Niiru wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Frag is 10 points because it replaces the power sword and bolter.

Power sword is irrelevant, as you have to pay extra for it anyway (its not included in the points of the squad).

Veteran is 20 points with a bolter. 23 with a power sword. 25 with a 10pt plasmagun. 30 with a 15pt frag cannon.

Unless (as I said before) plasmaguns are actually only 5pts for everyone now. In which case they're 25 for a 5pt plasmagun, and 30 with a 10 pt frag cannon. But that still makes frags worse, as they're double the cost of plasma/melta.

But the biker entry next to it says plasma is 10pt, which is the same as I thought it was in the new codex too.

Never said it was good, just clearing up the numbers. No idea where you are getting 15 points from.

Also double the cost is not an accurate presentation. 30 is not double of 25. Saying the cost of the weapon without the platform is going to lead to bad math/comparisons.

At 12.1 to 24 inches a frag Cannon is better than a plasma for the points. I believe it also is better at 12. Question is if the situations where it is better justify the 20% higher points. It is also better during assault doctrine which is during turns 3-5.

Until someone does the new math hammer I will withhold judgement on a final conclusion. Too many variables and I won’t be doing any math until I get marines in my xenos hunting hands.

No idea where you are getting 15 points from.

Maths. Explained earlier. Though it involves comparing relative values.

Essentially, plasma and melta guns are 10pts. Frag Cannons are 5 points more expensive than plasma and melta guns.

The actual issue is that GW have screwed up vet pricing. Either the body is 5 points cheaper than it should be, or the guns are 5 points cheaper than they should be.

(Eg. A meltagun vet is 25 points. That's a 10 point gun, which makes the body only 15 points.
A Frag vet is 30 points. Meaning a 15 point gun, on the same pseudo-"15 point" body.)

I would expect plasma and melta vets to end up being 30 points in the proper codex supplement. If Frag Vets remain at 30 points, then Frag may be useful. IF they go up to 35 points then I think they'll be too expensive.

Niiru wrote:

I would expect plasma and melta vets to end up being 30 points in the proper codex supplement. If Frag Vets remain at 30 points, then Frag may be useful. IF they go up to 35 points then I think they'll be too expensive.

Not without combi weapon vets going to 35 points, and that's a situation that TKOs any veteran build that isnt pure bolter and basic power weapon.

 Leth wrote:


At 12.1 to 24 inches a frag Cannon is better than a plasma for the points

It really isnt. The frag has a single purpose now (which it frankly does abjectly terribly): blob busting. As any kind of heavy infantry or vehicle hunter its abject garbage. The real comparison should be against the combi-flamer, which not only serves an identical purpose, but does it cheaper, and allows for melee upgrades or a shield.

 Leth wrote:

It is also better during assault doctrine which is during turns 3-5.

Incorrect. Assault doctrine imparts no benefit to the Frag Cannon as it is neither a Pistol or Melee type weapon.

Sterling191 wrote:
Not without combi weapon vets going to 35 points, and that's a situation that TKOs any veteran build that isnt pure bolter and basic power weapon.

Does it though? I mean it would be the same cost as any other space marine squad that carries a combi-weapon. Including chaos chosen.

Except that combi-weapons are normally just 10 points anyway, I can only assume GW are implying that an SIA boltgun is worth 5 points over a normal one? But that's not what they thought in 8th edition.

Sterling191 wrote:


It really isnt. The frag has a single purpose now (which it frankly does abjectly terribly): blob busting. As any kind of heavy infantry or vehicle hunter its abject garbage. The real comparison should be against the combi-flamer, which not only serves an identical purpose, but does it cheaper, and allows for melee upgrades or a shield.

I mean, the Frag is significantly better than a combi-flamer against most targets, especially T4 and T5 targets.

It also is better than plasma, especially at 12"+. It's basically a 2-shot plasmagun, that does 2-damage per wound without the risk of overloading. And overloading is now riskier than it used to be. Plasma is only better if you overload.

The issue is, of course, that the frag prevents you having a melee weapon. Not sure it's good -enough- to make up for that loss. But as i've said, people need to be writing this stuff to the rules team in the vague hope they'll reinstate some of the missing rules (like it going up to S9)

 Leth wrote:

It is also better during assault doctrine which is during turns 3-5.

Incorrect. Assault doctrine imparts no benefit to the Frag Cannon as it is neither a Pistol or Melee type weapon.

Easy mistake to make, considering the naming convention. Tactical doctrine though, which is active turns 2-3, would buff the frag (arguably the most important rounds in most games). It would also buff the plasma, but plasma going from -3 to -4 is mostly not a big deal, compared to going from -2 to -3.

I think the frag is close to being a choice. It may even be usable, if you can find a way to use it that means you aren't needing the chainsword in your other hand. It's losing the melee weapon that's the problem.

Unfortunately the same problem as the shotgun. Which I suspect is only the case because the only marine model that has a shotgun, carries it two-handed and so it falls under the "no model no rule" limitation.

Which is why deathwatch is likely to die off soon. All the interesting DW stuff doesn't have models, and so it wont get rules. Cassius is the only thing keeping it running, and it seems that'll be short lived.

Not sure what to change to though. DA maybe.

Niiru wrote:
I mean it would be the same cost as any other space marine squad that carries a combi-weapon. Including chaos chosen.

Incorrect. Non-DW combi weapons are 10 points apiece.

Niiru wrote:

I mean, the Frag is significantly better than a combi-flamer against most targets, especially T4 and T5 targets.

Again, incorrect. The Frag is not auto-hit anymore, is twice the cost of a combi-flamer, and doesnt come with SIA as an added bonus. The only defensive profile that the Frag is marginally better for is against T5 1W targets like some of the new Necrons, and those targets are what you're packing SIA for.

Niiru wrote:

It also is better than plasma, especially at 12"+. It's basically a 2-shot plasmagun, that does 2-damage per wound without the risk of overloading. And overloading is now riskier than it used to be. Plasma is only better if you overload.

No, it is not. S8 is a massive break point in the 40k wounding chart. And again, for every Frag you give to a Veteran, you can give two Veterans Plasma.

Frag cannons vs combiflamer/combiplasma pay for generalism.

A plasma is better for the points vs MEQ and Vehicles, but worse vs GEQ (even disregarding the potential 33% fire increase for full Blast if you do get that).

You also get range (24" full effect vs 12"), Assault type, and no gets hot. If you account for the 1/3 of a 25-pt plasma marine that you lose every time you fire an overcharged plas at MEQ or vehicles, the frag cannon is actually more efficient.

(Assuming 12" range:



The plas gives you a chainsword, which represents a significant melee boost now with AP-1 and +1A.

in general, because range isn't usually a problem with Veterans, and because in competitive settings it's usually better to take 2 specialized squads for opposite roles than 2 generalized squads, I think most will prefer the plasmas/combiflamers.

The plasma may only be strictly better *if* you are within 12" range and *if* you have a captain in range to make the gets hot drop from 30.5% to 5.5%, but as a player you can make that happen with your list setup, and 40k is very much a game where you execute your plan for the first two turns and then generally muddle through for the remainder of the game.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Combiflamer vs Frag is a bit easier to figure, since there's no risk and the range for the anti-infantry profile is the same.

Basically: Yeah, you pay for the ability to hurt MEQs and Tanks.

Combiflamer vs GEQ (+1 to wound ammo on the SIA bolter: 2.10 dead/25pts = 0.084

Frag vs GEQ (assuming 6+ blast, not 11+ blast): 1.9 dead/30pts = 0.063

Combiflamer vs Orks (+1 to wound ammo on the bolter) = 2.01 dead/25pts = 0.081

Frag vs Orks (assuming 11+ blast): 2.66 dead/30pts = 0.089

Combiflamer vs MEQ (+1D ammo on the bolter) = 0.913 wounds/25pts = 0.037

Frag Cannon vs MEQ (slug profile): 1.182 wounds/30pts = 0.039

Basically, if you're getting blast, or getting use out of the D2, the frag cannon does better for the points, if you're not getting blast or not benefitting from the AP (i.e. daemons) combiflamer is more efficient. Obviously range on the slug profile is also a thing that exists.

Frag has a distinct benefit of being very versatile. They have definitely been hurt bad compared to where they were and I would have preferred seeing that the frag version auto hit, even if a D6 shot weapon. 2D3 is better than D6 and Blast makes sure this is at least 3 shots vs 6-10 models, but a max of 6 shots is a huge nerf. The Strength and AP is good (especially in Tactical), especially vs T3 models. In that respect, it acts like a stormbolter using hellfire rounds (which I know is no longer a thing) more than a bolter with SIA.
The shell version is a slightly worse plasma weapon, but is great vs 2W units which are very prevalent and will not kill the user. If you compare directly with a combi-plasma at similar points, I think I'd prefer the frag, simply because the plasma is best when overcharged and that comes with a risk, and is less likely to hit if using both parts of the weapon (but at least won't kill you on 2s with the negative modifier).
This does leave the lack of secondary weapon. I'm not sure it's a big deal because a reasonable weapon is going to be an additional 3pts, raising the points even further on a unit that is already quite expensive. I will continue to use Frag on my units but will realize that it is an adjunct and in no way the weapon it used to be.

 bullyboy wrote:
I'm not sure it's a big deal because a reasonable weapon is going to be an additional 3pts, raising the points even further on a unit that is already quite expensive

I think you're markedly underselling the astartes chainsword. It turns a basic Vet's punching into the equivalent of a Storm Bolter with Kraken rounds, for free. Obviously i'd love to put LCs on them all the get that delicious full wound reroll, but losing the option to take the 0 point chainsword is a massive opportunity cost in my opinion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoiler:

Combiflamer vs Frag is a bit easier to figure, since there's no risk and the range for the anti-infantry profile is the same.

Basically: Yeah, you pay for the ability to hurt MEQs and Tanks.

Combiflamer vs GEQ (+1 to wound ammo on the SIA bolter: 2.10 dead/25pts = 0.084

Frag vs GEQ (assuming 6+ blast, not 11+ blast): 1.9 dead/30pts = 0.063

Combiflamer vs Orks (+1 to wound ammo on the bolter) = 2.01 dead/25pts = 0.081

Frag vs Orks (assuming 11+ blast): 2.66 dead/30pts = 0.089

Combiflamer vs MEQ (+1D ammo on the bolter) = 0.913 wounds/25pts = 0.037

Frag Cannon vs MEQ (slug profile): 1.182 wounds/30pts = 0.039

Basically, if you're getting blast, or getting use out of the D2, the frag cannon does better for the points, if you're not getting blast or not benefitting from the AP (i.e. daemons) combiflamer is more efficient. Obviously range on the slug profile is also a thing that exists.

Genuine thanks for running and laying out the maths there. I dont want to get too derailed on this, but I think its pertinent to the points discussion: I really do think the individual weapons cost should be the point of consideration, not the cost of the platform. I think this way for one very specific reason: I'm bringing the Vet bodies anyway (at least until we get the supplement and a set of unfucked kill team rules).

The chainsword is significantly better than it used to be, but I'm not convinced that 1 additional attack at -1 breaks the frag cannon. Its a loss, but I probably have enough melee in the unit to not miss it. I certainly did before when fielding them.

Not to mention, the rule of cool will keep them in my list, along with the corvus, shotgun and infernus. I like distinct weapons, abd if not completely terrible, I can handle average just fine.

 bullyboy wrote:
The chainsword is significantly better than it used to be, but I'm not convinced that 1 additional attack at -1 breaks the frag cannon. Its a loss, but I probably have enough melee in the unit to not miss it. I certainly did before when fielding them.

Its not just one additional attack at -1 though. It upgrades all of a model's attacks, while also increasing the attack volume. The net effect is to nearly double the damage output against most defensive statlines.

 bullyboy wrote:

Not to mention, the rule of cool will keep them in my list, along with the corvus, shotgun and infernus. I like distinct weapons, abd if not completely terrible, I can handle average just fine.

That's an entirely fair approach to take.

I mean I definitely think they've got different roles.

If I'm going to be taking a unit that's say, a Proteus kill team with SB/Power Weapon terminators providing 11pt per wound t4 2+ 5++ profiles, and they're going to be midfield objective holders I'll probably consider Frag Cannons on some of the veterans at least, because they have 24" reach on the move.

What do you think about CML terminators at 53pts? As far as I can tell, because their datasheet is "up to 3 models can equip" and not "for every X models, Y can equip" the restriction from constructing kill teams actually doesn't apply, so you could have a proteus kill team with 5 SS vets and 5 CML terminators for 405pts.

4 Missile dev squads are 150, meaning it would cost in theory 366pts to get the same number of missile shots out of devastator squads, and your CML proteus team gets benefits in...preeeeeetty much every area as compared to them. 20 extra attacks with power swords when charged. 5 storm bolters and 5 SIA bolters. 5 models with terminator armor and 5 models with storm shields vs 10 otherwise unprotected MEQs.

the_scotsman wrote:
I
What do you think about CML terminators at 53pts?

They've got serious legs. Losing SIA hurts, but gaining a wound, upgrading the melee weapon, actually fixing their keyword mess so they can always benefit from Bolter Discipline, and becoming cheaper I think balances it out. The current (pre-Codex) cost for the configuration is 56 points. Im eyeballing a backfield kill team with two of them, plus or minus a pair of missile vets, that can potentially combat squad down depending on the map, as well as upgrading effectively every Terminator I slot into a Proteus team.

The upgrade to 2d6 shots in Frag profile is horrific against 11+ model units due to Blast.

Man, I REALLY hope that when DW gets a full codex that they don't just import all the garbage from the get-you-by list. I started DW as a conversion army, and it morphed into the army I take just to be cheeky. I have two different lists for 2000 points, one has 16 frag cannons backed up by cyclone terminators, the other is running and gunning vets with stormbolters backed up by 20 intercessors. Both lists are DOA now.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Man, I REALLY hope that when DW gets a full codex that they don't just import all the garbage from the get-you-by list. I started DW as a conversion army, and it morphed into the army I take just to be cheeky. I have two different lists for 2000 points, one has 16 frag cannons backed up by cyclone terminators, the other is running and gunning vets with stormbolters backed up by 20 intercessors. Both lists are DOA now.

Cyclone terminators are still ok I think.

And tbh I still think Frags aren't -bad-. S7 with two shots up to 24", and 2 damage per wound, still lets it compare to plasma (especially when you take into account the zero risk of insta-gibbing yourself). And the blast profile still has a use. Combi-flamer or combi-plasma may still be more efficient, but this is a single gun that can do both in a pinch. And you never could have a melee weapon with it anyway, so no loss there. Those 16 frag cannons also cost half as much now, so you have 160 points spare to spend on something to shore up the anti-tank weakness.

Stormbolters, I suspect, will be gone for good. DW don't have a stormbolter model for sale that I know of, and so that's it. It's gone. Same reason shotgunners don't get melee weapons anymore - the shotgun guy is carrying it two-handed. No model, no rules. Stupid as that is. But combi-bolters, SIA and bolter discipline help to soften that a bit. And intercessors are still fine (they just don't get SIA...)

I think the only changes that are even remotely likely, are intercessors gaining some kind of SIA access (I suspect they won't, but it's possible), and frags getting a small tweak in their rules (maybe auto-hitting getting returned, or maybe S9 within 12", but it won't get both).

Personally I'm still thinking of going in on frags + shotguns, cos it'll be different and might be fun. I'll have to back them up somehow with dedicated melee units, or run mixed squads, cos losing melee weapons is a pain... but there we are.

Deathwatch was the last bastion of conversion. I'm praying to the Dice Gods that that option remains, even if it doesn't get SIA.

I suspect that the things that got SIA in kill team Cassius will keep it, rest wont. I believe the rapid fire Intercessor weapon will get it, the rest won’t, and I a, fine with that.

Personally I am thinking we can make some MEAN bike lists give the infantry treatment as well as 5 man squads. ATVs will also be pretty powerful as our anti-tank units(especially if we can trans-human them). I personally am not a fan of eliminators in our lists, but I can see a unit of three or so being a so,I’d pick.

What are you guys buying to be your home objective holders? That is where I am thinking heavy intercessors might be good, but I have not played any games of 9th yet so insights would be helpful(almost at the point where I just set up a damn table in my living room).

If I could redo my DW army I'd go multiple units of intercessors (especially if they do end up getting SIA), add in 5 outriders, then combat squad them.

You end up with several units of Intercessors as fire support and Objective Secured holding objectives in the back field while you have 5-man units of Outriders with Objective Secured to run out and capture far away objectives.


Now, one thing I am wondering about is how the Terminators' homing beacon works. Can you take one of those in a veteran squad? If so it would be neat to run a fast unit (Outriders) up the field, then dump a large squad out near them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As a side note, it looks like one of my other gimmicky squads has survived the change, 10-man unit with Meltaguns and chainswords in a drop pod.

Due to the way GW have structured the keyword rules, the Teleport Homer will not function in a mixed Proteus Kill Team.

Im going to wait until I get my codex today to start assembling my lists. I spent some of yesterday re-configuring some of my unpainted vets (and taking SS off 2 stalker bolt dudes).
I don't expect the supplement will differ much from the Index, why would it? It is already printed and probably due out in a few weeks. It makes no sense to put out an index with fundamental differences.
I added to my regular bolter dudes and reduced my SB/SS guys, plus added a few other variations (sitting on 50+ vets) so will play around with points. I still need to see what will be my main AT platforms in new format. Currently is 2 las vendreads (will stay in for sure), a mini dev sqd (ML) and a las razorback (may switch to rhino to take my SS/SB dudes).

Sterling191 wrote:
Due to the way GW have structured the keyword rules, the Teleport Homer will not function in a mixed Proteus Kill Team.

To add to this, it doesn't work the same as before. The previous poster said about giving it to some outriders to run forward and get some terminators to drop on to it. But now it seems to ork by giving it to a terminator squad, and that then gives the squad the ability to relocate for free, either to your deployment zone or to within however many inches of any friendly units.

Don't know if this is standard equipment for marines these days? But even if you can't use it on a mixed team right now (this is something that may actually change, as it doesn't rely on models) it still seems decent to be able to teleport terminators around the board.

Leth wrote:I suspect that the things that got SIA in kill team Cassius will keep it, rest wont. I believe the rapid fire Intercessor weapon will get it, the rest won’t, and I a, fine with that.

cuda1179 wrote:If I could redo my DW army I'd go multiple units of intercessors (especially if they do end up getting SIA), add in 5 outriders, then combat squad them.

Just a note that Fortis teams are not intercessor squads - even if they do get SIA back they will not have the same damage potential as regular codex intercessors due to losing out on the rapid fire strat. If the supplement rules dont do much to change things up, gravis or phobos teams might be the only primaris with any meaningul difference to basic codex units.

**edit
For funnies - we could ally in codex intercessors (imperial fists maybe) and use them as a "proper" primaris kill team as they have better bolters (rapid fire, bolter drill etc).

Insularum wrote:

Leth wrote:I suspect that the things that got SIA in kill team Cassius will keep it, rest wont. I believe the rapid fire Intercessor weapon will get it, the rest won’t, and I a, fine with that.

cuda1179 wrote:If I could redo my DW army I'd go multiple units of intercessors (especially if they do end up getting SIA), add in 5 outriders, then combat squad them.

Just a note that Fortis teams are not intercessor squads - even if they do get SIA back they will not have the same damage potential as regular codex intercessors due to losing out on the rapid fire strat. If the supplement rules dont do much to change things up, gravis or phobos teams might be the only primaris with any meaningul difference to basic codex units.

**edit
For funnies - we could ally in codex intercessors (imperial fists maybe) and use them as a "proper" primaris kill team as they have better bolters (rapid fire, bolter drill etc).

Right, this is what I was thinking too. An army of DW intercessors and outriders is like any other non-DW space marine army, but without the doctrines and strats that make them effective.

Sure, you can take 15 obsec outriders instead of 9 non-obsec outriders, but if you played, for example, Salamanders, you would have 3 different ways to make your outriders obsec as needed, plus all the Salamander rules. You’re giving up a lot to get those 6 extra outriders and not getting much in return compared with codex chapters.

SIA is what makes Deathwatch more than just a generic space marine chapter with no doctrines.

Sterling191 wrote:
Due to the way GW have structured the keyword rules, the Teleport Homer will not function in a mixed Proteus Kill Team.

But the "Building a Kill Team"-rules explicitly say so.
"A model in a Kill Team unit retains any abilities that applied to that model on its original datasheet."

The rule for the Teleport Homer also is worded in a way, that you need a Terminator model in "a unit", not "a Terminator unit", for that ability to work.

I'm now looking at what AT to add to my DW. Some of the new tanks and speeders are super expensive, probably not worth it. Eradicators of course, but nothing new there. Same with ATV MM. I dont rate the firestrike turret at all. Probably stick with my melta platforms, MLs and melee. I do have a Pred leftover, but not sure if it will go with my DA or DW.

Right now, I think the two prime plays for AT (other than the oppressively obnoxious Eradicators) are CML terminators or dreadnoughts.

The former is nearly as points efficient as the Eradicator if you use the strat to count them as stationary (the chip damage from the storm bolter plus the 2+ save and the melee profile for 53 points is not to be underestimated IMO), while the inclusion of Duty Eternal for all Codex dread options is a terrifying prospect.

The Redemptor especially is one im keeping my eye on. 185 points fully kitted out in the plasma configuration is *very* tempting as an all aspect threat. Especially if you're contemplating more melee oriented kill teams.

Pyrosphere wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:
Due to the way GW have structured the keyword rules, the Teleport Homer will not function in a mixed Proteus Kill Team.

But the "Building a Kill Team"-rules explicitly say so.
"A model in a Kill Team unit retains any abilities that applied to that model on its original datasheet."

The rule for the Teleport Homer also is worded in a way, that you need a Terminator model in "a unit", not "a Terminator unit", for that ability to work.

Under the keywords section on the same page of that doc, mixed units do not retain any original keywords, but on the various team entries if there is exclusive squad membership certain keywords can return. So I guess the conflict is that a kill team terminator isn't a terminator unless it's a combat squad of 5 not-terminators - then it magically is again?

It's another example of how wolves and both types of angels got reasonably well thought out datasheet and ability updates to transition to the new codex with a selection of decent buffs and nerfs, while DW just had content deleted and enough rules included to function. As previously mentioned, hopefully this is temporary.

Insularum wrote:

Under the keywords section on the same page of that doc, mixed units do not retain any original keywords, but on the various team entries if there is exclusive squad membership certain keywords can return. So I guess the conflict is that a kill team terminator isn't a terminator unless it's a combat squad of 5 not-terminators - then it magically is again?

Correct. A Proteus Kill Team does not have the Terminator keyword unless it is comprised exclusively of Terminators. The teleport homer requires a model with the Terminator keyword to function.

Although I'm going to wait on the suppIement to fully decide on my Kill Teams, I'm thinking that this will be my current make up of the primaris (not spamming for combat squads, not my style).

Fortis...5 Auto bolt Intercessors with PF on sgt, 3 assault intercessors, 2 auto plasma hellblasters. No outriders here as I think they're not good unless you take the 5 as a combat squad. Not sure i would even Combat Squad this team.

Indomitor...5 Heavy Intercessors, 2 eradicators, 1 aggressor, 2 Inceptors. Not really an optimized team, it really comes down to what I have leftover from my other marine lists. This is one that might change the most when I see the supplement.

Spectrus...5 Infiltrators, 1 Incursor with HW mine, 1 Reiver, 3 Eliminators. I don't think 9 eliminators in my Ravenguard is worth it anymore, so I'll transport 3 over to the Deathwatch. Combat squad 3 Infils with incursor and reiver. Eliminators will join 2 infiltrators.

So much of this will be dictated by the codex, but I do have a lot of spare Primaris to allocate to Deathwatch.

Sterling191 wrote:

Insularum wrote:

Under the keywords section on the same page of that doc, mixed units do not retain any original keywords, but on the various team entries if there is exclusive squad membership certain keywords can return. So I guess the conflict is that a kill team terminator isn't a terminator unless it's a combat squad of 5 not-terminators - then it magically is again?

Correct. A Proteus Kill Team does not have the Terminator keyword unless it is comprised exclusively of Terminators. The teleport homer requires a model with the Terminator keyword to function.

But you still added a Terminator MODEL from the original Datatsheet because the Datasheet is called Terminator Squad.
I am talking about the act of adding it, not what Keyowords it has afterwards. The rule for the teleport home explicitly say model, not "model with keyword X".

In your Logic, if it's not a Terminator (despite that's the model's name), what is it instead then?
If you were right, the whole wording of that rule would be pointless because Terminator squads are the only Datasheet with that keyword. In that case they could have written "this unit" (as GW usually does) and didn't need to change the wording to "a unit" to be more generic compared to the usual way. But having GW changed it implies that it is intended to be working with more than one Datasheet

Pyrosphere wrote:


In your Logic, if it's not a Terminator (despite that's the model's name), what is it instead then?

First things first, it's not my logic. It's GW's explicit rules language regarding what it means to put a word or section in bold. Look at your BRB (I don't have it on hand to give you a page reference unfortunately), but there is a section dedicated entirely to defining what it means to use a keyword or a model or unit name. If memory serves it's near the beginning of the Core Rules section.

As to your question, it's a Deathwatch Terminator model with the Infantry, Core, Kill Team, Proteus keywords. The teleport homer ability keys off of the Terminator keyword. If it did not, it would not function for a standalone Deathwatch Terminator team as they are Deathwatch Terminators, not Terminators. Yes, GW's rules definitions are that pedantic.

The rule for the teleport home explicitly say model, not "model with keyword X".

Incorrect. The wording of the teleport homer ability is as follows:

"Once per battle, at the start of your Movement phase, if this unit contains a Terminator model, you can remove this unit from the battlefield and then, in the Reinforcements step of your next Movement phase, you can set this unit back up on the battlefield, anywhere wholly within your own deployment zone and more than 9" away from any enemy models, or anywhere within 3" of a friendly Deathwatch model and more than 9" away from any enemy models. If the battle ends and this unit is not on the battlefield, it is destroyed. If this unit has split into two units because of its Combat Squads ability, only one of those units can use the Deathwatch Teleport Homer abilit"

Per the 9th BRB, that is a keyword, not a model name. Otherwise you're going to need to explain what the "Deathwatch" model they're referencing later in the rule is (hint, it's not a model, it's another Keyword).

If you were right, the whole wording of that rule would be pointless because Terminator squads are the only Datasheet with that keyword. In that case they could have written "this unit" (as GW usually does) and didn't need to change the wording to "a unit" to be more generic compared to the usual way. But having GW changed it implies that it is intended to be working with more than one Datasheet

I am right, and the ability is in fact pointless as written when inherited by a mixed Proteus kill team. As are most of the abilities inherited by the kill teams in the current index for precisely the same reason. You cant use the Reiver strat on a Spectrus kill team because it doesnt inherit the correct keyword unless its comprised entirely of Reivers. You cannot use the Intercessor rapid fire strat on a Fortis kill team because it cannot under any circumstances gain the Intercessor Keyword.

And so on, and so forth. As I've said previously in the thread, the potential for a lot of combos are there, but are currently explicitly excluded because of rules nuance exceptions like this. Had GW proofed this index better, we'd have a significantly more functional army ruleset. But they didnt, and we dont.

At first: I know how Keywords are indicated.

Sterling191 wrote:
Per the 9th BRB, that is a keyword, not a model name. Otherwise you're going to need to explain what the "Deathwatch" model they're referencing later in the rule is (hint, it's not a model, it's another Keyword).

I have to admit I have overread that Deathwatch-Sentence. As far as I remember, up to this point the wording was to only mention the Keyword (so "Terminator" and not "Terminator model"), which was confusing here.
But that doesn't change that GW is running in circles here.

 bullyboy wrote:
Although I'm going to wait on the suppIement to fully decide on my Kill Teams, I'm thinking that this will be my current make up of the primaris (not spamming for combat squads, not my style).

Fortis...5 Auto bolt Intercessors with PF on sgt, 3 assault intercessors, 2 auto plasma hellblasters. No outriders here as I think they're not good unless you take the 5 as a combat squad. Not sure i would even Combat Squad this team.

Indomitor...5 Heavy Intercessors, 2 eradicators, 1 aggressor, 2 Inceptors. Not really an optimized team, it really comes down to what I have leftover from my other marine lists. This is one that might change the most when I see the supplement.

Spectrus...5 Infiltrators, 1 Incursor with HW mine, 1 Reiver, 3 Eliminators. I don't think 9 eliminators in my Ravenguard is worth it anymore, so I'll transport 3 over to the Deathwatch. Combat squad 3 Infils with incursor and reiver. Eliminators will join 2 infiltrators.

So much of this will be dictated by the codex, but I do have a lot of spare Primaris to allocate to Deathwatch.

In the 4(?) years since this army has been released, pretty much every build has been completely invalidated by each change released. I'm probably not buying anything until the FAQ for the supplement means I've got 6 months until GW wipes me out again. That said, thoughts at the moment:

Fortis: I don't.... get this team. Like at all. I've got all the stuff, but I don't see how any of it mixes. At the moment, I'm not seeing a reason to run this team.

Indomitor: Heavy Intercessors feel pretty mainline but the killteam feels awkward. Eradicators are awesome, but adding ablative woulds demands those wounds shoot at the same target for them to remain awesome. Aggressors and Incursors have really awkward ranges for this team. Not sure.

Spectrus: Probably the team I'm mostly likely to pick up beforehand if I get motivated as they seem like they'll be fairly important. Good combat squad options and Eliminators mix into the unit fairly well. Pretty interested in this one.

I will say, the big wildcard is the killteam keyword added to each. I think/hope we'll see a lot of Strats that require the killteam to use and they'll probably really determine what works. As is, none of the killteams really have an incentive to mix, even if I theoretically like the idea.

 LunarSol wrote:

Indomitor: Heavy Intercessors feel pretty mainline but the killteam feels awkward. Eradicators are awesome, but adding ablative woulds demands those wounds shoot at the same target for them to remain awesome. Aggressors and Incursors have really awkward ranges for this team. Not sure.

Fully agree on the Aggressors and Inceptors. Both look to be better off as standalone formations (the former because they want to be smashing stuff in melee, while the latter want to be zooming around the table as mini-gunships) which dont for a moment mesh with the other options in the loadout.. Which leaves us with HIs and Eradicators.

I know the memetic choice is the 5/5 combo (and honest to god I want somebody to run a 30+ Eradicator list at a WHW event just to give a giant feth you to the rules team that put us in this mess), but I do genuinely think (at the current price point at least) there is a place for a 6/4 Indomitor team in a lot of lists. 6 HIs with no special weapon and 4 heavy Eradicators comes out on my napkin math at 348 points. Combat squad down to 3/2 elements and you're forcing your opponent to chew through three HIs before ever getting to the juicy Eradicator center, while also not overloading weapons in either squad to a point where the double tap of the Eradicators is legitimately threatened. The end result is a dangerous, durable, but not overwhelmingly expensive or ludicrously aggro-drawing unit that just has to be dealt with. Park each midfield, add character aura support to taste and let them go to town slagging vehicles and elite infantry.

(Note: none of the above should be considered a disavowal of my burning hatred of Eradicators and how exceptionally bad I think they are for 9th as a whole, just a dispassionate look at how I would personally use them in the current Kill Team structure)

I tried super hard not to turn every one of those into "except combat squad abuse".

 LunarSol wrote:
I tried super hard not to turn every one of those into "except combat squad abuse".

In fairness, I think deploying creative combat squads of mixed models is a far different beast than "here's a 5/5 split so you can bypass model restrictions", and are the other half of the Mixed Unit equation IMO. Even if GW doesnt give them bespoke special rules for being mixed, they can cause strategic issues by virtue of the ingredients you use. One of my favorite Proteus Kill Teams for instance is the 5 Vet, 3 Bike, 2 VanVet loadout (which I ran in 8th and do still plan to attempt to make work in 9th). Combat squadding makes it work, but it results in constituent components that fulfill very different roles than their constituent progenitor parts.

We're one of the few factions that can legitimately make Combat Squads an asset. Lean into that where you can, without being dumbtastic about the whole thing.

Absolutely. That's definitely why I like Spectrus team best among the options. It feels like the one in which the resulting split teams are more mechanically compelling than gimmicky.

Sterling191 wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
I tried super hard not to turn every one of those into "except combat squad abuse".

In fairness, I think deploying creative combat squads of mixed models is a far different beast than "here's a 5/5 split so you can bypass model restrictions", and are the other half of the Mixed Unit equation IMO. Even if GW doesnt give them bespoke special rules for being mixed, they can cause strategic issues by virtue of the ingredients you use. One of my favorite Proteus Kill Teams for instance is the 5 Vet, 3 Bike, 2 VanVet loadout (which I ran in 8th and do still plan to attempt to make work in 9th). Combat squadding makes it work, but it results in constituent components that fulfill very different roles than their constituent progenitor parts.

We're one of the few factions that can legitimately make Combat Squads an asset. Lean into that where you can, without being dumbtastic about the whole thing.

I definitely agree that it is an asset, and while I still think there's value in that mixed Bike/Vanguard unit, much of what made I loved about it in 8th was the bonuses it received from being a mixed unit - even when combat squadded. Being able to fall back, shoot, and still charge made it an ultra maneuverable threat that was fun to use. Now it's just sort of a Bike squad with a couple of slightly different models.

Combat squad as the only benefit for these mixed units seems to be a far cry from what made Kill Teams exciting in the first place.

Unrelated, but I'm excited to paint up some Deathwatch flyers to flank my Blackstars. May not be particularly effective in any way, but it'll look bloody badass.

Could i still use Stalker Patern Boltgun with a storm shield?

And do you guys still use storm bolters? till now i have to cut all my vets, because everyone has sb/ss or stalker / ss -.-

The current equipment list does not permit an SBG to be used with a Storm Shield.

That said, don’t go hacking anything up. The supplement should be out soon(tm), and will likely change everything again.

 Hesselhof wrote:
Could i still use Stalker Patern Boltgun with a storm shield?

And do you guys still use storm bolters? till now i have to cut all my vets, because everyone has sb/ss or stalker / ss -.-

I would definitely not still use storm bolters. I have actually taken the opportunity to prime up basically my whole bits bag, and cut most of my marines at the wrist (except for a couple with awkward weapons like hths I know I wont be able to) and now I have 15 or so swappablemarines.

Stalker/SS is not allowed, no. They're enforcing the two-handed nature of the shotguns and stalkers now for some reason.

Thanks for reply. Hmmm

How would a DW list look like atm? =/

 Hesselhof wrote:
Thanks for reply. Hmmm

How would a DW list look like atm? =/

I would not suggest investing in anything you don't already have, and for the most part just play whatever you want for right now. There's a ton of new units previously unavailable, and with how few people represent the faction competitively there is unlikely to be consensus on what a good DW list looks like for quite some time. The army is in flux because the supplement isn't here yet, but it also means experimentation is key right now.

 Hesselhof wrote:
Thanks for reply. Hmmm

How would a DW list look like atm? =/

Overall for space marines right now, it seems like you need 2-3 sturdy obsec units. Use one to cover your home objective.

Then get a second obsec unit on top of one of the objectives in no-man’s land in turn 1 to start scoring primaries in turn 2. Heavy intercessors have the best points-wounds ratio in the Deathwatch list right now, and they’re T5. But vets with chainswords are only slightly less efficient on points-to-wounds (but at T4). Also, unlike other armies that might struggle to get infantry onto an objective 12” away in one turn, Deathwatch can use combat-squadded obsec bikes or vanguard vets to camp the second objective.

Then you need at least 1-2 strong countercharge units to scrape off anything that tries to take one of those objectives from you—this is a good place to put the buffing characters as well. Terminators, aggressors, vanguard vets with melee weapons, bladeguard vets. They run back and forth between your two objectives, which are usually within 12-18 inches of each other, and make sure that you score the “hold two” primary points every turn.

[edit note] Lightning claws are currently the most efficient of the 1-damage power weapons right now (because of the extra attacks), and they are free on Deathwatch terminators.

Then you need some fast-moving units for bullying and harassing, picking up extra points on secondaries, contesting lightly-defended objectives, and killing long-range shooting threats. Bikes/outriders, inceptors, speeders, flyers, outflanking eradicators. Even a combat squad of 5 reivers with grav chutes can be made obsec and can drop in and grab a lightly-defended objective anywhere on the table for 100 points.

So there are lots of options for Deathwatch. It’s just that the options, except for the obsec combat squads, are not very competitive or fluffy right now compared with generic space marines.

the_scotsman wrote:

Stalker/SS is not allowed, no. They're enforcing the two-handed nature of the shotguns and stalkers now for some reason.

I loathe the fact every one of those things is stuck loading the clip....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ancible wrote:

Combat squad as the only benefit for these mixed units seems to be a far cry from what made Kill Teams exciting in the first place.

I suspect we'll see a lot of stuff moved to strategems that target the different Kill Team keywords.

Once someone mentioned the idea of special rules moving towards strategems I actually really like it more than special rule bloat, just from a gameplay and diversity perspective.

By making it a once per turn strategem, it discourages repetition and encourages taking a variety of units.

Personally I dont plan on taking more than two of any kill team, I like how each team brings something a little bit different which means you are going to play them differently.

Heavy intercessors strike me as great backfield objective sitters. I dont plan on running more than 3 eradicators(especially since I expect an eventual nerf before covid ends) and rather want to bring ALL THE BIKES(I love bikes, got 3 go-karts on the way).

So on and so forth.

I personally like that we are not as OP as regular marines, means I will get better matches.

 Leth wrote:
Once someone mentioned the idea of special rules moving towards strategems I actually really like it more than special rule bloat, just from a gameplay and diversity perspective.

Because nothing says fun times like a rule turning into a once-per turn CP fueled gotcha moment.

It's no less rules bloat than simply allowing Kill Teams to actually, y'know, do things, but instead you're stuck with the entire rest of your army that apparently forgot how to be Kill Teams. It was garbage design for Apocalypse, and if implemented it's going to be equally garbage for mainline 40k.

I have to agree. There are already like 50 stratagems in the game (hell, in the space marine codex alone) too many. There should be like... 5. Total.

Everything else should be on datasheets, and pointed appropriately.

90% of the imbalance in this game right now is due to stratagems being used in ways and on units that the GW team didn't consider. Or because a stratagem is faction/chapter locked. Just look at the slaanesh shoot-twice stratagem, which basically makes all slaanesh forces overpowered and cheap, and any other chaos faction weak and overcosted.

Even a combat squad of 5 reivers with grav chutes can be made obsec and can drop in and grab a lightly-defended objective anywhere on the table for 100 points.

RAW, that dies not work at the Moment due to Lazy rules writing. Declaration of Reserve, passengers in Transport etc. Is Done before deployment, splitting in combat squads happens at the Start of deployment. So, when declaring reserves, you don 't have a full unit of grave chute Models and can't Use the deep strike...

Many thanks for the tipps.

yesterday I made some thougts about a basic structure

Battalion:

Watchmaster

5 Infils + 5 incursor/ or 10 infils
5 infils + 5 incursor/ or 10 infils
5 stalker patern vets + 3 bikes with chainsword + 1 VV double pistol + 1 VV double claw
5 stalker patern vets + 3 bikes with chainsword + 1 VV double pistol + 1 VV double claw

Then i was thinking of adding 2x5 terminators: 3 with hammer + shield 2 with double claw, dunno if single or added in a killteam for counter charge

What for second or third hq? as anti tank/monster/ big stuff eradicators?

You guys this could work?

I tried hvy. Intercessor with eradicators, combat splitted into 2+3 and 3+2, which worked ok. I would definitely recommend a master apothecary - full heal of two gravis models per turn and 0 cp revival is really hilarious... i was not impressed by the performance of incursor/ infiltrators, the only thing they are good at is deploy scramblers... 5 deepstriking termies with triple flamer were fun and rather cheap with power swords

As regarding terminators: what about 4 veterans with stalker, together with a cyclone terminator for fire support and 4 cc terminators with black shield with 2 cc weapons as countercharge? Black shield with fist and cs or claw dishes out 5 attacks fist at ws 2+...

Bossdoc wrote:

As regarding terminators: what about 4 veterans with stalker, together with a cyclone terminator for fire support and 4 cc terminators with black shield with 2 cc weapons as countercharge? Black shield with fist and cs or claw dishes out 5 attacks fist at ws 2+...

THIS sounds great or blackshield with double claw for 7 atks in charge

but is 4 vets + BS possible?

RAW, that dies not work at the Moment due to Lazy rules writing. Declaration of Reserve, passengers in Transport etc. Is Done before deployment, splitting in combat squads happens at the Start of deployment. So, when declaring reserves, you don 't have a full unit of grave chute Models and can't Use the deep strike...

See index page 3 abilities, it works they took the example with vets and termis

 Hesselhof wrote:

THIS sounds great or blackshield with double claw for 7 atks in charge

but is 4 vets + BS possible?

It is not. Blackshields cannot be taken in Proteus Kill Teams.

 Hesselhof wrote:

See index page 3 abilities, it works they took the example with vets and termis

Sadly it does not. The Index got the order of operations wrong for pre-game steps. If the order were different, it would work. But it isnt.

Ok so a black shield only can included in a pure veteran squad?

Could i use 4 vets + termi & 4 termis + sarg? (squaded)


With the index ability, just wow - gj GW.... XD

 Hesselhof wrote:
Many thanks for the tipps.

yesterday I made some thougts about a basic structure

Battalion:

Watchmaster

5 Infils + 5 incursor/ or 10 infils
5 infils + 5 incursor/ or 10 infils
5 stalker patern vets + 3 bikes with chainsword + 1 VV double pistol + 1 VV double claw
5 stalker patern vets + 3 bikes with chainsword + 1 VV double pistol + 1 VV double claw

Then i was thinking of adding 2x5 terminators: 3 with hammer + shield 2 with double claw, dunno if single or added in a killteam for counter charge

What for second or third hq? as anti tank/monster/ big stuff eradicators?

You guys this could work?

Usually, when I make a DW list, I go for:

1) Allied patrol of something super-cheap to hold objectives, provide a screen if I'm up against an enemy I know has a super reliable turn 1 alpha strike, and perform actions so my expensive deathwatch duders can go smash face. I've been loving the Rogue Trader patrol from the boxed game plus a flexi-assassin imperial agent who is often a Vindicare.

2) jump chaplain whose job is to pop the +2" charge aura. I now run her with the relic that grants her a +1A aura within 6", jump pack, master of sanctity. Then I've got a 10-man vet squad in a drop pod, and a 9-man vanvet squad with a mix of HTHs and Chainsword+Storm Shield. Depending on how my opponent's army looks, all of it might be in deep strike, just the chaplain might be on the board, or both the chaplain and vanvets might be on the board, basically comes down to is my opponent coming to me or am I going to come to him turn 2.

The chaplain can now come down and pop the +2" charge aura in the move phase with Inspiring Oratory, which basically replaces her previous tactic of pulling in the assault squad using the beacon angelis. This last game, the squad in the pod had sergeant with HTH, blackshield with HTH, a couple Lightning Claw+Combiflamer guys, and the rest Chainsword+Storm Shield.

3) Troop kill teams consisting of 5 terminators, 5 veterans, and my captain who's generally the warlord. I'm now taking Storm of Fire on him since I make pretty heavy use of boltguns in the teams. The terminators deep strike if I need them to go up the board, or stick to the squad if I need them to tank longrange firepower. Combiplasma+Chainsword, Bolter+Storm Shield, and Frag Cannon are my most common vet setup here.

Thank you for your advice!

But if you use a cheap allie patrol you lose the combat doctrines, is it worth?

How do ypu equipt the termis?

 Hesselhof wrote:
Thank you for your advice!

But if you use a cheap allie patrol you lose the combat doctrines, is it worth?

How do ypu equipt the termis?

Combat doctrines isn't as clear cut as it used to be...

Old codex rule needed every model to have the rule in order for doctrines to work, new codex (going from preview vids as I don't have it yet) states that all models must have either <ADEPTUS ASTARTES>, <UNALIGNED> or <AGENT OF THE IMPERIUM> keywords. Potentially this allows other marine chapters, Inquisitors, Assassins, Grey Knights and Legion of the Damned to be added, but I doubt a cheap patrol is hidden amongst those options so it's questionable if it's worth the CP cost. If we continue to not have a super doctrine after the supplement, doing a patrol of other marines isn't totally silly.

A patrol as a second detachment does cost you CPs in 9th edition, though.

There's plenty of extra troop slots. Just take some cheap primaris Deathwatch troops to stand on the home objective. Then you don't have to pay for the required HQ for the patrol or pay the 2 CPs

 Hesselhof wrote:
Thank you for your advice!

But if you use a cheap allie patrol you lose the combat doctrines, is it worth?

How do ypu equipt the termis?

Yeah, so far I've played without them. Having a screen and having 4 mini-characters able to run around the board raising banners, holding objectives and hiding out of LOS has been worthwhile to me more so than the extra AP i'd get turn 2-3 (I only field a couple heavy weapons so it's not great turn 1, and turn 4+ rarely matters anyhow)

We dont have to wait long, to hopefully get this mess fixed.:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/10/15/warhammer-40000-the-codex-roadmap
Text states that DW is coming right after Necrons. But the pictures looks more like SW will be in between.

So I finally got my codex and I think people are sleeping on the Phobos warlord trait allowing for 3 units to re-deploy.

I wish the Phobos captains weapon wasn’t “meh” or he had the options t swap and I would take him, however Phobos librarian and two infiltrator units seems like a solid investment, especially since we will be able to reposition after finding out if we go first or second.

Put midfield deployment blockers and adjust depending on how our opponent deploys/puts units in reserves.

Plus Phobos psychic powers have some solid utility, and having the denies/smites wouldn’t hurt.

 Leth wrote:
So I finally got my codex and I think people are sleeping on the Phobos warlord trait allowing for 3 units to re-deploy.

I wish the Phobos captains weapon wasn’t “meh” or he had the options t swap and I would take him, however Phobos librarian and two infiltrator units seems like a solid investment, especially since we will be able to reposition after finding out if we go first or second.

the redeploy from this trait is before we know who starts, it is kinda gamble but still nice

Ahhh you are right, boo.

Still could see some use to prevent enemy units from getting the middle of the board and then pulling back to safety, but might not be worth it.

 Leth wrote:
Ahhh you are right, boo.

Still could see some use to prevent enemy units from getting the middle of the board and then pulling back to safety, but might not be worth it.

I think it isn't worth it. If it were a stratagem like the Ultramarine one, then it would be situationally useful since the opportunity cost command points is much less than devoting a Warlord trait to the effort.

With the new Codex structure we can take up to three different WLTs now. It’s not *that* large an opportunity cost. Most of the basic ones are pretty terrible.

Losing the post-roll off function hurts though.

Sterling191 wrote:
With the new Codex structure we can take up to three different WLTs now. It’s not *that* large an opportunity cost. Most of the basic ones are pretty terrible.

Losing the post-roll off function hurts though.

I suppose that's fair, but that's a CP cost on top of a Warlord trait right now. Maybe worth it very situationally, but even with just from the Phobos list there are more impactful options, IMHO.

Impactful possibly, but for 1 cp it can make it much easier to win a game well in excess of its cost.

Movement and board control are what win games now, not killing and smash hero hammer.

 Leth wrote:
Impactful possibly, but for 1 cp it can make it much easier to win a game well in excess of its cost.

Movement and board control are what win games now, not killing and smash hero hammer.

Fair enough. Any suggestions on how to make the best use of it and for which units? Are the results based entirely on the mental games you're playing with your opponent here? I haven't had a chance to play a game with the new codex yet.

Neither have I sadly, no games of 9th yet but I have watched a bunch of battle reports and practice deployed a few times.

My initial thoughts were either a Phobos captan(depending on our relics) or librarian and two infiltrator units.

Idea being that if your opponent has infiltrators/out of deployment zone deployment? Then you can put your guys in the middle to zone them out. They re-deploy after deployment has finished.

Not being after first turn is determined really limits its use. a lot of the movement abilities you want to block is post first turn being decided.

One of the big uses I can see for it is re-deploying your infiltrators based on where your opponent deploys for area denial, line breaker, etc. So much varies based on the deployment zone type and the secondaries that you take.

One thing I did find is that using one unit of infiltrators and one unit of Servitors I can reserve block the entire short side of the board and 23 inches or so into the long side. Really amazing for reserve and area denial. Next I need to see how it all fits in regards to the different objective placements and seeing how much it takes to block the entire half of the board with different deployments while also being in range of objectives. If I can get the measurements down in practice it will save a LOT of time setting up during the actual games.

Welp, one way or another we'll have our answers in about a week:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/10/25/sunday-preview-brothers-in-arms/

Sterling191 wrote:
Welp, one way or another we'll have our answers in about a week:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/10/25/sunday-preview-brothers-in-arms/

I like the dice a lot, but the Combat Patrol is a big question mark for me. Not that those kits aren't useful - I would have had a mighty big use for this type of box back when I was running those auto boltrifle Intergressor units. Today, these seem awkward given what we've seen from Index Deathwatch and Primaris vis a vis Kill Team design and Special Issue Ammunition. It's a savings, but only once given how much of that savings is eaten by characters you won't want repeats of. Will have to wait to see the Supplement to determine if new collectors will find the other units worth considering.

It's probably worth picking up just for the Apothecary right now. Also I'll be curious to see how they do the shoulder pads. I suppose 2 of the existing frames?

 LunarSol wrote:
It's probably worth picking up just for the Apothecary right now.

Eh, it's easy enough to convert up the Helix Adept parts from the Infiltrator kit to make a full blown Apoth. Im mostly amused that the entire box cannot utilize SIA, nor can you even begin to make a kill team out of any of the contents.

 LunarSol wrote:
Also I'll be curious to see how they do the shoulder pads. I suppose 2 of the existing frames?

I dont know about that. Each currently comes with 10 non-Gravis pads, which would leave 8 unallocated (plus the extra Gravis/Terminator pad). That's uncharacteristically generous by GW standards.

Sterling191 wrote:

I dont know about that. Each currently comes with 10 non-Gravis pads, which would leave 8 unallocated (plus the extra Gravis/Terminator pad). That's uncharacteristically generous by GW standards.

When the faction first launched the Terminator kit came with 3 sprues of the things. Personally, I'm hoping it comes with a new Primaris upgrade frame that has a third large pad, but I think they'd be selling them with this release if that was the case.

 LunarSol wrote:

When the faction first launched the Terminator kit came with 3 sprues of the things.

While true, that was before the era of $55 for 5 Aspect Warriors.

 LunarSol wrote:

Personally, I'm hoping it comes with a new Primaris upgrade frame that has a third large pad, but I think they'd be selling them with this release if that was the case.

You and everyone else looking at converting up the new Gravis line, which part of me thinks is precisely why they wont do it (so you have to shell out for more).

 LunarSol wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

I dont know about that. Each currently comes with 10 non-Gravis pads, which would leave 8 unallocated (plus the extra Gravis/Terminator pad). That's uncharacteristically generous by GW standards.

When the faction first launched the Terminator kit came with 3 sprues of the things. Personally, I'm hoping it comes with a new Primaris upgrade frame that has a third large pad, but I think they'd be selling them with this release if that was the case.

There was the Imperial Fists battle force box that included a Primaris upgrade sprue (the one with the misprint on the power fist) that I don't think was available separately for quite some time. I also don't think they did much to promote it in that box since I remember most of the discussion was about how it was a surprise.

Sterling191 wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

Personally, I'm hoping it comes with a new Primaris upgrade frame that has a third large pad, but I think they'd be selling them with this release if that was the case.

You and everyone else looking at converting up the new Gravis line, which part of me thinks is precisely why they wont do it (so you have to shell out for more).

Upgrade frames... this is the area I have my eye on the most, and am totally prepped to be disappointed by the most (potentially more than SIA). Throughout 8th, each of the 1st founding chapters had their own primaris upgrade frames, and these were used to coincide with giving primaris additional wargear options (all the intercessor sergeant options originated from the frames). Given that DW are now in the main dex, and are getting the standard issue supplement treatment, my very wishlisty hope is that we also get the upgrade frame treatment for each of our new teams/unique weapons:

Gravis/Terminator shared shoulder pads kit - heavy intercessors are a match made in heaven for the infernus HB, we could also do with a part for a certain fist/melta combi weapon on our terminators.
Fortis/Proteus shared shoulder pads kit - intercessor sergeants have a tradition of getting all the melee weapon goodness, heavy hammers/xeno blades spring to mind.
Spectrus shoulder pads kit - Reivers with shotguns. Rool of cool demands this happens. Would be good to see a proper phobos scale shoulder pad too I guess.

The total lack of any hint of anything to do with this in the new combat patrol box though makes me think my wishlist will never be more than wishful thinking though.

Insularum wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

Personally, I'm hoping it comes with a new Primaris upgrade frame that has a third large pad, but I think they'd be selling them with this release if that was the case.

You and everyone else looking at converting up the new Gravis line, which part of me thinks is precisely why they wont do it (so you have to shell out for more).

Upgrade frames... this is the area I have my eye on the most, and am totally prepped to be disappointed by the most (potentially more than SIA). Throughout 8th, each of the 1st founding chapters had their own primaris upgrade frames, and these were used to coincide with giving primaris additional wargear options (all the intercessor sergeant options originated from the frames). Given that DW are now in the main dex, and are getting the standard issue supplement treatment, my very wishlisty hope is that we also get the upgrade frame treatment for each of our new teams/unique weapons:

Gravis/Terminator shared shoulder pads kit - heavy intercessors are a match made in heaven for the infernus HB, we could also do with a part for a certain fist/melta combi weapon on our terminators.
Fortis/Proteus shared shoulder pads kit - intercessor sergeants have a tradition of getting all the melee weapon goodness, heavy hammers/xeno blades spring to mind.
Spectrus shoulder pads kit - Reivers with shotguns. Rool of cool demands this happens. Would be good to see a proper phobos scale shoulder pad too I guess.

The total lack of any hint of anything to do with this in the new combat patrol box though makes me think my wishlist will never be more than wishful thinking though.

Phobos shotguns might well be enough to keep me on Deathwatch by itself. Adding Infernus HB options, and/or changing the rules for frag cannons / shotguns in general, would also be pretty great.

Unfortunately I don't see any of this happening. I'm waiting until the supplement drops, but without significant changes from the index the likelihood is that I'll be dropping DW simply because they no longer exist (in a recognisable/fluff way). Probably change to an army with some actual character. But I'll wait for the supplement. Give GW a chance to surprise me.

I know we're still in the pre-codex WTF phase, but Goonhammer dropped a new Hammer of Math this morning about the updated power weapon profiles:

https://www.goonhammer.com/hammer-of-math-power-weapons/

I personally hadnt run the numbers, but my gut was leaning towards LCs from the get go. Nice to know I wasnt completely off base. A sleeper surprise that I hadnt clocked was the Relic Blade change. Going to S7 and flat 2 damage, while not incurring an accuracy malus makes it super reliable, both in basic units but also on characters (the latter screams for something like Imperiums Sword to push it to that sweet sweet S8 break point).

I really do think there's play for 5-man Vet squads with massed LCs, as well as standalone VanVet squads zooming around the table carving things up.

That Vet squad idea - you mean massed dual LC, or DW Bolter + LC?

The Black Shield with dual LC seems so insane and I love it.

Ancible wrote:
That Vet squad idea - you mean massed dual LC, or DW Bolter + LC?

Bolter plus LC. 115 points for the squad.

Ancible wrote:

The Black Shield with dual LC seems so insane and I love it.

The huge problem with Black Shields right now is that they require a minimum squad size of 6. They can no longer replace a Vet in a 5-man team, nor can they go into Proteus kill teams. It's fething idiotic.

Sterling191 wrote:

Ancible wrote:
That Vet squad idea - you mean massed dual LC, or DW Bolter + LC?

Bolter plus LC. 115 points for the squad.

Ancible wrote:

The Black Shield with dual LC seems so insane and I love it.

The huge problem with Black Shields right now is that they require a minimum squad size of 6. They can no longer replace a Vet in a 5-man team, nor can they go into Proteus kill teams. It's fething idiotic.

While I agree that is a problem, I'm thinking it isn't all that big of one given the Doctrine bonus for DW is apparently combat squad (I'm only half serious).

The whole Index is a complete mess but one way or the other we'll get clarity in about a week.

As for that 115 point Vet loadout - I love it.

At this point the answer to all my problems seems to be Combat Squad it.

Are the Vanguard Vets with dual a Inferno Pistol and the upgraded Power sword still possible? Because the new melee rules look like they would be beast mode with the DW Vanguard vets....

FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
Are the Vanguard Vets with dual a Inferno Pistol and the upgraded Power sword still possible? Because the new melee rules look like they would be beast mode with the DW Vanguard vets....

Two pistols and a power sword?

I didn't even know this was a thing. And there's no model for it that I know of, so the "no model no rule" will kick in and my guess is that no this isn't possible.

I have never heard of being able to have 3 weapons on the model.

Because it's an illegal loadout.

I'm sure there have been examples in 8th where messing around with wargear replacing ended up with some model (probably a sergeant) ending up with 3 pieces of gear in two hands... but nothing for deathwatch I can recall.

edit: and some may have been faq'd, and none were intentional I'd bet

Niiru wrote:
I'm sure there have been examples in 8th where messing around with wargear replacing ended up with some model (probably a sergeant) ending up with 3 pieces of gear in two hands... but nothing for deathwatch I can recall.

edit: and some may have been faq'd, and none were intentional I'd bet

To my knowledge, the only avenue for this in 8th for Deathwatch was the Powerfist with an aux meltagun (exclusive to Terminators thanks to the Salamander laddie from KT:Cassius). That wargear loadout has been removed for 9th (at least in the Index so far, we'll see what the big book says on the matter shortly).

The Rules preview has been posted




Automatically Appended Next Post:
If we were hoping for changes to the Kill Team rules, I don't think that is likely to occur since they pretty much took verbatim from the Index. I think that means many of these Kill Teams are only useful because of Combat Squad.

The Doctrine bonus being full control over the Doctrine rotation is kind of interesting and I honestly need much more time to personally wrap my head around the power value here. My initial impression is that I like it because it comes off as interesting and potentially tactical, but experience has shown that some fun things like that on paper aren't always as valuable in an actual match.

A whole new discipline is something I dared hope for, and I like that it exists. The ability to reduce the potential impact of massed melee with the Neural Void skill is neat, but the secondary part seems a little difficult to gain benefit out of in a way that your opponent can't work around pretty easily. Maybe I'm misjudging the opportunity cost.

The Strats are the same little flavourful things we are used to from 8th, but I dislike this change to the Aeldari one. I liked the Intercepting Volley Stratagem from the last Codex more.

Yes, the preview is meh (as they always are).

The relic is not bad. FNP 4+ is potent.

But the overall impression is that the index is not something different and "in between" but rather a preview of certain parts of the actual codex.

I hope to be wrong, especially when it comes to SIA. EDIT: apparently I am wrong, pic attached from WH40k Fb page I guess

The doctrines flow pretty nicely on their own, but there's some good synergies here:

Bank Devestator for when you want your heavy weapons to come in from reserves.

Jump ahead to Assault and save a tactical for cleaning up later.

The main issue is that it doesn't really add power the way the better super doctrines do and its going to be much hard to use effectively going second.

 LunarSol wrote:
The doctrines flow pretty nicely on their own, but there's some good synergies here:

Bank Devestator for when you want your heavy weapons to come in from reserves.

Jump ahead to Assault and save a tactical for cleaning up later.

The main issue is that it doesn't really add power the way the better super doctrines do and its going to be much hard to use effectively going second.

Is this counting as our "super doctrine"? Or is it just a special rule that Deathwatch get for doctrines?

If we get a super doctrine as well, that could change things.

Niiru wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
The doctrines flow pretty nicely on their own, but there's some good synergies here:

Bank Devestator for when you want your heavy weapons to come in from reserves.

Jump ahead to Assault and save a tactical for cleaning up later.

The main issue is that it doesn't really add power the way the better super doctrines do and its going to be much hard to use effectively going second.

Is this counting as our "super doctrine"? Or is it just a special rule that Deathwatch get for doctrines?

If we get a super doctrine as well, that could change things.

No superdoctrine, just your "chapter tactics"

KurtAngle2 wrote:

Niiru wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
The doctrines flow pretty nicely on their own, but there's some good synergies here:

Bank Devestator for when you want your heavy weapons to come in from reserves.

Jump ahead to Assault and save a tactical for cleaning up later.

The main issue is that it doesn't really add power the way the better super doctrines do and its going to be much hard to use effectively going second.

Is this counting as our "super doctrine"? Or is it just a special rule that Deathwatch get for doctrines?

If we get a super doctrine as well, that could change things.

No superdoctrine, just your "chapter tactics"

It counts as the Doctrine bonus. The Chapter Tactics are provided in the latest SM Codex.

As far a power goes, I think it's on the same level as a vast majority of the Doctrine bonuses. Salamanders and White Scars are really strong, but the rest are kind of limited or situational or downright weak.

Treat that as an additional "Chapter Tactics rule" since you're effectively trading a Super Doctrine for it

KurtAngle2 wrote:
Treat that as an additional "Chapter Tactics rule" since you're effectively trading a Super Doctrine for it

I mean, outside of maybe White Scars, Salamanders have the truly only powerful Super Doctrine.

The rest are really limited, or situational, or downright weak. This kind of fits with the majority of Doctrine bonuses as far as power level goes. DW isn't Salamanders, which is actually a good thing. Less meta warping faction bonuses is better for everybody.

IF has one that's really situational and only applies for the first turn, which is really easy to avoid.

IH has one that's really situational and only applies to Infantry moving with heavy weapons on the first turn.

UM only really applies to bolter discipline and Infantry moving with heavy weapons on turns 2 and 3.

BT only really applies on turn 3 and on, and is a very minor bonus all things considered.

RG is super limited on targets as it only applies to Characters, and only during turns 2 and 3.

And now DW get full control over Doctrines allowing them more control over when they apply, which I would say is pretty equivalent to a vast majority of those up there. It isn't a one turn wonder, but it applies to your whole army in ways that the tools above don't always.

Ancible wrote:

As far a power goes, I think it's on the same level as a vast majority of the Doctrine bonuses.

Which is a polite way of saying its hot fething garbage.

Sterling191 wrote:

Ancible wrote:

As far a power goes, I think it's on the same level as a vast majority of the Doctrine bonuses.

Which is a polite way of saying its hot fething garbage.

You can see it that way (it seems from other's comments in this thread you do have a reputation to uphold to be the rain at the parade ), but if what you were expecting was more Salamanders level of meta-skew then I'm glad your expectations were not met, friend.

Ancible wrote:

You can see it that way (it seems from other's comments you do have a reputation to uphold to be the rain at the parade )

I call things as they are, so step off. Had this been a stellar reveal with interesting and functional rules, I would be the first to say so. This does nothing to incentivize taking Deathwatch as a monocodex army. Similarly, a whole article telling us "hey remember that Index that is complete gak? Yeah your entire book is shaping up that way" does not bode well.

Ancible wrote:

but if what you were expecting was more Salamanders level of meta-skew then I'm glad your expectations were not met, friend.

What I was expecting was something that made the choice of whether to run Deathwatch as a pure army an actual decision with benefits and drawbacks. This doesnt even come close.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 SatanEatSeitan wrote:
Yes, the preview is meh (as they always are).

The relic is not bad. FNP 4+ is potent.

But the overall impression is that the index is not something different and "in between" but rather a preview of certain parts of the actual codex.

I hope to be wrong, especially when it comes to SIA. EDIT: apparently I am wrong, pic attached from WH40k Fb page I guess

The FNP is purely against mortal wounds, and I'm not about to take the community team commenting in the wilds of facebook as a source on rules, without a corresponding image of said rules, when they're wrong all the goddamn time.

I meant no offense. But if we're calling things as they are, I'd like to warn you that I won't stand for your bullying. There's a whole thread here showing two things - your passion for the faction and and how you approach discussion, and it's unnecessary to get so abrasive and insulting - we're all fans here looking for a good time. You don't get to speak for me just because you're upset.

Sterling191 wrote:
This does nothing to incentivize taking Deathwatch as a monocodex army.

That is a good thing. Does every marine force need an incentive to be monocodex? I don't think the answer to this has to be yes for every Chapter. In fact, I think it is better that it isn't.

Sterling191 wrote:

Ancible wrote:

As far a power goes, I think it's on the same level as a vast majority of the Doctrine bonuses.

Which is a polite way of saying its hot fething garbage.

I mean this is a very marine-centric viewpoint. Saying that superdoctrines are 'hot garbage', when other armies don't get superdoctrines AT ALL, and nobody other than necrons even gets a normal doctrine equivalent (and necron doctrines are mostly worse than marine doctrines)... I mean sure, marine doctrines aren't all overpowered instant-win buttons, but they are free buffs to an army which is already the most powerful in the game.


On deathwatch topic, the ability to choose which doctrine is in effect I think is actually not too bad. It means instead of having to plan your attack around the order of the doctrines (or just ignoring them and not getting the buffs), you will always have the doctrine that you want up when you need it. Would have been nice if this ability was on-top of a superdoctrine, but then that would likely have been a little too much.

Especially if SIA -does- get brought back in line with more units. IF (and it's a big if, see it's in capitals and everything) primaris and other units regain their SIA, then SIA plus this doctrine control become much better than just having a normal average superdoctrine.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ancible wrote:
I meant no offense. But if we're calling things as they are, I'd like to warn you that I won't stand for your bullying. There's a whole thread here showing two things - your passion for the faction and and how you approach discussion, and it's unnecessary to get so abrasive and insulting - we're all fans here looking for a good time. You don't get to speak for me just because you're upset.

Sterling191 wrote:
This does nothing to incentivize taking Deathwatch as a monocodex army.

That is a good thing. Does every marine force need an incentive to be monocodex? I don't think the answer to this has to be yes for every Chapter. In fact, I think it is better that it isn't.

I also agree with this. Now that mono-codex has actually become much more the norm, after the previous multiple editions all heavily favouring soups, it could be interesting (and much more fluffy) for Deathwatch to be the chapter where souping actually has less downside. Would be nice if a deathwatch inquisitor could also take the new psychic powers, but that's unlikely.

Ancible wrote:
I meant no offense. But if we're calling things as they are, I'd like to warn you that I won't stand for your bullying. There's a whole thread here showing two things - your passion for the faction and and how you approach discussion, and it's unnecessary to get so abrasive and insulting - we're all fans here looking for a good time. You don't get to speak for me just because you're upset.

I don't speak for anyone other than myself, and have never claimed to. Do not put words in my mouth.

Ancible wrote:

That is a good thing. Does every marine force need an incentive to be monocodex?

When the abundantly clear design intent of a force is to heavily incentivize monocodex play, to the point of locking out the strongest abilities behind said monocodex status, turning around and screwing over another subfaction from the same army by not giving them an equivalent ability is unequivocally a bad thing.

It's the exact same reason that you wont see Imperial Fists at anything beyond the casual level. They're playing at a substantial handicap compared to other Marine armies precisely because their capstone feature is objectively worthless.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Niiru wrote:

I mean this is a very marine-centric viewpoint. Saying that superdoctrines are 'hot garbage', when other armies don't get superdoctrines AT ALL, and nobody other than necrons even gets a normal doctrine equivalent (and necron doctrines are mostly worse than marine doctrines)... I mean sure, marine doctrines aren't all overpowered instant-win buttons, but they are free buffs to an army which is already the most powerful in the game.

Both Sisters and Necrons would like to have words with you. Both codices were written in a post Marine 2.0 environment, and mechanically incentivize non-mixed armies.

Niiru wrote:

I also agree with this. Now that mono-codex has actually become much more the norm, after the previous multiple editions all heavily favouring soups, it could be interesting (and much more fluffy) for Deathwatch to be the chapter where souping actually has less downside. Would be nice if a deathwatch inquisitor could also take the new psychic powers, but that's unlikely.

Except this isnt what they did. You still lose basic doctrines if you dont run pure Astartes. The difference is that there's no incentive to actually stay pure Deathwatch. It's the worst of both worlds.

I am SUPER happy with our doctrine. It is good, but not broken like White Scars or Salamanders. I would rather have us be powerful without being meta warping. Much better for having fun games instead of no-brainer games that make you a worse player.

It requires a bit of thinking about what to use when. and is 100% useful while not opening up army building options.

Heavy weapons were really limited by only getting the bonus on the first turn. Might be interesting to see how this changes things up.

@ancible I have found that ignoring a few specific users has made my enjoyment of this website a LOT higher. Also shortens threads by 3-4 pages or more sometimes!

Sterling191 wrote:

Ancible wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Niiru wrote:

I mean this is a very marine-centric viewpoint. Saying that superdoctrines are 'hot garbage', when other armies don't get superdoctrines AT ALL, and nobody other than necrons even gets a normal doctrine equivalent (and necron doctrines are mostly worse than marine doctrines)... I mean sure, marine doctrines aren't all overpowered instant-win buttons, but they are free buffs to an army which is already the most powerful in the game.

Both Sisters and Necrons would like to have words with you. Both codices were written in a post Marine 2.0 environment, and mechanically incentivize non-mixed armies.

The Necron buffs, at least so far, are not enough to actually close the gap. Though this is without long-term meta data so it's prone to change.

Sisters are in much the same situation, but with long term info already known.

Niiru wrote:

I also agree with this. Now that mono-codex has actually become much more the norm, after the previous multiple editions all heavily favouring soups, it could be interesting (and much more fluffy) for Deathwatch to be the chapter where souping actually has less downside. Would be nice if a deathwatch inquisitor could also take the new psychic powers, but that's unlikely.

Except this isnt what they did. You still lose basic doctrines if you dont rune pure Astartes. The difference is that there's no incentive to actually stay pure Deathwatch. It's the worst of both worlds.

I mean you said doctrines are garbage, so losing them shouldn't be a big deal. If they are a big deal, then the ability to control which doctrine is active on which round is a decent controlling factor. You can't say doctrines are garbage, but losing them is some huge handicap.

Choosing doctrine order is super beneficial, its crazy to think otherwise. I am really looking forward to seeing how this codex works out.
What people also need to realize is that its still marines at the end of the day, and we're sitting in a really good spot.

Niiru wrote:

The Necron buffs, at least so far, are not enough to actually close the gap. Though this is without long-term meta data so it's prone to change.

Sisters are in much the same situation, but with long term info already known.

The efficacy of said abilities are irrelevant to the fact that the clear design intent is to incentivize non-mixed formations. The fact that they're not good is an indictment of the implementation of said design.

Niiru wrote:

I mean you said doctrines are garbage, so losing them shouldn't be a big deal. If they are a big deal, then the ability to control which doctrine is active on which round is a decent controlling factor. You can't say doctrines are garbage, but losing them is some huge handicap.

Except of course that's not what I said. I said that getting to select which turns a portion of your army gets an AP bonus is not sufficiently powerful enough to incentivize remaining a pure Deathwatch army, which then forces players, especially those on the more competitive edge of the spectrum, to look at at non-Deathwatch supplementary forces to fill the efficacy gap. Had GW wanted to create a system that incentivized taking Deathwatch as an allied force, they could have very easily created rules to support that. They did not.

The end result is either forgoing options that can actually help your army, or persist with a superdoctrine that does effectively nothing outside of niche gotcha plays. It is a distinct handicap when compared to other forces drawn from the same base Codex.

Sterling191 wrote:
...or persist with a superdoctrine that does effectively nothing outside of niche gotcha plays. It is a distinct handicap when compared to other forces drawn from the same base Codex.

I mean... all other superdoctrines last for one or two rounds, and by your own admission almost all of them are pretty weak even for those one or two rounds.

The deathwatch one effectively runs for the entire game, allowing you to have the buff up when you need it, so that it's much less likely to be wasted (unlike for other marine armies, where devastator in particular can be mostly avoided). You also pick the order at the start of each battle round I believe, which is better than most alternatives where the order has to be chosen at the start of the game (necrons), which means you have no tactical flexibility.

The superdoctrine isn't game breaking, but it's not a handicap and it's better than most. If you think it makes deathwatch unplayable as mono-codex because it's not good enough, then I assume you think the same thing about every other marine army except for salamanders.

I mean, having the choice opens up a lot of options for how you build your army. A lot of heavy weapons are now in consideration as well considering that we can better optimize when it applies. I can see heavy infernus or frag cannons having a place if they apply first or second turn.

 Leth wrote:
I mean, having the choice opens up a lot of options for how you build your army. A lot of heavy weapons are now in consideration as well considering that we can better optimize when it applies. I can see heavy infernus or frag cannons having a place if they apply first or second turn.

Frags are assault I think.

Infernus is heavy though.

Niiru wrote:

I mean... all other superdoctrines last for one or two rounds, and by your own admission almost all of them are pretty weak even for those one or two rounds.

Once again, not what I said. Assault doctrine based superdoctrines are goddamn gold right now. Tactical based ones are sitting pretty well (yes, that includes the Raven Guard who live or die by their strats and tactical shenanigans). It's largely the Devastator based ones that are subpar right now (IFs are not even worth bringing to the table, while IHs and DAs generally are willing to eat the gak superdoctrine because of their other baked in special rules).

What I said was that the bad ones are really bad, and this particular superdoctrine is comparably abyssmal.

Niiru wrote:

The deathwatch one effectively runs for the entire game, allowing you to have the buff up when you need it

A buff you already got, and can already plan for. You're acting like Doctrines are somehow new for us.

Niiru wrote:

The superdoctrine isn't game breaking, but it's not a handicap and it's better than most. If you think it makes deathwatch unplayable as mono-codex because it's not good enough, then I assume you think the same thing about every other marine army except for salamanders.

You really cant stop yourself from putting words in my mouth can you? What I said is that it's not even close to being enough incentive to promote a monocodex army as opposed to bringing in other marine forces to supplement our weak areas (primarily mobility and early pressure). Nowhere have I ever said that Deathwatch are unplayable.

 Leth wrote:
I mean, having the choice opens up a lot of options for how you build your army. A lot of heavy weapons are now in consideration as well considering that we can better optimize when it applies. I can see heavy infernus or frag cannons having a place if they apply first or second turn.

What heavy weapons are you taking now that you werent taking before?

Sure, but we can put ourselves in tactical first turn. 7 -3 2 at range 24 is reasonable for 10 points IMO. Especially if we keep our +1 to wound strategem

It's super easy to hide from hvy weapons Turn 1, therefore having the ability to turn that on a later turn is an absolute benefit over regular doctrine order

Did I notice that there is no “Minimum 1 attack” on that power?

So you can completely shut down some Units.

And with creative movement you can control who they are able to charge. Just measure their movement and you can make it so there are only 1-2 choices they have,

Do I think it is crazy powerful? Nope, but I can think of quite a few situations or builds where I would bring it in.

Really it depends on the rest of the tree to determine if it is worth taking over the default marine one.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Did I notice that there is no “Minimum 1 attack” on that power?

So you can completely shut down some Units.

I just replied to someone on the reddit thread regarding that same thing lol.

I'd expect a day-1 faq on it, but otherwise it does make the power a little more interesting. Most marines now have loads of attacks, but there's a bunch of xenos that only have 1 attack.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Leth wrote:
And with creative movement you can control who they are able to charge. Just measure their movement and you can make it so there are only 1-2 choices they have,

Do I think it is crazy powerful? Nope, but I can think of quite a few situations or builds where I would bring it in.

Really it depends on the rest of the tree to determine if it is worth taking over the default marine one.

something else I noticed - it also prevents multi-charging completely, I believe.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Did I notice that there is no “Minimum 1 attack” on that power?

So you can completely shut down some Units.

It's a nice bonus, but honestly the big draw is the ability to force charges to go a particular way. Very niche, very dangerous, and extremely tricky to pull off (you're 100% going to be in deny range if the enemy has any psychic ability, plus you're exposing a not cheap caster), but it's a decent trick to have against a few matchups I can think of.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Niiru wrote:

something else I noticed - it also prevents multi-charging completely, I believe.

It does. Doesnt stop pile in or consolidate shenanigans though, but definitely can do some work on big blocks of things like Sanguinary Guard or Genestealers.

Mission tactics is looking really interesting - it's probably just that it's a community article and is missing half the rules content but it seems to be explicitly different in set up to the other super doctrines seen so far; no mention (yet) of single army requirement, it's a passive ability/always on - not just in your founding chapter's preferred doctrine etc. Very interested in seeing the full rule, as it currently seems open to the possibility of not being mono-faction locked. This would open up the question of whether a DW army with allied codex marines would have 2 doctrines in play at a time. Personally I think this would be a smart move by GW to make DW more popular, as for chapters with a less than stellar super doctrine you probably gain more with an allied DW patrol.

The rest of the community preview new stuff seems fine. New relic is neat, but can't think of a character who's going to be front and centre to benefit from it. New psy power seems like a fun way to try and funnel a unit into some good overwatch - but any real melee threat like genestealers are fast enough to only really be denied a multi charge.

As far as the Relic goes, I'm liking the idea of a T5 Watchmaster.

Insularum wrote:
Mission tactics is looking really interesting - it's probably just that it's a community article and is missing half the rules content but it seems to be explicitly different in set up to the other super doctrines seen so far; no mention (yet) of single army requirement, it's a passive ability/always on - not just in your founding chapter's preferred doctrine etc. Very interested in seeing the full rule, as it currently seems open to the possibility of not being mono-faction locked. This would open up the question of whether a DW army with allied codex marines would have 2 doctrines in play at a time. Personally I think this would be a smart move by GW to make DW more popular, as for chapters with a less than stellar super doctrine you probably gain more with an allied DW patrol.

The rest of the community preview new stuff seems fine. New relic is neat, but can't think of a character who's going to be front and centre to benefit from it. New psy power seems like a fun way to try and funnel a unit into some good overwatch - but any real melee threat like genestealers are fast enough to only really be denied a multi charge.

My first thought on this was, not that you'd have 2 doctrines active at the same time, but it could still be potentially busted.

For example, DW force alongside some RG or WS, then having a good chunk of obsec units charging into your opponents deployment zone on turn 1, with the Assault doctrine.

Love the preview. Anti xenos rules are great and fluffy and I love them.

However. A fair few xenos players have already hinted, more than hinted, they are not interested in playing against deathwatch. The thought is that they struggle enough against normal marines, let alone xenos killing specialists.

Is it possible that deathwatch will be too good at killing xenos that pick up games may be rarer. Will it be fun for xenos armies to play against.

 Leth wrote:
I mean, having the choice opens up a lot of options for how you build your army. A lot of heavy weapons are now in consideration as well considering that we can better optimize when it applies. I can see heavy infernus or frag cannons having a place if they apply first or second turn.

Not to mention it opens up stuff like turn 2 tempo assault strategies.

Anything that doesn't specifically reward loading up on identically-equipped, uniform ranks of primaris riflemen I suspect will be labeled garbage by Sterling.

My usual list features next to no Heavy weapons, so being able to start in Tactical, switch to Assault turn 2,and then choose between tactical and assault turn 3 is extremely impactful.

And yeah. Absolutely hilarious to label most superdoctrines as "hot garbage" when they are literally a thing 90% of the factions in the game still don't have when you play against them.

Sisters of Battle wasn't the right faction to model with Karen haircuts.

the_scotsman wrote:

Anything that doesn't specifically reward loading up on identically-equipped, uniform ranks of primaris riflemen I suspect will be labeled garbage by Sterling.

It's amusing that that's precisely the kind of build this stupidity favors. But go on, do tell me how I play my Deathwatch. This will be fun. Especially when I'm on record in this thread and elsewhere as a ride or die Veteran player. Peddle your anti-Primaris fetish someplace else.

Saw this floating around.

These are actually pretty good and I can see circumstances to use all of them.

Nowhere to hide took a slight nerf (cant negate dense cover), and with the new Dragonfire it's a bit redundant for SIA toting units, but it's a solid force multiplier for other units.

Vigilance is likewise a slightly nerfed old school Tome, but on a Captain it allows them to make a unit super-reliable against a target that just has to die. - EDIT: initially this seems a little underwhelming, but in combination with the new KT Specialisms it allows a character to power up any Kill Team to their full wound reroll every turn. Super good in that context.

Optimized Priority shores up a massive weakness of forces that go heavy on big Kill Teams, and I see that one being a near auto take.

Likewise Ties allows you to pretty reliably own an objective against anything other than a big honking horde army (full KTs counting as 20 models? Yes please).

I'm going to miss the old +1D for Castellan, but I get wanting to limit that from being able to double dip. A freebie piece of SIW isn't a bad trade off.

Paragon is both superbly fluffy, and also *really* good. Letting us cherry pick WLTs from any other marine army is awesome and likely allows for serious list specialization. - EDIT: not quite as powerful as I initially thought as it only allows us to crib from the prime Codex and not supplements, but that's still a *lot* of options to pick from.

I have more, enjoy (wait)

Paragon of the chapter is going to be a blast. Brilliant Strategist in combo with Mission Tactics has some real appeal.

Kill Team Specialisms?

OH MY.

25-35 points for a always on reroll wounds against a specific FoC? I'm gonna need a minute here.

Looks to be like old mission tactics, but you pay for it instead. I can dig it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
You know, I don't care how powerful this codex is. Fluff wise, they got me.

 bullyboy wrote:

You know, I don't care how powerful this codex is. Fluff wise, they got me.

I'm gonna agree with this. The ability to build each unit to do a specific job out of basic lads is what got me into Deathwatch, and they're nailing it. Would love to see the full KT and SIA rules (for the latter specifically how it's doled out to non-Proteus units), but this is definitely enough to get me hyped.

Yeah, the new specialisms could be brutal.

I am thinking of inceptors with bolters and aggressors, always rerolling wounds vs. a FoC


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I have also seen the psychic doctrine, but the original post on Fb was taken down before I could take a screenshot

Noticing some points weirdness on a few things in the codex, but otherwise it seems to line up squarely with the Index.

Stalker Boltguns are 5 for Vets, but 2 for Bikers.

Storm Bolters are back down to 2 for Vets.

Frags are up to 15.

Fists are at 8 and hammers 12 for Vets (unsure if this is different from the Index).

Apparently you can only have one KT of each Specialization. Curious how its going to interact with Combat Squads.

 LunarSol wrote:
Apparently you can only have one KT of each Specialization. Curious how its going to interact with Combat Squads.

It's quite possibly confirmation bias, but I think the last few lines of the left column in the Specialism image speaks to that.

Yeah, I can see that.

Frags going up to 15 kills them even more, they were useless at 10...

Unless they've been buffed, which we obvs don't yet know.

Weird a melta is still 5.

Niiru wrote:
Frags going up to 15 kills them even more, they were useless at 10...

Unless they've been buffed, which we obvs don't yet know.

Weird a melta is still 5.

Frag is same which makes that 5pt difference from Index really weird (they were passable at 10pts, but not 15pts)

Niiru wrote:

Weird a melta is still 5.

All the non-combi special weapons are 5, which makes some semblance of sense in the algorithm driven 9th edition points environment (even if it overcosts the standalone flamer).

 bullyboy wrote:

Frag is same which makes that 5pt difference from Index really weird (they were passable at 10pts, but not 15pts)

In fairness we havent seen the Frag profile for the codex yet. I doubt anything has changed to justify the points increase, but it's data we're missing all the same.

 bullyboy wrote:

Niiru wrote:
Frags going up to 15 kills them even more, they were useless at 10...

Unless they've been buffed, which we obvs don't yet know.

Weird a melta is still 5.

Frag is same which makes that 5pt difference from Index really weird (they were passable at 10pts, but not 15pts)

How do you know this? Have they shown weapon profiles?

The cost differences are weird to the point where I would assume the Index values are part of an errata to correct them.

Niiru wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

Niiru wrote:
Frags going up to 15 kills them even more, they were useless at 10...

Unless they've been buffed, which we obvs don't yet know.

Weird a melta is still 5.

Frag is same which makes that 5pt difference from Index really weird (they were passable at 10pts, but not 15pts)

How do you know this? Have they shown weapon profiles?

yep, saw a leaked image (one of many) and has it the same as FAQ. Looks like SIA will be only on same weapons too with a strat to be able to use for other bolt weapons (but changes them to hvy 1).

Hopefully someone managed to screenshot a few more of these leaked images. Particularly interested in the psychic tree, and the SIA strat... Making it a strat isn't terrible (depending on cost) but making them heavy 1 is pretty bad.

Problem i see with the new kill team specialisations is that it seems they're picked during army listing, so you could pay points for an anti-elite one and then face armies with zero elites.

Though this then makes sense as to why the troops and hq ones cost more, as most opponents will have those.

Niiru wrote:

Though this then makes sense as to why the troops and hq ones cost more, as most opponents will have those.

If it follows the same order as the progression in the chart, the +35 ones should be Heavy Support and Elites. Troops, Fast Attack, HQs and Aquila would then be +25.

what gets me is that it still appears that a spectrus kill team still can't use concealed positions if it contains a reiver model......which seems really dumb. Hopefully there is something that changes that in an FAQ otherwise you'll never see a Reiver in a spectrus kill team.

 bullyboy wrote:
what gets me is that it still appears that a spectrus kill team still can't use concealed positions if it contains a reiver model......which seems really dumb. Hopefully there is something that changes that in an FAQ otherwise you'll never see a Reiver in a spectrus kill team.

I mean you could still combat squad them, and have the reiver in a backfield squad that can then prevent enemy obsec taking home objectives... Maybe. Probably better than taking an actual full reiver squad.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I've not ever tried this myself, but if the images were taken down from the leak page... Wouldn't they still be in your temp browser cache folder? So... Couldn't the people that saw them but didn't manage to screenshot still recover the temp files?

In theory this is right, but as I say I've never had the need to try it.

Here you go,

Kind of surprised I'm sourcing all this stuff, I was hoping someone else had more lol

Cryogenicman wrote:
Here you go

Again, I think pretty reasonable across the board (with two huuuuuuge standouts).

Resonance is purpose built for a blender unit, while making them relatively scary to charge.

Fortified is a point and click Disgustingly Resilient. Auto. Take.

Void we've already discussed. Niche, but can allow for some tactical shenanigans.

Cleanse I dont expect to see much, but against horde armies it's gonna do the business if you get close enough.

Mantle is amaaaaazing for Action based objective units. Slap that on a pod of Servitors or Company Vets farming you VPs and they're effectively untouchable from a distance.

Severance is gonna be hilarious for sniping out support auras.

If I had to pick for a non-specialist list, Mantle and Fortified are probably the front runners, but all of them have their utility.

Sterling191 wrote:

Cryogenicman wrote:
Here you go

Again, I think pretty reasonable across the board (with two huuuuuuge standouts).

Resonance is purpose built for a blender unit, while making them relatively scary to charge.

Fortified is a point and click Disgustingly Resilient. Auto. Take.

Void we've already discussed. Niche, but can allow for some tactical shenanigans.

Cleanse I dont expect to see much, but against horde armies it's gonna do the business if you get close enough.

Mantle is amaaaaazing for Action based objective units. Slap that on a pod of Servitors or Company Vets farming you VPs and they're effectively untouchable from a distance.

Severance is gonna be hilarious for sniping out support auras.

If I had to pick for a non-specialist list, Mantle and Fortified are probably the front runners, but all of them have their utility.

Agree on the xenopurge discipline: two standouts and others more niche (but definitely fluffy).

Would now be cool to see the stratagems, which can be the real game-changer. But I guess it is now a matter of hours if not minutes

Cripple Strongholds and Cull Order are fantastic secondaries (the former more than the latter IMO, but the latter is still quite good).

An automatic 15vp if you can selectively deplete your enemy, and a 6vp per turn action that can only be stopped once started by killing the unit doing said action.

Absolutely tasty stuff right there.

Dominus Aegis on a captain close to an Indomitus kill team grants them a 5+ invuln, then by all means give them a 5+++ from the psychic discipline. Makes them super tanky.

 bullyboy wrote:
Dominus Aegis on a captain close to an Indomitus kill team grants them a 5+ invuln, then by all means give them a 5+++ from the psychic discipline. Makes them super tanky.

Also synergizes well with a Libby rocking the 5++ aura. You'd need to burn a relic to get both disciplines on one psyker (Tome of Malcador), but its doable.

Still looks like Blackshields are excluded from Proteus teams unfortunately. Semi-hoping for an FAQ on that front but dont really expect one.

There's a few questions that come up now (don't know if we have enough info to answer them) -

1. Lightning claws. Now that dw get widespread access to reroll wounds (1s or all), are these still the best choice? You pay 25 for the kill team specialisation, if you can then save that by not taking claws it would be nice. Claws seem half wasted, but you do still get extra attacks.

2. Do the kill team specialisations properly outweigh the benefits of a lieutenant? If you're castling a gun line, a lieutenant may work out cheaper, plus it works vs all enemies rather than single roles.

Niiru wrote:

1. Lightning claws. Now that dw get widespread access to reroll wounds (1s or all), are these still the best choice? You pay 25 for the kill team specialisation, if you can then save that by not taking claws it would be nice. Claws seem half wasted, but you do still get extra attacks.

The math on this will get weird, and is obviously highly matchup dependent, but I think LCs are still the way to go outside of extremely specialist configurations. The extra attack, and the always on nature of the reroll is exceptionally reliable, and allows a unit to engage a target even if that target isnt it's Favored Enemy (yeah I'm cribbing DnD, no I dont care).

Niiru wrote:

2. Do the kill team specialisations properly outweigh the benefits of a lieutenant? If you're castling a gun line, a lieutenant may work out cheaper, plus it works vs all enemies rather than single roles.

This one is going to require knowing our Strats and Relics, but I think it does. Between the always on RR1s that a team gets for its Favored Enemy, an upgrade to full rerolls for said Favored Enemy, and a WLT that allows us to modulate RR1s, there is limited space for an LT as a buffer. As a mini beatstick who isnt restricted to FoC slot restrictions, they may show up. But I dont think leaning on them for castles is the way to go.

i guess being able to buy permanent RR1s on a unit is a reason to take the new primaris kill teams, albeit a somewhat dull one.

Curious abut that SIA strat. Going to heavy 1 would be really weird - so it's super duper good with Stalker Bolt Rifles, Bolt Sniper Rifles and the like but super gakky with assault bolters?

Compiled leak link here (not my work, just passing along. Big kudos to the crew the last few pages who pulled these down from the interweb ether):

https://imgur.com/a/rgFKOCS

Nice to see Malleus didn't forget Dedicated Transports this time.

Sterling191 wrote:

Niiru wrote:

1. Lightning claws. Now that dw get widespread access to reroll wounds (1s or all), are these still the best choice? You pay 25 for the kill team specialisation, if you can then save that by not taking claws it would be nice. Claws seem half wasted, but you do still get extra attacks.

The math on this will get weird, and is obviously highly matchup dependent, but I think LCs are still the way to go outside of extremely specialist configurations. The extra attack, and the always on nature of the reroll is exceptionally reliable, and allows a unit to engage a target even if that target isnt it's Favored Enemy (yeah I'm cribbing DnD, no I dont care).

I don't necessarily disagree, but it also means if your unit has lightning claws it may not be worth paying the points for the killteam specialisation. If you're using LCs you have no ranged weapons to benefit from it anyway. If you're only using a single LC, then a chainsword would give the same attacks number plus rerolls, for 5ppm less.

I'd maybe say specialisations are for shooty units, and hybrid units, but dedicated blenders would have double LC (and a librarian for that power that makes them go first etc) and skip the specialisation.

However it also opens up other weapon options, like powerswords might now work out better even with less attacks? vs elites where the S5 and AP-3 (with rerolls from specialisation) closes the gap?

I don't know the maths, and you're right it'll all be about matchups etc. I just found it an interesting quirk.

I know LCs are currently king, but it'd be cool if our abilities meant we could suddenly be the niche chapter where "pseudo-lightning swords" or "lightning-hammers" are a thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:
i guess being able to buy permanent RR1s on a unit is a reason to take the new primaris kill teams, albeit a somewhat dull one.

Curious abut that SIA strat. Going to heavy 1 would be really weird - so it's super duper good with Stalker Bolt Rifles, Bolt Sniper Rifles and the like but super gakky with assault bolters?

I dunno... the kill team combos were at least somewhat fluffy, and they couldn't all get the unit abilities (imaging one eradicator letting a whole killteam fire twice, it'd be fun but also stupid). The main problem was that taking the kill teams was no better (in some cases worse) than just playing a vanilla chapter and running them normally.

Being able to basically promote your squad leader into a (specialised target) leiutenant, for a fairly acceptable premium, I think might be enough to tip the balance. I would still probably favour the oldschool vets for their more customisable weapon options, but I can see a couple of the primaris ones being potent enough now.

Totally depends on the stratagems and stuff though still. Like you, I need to see the SIA stratagem wording, as that makes a world of difference.

Niiru wrote:

I don't necessarily disagree, but it also means if your unit has lightning claws it may not be worth paying the points for the killteam specialisation. If you're using LCs you have no ranged weapons to benefit from it anyway. If you're only using a single LC, then a chainsword would give the same attacks number plus rerolls, for 5ppm less.

Against a Favored Enemy, absolutely. But against something else, S4 AP1 with +1A will only take you so far. I completely understand the cost argument here, and for many situations it may be the break point in a list.

Niiru wrote:

I'd maybe say specialisations are for shooty units, and hybrid units, but dedicated blenders would have double LC (and a librarian for that power that makes them go first etc) and skip the specialisation.

The thing is though, giving up even basic boltguns for one additional LC attack per model...doesnt really make a lot sense to me. SIA boltguns can still be scary, especially against Favored Enemies. If you're planning to split off a 5-pack of VanVets and have them go hunting, by all means go full Logan and *snikt* the place up. But for basic Vets I'm not sold.

I could absolutely be wrong on this though as I have a significant bias towards multi-purpose formations.

Niiru wrote:

However it also opens up other weapon options, like powerswords might now work out better even with less attacks? vs elites where the S5 and AP-3 (with rerolls from specialisation) closes the gap?

I don't know the maths, and you're right it'll all be about matchups etc. I just found it an interesting quirk.

I know LCs are currently king, but it'd be cool if our abilities meant we could suddenly be the niche chapter where "pseudo-lightning swords" or "lightning-hammers" are a thing.

I think if you're specializing on the melee front it's either massed attacks via LCs (or even chainswords if you're looking specifically at a low cost Furor anti-troops configuration), or high quality attacks via Fists/Hammers/Heavy Hammers. The additional attacks/damage just skew the output calculations too much for the mid-strength of the Sword/Axe/Maul to catch up against most target profiles, even with the full wound reroll.

Sterling191 wrote:

Niiru wrote:

I don't necessarily disagree, but it also means if your unit has lightning claws it may not be worth paying the points for the killteam specialisation. If you're using LCs you have no ranged weapons to benefit from it anyway. If you're only using a single LC, then a chainsword would give the same attacks number plus rerolls, for 5ppm less.

Against a Favored Enemy, absolutely. But against something else, S4 AP1 with +1A will only take you so far. I completely understand the cost argument here, and for many situations it may be the break point in a list.

That's kinda what I'm getting at though. The swords are free, and the single LC would be 3pts, and the only benefit vs favoured enemy is -1AP. Not sure if its worth the 3pts.

I agree with you on the killteam builds though, before this leak my plan was to run boltgun+LC as a base loadout (though I wanted to run shotgun+LC, sad times). But on a squad of 10 guys, changing LC to chainswords saves 30 pts. Don't know if -1AP is worth that many points. Possibly is.

Though I wouldn't run 10 like that anyway, I'd probably have a hammer in there and a couple shields etc... so yeh. Not sure how this will all shake out.

Killteams have always been a little dodgey with infinitely combinations with only a finite set of useful ones. This time around, it seems like we've got a lot of options of Base Unit + 1 specific support add on, which is probably more than usual, but we have less variety within the units themselves now that there's no advantage to taking say, one Aggressor or something.

 LunarSol wrote:
Killteams have always been a little dodgey with infinitely combinations with only a finite set of useful ones. This time around, it seems like we've got a lot of options of Base Unit + 1 specific support add on, which is probably more than usual, but we have less variety within the units themselves now that there's no advantage to taking say, one Aggressor or something.

One aggressor might be a decent way to throw some hidden powerfists into a unit?

I get what you're saying though, just looking for the options we have.

Niiru wrote:

That's kinda what I'm getting at though. The swords are free, and the single LC would be 3pts, and the only benefit vs favoured enemy is -1AP. Not sure if its worth the 3pts.

Against a favored enemy, the chainsword will absolutely win out for efficiency. But the LC allows the unit to still be very scary against non FEs. That extra capacity I think is entirely worth the 3ppm premium, assuming you're not kitting with shields.

Niiru wrote:

Though I wouldn't run 10 like that anyway, I'd probably have a hammer in there and a couple shields etc... so yeh. Not sure how this will all shake out.

Indeed. There's a *ton* to digest (and more to come once we get info on Strats and Relics).

Did I miss it. Or can veterans not take shotguns?

I see it for bikers?

Skarsgard wrote:
Did I miss it. Or can veterans not take shotguns?

I see it for bikers?

They can take DW shotguns, they just dont cost extra.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Niiru wrote:

One aggressor might be a decent way to throw some hidden powerfists into a unit?

I get what you're saying though, just looking for the options we have.

I think folks are going to have a hard time adjusting to Aggressors being baby Assault Centurions after the entirety of 8th with them being shooting lawnmowers.

Niiru wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
Killteams have always been a little dodgey with infinitely combinations with only a finite set of useful ones. This time around, it seems like we've got a lot of options of Base Unit + 1 specific support add on, which is probably more than usual, but we have less variety within the units themselves now that there's no advantage to taking say, one Aggressor or something.

One aggressor might be a decent way to throw some hidden powerfists into a unit?

I get what you're saying though, just looking for the options we have.

Indomitor has some solid options. I think it feels a lot like Fortis did in 8th. I can see this one being configured a few different ways.

Spectrus seems pretty cool, particularly for Combat squadding. Reivers are kind of disappointing. Not a ton of variety, but a functional mix with some options.

Proteus has a ton of wargear configurations but the extras are a bit odd. If you're going dedicated melee, Vanguard Vets save a point though the Jump Pack is pointless. Bikes seem pretty useless as well.

Fortis, sadly, feels very confused. I suppose they're still good ablative Hellblasters, and might deliver Assault Intercessors fairly well. Not very excited about this one sadly.

With the specialized teams, things get a bit more interesting.
Indomitor teams either geared up to shred troops with re-rolling agressors or tanks with rerolling hbolters and eliminators, plus throwing on a 5+++ on them seems like a good workhorse.

Spectrus eliminators with HQ rerolls for headhunting sounds fun.

You're right about Fortis, they seem pretty plain-jane riflemen with maybe some hellblasters if you want to get expensive. Hopefully some strats are able to breath more life into them over just taking regular intercessor squads.

I can see myself running:

Proteus vets - definitely. not sure how yet, will depend on how things shake out, and whether the stuff I want to model will be too much of a handicap. A few options here still. Guys with shields being 4++/5+++ with a libby is interesting (termies being 1+/4++/5++ might work now too).

Spectrus - probably at least one unit of these. Infiltrators for denial, with an incursor for a melta mine might be interesting. Eliminators (probably in a combat squad unit, maybe with one infiltrator for more denial). This all works and is fluffy.

Indomitor - Maybe. Not sure. Eradicators might be worth it. Not sure I'd bother with aggressors or inceptors. Several of these roles can be done by standard vets though.

Fortis - If outriders shake out as being good enough, I may take one Fortis just for an outrider combat squad. But again, proteus can do most of this.

I suspect I'd be going proteus + spectrus, and then use my remaining points on vehicles/dreads.

Depends entirely on strats though.

With the defensive abilities now available, we can push an Indomitor team to nearly Blightlord levels of resilience. I'm strongly leaning towards one for midfield objective holding and/or tank hunting (all comes down to whether I can stomach taking Eradicators).

Spectrus headhunters with Eliminators taking HQ scalps from across the table is a no brainer and I expect to see a team like that in most Deathwatch forces. Fluffy as feth and utterly terrifying when they fully power up.

Forts...I'm not seeing it. Maaaaybe if you want to do an Impulsor rush type list and mix in assault/RF Hellblasters?

Proteus teams I do think are going to be the meat and potatoes of Kill Team focused lists. They're the squads that go up field and take care of business. Hopefully they also fixed the Teleport Homer (probably not but a fella can hope).

I won't underestimate Fortis yet. If the rumour about the strat for SIA is true, 10 stalker intercessors with SIA could be interesting.

But will see

So this isn't my idea, but:

Brilliant Strategist trait - unique for Dark Angels - is:
In command phase, Select 1 dark angels unit within 6”. Until next command phase, if tactical doctrine is active they count as devastator. If Assault doctrine is active, they count as tactical.
So it lets you ‘roll back’ to a previous doctrine for one unit a turn. Pretty nice as it will let a unit stay in devastator for 3 turns."

This is in the codex, so you can pick it as a DW warlord.

Meaning one unit in your army can be Tactical for turns 1 & 2 (by choosing it using superdoctrine), and get converted to devastator by the warlord. And then you naturally just choose devastator for turn 3. So your heavy weapon squad is under dev for up to 3 turns.

Good? I dunno. Interesting though.

Also seems to work for the Blood Angel trait where you get to fight first with your warlord, though I dunno if that's useful to us.

Even with the additional rules it’s rough because one thing can make or break an entire build.

I am thinking one volume of fire kill team with the anti-troop upgrade could be worthwhile, maybe 1-2 with Aquila depending on how our targets can be changed.

 Leth wrote:
Even with the additional rules it’s rough because one thing can make or break an entire build.

I am thinking one volume of fire kill team with the anti-troop upgrade could be worthwhile, maybe 1-2 with Aquila depending on how our targets can be changed.

If you read the rules for Kill Team Cassius above the Aquila rules you'll realize that you can only have one of each kill team specialization, except if you take Kill Team Cassius.

Well I wouldn’t want to take more than one of each. Ain’t no one got points for that. At most I would take 2

So a full Indomitus kill team (5 Hvy Intercessors, 4 eradicators and an Aggressor) is 340pts (more if you add a specialism). Chief Primaris Apothecary at 95pts. Indomitus Captain with Dominus Aegis shield 105pts. A meaty blob that can hold the center, has a 5++ (could invest in a Libby to add the 5+++ too).

But, that's 540pts already....pretty pricey. Going to be the downside to a lot of the DW stuff you want to take...it just adds up really quickly.

Do we know if the aegis is still in he rules?

 Leth wrote:
Do we know if the aegis is still in he rules?

No (unless someone has seen the page but not shared it with the class).

I'm also not sure if the indomitus team is worth it. It's hard to shift, but it's so expensive.

You could run a cheaper unit of proteus vets / termies, with a librarian, and end up with a fair few wounds with either 2+/4++/5+++ or 1+/4++/5+++. Hell the terminators may not even be worth the points cost over vets with shields, as you mostly only gain the extra wound. A terminator might be better off in the unit being an offensive unit (guns+LC) and letting it rely on the standard 2+/5++/5+++ ?

Honestly not sure, but it seems like having a bunch more proteus wounds for the same points might be better as the "sit on a midfield objective" blob.

I may still run an indomitus squad, but it would get combat-squadded and probably put in reserves (or deepstrike if we get that ability again) in some fashion.

Again this is just my current opinion, but I'm biased towards the oldschool vets so I may well be wrong on all this. Hell, I'm even considering the blackstar.

Using old maths (so it's not accurate but close enough for now) for 370 points (a bit more than a full indomitus team admittedly), you can get a proteus team of 5x bolter (with SIA remember)+shield, 4x guys with infernus heavy bolters, and a terminator with assault cannon + power fist. AND a librarian to buff them. Not the best loadout (it was quick and dirty) but it's just something to think about. (I wish frags were good, but the infernus is pretty decent, and you can save a load of points by just taking meltas or plasmas).




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Stratagems are now in that imgur link:

We get a turn of picking a doctrine, so between that and the warlord shenanigans we could be in devastator for 4 turns lol.

Teleportarium is back! And is basically the same (1CP per unit) though it has a usage limit. Once in small games, twice in medium, thrice in large. Which seems fair, and tbh better than I could have hoped!

2CP at the start of the game, to give the corvus a "you can not target this unless it's the closest target" ability until the end of the first battle round... which might actually be good?

lol... 2CP to give a deathwatch unit a chapter trait FROM ANY OTHER CHAPTER/SUCCESSOR until the end of that turn. Fluffy as heck but dunno if it's good... I love it though.

kill teams with a jump pack guy can fall back and shoot for 1CP, so they did bring that back. Same for a single biker giving fall back and charge.

These stratagems are AWESOME, don’t know how powerful they are but they feel like Deathwatch and that is what matters to me.

So we’re just waiting for Relics realistically right?

So SIA is bad for intercessors. I honestly am not sure if anything in the Fortis team is worth taking. Outriders maybe, but the intercessor tax...

SIA is bad for most weapons in fact.

However....

Incursors and Infiltrators both have rapidfire1 weapons, which when used with SIA don't lose all that much, and could be decent targets.

And Eliminators also have their Instigator Carbine, which is assault 1 and can target characters, but isn't "bolt sniper" so it can take SIA. Not sure it's worth it over a sniper or the las fusil, but ... this makes a spectrus kill team have 3 decent units that can all make use of SIA.

AND special mention goes to Heavy Intercessors. S5 AP-2 D2 heavy bolt rifle gains SIA without losing anything at all. Damage 3 vs terminators, +1 to wound vs monsters, it's all good.

So SIA basically puts a nail in the coffin for Fortis. They get nothing from it really. But it may have some uses.

Edit: Kinda curious what Sterling comes back with once he sees the stratagems. I know his opinion of what GW were going to do with deathwatch was even lower than my own, but some of this stuff is actually decently fun. Still hoping an faq fixes frags and shotguns. (Although... shotguns may actually be ok, now that the unit can fall back and shoot........ or if not ok, then less terrible.)

Fortis seems to be down to either Teleportarium Hellblaster Rapid Fire or a team of Assaults with Biker hoping to fallback and charge into jucier stuff. Heavy Intercessors seem to have replaced 8th's Intercessor role in our army in all regards.

You can teleport in a unit of ATVs, must have learned that fighting Orks.

SIA changing the weapon to Heavy has some promise with the ways to manipulate Devastator Doctrine already mentioned.

I think the 2CP to pick any chapter tactic strat is clutch as hell, but I need to wrap my brain around it. Situationally it seems VERY useful to set up things like advance/charge, or fallback/shoot or charge or to unbracket a vehicle. It's like the omni-strat. It unlocks SO many possibilities.

Unfortunally it only lasts until the end of your turn, which limits some tactics (maybe it will get a faq to be till your next command phase as seems common.)

 Oaka wrote:
You can teleport in a unit of ATVs, must have learned that fighting Orks.

SIA changing the weapon to Heavy has some promise with the ways to manipulate Devastator Doctrine already mentioned.

That SIA + Devastator thing is... I mean they're only heavy 1, but still, it's an interesting combo. And then the next turn when it goes to tactical/assault, they just fire again with their normal guns and STILL get the -1AP cos they're now not heavy anymore haha.

Brotherhood tactic completely changes how you build your kill teams. Do you go +1 hit power fists, +1 power swords? Do you go hard core heavy shooting with +1 hit dark angels?

It’s so much versatility and options to wrap my head around, I even find myself considering a corvus!

I think first things first is figuring out the character core and just putting the models on the table in front of me to see how things fit together,

Yes, there are so many new combos and scenarios.

Could intercessors with SIA fire twice using the stratagem from codex space marine?

If so, 20 stalker bolt rifle in devastator doctrine could be brutal, with 3 dmg a pop.

Edited: no, they can as a "killteam", for they lose the "intercessor squad keyword", but they can if they are taken as standard intercessors, as the strat says "deatchwatch infantry"

It's 4 CP, though.

Interesting to read over those pages, and i am eager to hear some of the reviews that'll pop up this weekend.

One thing i did notice though that made me roll my eyes.... Is that Heavy Intercessors in the Kill Team still have the wrong weapon options listed as upgrades lol.

Copy and paste boys....copy and paste.

One thing I did discover is that you don’t lose your stratejism when using brotherhood or the vigilance warlord trait. it is perfectly possible to keep rerolls to wound while also getting benefits from blood angels, space wolves, etc.

Damage 5 veteran sgts heavy thunder hammer is the lolz.

Special issue ammo Phobos captains are pretty powerful and could see some use.

Current plan is to take the intercessors kill team with the mandatory 5 outriders and give them the kill troops upgrade.

give them advance and charge from white scars, start in assault doctrine, those 5 outriders will just blender some target.

Niiru wrote:

Edit: Kinda curious what Sterling comes back with once he sees the stratagems. I know his opinion of what GW were going to do with deathwatch was even lower than my own, but some of this stuff is actually decently fun. Still hoping an faq fixes frags and shotguns. (Although... shotguns may actually be ok, now that the unit can fall back and shoot........ or if not ok, then less terrible.)

Overall verdict: "Some Good, Some Bad". Amusingly enough, despite the very mixed bag I think we come out better than we were in 8th in this regard. We basically had +1 wound, Teleportarium, and thats it.

Losing our +1s to wound hurts immensely. Adaptive Tactics being 2cp, once per game *and* gated behind a WM hurts, especially in the context of the new Specialisms. The anti-xenos strats were all nerfed with the exception of the Tau one. My personal biggest gripe is the anti-Ork one being capped at -2 to charge, but that's mostly because my local scene has a lot of Ork players and I got a TON of work out of it for charge denial and general shenaniganery.

Disruptive Launch may be worth keeping a VanVet around for, but I dont see the Black Shield or Biker ability being worth the CP. I personally think it's stupid the amount of abilities and wargear that are getting converted to strats, but that's a blanket thing for 9th and not a Deathwatch specific thing. We'll just have to wear it until more codices come out to continue that trend. Kind of a weird slow burn buff-ish? Dunno, hard to parse that category in an information vacuum.

Teleportarium being more limited hurts, but it's still a huge tactical asset. Twice per 2000 point game still lets us drop in two heavy hitters, and with expanded access to forward deployment and other Deep Strike options (like Reserves) the end result is a wash to a net benefit IMO. Im hopeful this is an indication that the Beacon is still around in some capacity.

Giving a Corvus de-facto 8th edition character protection opens up some play for the flying turtle.

Death to the Alien is absolutely bonkers at 1 CP. Limited by target selection, but a blanket +1A is mechanically absurdly powerful.

Brotherhood of Veterans is unequivocally good, and may be both the fluffiest stratagem in the book but also my pick for single most powerful strat for the Deathwatch. Would have been better if we could pair up on successor rules for a round, but it is what it is. I expect to see a *lot* of use for the Ultra fall back and shoot, Scars zoom and charge, Dark Angels for stand and deliver, or Blood Angels / Tearers for rip and tear in melee. I'll need to double check the wording, but I dont think this will turn off Specialist Kill Teams fully rerolling wounds against their Favored Enemy (since I believe the latter keys off of what you pick for the *army* and not whether or not the *unit* has said CT). - EDIT: Confirmed, Specialists power up if you pick the appropriate target for the Xenos Hunters CT, but has no stipulation about the Kill Team itself still needing said CT.

Bog standard Sergeant Relic strat is I think significantly more helpful for us since Mastercrafted can stack with SIA (and on a combi-weapon too). Likewise the dual WLT strat has more legs for Deathwatch because we have a bunch of really, really good WLTs.

The SIA change...is dumb. Y'all dont need to hear me rant about it.

Good analysis.

There is a lot to like in the new codex, but also many things that still feel half-baked.

5 man squad of eliminators, eradicators and outriders were not really necessary to add flavour to DW.

The removal of SIA from standard intercessors was also not necessary. It could have been "SIA bolt rifle, RF 1" and that would have been cool.

But the psychic discipline, some strats, the bespoke secondaries and the addition of so many new units are indeed great.

Same for the killteam specialities: great idea.

I am eagerly waiting for the goonhammer review, as they are usually very informative

I think SIA is more or less done outside of the following:

1) Heavy Intercessors with Executors that you burn an extra CP to put into Devastator while they are glaring at a vehicle. 10 AP-3 D3 guns should spook transports and even light tanks.

2) Aquila (troops) Deathwatch Veterans. If some chunky blob of daemons comes at you just make the Vets into Crimson Fists. Double hit on 6’s is mathematically identical to +1 to hit, but stacks with it. 20 +1 to-wound shots near a captain will see half that blob disappear. Try this on things without an invul and things get gross.

I hadn't even considered the CF doctrine for hordesweeping (in my defense it's early and I'm not nearly appropriately caffeinated yet). Slap that on a Furor team...good googly moogly.

Okay, so I ran some preliminary numbers on this for shiggles. A fully powered up (Furor rerolls against Favored Enemies, WM full reroll and the CF boost) squad of 7 combiflamers Vets and 3 CML +SB Terminators (this is a squad configuration I'm seriously considering running) will delete on average 75 gaunts, 60+ Boyz or 50-ish Guardsmen. In one shooting volley. Target allocation and selection for the latter will obviously be tricky, but holy goddamn. These numbers increase if you also burn CP for the "all doctrines are active" strat too.

Brotherhood is insane. It enables so many otherwise risky Kill Team builds... deep strike charges, assault teams, just a lot of options. I like it better than the +1 Wound after some thought.

 LunarSol wrote:
Brotherhood is insane. It enables so many otherwise risky Kill Team builds... deep strike charges, assault teams, just a lot of options. I like it better than the +1 Wound after some thought.

Unfortunately due to order of operations you cant use it on a team that drops in the same turn. Has to be declared in the Command Phase.

EDIT: I may be wrong about this due to the specific wording of the strat. It does not appear to require the targeted unit to be on the table, and I cant seem to find the old stipulation that if you're off the table you cant be targeted by abilities or strats (I found it for embarked units but not ones in deep strike). You clearly cant use any abilities from the unit, but you *may* be able to use things on them. Gonna keep digging.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crusade bits and bobs via WHC:

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/10/30/deathwatch-new-crusade-rules/

Sterling191 wrote:
A fully powered up (Furor rerolls against Favored Enemies, WM full reroll and the CF boost) squad of 7 combiflamers Vets and 3 CML +SB Terminators (this is a squad configuration I'm seriously considering running) will delete on average 75 gaunts, 60+ Boyz or 50-ish Guardsmen. In one shooting volley. Target allocation and selection for the latter will obviously be tricky, but holy goddamn. These numbers increase if you also burn CP for the "all doctrines are active" strat too.

For feths sake sterling keep your voice down!

Jeez. This is why we can't have nice things!

Say it with me now - "Yeh, the new supplement is ok, but I'd stay as imperial fists if I were you young man."

Niiru wrote:

For feths sake sterling keep your voice down!

Jeez. This is why we can't have nice things!

Say it with me now - "Yeh, the new supplement is ok, but I'd stay as imperial fists if I were you young man."

I mean, the combo costs nearly 500 points and at minimum 2 CP. It damn well needs to do the business.

Sterling191 wrote:

Niiru wrote:

For feths sake sterling keep your voice down!

Jeez. This is why we can't have nice things!

Say it with me now - "Yeh, the new supplement is ok, but I'd stay as imperial fists if I were you young man."

I mean, the combo costs nearly 500 points and at minimum 2 CP. It damn well needs to do the business.

Lol I know, but you get what I'm saying.

Though the watchmaster isn't really a 'sunk cost' for it, as you need one anyway and he's multi-purpose. I'd even include a librarian in there as well now as a must-take. The only real cost is in the squad, which is about 350 points? (off top of my head). For 10 guys with a lot of firepower and Obsec. (2CP isn't even that bad for a heavy hitter wombo combo, compared to others).

I'm even wondering what I would put in a Blackstar now, as it may actually be a valid transport.

Rule #1. You cannot use chapter tactic of other chapter unless one member of squad has appropriate shoulder pad actually modeled!

 bullyboy wrote:
Rule #1. You cannot use chapter tactic of other chapter unless one member of squad has appropriate shoulder pad actually modeled!

Agreed. I think the same for the Warlord, if you take another factions trait. (I'm glad the rules actually specify that haha.)

Bleh. Like I get it for the Warlord, but there's no dumber gotcha than going to play a strat and being denied because the model who happened to have that pad was removed as a casualty.

 LunarSol wrote:
Bleh. Like I get it for the Warlord, but there's no dumber gotcha than going to play a strat and being denied because the model who happened to have that pad was removed as a casualty.

Little tongue in cheek. Just a thematic thing I'll do in friendly games, I like playing that way.

 LunarSol wrote:
Bleh. Like I get it for the Warlord, but there's no dumber gotcha than going to play a strat and being denied because the model who happened to have that pad was removed as a casualty.

(....I mean, I'm pretty sure we are mostly joking... plus I'd find it more than acceptable as long as that squad -orginally- had the right guy in it. Maybe he taught his squadmates his chapter tactics.)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 bullyboy wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
Bleh. Like I get it for the Warlord, but there's no dumber gotcha than going to play a strat and being denied because the model who happened to have that pad was removed as a casualty.

Little tongue in cheek. Just a thematic thing I'll do in friendly games, I like playing that way.

^

 Leth wrote:

I think first things first is figuring out the character core and just putting the models on the table in front of me to see how things fit together,

Right now I'm probably going with a Watch Master and Natorian (probably not optimal but he's cool). Relics may change that up and I'll need to see if Natorian would be better shifted to an Apothecary.

Niiru wrote:

Though the watchmaster isn't really a 'sunk cost' for it, as you need one anyway and he's multi-purpose. I'd even include a librarian in there as well now as a must-take. The only real cost is in the squad, which is about 350 points? (off top of my head). For 10 guys with a lot of firepower and Obsec. (2CP isn't even that bad for a heavy hitter wombo combo, compared to others).

My big issue with the WM right now is that he's loadout locked, and (more importantly) cant take a jump pack. I generally didnt run one in 8th for the same reason, but with the hard lock on Adaptive Tactics I may need to re-evaluate.

 LunarSol wrote:

Right now I'm probably going with a Watch Master and Natorian (probably not optimal but he's cool). Relics may change that up and I'll need to see if Natorian would be better shifted to an Apothecary.

Natorian I can see doing some work with offensive spells thanks to his +1, but being named means he's locked in for WLTs, cant upgrade to a Chief and cant take a relic. I think a standard libby is the better play if you're looking for a buff vector.

 Leth wrote:
Damage 5 veteran sgts heavy thunder hammer is the lolz.

How do you get up on Damage 5 for a single Weapon/Attack?

 LunarSol wrote:

 Leth wrote:

I think first things first is figuring out the character core and just putting the models on the table in front of me to see how things fit together,

Right now I'm probably going with a Watch Master and Natorian (probably not optimal but he's cool). Relics may change that up and I'll need to see if Natorian would be better shifted to an Apothecary.

I think a librarian might be an auto-take right now. I'd love to take two tbh but not sure that'll be possible. Natorian is a pretty standard guy, who happens to be better at the damage-spells (he also has better WS and a decentish weapon). So I don't think he's a bad choice.

However as you say, a good relic for a librarian might swing things heavily against him (as he can't take relics).

Apothecary is possibly worth it too though, as our guys are gonna be expensive. It's a tough call for sure. Finding points for everything is gonna be tricky.

Pyrosphere wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Damage 5 veteran sgts heavy thunder hammer is the lolz.

How do you get up on Damage 5 for a single Weapon/Attack?

You can mastercraft the hammer with the Sergeant specific stratagem (they get to take a piece of Special Issue Warger relic)

Niiru wrote:

Apothecary is possibly worth it too though, as our guys are gonna be expensive. It's a tough call for sure. Finding points for everything is gonna be tricky.

For super-competitive play I expect to see Chief Apothecaries everywhere. They basically mean that if any model in a Kill Team has wounds left at the end of a turn, they're going back to full health. And the freebie revive is stellar for something like the "Totally Not Blightlord Terminators, Honest!" Indomitor teams (or Terminators for that matter).

Competitive play will see a lot of "command upgrades".

The chief apothecary is now almost mandatory, and possibly the chief librarian as well.

The +1 to cast fnp seems now too good to pass.

What are your thoughts about the chaplain? I don't think we have seen anything about a specific DW litany, but the others are still good

 SatanEatSeitan wrote:

What are your thoughts about the chaplain? I don't think we have seen anything about a specific DW litany, but the others are still good

Rock solid support character, but tends to skew towards more melee oriented lists. The shooting buffs they can hand out are okay, but frankly we a ton of other sources to power up shooting, and he's one of the few that can help with unit delivery into assault. Even without a DW specific Litany they're well worth considering.

Sterling191 wrote:

 SatanEatSeitan wrote:

What are your thoughts about the chaplain? I don't think we have seen anything about a specific DW litany, but the others are still good

Rock solid support character, but tends to skew towards more melee oriented lists. The shooting buffs they can hand out are okay, but frankly we a ton of other sources to power up shooting, and he's one of the few that can help with unit delivery into assault. Even without a DW specific Litany they're well worth considering.

Are chaplains still HQ? (mind went blank, I think apothecary is elite)

At least deathwatch filling a battallion is not as much of a hardship as most other armies, as our troops are actually worthwhile (I would probably be bringing 2x proteus and 1x spectrus in every game minimum) so 3x HQ is feasible without having to take multiple vanguard/spearhead detachments to avoid troops tax. Means we get the full amount of CP as well.

I wonder which offers the best overall to DW, librarian or chaplain. Or whether taking both is required.

 SatanEatSeitan wrote:


The +1 to cast fnp seems now too good to pass.

+25 points and a Relic seems pretty pricey for that. Good, but I'm not convinced its worth it; particularly with all of our Specialisms.

Niiru wrote:

Are chaplains still HQ? (mind went blank, I think apothecary is elite)

Chappys are HQs. Apothecaries, Ancients and Champions are Elites.

Niiru wrote:

At least deathwatch filling a battallion is not as much of a hardship as most other armies, as our troops are actually worthwhile (I would probably be bringing 2x proteus and 1x spectrus in every game minimum) so 3x HQ is feasible without having to take multiple vanguard/spearhead detachments to avoid troops tax. Means we get the full amount of CP as well.

My intial list building is coalescing around a pair of patrols because of the Captain restrictions. But I can definitely see single Battalion being the way to go for a lot of people precisely because we have the best damn troops in the game.

Niiru wrote:

I wonder which offers the best overall to DW, librarian or chaplain. Or whether taking both is required.

It's really going to come down to your list. Both are viable, but offer different supporting options that lend themselves to different styles of play. The fact that its a hard choice is a fundamentally good thing IMO, and means the internal balance is headed the right direction (at least with respect to the discussion of these specific characters).

So here's another thing to remember for SIA -

People are saying that it's useless, even on RF1 weapons, cos you're getting half as many shots within 12" cos you're switching to Heavy1.

However, Infiltrators and Incursors also carry a pistol, which they don't normally get to fire with their rifle... but that will also become Heavy1, so you can fire both your pistol and your rifle, and get 2 shots within 12" with SIA.

Possibly not worth it still, but GW may one day tweak the rule to be 1CP, or something else. You never know.

So what are people thinking for Proteus? The other teams seem to have pretty obvious options, but Proteus is still pretty wide open. I was liking Stalkers/Infernus/Cyclone Terminators, but that price bump is a little iffy. Anything that seems worth dropping off in the Blackstar?

 LunarSol wrote:
So what are people thinking for Proteus? The other teams seem to have pretty obvious options, but Proteus is still pretty wide open. I was liking Stalkers/Infernus/Cyclone Terminators, but that price bump is a little iffy. Anything that seems worth dropping off in the Blackstar?

Proteus teams in general are still pretty flexible, but mostly down to their loadout, not their model composition anymore. A frontline team can spring for a VanVet and things like Combi-Flamers (I really do think they're going to be the new go-to for a lot of situations now the stormbolters are out) and not have to worry about getting tied up. I do still think there's a place for the Termi/VV/Vet configuration, with the VanVet still getting a Jump Pack to help lead out charges (if done right it can cut 2-4 inches off a charge, which is super helpful). Alternatively, big game hunting squads can opt for 5ppm Plasma or Melta. That's cheaper than Tac marines.

At 5ppm I think the Stalkers are a poor choice. Basic boltguns double tapping with SIA and bolter discipline from the back/midfield do the job just as well against most targets, and can hunker down with a shield for the same cost. CML terminators are I think still extremely aggressively costed for what they can do (53ppm for 2 missiles, a Storm Bolter and a power weapon). I'm looking to take a bunch if I can make it work.

The capacity to fully protect a Blackstar with a screen and 2 CP opens up some very interesting options. The first thing that comes to mind is a pair of VanVet teams (that dont need jump packs now), but im certain there are other choices that can do serious work. Shoot it up the table, screen it out with a few Spectrus lads (helpfully parked out of LoS), debark T2 and do the stabby stab.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Niiru wrote:

Possibly not worth it still, but GW may one day tweak the rule to be 1CP, or something else. You never know.

If it were 1 CP and didnt impart the Heavy type, there'd possibly be a place for it. But the combination of a 2CP cost, the reduction in shot volume and the accuracy malus imposed makes it a niche play at best with a huge opportunity cost.

Sterling191 wrote:
But the combination of a 2CP cost, the reduction in shot volume and the accuracy malus imposed makes it a niche play at best with a huge opportunity cost.

Ahh but that's what I'm saying, in a lot of cases there is no shot penalty, as your pistol suddenly becomes usable (when it wasn't before) and primaris pistols are basically bolters without the rapid fire.

I totally agree it's niche, and you'd never build a spectrus team around it, but it's worth keeping in mind I think as there will be occasions where it might be enough to tip the balance. The only real hindrance is that 2CP is a lot.

I'm not even sure 2CP is worth spending on the Heavy Executor, which is by far the best weapon to use it on I think. But I'm tempted to take an indomitus team. Not even sure what I would have in it... there's a temptation to take 10x heavy executors in a blob and keep it as a backfield unit.

Edit: Didn't notice but Heavy Ints also have pistols, so they actually gain shots lol. Only S4 AP0 but it's interesting. They may be the only unit where its worth using the strat vs certain enemies.

Niiru wrote:


Ahh but that's what I'm saying, in a lot of cases there is no shot penalty, as your pistol suddenly becomes usable (when it wasn't before) and primaris pistols are basically bolters without the rapid fire.

I totally agree it's niche, and you'd never build a spectrus team around it, but it's worth keeping in mind I think as there will be occasions where it might be enough to tip the balance. The only real hindrance is that 2CP is a lot.

I'm not even sure 2CP is worth spending on the Heavy Executor, which is by far the best weapon to use it on I think. But I'm tempted to take an indomitus team. Not even sure what I would have in it... there's a temptation to take 10x heavy executors in a blob and keep it as a backfield unit.

Edit: Didn't notice but Heavy Ints also have pistols, so they actually gain shots lol. Only S4 AP0 but it's interesting. They may be the only unit where its worth using the strat vs certain enemies.

I understand the argument being made here, but planning to be within 12" of a target on units that have zero melee profile is frankly just asking for trouble. Executor Heavy Intercessors are the only place I'd ever consider using this strat.

Also never, ever plan on being stationary in 9th. Maneuver is a critical part of the game, and having to give it up to not be hitting at a -1 (or spend even more CP to count as stationary, which is far more valuable elsewhere) is part of the opportunity cost that I spoke about.

Pyrosphere wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Damage 5 veteran sgts heavy thunder hammer is the lolz.

How do you get up on Damage 5 for a single Weapon/Attack?

One SGT in the army can get mastercrafted. Heavy thunder hammers are damage 4 base. So master crafted heavy is damage 5.

Sterling191 wrote:

Niiru wrote:


Ahh but that's what I'm saying, in a lot of cases there is no shot penalty, as your pistol suddenly becomes usable (when it wasn't before) and primaris pistols are basically bolters without the rapid fire.

I totally agree it's niche, and you'd never build a spectrus team around it, but it's worth keeping in mind I think as there will be occasions where it might be enough to tip the balance. The only real hindrance is that 2CP is a lot.

I'm not even sure 2CP is worth spending on the Heavy Executor, which is by far the best weapon to use it on I think. But I'm tempted to take an indomitus team. Not even sure what I would have in it... there's a temptation to take 10x heavy executors in a blob and keep it as a backfield unit.

Edit: Didn't notice but Heavy Ints also have pistols, so they actually gain shots lol. Only S4 AP0 but it's interesting. They may be the only unit where its worth using the strat vs certain enemies.

I understand the argument being made here, but planning to be within 12" of a target on units that have zero melee profile is frankly just asking for trouble. Executor Heavy Intercessors are the only place I'd ever consider using this strat.

Also never, ever plan on being stationary in 9th. Maneuver is a critical part of the game, and having to give it up to not be hitting at a -1 (or spend even more CP to count as stationary, which is far more valuable elsewhere) is part of the opportunity cost that I spoke about.

Very true, just trying to find the niche uses for the tools we have.

Indomitus team is likely the only one though. Even a mix of heavy bolters and eradicators could find use for it, as the eradicators also have pistols. I think if it drops to 1CP it'll be decent, but 2CP is just... asking a lot.

Edit: Do we have a standard "take a second relic" stratagem? I didn't notice it. I know there's one for sergeants but that's just the pseudo-relic upgrade list. I know a warlord can take 2 relics, but I mean the ability to take a second relic on a non-warlord. Maybe its a marine-codex strat?

Niiru wrote:
[
Very true, just trying to find the niche uses for the tools we have.

Realistically I think it's best use is as a close in deterrent for units with single shot weapons who also have pistols, or an Executor volley from an Indomitor team aiming at its Favored Enemy. The latter means forgoing Eradicators though, which from a flavor perspective I completely understand, but from a competitive efficiency standpoint is just...bleh.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Niiru wrote:

Edit: Do we have a standard "take a second relic" stratagem? I didn't notice it. I know there's one for sergeants but that's just the pseudo-relic upgrade list. I know a warlord can take 2 relics, but I mean the ability to take a second relic on a non-warlord. Maybe its a marine-codex strat?

We do, it's in the prime Marine codex. Can be used up to two times. Ditto for extra WLTs.

I have 20 painted intercessors that I would like to use (maybe not all of them, but at least some).

What would be a good use for them?

option 1: fortis killteam (+hellblasters? or alone with stalkers?)

option 2: upgrade to veteran intercessors (can we make use of them, maybe via teleportarium?)

option 3: invest in outriders (but I much prefer going the spectrus KT way, and then moving to indomitor KT as to be able to field inceptors and aggressors)

Suggestions?

Proxy as Heavy Intercessors until they're released?

sterling wrote:

Niiru wrote:

Edit: Do we have a standard "take a second relic" stratagem? I didn't notice it. I know there's one for sergeants but that's just the pseudo-relic upgrade list. I know a warlord can take 2 relics, but I mean the ability to take a second relic on a non-warlord. Maybe its a marine-codex strat?

We do, it's in the prime Marine codex. Can be used up to two times. Ditto for extra WLTs.

I can't check, so sorry to question it, but with my previous experience of how GW write their stratagems and rules sometimes -

Does the relic stratagem specify "can take an extra relic from the codex marines relics list" (and so limit our options to the CM codex relics) or does it say "can take an extra relic from ones available to them" (and so can take an extra deathwatch relic).

If you see what I mean?

Though obviously at this stage we don't even know if DW have any relics worth taking.

 LunarSol wrote:
Proxy as Heavy Intercessors until they're released?

That is another option, yes. But I am a slow painter, and the prospect of replacing all my troops with HI is not very attractive from a modelling standpoint. But I agree that would be the ideal competitive solution.

 SatanEatSeitan wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:
Proxy as Heavy Intercessors until they're released?

That is another option, yes. But I am a slow painter, and the prospect of replacing all my troops with HI is not very attractive from a modelling standpoint. But I agree that would be the ideal competitive solution.

Standard intercessors are the worst killteam for us (in my very limited and unprofessional opinion).

And taking intercessors without using them as a tax for killteam buffs is probably even worse.

I don't even know if veteran ints are worthwhile (are they still a thing? I need to get the new book really) as they won't have the killteam buffs.

I think their best use is to also unlock some outriders, but I'm not yet convinced outriders are good enough for us, as we already have a bunch of cool anti-infantry ability. As ever our issue is anti-vehicle, and the Fortis team doesn't help with that much....

Hellblasters, maybe? They're the one unit I'm tempted by from Fortis, but I dunno if it's worth the points vs taking veterans with plasma/melta or taking heavy ints and eradicators.

I understand your pain in wanting to use the models you have though. Could you not convert them? I would probably convert the models and run them as veterans (the statline is now identical I think?)

Sterling191 wrote:

At 5ppm I think the Stalkers are a poor choice. Basic boltguns double tapping with SIA and bolter discipline from the back/midfield do the job just as well against most targets, and can hunker down with a shield for the same cost. CML terminators are I think still extremely aggressively costed for what they can do (53ppm for 2 missiles, a Storm Bolter and a power weapon). I'm looking to take a bunch if I can make it work..

I need to remember Bolter Discipline. I kind of trained it out of myself.

I'm considering what stuff I'd try and take outside of killteams (though an all-killteam army may well be viable).

Corvus may actually be an option now.

I'm wondering if the Invictor has a place, or whether standard dreads would be a better option.

I am not sure any tanks really work for us.

ATVs though?

 LunarSol wrote:

I need to remember Bolter Discipline. I kind of trained it out of myself.

Entirely fair. We spent the entirety of 8th not getting to use it.

Niiru wrote:



I can't check, so sorry to question it, but with my previous experience of how GW write their stratagems and rules sometimes -

Does the relic stratagem specify "can take an extra relic from the codex marines relics list" (and so limit our options to the CM codex relics) or does it say "can take an extra relic from ones available to them" (and so can take an extra deathwatch relic).

If you see what I mean?

Though obviously at this stage we don't even know if DW have any relics worth taking.

I understand completely, and its an entirely reasonable concern to check on. The codex strat specifies a "Chapter Relic", which all prime codex relics are considered to be. We dont have the wording from the new Supplement yet, however the Indices allow a 1:1 swap of Supplement Relics for Chapter Relics so I dont expect it will be an issue. I'm quoting from the SW Index here:

If your army is led by a Space Wolves Warlord, you can, when mustering your army, give one of the following Relics of the Fang to a Space Wolves Character model in your army instead of giving them a Relic from Codex: Space Marines. These are considered to be Chapter Relics for all rules purposes..

The rules implication is that there is permission to take a Supplement relic in the place of a Codex relic whenever one could legally take a Codex relic.

Sterling191 wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

I need to remember Bolter Discipline. I kind of trained it out of myself.

Entirely fair. We spent the entirety of 8th not getting to use it.

Niiru wrote:



I can't check, so sorry to question it, but with my previous experience of how GW write their stratagems and rules sometimes -

Does the relic stratagem specify "can take an extra relic from the codex marines relics list" (and so limit our options to the CM codex relics) or does it say "can take an extra relic from ones available to them" (and so can take an extra deathwatch relic).

If you see what I mean?

Though obviously at this stage we don't even know if DW have any relics worth taking.

I understand completely, and its an entirely reasonable concern to check on. The codex strat specifies a "Chapter Relic", which all prime codex relics are considered to be. We dont have the wording from the new Supplement yet, however the Indices allow a 1:1 swap of Supplement Relics for Chapter Relics so I dont expect it will be an issue. I'm quoting from the SW Index here:

If your army is led by a Space Wolves Warlord, you can, when mustering your army, give one of the following Relics of the Fang to a Space Wolves Character model in your army instead of giving them a Relic from Codex: Space Marines. These are considered to be Chapter Relics for all rules purposes..

The rules implication is that there is permission to take a Supplement relic in the place of a Codex relic whenever one could legally take a Codex relic.

Ok, thats valid then, something to look out for when we have the full wordings etc. Not long to wait before we see relics etc.

Niiru wrote:
I'm considering what stuff I'd try and take outside of killteams (though an all-killteam army may well be viable).

Corvus may actually be an option now.

I'm wondering if the Invictor has a place, or whether standard dreads would be a better option.

I am not sure any tanks really work for us.

ATVs though?

Now we're getting into the stuff we have to talk about like we're no longer a separate codex. I don't think tanks really work for anyone right now. I do think we'll want some Dreadnoughts or an Invictor or something, but until we see how the Contemptor/etc comes out of the FW book its hard to say what our best option will be. I think with Eradicators we don't NEED any dedicated anti-tank, but I think the coffins are solid regardless. Corvus probably isn't optional but might be good enough to not be a massive detriment to take anymore and well worth the coolness factor.

ATVs probably aren't going to last....

I've been finding Codex Contemptors with multimelta to be well worth their weight at only 150pts. I used to run Ven Dreads with lascannons and fists as my heavy hitters, but now they're almost equal cost.
The Contemptors are faster, stronger (wounding T7 on 2+), and critically have a 5++ invuln.
Teleporting a couple of those suckers into multimelta range could prove to be pretty effective.

 LunarSol wrote:

Now we're getting into the stuff we have to talk about like we're no longer a separate codex. I don't think tanks really work for anyone right now. I do think we'll want some Dreadnoughts or an Invictor or something, but until we see how the Contemptor/etc comes out of the FW book its hard to say what our best option will be. I think with Eradicators we don't NEED any dedicated anti-tank, but I think the coffins are solid regardless. Corvus probably isn't optional but might be good enough to not be a massive detriment to take anymore and well worth the coolness factor.

ATVs probably aren't going to last....

ATVs are objectively good because theyre fast, cheap, durable for their cost, and kick out a ton of firepower. Even without the Apothecary heal/rez they're absurdly efficient for their points. For 80 points they put out as much dakka as an Intercessor squad. I *really* do wish we could take standalone Attack Bikes, but that's a rant for another day.

In terms of armored support, the Redemptor is at the top of the list, specifically the plasma variant. It's pretty reasonably costed (185 points with the rocket pod, which you should absolutely take if you can spare the 5 points), it's quite resilient with the flat -1 damage at all times, it's Core so can interact with auras, it's dangerous in both melee and at range with its upgraded fist, and its ranged armament is capable of dealing with several different kinds of targets efficiently. It can also stand in as a buff vector thanks to Wisdom of the Ancients.

 McGibs wrote:
I've been finding Codex Contemptors with multimelta to be well worth their weight at only 150pts. I used to run Ven Dreads with lascannons and fists as my heavy hitters, but now they're almost equal cost.
The Contemptors are faster, stronger (wounding T7 on 2+), and critically have a 5++ invuln.
Teleporting a couple of those suckers into multimelta range could prove to be pretty effective.

The invuln isnt that big of a concern anymore thanks to Psychic Fortress, which we're very likely to be taking. We should know tomorrow how the Dreadnought situation works itself out with the NDA drop on the FW index (I know not precisely the unit you're talking about here but it's the last piece of the puzzle we dont have).

I'm referring to the basic Contemptor in the Marine codex (the plastic Calth one) that can only take a multimelta or assault cannon and fist.

I personally like the built in 5++ because I like the reliability it affords. It's active turn 1, isnt subject to bad cast or deny rolls, and most importantly, doesnt force me to castle around an aura. I like to play my dreads aggressively and independently and keep the support characters around infantry.

Leaked info looks great overall - no surprises with SIA and no extra wargear for primaris, but everything else looks spot on.

Stand outs for me:
DW are now fantastic allies for other marines, a specialist team in a patrol is likely better than keeping super doctrines. 395 points all in for pergatus/spectrus with 5 snipers and shrouded/soul sight phobos libby in a self contained patrol seems like an absolute steal - rerolling everything and practically untouchable.

Am expecting either some datasheet changes in the unleaked parts, or soon to be FAQ's reigning in the new melee supremacy of DW. Centurians (possibly even 12 of them if no datasheet changes?!) in untouchable blackstars or teleportarium with a chaplain could be ravenguard infiltration all over again.

Natorian and something cheap to screen him in a blackstar looks really fun, jump out turn 2, do a bombing run with the blackstar, then psychic cleanse/smite away. Should be able to generate a modest number of mortal wounds quite reliably. Libby's in general look great, 3 solid disciplines now.

Melee supremacy? DW have few melee tricks other than spending CP to replicate BA or SW. Unless the new meta becomes Heavy Thunder Hammer spammed Vanguard Vets, of course, but that doesn’t feel likely.

I dont expect ATVs to be nerfed because they are not that good. People are really over estimating the apoth regen. If your ATV unit is near your apoth then you are wasting pretty much everything you are paying for. Might as well just get another unit of eradicators. Just because you dont like a model, doesnt mean it is going to be errated to be bad.

Feel like our vets can be a pretty solid melee threat, especially since they are Ob sec. Sad thing is the unit would probably feel like worse bladeguard, but they are broken right now so.

 Leth wrote:
I dont expect ATVs to be nerfed because they are not that good. People are really over estimating the apoth regen. If your ATV unit is near your apoth then you are wasting pretty much everything you are paying for. Might as well just get another unit of eradicators. Just because you dont like a model, doesnt mean it is going to be errated to be bad.

Feel like our vets can be a pretty solid melee threat, especially since they are Ob sec. Sad thing is the unit would probably feel like worse bladeguard, but they are broken right now so.

I mean... bladeguard are great, sure. But they're limited to a unit of 3 (unless this changed?), and no obsec.

For the same points as 3 bladeguard, you can get 4 veterans with shields and lightning claws.

No obsec vs Obsec
9 wounds vs 8 wounds (pretty close)
9 attacks vs 12 attacks
Damage 2 vs Damage 1
But the Vets get to reroll all failed wounds, so it's probably pretty close in overall damage dealt. Depending on targets of course. I should try and do the maths, but I'm so tired....

Bladeguard are better body for body sure, but I think it's not too bad. I didn't even count the Vet sergeant as an option which skews the maths a bit more. I honestly don't think I'd take bladeguard, as it would feel like those points could be better spend on a vet squad. Though I do like the bladeguard models. May just use them as shield vets.

Blade guard cap at 6 and getting obsec is easy since it’s a warlord trait.

Reroll ones they both get, reroll wounds is only if they spend the points.

Preview vids starting to pop up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1npCkz4Px0

Quite brief but includes relics - mostly reworks of old ones. Tome of Ectoclades looks good, single use but stronger than before.

Okay, relics appear to be a mixed bag again, but the good ones are very good. Running down the ones we havent seen below:

Beacon is mostly the same, but has a stipulation that it cant be activated the same turn that the bearer drops in from reinforcements. Still super clutch to yoink a kill team across the table to a jump character. Near auto-take as far as I'm concerned.

The Aegis is an always on (yay!) aura of 5++ for Characters and Core models within 6" of the bearer. Flat buff, doesnt keep you from moving and another vector to get invulns on things that couldnt before. More situational than the Beacon, but a super solid choice.

Osseus Key and Thief of Secrets are still pretty bad.

The Tome...hoo boy the Tome. I can see some serious mixed feelings about this one. It's extremely powerful, but very limited. Very matchup dependent and situational, but when you can deploy it against something your opponent has built around, it'll bring the hurt.

Spear of the First Vigil is...okay? Gives the WM back SIA and a better melee profile. Likely not worth the slot for Matched Play, but a solid pick for a Crusade game where everything can be toting WLTs and Relics.

Soul Fortress is interesting. Ignoring maluses to cast can potentially be very powerful, and extending the +1 to Deny to full range can be quite good. I can see this one showing up on some Libbys that we're certain to see in DW lists.

Banebolts...took a serious nerf. Limiting to one shot is pretty bleh, but I can see some combos on a Sergeant toting a Stalker boltgun (as written it doesnt preclude a combination with SIA). Probably not worth the CP to add.

The Auspicator is niche, but suuuuuuper good. Toting around a Velocity Tracker aura for Core units against Eldar armies (as an example, it works against anything with Fly) is choice.

Artificer Bolt Cache - just give it to a Phobos Captain. You'll thank me later.

Eye of Abiding...I really dont know what to think about this one. It wants to go on a character with high RoF weapons...but none of the loadouts I can think of pack enough shots to make the "ignore invulns on 6s to wound (which it appears they hilariously typod) worth the relic slot.