from the IG codex, they can only have swords now), which would seem to be covered, but comes to be a pretty grey area. But a single axe vs sword isn't going to make a huge difference on average so it'll probably slide.
But it then gets to the point where you can say "In the index this unit was allowed to take 3 lascannons, but now it can only take 2 lascannons, so I'll use the Index version". How is that different to choosing between codex sword or index axe? It's not, not really. But it effects the way they (tried) to balance the book.
What if they dropped the toughness of a unit from 8 to 7? Not unlikely, as they just increased Wraithlords from 7 to 8. But If you can freely choose to use the Index datasheet for a weapons option, but not for stats options too?
Someone will reply with "Well no, because they say you should always use the most recent rules, datasheet and points values for a unit, from the most recent codex or index update!" Which is totally true. Which means no axes on sergeants, and no demolition charges on HWTs. But you can field a Chaos Lord on a Juggernaut, because that had it's own datasheet in the index, and it hasn't been superceded by a newer one.
While my gut tells me your right, I still hope the FAQ clears up demo squads for SWS. Just can't understand the rational behind pushing for conversions with GW kits for IG yet cutting options for conversions at the same time. It wasn't as if SWS or power axe/maul seargents were an issue i thought as well. Will be a tough pill to swallow.
I understand i cannot make my Basilisk "Militarus Tempus" but i can make it "The Super Awesome Dudes" Regiment and then choose the "MT:Stormtrooper" Doctrine as my Regiments Doctrine based off of pg 132 ?
I don't believe there is anything that limits the Doctrine based off of your Army? Just that I Cannot have MT Basilisks, but i can have "TSAD" Basilisks with MT Doctrine?
Page 84 might help clarify this. It specifically disallows units from replacing <Regiment> with MILITARUM TEMPESTUS. While its poorly worded, I think what Page 132 is actually allowing you to do is replace <REGIMENT> with Militarum Tempestus" even though your army might actually be called "The Super Awesome Dudes". Thats just my intepretation however. As written it would seem that you are in the right, but I would be surprised if that remained the case past a FAQ. Also worth pointing out that doing this kinda ties your hands in some ways, as orders, artifacts, strategems, etc. are all tied to the "MILITARUM TEMPESTUS" keyword specifically, so at most you would be getting the benefit of the doctrine and nothing else.
I'm not sure that's legal... I know there's that FAQ thing that lets you use models or wargear options that are no longer supported in the new codex, such as Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts, which were in the Index but not in the Codex... but that's a whole models' datasheet that was left out of the codex, but people have the models for so GW has said "You can still play them, but use the datasheet from the Index".
It is legal, the same FAQ thing you reference makes a specific allowance for using models with weapon options that were in the index but not in the codex. I.E. - its the same datasheet in both codex and index, but the index has options that the codex version does not.
But it then gets to the point where you can say "In the index this unit was allowed to take 3 lascannons, but now it can only take 2 lascannons, so I'll use the Index version". How is that different to choosing between codex sword or index axe? It's not, not really. But it effects the way they (tried) to balance the book.
Yep, GW have kinda screwed themselves with a slippery slope situation here. I think they will need to clarify what, specifically, is allowable and what isn't, otherwise the codexes eventually become redundant.
I'm not sure that's legal... I know there's that FAQ thing that lets you use models or wargear options that are no longer supported in the new codex, such as Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts, which were in the Index but not in the Codex... but that's a whole models' datasheet that was left out of the codex, but people have the models for so GW has said "You can still play them, but use the datasheet from the Index".
It is legal, the same FAQ thing you reference makes a specific allowance for using models with weapon options that were in the index but not in the codex. I.E. - its the same datasheet in both codex and index, but the index has options that the codex version does not.
But it then gets to the point where you can say "In the index this unit was allowed to take 3 lascannons, but now it can only take 2 lascannons, so I'll use the Index version". How is that different to choosing between codex sword or index axe? It's not, not really. But it effects the way they (tried) to balance the book.
Yep, GW have kinda screwed themselves with a slippery slope situation here. I think they will need to clarify what, specifically, is allowable and what isn't, otherwise the codexes eventually become redundant.
I would say, however, that usually rules erratas are only valid for the codex they are errata-ing. Unless this FAQ was in the main rulebook errata... I honestly can't remember which army it was for. Thought it was space marines but I can't see it on there now when I look. The wording didn't say anything about "this rule applies to all armies" or anything. It's a precedent, sure, but since when has precedence meant anything in 40klol
Otherwise, I agree with you - GW screwed up and it's a slippery slope.
Colonel Cross wrote: Seems better than no doctrine for sure. Tallarn could certainly be interesting ...
I have one but keep forgetting to try it out. I'm concerned about the D6 range. You can only detonate it in the shooting phase so you can't sling shot it in with a charge then blow it.
Well it moves 10" and can EASILY be hidden behind a tank. It is also cheap as dirt and nobody will want to be near it. I think rolling it up behind the must take hellhound would work quite well, I also think putting it near an objective in no mans land is hilarious. 2d6 s9 ap-2 d3 damage auto hits is no fething joke, especially with a reroll for number of hits. Would laos be a nightmare in a tallarn detachment if you had 3 units of these show up right up your ass
Edit: actually after rereading it, seems as though you can detonate it in combat, I know you can't the turn you charge, but turn 1 if your not in range to detonate but can charge a unit then that seems like a solid approach, just watch them flee in their turn and if they don't roll high enough move it up and blow them up lol. You figure the majority of things don't move 10" and you can't adcance as part of a withdrawal so they will have to kill it or tie it up with something else lol. Or shoot it of course but 4 t6 3+ save wounds isn't gona be easy.
Colonel Cross wrote: Seems better than no doctrine for sure. Tallarn could certainly be interesting ...
I have one but keep forgetting to try it out. I'm concerned about the D6 range. You can only detonate it in the shooting phase so you can't sling shot it in with a charge then blow it.
Well it moves 10" and can EASILY be hidden behind a tank. It is also cheap as dirt and nobody will want to be near it. I think rolling it up behind the must take hellhound would work quite well, I also think putting it near an objective in no mans land is hilarious. 2d6 s9 ap-2 d3 damage auto hits is no fething joke, especially with a reroll for number of hits. Would laos be a nightmare in a tallarn detachment if you had 3 units of these show up right up your ass
Edit: actually after rereading it, seems as though you can detonate it in combat, I know you can't the turn you charge, but turn 1 if your not in range to detonate but can charge a unit then that seems like a solid approach, just watch them flee in their turn and if they don't roll high enough move it up and blow them up lol. You figure the majority of things don't move 10" and you can't adcance as part of a withdrawal so they will have to kill it or tie it up with something else lol. Or shoot it of course but 4 t6 3+ save wounds isn't gona be easy.
Hiding it behind a tank is all fun and games until they bring out the indirect fire weapons and cause a terrifying mortal wound cascade in your motor pool.
Twoshoes23 wrote: Can special weapons squads still take demo charges??
Not the ones in the Codex. However, if you take the entry from the index then you can. It's a weird position really.
I'm not sure that's legal... I know there's that FAQ thing that lets you use models or wargear options that are no longer supported in the new codex, such as Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts, which were in the Index but not in the Codex... but that's a whole models' datasheet that was left out of the codex, but people have the models for so GW has said "You can still play them, but use the datasheet from the Index".
People have argued that this also covered things like Sergeants with Axes (which were removed from the IG codex, they can only have swords now), which would seem to be covered, but comes to be a pretty grey area. But a single axe vs sword isn't going to make a huge difference on average so it'll probably slide.
But it then gets to the point where you can say "In the index this unit was allowed to take 3 lascannons, but now it can only take 2 lascannons, so I'll use the Index version". How is that different to choosing between codex sword or index axe? It's not, not really. But it effects the way they (tried) to balance the book.
What if they dropped the toughness of a unit from 8 to 7? Not unlikely, as they just increased Wraithlords from 7 to 8. But If you can freely choose to use the Index datasheet for a weapons option, but not for stats options too?
Someone will reply with "Well no, because they say you should always use the most recent rules, datasheet and points values for a unit, from the most recent codex or index update!" Which is totally true. Which means no axes on sergeants, and no demolition charges on HWTs. But you can field a Chaos Lord on a Juggernaut, because that had it's own datasheet in the index, and it hasn't been superseded by a newer one.
The big thing for me is I have a ton of old IG models with things like shotguns, demo charges, and yes, legit power axes (the original hand flamer commissar, I have 2 of them) so it was a bit of cruel move to give me back my shotgun company and platoon commanders only for them to be taken away again, along with taking away demo charges entirely and other things like power axes. I really hope there's a way to keep bringing them, taking away shotguns on commanders alone invalidated like 10 different officer models I have. Not to mention krak grenades and melta bombs being gone as upgrades for many units, which used to be all over the codex. And then of course we get into all the veteran doctrines disappearing and even more odd ones like sergeants STILL not being able to take lasguns when the new stormtrooper kit even shows the sergeant with one slung on his backpack? Not to mention the other infantry kits have the option of outfitting all 10 men with rifles if memory serves. They just seem like really odd choices and someone must be preventing it higher up, it makes no sense why with all the other stuff we got nobody thought "huh, that's weird, the sarge should be able to take a lasgun".
Not to mention my priest has a plasma pistol and an eviscerator. I got them back for all of a few months only for the options to disappear again. I'm sure there's more stuff I haven't noticed yet in here somewhere, that's just what I have for now.
Was this an issue with other codexes? I don't remember hearing about this when space marines and chaos space marines came out but surely they had something similar happen.
I'm not sure that's legal... I know there's that FAQ thing that lets you use models or wargear options that are no longer supported in the new codex, such as Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts, which were in the Index but not in the Codex... but that's a whole models' datasheet that was left out of the codex, but people have the models for so GW has said "You can still play them, but use the datasheet from the Index".
It is legal, the same FAQ thing you reference makes a specific allowance for using models with weapon options that were in the index but not in the codex. I.E. - its the same datasheet in both codex and index, but the index has options that the codex version does not.
But it then gets to the point where you can say "In the index this unit was allowed to take 3 lascannons, but now it can only take 2 lascannons, so I'll use the Index version". How is that different to choosing between codex sword or index axe? It's not, not really. But it effects the way they (tried) to balance the book.
Yep, GW have kinda screwed themselves with a slippery slope situation here. I think they will need to clarify what, specifically, is allowable and what isn't, otherwise the codexes eventually become redundant.
I would say, however, that usually rules erratas are only valid for the codex they are errata-ing. Unless this FAQ was in the main rulebook errata... I honestly can't remember which army it was for. Thought it was space marines but I can't see it on there now when I look. The wording didn't say anything about "this rule applies to all armies" or anything. It's a precedent, sure, but since when has precedence meant anything in 40klol
Otherwise, I agree with you - GW screwed up and it's a slippery slope.
The errata would still apply. You can't name your regiment Militarum Tempestus. However "Bob's Regiment" can use the Militarum Tempestus doctrine all they want. They can't use the stormtrooper's transports, or officers, and any stormtroopers in the same detachment will loose THEIR doctrine. All because this is "Bob's Regiment".
Played vs a tournament admech army. Cawl, knight, robots galore.
Tabled him turn 4.
Tallaran Shadowsword. Tank commander, and two demo tanks all with the extra guns and a cadian fire base (manticore, wyverns, conscripts)
Worked very well. Love the tank order to move 6 before OR after shooting. And oh that dune crawler that is a vehicle killed. Yeah Ill charge that with a tank.
Colonel Cross wrote: Seems better than no doctrine for sure. Tallarn could certainly be interesting ...
I have one but keep forgetting to try it out. I'm concerned about the D6 range. You can only detonate it in the shooting phase so you can't sling shot it in with a charge then blow it.
The range is not a big deal. Hide them out of LOS 10" behind a unit that is likely to get charged or advance them to hide behind a Los blocking piece of terrain. Think of them as a 22" diameter area denial tool.
Tallaran won't do anything for a cyclops except the out flank doctrine.
Noob question I bought an executioner kit but haven't put it together I already have 3 Battle Tanks and Pask; Is there a reason executioner plasma cannons got cut to D3? Is there a reason to take it over battle cannons that have twice as much range, "almost twice" as many shots, and won't cause mortal wounds on 1, and average the same damage? +1 Strength, -1AP worth all that much? I'm not trashing executioners but I'd like to hear opinions on Astra Militarium players that use Executioners.
Comparing supercharge vs the battle cannon, you get more consistent damage which the battle cannon will match or surpass 66% of the time, and the AP increases odds of causing wounds an overall 16% for anything with 4+ or better armor. And it costs 2 fewer points.
I typically play close range, so I'd say yeah, it's probably a good way to go. Toss some guns on it with good range synergy and have it be the one that moves up, while your LRBT keep shelling across the table.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Oh, I think I see part of the confusion. Don't look at the plasma cannon. Look at the Executioner Plasma Cannon.
Resipsa131 wrote: Noob question I bought an executioner kit but haven't put it together I already have 3 Battle Tanks and Pask; Is there a reason executioner plasma cannons got cut to D3? Is there a reason to take it over battle cannons that have twice as much range, "almost twice" as many shots, and won't cause mortal wounds on 1, and average the same damage? +1 Strength, -1AP worth all that much? I'm not trashing executioners but I'd like to hear opinions on Astra Militarium players that use Executioners.
They didn't get dropped to D3, still D6. Also, S8 and S9 are pretty much equivalent except against other t8 units, while the 2 damage is a lot more reliable than d3 especially against 2 wound models. If you make 3 wounds against primaris marines with a battlecannon, there's a good chance you'll only kill 2, possibly 1.5 if you roll 1s on damage for the first and third wound. Where as with the executioner its 3 guaranteed dead. An additional point of ap is always good, and if you're playing pask cadians, you should always be rerolling 1s to hit, so mortal wounds are far less of a worry. Whereas index executioners, even one overheat was really bad, now one mortal wound is a fair price to pay. 36" is a fair old range, you just have to be careful with deployment, especially in games that play lengthways.
xmbk wrote: Does a slabshield give a 5++, or do you have to have one before you can add to it?
You have to have one to add to it. An invuln, like an armour save, is not a right, but is conferred from wargear, abilities or auras. The slabshield only adds two to the save, so you have to have something conferring the save in the first place. This is why you see 7+ armour saves. You could in principle see, 7+ invuln saves that would mean you need a bonus like a slabshield to get a 5++.
Colonel Cross wrote: Seems better than no doctrine for sure. Tallarn could certainly be interesting ...
I have one but keep forgetting to try it out. I'm concerned about the D6 range. You can only detonate it in the shooting phase so you can't sling shot it in with a charge then blow it.
Well it moves 10" and can EASILY be hidden behind a tank. It is also cheap as dirt and nobody will want to be near it. I think rolling it up behind the must take hellhound would work quite well, I also think putting it near an objective in no mans land is hilarious. 2d6 s9 ap-2 d3 damage auto hits is no fething joke, especially with a reroll for number of hits. Would laos be a nightmare in a tallarn detachment if you had 3 units of these show up right up your ass
Edit: actually after rereading it, seems as though you can detonate it in combat, I know you can't the turn you charge, but turn 1 if your not in range to detonate but can charge a unit then that seems like a solid approach, just watch them flee in their turn and if they don't roll high enough move it up and blow them up lol. You figure the majority of things don't move 10" and you can't adcance as part of a withdrawal so they will have to kill it or tie it up with something else lol. Or shoot it of course but 4 t6 3+ save wounds isn't gona be easy.
Hiding it behind a tank is all fun and games until they bring out the indirect fire weapons and cause a terrifying mortal wound cascade in your motor pool.
So you seriously think that them wasting their indirect artillery capable of killing a 4w t6 3+ save unit is somehow a bad thing? When it does it causes d3 mortal wounds, big whoop. It's hardly going to cascade with proper placement, it would cause a couple wounds to the blocking tank and any other I was too lazy to be bothered to measure from to keep 6.00001" away.
IDK, to me that seems like a win right there for 40pts, even if it causes 2 MW to my hellhound. Besides it is not as if there is a ton of indirect fire capable of killing one of these in a volley.
vipoid wrote: Yet another random question - do you think Tank Commanders are worth their points, or is it better to just have cheaper, BS4+ Russes?
Also, does it make any difference which Leman Russ you're using?
I'd use tank commanders (especially pask) but you don't need all tank commanders. I currently run Pask and 2 normals. As to type, that matters a lot. Executioner, Battle Cannon and Punisher are all standouts (that's not in order) while the other 4 weapons are all situational or just flat out worse.
vipoid wrote: Yet another random question - do you think Tank Commanders are worth their points, or is it better to just have cheaper, BS4+ Russes?
Also, does it make any difference which Leman Russ you're using?
I'd use tank commanders (especially pask) but you don't need all tank commanders. I currently run Pask and 2 normals. As to type, that matters a lot. Executioner, Battle Cannon and Punisher are all standouts (that's not in order) while the other 4 weapons are all situational or just flat out worse.
Isn't the Demolisher Cannon supposed to be one of the best weapons?
Also, is the Executioner Plasma Cannon really that good? I know rolls of 1 just do 1 Mortal Wound now (instead of d6), but it still seems little better than a Battle Cannon even when Overcharging.
Colonel Cross wrote: I've had crazy good success with battle Cannon, Lascannon, heavy Bolter tank commanders.
I like to run a punisher with 3 heavy flamers as a normal tank. I also give it track guards.
They have wrecked people.
The classic Russ is definitely back in vogue. Decentralising your AT lascannons helps with target priority and redundancy too. I am looking forward to a possible 198pt las/bolt annihilator though, that turret will be nice if updated. I also like Ambush russes with meltas, as it is the easiest way to get within 12" melta range. An ambushing melta commander ordering a fireball punisher forward with the Tallarn order is rather a fun surprise.
I like the Tallarn option to (basically) guarantee yourself first turn. Not hard to make a Brigade list where only Conscripts can be shot if the other guy goes first. Use the dagger, stratagem, and scions to keep everything else in reserve.
Anyone have experience running Yarrick in the new book? He still seems solid for the points. I'm thinking him behind a blob of conscripts will be a good way to tackle Celestine, just keep some of those 13 CPs handy to re-roll his 3+ recovery and strike her back with that power klaw.
Okay so here's my thing with the Tallarn Strategem. It says <TALLARN> UNIT right? I keep hearing that you can use it to deepstrike three russes BUT, russes (and other IG vehicles) can be taken in units of up to three that have to be set up within 6" of each other and only act independently once set up on the battlefield . So couldn't IG deepstrike three russ/hellhound/sentinel/basilisk/wyvern SQUADRONS while having dirt cheap infantry hold the field to either counter not getting the first turn and hide our big guns from alpha strikes or get the close range heavy hitters in range as normally suggested for a alpha/beta strike? Its alot of points to put in reserve but thats potentially nine russes rolling out from behind lamp posts!
I haven't heard this mentioned once by anyone and can't have been the only person to catch it
Ir0njack wrote: I haven't heard this mentioned once by anyone and can't have been the only person to catch it
There's a couple of pages of discussion on doing just that with Punishers/Demolishers to get them in range safely. Try it out and let us know how it goes, it's tough to say how well it works without actually fielding it.
Ir0njack wrote: Okay so here's my thing with the Tallarn Strategem. It says <TALLARN> UNIT right? I keep hearing that you can use it to deepstrike three russes BUT, russes (and other IG vehicles) can be taken in units of up to three that have to be set up within 6" of each other and only act independently once set up on the battlefield . So couldn't IG deepstrike three russ/hellhound/sentinel/basilisk/wyvern SQUADRONS while having dirt cheap infantry hold the field to either counter not getting the first turn and hide our big guns from alpha strikes or get the close range heavy hitters in range as normally suggested for a alpha/beta strike? Its alot of points to put in reserve but thats potentially nine russes rolling out from behind lamp posts!
I haven't heard this mentioned once by anyone and can't have been the only person to catch it
I believe it reads "Units" which yes, means you can start 9 tanks up front T1. My choice would be HellHounds as you can use this for clearing annoying conscripts and other infantry guarding characters, and also Russes if they were taken in a Spearhead so that you can stick them on objectives and get the benefit of their Obesc.
I'd do this:
3x HellHounds
3x Russes, maybe take advantage of Punisher cannons, Demolishers, Multi Melta sponsons.
You can't Ambush Commissars along with the conscripts though, so you would need to use the Dagger of Tu'sakh to stop conscripts just being moralled to death. Also, I think that ambushing with 9 is a bit overkill myself.
I've found I have to force myself to call it ambushing too. Referring to it as deepstrike or outflank is wrong, as it doesn't work like either of those abilities. Mainly, if I call it outflanking I may forget that I can do it from any of the four board edges, not just the side ones. It may be extreme but I would urge people not to use those terms as they are not really correct.
They dropped by 15 points, making them one of the cheapest transports in the game at 70 points while still rocking two Autocannons.
I think with the Tallarn doctrine, they can work quite nicely.
Only downside is that they don't come with Smoke Launchers (transports tend to advance and make us of them) and can't be upgraded with any of the new vehicle upgrades.
More Dakka wrote:I still think just more stock LRBTs with hull HB is the way to go, I do have to test it out, but 5 sets of HB's is halfway to a 6th LRBT.
I'm going to test out a Catachan Brigade + Spearhead with 5x stock LRBT and a Command Punnisher with 3x HB to see how it goes.
That's my thought, especially for Catachans. The basic battle cannon is cheap and hits reasonably hard, with 8.5 shots a turn if going half speed.
I'm toying around with a heavy armor skew brigade with the LRBTs and hellhounds.
Doctoralex wrote:So, what do you people think of Tauroxes?
They dropped by 15 points, making them one of the cheapest transports in the game at 70 points while still rocking two Autocannons.
I think with the Tallarn doctrine, they can work quite nicely.
Only downside is that they don't come with Smoke Launchers (transports tend to advance and make us of them) and can't be upgraded with any of the new vehicle upgrades.
I quite like the basic Taurox. It's cheap, it's fast, and it's reasonably durable. Put a cheap infantry squad in it, hold and ojective, and pepper the enemy with autocannon shots.
Trickstick wrote: You can't Ambush Commissars along with the conscripts though, so you would need to use the Dagger of Tu'sakh to stop conscripts just being moralled to death. Also, I think that ambushing with 9 is a bit overkill myself.
I've found I have to force myself to call it ambushing too. Referring to it as deepstrike or outflank is wrong, as it doesn't work like either of those abilities. Mainly, if I call it outflanking I may forget that I can do it from any of the four board edges, not just the side ones. It may be extreme but I would urge people not to use those terms as they are not really correct.
Re the conscripts you just need something to stop T1 charge, after that who cares if they die? If it's important, it's really not very hard to string a conga line back to a commissar in your deployment zone and still have all the bristling guns at 24" fro the enemy.
More Dakka wrote: If it's important, it's really not very hard to string a conga line back to a commissar in your deployment zone and still have all the bristling guns at 24" fro the enemy.
I mean, sure you could. I just think that sort of play is silly. I know it is just some arbitrary "rules of cool" I have come up with myself but I try to stick within the spirit of the game. I just seems weird to do stuff like that to me. I guess I am hurting myself by not doing things like that, or moving all of my tanks sideways for more cover and things like that. Personally, I want to be able to look at the board at the end of a turn and have it look like an actual battle. I guess I can't fault people for playing within the rules to gain an advantage, but I may tease them for it!
Yeah, but like I said, that's only if you're really compelled to keep your Conscripts alive. In my proposed ambush deployment they're just there to screen for T1, then they can evaporate for all that they're worth.
Anyone got any thoughts about an all-infantry Tallarn army? (Maybe with Sentinels to fill out a Brigade if necessary).
I'm thinking lots of Infantry squads as a base, perhaps some SWSs and/or Veterans to outflank with the Stratagem.
Do you think it would be worth taking any Heavy Weapons at all on Infantry, or just stick to special weapons (and maybe pistols) to keep them as mobile as possible?
Have any of you guys run Codex Guard against Codex AdMech? What units were you afraid of? How did your lists do? I am asking as an AdMech player who may want to tweak his list before SoCal open. The main elements of my list are: Cawl/3Onagers/5DakkaRobots + Offier/OrdinanceGuy/3x Earthshakers + CelestineAndScreen
I'm not sure that's legal... I know there's that FAQ thing that lets you use models or wargear options that are no longer supported in the new codex, such as Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts, which were in the Index but not in the Codex... but that's a whole models' datasheet that was left out of the codex, but people have the models for so GW has said "You can still play them, but use the datasheet from the Index".
It is legal, the same FAQ thing you reference makes a specific allowance for using models with weapon options that were in the index but not in the codex. I.E. - its the same datasheet in both codex and index, but the index has options that the codex version does not.
But it then gets to the point where you can say "In the index this unit was allowed to take 3 lascannons, but now it can only take 2 lascannons, so I'll use the Index version". How is that different to choosing between codex sword or index axe? It's not, not really. But it effects the way they (tried) to balance the book.
Yep, GW have kinda screwed themselves with a slippery slope situation here. I think they will need to clarify what, specifically, is allowable and what isn't, otherwise the codexes eventually become redundant.
I would say, however, that usually rules erratas are only valid for the codex they are errata-ing. Unless this FAQ was in the main rulebook errata... I honestly can't remember which army it was for. Thought it was space marines but I can't see it on there now when I look. The wording didn't say anything about "this rule applies to all armies" or anything. It's a precedent, sure, but since when has precedence meant anything in 40klol
Otherwise, I agree with you - GW screwed up and it's a slippery slope.
The errata would still apply.
Why? Why would it still apply? Is there a rule written somewhere that says "any errata in one FAQ that also applies to other armies, automatically applies to all other armies"?
No, there isn't (that I know of). And so any FAQ in one army codex is completely unrelated to all other codices.
The only possible exception to this, is if the FAQ/Errata is in the big rule book FAQ, as that is by definition a universal set of rules that effects all other armies.
Just because you say it works, and you want it to work, doesn't mean that it does. This isn't RAW. It's barely even RAI. This is Rule Was Never Written Or Even Implied.
I’m thinking a supreme command detachment with 3 tank commanders, harker and a shadowsword would be pretty sexy.
Tank commanders are definitely worth it because they themselves are Leman Russes, so they can issue orders to each other, allowing harker to be elsewhere.
I’m thinking maybe a fire base of 3 Earthshaker batteries, some Wyverns and/or Manticores, all anchored by harker. Then maybe some Genestealers dropping in to clean up whatever’s left. Because I have no shame
I'm not sure that's legal... I know there's that FAQ thing that lets you use models or wargear options that are no longer supported in the new codex, such as Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts, which were in the Index but not in the Codex... but that's a whole models' datasheet that was left out of the codex, but people have the models for so GW has said "You can still play them, but use the datasheet from the Index".
It is legal, the same FAQ thing you reference makes a specific allowance for using models with weapon options that were in the index but not in the codex. I.E. - its the same datasheet in both codex and index, but the index has options that the codex version does not.
But it then gets to the point where you can say "In the index this unit was allowed to take 3 lascannons, but now it can only take 2 lascannons, so I'll use the Index version". How is that different to choosing between codex sword or index axe? It's not, not really. But it effects the way they (tried) to balance the book.
Yep, GW have kinda screwed themselves with a slippery slope situation here. I think they will need to clarify what, specifically, is allowable and what isn't, otherwise the codexes eventually become redundant.
I would say, however, that usually rules erratas are only valid for the codex they are errata-ing. Unless this FAQ was in the main rulebook errata... I honestly can't remember which army it was for. Thought it was space marines but I can't see it on there now when I look. The wording didn't say anything about "this rule applies to all armies" or anything. It's a precedent, sure, but since when has precedence meant anything in 40klol
Otherwise, I agree with you - GW screwed up and it's a slippery slope.
The errata would still apply.
Why? Why would it still apply? Is there a rule written somewhere that says "any errata in one FAQ that also applies to other armies, automatically applies to all other armies"?
No, there isn't (that I know of). And so any FAQ in one army codex is completely unrelated to all other codices.
The only possible exception to this, is if the FAQ/Errata is in the big rule book FAQ, as that is by definition a universal set of rules that effects all other armies.
Just because you say it works, and you want it to work, doesn't mean that it does. This isn't RAW. It's barely even RAI. This is Rule Was Never Written Or Even Implied.
What I should have said was; it the errata isn't cancelled out by the wording in the new codex.
Whether or not it applies to the new codex might still be up in the air at the moment (I personally don't think so), but if it does, you still can't name your regiment [Ordo}, {Militarum Tempestus], or [Auxillera].
(took out a sentence that was answering a different question)
I'm not sure that's legal... I know there's that FAQ thing that lets you use models or wargear options that are no longer supported in the new codex, such as Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts, which were in the Index but not in the Codex... but that's a whole models' datasheet that was left out of the codex, but people have the models for so GW has said "You can still play them, but use the datasheet from the Index".
It is legal, the same FAQ thing you reference makes a specific allowance for using models with weapon options that were in the index but not in the codex. I.E. - its the same datasheet in both codex and index, but the index has options that the codex version does not.
But it then gets to the point where you can say "In the index this unit was allowed to take 3 lascannons, but now it can only take 2 lascannons, so I'll use the Index version". How is that different to choosing between codex sword or index axe? It's not, not really. But it effects the way they (tried) to balance the book.
Yep, GW have kinda screwed themselves with a slippery slope situation here. I think they will need to clarify what, specifically, is allowable and what isn't, otherwise the codexes eventually become redundant.
I would say, however, that usually rules erratas are only valid for the codex they are errata-ing. Unless this FAQ was in the main rulebook errata... I honestly can't remember which army it was for. Thought it was space marines but I can't see it on there now when I look. The wording didn't say anything about "this rule applies to all armies" or anything. It's a precedent, sure, but since when has precedence meant anything in 40klol
Otherwise, I agree with you - GW screwed up and it's a slippery slope.
The errata would still apply.
Why? Why would it still apply? Is there a rule written somewhere that says "any errata in one FAQ that also applies to other armies, automatically applies to all other armies"?
No, there isn't (that I know of). And so any FAQ in one army codex is completely unrelated to all other codices.
The only possible exception to this, is if the FAQ/Errata is in the big rule book FAQ, as that is by definition a universal set of rules that effects all other armies.
Just because you say it works, and you want it to work, doesn't mean that it does. This isn't RAW. It's barely even RAI. This is Rule Was Never Written Or Even Implied.
What I should have said was; it the errata isn't cancelled out by the wording in the new codex.
Whether or not it applies to the new codex might still be up in the air at the moment (I personally don't think so), but if it does, you still can't name your regiment [Ordo}, {Militarum Tempestus], or [Auxillera].
(took out a sentence that was answering a different question)
Hi, sorry, I think we are talking about two totally different Erratas. I was talking about the one regarding grandfathering in units that no longer have a datasheet in new codex releases. I think you are talking about the FAQ regarding renaming regiments to match units with a fixed regiment keyword.
The rule you're talking about (and how you're explaining it) is correct, and is still valid with the new codex release.
I think you replied to my post by mistake. Think you meant to reply to the guy who was talking about getting Tempestus traits on his army.
Trickstick wrote: You can't Ambush Commissars along with the conscripts though, so you would need to use the Dagger of Tu'sakh to stop conscripts just being moralled to death. Also, I think that ambushing with 9 is a bit overkill myself.
I've found I have to force myself to call it ambushing too. Referring to it as deepstrike or outflank is wrong, as it doesn't work like either of those abilities. Mainly, if I call it outflanking I may forget that I can do it from any of the four board edges, not just the side ones. It may be extreme but I would urge people not to use those terms as they are not really correct.
Re the conscripts you just need something to stop T1 charge, after that who cares if they die? If it's important, it's really not very hard to string a conga line back to a commissar in your deployment zone and still have all the bristling guns at 24" fro the enemy.
Or just spend 2CP to keep the conscripts from taking a morale test if it's that important to keep them around.
Or spend 1 CP for commissar tank and ride out the morale test.
Has anyone thought about using the "grenaders" and mordian "volley fire" stratagems on the same unit (say conscripts). that could be a lot of D6 shots if possible
spiderman518 wrote: Has anyone thought about using the "grenaders" and mordian "volley fire" stratagems on the same unit (say conscripts). that could be a lot of D6 shots if possible
I'm thinking about it now, but with an Infantry squad, because you don't get more than 10 anyway. You'd average 5.8 6s to hit out of that, which would get you an extra 5-6 d6s worth of damage. Could be fun.
Otto von Bludd wrote: I really want to try out Cadian Doctrines but I feel like they are a trap, and a potentially boring one at that. Great buffs but you have to sit still to make use of them. Every Cadian unit weakens itself by moving and I'm tempted enough to sit still and gun line already. I think Catachans and Tallarn are the way to go.
Cadian Doctrine is good. It makes lascannons worthy.
You would think that your mobility suffers but it's not so bad. If the situation calls it and you really have to move these guys, you can move+advance in movement phase *and* move+advance in shooting place with Orders. You are bringing officers, right? Sure, you miss a turn a of shooting but with scenario play, it might be worth it. Killing something out of spite pales in comparison to actually playing the scenario and winning the game.
Also, nothing is stopping you from also fielding Stormtroopers. Deepstriking is the best form of movement.
Either way, when you are playing Imperium, it's a good idea to bring one detachment that doesn't benefit from Doctrines/etc. The variety just beats the alternative.
Those are good points, and I'll probably be running an Elysian detachment for mobility anyway. The sheer potential of the Cadian stratagem combined with their Doctrines is too much to pass up. Not to mention you can replicate the Catachan doctrine with your tank orders. The only units that I think are strictly better as Catachan units are Flame tanks, like the Heavy Flamer Chimera/Hellhound, but these could slip into a Catachan Outrider detachement to get the doctrines. But then again, Leman Russ tanks being immune to alpha strike via the Tallarn Stratagem is really good as well...
edit: Then again, Catachan Russes don't need to sit still to get a reroll of ones because of Harker, and re-rolling blasts is incredible...but Tallarns..
I haven't been this torn in list building for a long time.
Yeah Guard are absolutely drowning with options. But, because of the Catachan doctrine, I think Plasma Cannon sponsons are better on their tanks, (especially with Harker) as well as all HF tanks, Manticores, Manticore Batteries, Earthshakers, and more. Harker+Catachan is strictly better than Cadian + tank order for me. But, the Cadian Relic/Stratagem does make that much trickier...
For real, decisions decisions. I need to play a lot of games just to test out different doctrines to see what are most fun.
My Catachan punisher tank with 3 heavy flamers is crazy scary. And I've always rolled GARBAGE on my Manticore and Basilisk shots. Now I can free reroll 1 of those and it's been a game changer. I should probably just buy new dice ... Like my buddies Dark Imperium boxed set dice which are STUPID lucky.
jifel wrote: Yeah Guard are absolutely drowning with options. But, because of the Catachan doctrine, I think Plasma Cannon sponsons are better on their tanks, (especially with Harker) as well as all HF tanks, Manticores, Manticore Batteries, Earthshakers, and more. Harker+Catachan is strictly better than Cadian + tank order for me. But, the Cadian Relic/Stratagem does make that much trickier...
The Doctrine allows you to re-roll the number of shots for blast weapons.
If I have an Executioner with Plasma cannons. Do I get to re-roll the 1D6 (Each time the main gun fires, assuming it moves under 1/2 speed) and each of the D3 shots from the plasma cannons?
Razerous wrote: Do I get to re-roll the 1D6 (Each time the main gun fires, assuming it moves under 1/2 speed) and each of the D3 shots from the plasma cannons?
I seriously tried a melee force. Granted it was against death guard. I still won, but only because our tanks are beasts now. Even fighting against T3 poxwalkers my Catachans barely did anything.
S4 is a nice bonus, it can help put wounds on some vehicles (5's instead of 6's) but even if you lean into it with Straken and Priests etc you're still not going to hit hard enough, and with enough attacks to get close to anything like Berzerkers or Stealers.
Plasma cannon sponsons are nice but LRBTs are still pretty flimsy and they cost a lot. I'd go for more tanks before any sponsons.
I agree. The double firing battle Cannon is actually worthwhile now. No reason to spend points on expensive plasma sponsons. More tanks! More tanks! I do like Lascannon on my tank commanders though. Then attack with my regular Russes. Which would you rather allow to live? A Catachan fireball punisher advancing on you or a tank Commander sitting back in the corner with a hull Lascannon? Exactly. Tough call. PS - track guards are worth it on the fireball Russ. So worth it!
With Catachan rerolls it feels like every tank is firing 10 Battle Cannon shots.
rhinoceraids wrote: I just realized how good tallaran tanks would be deep striking in. All with flamers.
Orders: Move 6inches before of after shooting. Move up. 3 Heavy flamers. Then fire. (I use demolisher cannons).
Man I love guard. Still not sold on tallaran or vahallan for the shadowsword. Deep strike and turn 1 protection. OR the thing never degrading....
I can see 2 fireball demolishers and a las/melta working well. Use the +1 order stratagem to order both forward to flame, then you still get bs3+ meltas from the commander.
I'm curious as to how many characters you guys include in your armies?
I ask because many of my lists tend to include quite a few, almost by default, and I'm wondering if I'm making them too top-heavy.
I'm particularly interested in how you measure out stuff like Company Commanders and Commissars (assuming you use them at all). Do you like to have enough orders to cover every squad, or do you rely on just ordering a couple of key squads each turn whilst the others fend for themselves?
Also, what about other support characters like Primaris Psykers, Astropaths and Tech-Priests. Do you use them at all? If so, how many do you think is enough?
Low end is probably 4-5 characters. I think I've had about 10 at one point though one you count priests and the like.
I normally keep all or most of my units covered with orders. The last one I came up with that I haven't run yet has 8 / 12 covered. That's low for me, but I was going to let some of those infantry squads be sacrificial.
So with Catachans I started trying out the banner in a vet squad with a Lascannon.
Catachans get +1 Leadership with an officer within 6" and then another one for the banner. I haven't needed commissars since. Basically, if you take any more casualties then a Commissar isn't going to matter much then anyway. As long as my special weapon and heavy weapon stay put I'm happy.
More Dakka wrote: S4 is a nice bonus, it can help put wounds on some vehicles (5's instead of 6's) but even if you lean into it with Straken and Priests etc you're still not going to hit hard enough, and with enough attacks to get close to anything like Berzerkers or Stealers.
Plasma cannon sponsons are nice but LRBTs are still pretty flimsy and they cost a lot. I'd go for more tanks before any sponsons.
Use regular infantry squads in the double bubble instead of conscripts. Every Sargeant will turn into a roided out beast with 4A s8 ap-2 D3 damage if you buy them a 10 point power fist. 6 squads at 300 points will pump out 24 of those power fist attacks plus 162 regular s4 attacks.
They dropped by 15 points, making them one of the cheapest transports in the game at 70 points while still rocking two Autocannons.
I think with the Tallarn doctrine, they can work quite nicely.
Only downside is that they don't come with Smoke Launchers (transports tend to advance and make us of them) and can't be upgraded with any of the new vehicle upgrades.
I really like mine. It's actually garnered a fair bit of hatred at the store, as it seems to be really lucky for some reason. The "party bus" as it's known tends to make at least 1 big play a game. I'm heavily considering getting one or two more. It doesn't hurt I really like autocannons even if they're a bit expensive, that consistent 2 damage per hit adds up. Add in the fact that they're stupid fast and theyre my melta delivery system of choice (aside from valks of course)
I'm toying with an idea for a list mainly focusing around a full squad of melee bullgryns. Taking the catachan regiment and giving a priest the heiloom dagger that allows him and the bullgryn to outflank in from reserves, or for a more costly approach stick them in a stormlord and rush up the board.
9 S8 bullgryns should be able to tackle T8 vehicles and just be a murderhouse on whatever they charge.
Do they cap out at 9 or is it possible to take 10? The only issue with having them outflank is I can't reliably run an astropath or other support characters along with them. I really want to start using my bullgryn more and the dagger allows me to not rely on bringing a baneblade as much.
vipoid wrote:I'm curious as to how many characters you guys include in your armies?
I ask because many of my lists tend to include quite a few, almost by default, and I'm wondering if I'm making them too top-heavy.
I'm particularly interested in how you measure out stuff like Company Commanders and Commissars (assuming you use them at all). Do you like to have enough orders to cover every squad, or do you rely on just ordering a couple of key squads each turn whilst the others fend for themselves?
Also, what about other support characters like Primaris Psykers, Astropaths and Tech-Priests. Do you use them at all? If so, how many do you think is enough?
I run infantry guard a lot and bare minimum I have 6 at 1000pts/ 50pl, usually it's two company commanders and a commissar per "batallion" which in my case is what a platoon used to be. That being said, I'm about to start including priests and primaris pyskers as well. They're incredibly cheap for the utility they give to an infantry army and it feels like a no brainer to include them. If I do that, the amount of characters I have goes up to 9 minimum, and I often throw in a couple of extra commissars for redundancy and counterattacking because I own like 15 of them. Goal is to pick up some Tech priests as well as I'm slowly picking up more russes. Even just a single tech priests with a few russes in the back field can be handy, especially if you have Valhallan tanks.
Our characters are just all so good I have a hard time justifying not bringing them. Plus it's really cool to see these small "command squads" form as usually your commissar, commander, priests, and pyskers will fight near one another and form small units. They're surprisingly handy to repulse assaults as well, a lot of the players in my area have learned to respect these roving groups of characters packing powerfists and weapons. They're not dropping something like an Imperial knight but if they get the charge on things like Beserkers, Genestealers, or Harlequins they can put out enough hits to actually do a fair bit of damage in a pinch, especially if you have an infantry squad or two move in to help them.
Colonel Cross wrote:So with Catachans I started trying out the banner in a vet squad with a Lascannon.
Catachans get +1 Leadership with an officer within 6" and then another one for the banner. I haven't needed commissars since. Basically, if you take any more casualties then a Commissar isn't going to matter much then anyway. As long as my special weapon and heavy weapon stay put I'm happy.
I've been noticing this too. Between your officers and standards there's not much point to bringing commissars with Catachans unless you're running conscripts for whatever reason. LD 9 on guardsmen pretty much guarantees morale losses are rare.
schadenfreude wrote:
More Dakka wrote: S4 is a nice bonus, it can help put wounds on some vehicles (5's instead of 6's) but even if you lean into it with Straken and Priests etc you're still not going to hit hard enough, and with enough attacks to get close to anything like Berzerkers or Stealers.
Plasma cannon sponsons are nice but LRBTs are still pretty flimsy and they cost a lot. I'd go for more tanks before any sponsons.
Use regular infantry squads in the double bubble instead of conscripts. Every Sargeant will turn into a roided out beast with 4A s8 ap-2 D3 damage if you buy them a 10 point power fist. 6 squads at 300 points will pump out 24 of those power fist attacks plus 162 regular s4 attacks.
Infantry squads can't bring powerfists, that would be vets. Granted that's only 10 points more for the squad, and you get +1 Bs, so its not the end of the world, but I'd prefer to use regular infantry squads for that as well. That said, running a bunch of Catachan vet squads with powerfists and weapons like flamers and meltas with Straken and Priest support would be a really fun list. I feel like it'd work best for outflanking or ambushing (something you can't really do sadly) but if you brought enough of them I don't see why it would be impossible. My primary trick has been Catachan Company Commanders with power fists. Nobody expects the damage they can do, especially if they get the charge off. Everything else I really just see as a bonus and not something to build a list around, but fists on the commanders has so far been mandatory in my experience. For such a paltry amount of points it can really bail you out of a bad situation.
jifel wrote: And the dagger only works on <regiment> units.
Not unless there's been an errata. You only have to take a <regiment> unit if the character himself has a <regiment> tag. Either send a Commissar, a Priest, or a Bullgryn Bodyguard with the dagger and he can bring Bullgryns.
jifel wrote: And the dagger only works on <regiment> units.
Not unless there's been an errata. You only have to take a <regiment> unit if the character himself has a <regiment> tag. Either send a Commissar, a Priest, or a Bullgryn Bodyguard with the dagger and he can bring Bullgryns.
Ah just reread that, you are correct... Hm very interesting. That's actually a good way to use Bulgryn.
jifel wrote: And the dagger only works on <regiment> units.
Not unless there's been an errata. You only have to take a <regiment> unit if the character himself has a <regiment> tag. Either send a Commissar, a Priest, or a Bullgryn Bodyguard with the dagger and he can bring Bullgryns.
Ah just reread that, you are correct... Hm very interesting. That's actually a good way to use Bulgryn.
Yep. I think it'll work really well for Crusaders too, as they'll be getting their acts of faith movement afterwards so have surprising mobility.
I run infantry guard a lot and bare minimum I have 6 at 1000pts/ 50pl, usually it's two company commanders and a commissar per "batallion" which in my case is what a platoon used to be.
Out of interest, what else do you include in your 'platoons'?
MrMoustaffa wrote: That being said, I'm about to start including priests and primaris pyskers as well. They're incredibly cheap for the utility they give to an infantry army and it feels like a no brainer to include them. If I do that, the amount of characters I have goes up to 9 minimum, and I often throw in a couple of extra commissars for redundancy and counterattacking because I own like 15 of them. Goal is to pick up some Tech priests as well as I'm slowly picking up more russes. Even just a single tech priests with a few russes in the back field can be handy, especially if you have Valhallan tanks.
Well, this makes me feel a lot better about the number of characters I use - especially in my own infantry army.
The one thing I'm curious about is the priests - even for a relatively low cost, are they really that useful?
Our characters are just all so good I have a hard time justifying not bringing them. Plus it's really cool to see these small "command squads" form as usually your commissar, commander, priests, and pyskers will fight near one another and form small units. They're surprisingly handy to repulse assaults as well, a lot of the players in my area have learned to respect these roving groups of characters packing powerfists and weapons. They're not dropping something like an Imperial knight but if they get the charge on things like Beserkers, Genestealers, or Harlequins they can put out enough hits to actually do a fair bit of damage in a pinch, especially if you have an infantry squad or two move in to help them.
That's true, though I'm often wary of sending my commanders into battle unless their platoon has been all but wiped out.
I've been noticing this too. Between your officers and standards there's not much point to bringing commissars with Catachans unless you're running conscripts for whatever reason. LD 9 on guardsmen pretty much guarantees morale losses are rare.
Might be for the best. Don't Catachan Commissars have an unusually high accident rate?
I'm thinking about my army, and here's a rough draft of a competitive Catachan Brigade. It's based on maximizing blasts and the harker re-rolls, while also brining some of the IG's greatest hits, like plasma scions and smite spam. I included the ratlings to deal with support characters like ancients.
Catachan Brigade:
Primaris
Primaris
Primaris
Company Commander, Plasma Pistol, Power Sword
Company Commander, Plasma Pistol, Power Sword
Scout Sentinel, Heavy Flamer
Scout Sentinel, Heavy Flamer
Hellhound, heavy flamer
Hellhound, heavy flamer
Leman Russ, Battle Cannon, heavy bolter
Leman Russ, Battle Cannon, heavy bolter
Leman Russ, Battle Cannon, heavy bolter
Manticore, heavy bolter
Manticore, heavy bolter
I'm a little worried that there isn't a lot of fast movement, although everything but the manticores and the las/plas squads can move without a big loss in efficacy. I'm not sure I have enough hard hitting anti-armor, but that's oddly a weakness for the IG.
It's not a very fun list to face, but I think it'll play reasonably quickly (no conscripts), and has some staying power.
One thing I think is pretty overlooked are the Plasma Special Weapon Squads.
45 Bolt Pistols (Tallarn Doctrine) gets you 19” average movement with orders, increasing threat range from 43” single shot, to 31” rapid fire.
If I start them at 12” from an edge, I can single tap just about anything on the field and double tap immediate threats.
Cadian Doctrine for defensive gunline (based on meta) if you go against aggressive enemies.
330 Bolt Pistols (2 CC and 6 SWS) gets you 18 plasma guns
Throw in a Girlyman or Yarrick for rerolls.
I’m currently running 8 of them with Harker in my Catachan list, 24 plasma shots plus my Stormtrooper plasma/melta…
I think if you drop 1 of your sentinels you can probably move your Scions into their own battalion with a tempestor and a Primaris Psyker. Probably shuffle your squads a bit to squeeze in 3 squads and +3 CPs ... I'd say it would be worthwhile to consider. Those extra shots on 6s plus a tempestors orders and extra CPs are probably worth it.
And I have found the sweet spot, at least in my local meta to be about 60 guardsmen and no less than 3 Lascannon in my lists. I've also moved to Basilisks with Catachans since that -3ap is what I'm looking for. Personal preference really. With Catachan doctrine the Manticore probably does very well with a free reroll per.
Oh, random question - what powers do you guys take with your Astropaths and Primaris Psykers?
Polonius wrote: I'm thinking about my army, and here's a rough draft of a competitive Catachan Brigade. It's based on maximizing blasts and the harker re-rolls, while also brining some of the IG's greatest hits, like plasma scions and smite spam. I included the ratlings to deal with support characters like ancients.
Spoiler:
Catachan Brigade:
Primaris
Primaris
Primaris
Company Commander, Plasma Pistol, Power Sword
Company Commander, Plasma Pistol, Power Sword
Scout Sentinel, Heavy Flamer
Scout Sentinel, Heavy Flamer
Hellhound, heavy flamer
Hellhound, heavy flamer
Leman Russ, Battle Cannon, heavy bolter
Leman Russ, Battle Cannon, heavy bolter
Leman Russ, Battle Cannon, heavy bolter
Manticore, heavy bolter
Manticore, heavy bolter
I'm a little worried that there isn't a lot of fast movement, although everything but the manticores and the las/plas squads can move without a big loss in efficacy. I'm not sure I have enough hard hitting anti-armor, but that's oddly a weakness for the IG.
It's not a very fun list to face, but I think it'll play reasonably quickly (no conscripts), and has some staying power.
I want to have a go at Catachans soon. I can't copy this entirely (mostly because I lack some of the vehicles), but I might well use this as a guide to get me started. I hope you don't mind.
RegulusBlack wrote: One thing I think is pretty overlooked are the Plasma Special Weapon Squads.
45 Bolt Pistols (Tallarn Doctrine) gets you 19” average movement with orders, increasing threat range from 43” single shot, to 31” rapid fire.
If I start them at 12” from an edge, I can single tap just about anything on the field and double tap immediate threats.
Cadian Doctrine for defensive gunline (based on meta) if you go against aggressive enemies.
330 Bolt Pistols (2 CC and 6 SWS) gets you 18 plasma guns
Throw in a Girlyman or Yarrick for rerolls.
I’m currently running 8 of them with Harker in my Catachan list, 24 plasma shots plus my Stormtrooper plasma/melta…
I actually used some SWSs in an Armageddon list I made recently:
Spoiler:
Armageddon Outrider (+1CP) Primaris Psyker w/ Death Mask of Ollanius Armoured Sentinel w/ Lascannon
Armoured Sentinel w/ Lascannon
Armoured Sentinel w/ Lascannon
Armoured Sentinel w/ Lascannon
Leman Russ Battle Tank w/ 3x Heavy Bolter
Leman Russ Punisher w/ 3x Heavy Bolter, Storm Bolter
Armageddon Vanguard (+1CP) Company Commander w/ Power Fist, Bolter
Veteran Squad w/ 3x Plasmagun, Bolter
Special Weapon Squad w/ 3x Plasmagun
Special Weapon Squad w/ 3x Plasmagun
Special Weapon Squad w/ 3x Plasmagun
Special Weapon Squad w/ 3x Plasmagun
- Chimera w/ 2x Heavy Bolter
- Chimera w/ 2x Heavy Flamer
- Chimera w/ 2x Heavy Flamer
Armageddon Vanguard (+1CP) Company Commander w/ Power Sword, Bolt Pistol, Blade of Conquest Veteran Squad w/ 3x Plasmagun, Bolter
Special Weapon Squad w/ 3x Plasmagun
Special Weapon Squad w/ 3x Plasmagun
- Chimera w/ 2x Heavy Flamer
- Chimera w/ 2x Heavy Flamer
Armageddon Vanguard (+1CP) Company Commander w/ Power Maul, Laspistol, Dagger of Tu'Sakh Astropath w/ Lasgun – 15
Astropath w/ Lasgun – 15
Veteran Squad w/ 3x Plasmagun, Bolter
1850pts (7/4CP)
The only reason I'm not using more SWSs is because I want to fit some commanders in the transports as well (hence 2 of them having Veteran squads instead).
The final Veteran squad will outflank along with the dagger-commander.
I'm definitely going to try a heavy Bullgryn list. 20+ Bulls, a Primaris with the dagger to ambush a big unit, and a Bodyguard with the Deathmask to tarpit. All vehicles and scions with them.
It's nasty, but since it's Guard that's redundant.
I run infantry guard a lot and bare minimum I have 6 at 1000pts/ 50pl, usually it's two company commanders and a commissar per "batallion" which in my case is what a platoon used to be.
Out of interest, what else do you include in your 'platoons'?
MrMoustaffa wrote: That being said, I'm about to start including priests and primaris pyskers as well. They're incredibly cheap for the utility they give to an infantry army and it feels like a no brainer to include them. If I do that, the amount of characters I have goes up to 9 minimum, and I often throw in a couple of extra commissars for redundancy and counterattacking because I own like 15 of them. Goal is to pick up some Tech priests as well as I'm slowly picking up more russes. Even just a single tech priests with a few russes in the back field can be handy, especially if you have Valhallan tanks.
Well, this makes me feel a lot better about the number of characters I use - especially in my own infantry army.
The one thing I'm curious about is the priests - even for a relatively low cost, are they really that useful?
Our characters are just all so good I have a hard time justifying not bringing them. Plus it's really cool to see these small "command squads" form as usually your commissar, commander, priests, and pyskers will fight near one another and form small units. They're surprisingly handy to repulse assaults as well, a lot of the players in my area have learned to respect these roving groups of characters packing powerfists and weapons. They're not dropping something like an Imperial knight but if they get the charge on things like Beserkers, Genestealers, or Harlequins they can put out enough hits to actually do a fair bit of damage in a pinch, especially if you have an infantry squad or two move in to help them.
That's true, though I'm often wary of sending my commanders into battle unless their platoon has been all but wiped out.
I've been noticing this too. Between your officers and standards there's not much point to bringing commissars with Catachans unless you're running conscripts for whatever reason. LD 9 on guardsmen pretty much guarantees morale losses are rare.
Might be for the best. Don't Catachan Commissars have an unusually high accident rate?
Keep in mind for my advice I do not play in a very competitive meta, so I actually tone down my lists. I don't take intentionally bad ones, but I do try to tone down things like plasma spam. For example, I no longer run conscripts. Not because they're bad or anything, but because they make the game far too easy and no one at my store has the tools to fight them. So you'll see me talk about things like having to counter charge because I don't have a cheap conscript screen to eat the charge in the first place.
#1
Typical "platoon" looks like this
X4 infantry squads. Usually a 50/50 autocannon/lascannon and plasma, bolter. If I have models voxes as well
X2 company commanders, loadout varies depending on doctrine. Cadians tend to have things like bolters and plasma pistols, Catachans will have Powerfists, etc.( I use 2 right now because I have a mixed regiment and need 2 HQ's per batallion. Once I get more stuff painted this will probably be dropped to 1)
X1 command squad with a standard. Loadout varies, but I traditionally give them short ranged weapons like meltas or flamers and use them to counterattack. Heavy weapons and plasma make them too much of a target.
X1 commissar with at least a power weapon, sometimes a fist depending on my mood.
X1 vet squad with a ride and close quarters weapons like shotguns and meltas with a heavy flamer. Tauroxes are good assault vehicles while Chimera s work better for counterattack.
Sometimes I run heavy weapon squads against newer players and remove my heavy weapons from the infantry squads so new players can learn target priority. Other than as mortar/heavy bolter platforms I really don't care for them, way too fragile. I've also considered special weapon squads but normally find myself just taking vets instead.
#2 additional attack per astra militarum model. He doubles your CQC effectiveness of your base infantry for barely the cost of a squad, but the main reason you bring him is to buff characters. Having him roam around with a bunch of commissars and officers and he makes them way more scary on the charge. Not only that, he's thematic and it just looks cool to see them running around. This leads into number 3
#3 Guard characters are way nastier than their cost would suggest in close combat. I've seen even 2 or 3 face down an enemy squad for a turn and hold a flank to win a game, and they can often kill their cost in enemy models in my experience. Usually this is a desperation tactic but it is a handy trick to have especially for the objective card missions. Some require killing things in CQC and since I don't own Ogryn or Crusaders theyre my next best option. They're no khorne beserkers or anything, but usually what happens is say something like genestealers charge in and crush the first line. You pull back survivors, fire into the genestealers point blank, and then realize there's still a few standing. You can't allow these units to survive because they'll wreck another unit or tie up tanks, so your only option at that point is a counter charge. Nobody really expects IG to take the fight to them so usually they're in easy charge distance for you too. Even if you don't kill the target, you've stolen his initiative, meaning that he's tied up going into his turn and he doesn't get to charge you. This doesn't work against superheavies or jump units obviously but against things like genestealers and Beserkers it can mean the difference between a turn 3 win or a turn 4 loss. Keep In mind I usually end up in this situation because I don't run conscripts.
#4 Accidents? Catachans can't help it if Commissars don't need their advice Although I have one commissar I run with mine, he's earned the right to fight with them after all of the dumb things he's taken on in assault and won
Keep in mind for my advice I do not play in a very competitive meta, so I actually tone down my lists. I don't take intentionally bad ones, but I do try to tone down things like plasma spam. For example, I no longer run conscripts. Not because they're bad or anything, but because they make the game far too easy and no one at my store has the tools to fight them. So you'll see me talk about things like having to counter charge because I don't have a cheap conscript screen to eat the charge in the first place.
That's funny...my meta's the exact and complete opposite. If you don't bring your A game list and play perfectly you will get steam rolled. They're great guys but good lord do I take a beating
Made a little excel document comparing the damage per points of various 5 man squads of Scions. The layout is a bit messy so the readability isn't great but there's lots of interesting info. (edited to add more than just Scions since)
I've compared the wounds caused against the pts cost of a Scions Squad vs various targets.
I've assumed a 5 man squad with a plasma pistol and 2 special weapons that deepstruck the same turn at 9-12'' range. (See the color coded cells)
Some nice finds:
HSVG are the most pts efficient vs light infantry (guard, firewarriors, etc)
Plasmaguns are the most pts efficient vs heavy infantry(Primaris, Nobs, Terminators, etc)
Meltaguns are the most efficient vs vehicles (Russes, Predators, etc)
It's good to see that with the nerfed plasmaguns each weapon could have it's place (except for the GL of course).
note: The values against units with either lots of wounds or just one wound are pretty much perfect. However melta vs units with just a couple of wounds gets quite complicated and thus isn't entirely accurate. Plasma is also not quite correct vs units with uneven numbers of wounds, quite significantly so vs 3 wound units such as nobs.
Quick question; Does the Scout Sentinel stratagem that allows you to move 2d6 in the shooting phase allow you to move within 1 inch of an enemy unit, therefore negating the charge mechanic and put you in position to fight in the fight phase? I tried this strategem in a recent game an my opponent said it applied to all movement. We ended up disallowing it and he killed me with lascannons in his next shooting phase.
Keep in mind for my advice I do not play in a very competitive meta, so I actually tone down my lists. I don't take intentionally bad ones, but I do try to tone down things like plasma spam. For example, I no longer run conscripts. Not because they're bad or anything, but because they make the game far too easy and no one at my store has the tools to fight them. So you'll see me talk about things like having to counter charge because I don't have a cheap conscript screen to eat the charge in the first place.
That's funny...my meta's the exact and complete opposite. If you don't bring your A game list and play perfectly you will get steam rolled. They're great guys but good lord do I take a beating
What kind of army do you run?
My main issue is I run almost pure infantry. For a fairly new playerbase like my store has, Imperial Guard infantry are a very tough nut to crack. I don't want to reopen the can of worms that happened in the General Discussions but Imperial Guardsmen are insanely good value point for point and when you've got between 100-150 running around with proper officer support even at a 1000pts that's a difficult thing to beat without tailoring. Add in that there are very few efficient anti infantry counters, especially for index armies, and you have my problem. Tanks have counters, but every infantry counter I've seen so far has been underwhelming. The only things that really bother me are Raven guard tactics and maybe guilleman if he gets first turn. Oh, and IG, they're pretty good too
I'm actually picking up more tanks for this reason. Tones down my infantry numbers and Leman Russe's are much easier for new players to understand and fight. Also provides a mix of targets so when someone brings AT they're not screwed like they would be with my pure guardsmen lists.
Resipsa131 wrote: Quick question; Does the Scout Sentinel stratagem that allows you to move 2d6 in the shooting phase allow you to move within 1 inch of an enemy unit, therefore negating the charge mechanic and put you in position to fight in the fight phase? I tried this strategem in a recent game an my opponent said it applied to all movement. We ended up disallowing it and he killed me with lascannons in his next shooting phase.
RAW, it kinda looks like it would because you're doing it during the shooting phase, and page 177 says that "When you move a model in the Movement phase, it may not be moved within 1" of any enemy models."
Personally, I think it's Not Nice (TM) and that this is a Reason We Can't Have Nice Things.
I've had a lot of success running a pure MT battalion alongside my Guard Brigade, the extra overcharged shots on 6's is surprisingly helpful, especially combined with the standard Take Aim and Laurels of Command stacking Elimination Protocols. With Inspired tactics and good rolls, you can get three squads rerolling 1's to hit, and reroll all wounds on monsters/vehicles generating extra shots on 6's.
Dusted off my guard when 8E hit because it looked like tanks were going to be back in vogue which made me happy. Didn't have as much as I wanted - I had to bolt on other stuff that I did have unit wise. So, yeah, not necessarily the most competitive but I was building towards it.
In my meta you definitely don't want to have all your eggs in one or two baskets. I had a shadowsword as the centerpiece during the index days and he rarely made it past turn 2. But yeah like I said my current list is a work in progress and it doesn't help that GW is literally out of everything IG related. I was starting to invest in the getting started kits in case I wanted to start playing a heavy russ list and then out-of-stock. Along with bassies and manticores. I have them just not as many as I'd like.
Right now I'm looking at a combo of conscripts footslogging backed up with earth shaker batteries, manticores, wyverns, mortars and plasma wielding scions dropping out of the sky. Sadly my business has kept me busy with Christmas coming up so I haven't been able to play at all since the codex dropped :(
Keep in mind for my advice I do not play in a very competitive meta, so I actually tone down my lists. I don't take intentionally bad ones, but I do try to tone down things like plasma spam. For example, I no longer run conscripts. Not because they're bad or anything, but because they make the game far too easy and no one at my store has the tools to fight them. So you'll see me talk about things like having to counter charge because I don't have a cheap conscript screen to eat the charge in the first place.
#1
Typical "platoon" looks like this
X4 infantry squads. Usually a 50/50 autocannon/lascannon and plasma, bolter. If I have models voxes as well
X2 company commanders, loadout varies depending on doctrine. Cadians tend to have things like bolters and plasma pistols, Catachans will have Powerfists, etc.( I use 2 right now because I have a mixed regiment and need 2 HQ's per batallion. Once I get more stuff painted this will probably be dropped to 1)
X1 command squad with a standard. Loadout varies, but I traditionally give them short ranged weapons like meltas or flamers and use them to counterattack. Heavy weapons and plasma make them too much of a target.
X1 commissar with at least a power weapon, sometimes a fist depending on my mood.
X1 vet squad with a ride and close quarters weapons like shotguns and meltas with a heavy flamer. Tauroxes are good assault vehicles while Chimera s work better for counterattack.
Sometimes I run heavy weapon squads against newer players and remove my heavy weapons from the infantry squads so new players can learn target priority. Other than as mortar/heavy bolter platforms I really don't care for them, way too fragile. I've also considered special weapon squads but normally find myself just taking vets instead.
#2 additional attack per astra militarum model. He doubles your CQC effectiveness of your base infantry for barely the cost of a squad, but the main reason you bring him is to buff characters. Having him roam around with a bunch of commissars and officers and he makes them way more scary on the charge. Not only that, he's thematic and it just looks cool to see them running around. This leads into number 3
#3 Guard characters are way nastier than their cost would suggest in close combat. I've seen even 2 or 3 face down an enemy squad for a turn and hold a flank to win a game, and they can often kill their cost in enemy models in my experience. Usually this is a desperation tactic but it is a handy trick to have especially for the objective card missions. Some require killing things in CQC and since I don't own Ogryn or Crusaders theyre my next best option. They're no khorne beserkers or anything, but usually what happens is say something like genestealers charge in and crush the first line. You pull back survivors, fire into the genestealers point blank, and then realize there's still a few standing. You can't allow these units to survive because they'll wreck another unit or tie up tanks, so your only option at that point is a counter charge. Nobody really expects IG to take the fight to them so usually they're in easy charge distance for you too. Even if you don't kill the target, you've stolen his initiative, meaning that he's tied up going into his turn and he doesn't get to charge you. This doesn't work against superheavies or jump units obviously but against things like genestealers and Beserkers it can mean the difference between a turn 3 win or a turn 4 loss. Keep In mind I usually end up in this situation because I don't run conscripts.
#4 Accidents? Catachans can't help it if Commissars don't need their advice Although I have one commissar I run with mine, he's earned the right to fight with them after all of the dumb things he's taken on in assault and won
Thanks for that. I always enjoy reading how others structure their infantry armies.
You know, it's silly but I never really considered the benefits of priests in terms of buffing IG characters. That's a really good point.
You've also made me want to be more gung-ho with my characters.
Don't go too crazy, keep in mind the kind of stuff I tend to charge them into is glass cannon units. Things like Beserkers or Genestealers that hit like a truck but aren't particularly durable. They'll have a rough go of it against things like Plague Marines or Monstrous creatures most of the time.
The bad:
- Take Cover only works on Infantry.
- The Dagger of Tu’Sakh can now only be taken by Infantry Officers.
- Ogryn Bodygards can now only take wounds for Infantry.
- Commissars of all types are now utterly worthless.
- It's been clarified that, yes, Send in the Next Wave really is that crap.
- Draconian Discipline is garbage for everything except babysitting Conscripts.
The only things here I really don't like are the changes to Commissars and the fact that Send in the Next Wave uses RPs.
I played this 100 PL list and had a blast against a blood angels player and an Ad Mech Mars player :
Spoiler:
Steel Legion Brigade
Company Commander-Power Weapon, bolt pistol, The Laurels of Command
Company Commander-Power Weapon, bolt pistol (warlord with Grand Strategist)
Company Commander-Power Weapon, bolt pistol
Primarius Psyker-Staff
Special Weapons Squad-3 flamers
Command Squad-4 plasma guns
Chimera-2 heavy flamers, Track Guards
Special Weapons Squad-3 flamers
Command Squad-4 Melta Guns
Chimera-2 heavy flamers, Track Guards
Commissar-Power Weapon, Power Fist
Commissar-Power Weapon, Bolter
Scout Sentinel- Heavy Flamer (or lascannon second game), Hunter Killer Missile
Scout Sentinel- Heavy Flamer (or lascannon second game), Hunter Killer Missile
Scout Sentinel- Heavy Flamer (or Missile Launcher second game), Hunter Killer Missile
Heavy Weapons Team-3 Autocannons
Heavy Weapons Team- Autocannon, 2 lascannons
Heavy Weapons Team-3 heavy bolters
Catachan SpearHead
Primarius Psyker-staff
Leman Russ Tank-2 plasma cannons, heavy bolter, Track Guards
Leman Russ Tank-3 heavy bolters, Track Guards
Manticore-Heavy bolter
I might trade out the flamers in the special weapon squads for grenade launchers because once they got out of the tank on an objective they were out of the fight.
conscripts aren't dead, but aren't a viable heavy lifter anymore. They are back to pure chaff.
Commissars aren't dead, but are now just one tool among many for managing morale. (side note.. anybody want to buy some commissars?)
The Ambush nerf makes sense, Send in the Next wave does not. (I can pay two CP and full points to bring back a dead unit in my deployment zone? Hard pass). Valhallans went from being solid, albeit a step below Cadia/Catachan/Tallarn to joining Mordia and Vostroya in niche army build hell.
Take Cover can only affect infantry, which makes our tanks more fragile (especially without Ogryn bodyguards).
On the whole, while some of the stuff was foreseeable (Ogryn hyperloop, Ambush) others are surprising (summary execution) and some are just baffling (send in the next wave).
Unit1126PLL wrote: Conscripts are still viable if you want to play them though. You just have to finegal a bit more.
Oh, absolutely, but they aren't a high durability, decent offensive output unit like they were under the index. 20 of them can still be an effective screen, even if they'll be lucky to survive a dedicated attempt to wipe them out.
Considering conscripts are ld4 and a commissar was the only way to substantially increase thier leadership anyway. Commissars are pretty much required for conscripts still. Even if you take catachan (+1 ld) and platoon banner(+1 ld), ld 6 means you have a chance losing models to morale with even 1 casualty. A commissar makes that same unit ld 10 and thus not only can you reroll a bad morale roll you need to take 5 casualties and roll a 6 twice on morale to lose a casualty. Odds are you need to take 8-9 casualties before you lose a model for morale near a commissar. And no I would never take a commissar for a 10 man unit with ld7 (8 if catachan)already.
But if you take conscripts (and to a lesser degree combined squads) commissars are a massive morale mitigation. The main point of commissars is spreading that ld8/9 around especially to ld4 and ld6 units. I guess people will finally learn why leadership matters this edition and why all those negative leadership abilities hurt so bad.
They still have a Leadership aura, so they'll see limited use in specific builds. If you run a Cadian gunline, you have a ton of three model, LD6 heavy weapon squads. the commissars LD8 makes them immune to any morale losses. It's not a bad use of a 31pt character.
But they're not going to be auto includes in lists (although, with all the LD buffs int eh codex and the nerf to conscripts, I was dropping them already).
They've gone from putting three in a touranemnt list to maybe having a few in a large casual list.
Though if you're running a conscript army, perhaps Valhallan would be better.
Their relic is unchanged so you can still make one of your officers an Oldissar and you still get at least 1 unit to autopass morale with a astrotelepath (though there is counterplay here and imo that's good), same thing with an Inquisitor, and same thing again for 2 CP.
Dissapointed by the FAQ. Conscripts went from being a cheap but survivable unit that could pack a nice punch on the battlefield to a somewhat decent screening unit.
They still have a Leadership aura, so they'll see limited use in specific builds. If you run a Cadian gunline, you have a ton of three model, LD6 heavy weapon squads. the commissars LD8 makes them immune to any morale losses. It's not a bad use of a 31pt character.
But they're not going to be auto includes in lists (although, with all the LD buffs int eh codex and the nerf to conscripts, I was dropping them already).
They've gone from putting three in a touranemnt list to maybe having a few in a large casual list.
There isn't a ton of ld increasing abilities. You get catachan near an officer (+1) and banner (+1) and other then that commissar was the biggest boost to ld. But as you said he majority of the guard models are ld6 (or conscripts ld4). This means even with a single casualty and a bad roll on morale you are losing models to morale.
You can take draconian discipline but it's likely not worth losing the other traits
You can play vahallan with the gun relic but it's an awful regiment compared to Cadian and catachan.
People still won't use banners because it's a plasmagun in a command squad slot
So expect a lot of catachan armies (+1 ld) and if they are using a lot of HWT (as they should) and a unit of conscripts it is in their best interest to include at least 1 commissar to make those units basically immune to morale. And as prevalent as negative leadership abilities are expect commissars to help vs that tactic as well.
Q: Can Death Korps of Krieg, Elysian Drop Troops or Renegades and Heretics Detachments use any of the Regiment-specific rules (Doctrines, Orders, Stratagems, Warlord Traits, etc.) in Codex: Astra Militarum? A: No. Instead these units use the bespoke abilities and Orders that are described in Imperial Armour – Index: Forces of the Astra Militarum.
Well bugger me, can't they also explicitly say whether or not we're allowed to use the general rules from the book?
Anyway, it's nice to see that we got a quick FAQ that put us on roughly the same level as the codex.
Considering conscripts are ld4 and a commissar was the only way to substantially increase thier leadership anyway. Commissars are pretty much required for conscripts still. Even if you take catachan (+1 ld) and platoon banner(+1 ld), ld 6 means you have a chance losing models to morale with even 1 casualty. A commissar makes that same unit ld 10 and thus not only can you reroll a bad morale roll you need to take 5 casualties and roll a 6 twice on morale to lose a casualty. Odds are you need to take 8-9 casualties before you lose a model for morale near a commissar. And no I would never take a commissar for a 10 man unit with ld7 (8 if catachan)already.
You seem to have missed the part where rerolling morale isn't optional. Have fun rolling a 1 or 2 for morale and then not only being forced to reroll it but having to kill an additional model for the privilege.
Considering conscripts are ld4 and a commissar was the only way to substantially increase thier leadership anyway. Commissars are pretty much required for conscripts still. Even if you take catachan (+1 ld) and platoon banner(+1 ld), ld 6 means you have a chance losing models to morale with even 1 casualty. A commissar makes that same unit ld 10 and thus not only can you reroll a bad morale roll you need to take 5 casualties and roll a 6 twice on morale to lose a casualty. Odds are you need to take 8-9 casualties before you lose a model for morale near a commissar. And no I would never take a commissar for a 10 man unit with ld7 (8 if catachan)already.
But if you take conscripts (and to a lesser degree combined squads) commissars are a massive morale mitigation. The main point of commissars is spreading that ld8/9 around especially to ld4 and ld6 units. I guess people will finally learn why leadership matters this edition and why all those negative leadership abilities hurt so bad.
Crap. I forgot about the leadership thing they have. Okay, need to lose 11 conscripts before the commissar is on average hurting you more than helping you.
Considering conscripts are ld4 and a commissar was the only way to substantially increase thier leadership anyway. Commissars are pretty much required for conscripts still. Even if you take catachan (+1 ld) and platoon banner(+1 ld), ld 6 means you have a chance losing models to morale with even 1 casualty. A commissar makes that same unit ld 10 and thus not only can you reroll a bad morale roll you need to take 5 casualties and roll a 6 twice on morale to lose a casualty. Odds are you need to take 8-9 casualties before you lose a model for morale near a commissar. And no I would never take a commissar for a 10 man unit with ld7 (8 if catachan)already.
You seem to have missed the part where rerolling morale isn't optional. Have fun rolling a 1 or 2 for morale and then not only being forced to reroll it but having to kill an additional model for the privilege.
you seem to miss that part that you need to FAIL morale to reroll...
gungo wrote: you seem to miss that part that you need to FAIL morale to reroll...
Which happens 50% of the time that you lose 5 of the most reviled and despised T3 Sv5+ models in the game that anyone not IG pathologically fixates as literally THE reason they can't win....
vipoid wrote: You seem to have missed the part where rerolling morale isn't optional. Have fun rolling a 1 or 2 for morale and then not only being forced to reroll it but having to kill an additional model for the privilege.
You only re-roll a failed morale test.. so rolling a 1 or a 2 would usually pass, right?
Personally I'm glad I removed the Commissar in lieu of a Psyker... I'm guessing the morale power is golden now?
Jkbulldogg wrote:Dissapointed by the FAQ. Conscripts went from being a cheap but survivable unit that could pack a nice punch on the battlefield to a somewhat decent screening unit.
Polonius wrote:
Oh, absolutely, but they aren't a high durability, decent offensive output unit like they were under the index. 20 of them can still be an effective screen, even if they'll be lucky to survive a dedicated attempt to wipe them out.
Polonius wrote:
conscripts aren't dead, but aren't a viable heavy lifter anymore. They are back to pure chaff.
This is what makes me kinda laugh a bit... everyone seems to think it was perfectly fine for conscripts (the cheapest, most worthless untrained standard humans the universe has to offer. One step above farmers with pitchforks) to be cheap, survivable, hard-hitting, packing a punch, durable, offensive heavy lifters. For 3 points per model.
They're now what they should always have been - somewhat survivable chaff that can still deal a lot of damage, but only if they survive long enough to do so without running away. The only change they need now is that the commissar ability should be a choice, not compulsory.
vipoid wrote: You seem to have missed the part where rerolling morale isn't optional. Have fun rolling a 1 or 2 for morale and then not only being forced to reroll it but having to kill an additional model for the privilege.
You only re-roll a failed morale test.. so rolling a 1 or a 2 would usually pass, right?
I guess if your opponent is attacking your conscripts with water pistols.
They're now what they should always have been - somewhat survivable chaff that can still deal a lot of damage, but only if they survive long enough to do so without running away. The only change they need now is that the commissar ability should be a choice, not compulsory.
I mean, it's been that way for, what, 10 years now? I'd consider myself still in shock, to be honest. It's a significant change.
From a game-balance point of view, I would be less bothered by it if it was optional, as you say. Even then I don't think it's something I'd concern myself with much.
This is what makes me kinda laugh a bit... everyone seems to think it was perfectly fine for conscripts (the cheapest, most worthless untrained standard humans the universe has to offer. One step above farmers with pitchforks) to be cheap, survivable, hard-hitting, packing a punch, durable, offensive heavy lifters. For 3 points per model.
They're now what they should always have been - somewhat survivable chaff that can still deal a lot of damage, but only if they survive long enough to do so without running away. The only change they need now is that the commissar ability should be a choice, not compulsory.
That's the thing though - this was applied to *all* infantry, not just Conscripts.
If it was just a rule given to Conscripts to justify their low cost, I'd be far less objectionable about it.
However, speaking as someone who never use Conscripts (just Infantry Squad), I feel rather annoyed that my Commissars are now a liability because one specific unit of infantry that I don't use was considered OP with them.
I think we are surprised that it wasn't the specific 2 unit composition, and was in fact essentially the entire backbone of the leadership for IG infantry armies whether or not they used conscripts.
rvd1ofakind wrote: Lol. Are you guys sad/surprised that a 2 unit composition that almost every imperium soup list took got nerfed.
Give me a break
No, but they are mad that one composition meant that one unit in the codex suddenly lost what little appeal it had outside one specific scenario. If they had nerfed the Conscript-Commissar interaction while preserving it as it was for everything else, people would be happy.
This is what makes me kinda laugh a bit... everyone seems to think it was perfectly fine for conscripts (the cheapest, most worthless untrained standard humans the universe has to offer. One step above farmers with pitchforks) to be cheap, survivable, hard-hitting, packing a punch, durable, offensive heavy lifters. For 3 points per model.
They're now what they should always have been - somewhat survivable chaff that can still deal a lot of damage, but only if they survive long enough to do so without running away. The only change they need now is that the commissar ability should be a choice, not compulsory.
That's the thing though - this was applied to *all* infantry, not just Conscripts.
If it was just a rule given to Conscripts to justify their low cost, I'd be far less objectionable about it.
However, speaking as someone who never use Conscripts (just Infantry Squad), I feel rather annoyed that my Commissars are now a liability because one specific unit of infantry that I don't use was considered OP with them.
I understand your annoyance, they could have made it conscripts only, but I thought Infantry squads with a commissar would have to lose half their models to be in serious risk of losing one or two more, and they would have lost one before anyway from the friendly fire, so it doesn't seem -too- much different. (Except for the aforementioned compulsory reroll. I'll probably end up saying this a million times, but it really should be a choice!)
Niiru wrote: I understand your annoyance, they could have made it conscripts only, but I thought Infantry squads with a commissar would have to lose half their models to be in serious risk of losing one or two more, and they would have lost one before anyway from the friendly fire, so it doesn't seem -too- much different. (Except for the aforementioned compulsory reroll. I'll probably end up saying this a million times, but it really should be a choice!)
That's the thing though - the compulsory reroll is a key factor in why the new rule is so atrocious. It means that Commissars can actually be a liability to an infantry squad.
Niiru wrote: I understand your annoyance, they could have made it conscripts only, but I thought Infantry squads with a commissar would have to lose half their models to be in serious risk of losing one or two more, and they would have lost one before anyway from the friendly fire, so it doesn't seem -too- much different. (Except for the aforementioned compulsory reroll. I'll probably end up saying this a million times, but it really should be a choice!)
That's the thing though - the compulsory reroll is a key factor in why the new rule is so atrocious. It means that Commissars can actually be a liability to an infantry squad.
Agreed. Though if it makes you feel any better, I suspect this is unintentional. I'm sure with other similar rules, GW have always left it as being a choice. The wording on this I reckon is a mistake, typical GW not proof-reading their rules properly before printing. I'd suggest writing in the question, because they may well correct the FAQ wording. Would NOT be the first time this sort of thing has happened.
rvd1ofakind wrote: Lol. Are you guys sad/surprised that a 2 unit composition that almost every imperium soup list took got nerfed.
Give me a break
Conscripts invincibility to morale needed a nerf. The nerf is just a sucky, inelegant over-nerf.
It is shoddy rule-making, and it makes an iconic Guard character almost uselss. No one will miss running 150 imba conscripts. But commisars will be missed. A lot.
Niiru wrote: Agreed. Though if it makes you feel any better, I suspect this is unintentional. I'm sure with other similar rules, GW have always left it as being a choice. The wording on this I reckon is a mistake, typical GW not proof-reading their rules properly before printing. I'd suggest writing in the question, because they may well correct the FAQ wording. Would NOT be the first time this sort of thing has happened.
It's possible, but even if it was changed I'm not sure that Commissars would be worthwhile for infantry. I mean, even without the reroll being compulsary, it can still end up costing you more guys (especially since the model the commissar killed is in addition to any morale losses).
Paying 31+pts to reduce morale losses on my infantry squads was a price I was prepared to pay.
Paying 31+pts to *maybe* reduce morale losses but often also with a chance to increase them . . . that's a lot less appealing.
On the other hand, Valhallan is looking more attractive.
rvd1ofakind wrote: Lol. Are you guys sad/surprised that a 2 unit composition that almost every imperium soup list took got nerfed.
Give me a break
Conscripts invincibility to morale needed a nerf. The nerf is just a sucky, inelegant over-nerf.
It is shoddy rule-making, and it makes an iconic Guard character almost uselss. No one will miss running 150 imba conscripts. But commisars will be missed. A lot.
The worst part is it didn't even change their invincibility.
Valhallan conscripts didn't change at all (because of their relic), a 15 point astrotelepath still can make 1 unit immune to morale, a 55 point inquisitor can do the same thing at the same time, and a 2 CP stratagem preserves them if the situation is dire.
What everyone else said about the commissar nerf is spot on. Something needed to be done for balance, that's true, but now you just won't see commissars or Yarrick on the table for anything other than fluffy matches, which is a real shame because they just started reappearing. For a couple of editions they've been vastly outclassed by priests, now they're irrelevant in most situations and a liability in others.
Disappointed that GW didn't think this through better. The Commissar is an iconic IG unit, it's on the fething codex cover and they just made them unplayable. Thanks.
Similarly, they've also made Send In The Next Wave totally pointless. Why pay reinforcement points for units that are not going to fill up troop slots to give you command points, and then force you to pay 2 CP to just bring in an identical unit as if they were reserves? This also could have been saved with some more thoughtful adjusting. If its too powerful, just make it 4 or 5 CPs. Expensive, but still situationally playable.
It is interesting how these changes affect Valhallans specifically. On one hand, their unique strategem is now garbage, but their relic is now the only thing with the old commissar ability (until they notice that oversight) and their regimental doctrines are that much more valuable for morale. Will be interesting to seek how this plays out.
Niiru wrote: Agreed. Though if it makes you feel any better, I suspect this is unintentional. I'm sure with other similar rules, GW have always left it as being a choice. The wording on this I reckon is a mistake, typical GW not proof-reading their rules properly before printing. I'd suggest writing in the question, because they may well correct the FAQ wording. Would NOT be the first time this sort of thing has happened.
It's possible, but even if it was changed I'm not sure that Commissars would be worthwhile for infantry. I mean, even without the reroll being compulsary, it can still end up costing you more guys (especially since the model the commissar killed is in addition to any morale losses).
Paying 31+pts to reduce morale losses on my infantry squads was a price I was prepared to pay.
Paying 31+pts to *maybe* reduce morale losses but often also with a chance to increase them . . . that's a lot less appealing.
On the other hand, Valhallan is looking more attractive.
I will miss the morale boost from the commissar as much as I miss the convenience that combined squads gave us.
Valhallan doctrine may look as a fall-back option, but their unique stratagem has been severely restricted in use due to the need of setting aside reinforcement points. As Polonius said, Valhallan regiment goes from situationally good to bottom tier.
Yeah, the fact that is requires Reinforcement Points is disappointing, to say the least.
It just makes it an entirely pointless stratagem - since you'd be better off just buying the extra unit in the first place (which would have the added benefit of not costing you CPs).
rvd1ofakind wrote: Lol. Are you guys sad/surprised that a 2 unit composition that almost every imperium soup list took got nerfed.
Give me a break
Conscripts invincibility to morale needed a nerf. The nerf is just a sucky, inelegant over-nerf.
It is shoddy rule-making, and it makes an iconic Guard character almost uselss. No one will miss running 150 imba conscripts. But commisars will be missed. A lot.
The worst part is it didn't even change their invincibility.
Valhallan conscripts didn't change at all (because of their relic), a 15 point astrotelepath still can make 1 unit immune to morale, a 55 point inquisitor can do the same thing at the same time, and a 2 CP stratagem preserves them if the situation is dire.
Completely disagree.
Astropath and inquisitors can mime the effect of a commissar, but only on one unit at a time that has to be declared before your opponents turn. This works for 30 conscripts, it doesn't work for 150. Also, i don't think that both an astropath and an inquisitor can cast it, it's the same power with the same name.
I like this FAQ, it gave the commissars the role they should have according to the fluff. They are now good to keep troops in line as long as nothing major is coming theyr way, but only add to the chaos when morale is completely broken. You will still see commissars around to babysit your HWTs and small squads.
Mass conscripts is still a thing for Valhallan, which is something i'm fine with.
Well, guys, there is still a warlord trait which essentialy makes what pre-FAQ comissar did... just for one unit.
And IMHO that warlord trait should have been the comissard rule in the first place (i.e. comissar can "discipline" only one unit per turn with 1+up to d3 cassualties)
Well, given we still have Valhalla, conscipts aren't going anywhere... Comissars do. And that's a shame.
In the immortal parlance of PP, nerfing conscripts really opens up a lot of design space. If you still want fearless conscripts, you can. If you just want more durable squads against morale, there are plenty of ways, including the commissar.
On the whole though, this was a weird set of nerfs. I really feel that the strongest builds in the codex weren't going to be using the conscript hordes. Or, more accurately, the strongest builds that were nearly all AM, and not an imperial soup with AM for flavor. On the whole, while it's an undeniable power loss, none of the really powerful aspects of the new codex were nerfed, just stuff that was "gamey."
At then end of the day, this is a codex that can spam 152 T8, 11 Wound models that can move 5" and still fling 8.5 S8, AP2, d3 damage shots. Oh, and they have obsec. Or, you can fill your slots with 48 pt squads with a lascannon and two mortars, all of which re-roll ones to hit, and can get full twin linked with an order.
Oh, and we're also a codex that can easily bring 12+ Command points to a battle, while refunding a third of the CPs we spend, and gaining a CP on a third of all enemy strategems.
Guard now have to worry about people getting through their screens. The change is a good thing and brings guard WAY back into balance and makes conscripts not the unit you would see in almost every imperial list.
Martel732 wrote: Power armor lists still have no way to get through 10 man squads that cost 40 pts. Maybe some other lists like Drukhari can really take advantage.
Yes they do. 10 men are very limited. Kill them all and there's a hole in the line. Conscripts covered rather more of the field and were harder to remove.
Guard is still standing as probably the strongest codex, but conscripts being taken out of the running is a big deal. Now I just have to fret over Alaitoc armies building an eternal minus 2
Anyone got any ideas on the best use of the tallarn stratagem now triple tank commander is out the window? A unit of russes is going to take up way too much space to be feasible, too readily blockable given the deployment restrictions.
I can tell you I stopped playing Drukhari till the codex drops because of a lack of ways to deal with hordes, so if you're implying that drukhari can deal with conscripts better than power armor armies I'd disagree. The power armor armies have lots of access to weapons like storm bolters, combi-bolters, and heavy bolters that put out lots of damage for very little cost while the only high rate of fire weapons drukhari have are disintegrators and those cost 30 points (with few units that can even take them) so they're incapable of dealing with the numbers you see in any horde list.
I think conscripts will still be solid even without commissar support since they still compare favorably to units like cultists are frequently used in tournament lists. You're still paying less for a model with a better save which is the more important stat for units like them. You won't them to take up as much table space as they can while absorbing as many hits as possible. They still handle that role quite admirably for their price.
I think conscripts will still be solid even without commissar support since they still compare favorably to units like cultists are frequently used in tournament lists. You're still paying less for a model with a better save which is the more important stat for units like them. You won't them to take up as much table space as they can while absorbing as many hits as possible. They still handle that role quite admirably for their price.
I actually think that with Tide of Traitors, 4+ shooting and all of the buffs that you can give Poxwalkers, both are now superior to conscripts. That doesn't mean conscripts no longer have a place, but they're far from the best horde available now.
Also, if they were going to do this to commissars all along, it really would have been nice for them to not give them the nerfs they got in the codex. This is a ton of drawbacks for being just one point cheaper than normal guardsmen. May be time to go back to combined guard blobs.
Niiru wrote: I understand your annoyance, they could have made it conscripts only, but I thought Infantry squads with a commissar would have to lose half their models to be in serious risk of losing one or two more, and they would have lost one before anyway from the friendly fire, so it doesn't seem -too- much different. (Except for the aforementioned compulsory reroll. I'll probably end up saying this a million times, but it really should be a choice!)
That's the thing though - the compulsory reroll is a key factor in why the new rule is so atrocious. It means that Commissars can actually be a liability to an infantry squad.
You know, like they can be in the background? Commissars have "accidents" for a reason and it's not because they're always known for their reasonable and compromising personalities.
With this nerf, it at least makes it where I feel like infantry costs are more in line. Part of the reason I felt guardsmen across the board needed a price increase was because the commissar was so insanely good. As it sits now without the ability to autopass morale all the time, they're much more vulnerable to morale and it allows for more counters, so their current cost feels a lot more fair. So with that out of the way lets talk about all the ways we can still ignore morale and make people froth at the mouth again
1. Insane Bravery. Obvious choice for conscripts. "But MrMoustaffa that's 2CPs! That's ridiculous!" This is IG. We have more CP's than anyone. I think you can live with 2 CP's a turn to ensure an out of position conscript squad holds its ground. And it's not like tourney play is going much longer than 3 or 4 turns anyways. With the proper relic and warlord trait you'll make a few of these back anyways.
2. Fight to the Death! Mainly for things like Ogryn, but it will also line up well with things like Valhallan conscripts.
3. Regiment Traits. Mainly Catachan and Mordian for obvious reasons, but there are other mechanics out there that help with Leadership as well. Regimental Standards in particular got a lot more utility now and a properly kitted command squad can still be useful and yet not immediately be shot off the board if kitted out right (I.E. Not just 3 plasma guns and a flag)
4.Regiment "extras". Big one here is the Valhallan Relic, the Mk 45 Bolt Pistol, which literally turns a Valhallan commander into the old style Commissar. You're essentially bringing Chenkov in this case, since this is similar to how he worked back in 5th. Mordians also get a trait that helps them, their warlord trait makes it where any model that flees from a unit within 6" of your warlord, on a +4 they do not flee. Essentially gives you the Valhallan trait in a bubble. There's also Draconian Disciplinarian which could probably be made to work with some forethought, although it's not quite as game changing in my opinion. Cadians have access to Kell who is a hideable regimental standard with a built in reroll, which will very nice for infantry squad gunlines.
5. Mental Fortitude. Obvious one, basically just a psychic source for insane bravery.
6. Commissar Tank. Again, another source of Leadership 9, which makes infantry squads very tough to shift.
7. Commissars. Yes, they still help. Properly spaced among conscript units they can make their points back in models saved by the morale buff in a turn or two depending on how many conscripts you have within his buff radius. No, he no longer turns conscripts into the bravest unit in the game but given how cheap he is at a measly 30 or so points, he only needs to keep 10 conscripts around in order to make his points back. While yes, this isn't amazing in and of itself, there is only so much deployment space on the table. Being able to take "more" conscripts on a smaller footprint by mitigating morale casualties will pay for itself, even if occasionally he'll kill an extra 1 or 2 to morale tests. Keep him near conscripts, away from infantry, and ideally in a Valhallan regiment, where the potential of extra damage is cut in half.
Ideally you will never rely on any 1 or 2 of these, in order to truly keep infantry around and bug people who thought IG were wrecked by the commissar nerf, you will need to use these in tandem to properly drive them crazy. Obviously not everyone has access to every trick, but with proper planning you can still come up with a hard to shift infantry force that will make the Emperor proud. It will also depend on how many conscript units you intend to run. 1 or 2 and you obviously don't need to use near as many tricks to keep them around as you would say starting the game with six 30 man units.
Conscripts can absolutely still be run to be useful, they're just a very annoying screen to shift that an opponent needs to dedicate time to kill. You know, what they're intended to be, a screen for your tanks and artillery. They're still so cheap that anyone dedicating enough firepower to kill them is spending far more points than the conscripts are worth to remove them, and they still screen turn 1 charges, which is all they really need to do at 3 points per man. They're nowhere near as powerful offensively now but they honestly never should have been in the first place.
An additional upside, at least for more casual players, is that in order to build an IG force with proper morale, you kind of need to commit to more of a proper IG army. Just trying to run a token soup force with some IG sprinkled in will not stick around nearly as effectively as an IG player who built his entire army up around his codex's strengths. Sucks for Imperium Tournament players but it's good news for Xenos and Chaos and hopefully will encourage a bit more variety.
Already wasn’t using conscripts, but I guess now I won’t ever use a commissar either. Thanks I guess? 30 points to *maybe* save one or two 4pt guys? Nah.
And a 2cp stratagem to use a unit I already paid for? Seriously?
I think conscripts will still be solid even without commissar support since they still compare favorably to units like cultists are frequently used in tournament lists. You're still paying less for a model with a better save which is the more important stat for units like them. You won't them to take up as much table space as they can while absorbing as many hits as possible. They still handle that role quite admirably for their price.
I actually think that with Tide of Traitors, 4+ shooting and all of the buffs that you can give Poxwalkers, both are now superior to conscripts. That doesn't mean conscripts no longer have a place, but they're far from the best horde available now.
Also, if they were going to do this to commissars all along, it really would have been nice for them to not give them the nerfs they got in the codex. This is a ton of drawbacks for being just one point cheaper than normal guardsmen. May be time to go back to combined guard blobs.
If you want more output, then why not just take infantry squads? Same cost as a cultist, better leadership, better armor save, more weapon options, and more buffs from orders (make them catachan and you're better in melee too). You take conscripts because they're cheaper and more durable and when all you're trying to do is fill space on the board, block enemy units, and fill troop slots, the conscripts will do that better.
Poxwalkers I've found only work when you design an entire army around buffing them and then you're throwing all your points at making them usable rather than having them as just chaff to protect your important stuff. It becomes a list about poxwalkers and not a list about other elements that you're just throwing in poxwalkers as chaff and to fill slots. Sure, they have some things they can do better, but there are also some things they do worse and at twice the cost.
Commissars are all but useless now. Inquisitors are the answer. 55 points for a better LD buff and a different morale immunity psychic power than the primaris.
I hate that Commissars are trash, but I am happy to see GW being so fast at addressing issues in the game. They may have overreacted, but at least they reacted.
In my mind the purpose of a horde is to fill space and take punishment, while maybe killing somethings through weight of fire.
Cultists can blob up in large groups, shoot more accurately than conscripts and still teleport to another board edge as needed at some point in the game -- even out of combat and even replenishing nearly the entire squad.
Infantry squads can take more heavy weapons and stuff than cultists, but that isn't a horde function. That's a sit-and-shoot function. To even blob up to cultist levels takes 1-2 CPs.
And Poxwalkers, while more expensive, can fulfill the survivability portion of their horde mission better than conscripts as well. Orders only work on conscripts just 50% of the time, below the success rate of DG psychic buffs for poxwalkers, so I think its clear they're a more reliably effective horde too.
crimsondave wrote: Commissars are all but useless now. Inquisitors are the answer. 55 points for a better LD buff and a different morale immunity psychic power than the primaris.
I hate that Commissars are trash, but I am happy to see GW being so fast at addressing issues in the game. They may have overreacted, but at least they reacted.
They should have just mashed the nerf on conscripts. They’re the problem unit. Old commissars we’re fine for infantry squads.
crimsondave wrote: Commissars are all but useless now. Inquisitors are the answer. 55 points for a better LD buff and a different morale immunity psychic power than the primaris.
I hate that Commissars are trash, but I am happy to see GW being so fast at addressing issues in the game. They may have overreacted, but at least they reacted.
They should have just mashed the nerf on conscripts. They’re the problem unit. Old commissars we’re fine for infantry squads.
I agree, but it is what it is. IG is still far from the hot garbage it was in 7th. Scions are still the beat stick.
A Commissar is still just as useful to normal infantry squads as he was before.
I've never had a situation where a Commissar wasn't already killing the last man in a squad that got hit hard enough to actually use his Summary Execution before the nerf, and I seriously doubt it'll change things now.
I am hoping they change their stance on commissars in short order. If not, I don't think I'll see them in my opponents lists until 9th edition when they rework the moral system again.
I'm thinking of proposing a house rule for my gaming group as there are two IG players. Keeping the conscript 4+ order but making the failed moral test for commissars D3 kills for conscripts and keep the old rules for everything else.
Hope to playtest this houserule soon and see what/how others think about it.
And Boy am I glad I saw the Errata today. As I was about to buy three more squads of Guard Infantry because I was going to make a whole detachment built around send in the next wave. Shame really, as I wanted to play some fluffy guard lists of "attack move that way you meatbags!!"
Conscripts don't compete with Chaos cannon fodder they compete with 4 point infantry squads.
Commissar tank is pretty beefy when buffing regular infantry squads. LD9 is pretty solid on 10 man squads. The take morale tests on a D3 strategem is also very useful especially if the goal is.to save a special or heavy weapon.
The nerfing of commisars will teach players that the 40 point infantry squad is a really good unit.
crimsondave wrote: Commissars are all but useless now. Inquisitors are the answer. 55 points for a better LD buff and a different morale immunity psychic power than the primaris.
I hate that Commissars are trash, but I am happy to see GW being so fast at addressing issues in the game. They may have overreacted, but at least they reacted.
Is there a YMDC on this? Because as far as i know you can't cast the same power twice, even it comes from different psykers from different disciplines.
Stus67 wrote: A Commissar is still just as useful to normal infantry squads as he was before.
I've never had a situation where a Commissar wasn't already killing the last man in a squad that got hit hard enough to actually use his Summary Execution before the nerf, and I seriously doubt it'll change things now.
I lose 6-7 guys all the time in regular infantry squads. Pre-nerf, the Commissar guaranteed the lascannon/plasma gun would stick around, usually at the cost of the Sergeant. Now, the squad is an almost guaranteed wipe at 6-7 casualties with the new Commissar.
Stus67 wrote: A Commissar is still just as useful to normal infantry squads as he was before.
I've never had a situation where a Commissar wasn't already killing the last man in a squad that got hit hard enough to actually use his Summary Execution before the nerf, and I seriously doubt it'll change things now.
I lose 6-7 guys all the time in regular infantry squads. Pre-nerf, the Commissar guaranteed the lascannon/plasma gun would stick around, usually at the cost of the Sergeant. Now, the squad is an almost guaranteed wipe at 6-7 casualties with the new Commissar.
Commissar tank makes 6 to 7 casualties a lot less scary.
Leadership on a D3 strategem stacks
Over say 4 tests on 4 turns that's only 5CP, plus the commissar tank makes 4 and 5 tests minimally risky.
TheNightWillEnd wrote: In my mind the purpose of a horde is to fill space and take punishment, while maybe killing somethings through weight of fire.
Cultists can blob up in large groups, shoot more accurately than conscripts and still teleport to another board edge as needed at some point in the game -- even out of combat and even replenishing nearly the entire squad.
Infantry squads can take more heavy weapons and stuff than cultists, but that isn't a horde function. That's a sit-and-shoot function. To even blob up to cultist levels takes 1-2 CPs.
And Poxwalkers, while more expensive, can fulfill the survivability portion of their horde mission better than conscripts as well. Orders only work on conscripts just 50% of the time, below the success rate of DG psychic buffs for poxwalkers, so I think its clear they're a more reliably effective horde too.
Why are you only looking at the viability as a horde? I was happy at my last tournament using chaos going 4-1 and I ran 60 cultists for it but they were all in 10 man units anyways. I don't bring them expecting them to get any damage out at all (in fact, I even had two units shoot and charge a single unit of scouts and come out the losers of that bout) but I am happy when some wounds are snuck in. Over the 5 rounds of my last event, I only used tide of traitors once. It's alright, but as many of you have commented about conscripts, the unit rarely survives any attention anyways and the cultists have an even worse save making it less likely they'll do so either. I bring them to deny reserves coming in around me, keep units back from my more valuable units, and build lots of cp's for other units to use. In those comparisons, the astra militarum troop options still come out significantly ahead with a combination of more damage, more durability, and more numbers for the same or less cost so that I can buy other fun stuff to keep in the back lines too. I would love to have cultists come out the same as either of the two troop options available to astra militarum.
I'm not only looking at their viability as a horde, but that is what I am talking about right now. Sure, infantry squads are better than cultists for shooting and durability, that's not my point.
I'm saying if you want to run hordes for board control, bubblewrapping, and swarming some stuff, conscripts are now inferior to cultists and poxwalkers.
I am going to try some more MSU builds, but it sounds like its going to be rather annoying. You have to spam officers or use relics to get enough orders for all of the units, eliminating a ton of efficiency there and individual infantry squads are still imperfect at the conscript role.
Another point is that I started taking a combined army big blobs and tanks because I thought it looked fluffy and cinematic on the battlefield. To me, that's what an IG army should look like, and what distinguished the army from the standard 40k faction that has a bunch of 5-10-man units running around.
It feels like most of the conscript abuse on was happening on the competitive scene by imperial soup players rather than core IG folks, and the fact that GW responded by just nerfing a couple of IG units to death and undermining pure IG play styles is frustrating.
crimsondave wrote: Commissars are all but useless now. Inquisitors are the answer. 55 points for a better LD buff and a different morale immunity psychic power than the primaris.
I hate that Commissars are trash, but I am happy to see GW being so fast at addressing issues in the game. They may have overreacted, but at least they reacted.
Is there a YMDC on this? Because as far as i know you can't cast the same power twice, even it comes from different psykers from different disciplines.
How can it be the same power if it's from a different discipline?
Stus67 wrote: A Commissar is still just as useful to normal infantry squads as he was before.
I've never had a situation where a Commissar wasn't already killing the last man in a squad that got hit hard enough to actually use his Summary Execution before the nerf, and I seriously doubt it'll change things now.
I lose 6-7 guys all the time in regular infantry squads. Pre-nerf, the Commissar guaranteed the lascannon/plasma gun would stick around, usually at the cost of the Sergeant. Now, the squad is an almost guaranteed wipe at 6-7 casualties with the new Commissar.
This is the problem. The nerf is harder on multiple regular squads than it is on the "problem" that is conscripts. It's easier to mitigate the nerf using fewer big blobs than it is using multiple 10 man squads.
crimsondave wrote: Commissars are all but useless now. Inquisitors are the answer. 55 points for a better LD buff and a different morale immunity psychic power than the primaris.
I hate that Commissars are trash, but I am happy to see GW being so fast at addressing issues in the game. They may have overreacted, but at least they reacted.
Is there a YMDC on this? Because as far as i know you can't cast the same power twice, even it comes from different psykers from different disciplines.
How can it be the same power if it's from a different discipline?
Having the same effect description and name is a good start.
I mean if they wanted it to be a different power, i'm sure that GW wouldn't have problems using a different name, instead they used that exact same name which tells us something.
crimsondave wrote: Commissars are all but useless now. Inquisitors are the answer. 55 points for a better LD buff and a different morale immunity psychic power than the primaris.
I hate that Commissars are trash, but I am happy to see GW being so fast at addressing issues in the game. They may have overreacted, but at least they reacted.
Is there a YMDC on this? Because as far as i know you can't cast the same power twice, even it comes from different psykers from different disciplines.
How can it be the same power if it's from a different discipline?
Having the same effect description and name is a good start.
I mean if they wanted it to be a different power, i'm sure that GW wouldn't have problems using a different name, instead they used that exact same name which tells us something.
No, i defintely wouldn't allow this at the table.
Then why have different disciplines? What's the point?
I don't get why they changed Commissars the way they did. I mean OK if they made the morale ignore happen once per unit per game, that's a good tradeoff. I get that, but only once per unit per game then also only lets you re-roll? Just doesn't make sense.
Then why have different disciplines? What's the point?
The fact that there is one power in common between a codex discipline and the index discipline of a minor faction doesn't make those disciplines useless.
Then why have different disciplines? What's the point?
The fact that there is one power in common between a codex discipline and the index discipline of a minor faction doesn't make those disciplines useless.
They actually are different powers as they are worded completely differently. The only thing the same between them is the name.
Indeed looking at it again there are some differences. So now the problem is in defining what identifies a power, if it is the name or something else. Definitely out topic here though, maybe i should open a YMDC on it.
slobulous wrote: Guys, conscripts don't have to be nerfed if you are willing to take them under the Valhallan regiment.
They have a Relic bolt pistol called "Pietrov's Mk 45" which has the following ability:
" Friendly VALHALLAN units within 6" of the bearer can never lose more than one model as a result of any single failed morale test"
Problem solved. Conscripts shall live forever!!!!!!!
You can also use the 2 CP stratagem or even the 1CP guard stratagem to reduce it to a d3. Or you can make the commissar your warlord and get his kick butt warlord trait.
Its the rest of the guard that commissars are screwed for, which most likely was the opposite of GW's intent.
slobulous wrote: Guys, conscripts don't have to be nerfed if you are willing to take them under the Valhallan regiment.
They have a Relic bolt pistol called "Pietrov's Mk 45" which has the following ability:
" Friendly VALHALLAN units within 6" of the bearer can never lose more than one model as a result of any single failed morale test"
Problem solved. Conscripts shall live forever!!!!!!!
You can also use the 2 CP stratagem or even the 1CP guard stratagem to reduce it to a d3. Or you can make the commissar your warlord and get his kick butt warlord trait.
Its the rest of the guard that commissars are screwed for, which most likely was the opposite of GW's intent.
Conscripts are the problem. Nerf conscripts.
To be fair Commissars were a wee bit too good for their points cost. Let's not try to deny here that we functionally had the best morale mechanic in the game tied to an aura ability on a 31 pt model who had the "cost" of shooting one of the cheapest infantry models in the game any time you wanted to use him with a squad.
Commissars did deserve a nerf, they just didn't deserve this.
slobulous wrote: Guys, conscripts don't have to be nerfed if you are willing to take them under the Valhallan regiment.
They have a Relic bolt pistol called "Pietrov's Mk 45" which has the following ability:
" Friendly VALHALLAN units within 6" of the bearer can never lose more than one model as a result of any single failed morale test"
Problem solved. Conscripts shall live forever!!!!!!!
You can also use the 2 CP stratagem or even the 1CP guard stratagem to reduce it to a d3. Or you can make the commissar your warlord and get his kick butt warlord trait.
Its the rest of the guard that commissars are screwed for, which most likely was the opposite of GW's intent.
Conscripts are the problem. Nerf conscripts.
To be fair Commissars were a wee bit too good for their points cost. Let's not try to deny here that we functionally had the best morale mechanic in the game tied to an aura ability on a 31 pt model who had the "cost" of shooting one of the cheapest infantry models in the game any time you wanted to use him with a squad.
Commissars did deserve a nerf, they just didn't deserve this.
Well Tyranids Synapse rule let's you autopass a moral test when you are within 8" of a model with that rule. I think that's better
slobulous wrote: Guys, conscripts don't have to be nerfed if you are willing to take them under the Valhallan regiment.
They have a Relic bolt pistol called "Pietrov's Mk 45" which has the following ability:
" Friendly VALHALLAN units within 6" of the bearer can never lose more than one model as a result of any single failed morale test"
Problem solved. Conscripts shall live forever!!!!!!!
You can also use the 2 CP stratagem or even the 1CP guard stratagem to reduce it to a d3. Or you can make the commissar your warlord and get his kick butt warlord trait.
Its the rest of the guard that commissars are screwed for, which most likely was the opposite of GW's intent.
Conscripts are the problem. Nerf conscripts.
To be fair Commissars were a wee bit too good for their points cost. Let's not try to deny here that we functionally had the best morale mechanic in the game tied to an aura ability on a 31 pt model who had the "cost" of shooting one of the cheapest infantry models in the game any time you wanted to use him with a squad.
Commissars did deserve a nerf, they just didn't deserve this.
Well Tyranids Synapse rule let's you autopass a moral test when you are within 8" of a model with that rule. I think that's better
But tyranid synapse means if you are out of range you can only shoot the nearest target as well also we don't have orders like FRF/SRF or access to rerolls to blow our dps into the stratosphere. Our best shooting swarm unit costs 4 pts each with a 12" str 4 assault 1 gun or 8 pts with an 18" str 4 assault 3 gun and can be taken in a unit up to 30. Points/range/dps wise it's not really comparable. We have one unit that can buff/heal Termigaunts to reroll 1's to hit and replace up to 10 dead basic weapons per turn but he costs 250+pts and dies fairly easily to heavy weapons.
slobulous wrote: Guys, conscripts don't have to be nerfed if you are willing to take them under the Valhallan regiment.
They have a Relic bolt pistol called "Pietrov's Mk 45" which has the following ability:
" Friendly VALHALLAN units within 6" of the bearer can never lose more than one model as a result of any single failed morale test"
Problem solved. Conscripts shall live forever!!!!!!!
You can also use the 2 CP stratagem or even the 1CP guard stratagem to reduce it to a d3. Or you can make the commissar your warlord and get his kick butt warlord trait.
Its the rest of the guard that commissars are screwed for, which most likely was the opposite of GW's intent.
Conscripts are the problem. Nerf conscripts.
To be fair Commissars were a wee bit too good for their points cost. Let's not try to deny here that we functionally had the best morale mechanic in the game tied to an aura ability on a 31 pt model who had the "cost" of shooting one of the cheapest infantry models in the game any time you wanted to use him with a squad.
Commissars did deserve a nerf, they just didn't deserve this.
Orks get their LD to be their unit count. Most other armies don't care about LD because they're elites running in tiny minimum size squads. My marines will at their worst have a 10% chance of losing their last man in a 5 man squad, and that's rare. Them whining about how morale doesn't effect IG is hypocritical, because it doesn't effect most of them either. Ultramarines should never lose a man, because they've got LD 9. You have to lose all 4 guys, then roll two sixes in a row.
Tyranids can't hide all their synapse stuff like IG can, if I want synapse gone I can drop the big bugs pretty quickly. I'm sure there's some smaller stuff that can blend in but it's nowhere near as cheap or as spammable as Commissars were. At the very least they're nowhere near as easy to hide from snipers, considering the commissar is a single human model and can be hidden with even a single chimera or corner of a building. I'm no Nid expert but I don't recall ever having an issue shutting down synapse in 8th.
Orks have a pretty good mechanic, but it still has a counter built in, since if you can gut a couple of boyz mobs they start to fall apart. Conscript mobs, or infantry squad gunlines, were basically fighting at almost full effect because it didn't matter if you had 30 guys or 3, the commissar still worked, still did his job, and the main utility of IG units was just surviving long enough to screen and then make mad dashes for objectives. Shutting down a commissar basically boiled down to "do you have snipers, is the IG player an idiot leaving his commissar in the open, and do you roll hot enough to knock them all out in time?" or plan B "do you have enough dakka to just kill the infantry outright?" Because you weren't dropping in behind him, you certainly weren't getting to him on a 1st turn assault unless the IG player was a moron, and you weren't very likely to catch him with shenanigans like snipers and pyschic abilities.
Space marines being forced to play 5 man squads to ignore morale isn't a great point either, you've basically made it where no one will run full 10 man squads (or black templar Crusader 20 man units) because the more people they have the worse morale can affect them. A 10 man space marine squad that lost say 6 marines was far more likely to have men run than a 10 man IG squad with commissar support was. Yes Ultramarines are LD 9 but that still doesn't account for the fact that most marines were more cowardly than guardsmen with the old commissar rules, which is kind of ridiculous.
IG on the other hand could lose 48 men in the shooting phase with old commissar, and still guarantee only 1 more died to morale. All on a dirt cheap character that was easy to spam across the army and could be hidden incredibly easy if you had even the faintest idea of how to play. I'm sorry but I've watched all of these other amies in action in 8th and none of them held a candle to what a commissar could do. He was basically letting you use "insane bravery" on every unit except instead of paying 2 CP's you were paying 3-4pts per guardsman.
Keep in mind,I agree that the nerf on commissars went too far. I think it's a bit BS as well, but you can't sit here and tell me that the original commissar at 31pt was at any point the appropriate price for him. His massive utility alone should have put him in the 50-60pt range. Properly utilized, he could save 10-20 regular guardsmen a turn, easily double to triple that in conscripts, and deny multiple killpoints. Had he been say 1 wound, or in the 50pt range, he wouldn't have been near as insane as he was. The main issue though was that there was no counter to a commissar that was reasonable. Snipers were hilariously ineffective, fear abilities like Night Lords had no effect, and casualties had no impact either regardless of how bad they were. There was no counterplay, no strategy, no tactics, just a "hope you brought snipers bro" and that's it.
Give the commissar something like "Execute a model, you count as rolling a 1 for your battleshock test" for example, and it would've been a far more interesting and fair rule. You still get a very effective morale buff, it helps professional infantry like vets and infantry squads quite a bit, and still helps conscripts some but doesn't make them fearless. Having it as "kill 1 guy, auto pass" was just insanely good and seems to fly in the face of GW's entire philosophy of how they wanted morale to work in 8th.
slobulous wrote: Guys, conscripts don't have to be nerfed if you are willing to take them under the Valhallan regiment.
They have a Relic bolt pistol called "Pietrov's Mk 45" which has the following ability:
" Friendly VALHALLAN units within 6" of the bearer can never lose more than one model as a result of any single failed morale test"
Problem solved. Conscripts shall live forever!!!!!!!
My Gawd. He is right. Take a Patrol detachment, put in a commisar HQ and a couple squads of conscripts! This isnt great nor efficent for soup lists, but this very much allows me to keep my Commisar and meatbags charging!!! HOORAH!
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I still don't understand why the nerfed commisars, they should have just added this onto consripts Raw Recruits Rule: due to the iron dicipline of the guard not properly drilled into the unit the Commissars Summary Execution does not work on this unit.
Or lessen it: Models in this unit halve their losses to moral.
Perfectly reasonable and still keeps the commissars' abilities for the rest of the army fully functional. And I must say, I have yet to see anyone complain how commissars worked on regular infantry squads, so with some people trying to bait and switch and retroactively be apologetic for it makes no sense to me.
I am not too concerned about commisars being "meh" for conscripts as I don't really run conscripts outside of lols fun matches. Though I am happy to see that there still is a way for others to play it. I'm super sad to see all the IG players and armies which will never use the commissar again.
IG on the other hand could lose 48 men in the shooting phase with old commissar, and still guarantee only 1 more died to morale.
Are those men all from the same squad? If so, the Commissar is only saving 2 men.
MrMoustaffa wrote: All on a dirt cheap character that was easy to spam across the army and could be hidden incredibly easy if you had even the faintest idea of how to play. I'm sorry but I've watched all of these other amies in action in 8th and none of them held a candle to what a commissar could do. He was basically letting you use "insane bravery" on every unit except instead of paying 2 CP's you were paying 3-4pts per guardsman.
If you're paying 3-4pts per guardsman, then you're basically doubling the cost of your squads (before special/heavy weapons) yet getting no increase in firepower.
Surely there's a argument to be made that, outside of Conscripts, you'd be better off just spending those points on more squads and letting morale take its course?
Keep in mind,I agree that the nerf on commissars went too far. I think it's a bit BS as well, but you can't sit here and tell me that the original commissar at 31pt was at any point the appropriate price for him. His massive utility alone should have put him in the 50-60pt range.
Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree with this. Outside of Conscripts, Commissars weren't worth anything like that amount. And the increase in cost of Commissar Lords would have given people even less reason to ever take them.
Put simply, no, they din't save anywhere near enough men to be worth that sort of cost.
Also, I have to raise my eyebrow at 'massive utility'. He does literally one thing - helps with morale. That's it. If you want utility, take a Company Commander or a psyker.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Properly utilized, he could save 10-20 regular guardsmen a turn
Yeah, sorry, I'm going to call bull on this. You'd be lucky if multiple Commissars saved that many men in an entire game.
Give the commissar something like "Execute a model, you count as rolling a 1 for your battleshock test" for example, and it would've been a far more interesting and fair rule. You still get a very effective morale buff, it helps professional infantry like vets and infantry squads quite a bit, and still helps conscripts some but doesn't make them fearless. Having it as "kill 1 guy, auto pass" was just insanely good and seems to fly in the face of GW's entire philosophy of how they wanted morale to work in 8th.
MrMoustaffa wrote: The main issue though was that there was no counter to a commissar that was reasonable. Snipers were hilariously ineffective, fear abilities like Night Lords had no effect, and casualties had no impact either regardless of how bad they were. There was no counterplay, no strategy, no tactics, just a "hope you brought snipers bro" and that's it.
The problem with Commissars is that is forces the opponents hand, as they knew, 100% of the time, they would not be able to burn down the squad using additional casualties due to morale.
I,e, after a certain base load of casualties (Ld) it becomes a case of additional casualties + D6 in addition wounds.
Now there isn't a guarantee, so the opponents may find it worthwhile to focus fire.
In a roundabout way.. this does mean the conscripts have become a bit more of a fire magnet... which is a good thing
Tyranids can't hide all their synapse stuff like IG can, if I want synapse gone I can drop the big bugs pretty quickly. I'm sure there's some smaller stuff that can blend in but it's nowhere near as cheap or as spammable as Commissars were. At the very least they're nowhere near as easy to hide from snipers, considering the commissar is a single human model and can be hidden with even a single chimera or corner of a building. I'm no Nid expert but I don't recall ever having an issue shutting down synapse in 8th.
Orks have a pretty good mechanic, but it still has a counter built in, since if you can gut a couple of boyz mobs they start to fall apart. Conscript mobs, or infantry squad gunlines, were basically fighting at almost full effect because it didn't matter if you had 30 guys or 3, the commissar still worked, still did his job, and the main utility of IG units was just surviving long enough to screen and then make mad dashes for objectives. Shutting down a commissar basically boiled down to "do you have snipers, is the IG player an idiot leaving his commissar in the open, and do you roll hot enough to knock them all out in time?" or plan B "do you have enough dakka to just kill the infantry outright?" Because you weren't dropping in behind him, you certainly weren't getting to him on a 1st turn assault unless the IG player was a moron, and you weren't very likely to catch him with shenanigans like snipers and pyschic abilities.
Space marines being forced to play 5 man squads to ignore morale isn't a great point either, you've basically made it where no one will run full 10 man squads (or black templar Crusader 20 man units) because the more people they have the worse morale can affect them. A 10 man space marine squad that lost say 6 marines was far more likely to have men run than a 10 man IG squad with commissar support was. Yes Ultramarines are LD 9 but that still doesn't account for the fact that most marines were more cowardly than guardsmen with the old commissar rules, which is kind of ridiculous.
IG on the other hand could lose 48 men in the shooting phase with old commissar, and still guarantee only 1 more died to morale. All on a dirt cheap character that was easy to spam across the army and could be hidden incredibly easy if you had even the faintest idea of how to play. I'm sorry but I've watched all of these other amies in action in 8th and none of them held a candle to what a commissar could do. He was basically letting you use "insane bravery" on every unit except instead of paying 2 CP's you were paying 3-4pts per guardsman.
Keep in mind,I agree that the nerf on commissars went too far. I think it's a bit BS as well, but you can't sit here and tell me that the original commissar at 31pt was at any point the appropriate price for him. His massive utility alone should have put him in the 50-60pt range. Properly utilized, he could save 10-20 regular guardsmen a turn, easily double to triple that in conscripts, and deny multiple killpoints. Had he been say 1 wound, or in the 50pt range, he wouldn't have been near as insane as he was. The main issue though was that there was no counter to a commissar that was reasonable. Snipers were hilariously ineffective, fear abilities like Night Lords had no effect, and casualties had no impact either regardless of how bad they were. There was no counterplay, no strategy, no tactics, just a "hope you brought snipers bro" and that's it.
Give the commissar something like "Execute a model, you count as rolling a 1 for your battleshock test" for example, and it would've been a far more interesting and fair rule. You still get a very effective morale buff, it helps professional infantry like vets and infantry squads quite a bit, and still helps conscripts some but doesn't make them fearless. Having it as "kill 1 guy, auto pass" was just insanely good and seems to fly in the face of GW's entire philosophy of how they wanted morale to work in 8th.
malamis wrote: I'm rather pleased at the concept of Grinding Advance Russ Annihlators; even if they have rendered the Vanquisher completely redundant now.
Too bad they cant be Tank Commanders
I don't have either of the books on me right now, but couldn't you just buy a tank commander and pay for the twin-linked lascannon? Or did they put the entry in for the annihilator as a distinct tank?
malamis wrote: I'm rather pleased at the concept of Grinding Advance Russ Annihlators; even if they have rendered the Vanquisher completely redundant now.
Too bad they cant be Tank Commanders
I don't have either of the books on me right now, but couldn't you just buy a tank commander and pay for the twin-linked lascannon? Or did they put the entry in for the annihilator as a distinct tank?
The Annihilator, like the Conqueror, is its own entry.
That may change in the future, but even so, the Tank Commander entry is clear about what guns the Tank Commander can have.
Tsol wrote: I am hoping they change their stance on commissars in short order. If not, I don't think I'll see them in my opponents lists until 9th edition when they rework the moral system again.
I can't wait for them to nerf the Iyanden trait that does exactly what Summary Execution did.
Colonel Cross wrote: I seriously tried a melee force. Granted it was against death guard. I still won, but only because our tanks are beasts now. Even fighting against T3 poxwalkers my Catachans barely did anything.
Don't feel bad, in multiple games I've charged Poxwalkers with a near full unit of Bloodletters and a near full unit of Genestealers and lost both of those combats.....and I wasn't even rolling that badly
Razerous wrote: What are the Annihilator and Conqueror again?
The Leman Russ Annihilator is the LRBT version of the Predator Annihilator (twin lascannons in the turret, for a total of 5 lascannon blasts from an LRBT that moves half speed or less).
The Leman Russ Conqueror is an LRBT with a cut-down battlecannon, giving it slightly shorter range but making it more accurate and faster.
Colonel Cross wrote: I seriously tried a melee force. Granted it was against death guard. I still won, but only because our tanks are beasts now. Even fighting against T3 poxwalkers my Catachans barely did anything.
Don't feel bad, in multiple games I've charged Poxwalkers with a near full unit of Bloodletters and a near full unit of Genestealers and lost both of those combats.....and I wasn't even rolling that badly
Just to clarify, with the typical buffs, how tough are pox walkers?
malamis wrote: I'm rather pleased at the concept of Grinding Advance Russ Annihlators; even if they have rendered the Vanquisher completely redundant now.
Too bad they cant be Tank Commanders
I don't have either of the books on me right now, but couldn't you just buy a tank commander and pay for the twin-linked lascannon? Or did they put the entry in for the annihilator as a distinct tank?
The Annihilator, like the Conqueror, is its own entry.
That may change in the future, but even so, the Tank Commander entry is clear about what guns the Tank Commander can have.
I don't understand how FW and GW can feth up basic things like writing unit entries in the same manner. If we're going to use the absolutely fethed up method they're using nowadays for wargear, might as well stick to one method.
How hard would it have been to simply add "Twin-linked lascannon - XXpts" in the wargear section, or "Conqueror Battle Cannon - XXpts"? Honestly.
malamis wrote: I'm rather pleased at the concept of Grinding Advance Russ Annihlators; even if they have rendered the Vanquisher completely redundant now.
Too bad they cant be Tank Commanders
I don't have either of the books on me right now, but couldn't you just buy a tank commander and pay for the twin-linked lascannon? Or did they put the entry in for the annihilator as a distinct tank?
The Annihilator, like the Conqueror, is its own entry.
That may change in the future, but even so, the Tank Commander entry is clear about what guns the Tank Commander can have.
I don't understand how FW and GW can feth up basic things like writing unit entries in the same manner. If we're going to use the absolutely fethed up method they're using nowadays for wargear, might as well stick to one method.
How hard would it have been to simply add "Twin-linked lascannon - XXpts" in the wargear section, or "Conqueror Battle Cannon - XXpts"? Honestly.
/rant
Yes, this I agree with.
I love what Forge World does and I utilize a lot of their models, but I do regret that they miss the boat oftentimes on combining entries with the GW team.
So now that the Annihilator and Conqueror have been updated let us vigorously hash out which LR variant + regiment is the best. Sure it will depend on situation, but I'm thinking a Catachan Conqueror is the ultimate LR in terms of firepower. You don't need a commander as you have re-rolls at 24", and you re-roll number of shots. You also can easily put out high volume of fire with double stormbolters and heavy bolters, making it double as a mini punisher.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Tyranids can't hide all their synapse stuff like IG can, if I want synapse gone I can drop the big bugs pretty quickly. I'm sure there's some smaller stuff that can blend in but it's nowhere near as cheap or as spammable as Commissars were. At the very least they're nowhere near as easy to hide from snipers, considering the commissar is a single human model and can be hidden with even a single chimera or corner of a building. I'm no Nid expert but I don't recall ever having an issue shutting down synapse in 8th.
Tyranid Primes can be hidden. Warriors and Zoanthropes come in units.
And let's not forget that you can park Venomthropes nearby for a sweet, sweet -1 to Hit.
Otto von Bludd wrote: So now that the Annihilator and Conqueror have been updated let us vigorously hash out which LR variant + regiment is the best. Sure it will depend on situation, but I'm thinking a Catachan Conqueror is the ultimate LR in terms of firepower. You don't need a commander as you have re-rolls at 24", and you re-roll number of shots. You also can easily put out high volume of fire with double stormbolters and heavy bolters, making it double as a mini punisher.
This is my current plan. Catachan Leman Russ Conqueror with just the heavy bolter and co-axial SB, 165p.
Taking two of those, two earthshakers, and a warlord 5+/5+ command point for a detachment to help my Mechanicus.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Tyranids can't hide all their synapse stuff like IG can, if I want synapse gone I can drop the big bugs pretty quickly. I'm sure there's some smaller stuff that can blend in but it's nowhere near as cheap or as spammable as Commissars were. At the very least they're nowhere near as easy to hide from snipers, considering the commissar is a single human model and can be hidden with even a single chimera or corner of a building. I'm no Nid expert but I don't recall ever having an issue shutting down synapse in 8th.
Tyranid Primes can be hidden. Warriors and Zoanthropes come in units.
And let's not forget that you can park Venomthropes nearby for a sweet, sweet -1 to Hit.
Broodlords can hide as well as can Malanthropes
Venomthropes -1 to hit only effects infantry so it pairs nicely with warriors and that's about it. They can't keep up with Genestealers move plus advance speed, and Tyranid players aren't going to spend 90 points on venoms to keep 40 points of hormagaunts or termagaunts alive.
Quick Question can Astropaths deny the witch on a 2D6 and manifest powers other than Smite on a 2d6? It seems like it should be 1d6 given their cost but the Rule clearly states when manifesting Smite.
Razerous wrote: What are the Annihilator and Conqueror again?
The Leman Russ Annihilator is the LRBT version of the Predator Annihilator (twin lascannons in the turret, for a total of 5 lascannon blasts from an LRBT that moves half speed or less).
The Leman Russ Conqueror is an LRBT with a cut-down battlecannon, giving it slightly shorter range but making it more accurate and faster.
Cheers.. how much more accurate, I assume that is the co-ax heavy stubber?
malamis wrote: I'm rather pleased at the concept of Grinding Advance Russ Annihlators; even if they have rendered the Vanquisher completely redundant now.
Too bad they cant be Tank Commanders
I don't have either of the books on me right now, but couldn't you just buy a tank commander and pay for the twin-linked lascannon? Or did they put the entry in for the annihilator as a distinct tank?
The Annihilator, like the Conqueror, is its own entry.
That may change in the future, but even so, the Tank Commander entry is clear about what guns the Tank Commander can have.
I don't understand how FW and GW can feth up basic things like writing unit entries in the same manner. If we're going to use the absolutely fethed up method they're using nowadays for wargear, might as well stick to one method.
How hard would it have been to simply add "Twin-linked lascannon - XXpts" in the wargear section, or "Conqueror Battle Cannon - XXpts"? Honestly.
/rant
Yes, this I agree with.
I love what Forge World does and I utilize a lot of their models, but I do regret that they miss the boat oftentimes on combining entries with the GW team.
I like FW models, but their rules utterly suck almost entirely across the board. Have you ever cracked open the chaos index?
Automatically Appended Next Post: I'll clarify that by suck I mean all over the place. Some things will make your friends enemies while others are written so poorly and sloppily that it is hard to even use them correctly.
Razerous wrote: What are the Annihilator and Conqueror again?
The Leman Russ Annihilator is the LRBT version of the Predator Annihilator (twin lascannons in the turret, for a total of 5 lascannon blasts from an LRBT that moves half speed or less).
The Leman Russ Conqueror is an LRBT with a cut-down battlecannon, giving it slightly shorter range but making it more accurate and faster.
Cheers.. how much more accurate, I assume that is the co-ax heavy stubber?
Co-ax storm bolter, but yes, if you fire that at the same target as the main armament, the main armament re-rolls its to-hit rolls. It's THAT good.
Razerous wrote: What are the Annihilator and Conqueror again?
The Leman Russ Annihilator is the LRBT version of the Predator Annihilator (twin lascannons in the turret, for a total of 5 lascannon blasts from an LRBT that moves half speed or less).
The Leman Russ Conqueror is an LRBT with a cut-down battlecannon, giving it slightly shorter range but making it more accurate and faster.
Cheers.. how much more accurate, I assume that is the co-ax heavy stubber?
Co-ax storm bolter, but yes, if you fire that at the same target as the main armament, the main armament re-rolls its to-hit rolls. It's THAT good.
oh bejesus. That combined with catachans could force a complete rethink of the army. I mean... that's really good.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Tyranids can't hide all their synapse stuff like IG can, if I want synapse gone I can drop the big bugs pretty quickly. I'm sure there's some smaller stuff that can blend in but it's nowhere near as cheap or as spammable as Commissars were. At the very least they're nowhere near as easy to hide from snipers, considering the commissar is a single human model and can be hidden with even a single chimera or corner of a building. I'm no Nid expert but I don't recall ever having an issue shutting down synapse in 8th.
Tyranid Primes can be hidden. Warriors and Zoanthropes come in units.
And let's not forget that you can park Venomthropes nearby for a sweet, sweet -1 to Hit.
Broodlords can be hidden as well.
Something else to consider is that, whilst these units are indeed more expensive than Commissars, they also contribute far more to the battle. Commissars basically do one thing and one thing only - stop units running. other than that, they can maybe bring a Bolter.
A Tyranid Prime can wield an Assault Heavy Bolter, can have 5 attacks with S5 AP-2 melee weapons, and gives all Warriors +1 to hit.
A Broodlord is practically a monstrous creature in terms of melee ability. It has 6 S5 AP-3 Dd3 attacks, rerolls failed to-wound rolls and any to-wound rolls of 6+ are resolved at AP-6 and do 3 damage. It also gives nearby genestealers +1 to hit and is a psyker to boot. Oh, and like genestealers it can charge after Advancing.
They're also considerably tougher than Commissars, having T5, 6 wounds apiece with a 3+ save and a 4+/5+ save on the Prime and Broodlord, respectively.
Otto von Bludd wrote: So now that the Annihilator and Conqueror have been updated let us vigorously hash out which LR variant + regiment is the best. Sure it will depend on situation, but I'm thinking a Catachan Conqueror is the ultimate LR in terms of firepower. You don't need a commander as you have re-rolls at 24", and you re-roll number of shots. You also can easily put out high volume of fire with double stormbolters and heavy bolters, making it double as a mini punisher.
Trying to catch up on this thread, when did the Conqueror get updated to the new Grinding Advance rules? That's seriously awesome, they're already my fav tank before and now they can shoot twice and re-roll to hit if you catch someone with the storm bolter!
Razerous wrote: What are the Annihilator and Conqueror again?
The Leman Russ Annihilator is the LRBT version of the Predator Annihilator (twin lascannons in the turret, for a total of 5 lascannon blasts from an LRBT that moves half speed or less).
The Leman Russ Conqueror is an LRBT with a cut-down battlecannon, giving it slightly shorter range but making it more accurate and faster.
Cheers.. how much more accurate, I assume that is the co-ax heavy stubber?
Co-ax storm bolter, but yes, if you fire that at the same target as the main armament, the main armament re-rolls its to-hit rolls. It's THAT good.
oh bejesus. That combined with catachans could force a complete rethink of the army. I mean... that's really good.
36" range? 165pts ish you say?
It's a 48" battle cannon, if you HIT with the coaxial storm bolter (24" range) then you get to re-roll, but it really suits my style of play so I love them.
IG on the other hand could lose 48 men in the shooting phase with old commissar, and still guarantee only 1 more died to morale.
Are those men all from the same squad? If so, the Commissar is only saving 2 men.
MrMoustaffa wrote: All on a dirt cheap character that was easy to spam across the army and could be hidden incredibly easy if you had even the faintest idea of how to play. I'm sorry but I've watched all of these other amies in action in 8th and none of them held a candle to what a commissar could do. He was basically letting you use "insane bravery" on every unit except instead of paying 2 CP's you were paying 3-4pts per guardsman.
If you're paying 3-4pts per guardsman, then you're basically doubling the cost of your squads (before special/heavy weapons) yet getting no increase in firepower.
Surely there's a argument to be made that, outside of Conscripts, you'd be better off just spending those points on more squads and letting morale take its course?
Keep in mind,I agree that the nerf on commissars went too far. I think it's a bit BS as well, but you can't sit here and tell me that the original commissar at 31pt was at any point the appropriate price for him. His massive utility alone should have put him in the 50-60pt range.
Yeah, I'm going to have to disagree with this. Outside of Conscripts, Commissars weren't worth anything like that amount. And the increase in cost of Commissar Lords would have given people even less reason to ever take them.
Put simply, no, they din't save anywhere near enough men to be worth that sort of cost.
Also, I have to raise my eyebrow at 'massive utility'. He does literally one thing - helps with morale. That's it. If you want utility, take a Company Commander or a psyker.
Right so I need to clarify a bit, posting at 4 AM is a heck of a drug. Hope I don't come across as pissy or anything, I'm basically just going to disagree with you a bit here and explain myself better. Keep in mind I run infantry squad spam IG right now, so when I talk about how commissars work, it's usually with anywhere from 10-15 Infantry squads running around and, depending on how annoying my opponent is, conscripts on top of that. Essentially the perfect storm for a commissar and any other morale mechanic. I knew how to abuse the absolute feth out of Commissars in my area and they were pretty thoroughly hated by everyone I knew. Even brand new players could tell after the first turn that commissars were stupidly powerful.
#1: Yes, he was only saving two men, or in the case of a 50 man conscript squad, one. But you only need one with objective secured to hold an objective and win a game. Every IG player out there should know the value of keeping a few men alive here and there. This can be the difference in first blood, a killpoint, or denying a maelstom mission that involves destroying units. Especially infantry squads which will lead into number 2
#2 Sorry, I worded this badly. What I should have typed is "Except instead of spending 2 CP's, you spend 3-4 pts to pop a guardsman instead." Basically what I'm arguing is the commissar ability let you spam "Insane Bravery" multiple times a turn for at worst maybe 20-30pts worth of models. That is huge. I cannot tell you how powerful that is in an infantry squad list. I basically guarantee that my lascannons and plasma guns will fight to the very end, and an opponent HAS to kill me down to one model or wipe the unit to prevent that. An infantry squad could lose 8 wounds, fail the test, and still have a lascannon firing at full effect into the next turn, or hold an objective, or just even have a random guardsman charge a vehicle to tie it up. That is massive. Mechanically you're getting 10 or so "free" command points a turn to spam Insane Bravery, and you even got to ignore the "once per turn" limit strategems have in matched play. This leads me into point number 3
#3 Commissars could save a massive amount of points in infantry (at least in the mind of an IG player) every turn. Take the infantry squad example. With the old commissar rules, that could save a 20pt lascannon and give me another turn to fire with it, with 0 CP investment. I now have a spare command point to merge that lascannon into another squad, both denying a kill point for those kind of missions and ensuring that I continue to fire that weapon. So in a single turn with that one example, I've essentially saved 28pts, allowed a lascannon another crucial shot, and denied a killpoint. In one single action, the commissar has essentially paid for himself. Now take into account that this aura can affect everything around him. Depending on line of sight and what your opponent has they may not be able to wipe every single unit like they want to, so you can end up with 2 or 3 squads like this in any given turn. All with their firepower essentially unchanged, all still holding their objectives, all still denying their kill points. A single well placed commissar with a clever player could save well over a hundred points of infantry in a game with a little luck and proper positioning. This is of course ignoring things like conscripts, where a unit could take say 16 casualties and yet still have 13 left at the end of the phase, meaning that commissar saved 39pts worth of models in a single morale phase for a single unit. In that case, even counting the conscript the commissar shot, he was making a 5pt profit, essentially giving the IG player a free extra 5pts in his list.
This becomes doubly important in assault, as keeping these infantry alive prevents an assault player from getting as perfect of a consolidation as he would if he wipes the unit. Inevitably a few will have to go around the survivors and lose a couple of inches in movement. If you're clever enough to countercharge properly, and you can do this, you can potentially tie up units like Beserkers or Genestealers going into the opponents turn. So long as one guardsman stands, and the enemy unit doesn't have a "fall back and charge again" rule, you've stolen that unit's initiative and drastically cut down it's threat radius. In an instance like this yes, mechanically the commissar only saved maybe one or two guardsman, but strategically he could save massive swathes of your army. Yes he's dangerously close to the enemy unit you countercharged, but if you're an infantry player you should have more than one running around. Not to mention they're so cheap it's really not a big deal to sacrifice one here and there if the infantry he's supposed to watch over have been destroyed.
This was the true value of commissars that people rarely mention, Commissars essentially gave you extra guardsmen by ignoring the morale mechanic. Any given turn, you were saving far more men than you shot, men who would've ran otherwise, which meant even a 40pt infantry squad was in reality fighting like it had 50, potentially 60pts worth of guardsmen in it. In an army built from the ground up to wear down it's opponent by attrition, this is absolutely massive. You are getting more lascannon shots, more plasma shots, holding onto ground longer, every turn of every game. He was like a space marine banner except more consistent, on top of the fact that he let the model live to continue fighting. Not to mention what I said earlier about it literally being "insane bravery" for a paltry cost of points instead of CP's, and the fact that it could be used army wide, and it gave out LD 8, and it could be hidden, all for the hilariously low price of 31pts. Commissars would've been worth every point at 50pts guaranteed, possibly even more, it's just the higher you go the more he becomes a dedicated infantry list unit only. I can see a tank player with only one or two conscript screens balking at the idea of a 50pt commissar but any infantry player worth his salt knew that Commissars were your most powerful tool in your army and would still buy them in a heartbeat. They were that good.
And again, just to reiterate, I'm very annoyed about the commisar change too, probably more than anyone else here as I own 15 of the things. But I cannot sit here with a straight face and even remotely try to act like commissars weren't an issue in and of themselves. They were bar none the most powerful morale mechanic in the game and put 1,000 year old space knights, unkillable space skeletons, unending hordes of greenskins, 10,000 year old space hell marines, and many other horrors of the galaxy to shame by simply having a guy in a fancy hat with a bolt pistol.
Right so I need to clarify a bit, posting at 4 AM is a heck of a drug. Hope I don't come across as pissy or anything, I'm basically just going to disagree with you a bit here and explain myself better.
No worries.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Keep in mind I run infantry squad spam IG right now, so when I talk about how commissars work, it's usually with anywhere from 10-15 Infantry squads running around and, depending on how annoying my opponent is, conscripts on top of that. Essentially the perfect storm for a commissar and any other morale mechanic. I knew how to abuse the absolute feth out of Commissars in my area and they were pretty thoroughly hated by everyone I knew. Even brand new players could tell after the first turn that commissars were stupidly powerful.
Is there any chance you could post your armies?
I like playing Infantry armies myself and am always keen to see what others are running in that regard.
#1: Yes, he was only saving two men, or in the case of a 50 man conscript squad, one. But you only need one with objective secured to hold an objective and win a game. Every IG player out there should know the value of keeping a few men alive here and there. This can be the difference in first blood, a killpoint, or denying a maelstom mission that involves destroying units. Especially infantry squads which will lead into number 2
Granted, but when a Commissar can buy you 10 more Conscripts, saving just 2 doesn't really seem to be earning his keep.
I bring it up mainly because you talked about Commissars in terms of how many points they could save.
#2 Sorry, I worded this badly. What I should have typed is "Except instead of spending 2 CP's, you spend 3-4 pts to pop a guardsman instead." Basically what I'm arguing is the commissar ability let you spam "Insane Bravery" multiple times a turn for at worst maybe 20-30pts worth of models. That is huge. I cannot tell you how powerful that is in an infantry squad list. I basically guarantee that my lascannons and plasma guns will fight to the very end, and an opponent HAS to kill me down to one model or wipe the unit to prevent that. An infantry squad could lose 8 wounds, fail the test, and still have a lascannon firing at full effect into the next turn, or hold an objective, or just even have a random guardsman charge a vehicle to tie it up. That is massive. Mechanically you're getting 10 or so "free" command points a turn to spam Insane Bravery, and you even got to ignore the "once per turn" limit strategems have in matched play.
To be fair, Insane Bravery doesn't cost you points (not many points, but still), nor does it kill one of your models anyway. The latter is quite important, since if a squad is down to just the plasmagun and lascannon, insane bravery would let you keep both, whilst the Commissar only lets you keep one of them.
More than that though, does this not illustrate how impractical Insane Bravery and such would be for an IG army? Even with the considerable number of CPs we can get, we'd basically have to spend our entire allowance each turn. Does that not illustrate how impractical the standard tools would be for us?
#3 Commissars could save a massive amount of points in infantry (at least in the mind of an IG player) every turn. Take the infantry squad example. With the old commissar rules, that could save a 20pt lascannon and give me another turn to fire with it, with 0 CP investment. I now have a spare command point to merge that lascannon into another squad, both denying a kill point for those kind of missions and ensuring that I continue to fire that weapon. So in a single turn with that one example, I've essentially saved 28pts, allowed a lascannon another crucial shot, and denied a killpoint. In one single action, the commissar has essentially paid for himself. Now take into account that this aura can affect everything around him. Depending on line of sight and what your opponent has they may not be able to wipe every single unit like they want to, so you can end up with 2 or 3 squads like this in any given turn. All with their firepower essentially unchanged, all still holding their objectives, all still denying their kill points. A single well placed commissar with a clever player could save well over a hundred points of infantry in a game with a little luck and proper positioning. This is of course ignoring things like conscripts, where a unit could take say 16 casualties and yet still have 13 left at the end of the phase, meaning that commissar saved 39pts worth of models in a single morale phase for a single unit. In that case, even counting the conscript the commissar shot, he was making a 5pt profit, essentially giving the IG player a free extra 5pts in his list.
Again though, does this not illustrate the problem with morale for guard?
Let's say that your Commissar saves your plasmagun and lascannon. That comes to 35pts (including the guardsmen holding them), out of a ~67pt squad. So let's say that he's saved half the squad (in pts). Okay, sure, that's a good deal.
However, if you take the Commissar out of the equation, then that squad is losing half its pts to morale. In fact, once we factor in the Commissar's Ld and the man he executed, the squad has actually lost 43pts to morale. So it's actually lost 2/3 of its cost just to morale. Is that any more reasonable?
I think we either have to look at this differently (assuming a squad's cost is spread evenly), or else admit that morale is really screwy. with or without Commissars.
This becomes doubly important in assault, as keeping these infantry alive prevents an assault player from getting as perfect of a consolidation as he would if he wipes the unit. Inevitably a few will have to go around the survivors and lose a couple of inches in movement. If you're clever enough to countercharge properly, and you can do this, you can potentially tie up units like Beserkers or Genestealers going into the opponents turn. So long as one guardsman stands, and the enemy unit doesn't have a "fall back and charge again" rule, you've stolen that unit's initiative and drastically cut down it's threat radius. In an instance like this yes, mechanically the commissar only saved maybe one or two guardsman, but strategically he could save massive swathes of your army. Yes he's dangerously close to the enemy unit you countercharged, but if you're an infantry player you should have more than one running around. Not to mention they're so cheap it's really not a big deal to sacrifice one here and there if the infantry he's supposed to watch over have been destroyed.
It's possible, but outside of Conscripts (which I think we've all agreed were an issue), I've yet to see an Infantry Squad survive an assault from Beserkers or Genestealersin the first place.
This was the true value of commissars that people rarely mention, Commissars essentially gave you extra guardsmen by ignoring the morale mechanic. Any given turn, you were saving far more men than you shot, men who would've ran otherwise, which meant even a 40pt infantry squad was in reality fighting like it had 50, potentially 60pts worth of guardsmen in it. In an army built from the ground up to wear down it's opponent by attrition, this is absolutely massive. You are getting more lascannon shots, more plasma shots, holding onto ground longer, every turn of every game. He was like a space marine banner except more consistent, on top of the fact that he let the model live to continue fighting. Not to mention what I said earlier about it literally being "insane bravery" for a paltry cost of points instead of CP's, and the fact that it could be used army wide, and it gave out LD 8, and it could be hidden, all for the hilariously low price of 31pts. Commissars would've been worth every point at 50pts guaranteed, possibly even more, it's just the higher you go the more he becomes a dedicated infantry list unit only. I can see a tank player with only one or two conscript screens balking at the idea of a 50pt commissar but any infantry player worth his salt knew that Commissars were your most powerful tool in your army and would still buy them in a heartbeat. They were that good.
As above though, this logic also applies to morale when Commissars aren't present. it means that an opponent can kill just 1/3 of a squad's value and have the other 2/3 melt to morale. Is that really a more reasonable situation?
And again, just to reiterate, I'm very annoyed about the commisar change too, probably more than anyone else here as I own 15 of the things. But I cannot sit here with a straight face and even remotely try to act like commissars weren't an issue in and of themselves. They were bar none the most powerful morale mechanic in the game and put 1,000 year old space knights, unkillable space skeletons, unending hordes of greenskins, 10,000 year old space hell marines, and many other horrors of the galaxy to shame by simply having a guy in a fancy hat with a bolt pistol.
I don't see how you can call them the most powerful morale mechanic in the game. Perhaps the most cost-effective (since they basically did morale and nothing else) or the best with respect to their army, but Synapse was still better.
Regardless, I do agree with what you said earlier - that 'kill a model to count a failed morale test as having rolled a 1' would be a better mechanic. It would hurt Conscripts while leaving other Infantry largely unchanged. However, it would also allow other factors to enter in - such as Ld debuffs.
Are inquistors basically the new commissars now? 55pts for a LD 10 bubble plus smite is just epic! Now we need to look for an alternate source of LD buff these guys seem to outshine commissars by a long way in my opinion.
DoomMouse wrote: Are inquistors basically the new commissars now? 55pts for a LD 10 bubble plus smite is just epic! Now we need to look for an alternate source of LD buff these guys seem to outshine commissars by a long way in my opinion.
I think Inquisitors are only Ld9.
Regardless, the main issue that I see is that they're not Astra Militarum units. Nor are they included in the list of exceptions. So if you take one in a regular detachment then you'll lose both your Objective Secured bonus and your Regimental Doctrine.
Hence, they'll need their own dedicated detachment - which means either forking out more points to take some other stuff with the Inquisitor or else sacrificing a Command Point.
Then again, I suppose if you have excess HQs or Elites who can't benefit from doctrines anyway (Primaris Psykers, Tech priests etc.), then you could always put those in a Supreme Command or Vanguard detachment with one or more Inquisitors.
If you can fit in (min.) 165 points for a Supreme Command Detachment you could get 3 Inquisitors with bolt pistol/chainsword + Smite/1 Telethesia psychic power.
it is so trivially easy to fill out a supreme command detachment that you really don't need to care too much about how an HQ would effect your army. You have a bunch of HQs that get nothing from being in regiments.
Blacksails wrote: I don't understand how FW and GW can feth up basic things like writing unit entries in the same manner. If we're going to use the absolutely fethed up method they're using nowadays for wargear, might as well stick to one method.
How hard would it have been to simply add "Twin-linked lascannon - XXpts" in the wargear section, or "Conqueror Battle Cannon - XXpts"? Honestly.
/rant
Well, Tank Commanders are only in the Codex. GW, so far this edition, is almost 99% only giving unit options for models it makes. No LRBT kit comes with either weapon option that FW made those rules for. FW, for their part, cannot errata their options into the GW books. All they can do is create their own unit entries in their own books. So FW would have to create their own tank commander and give it said options.
So its not a messed up method, honestly. Its actually quite clear. Making extra options available for FW units and upgrades is entirely FW responsibility.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Tyranids can't hide all their synapse stuff like IG can, if I want synapse gone I can drop the big bugs pretty quickly. I'm sure there's some smaller stuff that can blend in but it's nowhere near as cheap or as spammable as Commissars were. At the very least they're nowhere near as easy to hide from snipers, considering the commissar is a single human model and can be hidden with even a single chimera or corner of a building. I'm no Nid expert but I don't recall ever having an issue shutting down synapse in 8th.
Tyranid Primes can be hidden. Warriors and Zoanthropes come in units.
And let's not forget that you can park Venomthropes nearby for a sweet, sweet -1 to Hit.
Broodlords can hide as well as can Malanthropes
Venomthropes -1 to hit only effects infantry so it pairs nicely with warriors and that's about it. They can't keep up with Genestealers move plus advance speed, and Tyranid players aren't going to spend 90 points on venoms to keep 40 points of hormagaunts or termagaunts alive.
Quick Question can Astropaths deny the witch on a 2D6 and manifest powers other than Smite on a 2d6? It seems like it should be 1d6 given their cost but the Rule clearly states when manifesting Smite.
As a Nid player myself, (my IG army is built around tanks not infantry and is there to support my GSC) I am always amused whem people bemoan and complain how "overpowered" or "strong" or"Impossible" conscript are to kill and I just get this sick smirk on my face as I cannot wait to tell them how my Guant lists runs. I put my guants in cover I take usually about 120-160 and sprinkle devilguants in there, surround them with Terigons and warriros and Venonthropes. They become a respawning, -1 BS 5+/5++/5+++ with better damage and soaking ability than anything the guard can put out. (void shield, catalist and venomthropes for all the modifiers for those who are confused)
I've never had problems with conscripts myself, because I always build my lists to handle infantry blobs, more specifically I like infantry and thus I take lots of them. Conscripts are easy to kill, if you as a player or army list builder cannot make your build kill 30 mooks, your army is bad. Simple as that. Restructure and try again, or players like me or Ork will walk in and stomp you.
DoomMouse wrote: Are inquistors basically the new commissars now? 55pts for a LD 10 bubble plus smite is just epic! Now we need to look for an alternate source of LD buff these guys seem to outshine commissars by a long way in my opinion.
I think Inquisitors are only Ld9.
Regardless, the main issue that I see is that they're not Astra Militarum units. Nor are they included in the list of exceptions. So if you take one in a regular detachment then you'll lose both your Objective Secured bonus and your Regimental Doctrine.
Hence, they'll need their own dedicated detachment - which means either forking out more points to take some other stuff with the Inquisitor or else sacrificing a Command Point.
Then again, I suppose if you have excess HQs or Elites who can't benefit from doctrines anyway (Primaris Psykers, Tech priests etc.), then you could always put those in a Supreme Command or Vanguard detachment with one or more Inquisitors.
Taking a detachment is highly recommend. I take Inquisitors in my Imperium lists all the time, because I think they are cool. Take some SOB or some acoyltes or some servitors and watch them do work. You can even steal a ride from the IG or Space marines!
DoomMouse wrote: Are inquistors basically the new commissars now? 55pts for a LD 10 bubble plus smite is just epic! Now we need to look for an alternate source of LD buff these guys seem to outshine commissars by a long way in my opinion.
I think Inquisitors are only Ld9.
Regardless, the main issue that I see is that they're not Astra Militarum units. Nor are they included in the list of exceptions. So if you take one in a regular detachment then you'll lose both your Objective Secured bonus and your Regimental Doctrine.
Hence, they'll need their own dedicated detachment - which means either forking out more points to take some other stuff with the Inquisitor or else sacrificing a Command Point.
Then again, I suppose if you have excess HQs or Elites who can't benefit from doctrines anyway (Primaris Psykers, Tech priests etc.), then you could always put those in a Supreme Command or Vanguard detachment with one or more Inquisitors.
Ah yes - I'd forgotten they were only LD 9... Need to rememeber that. I thought they were 10 because I was used to running coteaz.
Zeshi wrote:If you can fit in (min.) 165 points for a Supreme Command Detachment you could get 3 Inquisitors with bolt pistol/chainsword + Smite/1 Telethesia psychic power.
W + 2; A +1; LD +1; Save +1 for 24 more points
I think that could work.
Yeah - in my most competitive foot list I've switched to using a supreme command detachment and two brigades
21 CPs
Brigade detachment (tallarn doctrine) 795pts
HQ Company commander (warlord with Kurov’s aquila relic and grand strategist warlord trait) 30pts
Company commander 30pts
Company commander 30pts
Elites
Astropath 15pts (with dagger relic)
Astropath 15pts
Astropath 15pts
Troops
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Fast attack
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
Heavy support – 384pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HQ:
Primaris psyker 40pts
Primaris psyker 40pts
Primaris psyker 40pts
Elites
5 ratlings 35pts
5 ratlings 35pts
5 ratlings 35pts
Troops
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Fast attack
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
Heavy support
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
No LRBT kit comes with either weapon option that FW made those rules for. FW, for their part, cannot errata their options into the GW books.
I'm not asking for GW to errata in a FW option to the main codex.
All they can do is create their own unit entries in their own books. So FW would have to create their own tank commander and give it said options.
This is what I'm asking. In the FW book, there should be "Leman Russ Battle Tank" with turret weapon options that say "Conqueror Battle Cannon" and "Twin-linked Lascannon". Then have another entry that says "Tank Commander". Now you can have tank commanders with Annihilators or Conqeuerors.
So its not a messed up method, honestly. Its actually quite clear. Making extra options available for FW units and upgrades is entirely FW responsibility.
It is messed up because its not consistent between the two design teams. GW has decided to add generic vehicle chassis for Russes that you pay for a turret choice. FW has decided you pick the specific Leman Russ and then pay nothing for the turret weapon. Essentially, FW is actually doing what GW did for their artillery.
No matter how I look at it, the unit entries and wargear selection is probably the most fethed it has ever been, and probably the most fethed I could even imagine it could be. Its almost as though someone sat down and decided to make it as confusing, complicated, and inconsistent as possible.
Can the astropath still take this relic after the FAQ? FAQ changed it to "infantry officer only".
You're right... I'd missed that one! Well that makes it less good. Not sure if any of the infantry squads are really worth infiltrating with the dagger if it costs 1 CP and 20pts for a platoon commander. Maybe it's just better to go with scions?
Zeshi wrote: If you can fit in (min.) 165 points for a Supreme Command Detachment you could get 3 Inquisitors with bolt pistol/chainsword + Smite/1 Telethesia psychic power.
W + 2; A +1; LD +1; Save +1 for 24 more points
I think that could work.
Honestly, that's far too expensive for my tastes. Maybe Smite makes up for it but my lists already spend quite a bit on characters and I'm not keen to add even more to that figure.
You're right... I'd missed that one! Well that makes it less good. Not sure if any of the infantry squads are really worth infiltrating with the dagger if it costs 1 CP and 20pts for a platoon commander. Maybe it's just better to go with scions?
This is another change that irritates me. I can understand them not wanting Tank Commanders infiltrating with the dagger, but why not just limit it to infantry?
Yeah - in my most competitive foot list I've switched to using a supreme command detachment and two brigades
21 CPs
Spoiler:
Brigade detachment (tallarn doctrine) 795pts
HQ Company commander (warlord with Kurov’s aquila relic and grand strategist warlord trait) 30pts
Company commander 30pts
Company commander 30pts
Elites
Astropath 15pts (with dagger relic)
Astropath 15pts
Astropath 15pts
Troops
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Fast attack
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
Heavy support – 384pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HQ:
Primaris psyker 40pts
Primaris psyker 40pts
Primaris psyker 40pts
Elites
5 ratlings 35pts
5 ratlings 35pts
5 ratlings 35pts
Troops
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Infantry squad with plasma gun and bolter 48pts
Fast attack
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
5 Rough riders with 2 plasma guns 60pts
Heavy support
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
HWS with 2 mortars and lascannon 48pts
Well, that certainly puts my infantry list to shame.
I've got a few questions if you don't mind:
1) What do yo use the psykers for? It seems that trying to protect one squad with Nightshroud or Psychic Barrier would be a moot point. Do they just spam Smite?
2) Are the Mortars not wasted with the Lascannons? Since they can't hide out of sight (without screwing over the lascannons), wouldn't Heavy Bolters make more sense?
3) Are the HWSs not too fragile? They seem very vulnerable as your only long-range firepower.
4) For a list with so much infantry, you have surprisingly few Company Commanders. How do you use the three that you have? I suppose I'm especially surprised because this seems like a list that would love FRFSRF.
5) How does this list play in general?
(Sorry for all the questions, but this is quite different to the Infantry lists I use and I'd quite like to give it a try.)
6) Finally, do you think this list could function without Rough Riders? (I ask because I don't own them, nor any suitable stand-ins) Is there anything that could reasonably replace them or are they just too important?
1) Yes psykers are there for smite spam. Lasguns blow away horde cover and psykers get to work on enemy heavies. Having 8 of them including astropaths and inquisitors puts out around 11 mortal wounds per turn on average
2) To be honest I'm not too concerned about hiding mortars out of sight as they're so cheap. They're in mixed squads so they can tank for the pricey lascannon. It also means that the enemy can't choose to just take out my anti infantry-HWTs or my anti-tank HWTs if they're mixed. I also like that the range synergises well with the lascannons.
3) Yes they are a little to be honest. It depends on the list I'm facing. If the enemy doesn't have a lot of long range firepower then they're generally stars all game long, but if they do then they can be rubbed out in short order. Going to keep them or now. I might just tone them down to the bare six needed to unlock the brigades.
4) Yeah another company commander or two would be great... I just struggle to weigh them up against more bodies or more smite. The warlord sits at the back, orders HWTs while not dying. The other two advance with the infantry, using 'get back in the fight', 'move move move' and FRFSRF as needed. I should probably crowbar in another one to go with the main push.
5) It's played very well so far - I've not lost a game with my competitive AM list yet this edition (not that I've played it loads and I've only been to one tourney). Infantry squads, psykers, inquisitors + 2 commanders barrel forwards onto midfield objectives while lasgunning / smiting at will. HWTs sit at the back and fire. Ratlings can either be a screen for turn-one-assault armies, early objective grabbers or just snipe from cover. Rough riders jump out from whatever flank is needed, plasma stuff dead, tie up tanks/targets of opportunity in assault, and capture backfield objectives. I also use either a scion squad or dagger of tusakh to deep strike a unit onto a midfield objective if needed. Celestine starts in the middle for the invuln save, and jumps forward 24" (act of faith) and kills something. This draws loads of enemy fire. Then she comes back next turn and does it again cos she's crazily undercosted haha.
6) the rough riders are awesome little units as they let you apply a horde to the opponent's backfield! Being 2W each makes them surprisingly reslient too and they take a LOT of anti infantry firepower to put down for their points. If I couldn't use them I'd probably have to swap them for cheap scout sentinels in a brigade (which I don't like at all tbh - they'll just die instantly in an infantry list).
If I had to use sentinels I'd probably drop the second brigade for a battalion so I don't have to take more than three. I'd use the tallarn ambush stratagem to get some backfield threats. Any points I'd save by using sentinels/dropping riders I'd put into scions.
I think it can be a good idea to take one detachment that doesn't benefit from Doctrines, etc.
That way you can indeed put an Inquisitor in it or any other Imperial units you fancy. Doctrines are useful but you don't need to have them on every single model in your army. For example, Assassins work just fine, even if they are not from Valhalla or some other backwater world like the rest of your guys.
All you need is a solid plan for your off-world reinforcements.
Just one more question - would it be worth giving Plasma Pistols to the Infantry sergeants?
I don't know. Do they get to use them?
The only dudes I give plasma pistols to are Tempestor Primes because they are expected to go near tough enemies along with their Command Squads and the plasma pistols just might tip the scales there. Not to mention, they are good shots.
Looking for some advice in my "Horde clearer" spot for my lists. Can people tell me why the Taurox prime is seems to be preferred over the Vulture and the LR Punisher.
I mean I think they are all good at the job it just I see a heck of alot more Taurox Primes then the other 2 at the top tables.
Khadorstompy wrote: Looking for some advice in my "Horde clearer" spot for my lists. Can people tell me why the Taurox prime is seems to be preferred over the Vulture and the LR Punisher.
I mean I think they are all good at the job it just I see a heck of alot more Taurox Primes then the other 2 at the top tables.
Personally I love Vultures with punishers. They're really mobile, hit non flying targets on 4+ if they move, are about as durable, if not more durable as a leman russ (more wounds, and -1 to hit, vs 1 point lower toughness) for less points. Granted they don't benefit from doctrines, but a 25 point officer of the fleet can give them rerolls of 1 to hit. They also can't stop tabling, and soon won't be able to take objectives, but other than that they're great. Take them Elysian and they get deep strike at the cost of diddly squat. I guess taurox primes are reasonably cheap and many hordes are t3 so the difference in strength is moot. They're also bs3+ which is likely a large factor.
vipoid wrote: Thanks, DoomMouse, that's a fantastic help. I'm definitely going to try an army along these lines.
Just one more question - would it be worth giving Plasma Pistols to the Infantry sergeants?
No worries
Personally I don't bother as I'll never want to overcharge a plasma pistol on a sergeant as it risks the squad lowering its LD. I'm sure they'd be fine to use on a tallarn infantry wave that gets up into your opponent's face though.
Personally I don't bother as I'll never want to overcharge a plasma pistol on a sergeant as it risks the squad lowering its LD. I'm sure they'd be fine to use on a tallarn infantry wave that gets up into your opponent's face though.
Well, even if you don't overcharge it, it's still S7 AP-3.
Also, since you're specifically using Inquisitors for their Ld bubble, are sergeants really needed for Ld?
That said, do your infantry typically keep their distance? I'd assumed that you'd try to advance many of them into rapid-fire (and pistol) range.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Tyranids can't hide all their synapse stuff like IG can, if I want synapse gone I can drop the big bugs pretty quickly. I'm sure there's some smaller stuff that can blend in but it's nowhere near as cheap or as spammable as Commissars were. At the very least they're nowhere near as easy to hide from snipers, considering the commissar is a single human model and can be hidden with even a single chimera or corner of a building. I'm no Nid expert but I don't recall ever having an issue shutting down synapse in 8th.
Tyranid Primes can be hidden. Warriors and Zoanthropes come in units.
And let's not forget that you can park Venomthropes nearby for a sweet, sweet -1 to Hit.
Broodlords can be hidden as well.
Something else to consider is that, whilst these units are indeed more expensive than Commissars, they also contribute far more to the battle. Commissars basically do one thing and one thing only - stop units running. other than that, they can maybe bring a Bolter.
A Tyranid Prime can wield an Assault Heavy Bolter, can have 5 attacks with S5 AP-2 melee weapons, and gives all Warriors +1 to hit.
A Broodlord is practically a monstrous creature in terms of melee ability. It has 6 S5 AP-3 Dd3 attacks, rerolls failed to-wound rolls and any to-wound rolls of 6+ are resolved at AP-6 and do 3 damage. It also gives nearby genestealers +1 to hit and is a psyker to boot. Oh, and like genestealers it can charge after Advancing.
They're also considerably tougher than Commissars, having T5, 6 wounds apiece with a 3+ save and a 4+/5+ save on the Prime and Broodlord, respectively.
You're correct on the Broodlord and the Prime, however you do need to add that the Prime clocks in at north of 100 points and the Broodlord is 167 points, to keep things in perspective.
Battlesong wrote: You're correct on the Broodlord and the Prime, however you do need to add that the Prime clocks in at north of 100 points and the Broodlord is 167 points, to keep things in perspective.
That was my point though. I was pointing out that while both are indeed significantly more expensive than a Commissar, they also both bring far more to the table.
Personally I don't bother as I'll never want to overcharge a plasma pistol on a sergeant as it risks the squad lowering its LD. I'm sure they'd be fine to use on a tallarn infantry wave that gets up into your opponent's face though.
Well, even if you don't overcharge it, it's still S7 AP-3.
Also, since you're specifically using Inquisitors for their Ld bubble, are sergeants really needed for Ld?
That said, do your infantry typically keep their distance? I'd assumed that you'd try to advance many of them into rapid-fire (and pistol) range.
Yeah, that's all true! To be honest I usually try and advance forward as fast as possible with my infantry, so there'd be nothing wrong with using them. I can certainly think of times they'd have come in handy. I'm not sure whether they're worth the points of another HWS or infantry squad and the loss of 12 bolters though. On scion sergeants they're pretty awesome on the other hand now that their plasma guns cost 15pts each!
Yeah, that's all true! To be honest I usually try and advance forward as fast as possible with my infantry, so there'd be nothing wrong with using them. I can certainly think of times they'd have come in handy. I'm not sure whether they're worth the points of another HWS or infantry squad and the loss of 12 bolters though. On scion sergeants they're pretty awesome on the other hand now that their plasma guns cost 15pts each!
Huh, that's a very good point about Scions.
And, yeah, I get that the cost aspect is tricky. I think I'd be tempted to do it, especially since the squads aren't using Heavy Weapons.
Oh, one other thing - do you use the Ambush stratagem with this army?
On Chimeras, does the twin heavy bolter make them workable? I still feel that the two autocannons on the Taurox with its much cheaper cost is the better IFV, but I'd prefer to run chimeras. Spring for the hull heavy flamer or run it cheap with the heavy bolter?
I'll probably run my mech/armoured force as Tallarn so I can move and shoot freely.
As a Nid player myself, (my IG army is built around tanks not infantry and is there to support my GSC) I am always amused whem people bemoan and complain how "overpowered" or "strong" or"Impossible" conscript are to kill and I just get this sick smirk on my face as I cannot wait to tell them how my Guant lists runs. I put my guants in cover I take usually about 120-160 and sprinkle devilguants in there, surround them with Terigons and warriros and Venonthropes. They become a respawning, -1 BS 5+/5++/5+++ with better damage and soaking ability than anything the guard can put out. (void shield, catalist and venomthropes for all the modifiers for those who are confused)
I've never had problems with conscripts myself, because I always build my lists to handle infantry blobs, more specifically I like infantry and thus I take lots of them. Conscripts are easy to kill, if you as a player or army list builder cannot make your build kill 30 mooks, your army is bad. Simple as that. Restructure and try again, or players like me or Ork will walk in and stomp you.
Yeah I'd ignore the gants until after I killed the Tervigon and Warriors.
vipoid wrote: Thanks, DoomMouse, that's a fantastic help. I'm definitely going to try an army along these lines.
Just one more question - would it be worth giving Plasma Pistols to the Infantry sergeants?
On Cadians that are holding an objective and therefore aren't moving you get to reroll that 1.
Fishborne wrote: I played this 100 PL list and had a blast against a blood angels player and an Ad Mech Mars player :
Spoiler:
Steel Legion Brigade
Company Commander-Power Weapon, bolt pistol, The Laurels of Command
Company Commander-Power Weapon, bolt pistol (warlord with Grand Strategist)
Company Commander-Power Weapon, bolt pistol
Primarius Psyker-Staff
Special Weapons Squad-3 flamers
Command Squad-4 plasma guns
Chimera-2 heavy flamers, Track Guards
Special Weapons Squad-3 flamers
Command Squad-4 Melta Guns
Chimera-2 heavy flamers, Track Guards
Commissar-Power Weapon, Power Fist
Commissar-Power Weapon, Bolter
Scout Sentinel- Heavy Flamer (or lascannon second game), Hunter Killer Missile
Scout Sentinel- Heavy Flamer (or lascannon second game), Hunter Killer Missile
Scout Sentinel- Heavy Flamer (or Missile Launcher second game), Hunter Killer Missile
Heavy Weapons Team-3 Autocannons
Heavy Weapons Team- Autocannon, 2 lascannons
Heavy Weapons Team-3 heavy bolters
Catachan SpearHead
Primarius Psyker-staff
Leman Russ Tank-2 plasma cannons, heavy bolter, Track Guards
Leman Russ Tank-3 heavy bolters, Track Guards
Manticore-Heavy bolter
I might trade out the flamers in the special weapon squads for grenade launchers because once they got out of the tank on an objective they were out of the fight.
Your post about your Steel Legion army got buried in all the FAQ stuff, so I thought I'd PM you instead. Hope that's okay.
I've got a few questions about your army if you don't mind:
1) Do you find the Steel Legion doctrine useful for normal (non-mechanised) Infantry?
2) Do you think the SWS/Command Squad combination in a Chimera is better than just having a Veteran Squad in there?
3) Do you get much use out of the Steel Legion order or stratagem?
4) Do you find the Steel Legion bonus to vehicles useful?
5) Really random but is there a reason the Company Commander with Laurels of Command isn't your warlord?
1)Yes because you can catch people at 18 inches and get a full round of shooting FRFSRF before charged next turn (for fast units IE jump marines, deamonettes) against heavy armor, 18 inch plasma rapid fire is a great range!
2)for Power level yes, for points and the recent Commissar change they might become more of a background unit instead of a frontline one.
3)the order is good for late turns when you want to keep things alive when someone close combatty gets through with a unit next to them. The stratagem was used every turn I got out of the bus. reroll ones for hits and wounds from just one order? its good. I wish it was a 2CP strat and everyone getting out of a chimera that turn got the bonus... but such is life.
4)For Main Battle Tanks, not really. But for Sentinals, chimeras, Turoxs' they are heaven sent! Against armies like Mechanicus its fantastic.
5)He was a front line guy who I thought would bite the dust. And I knew I was going to order several units jumping out of a chimera next to him. The warlord was in the back refunding CP
What are peoples thoughts on the other warlord traits?
Battlesong wrote: You're correct on the Broodlord and the Prime, however you do need to add that the Prime clocks in at north of 100 points and the Broodlord is 167 points, to keep things in perspective.
That was my point though. I was pointing out that while both are indeed significantly more expensive than a Commissar, they also both bring far more to the table.
Don't forget that Primes and Broodlords both are HQs as well versus Commissars as Elites.
Zeshi wrote: If you can fit in (min.) 165 points for a Supreme Command Detachment you could get 3 Inquisitors with bolt pistol/chainsword + Smite/1 Telethesia psychic power.
W + 2; A +1; LD +1; Save +1 for 24 more points
I think that could work.
Maybe 1-2 Inquisitors and 3 Assassins. So you get an Vanguard detachment. more costly than that supreme command, but more versitale than just 3 Inqs
How many of yall run Super Heavies in a 2,000 pt list? I have an idea of running a mixed Tallarn infantry/Russ brigade with a Stormlord. 4 sponsons seems like a TON of points though.
Jkbulldogg wrote: How many of yall run Super Heavies in a 2,000 pt list? I have an idea of running a mixed Tallarn infantry/Russ brigade with a Stormlord. 4 sponsons seems like a TON of points though.
But for the 4 sponsons you are effectively getting the damage output of another stormlord.
My 4 sponson'd shadowsword is a staple feature of my 2k list; when taking 3 would be considered improper in a pick up game.
Fishborne wrote: What are peoples thoughts on the other warlord traits?
Grand Strategist - Probably the 'default' trait. However, I think I'd only take it if I was starting with a lot of CPs to begin with (using Brigades/Battalions or such). If I was just using 1-2 Spearhead detachments (for a Leman Russ army) or Vanguard detachments (for a Veteran/SWS army), I'd probably consider using something else. Maybe it would still be worth it, but I'd at least consider the others.
Old Grudges - Useful if your opponent has a super-heavy or such. Probably wouldn't bother otherwise.
Implacable Determination - Might be useful in a Tallarn army. I was actually considering this on a Primaris Psyker, since they can cast after advancing and this would make them quite mobile (along with another unit each turn).
Draconian Discipline - Meh. On a Commissar or Lord Commissar this can kinda get the old ability back, at least with regard to Conscripts (for anything else, I think the cost would be too steep). However, it seems pretty poor in general and I think we have better options for making Conscripts ignore morale.
Bellowing Voice - I can't see 3" making a huge difference, quite honestly. And given how cheap Company Commanders and such are, I think you can easily buy enough to give yourself good coverage to begin with. Pass.
Master of Command - On a Company Commander with the Laurels of Command or a Tank Commander, this could be worth considering. I wouldn't bother otherwise though.
Superior Tactical Training - Outside of maybe Creed, isn't this just a worse version of Master of Command? I guess it might combo to some degree with Laurels of Command, but I'm not fond of the double-randomness. I can't see myself taking this.
Lead from the Front, Honoured Duelist, Ex Gang Leader - I've grouped these together because they all amount to basically the same thing (making your warlord better in combat). They're probably not the sort of trait anyone would take in a tournament. However, I like their fluff and I'm sure many of us enjoy having our HQs heroically charge into combat now and again. So, whilst not tactically useful, I could definitely see myself taking these for a bit of fun.
Tenacious - Doesn't seem very useful to me. I don't think 5+ FNP will help much for a T3 character. You're probably better off buffing his offence and trying to kill the enemy before they kill him. And while a 6+ FNP might help a bit for a Leman Russ, I don't think it'll make enough of a difference to be worthwhile.
Swift Attacker - Eh? I really can't think of many circumstances where this would be useful, or even relevant. I guess if you have a really specific build?
Faithful Servant of the Throne - Are you kidding? Why would I ever need this when I can practically paper my walls with Astropaths?
Iron Discipline - Given the change to Commissars, this might actually be pretty decent now (though probably better for Infantry Squads and such than for Conscripts). I don't know if it's worth it over other abilities, but seems okay at least.
(Obviously this is based on the power of the respective traits. I can definitely see myself using many of the 'bad' ones because they fit the fluff of my army/leader.)
Fishborne wrote: What are peoples thoughts on the other warlord traits?
Grand Strategist - Probably the 'default' trait. However, I think I'd only take it if I was starting with a lot of CPs to begin with (using Brigades/Battalions or such). If I was just using 1-2 Spearhead detachments (for a Leman Russ army) or Vanguard detachments (for a Veteran/SWS army), I'd probably consider using something else. Maybe it would still be worth it, but I'd at least consider the others.
Old Grudges - Useful if your opponent has a super-heavy or such. Probably wouldn't bother otherwise.
Implacable Determination - Might be useful in a Tallarn army. I was actually considering this on a Primaris Psyker, since they can cast after advancing and this would make them quite mobile (along with another unit each turn).
Draconian Discipline - Meh. On a Commissar or Lord Commissar this can kinda get the old ability back, at least with regard to Conscripts (for anything else, I think the cost would be too steep). However, it seems pretty poor in general and I think we have better options for making Conscripts ignore morale.
Bellowing Voice - I can't see 3" making a huge difference, quite honestly. And given how cheap Company Commanders and such are, I think you can easily buy enough to give yourself good coverage to begin with. Pass.
Master of Command - On a Company Commander with the Laurels of Command or a Tank Commander, this could be worth considering. I wouldn't bother otherwise though.
Superior Tactical Training - Outside of maybe Creed, isn't this just a worse version of Master of Command? I guess it might combo to some degree with Laurels of Command, but I'm not fond of the double-randomness. I can't see myself taking this.
Lead from the Front, Honoured Duelist, Ex Gang Leader - I've grouped these together because they all amount to basically the same thing (making your warlord better in combat). They're probably not the sort of trait anyone would take in a tournament. However, I like their fluff and I'm sure many of us enjoy having our HQs heroically charge into combat now and again. So, whilst not tactically useful, I could definitely see myself taking these for a bit of fun.
Tenacious - Doesn't seem very useful to me. I don't think 5+ FNP will help much for a T3 character. You're probably better off buffing his offence and trying to kill the enemy before they kill him. And while a 6+ FNP might help a bit for a Leman Russ, I don't think it'll make enough of a difference to be worthwhile.
Swift Attacker - Eh? I really can't think of many circumstances where this would be useful, or even relevant. I guess if you have a really specific build?
Faithful Servant of the Throne - Are you kidding? Why would I ever need this when I can practically paper my walls with Astropaths?
Iron Discipline - Given the change to Commissars, this might actually be pretty decent now (though probably better for Infantry Squads and such than for Conscripts). I don't know if it's worth it over other abilities, but seems okay at least.
(Obviously this is based on the power of the respective traits. I can definitely see myself using many of the 'bad' ones because they fit the fluff of my army/leader.)
Old grudges is fantastic agaist deamon primarchs and they are more common than super heavies in the current meta.
Iron Discipline is interesting because it still works after the unit is wiped out by a failed morale test, and it doesn't matter how much they fail the morale test by.
What's everybody's preferred Baneblade variant? Or what do you guys think is generally the better one? My friend has a Stormsword he's selling and I was thinking of picking it up, but he has none of the extra bits or weapons for it anymore.
Stus67 wrote: What's everybody's preferred Baneblade variant? Or what do you guys think is generally the better one? My friend has a Stormsword he's selling and I was thinking of picking it up, but he has none of the extra bits or weapons for it anymore.
Other threads indicate it's the Shadowsword. I personally use the Stormlord because I also use it as a HWS bunker, but this is not as good of a configuration as it used to be.
Whichever is best depends on what you want to use it for they all have a niche, generally top three are Baneblade as best all rounder, Shadowsword best tank killer, Stormlord best troop transport while still being decent anti infantry. The Stormsword is a short range anti fortification specialist as its weapon ignores cover and it rerolls wounds. Its a Derper with high damage output and a gun strong enough to reliably wound vehicles or other high save targets but its very short range meaning it has to close within range of all your opponents anti tank infantry weapons whereas the other variants (apart from near identical Hellhammer which is its anti-infantry twin) like to sit at the back and snipe.
Niiai wrote: Hi, I do not have the new codex. I was wondering how easy can IG spam smite? Is it a cheap hq choise, or a cheap elite choise?
Cheap HQ 40 points but astropaths are 15 points in elite but only roll one dice
Actually I believe it's 21 bolt pistols with the stave. I'm starting to seriously look into 2 primaris psykers with a conscript blob. the psykers get to know 2 powers each plus smite. They should be able to keep the blob alive long enough to get into smite range
I'm slowly gravitating to the Baneblade as SHT of choice; the reliability of the main gun has shone consistently, especially in overwatch.
I'm also of the opinion that whilst rerolling 1s is nice for Cadian SHTs, Valhallan trait is better as it means the damage output over the whole game is consistent, instead of spiking turn one and degrading constantly.
Losing Overlapping Fire does hurt, but i'm starting to see a case that overlapping fire on SHTS is wasted *anyway*.
malamis wrote: I'm slowly gravitating to the Baneblade as SHT of choice; the reliability of the main gun has shone consistently, especially in overwatch.
I'm also of the opinion that whilst rerolling 1s is nice for Cadian SHTs, Valhallan trait is better as it means the damage output over the whole game is consistent, instead of spiking turn one and degrading constantly.
Losing Overlapping Fire does hurt, but i'm starting to see a case that overlapping fire on SHTS is wasted *anyway*.
Thoughts?
Well, as a superheavy tank player, the Baneblade is certainly good for reliability. The Stormsword is too - it gets 1 fewer d6 of damage, but wounds everything on 3+ (including space marine superheavies), T5 on 2+, ignores 3+ armour outright, ignores cover outright, and re-rolls 1s for damage dice. That's some neat reliability and makes it a better tank destroyer than the Baneblade. It's also cheaper - losing the Demolisher Cannon and autocannon essentially buys you the first set of sponsons for free. So a Stormsword with 4 sponsons (and therefore 4 lascannons and 30 heavy bolter dice) is essentially the same price as a Baneblade with only 2 sponsons.
As for regimental doctrine - meh on everything except Mordian and Catachan. I always take an Atlas and / or Trojan with the superheavy, so there's always a Vehicle within 3" for the trait. Since the vehicle can never be stopped from firing overwatch except by very specific abilities, overwatching every single unit that charges it on a 4+ is hilarious - it's essentially a free shooting phase.
Catachan gets you that sweet sweet main armament shots re-roll.
Valhallan seems good, but the problem is that most people focus the superheavy to death if they shoot at it at all. I know very few players that slowly plink away at a superheavy with a few things a turn. Either it's fine, or it's essentially wiped out. Having an Atlas or Techpriest (or hilariously, both, since they stack) can mitigate this problem a bit.
The Valhallan trait really seems to depend on where you play. I would imagine more competitive aeas don't get as much use out of it, but at the same time you see people online talk about just wounding tanks enough to degrade them then moving onto the next. In my area for example I tend to end up with tanks at very low wounds quite a bit, so the trait helps me a lot. Means people need to actually kill my tanks, not just whittle them down a bit.
I'd say take a look at what's going on in your area and go from there. IG tanks like Leman Russe's degrade surprisingly quickly and in my experience I've often found I would have preferred a little bit slower damage output but continue hitting on 4's, than say rerolling shots/1's but hitting on 5's and 6's. That said, I'm no tourney player and I predominantly run infantry. Tanks are support in my army and mainly meant as a distraction, so anything that keeps them a threat helps me out a lot. You may find with a tank force the extra firepower makes the Valhallan trait a non issue as you just don't take as many hits.
MrMoustaffa wrote: The Valhallan trait really seems to depend on where you play. I would imagine more competitive aeas don't get as much use out of it, but at the same time you see people online talk about just wounding tanks enough to degrade them then moving onto the next. In my area for example I tend to end up with tanks at very low wounds quite a bit, so the trait helps me a lot. Means people need to actually kill my tanks, not just whittle them down a bit.
I'd say take a look at what's going on in your area and go from there. IG tanks like Leman Russe's degrade surprisingly quickly and in my experience I've often found I would have preferred a little bit slower damage output but continue hitting on 4's, than say rerolling shots/1's but hitting on 5's and 6's. That said, I'm no tourney player and I predominantly run infantry. Tanks are support in my army and mainly meant as a distraction, so anything that keeps them a threat helps me out a lot. You may find with a tank force the extra firepower makes the Valhallan trait a non issue as you just don't take as many hits.
My go-to strategy to counter SHT's prior to codex was to do just that. Do one Leman Russ' worth of damage to it and ignore it until I had nothing better to shoot. It forced the SHT to stand still or hit on 6's, essentially immobilizing it.
The difference is now with all the repair options to the IG (a stratagem, a d3 from an Enginseer and a d3 from an Atlas), you could see a Baneblade springing up 7 wounds in one turn. Personally, I think this is an overinvestment, but it happens.
This means that it must absolutely be killed, or else it'll just be back in action relatively quickly.
I do not understand. There is a smiter as an HQ and one as an elite? But the HQ smites 1d3 and the elite smite 1d6? And they cost 40 and 15 points? That sounds absurd.
Niiai wrote: I do not understand. There is a smiter as an HQ and one as an elite? But the HQ smites 1d3 and the elite smite 1d6? And they cost 40 and 15 points? That sounds absurd.
No no, the elites only roll 1d6 to cast smite. So they only get it on a 5+ on 1d6, rather than a 5+ on 2d6.
Just had first game with my Catachans versus primaris smurfs 1165pts.
Hellhounds were awesome but he didn't have any AT other than hellblasters.
Wyverns are meh vs marines but i believe everyone knew that. Catachan re-roll is awesome, can't wait on getting a basilisk.
Between orders and stratagems this codex is a lot of fun.
gendoikari87 wrote: So question.... how viable would a catachan close combat army be? Could it be done?
A purely "charge forward and stab everything" list? Probably not.
The tools to make catachans scary in close combat though are cheap and easy to use, so it doesn't hurt you too much to bring them. In that case I would use them in a counterattack role when the enemy gets close. In that kind of situation they would shine, as they still shoot pretty well and can CQC in a pinch.
gendoikari87 wrote: So question.... how viable would a catachan close combat army be? Could it be done?
As in charge the enemy? No. The best parts of catachan melee (like vicious traps and flamer rerolls) are defensive in nature. Better is to use a bunch of tanks/artillery to force the opponent to come to you. I do deploy my infantry with the intention of getting it into melee, but only charge if I have to. Better to hole up in a building, shoot them if they refuse to charge and then counterattack mercilessly if they do. I have shredded chaos cultist groups with catachans + viscious traps+ministorum priests. Anything T3 is fair game, really.
Catachan are pretty good in melee, but they don't have anything to ensure they get the charge distance like tyranids or chaos.
All my IG armies thus far have included no psykers whatsoever. However, that's about to change drastically, so I'm looking for a bit of advice regarding our psychic powers.
For reference, my army is likely to include:
1-3 Primaris Psykers
3 Astropaths
3 Inquisitors
Anyway, my main questions are:
1) How do you rate our psychic powers?
2) Are there some powers that it's better for an Astropath to know (as opposed to a Primaris Psyker), or vice versa?
3) With multiple Psykers, is it better to have an even selection of powers, or should I lean towards redundancy with the 'good' powers?
4) Lastly, does anyone know whether the IG Mental Fortitude counts as the same power as the Inquisition Mental Fortitude? I ask because you can only cast each power once per turn. However, in this case, the powers have the same name but different wording (one affects any Imperium unit, the other only affects IG units), does that matter?
![[Disk]](/dakkaforum/templates/default/images/icon_disk.gif){kind=icon}
on this. You'd be lucky if multiple Commissars saved that many men in an entire game.
