Kangodo wrote:
2. I equipped my marines with the weapons that I am most likely going to use.
For tactical marines I did something different: I already have around 35 models (more than I will ever field) so I am going to buy a tactical squad and give EVERY model a special/heavy weapon.
So now I have 35 Tactical Marines and 10 Tactical Marines with special/heavy weapons, so I can use the model that I want.

The new tactical box can only make a missile launcher and five special weapons; a gravgun, a meltagun, a plasma gun, a flamer, and ONE combi-bolter. The combi-bolter is in two parts one bolter lower and a chose of four special weapon uppers.

Dinamarth wrote:
Lysander or a Terminator on the cover of IF would of been nice.

I really dig the IF cover and his somewhat modern tactical stance. If I had the money I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

Smaug wrote:

Kangodo wrote:
2. I equipped my marines with the weapons that I am most likely going to use.
For tactical marines I did something different: I already have around 35 models (more than I will ever field) so I am going to buy a tactical squad and give EVERY model a special/heavy weapon.
So now I have 35 Tactical Marines and 10 Tactical Marines with special/heavy weapons, so I can use the model that I want.

The new tactical box can only make a missile launcher and five special weapons; a gravgun, a meltagun, a plasma gun, a flamer, and ONE combi-bolter. The combi-bolter is in two parts one bolter lower and a chose of four special weapon uppers.

Could go for a dev squad on top of the tac, that would get you a lot of spare heavy weps

Smaug wrote:
The new tactical box can only make a missile launcher and five special weapons; a gravgun, a meltagun, a plasma gun, a flamer, and ONE combi-bolter. The combi-bolter is in two parts one bolter lower and a chose of four special weapon uppers.

Yeah, miscounted with those combi-parts.
But I also have 4 special weapons from other 2 sets, so in the end I still have my 10 models with special weapons.

Kangodo wrote:

2. I equipped my marines with the weapons that I am most likely going to use.
For tactical marines I did something different: I already have around 35 models (more than I will ever field) so I am going to buy a tactical squad and give EVERY model a special/heavy weapon.
So now I have 35 Tactical Marines and 10 Tactical Marines with special/heavy weapons, so I can use the model that I want.

35 Marines seems like a decent bit on paper, but I personally use 30 Tac Marines in a 1750 point game. If you see yourself wanting to play a game of that size or larger, I would recommend keeping those other 10 as a normal tac squad. If you want special weapons, buy the bits on Ebay and/or get a Devastator squad for a good array of the heavy weapons.

Just my 2 Cents.

 Compel wrote:
One of my mates got all grumpy with the RG codex cover because, "the shoulder pad is the wrong colour."

Yeah, seems GW has finally gone all in on their retcon of the RG tactical markings. RG tacs originally had green shoulder markings. Seems they've now moved to the shoulder pad having the Company Color. I've since repainted all of mine black, for fifth company. Looks better in my opinion anyways.

 NickTheButcher wrote:
35 Marines seems like a decent bit on paper, but I personally use 30 Tac Marines in a 1750 point game. If you see yourself wanting to play a game of that size or larger, I would recommend keeping those other 10 as a normal tac squad. If you want special weapons, buy the bits on Ebay and/or get a Devastator squad for a good array of the heavy weapons.
Just my 2 Cents.

That depends on what weapons you need.
I only need the ones that come in the new Tac-box, and that box is just slightly more expensive than a devestator-box with only half the models.

PS. I play Blood Angels or Ravenguard with Korvydae, so my troops are usually ASM. I really don't need that many tacs.
And our games are almost always 1500 points.

 Kanluwen wrote:

By that sentiment the Raven Guard cover should just be black with no art, the Imperial Fists should be hidden behind a giant wall, etc.

The White Scars aren't a Chapter/Legion that were just "Vroom vroom, we're bikers!". They're all about mobile warfare. Bikers play a part, but so do Razorbacks and Rhinos loaded with Tactical Marines.
They're also considered a bit "savage". I think the cover conveys that perfectly, with him having a severed Eldar(or Dark Eldar) head in one hand and the other strapped to his backpack.

The cover is ok, but most of those guys are known for certain things on the tabletop. White Scars are bikers, and their CT is all about that, so while yes, in fluff they're all about mobile warfare, on the tabletop they're all about them bikes.

They could have made WS on a bike, Raven Guard with a jump pack, IF with a ML, etc. They got the Salamanders fine, with the flamer. IH had a cybernetic leg, but maybe something more pronounced, like an arm or something would have been better, to really drive the point home. I didn't even realize the leg was cybernetic until I had seen the cover about a dozen times.

But hey, they're still cool, and they're certainly going to sell out, so it's not a big deal.

I find myself liking this release a lot more now that the official pictures are out.

The Centurions actually look pretty cool and I like the blend of tactical armour with the dreadnought feet. The only change I think might improve the look is removing the hands and replacing them with the guns, might photoshop it to see what the result is...

All the Tac Armour kits are amazing of course. I am surprised that they didn't feature all of the different armour marks given the popularity of them with FW's kits but I can live with it.

The new tank is also very nice indeed, while the stalker version looks a little odd, I love the hunter!

Minus the scary pricing I am most happy with this release!

 JB wrote:
I don't think the website is a problem.

I ordered today with no lag or timeouts at all.

As for the comment about some LE codices not selling out yet, I think that White Scars and Iron Fists will get more popular with this new codex but they are PITA to paint correctly. Also, players that are just starting them probably are not ready to drop big money on a LE codex. They would really need their cash for models.

Iron Hands and Raven Guard are very cool but I think most players will stay away from them. That's actually a good thing for fans of those chapters. They probably prefer to remain hip and unique at their FLGS.

Not going to lie, wanting to be unique is one reason I started building my Iron Hands themed army 2 years ago. Had one self declared "expert" try and argue that they were not 1st Founding because they didn't have a SC or larger blurb in the 5th Ed codex until I pointed out the list in the front of the book. It's also why I play SoB (started as Witch Hunters 5 years ago) as I have still never seen another one.

The website was horrible Friday night around 6pm... 5:58 was fine, 6pm saw the site come crashing down from everyone who wanted the LE stuff.

It took me almost three hours to secure a copy of the LE salamanders and a copy of the LE Templar codex. I would have gone for the ravenguard codex, but the cover art is pretty bland for all 5 over covers imho.

I wanted the librarian (god doe he look cool), but $30 i ridiculous for a single plastic mini. I remember when forgeworld stuff was expensive, now I can have a forgeworld terminator character for cheaper than a platic PA GW mini!

Kangodo wrote:

Smaug wrote:
The new tactical box can only make a missile launcher and five special weapons; a gravgun, a meltagun, a plasma gun, a flamer, and ONE combi-bolter. The combi-bolter is in two parts one bolter lower and a chose of four special weapon uppers.

Yeah, miscounted with those combi-parts.
But I also have 4 special weapons from other 2 sets, so in the end I still have my 10 models with special weapons.

I didn't want you to feel ripped-off. I'm thinking of going with the sternguard set as it has one each of the special weapons and two combi-weapons in each type/ configuration. So twelve special weapons and two heavies to mix in with some of the other tactical squads I still have unassamblied.

I'm thinking they could of made that new chaplain come with the LE codices, would of been awesome.

[

Dinamarth wrote:
I'm thinking they could of made that new chaplain come with the LE codices, would of been awesome.

I'd be happy if they would give a free download with the LE's.

I'd be happy if my Strike Force, which includes the Resuvian Command Squad box... actually came with the Chaplain. Customer service rep just said that model is replaced with a Captain in the Strike-Force bundle. :-p

Boooo. :-p I've been "playing" 40k for one day, and GW is already trying to get me to rebuy a whole unit-box, just for one new model. :-p

Oh well, i'll probably just get one Sternguard Veteran box, so I can combine it with some of my many Tactical Marines now to make more diverse weapon options.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'd be happy if my Strike Force, which includes the Resuvian Command Squad box... actually came with the Chaplain. Customer service rep just said that model is replaced with a Captain in the Strike-Force bundle. :-p

Boooo. :-p I've been "playing" 40k for one day, and GW is already trying to get me to rebuy a whole unit-box, just for one new model. :-p

Oh well, i'll probably just get one Sternguard Veteran box, so I can combine it with some of my many Tactical Marines now to make more diverse weapon options.

Looks like the codexes are selling. Imperial fists in now sold out on the US site.

I think that although it would be more fluffy to have the like a white scar biker, or something like that I think they really wanted to go with the tactical squad member theme for the LE.

Personally I really like it.

Notice there is a lack of information on grav weapons.

They wound on whatever the targets armor save is ap2

There is
Pistol
Gun - Salvo 2/3 range 18
Heavy grav salvo 3/5 range 24

Can command squads still take plasma guns?

Jamo wrote:
Can command squads still take plasma guns?

Yes.

The Command Squad contains enough parts to make 1 Space Marine sergeant; 1 apothecary; 1 company champion; 1 company standard bearer; and 1 Veteran armed with either flamer, meltagun, or plasma gun.

Dinamarth wrote:

Jamo wrote:
Can command squads still take plasma guns?

Yes.

The Command Squad contains enough parts to make 1 Space Marine sergeant; 1 apothecary; 1 company champion; 1 company standard bearer; and 1 Veteran armed with either flamer, meltagun, or plasma gun.

Cool, cheers, thought I read a rumor that said nO to special weapons somewhere. Are you sure?

Yeah, says so on GWs site.

Of course, doh, thanks

All these people buying the different cover $115 codex's (I refuse to call them whatever title GW is giving them) are truly a baffling group of individuals. I just don't get it.

Ultramarines, Salamanders, Imperial Fists, and Successors are all sold out.

2000/3500 limited editions, at the minimum, are sold.

Still glad that I got the normal version, instead of the Ultramarine one.

 Harriticus wrote:
All these people buying the different cover $115 codex's (I refuse to call them whatever title GW is giving them) are truly a baffling group of individuals. I just don't get it.

If you play SM, its the book you look at every time you play. Its also kinda cool to have a book that matches your army right down to the color scheme... I didn't get a LE, but I certainly "get" the ones who did.

DogofWar1 wrote:
IH had a cybernetic leg, but maybe something more pronounced, like an arm or something would have been better, to really drive the point home. I didn't even realize the leg was cybernetic until I had seen the cover about a dozen times.

How many times did you have to look until you noticed the cybernetic arm?

Any more updates from 40k radio?

I thought they were having a September 1st show, but I can't get on their website to listen to it.

 Lobukia wrote:

 Harriticus wrote:
All these people buying the different cover $115 codex's (I refuse to call them whatever title GW is giving them) are truly a baffling group of individuals. I just don't get it.

If you play SM, its the book you look at every time you play. Its also kinda cool to have a book that matches your army right down to the color scheme... I didn't get a LE, but I certainly "get" the ones who did.

I understand wanting a limited edition because it stands out from the crowd. I didn't go for it though since the cover art for all seven limited editions is also inside the regular codex. Each image is the centerpiece for each of those chapter's section in the codex. So you could just make a copy and create your own dustcover if you want to see your chapter on front. I guess you still get the bookmark and gilded pages but is that really worth it?

I am really disapointed that there is no scythes of the emperor codex.

...really sad.

Man... seeing this image from the news about the enhanced iPad codex makes the Centurions seem *almost* interesting -




But then GW does a full-on Mantic maneouvre and produces models that look nowhere like the art...

typical space marine models, no movement whatsoever. altough after reading the fluff in the latest WD I kinda like them. but they are waaaay to expensive for me to buy even if I wanted to...

 Bomster wrote:
Man... seeing this image from the news about the enhanced iPad codex makes the Centurions seem *almost* interesting -




But then GW does a full-on Mantic maneouvre and produces models that look nowhere like the art...

Lovely picture of horrible mini.

sgtspiff wrote:

 Bomster wrote:
Man... seeing this image from the news about the enhanced iPad codex makes the Centurions seem *almost* interesting -




But then GW does a full-on Mantic maneouvre and produces models that look nowhere like the art...

Lovely picture of horrible mini.

I don't think it would be too difficult to pose a Centurion like that.

The rule on eldar relics is one per army of each type, but you can take more than one on the same model.

With relics that replace weapons, you can only take as many as weapons that the model has to replace

i.e. shuriken pistol and scorpion chainsword could be replaced with fire sabre and the long rifle if you wished.

Puscifer wrote:
I don't think it would be too difficult to pose a Centurion like that.

I think the real challenge is that it looks cooler in part because the head is proportionally smaller in the art, making the Centurion seem bigger and more imposing rather than an awkwardly sized exo armor.

 Vasarto wrote:
I am really disapointed that there is no scythes of the emperor codex.

...really sad.

I'm happy to be saving money not forking out on a Relictors LE variant!

 ph34r wrote:

Puscifer wrote:
I don't think it would be too difficult to pose a Centurion like that.

I think the real challenge is that it looks cooler in part because the head is proportionally smaller in the art, making the Centurion seem bigger and more imposing rather than an awkwardly sized exo armor.

Yeah, totally agree, but that can bulked out to be made to look bigger.

455_PWR wrote:
The website was horrible Friday night around 6pm... 5:58 was fine, 6pm saw the site come crashing down from everyone who wanted the LE stuff.

It took me almost three hours to secure a copy of the LE salamanders and a copy of the LE Templar codex. I would have gone for the ravenguard codex, but the cover art is pretty bland for all 5 over covers imho.

I wanted the librarian (god doe he look cool), but $30 i ridiculous for a single plastic mini. I remember when forgeworld stuff was expensive, now I can have a forgeworld terminator character for cheaper than a platic PA GW mini!

eh, sounds like pure craziness to me, you bought 2 pictures for how much then complain about a 30 dollar mini? atleast the mini you can still use in the next edition

Puscifer wrote:


I don't think it would be too difficult to pose a Centurion like that.

Yes, I agree, you could do something with the pose to make them look more dynamic and more of a bulky kind of exoskeleton (instead of the Sumo suit it appeared to be from the first leaked pics). Would mean some work, though - among the biggest offenders on the model are the legs, and from what I see the legs provided in the box are single pieces and would have to be cut apart and reposed.

Considering that I prefer my Dreadnoughts and Devastators to be separat units, I don't see myself spending that amount of money just to hone my conversion skills on a unit which doesn't interest me hobby-wise, however powerful the unit may be. I suppose I'll have to wait until someone more adventurous than me puts some nice images up on CMON...

I see no reason to buy the newer plastic characters. They're too expensive and you can make the same guy(s) on the cheap with existing bits.

My main problem right now is that I'm not really digging any of the HQ models (except chaplains because they look super badass).

But the Libbys and Captains all look rather meh, so I've no idea what do get when it's payday xD

 centuryslayer wrote:
My main problem right now is that I'm not really digging any of the HQ models (except chaplains because they look super badass).

But the Libbys and Captains all look rather meh, so I've no idea what do get when it's payday xD

Yes, that's really the problem with the marines; not enough HQ models!

At least it's an easy way to get a Librarian with Helmet, as the head is an extra bit without relying on Sevrin Loth.

/Edit: Will get Tacticals, Sternguards and Vanguards - and if it's just for the bits. Librarian is ok because mentioned above, Captain is bad imho. Not getting those centurions - if I like to use their rules I will put my out-to-date Dreadnoughts on the field - at least it's not prohibited to use bigger bases. Their price doesn't help with their look and pseudo-choice in the codex (what do I have Terminators/Devastators for?)

daisho wrote:
At least it's an easy way to get a Librarian with Helmet, as the head is an extra bit without relying on Sevrin Loth.

But the Merlin head is the best part!

 Crimson wrote:

daisho wrote:
At least it's an easy way to get a Librarian with Helmet, as the head is an extra bit without relying on Sevrin Loth.

But the Merlin head is the best part!

Face-Heads were never the best part of GWS minis ... at least they might sell good on ebay if people like them.

 Crimson wrote:

 centuryslayer wrote:
My main problem right now is that I'm not really digging any of the HQ models (except chaplains because they look super badass).

But the Libbys and Captains all look rather meh, so I've no idea what do get when it's payday xD

Yes, that's really the problem with the marines; not enough HQ models!

not really what I was saying. I'm just saying that I don't really like the look on any of them

The new models have impressive detail but the designs just don't work for me. I might pick up a Sternguard box for the bits and convert some in to HQ characters/sergeants. Stalker looks alright but for that price I'll probably just magnetize my Whirlwind's launchers and add a triple barrel attachment.

Personally I'm more likely to pick up Forge worlds HQ's like librarian Sevrin Loth with honorguard, the apothocaries and reclusiarch Enkomi + chapter master Asterion Moloc, than the new SM libby, captain and reclusiarch command set. Taken together they are roughly the same total price.

46€ for the Codex? WTF? 7€ more than the others, and the double of what softcover codexes were worth. Come on...

Its 7€ more because it is 70 pages longer.


And yes double'ish of the softcover price, but that is old news that honestly cant get me going anymore.

Seriously, after a month of rumours and discussion, how are people still dropping in here and being surprised about the Codex being more expensive than the others?

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Seriously, after a month of rumours and discussion, how are people still dropping in here and being surprised about the Codex being more expensive than the others?

Because I haven't read the whole thread. I saw the pictures and heard about some rules, but I didn't know about the prizes. Should have expected it, though.

 Erasoketa wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Seriously, after a month of rumours and discussion, how are people still dropping in here and being surprised about the Codex being more expensive than the others?

Because I haven't read the whole thread. I saw the pictures and heard about some rules, but I didn't know about the prizes. Should have expected it, though.

It's not the price thing that you should be focusing on.

It's 70 more pages than the standard codices.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Erasoketa wrote:

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Seriously, after a month of rumours and discussion, how are people still dropping in here and being surprised about the Codex being more expensive than the others?

Because I haven't read the whole thread. I saw the pictures and heard about some rules, but I didn't know about the prizes. Should have expected it, though.

It's not the price thing that you should be focusing on.

It's 70 more pages than the standard codices.

I'm sorry, but my budget does not increase depending on the quality of the product. SM are not my main army. In the last editions I've been buying the SM and IG Codexes just for reading it. I have some BT, but I've never used them. I don't think the extra pages are going to make a difference to me. I guess I'll make my final choice seeing the book on my hand, but it's not likely I'll buy it.

Is it just me, or am I accurate in seeing that the ONLY difference between these $ 115 editions and the basic edition is the different cover, a dust jacket, a numbered end paper and ribbon? There is no new content for the chapter shown on the cover..... Do those who buy (into) this 115 edition get a courtesy reach around?

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Is it just me, or am I accurate in seeing that the ONLY difference between these $ 115 editions and the basic edition is the different cover, a dust jacket, a numbered end paper and ribbon? There is no new content for the chapter shown on the cover..... Do those who buy (into) this 115 edition get a courtesy reach around?

That's been answered 30 times in this thread.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Is it just me, or am I accurate in seeing that the ONLY difference between these $ 115 editions and the basic edition is the different cover, a dust jacket, a numbered end paper and ribbon? There is no new content for the chapter shown on the cover..... Do those who buy (into) this 115 edition get a courtesy reach around?

That's been answered 30 times in this thread.

let them be

It's not accurate anyway as they are printed using a different kind of paper too

So a question for people who have pre-ordered from GW before; can I expect to get my LE book delivered for release, or will it be afterward?

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
It's not accurate anyway as they are printed using a different kind of paper too

So a question for people who have pre-ordered from GW before; can I expect to get my LE book delivered for release, or will it be afterward?

They will ship it the Friday before release usually. So you will get it as soon as the post gets it there from when they get it Friday. So you probably won't get it release day Saturday, but pretty soon the following week.

I'm trying to figure out why GW thinks I should pay $30US for a Space marine captain that has the same quality as the one from the Assault on Black Reach, which you can get for about 5 dollars.

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I'm trying to figure out why GW thinks I should pay $30US for a Space marine captain that has the same quality as the one from the Assault on Black Reach, which you can get for about 5 dollars.

I actually prefer the AoBR captain over the new one.

 MWHistorian wrote:

 krazynadechukr wrote:
Is it just me, or am I accurate in seeing that the ONLY difference between these $ 115 editions and the basic edition is the different cover, a dust jacket, a numbered end paper and ribbon? There is no new content for the chapter shown on the cover..... Do those who buy (into) this 115 edition get a courtesy reach around?

That's been answered 30 times in this thread.

It was a rhetorical & sarcastic statement.... Was the reach around question answered though?

i prefer the new Captain...
i like the changes they have made, and will be stoked to paint one...
i've had the AoBR Captain from day one, and am still not inspired to paint him...
the new guy looks much cooler to me, and has me itching to paint...
the Iron Hands version looks like fun...

i will be sure to get him at 25% off, though...

cheers
jah

 AegisGrimm wrote:
I'm trying to figure out why GW thinks I should pay $30US for a Space marine captain that has the same quality as the one from the Assault on Black Reach, which you can get for about 5 dollars.

i actually agree. I think the new librarian looks awesome but i'm struggling to see the point in the new commander, especially at that price.

decker_cky wrote:

DogofWar1 wrote:
IH had a cybernetic leg, but maybe something more pronounced, like an arm or something would have been better, to really drive the point home. I didn't even realize the leg was cybernetic until I had seen the cover about a dozen times.

How many times did you have to look until you noticed the cybernetic arm?

Well...hmm...about 30 times now I suppose. I think some of it had to do with the quality of the scans, they tended to get fuzzy to the left side of the page, as the part of the arm near the hand just looks silvery, not all that cybernetic.

About those LE codexes. I am a die hard DA fanboy and was really tempted to get the LE codex. High prices has stopped me though. I picked up the normal codex and found there is a lot of spelling and rules error on the book. I feel bad for those who got that LE codex and have to live with those rules/spelling mistakes.

So, does this make the White Scars and the Raven Guard officially the least popular legions?

And the Iron Hands

 Melcavuk wrote:
And the Iron Hands

Yeah, but that's only the books.

The moment people realize they can get IWND Vindicators, Whirlwinds, and Predators, along with a bike CM with a 2+/3++/6+FNP with EW with the right upgrades, I think we'll be seeing lots and lots of Iron Hands.

After my initial thoughts on the kits I purchased I've decided to take a look at the others

Things I like about the Centurions:
- servo skull targeting array bit
- winged skull banner topper bit
- plethora of meltaguns and flamers that look like they can be used with infantry models
- some of the crotch plates might make good bucklers/combat shields when cut up.
Not enough to make the kit worth buying, though.

Looking at the Librarian sprue it really is excellent, the staff is completely optional and being able to swap the head for a helmet is great. The back pack and legs are really cool too. But I would pay £12 at most for it, so there we go.

The Captain model is just baffling to me, are gravs going to be so good that it's worth putting a combi-grav on the model? Surely a choice of combi-weapons would have been a better idea, or a modular one like the one included with the tactical box? Also that equipment compromises the extra attack in CC that you'd likely want a Captain or Chapter Master to have.
I like the sword, the backpack and some of the leg detail, but I dislike the stupidly large cloak, crested helmet and the braid covering up the MK VIII armour.

Some nice individual plastics here (Chaplain and Librarian) and the veteran kits are cool too. Centurions are just dumb and seem symbolic of the designers desperation to get a new unit into every book.

Have to respect the relatively sane pricing of the Tactical Squad box (was sure it was going to cost £30) although it now makes the cost of 5 Dire Avengers look especially diabolical.

 Compel wrote:
So, does this make the White Scars and the Raven Guard officially the least popular legions?

Nah, they would have sold the Raven Guard ones twice over by now.

Nobody can find them though!

So just to ask for buying assistance one last time...

I surveyed the local community which TENDS to only play 1500pt games.

I now own 30 total Tactical Marines, but only 10 are assembled meaning I now have a bunch of choices/options involved.

If I want to add a little more to my collection, should I buy...

- A new Sternguard Veterans squad, and then ten of my unassembled Tacticals, to make a bunch of guys with all kinds of heavy/speciality weapons?

- I could buy ANOTHER box of Tacticals and a Sternguard box, and do the same.

- I could buy Devastators and do either of the above but with them.

- I could buy no more units, and instead add a vehicle, flyer, etc....

Again, i've never built a list and am just not learning the game and embarking on the whole thing. I own the contents of a Black Reach starter, the new 6th Ed. Strike Force, and a copy of Space Hulk 3rd Ed meaning... i've got 30 tacticals, 5 regular terminators, a mountain of fancy terminators from Space Hulk, a Dreadnaught, a Venerable Dreadnaught, two Captains, a Command Squad, a Razorback, and a Drop-pod.

White Scar - well for me no biker on the cover meant no sale... the fact you can barely see any of his symbols hardly helps either.
It is blatantly the worst pic of the lot and deserves to be shunned.

 squall018 wrote:

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:
It's not accurate anyway as they are printed using a different kind of paper too

So a question for people who have pre-ordered from GW before; can I expect to get my LE book delivered for release, or will it be afterward?

They will ship it the Friday before release usually. So you will get it as soon as the post gets it there from when they get it Friday. So you probably won't get it release day Saturday, but pretty soon the following week.

It feels like to me that everything I've pre-ordered gets to me a week after release. Just like how WD subscipers get the magazine a week after the stores.

By the GW front page: Less than 100 Iron Hands Codexes, Less than 100 Raven Guard codexes and Less than 200 White Scar codexes left. Really does look like the White Scar one was the worst recieved of the bunch,

DogofWar1 wrote:

 Melcavuk wrote:
And the Iron Hands

Yeah, but that's only the books.

The moment people realize they can get IWND Vindicators, Whirlwinds, and Predators, along with a bike CM with a 2+/3++/6+FNP with EW with the right upgrades, I think we'll be seeing lots and lots of Iron Hands.

Having played an Iron Hands themed army for the past 2 years, I am fearing the bandwagons jumpers once this become well known. I hated when the BA got a new dex and everyone came over and accused me of jumping onboard even though I had been playing the PDF for awhile, and I can see the same thing happening here.

 Salted Diamond wrote:

DogofWar1 wrote:

 Melcavuk wrote:
And the Iron Hands

Yeah, but that's only the books.

The moment people realize they can get IWND Vindicators, Whirlwinds, and Predators, along with a bike CM with a 2+/3++/6+FNP with EW with the right upgrades, I think we'll be seeing lots and lots of Iron Hands.

Having played an Iron Hands themed army for the past 2 years, I am fearing the bandwagons jumpers once this become well known. I hated when the BA got a new dex and everyone came over and accused me of jumping onboard even though I had been playing the PDF for awhile, and I can see the same thing happening here.

Hipster much? What's it matter what other people play if you enjoy what you do?

Locrian wrote:

 Salted Diamond wrote:

DogofWar1 wrote:

 Melcavuk wrote:
And the Iron Hands

Yeah, but that's only the books.

The moment people realize they can get IWND Vindicators, Whirlwinds, and Predators, along with a bike CM with a 2+/3++/6+FNP with EW with the right upgrades, I think we'll be seeing lots and lots of Iron Hands.

Having played an Iron Hands themed army for the past 2 years, I am fearing the bandwagons jumpers once this become well known. I hated when the BA got a new dex and everyone came over and accused me of jumping onboard even though I had been playing the PDF for awhile, and I can see the same thing happening here.

Hipster much? What's it matter what other people play if you enjoy what you do?

It's more I dislike how people react to what they see as "another bandwagoner" When it's not me jumping on the bandwagon, but everyone else jumping on mine.

Problem with playing with strangers I guess. Clearly anyone who knows you knows you're not a bandwaggoner...and why would you care about what people who don't know you think about you?

I wanna create a chapter whom was formed illegally by an inquisitor when he stole some of the Gene seed materials from the Space Wolf, Ultra Marine and Grey Knight Gene seeds to create a powerful new chapter.
A Chapter the Imperium is just now discovered hanging around the eye of terror and tyranid infested planets fighting off chaos and nids where ever they are.

xruslanx wrote:
Problem with playing with strangers I guess. Clearly anyone who knows you knows you're not a bandwaggoner...and why would you care about what people who don't know you think about you?

I try and not care, but being military, there is are always new people showing up, and I had PCS'ed right after BA came out, so at my new FLGS I was seen as "another bandwagon BA player" It annoyed me then, so I'm just still stuck in that mind set. That's all. Time to get off my soap box I guess LOL

I don't understand a lot of the obsession people have against bandwagoners. I just don't get it.

On the sameish subject... I just found a company that makes Blood Raven and Lamenters Shoulder Pads.

Been wanting to do an army of either of them for nearly ten years.

Now the choices :-(.

I can make a great 5th company starter force of Blood Ravens, based on the characters from the game...

Gabriel Angelos: Chapter Master.

Davian Thule: Venerable Dreadnought.

Squad Tarkus: Tactical Squad.
Squad Cyrus: Scout Squad.

Squad Thaddeus: Assault Squad.

Squad Avitus: Devastator Squad.

Give a taste of everything and is going to look amazing when finished.

The Lamenters on the other hand are just Bad Ass Blood Angels. I like the look of them, but they lack a lot of the background that the Blood Ravens have.

Bandwagoners that always rush to the newest and often most overpowered thing are annoying. I don't see how they are NOT annoying.

Ahhhh, the WAAC players?

Explains the majority of people I play against then.

just ordered the nomral codex and a centurion from the warstore. I figure, i can make a better cover than those on the limited and only for like 15$.

GW needs to learn that collectors editions need to have extra to make it worth it. charge 150$ for a special codex, but add a limited edition mini, limited edition dice, + a few extras.

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
So just to ask for buying assistance one last time...

I surveyed the local community which TENDS to only play 1500pt games.

I now own 30 total Tactical Marines, but only 10 are assembled meaning I now have a bunch of choices/options involved.

If I want to add a little more to my collection, should I buy...

- A new Sternguard Veterans squad, and then ten of my unassembled Tacticals, to make a bunch of guys with all kinds of heavy/speciality weapons?

- I could buy ANOTHER box of Tacticals and a Sternguard box, and do the same.

- I could buy Devastators and do either of the above but with them.

- I could buy no more units, and instead add a vehicle, flyer, etc....

Again, i've never built a list and am just not learning the game and embarking on the whole thing. I own the contents of a Black Reach starter, the new 6th Ed. Strike Force, and a copy of Space Hulk 3rd Ed meaning... i've got 30 tacticals, 5 regular terminators, a mountain of fancy terminators from Space Hulk, a Dreadnaught, a Venerable Dreadnaught, two Captains, a Command Squad, a Razorback, and a Drop-pod.

Your options will ultimately be determined by the types of lists you end up running.

With that being said, the Devastator box would be a pretty good choice. No Space Marine player should be without a multi-melta and the Devastator box is the only place to get one. It also comes packed with one or two of every heavy weapon you'll ever need and comes with enough components to make five Marines. It's really an essential starter purchase if you want to build a Marine Army. Depending on how many tactical sprues you have, you should have enough special weapons to put together one or two of each loadout. Between that and the Devastator box, you'll have enough to build whatever combination you might want when you get around to putting together a list.

Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

 tvih wrote:
Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

You see it all the time on Salamander lists. But then, you see multi-meltas EVERYWHERE on Salamander lists...

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

Motograter wrote:
Saving myself a load of cash by not buying any of this. Prices are a joke

Congrats on being the first person to ever say that. You must feel special.

ditto...

 tvih wrote:
Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

Vulkan He'Stan and Drop Pods don't need tanks to come to them.

I doubt many people actually flock to painting Iron Hands or whatever armies, since the book (as always) allows for DIY chapters to pick and choose the best trait depending on the tournament / matchup at hand.

I am really glad for the change to 5 man squads getting specials/heavies.

Now with KP only being 1 in 6 missions the drop pod list will not be as difficult to pull off. (Assuming the requirement of 10 dudes no longer applies......)

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 tvih wrote:
Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

You see it all the time on Salamander lists. But then, you see multi-meltas EVERYWHERE on Salamander lists...

Well, I never see Salamander lists either so I guess that figures Haven't run one yet myself either despite having Vulkan. But even if I did, I still wouldn't use multi-meltas on infantry. Speeders, attack bikes, etc? Sure. Infantry? No.

 Leth wrote:
I am really glad for the change to 5 man squads getting specials/heavies.

Now with KP only being 1 in 6 missions the drop pod list will not be as difficult to pull off. (Assuming the requirement of 10 dudes no longer applies......)

I wondering if this new weapons rule, coupled with a combi-weapon on the Sgt., will see the return of the 4e Las/Plas units I heard about. Sure, the combi-plasma only gets to be fired once, but once is typically all you need, unless you're facing an all-termie army, which grow rarer by the day...

 tvih wrote:
Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

Well, the same could be said about regular plain ol' melta, because it's not like tanks are going to come even closer for you to shoot them with one. But that's part of the point of melta weapons in general--your opponent doesn't want to get his tanks within range of your meltas. They're denial units (in the traditional sense, not the 40K rules sense) that help determine where your opponent is going to move his units.

As far as actually using them to kill tanks, that's what Drop Pods are for. If there's enemy armor that you absolutely, positively must take out in your first turn, you drop a melta/multi-melta squad next to it. You get one shot at regular BS and one at BS 1. And then, next turn, you get two at regular BS if the relevant models have survived.

Given that it's a free upgrade (at least until the new codex is actually released) there's no reason not to take a multi-melta if you're running a dedicated anti-armor Tac Squad. It's kind of a no brainer.

 tvih wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 tvih wrote:
Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

You see it all the time on Salamander lists. But then, you see multi-meltas EVERYWHERE on Salamander lists...

Well, I never see Salamander lists either so I guess that figures Haven't run one yet myself either despite having Vulkan. But even if I did, I still wouldn't use multi-meltas on infantry. Speeders, attack bikes, etc? Sure. Infantry? No.

Then you're missing out. 4 twin-linked multi-meltas + a Sgt with Combi-melta in a drop pod means a lot of vehicles are going to have a very bad day.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Youngblood13 wrote:

 tvih wrote:
Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

Well, the same could be said about regular plain ol' melta, because it's not like tanks are going to come even closer for you to shoot them with one. But that's part of the point of melta weapons in general--your opponent doesn't want to get his tanks within range of your meltas. They're denial units (in the traditional sense, not the 40K rules sense) that help determine where your opponent is going to move his units.

As far as actually using them to kill tanks, that's what Drop Pods are for. If there's enemy armor that you absolutely, positively must take out in your first turn, you drop a melta/multi-melta squad next to it. You get one shot at regular BS and one at BS 1. And then, next turn, you get two at regular BS if the relevant models have survived.

Given that it's a free upgrade (at least until the new codex is actually released) there's no reason not to take a multi-melta if you're running a dedicated anti-armor Tac Squad. It's kind of a no brainer.

Exactly, Taking MMs on infantry (especially when Vulcan twin-links them) essentially creates a 12" bubble (24" for vehicles with AV 11 or less) around the unit that no vehicle dares cross except maybe fliers, and even then you just need one hit and they're gone.

I'd rather take say, 4 lascannons and threaten 48" than 4 multi-meltas and threaten 12", even if the latter is double armor pen. If I want to drop pod someone/thing, I'll drop regular meltas/combi-meltas that can actually hit something before being blasted off the table.

 tvih wrote:
I'd rather take say, 4 lascannons and threaten 48" than 4 multi-meltas and threaten 12", even if the latter is double armor pen. If I want to drop pod someone/thing, I'll drop regular meltas/combi-meltas that can actually hit something before being blasted off the table.

Thats perfect for most every other army (IFs in particular with re-rolls to armor pen). But specifically for Salamanders CT, and now only if you take Vulcan, MMs are the best.

I'm just glad we can now take heavy flamers with Tac squads.

Honestly, bandwagoners don't really bug me.

Everyone plays for certain reasons, some play for fluff, others play to win. As long as its all legal and not trying to cheat or subvert the rules, I don't think it's a big deal.

GW put it in a codex, they supposedly play tested it, and supposedly knew of the possible consequences of it. Don't get angry at the player who got C:CSM, saw the Heldrakes, bought 3, and dominated the next dozen games until his local meta caught up. Don't hate the Tau player who runs a Riptide or two because it's an awesome model. Don't hate the Daemon player with the re-rollable 2++ save on their HQ.

If you want to hate anyone for people playing the best units legally, hate Games Workshop for putting the unit in the way they did. 40k is a hobby, and there are lots of goals therein, but once the models his the table, the goal is to win.

It's one thing to say that you don't like people rushing to the new hotness on the internet, but letting it transfer to real life or the tabletop is taking it too far.

Likewise, don't hate the guy who rolls up to the table at 2000 points with primary detachments of White Scars with Khan and three squads of bikers, another primary detachment of Iron Hands with that insane biker relic CM HQ, two tac melta squads in drop pods, a Vindicator and a Whirlwind, and an allied detachment of Imperial Fists with a biker libby, a 3rd melta tac drop pod squad, a devastator squad with tank hunters, and an ADL manned by one of those devastators conferring tank hunters. It's legal, and if GW didn't want people doing that, then they should have set up the rules so that it couldn't be done.

LE codexes are on ebay already.

£179 for a Sallies one ...

Nobody seems to realize it- it's not the bandwagoners that are that bad, but rather the other people who really have a bad view of said bandwagoners, and treat all the people they don't know with a broad brush, even when some of use have been sticking it out with an army that's been average, or even sub-par, for years before getting amped up to boost sales of that army.

For instance, am I a bandwagoner for playing Necrons? Some people I might come up against that don't know me would claim it just because I play them. But it's not my fault they are hugely powerful all of a sudden. All my models are the metals that I have had painted since the Second Edition days, other than some metal Lords and Pariah models, and I don't even use flyers.

But bandwagoners are annoying, because the majority of the time they are only with the army because of the latest codex creep and want the power trip of slaughtering opponents. They aren't in it for the effort of devising (their own) tactics, or the hobby aspect of playing with an army of something other than bare metal and plastic, or discussing the cool fiction. It's just jarring to have people in a hobby that are only there for a reason that any other hobby can give them.

But definitely the larger grip is with GW, for such crazy codex creep that jumping on a bandwagon with a new army is even something to do.

Band wagon jumpers aren't the problem. It's the WAAC, cheese monkey players that I take exception with. You know, the really powerful combos like 3 Heldrakes or 3 squads of Honor Guard with Relic Blades. When a new codex is released, there's a certain type of player that min/maxs everything and finds cheesy combos/tactics/loopholes. I am glad that most people I play with are more about the cinematic and having fun than winning at all costs.

This might have been answered earlier:
Did I misread or do HQs have access to special weapons now (flamer, meltagun, plasmagun, grav rifle, etc...)?

 phoenix darkus wrote:
This might have been answered earlier:
Did I misread or do HQs have access to special weapons now (flamer, meltagun, plasmagun, grav rifle, etc...)?

According to 40k radio, that does appear to be the case. They even had to type out "special" and "special issue" separately, so the odds of it being a mistake are pretty small. Surprising, but definitely cool.

Oh man, I just had a vision of bikes with two special weapons, a combi-weapon on the sarge, and an HQ rolling around with a 4th weapon. Hey Terminators, how do you feel about 4 plasma-guns?

Nocturnus wrote:
Band wagon jumpers aren't the problem. It's the WAAC, cheese monkey players that I take exception with. You know, the really powerful combos like 3 Heldrakes or 3 squads of Honor Guard with Relic Blades. When a new codex is released, there's a certain type of player that min/maxs everything and finds cheesy combos/tactics/loopholes. I am glad that most people I play with are more about the cinematic and having fun than winning at all costs.

See, this is what I don't understand, what's the problem with playing the best list you can?

If it's a legal list, and it's played legally, then what's the problem, other than you don't like it? Again, GW put Heldrakes in the new codex, they knew that some people were going to run tripledrake lists. I won't say that every unit and rule that GW puts in a codex is fit to print, but attacking other players for using what's available to them is not ok. It's basically saying that people should gimp their lists so that they don't offend sentiments, despite the fact that when the models hit the table to goal is to win.

If you want to play more cinematic lists, that's fine, and I would never want anyone to stop playing a fluffy list, and equally I wouldn't ask someone to stop playing the best list they can think up. The game should be about accommodating all types, the painters, the fluff buffs, and the wargamers. Admittedly, the wargamers probably have an edge on the painters and fluff-centric players on the tabletop since they spend more of their 40k energy on trying to win, but that's fine. That's how someone wants to play the game, and so long as it's legal, they shouldn't be attacked for playing that way.

Heck, if anything, players like that are easier to counter than anyone. The meta gets so warped that you pretty much KNOW that someone playing X army is playing Y way, and as such can build in counters. Every CSM player bringing Heldrakes? Alright fine, excuse me while my two squads of IF Tank Hunting Devs, all with Flakk missiles, line up, and have a dude man that ADL. Now excuse me while I chew a HP or two off the moment they arrive with the ADL's interceptor, and finish them off the next turn with twelve S7 flakk shots, all with tank hunter.

Also, I see WAAC used in two completely different ways when discussing players. There are those who use WAAC as you have, discussing players who have legal lists and play legally, but with min maxed units, and then there are those who use the term as a sort of stand-in for "cheater" or someone who bends the rules, rather than operating within them. Those two things shouldn't be mixed together, and we need a standardized definition.

I can't contribute much as a brand-new player... but coming from having a LOT of experience in other games, I can say that I will always prefer to play what I like and have fun, than win at all costs. I got into this hobby to PERSONALIZE armies, crews, what-have you, and make them uniquely mine. I don't sit at a painting-table, often for hours on end, painting these minis, because I need to dominate fellow nerds in a competitive game that is ultimately meaningless.... I do it, to have fun, to field my favorite and coolest minis based on my love of fiction, lore, or just aesthetics, and I want to hit a table with a paint-job unlike the other guy/gal.

I would LIKE to always have a fighting chance at winning... but that really is secondary. Any game like this where codex and rules issues come piece-meal for factions, etc.... can NEVER be taken too seriously as competitive "sport", so we'd might as well have a blast.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to commit sacrillage... defile an unopened Space Hulk 3rd Ed. and turn the Termies into members of my "Fortunate Sun", Iron Hands sub-chapter... in all their yellow, black, and gold... bumble-bee looking non-glory. :-p

@DogofWar1

Good comments being posted here. Logical thought in your postings.

Grab cannon deathstar:

6 centurions, grav cannons, grav amps + allied DA Libby with PFG = 30 reroll to hit and wound grav shots

Ouch...

The Razorback changes seem unusual to me. Upgrades are cheaper, but base cost increase means you still pay the same amount as 5th ed for them; you're forking over +15pts for a TL heavy bolter Razorback.

 phoenix darkus wrote:
Grab cannon deathstar:

6 centurions, grav cannons, grav amps + allied DA Libby with PFG = 30 reroll to hit and wound grav shots

Ouch...

And those shots are ap2, MCs and Termies will brixs.

 gianlucafiorentini123 wrote:
I'm just glad we can now take heavy flamers with Tac squads.

You can't. The spoiler specifically said (twice) that HFs are exclusive to Sternguard and LotD squads. That collection manager screenshot (if that's where you're getting this assumption from) is riddled with typos and incorrect information. It's likely from an old beta testing program for the software, or was simply thrown together as an example. It's not accurate for the squad options.

Don't get me wrong, I'd kill for a HF option in Tac squads, but we're not getting one.

 tvih wrote:
Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

That's precisely why they're good. It creates a 24" bubble your opponent doesn't want to move armor into. Zoning out the locations of your opponent's army is precisely what a midrange gunline army wants to do, especially with objective-based victory conditions. It seems like you're simply inexperienced with winning C:SM tactics.

Now if you'll excuse me, I need to commit sacrillage... defile an unopened Space Hulk 3rd Ed. and turn the Termies into members of my "Fortunate Sun", Iron Hands sub-chapter... in all their yellow, black, and gold... bumble-bee looking non-glory. :-p

Ah, that kind of sacrilege is the most fun! I am using the SH terminators as the core of my Blood Angels counts-as Deathwing army (double sacrilege in this day and age!). Seemed like a cool way to field the 1st Company of the Blood Angels in Terminator armor. I even have a "vanilla" terminator painted in scraped-up Ultramarines heraldry to fit with an old Rogue Trader era piece of fluff.

 tvih wrote:
I'd rather take say, 4 lascannons and threaten 48" than 4 multi-meltas and threaten 12", even if the latter is double armor pen.

I said that no Space Marine player should be without a Marine equipped with a Multi-Melta (note the singular). You responded by pointing out that opponents are unlikely to drive their tanks into a Multi-Melta's threat range. I agreed with your statement and pointed out that a Multi-Melta can be used as a denial unit to keep enemy armor away from certain areas of the board or it could be dropped next to a big scary tank as part of an Alpha Strike.

I did not say that Multi-Meltas are the only heavy weapons that Space Marine players should equip their Tac Squads with. I did not say that a Space Marine player should equip four Tac Squads with Multi-Meltas. I did not say that a Space Marine player should equip four Tac Squads with Multi-Meltas instead of taking Lascannons.

Given what I said and what I didn't say, it's obvious that you're working on building a strawman. Since I have no reason to argue in support of things I did not say and positions I do not subscribe to, all I can do there is wish you the best of luck with your new creative endeavor.

 tvih wrote:
If I want to drop pod someone/thing, I'll drop regular meltas/combi-meltas that can actually hit something before being blasted off the table.

Taking a Tac Squad with a meltagun and a combi-melta doesn't preclude taking a Multi-Melta. In fact, until the new codex is officially released, it costs the same to put a Multi-Melta into the squad as it does not to. Now, you could take a different heavy weapon, combat squad the Tac Squad, drop the Melta and Combi-Melta on a tank and put the other heavy weapon somewhere else. There's not necessarily anything wrong with that. Personally, I like to dedicate a full squad to alpha strike duty as it's way more survivable and it will draw more fire. Also, if it does survive, then there are all sorts of things you can do with Tac Marines in the opponent's back ranks. But that's what vanilla Marines are all about--flexibility.

My position, which I stand by, is that no Space Marine player should be without a Marine equipped with a Multi-Melta. That is still, in my opinion, one of several reasons that the Devastator box is a good buy for a starting Space Marine player.

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Then you're missing out. 4 twin-linked multi-meltas + a Sgt with Combi-melta in a drop pod means a lot of vehicles are going to have a very bad day.

Except for the very important detail about how they must Snap Fire on the turn they arrive, and so probably won't blow up anything. Then they stand there and die. This only works with Logan for Relentless, and even at that, it is a waste of Logan's abilities.

"Sales"
(I have the one I tried to make here )

Grav deathstar "light": Tigurius, biomancy (endurance), command squad with 5 Grav rifles + captain with Grav rifle. Sprinkle some stormshields for better saves and voila!

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Then you're missing out. 4 twin-linked multi-meltas + a Sgt with Combi-melta in a drop pod means a lot of vehicles are going to have a very bad day.

Except for the very important detail about how they must Snap Fire on the turn they arrive, and so probably won't blow up anything. Then they stand there and die. This only works with Logan for Relentless, and even at that, it is a waste of Logan's abilities.

Ultramarines CT can make them Relentless the turn they land now. It's still a 1-trick pony, but it works, and you get the relentless part without expending any more points.

I forget that he knows all disciplines, so definitely prescience as well!

 wtwlf123 wrote:

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Then you're missing out. 4 twin-linked multi-meltas + a Sgt with Combi-melta in a drop pod means a lot of vehicles are going to have a very bad day.

Except for the very important detail about how they must Snap Fire on the turn they arrive, and so probably won't blow up anything. Then they stand there and die. This only works with Logan for Relentless, and even at that, it is a waste of Logan's abilities.

Ultramarines CT can make them Relentless the turn they land now. It's still a 1-trick pony, but it works, and you get the relentless part without expending any more points.

Doesn't the CT say that you only get relentless if you are not disembarking out of a transport?

 wtwlf123 wrote:

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Then you're missing out. 4 twin-linked multi-meltas + a Sgt with Combi-melta in a drop pod means a lot of vehicles are going to have a very bad day.

Except for the very important detail about how they must Snap Fire on the turn they arrive, and so probably won't blow up anything. Then they stand there and die. This only works with Logan for Relentless, and even at that, it is a waste of Logan's abilities.

Ultramarines CT can make them Relentless the turn they land now. It's still a 1-trick pony, but it works, and you get the relentless part without expending any more points.

As far as I saw the whole conversation was about Salamander armies. Plus, didn't the rumours say that the Doctrines don't effect units that just came on from reserves?

 Shadox wrote:
Doesn't the CT say that you only get relentless if you are not disembarking out of a transport?

Ha, yes it does. How sad for them. :(

As long as they didnt disembark from a transport.

Still a multi-melta on its own is not as useful, however if you have a 10 man squad(if you twin link with vulkan) Snap shot multi melta has a decent(although low) chance to hit on the deep strike. Combined with a combi melta and a meltagun this could be a pretty decent alpha strike. Even snapfiring on the first turn, if there are multiple units some of them will survive so it will be very interesting to see how many of them survive the initial drop.

Still I would rather have bikes for this role, depending on how exactly units/characters can be equipped. GAAHHH too many variables that are not 100% known for sure to really make a solid tactical analysis.....Still I look forward to trying my sternguard in a more anti infantry role instead of combi weapon delivery systems. Save 90 points across the board in just guys, that is before anything else......Seriously Hvy flamers going down 10 points and that sweet, SWEET set of arms......

Where did it say that HF were going down 10 points for Sternguard?

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Then you're missing out. 4 twin-linked multi-meltas + a Sgt with Combi-melta in a drop pod means a lot of vehicles are going to have a very bad day.

Except for the very important detail about how they must Snap Fire on the turn they arrive, and so probably won't blow up anything. Then they stand there and die. This only works with Logan for Relentless, and even at that, it is a waste of Logan's abilities.

Salamanders w/ Vulcan: 4 twin-linked snap shots means you have a good chance of getting off at least one hit, ignoring the Combi-melta sgt of course. And as we all know, when your melta weapons are in melta range, one shot it all you need.

DogofWar1 wrote:See, this is what I don't understand, what's the problem with playing the best list you can?

If it's a legal list, and it's played legally, then what's the problem, other than you don't like it? Again, GW put Heldrakes in the new codex, they knew that some people were going to run tripledrake lists. I won't say that every unit and rule that GW puts in a codex is fit to print, but attacking other players for using what's available to them is not ok. It's basically saying that people should gimp their lists so that they don't offend sentiments, despite the fact that when the models hit the table to goal is to win.

If you want to play more cinematic lists, that's fine, and I would never want anyone to stop playing a fluffy list, and equally I wouldn't ask someone to stop playing the best list they can think up. The game should be about accommodating all types, the painters, the fluff buffs, and the wargamers. Admittedly, the wargamers probably have an edge on the painters and fluff-centric players on the tabletop since they spend more of their 40k energy on trying to win, but that's fine. That's how someone wants to play the game, and so long as it's legal, they shouldn't be attacked for playing that way.

If a stupid sloppy rule oversight allowed someone to bring brass knuckles instead of boxing gloves into a boxing match/tournament, would that be fine? Stupid comparison, you say? Yes, but stuff like Heldrakes are the brass knuckle boxers of 40k and deserve a stupid comparison. Yes, they're legal and allowed and official, but that doesn't make them any less ed up. I have a single Heldrake that I bought last year prior to the full- FAQ update, but I'm not sure I'll ever actually even assemble it - thinking of selling it, in fact - because it's just that stupid and I'd be embarrassed to even use the one. I wouldn't have fun with it AT ALL because I'd know it's nothing to do with me that it's clearing the damn table all on its own while the rest of my models are line-dancing while singing "Kumbaya My Chaos Lord". It's nothing but a stupid crutch.

Would I refuse to play a triple Heldrake list in a tournament? No. I've actually played against at least double Heldrakes in a tournament - can't remember if there was a third. Bring them in a "friendly" game? Friendly, that ain't. I might play you, but that'd likely be the last time at least without prior agreement that I'll be bringing my AA-focused list with LRs and a Skyshield Landing pad (to hide in) to match it. Not that it'd necessarily even help - because a fun fact, in a big Apoc match earlier this year - I think it was 20k per side, and it took nearly all of our shooting to bring down "only" three Heldrakes in one turn. Of the units that could have even a remote chance of hurting them and were in range, basically all of them shot at them, including 2-3 of my own flyers and another player's Storm Raven, and my Quad Gun. It took probably at least around 5k worth of shooting to bring down 510 points worth of Heldrakes. Good times. Obviously they CAN die easier at times (in a tournament my quad gun Intercepted a drake right out of the sky, thanks to tank hunting BT terminators), but even so they are simply no fun to use, nor play against. And why play if it's not fun?

Obviously this isn't limited to JUST Heldrakes, but they are definitely the most prominent single unit that simply sucks the fun out of the game.

wtwlf123 wrote:That's precisely why they're good. It creates a 24" bubble your opponent doesn't want to move armor into. Zoning out the locations of your opponent's army is precisely what a midrange gunline army wants to do, especially with objective-based victory conditions. It seems like you're simply inexperienced with winning C:SM tactics.

No, I'm just experienced on how fast that squad can die if the enemy wants to get there, and therefore how little that immobile 12" danger zone would matter. At least the lascannons are more likely to get to shoot at their full effectiveness before dying. Of course it depends on the opposing army just how fast they'd get wiped out, but some armies can really do it in a hurry.

If I wanted an actual multi-melta area denial threat, I'd probably use the MM attack bikes or put twin-MM Land Speeders behind a building or other LoS-blocking terrain (assuming it was present), and from where they could then pop up and wreck stuff if suitable targets got close. After all, for bikes and speeders the effective melta threat range is 24", not just 12".


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

Salamanders w/ Vulcan: 4 twin-linked snap shots means you have a good chance of getting off at least one hit, ignoring the Combi-melta sgt of course. And as we all know, when your melta weapons are in melta range, one shot it all you need.

Tell that to the 5 sub-12" multi-melta hits in a single game against a LR of which none even glanced.

Locally meltas don't get much respect in general, because either they don't hit (with which twin-linked would of course help), or roll snake eyes on their pen rolls. You'd be amazed at the consistency of these things occurring. Another good example is one recent game where an enemy LRC shot at my Vindicator's side armor with MM and the TLAC. Of course the MM did nothing, and the TLAC did the killing. This was then repeated the next turn against my own LRC, where the MM again missed and then the TLAC rended my 4 HP LRC.

 tvih wrote:
No, I'm just experienced on how fast that squad can die if the enemy wants to get there, and therefore how little that immobile 12" danger zone would matter. At least the lascannons are more likely to get to shoot at their full effectiveness before dying. Of course it depends on the opposing army just how fast they'd get wiped out, but some armies can really do it in a hurry.

10 Tac Marines are relatively resilient midfield units. There are of course things in this game that can remove them, but I'd hesitate in assuming that my opponent could quickly wipe the entire squad off the table like they were nothing.

 tvih wrote:
If I wanted an actual multi-melta area denial threat, I'd probably use the MM attack bikes or put twin-MM Land Speeders behind a building or other LoS-blocking terrain (assuming it was present), and from where they could then pop up and wreck stuff if suitable targets got close. After all, for bikes and speeders the effective melta threat range is 24", not just 12".

I understand that the other units do that too, but you're already going to be having Tac squads in the center of the map grabbing objectives anyways; might as well throw on the anti-armor area denial heavy weapon upgrade considering how cheap it is. It's an added benefit to a squad that's already going to be denying area as it is. Best to give them all the tools they need to do it effectively.

 tvih wrote:
Locally meltas don't get much respect in general, because either they don't hit (with which twin-linked would of course help), or roll snake eyes on their pen rolls. You'd be amazed at the consistency of these things occurring.

Um... so you think they're bad because of the poor rolls in your metagame? Everything makes so much more sense now. If you're going to base your opinion on mathematical improbabilities and local anecdotal experience ("people at my FLGS throw 1s with their meltaguns ...so they're bad!"), you should just say so up front and save everyone from taking your posts seriously.

..........

When all each race gets an updated codex, the flying turkey list will not be the bees knees. I took out a two turkey list the turn they arrived in my Vulcan list - two multi melta shots on one and a combi melta on the other. They are not unstoppable. I think with the new AA tanks for marines, you're going to start seeing less reliance on flyers.

Maybe with the new guard codex each of your artillery battalions will have hydra add ons like Epic 40k used to do. You will see anti fyer spam all over soon.

I like the brass knuckles in a boxing glove reference! Good one. The point I was trying to make was that GW has made a very concious decision to move away from tournament/competitive play. So, sure you can run 3 Heldrakes, but you will look like a total douche bag. Some players don't care and that's fine. I know I will only ever play them once. I have Chaos Marines and I will only ever run 1 Heldrake. I guess it depends on your local meta. Also, at 1500pts (which is the standard around here) it's hard to make a list with a ton of cheese. But it can be done. One guy around here ran 'Cron Air allied with Chaos Marines and that list included a Heldrake. He even took it to a local tournament. Needless to say, he didn't make any friends and didn't place well overall, as things like army comp and sportsmanship were factored into your final score. I guess it boils down to what you want to do. It's your hobby, enjoy it. Just don't be "that guy"...

Nocturnus wrote:
I like the brass knuckles in a boxing glove reference! Good one. The point I was trying to make was that GW has made a very concious decision to move away from tournament/competitive play. So, sure you can run 3 Heldrakes, but you will look like a total douche bag. Some players don't care and that's fine. I know I will only ever play them once. I have Chaos Marines and I will only ever run 1 Heldrake. I guess it depends on your local meta. Also, at 1500pts (which is the standard around here) it's hard to make a list with a ton of cheese. But it can be done. One guy around here ran 'Cron Air allied with Chaos Marines and that list included a Heldrake. He even took it to a local tournament. Needless to say, he didn't make any friends and didn't place well overall, as things like army comp and sportsmanship were factored into your final score. I guess it boils down to what you want to do. It's your hobby, enjoy it. Just don't be "that guy"...

1500pts, Army Comp and Sportsmanship is where it is at IMHO, and I agree with the rest of your comment.

 tvih wrote:
Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

You combat squad a unit and have them run up into cover where the enemy will have to pass by. The combat squad is a small distraction they have to choose to deal with, or not deal with. MM will deter almost all armor from going that route. Land raiders might be the only thing that will go by because they are delivering a payload. I use them all the time in my SM lists with or without Vulcan.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Nocturnus wrote:
I like the brass knuckles in a boxing glove reference! Good one. The point I was trying to make was that GW has made a very concious decision to move away from tournament/competitive play. So, sure you can run 3 Heldrakes, but you will look like a total douche bag. Some players don't care and that's fine. I know I will only ever play them once. I have Chaos Marines and I will only ever run 1 Heldrake. I guess it depends on your local meta. Also, at 1500pts (which is the standard around here) it's hard to make a list with a ton of cheese. But it can be done. One guy around here ran 'Cron Air allied with Chaos Marines and that list included a Heldrake. He even took it to a local tournament. Needless to say, he didn't make any friends and didn't place well overall, as things like army comp and sportsmanship were factored into your final score. I guess it boils down to what you want to do. It's your hobby, enjoy it. Just don't be "that guy"...

My meta plays a lot of objective based games so you generally have to have a lot of infantry to take them. You can table me but with no troops on the objectives you don't meet the primary victory conditions on the scenario so you won't get full battle points. If I kill all of your troops, the best you can do is deny me the objectives. They are half of your battle points so they are very important. Then again, this is my meta.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

NewTruthNeomaxim wrote:
So just to ask for buying assistance one last time...

I surveyed the local community which TENDS to only play 1500pt games.

I now own 30 total Tactical Marines, but only 10 are assembled meaning I now have a bunch of choices/options involved.

If I want to add a little more to my collection, should I buy...

- A new Sternguard Veterans squad, and then ten of my unassembled Tacticals, to make a bunch of guys with all kinds of heavy/speciality weapons?

- I could buy ANOTHER box of Tacticals and a Sternguard box, and do the same.

- I could buy Devastators and do either of the above but with them.

- I could buy no more units, and instead add a vehicle, flyer, etc....

Again, i've never built a list and am just not learning the game and embarking on the whole thing. I own the contents of a Black Reach starter, the new 6th Ed. Strike Force, and a copy of Space Hulk 3rd Ed meaning... i've got 30 tacticals, 5 regular terminators, a mountain of fancy terminators from Space Hulk, a Dreadnaught, a Venerable Dreadnaught, two Captains, a Command Squad, a Razorback, and a Drop-pod.

It all depends on your play style. From the sound of it though, I would go for the Sternguard and Devastators. Sounds like you want to get up close for a fire fight. Try out the salamanders or Imperial Fists and see if you like them. they are your typical up close but not too personal marine forces.

You have 10 unassembled marines combined with 10 more new ones and tons of bits. Go for making a cool sergeant with a combi weapon for your tactical squad, make several heavy weapons (some 5-6 if possible), make the stern guards, and the rest make them up as more Sternguard (try to make them 7-8 models if possible). Heck make some of the remaining guys bolsters for a full 10 man dev squad so you can combat squad them.

DogofWar1 wrote:See, this is what I don't understand, what's the problem with playing the best list you can?

If it's a legal list, and it's played legally, then what's the problem, other than you don't like it? Again, GW put Heldrakes in the new codex, they knew that some people were going to run tripledrake lists. I won't say that every unit and rule that GW puts in a codex is fit to print, but attacking other players for using what's available to them is not ok. It's basically saying that people should gimp their lists so that they don't offend sentiments, despite the fact that when the models hit the table to goal is to win.
.

I keep hearing about Heldrake BS, but playing my son who has one, I haven't seen anything in game yet that makes them a must-take. Can someone explain to me why they've gained such a bad reputation, as I'm just not seeing it?

 tvih wrote:

If a stupid sloppy rule oversight allowed someone to bring brass knuckles instead of boxing gloves into a boxing match/tournament, would that be fine? Stupid comparison, you say? Yes, but stuff like Heldrakes are the brass knuckle boxers of 40k and deserve a stupid comparison. Yes, they're legal and allowed and official, but that doesn't make them any less ed up. I have a single Heldrake that I bought last year prior to the full- FAQ update, but I'm not sure I'll ever actually even assemble it - thinking of selling it, in fact - because it's just that stupid and I'd be embarrassed to even use the one. I wouldn't have fun with it AT ALL because I'd know it's nothing to do with me that it's clearing the damn table all on its own while the rest of my models are line-dancing while singing "Kumbaya My Chaos Lord". It's nothing but a stupid crutch.

Would I refuse to play a triple Heldrake list in a tournament? No. I've actually played against at least double Heldrakes in a tournament - can't remember if there was a third. Bring them in a "friendly" game? Friendly, that ain't. I might play you, but that'd likely be the last time at least without prior agreement that I'll be bringing my AA-focused list with LRs and a Skyshield Landing pad (to hide in) to match it. Not that it'd necessarily even help - because a fun fact, in a big Apoc match earlier this year - I think it was 20k per side, and it took nearly all of our shooting to bring down "only" three Heldrakes in one turn. Of the units that could have even a remote chance of hurting them and were in range, basically all of them shot at them, including 2-3 of my own flyers and another player's Storm Raven, and my Quad Gun. It took probably at least around 5k worth of shooting to bring down 510 points worth of Heldrakes. Good times. Obviously they CAN die easier at times (in a tournament my quad gun Intercepted a drake right out of the sky, thanks to tank hunting BT terminators), but even so they are simply no fun to use, nor play against. And why play if it's not fun?

Obviously this isn't limited to JUST Heldrakes, but they are definitely the most prominent single unit that simply sucks the fun out of the game.

This is some next level saltiness right here.

Stormonu wrote:

DogofWar1 wrote:See, this is what I don't understand, what's the problem with playing the best list you can?

If it's a legal list, and it's played legally, then what's the problem, other than you don't like it? Again, GW put Heldrakes in the new codex, they knew that some people were going to run tripledrake lists. I won't say that every unit and rule that GW puts in a codex is fit to print, but attacking other players for using what's available to them is not ok. It's basically saying that people should gimp their lists so that they don't offend sentiments, despite the fact that when the models hit the table to goal is to win.
.

I keep hearing about Heldrake BS, but playing my son who has one, I haven't seen anything in game yet that makes them a must-take. Can someone explain to me why they've gained such a bad reputation, as I'm just not seeing it?

They were fine until the FAQ gave them 360 line of sight. So basically they can strike anyone anywhere on the turn they show up. Even units behind them that they just vector striked. So on and so forth. It used to be that you could close with the table and get some measure of defense, or other tactics.

Also multiple ones invalidate a lot of army builds, like bikers.

However A skill I need to learn is to practice placement to minimize the number that get hit. So for example front loading the squad since the template needs to be further back.

But on the same token they are practically worthless against most hordes and Armor 2+ so there is that trade off, as well as not being good against other fliers.

 wtwlf123 wrote:
Um... so you think they're bad because of the poor rolls in your metagame? Everything makes so much more sense now. If you're going to base your opinion on mathematical improbabilities and local anecdotal experience ("people at my FLGS throw 1s with their meltaguns ...so they're bad!"), you should just say so up front and save everyone from taking your posts seriously.

That just about covers it.

But since we're sharing anecdotal experiences here, in my last two full-points games, my alpha-strike Meltagunner whiffed and my alpha-strike Multi-Melta Marine not only pulled off snap shots but cratered the assigned alpha-strike targets. (To add to the Meltagunner's shame, he missed a Rhino at two inches in a recent Kill Team game. He did manage to pop the Rhino on the following turn, but only after it had dislodged its cargo of Noise Marines. Now that I think about it, in my last five games, the poor guy has only racked up three kills: an empty Rhino, a genestealer, and a guardsman! I think I need to add a purity seal to his Meltagun or something.)

Stormonu wrote:

I keep hearing about Heldrake BS, but playing my son who has one, I haven't seen anything in game yet that makes them a must-take. Can someone explain to me why they've gained such a bad reputation, as I'm just not seeing it?

Like others said, the 360 degree thing was pretty helpful. The S6 AP3 torrent flamer basically made murdering MEQs on down a piece of cake, and the combination of 3HP, 12AV, and IWND makes them nasty on the tabletop. The fact they have to come in from reserves does make them a little weaker in that if you're unlucky with your reserve rolls it might come in too late to do much. Also, it's not so much a single Heldrake that's a problem, but when you bring 2-3 of them. One AP3 flamer means you can probably shred about half of a unit a given turn, so over 3-4 turns you might kill a couple units and do some damage, but with 2-3 of them you can pretty much scour the board of infantry.

 tvih wrote:

Obviously this isn't limited to JUST Heldrakes, but they are definitely the most prominent single unit that simply sucks the fun out of the game.

I can definitely see it sucking the fun out of things for some people, but personally, I enjoy them flying around. It's a challenge. Sure, I got kicked squarely in the teeth when I started back up and my 5th ed SW list got steamrolled, what with my Long Fangs turning out to be pretty much useless, but it forced me back to the drawing board.

I love working through army lists, and squeezing every molecule of power out of a list, and the Heldrake made me go back to the drawing board real fast. Trying to keep a TAC list while planning for Heldrakes can be tough, but that makes it fun. If I lose again it means I didn't adjust enough. If I beat Heldrakes and lose badly to something else, it means I over-corrected. Same thing with Riptides, Valkyries, Necron Flyers, etc., pretty much anything that is the new hotness.

For me, that's fun. I'm personally really looking forward to getting my tank hunter IF on the table and playing chicken with some Helldrakes. That, or an IH IWND Stormraven, a little payback.

If it's not fun for you, that's fine. In a casual environment no one is forced to play anyone. I'll gladly play the Heldrake kid, it makes getting a win all the more satisfying. If all his troops want to stand around singing in a circle, all the better, I have some circle shaped pie plates that should fit nicely over them.

To each their own, I just don't like people getting shunned for playing legal lists.

Back on topic, down to 75 for Raven Guard, 100 for Iron Hands, and 150 for White Scars.

Someone had the theory that they'd put out the supplements based on how quickly LEs sold out. I hope that's not the case, since wasn't White Scars supposed to be first down the pipe, while they're currently last in the sales? I want some more special characters and units for them. Also, if IH gets delayed because of poor sales, that would be a shame, though I imagine GW would delay them just fine without any sales reasoning.

It's almost as if GW should consider looking at the heldrake and fixing it via the FAQ...maybe even by simply deleting that paragraph from the FAQ that gave it 360 degree line of sight to begin with. Perhaps the community at large could start putting the pressure on GW to change it because it's killing the game for them and making them want to spend less money?

Nah, better just resort to social engineering/bullying to create an environment I want to play in. There's no other way.

 Sidstyler wrote:
It's almost as if GW should consider looking at the heldrake and fixing it via the FAQ...maybe even by simply deleting that paragraph from the FAQ that gave it 360 degree line of sight to begin with. Perhaps the community at large could start putting the pressure on GW to change it because it's killing the game for them and making them want to spend less money?

Nah, better just resort to social engineering/bullying to create an environment I want to play in. There's no other way.

Thanks for that Sid, I was actually getting into the mood to get involved with this discussion, but not only did your post nearly make me fall out of my chair with laughter, it's also reminded me just how futile and pointless it is to try discussing sportsmanship and enjoyment of the game beyond self-gratification with people who have absolutely no concept of such ideas.

Bullying....

Am I the only person who doesn't have a problem vs Heldrake Spam?

I've faced it nine times and won nine times with my Orks and twice with my Deathwing.

If you want to get away from those fire breathing death budgies, get into cc. They can't get you in cc.

Drake spam is not unbeatable, you just have to find a way to play around it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back on topic...

This codex is looking to be very versatile. Marines have an answer to everything, it seems.

Puscifer wrote:
Am I the only person who doesn't have a problem vs Heldrake Spam?

I've faced it nine times and won nine times with my Orks and twice with my Deathwing.

If you want to get away from those fire breathing death budgies, get into cc. They can't get you in cc.

Drake spam is not unbeatable, you just have to find a way to play around it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back on topic...

This codex is looking to be very versatile. Marines have an answer to everything, it seems.

So what you're saying is that you have no issues beating a list designed to slaughter 3+ save MEQ armies using a horde army and a 2+ save TEQ army? So, essentially, when you say "you have to find a way around it" what you mean is "play a different army", gotcha

 Yodhrin wrote:

Puscifer wrote:
Am I the only person who doesn't have a problem vs Heldrake Spam?

I've faced it nine times and won nine times with my Orks and twice with my Deathwing.

If you want to get away from those fire breathing death budgies, get into cc. They can't get you in cc.

Drake spam is not unbeatable, you just have to find a way to play around it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back on topic...

This codex is looking to be very versatile. Marines have an answer to everything, it seems.

So what you're saying is that you have no issues beating a list designed to slaughter 3+ save MEQ armies using a horde army and a 2+ save TEQ army? So, essentially, when you say "you have to find a way around it" what you mean is "play a different army", gotcha

Thank you for replying before I got to, and in a calm, civilized manner. I was about to tear him a new one

So do dreads get IH chapter tactics. I'm reading conflicting reports

 Yodhrin wrote:

Puscifer wrote:
Am I the only person who doesn't have a problem vs Heldrake Spam?

I've faced it nine times and won nine times with my Orks and twice with my Deathwing.

If you want to get away from those fire breathing death budgies, get into cc. They can't get you in cc.

Drake spam is not unbeatable, you just have to find a way to play around it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back on topic...

This codex is looking to be very versatile. Marines have an answer to everything, it seems.

So what you're saying is that you have no issues beating a list designed to slaughter 3+ save MEQ armies using a horde army and a 2+ save TEQ army? So, essentially, when you say "you have to find a way around it" what you mean is "play a different army", gotcha

Not in the slightest.

I play a Trukk Rush army and it isn't anywhere near a horde. 4 squads of ten in Trukks, large unit of Biker Nobs with Warboss and squads of troop choice bikers, a Warboss on bike and Gutsmek.

I haven't played a Marine army since... 4th I think... And now I'm branching back into a MEQ, there are ways, pre new codex, to beat them.

Stormtalon and Stormraven for unit choices are a start. Putting your MEQ in transports is another. You know, shielding them from those Drakes? Rifleman Dreads are pretty good for taking out flyers. That many shots and rerolls help.

As for tactics, I take this from our local tournament guru... Rush the enemy lines to avoid the fire from Drakes. He plays Blood Angels and he has no problem vs the spam. He uses multiple units in transports and combines that with DOA. The Vanguard tie up the ground units, while the transports rush in and assault.

Drakes are powerful, but they are not unbeatable.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

Puscifer wrote:
Am I the only person who doesn't have a problem vs Heldrake Spam?

I've faced it nine times and won nine times with my Orks and twice with my Deathwing.

If you want to get away from those fire breathing death budgies, get into cc. They can't get you in cc.

Drake spam is not unbeatable, you just have to find a way to play around it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back on topic...

This codex is looking to be very versatile. Marines have an answer to everything, it seems.

So what you're saying is that you have no issues beating a list designed to slaughter 3+ save MEQ armies using a horde army and a 2+ save TEQ army? So, essentially, when you say "you have to find a way around it" what you mean is "play a different army", gotcha

Thank you for replying before I got to, and in a calm, civilized manner. I was about to tear him a new one

No need for that.

Jamo wrote:
So do dreads get IH chapter tactics. I'm reading conflicting reports

I'm not sure, the rumors as they stand are indeed conflicting.

Looking at the rumor round-up over on talkwargaming http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/08/codex-space-marines-roll-up-special_29.html#.UiDsIBtJOSo and http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/08/codex-space-marines-roll-up-special.html#.UiQswhtJOSo
the IH CT states that vehicles and characters have IWND, even though vehicles normally don't have CT.

Thing is, looking at the other rumor roundup, where they go unit by unit, they don't mention CTs for any units except Dreadnoughts, where they say "Does not have chapter tactics" and "No chapter tactics."

I think either:
A) Dreads do get IH CT, and them saying they don't have CT is the same as every other vehicle, they just neglected to mention it for other vehicles
or
B) Dreads are special and do not get IH CT, while other vehicles do.

I don't think we'll get definitive clarification until we can read all the rules.

DogofWar1 wrote:

Jamo wrote:
So do dreads get IH chapter tactics. I'm reading conflicting reports

I'm not sure, the rumors as they stand are indeed conflicting.

Looking at the rumor round-up over on talkwargaming http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/08/codex-space-marines-roll-up-special_29.html#.UiDsIBtJOSo and http://www.talkwargaming.com/2013/08/codex-space-marines-roll-up-special.html#.UiQswhtJOSo
the IH CT states that vehicles and characters have IWND, even though vehicles normally don't have CT.

Thing is, looking at the other rumor roundup, where they go unit by unit, they don't mention CTs for any units except Dreadnoughts, where they say "Does not have chapter tactics" and "No chapter tactics."

I think either:
A) Dreads do get IH CT, and them saying they don't have CT is the same as every other vehicle, they just neglected to mention it for other vehicles
or
B) Dreads are special and do not get IH CT, while other vehicles do.

I don't think we'll get definitive clarification until we can read all the rules.

I think the IH CT is the exception to the rule where vehicles are effected by CT.

The entries on the vehicles won't mention CTs but the IH rule is a catch all for the IWND rule.

 wtwlf123 wrote:
10 Tac Marines are relatively resilient midfield units. There are of course things in this game that can remove them, but I'd hesitate in assuming that my opponent could quickly wipe the entire squad off the table like they were nothing.

Heldrakes, Tau, IG etc will have no serious problems. Or my LRC-delivered CC units for that matter, especially against a unit placed on the midfield. I don't really have much faith in MEQ resilience these days.

Um... so you think they're bad because of the poor rolls in your metagame? Everything makes so much more sense now. If you're going to base your opinion on mathematical improbabilities and local anecdotal experience ("people at my FLGS throw 1s with their meltaguns ...so they're bad!"), you should just say so up front and save everyone from taking your posts seriously.

No, that's just the icing on the cake, as it were. Can't deny an area with a weapon that the opponents have no "respect" for. And after a ridiculous number of "hey, are you nuts coming so close to my melta?" "hehheh, not really" *rolls a 1 to hit* "right, never mind" scenarios, can't really blame them anymore. The only way to get their attention is to have several mobile melta weapons. Not that even that always works out, as demonstrated by the mathematically improbable examples.

Besides, this is the internet, why would anyone take anyone seriously?

 tvih wrote:

 wtwlf123 wrote:
10 Tac Marines are relatively resilient midfield units. There are of course things in this game that can remove them, but I'd hesitate in assuming that my opponent could quickly wipe the entire squad off the table like they were nothing.

Heldrakes, Tau, IG etc will have no serious problems. Or my LRC-delivered CC units for that matter, especially against a unit placed on the midfield. I don't really have much faith in MEQ resilience these days.

Um... so you think they're bad because of the poor rolls in your metagame? Everything makes so much more sense now. If you're going to base your opinion on mathematical improbabilities and local anecdotal experience ("people at my FLGS throw 1s with their meltaguns ...so they're bad!"), you should just say so up front and save everyone from taking your posts seriously.

No, that's just the icing on the cake, as it were. Can't deny an area with a weapon that the opponents have no "respect" for. And after a ridiculous number of "hey, are you nuts coming so close to my melta?" "hehheh, not really" *rolls a 1 to hit* "right, never mind" scenarios, can't really blame them anymore. The only way to get their attention is to have several mobile melta weapons. Not that even that always works out, as demonstrated by the mathematically improbable examples.

Besides, this is the internet, why would anyone take anyone seriously?

In my meta we are hitting with meltas. And they still suck. Theres no one (except exactly 1 IG player) using vehicles anymore that arent flyers. Thats my local meta and says nothing about yours though.

I.coined the phrase "lone melta syndrome" due to how often they miss land raiders at 1"

 Formosa wrote:
I.coined the phrase "lone melta syndrome" due to how often they miss land raiders at 1"

I can miss a Land Raider at 1" with 3 meltas just as easily as with a lone melta

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:

 Godless-Mimicry wrote:

 Ferrum_Sanguinis wrote:
Then you're missing out. 4 twin-linked multi-meltas + a Sgt with Combi-melta in a drop pod means a lot of vehicles are going to have a very bad day.

Except for the very important detail about how they must Snap Fire on the turn they arrive, and so probably won't blow up anything. Then they stand there and die. This only works with Logan for Relentless, and even at that, it is a waste of Logan's abilities.

Salamanders w/ Vulcan: 4 twin-linked snap shots means you have a good chance of getting off at least one hit, ignoring the Combi-melta sgt of course. And as we all know, when your melta weapons are in melta range, one shot it all you need.

No, we don't know that, that's just a stigma people like to attach to things. That one hit probably will get a pen. sure, but you are ignoring cover, and the still 50/50 chance only of destroying it. Not at all good odds, and you'd want to taking down something like a Land Raider or Monolith with those shoddy odds to be giving up a squad on a suicide run like that.

DogofWar1 wrote:

See, this is what I don't understand, what's the problem with playing the best list you can?

If it's a legal list, and it's played legally, then what's the problem, other than you don't like it? Again, GW put Heldrakes in the new codex, they knew that some people were going to run tripledrake lists. I won't say that every unit and rule that GW puts in a codex is fit to print, but attacking other players for using what's available to them is not ok. It's basically saying that people should gimp their lists so that they don't offend sentiments, despite the fact that when the models hit the table to goal is to win.

If you want to play more cinematic lists, that's fine, and I would never want anyone to stop playing a fluffy list, and equally I wouldn't ask someone to stop playing the best list they can think up. The game should be about accommodating all types, the painters, the fluff buffs, and the wargamers. Admittedly, the wargamers probably have an edge on the painters and fluff-centric players on the tabletop since they spend more of their 40k energy on trying to win, but that's fine. That's how someone wants to play the game, and so long as it's legal, they shouldn't be attacked for playing that way.

Heck, if anything, players like that are easier to counter than anyone. The meta gets so warped that you pretty much KNOW that someone playing X army is playing Y way, and as such can build in counters. Every CSM player bringing Heldrakes? Alright fine, excuse me while my two squads of IF Tank Hunting Devs, all with Flakk missiles, line up, and have a dude man that ADL. Now excuse me while I chew a HP or two off the moment they arrive with the ADL's interceptor, and finish them off the next turn with twelve S7 flakk shots, all with tank hunter.

Also, I see WAAC used in two completely different ways when discussing players. There are those who use WAAC as you have, discussing players who have legal lists and play legally, but with min maxed units, and then there are those who use the term as a sort of stand-in for "cheater" or someone who bends the rules, rather than operating within them. Those two things shouldn't be mixed together, and we need a standardized definition.

From a competitive stance, min maxed lists create a rock paper scissor meta where the game strategy centers on a few dominant combo's and their counter lists. This can lead to rather predictable games. In a more constrained environment with only relatively balanced TAC lists resource and risk management on the table top will matter more. When you control the local scene for waac/extreme lists, it can enrich game play and prevent flavor of the month arms races.

Puscifer wrote:
Am I the only person who doesn't have a problem vs Heldrake Spam?

I've faced it nine times and won nine times with my Orks and twice with my Deathwing.

If you want to get away from those fire breathing death budgies, get into cc. They can't get you in cc.

Drake spam is not unbeatable, you just have to find a way to play around it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Back on topic..

This codex is looking to be very versatile. Marines have an answer to everything, it seems.

No, you are not alone. Because Marine players seem to be the majority, and Heldrakes are good at killing Marines... que the tears. Also, a lot of players seem to forget that 40k is won or lost in the movement phase. Damage can be mitigated with proper placement of models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, Marines have more than enough tools to deal with Heldrakes and other flyers. Certainly more than Chaos gets, hence the need for Heldrakes...

 Mywik wrote:
In my meta we are hitting with meltas. And they still suck. Theres no one (except exactly 1 IG player) using vehicles anymore that arent flyers. Thats my local meta and says nothing about yours though.

The lack of non-flyer vehicles is also true. I tend to be the one most commonly fielding vehicles in our local games, or so it often seems. Usually there's just the token LR on marine / chaos marine armies, or perhaps a Vindicator.

 tvih wrote:
Multi-melta, on infantry? I never see that actually being used. And no wonder, it's not like tanks will just come to you for your to shoot them with one.

So, yesterday, having a Multi-Melta in an infantry squad was bad because nobody would ever put a tank in a position to be hit by one...

 tvih wrote:
No, that's just the icing on the cake, as it were. Can't deny an area with a weapon that the opponents have no "respect" for. And after a ridiculous number of "hey, are you nuts coming so close to my melta?" "hehheh, not really" *rolls a 1 to hit* "right, never mind" scenarios, can't really blame them anymore.

...but today having a Multi-Melta in an infantry squad is bad because everybody will just drive their tanks right up to it.

Got it.

No, they're bad because people in his meta roll 1s with multi-meltas. I thought that was clear.

Puscifer wrote:

I think the IH CT is the exception to the rule where vehicles are effected by CT.
The entries on the vehicles won't mention CTs but the IH rule is a catch all for the IWND rule.

Right, and that's how it appears, with the one perhaps complicating factor that the rumors specifically mention a lack of CT for dreads, while not mentioning it for other vehicles. If the Dreadnoughts didn't have that line, I would agree that the IH rule creates an exception for vehicles, BUT since those lines exist in the DN rumors, I'm wondering if Dreadnoughts don't have their own special rule making them exempt from the exception.

Sure, it's unnecessarily complicated, they could have just included in the IH CT that Dreadnoughts don't count, but they kind of did some "sort of" similar rules hoop jumping with Fenrisian Wolves, where Canis had a rule that made them troops, but instead of mentioning right on Canis' entry that they were troops but not scoring, they put a blurb on the Fenrisian Wolves entry that they weren't scoring. The Dreadnought thing might end up the same way.

 Antario wrote:
From a competitive stance, min maxed lists create a rock paper scissor meta where the game strategy centers on a few dominant combo's and their counter lists. This can lead to rather predictable games. In a more constrained environment with only relatively balanced TAC lists resource and risk management on the table top will matter more. When you control the local scene for waac/extreme lists, it can enrich game play and prevent flavor of the month arms races.

You used the word "control." This is what I'm trying to say should be avoided. Sure, tripdrakes are obnoxious, and have the potential to upset local metagames, as do any number of flavor of the month armies, but I shouldn't be telling people how to play their lists. They bought the models, they made the list, and if they checked the legality of it and it is alright, who are we to go to them and demand they change their list for the sake of "meta?"

Yes, we all want the game to be enriched and fun and require more tactics and strategy than just "aim unit X at unit Y and win," but you've got to balance it with the fact that people have a right to play the game however they wish, within the rules. If you start controlling the scene, you've basically created a regime that infringes upon an individual's freedoms and liberty, in that despite the fact that GW condones their list and tactics (or lack thereof), you've overruled GW and declared they are NOT free to play how they wish. And that is what does not sit well with me.

My fun should not come at the expense of other people's fun.

And yes, I know there is some irony in an Imperial marine player arguing for civil liberties within wargame meta, but the alternative is a majority rule regime that is seeking "the greater good," and that's some Tau manifesto bs and must be purged as heresy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 wtwlf123 wrote:
No, they're bad because people in his meta roll 1s with multi-meltas. I thought that was clear.

I assume Lascannons only ever roll 5s and 6s, and MLs only ever roll 6s then.

Man, when the law of averages kicks in it's going to be HILARIOUS. Meltas 6s all the time, while MLs and LCs 1s and 2s. Gonna be funny to see Devastators and Predator Annihilators replaced by Tactical melta drop squads and Loganwing Relentless MM teams.

DogofWar1 wrote:

Puscifer wrote:

Yes, we all want the game to be enriched and fun and require more tactics and strategy than just "aim unit X at unit Y and win," but you've got to balance it with the fact that people have a right to play the game however they wish, within the rules. If you start controlling the scene, you've basically created a regime that infringes upon an individual's freedoms and liberty, in that despite the fact that GW condones their list and tactics (or lack thereof), you've overruled GW and declared they are NOT free to play how they wish. And that is what does not sit well with me.

My fun should not come at the expense of other people's fun.

People should indeed be able to play however they wish. However, I don't know about other people's local meta, but for casual games whilst people are compeltely free to bring things like a triple Drake list, they'll struggle to find anyone to play against. They're free to bring whatever army they want and I'm equally free to refuse to waste an evening's gaming watching three drakes fry my marines when I can find an oppoenent with a more balanced list that I'll enjoy playing against more.

More on topic, from the rumours so far am I right in thinking that the new codex's terminators will still be limited to a minimim 5 man squad? That sucks a bit if the standard Landraider now only has space for 10, so no termies plus special character :(

Dundas wrote:

DogofWar1 wrote:

Puscifer wrote:

Yes, we all want the game to be enriched and fun and require more tactics and strategy than just "aim unit X at unit Y and win," but you've got to balance it with the fact that people have a right to play the game however they wish, within the rules. If you start controlling the scene, you've basically created a regime that infringes upon an individual's freedoms and liberty, in that despite the fact that GW condones their list and tactics (or lack thereof), you've overruled GW and declared they are NOT free to play how they wish. And that is what does not sit well with me.

My fun should not come at the expense of other people's fun.

People should indeed be able to play however they wish. However, I don't know about other people's local meta, but for casual games whilst people are compeltely free to bring things like a triple Drake list, they'll struggle to find anyone to play against. They're free to bring whatever army they want and I'm equally free to refuse to waste an evening's gaming watching three drakes fry my marines when I can find an oppoenent with a more balanced list that I'll enjoy playing against more.

More on topic, from the rumours so far am I right in thinking that the new codex's terminators will still be limited to a minimim 5 man squad? That sucks a bit if the standard Landraider now only has space for 10, so no termies plus special character :(

Landraider Redeemer?

 streamdragon wrote:

Dundas wrote:

DogofWar1 wrote:

Puscifer wrote:

Yes, we all want the game to be enriched and fun and require more tactics and strategy than just "aim unit X at unit Y and win," but you've got to balance it with the fact that people have a right to play the game however they wish, within the rules. If you start controlling the scene, you've basically created a regime that infringes upon an individual's freedoms and liberty, in that despite the fact that GW condones their list and tactics (or lack thereof), you've overruled GW and declared they are NOT free to play how they wish. And that is what does not sit well with me.

My fun should not come at the expense of other people's fun.

People should indeed be able to play however they wish. However, I don't know about other people's local meta, but for casual games whilst people are compeltely free to bring things like a triple Drake list, they'll struggle to find anyone to play against. They're free to bring whatever army they want and I'm equally free to refuse to waste an evening's gaming watching three drakes fry my marines when I can find an oppoenent with a more balanced list that I'll enjoy playing against more.

More on topic, from the rumours so far am I right in thinking that the new codex's terminators will still be limited to a minimim 5 man squad? That sucks a bit if the standard Landraider now only has space for 10, so no termies plus special character :(

Landraider Redeemer?

I've not seen anything to suggest that terminators will be less then 5, or an option for command squads.

I dislike the LRR/LRC personally. I liked the fact that the stock LR had long range guns as well as the transport capacity. With the short range guns on the variants, your only option was to close with your foe and drop off the cargo. I liked sitting back, shooting for a few turns, then committing the assault terminators + HQ to where they were needed. Not really a valid option with the new rules.

I'm not sure which path I'll take. I can stick with the LR/terminators, just dropping the HQ, and hope they work. Swap my beloved godhammers for flamestorm cannons or hurricane bolters, and keep the chaplain. Not something I want to do. The last option is to look at other assault troops. Command squads, honor guard, or vanguard vets could all fit the role. As could normal assault marines or CC scouts, but if I'm springing for the LR, I want something MEAN inside. Once I get the book, I can look at all the pricing and wargear options and see what I'll go with.

It's not a surprise that the stock LR is returning to 10 man, but I need to figure out how to react to the change.

Dundas wrote:

People should indeed be able to play however they wish. However, I don't know about other people's local meta, but for casual games whilst people are compeltely free to bring things like a triple Drake list, they'll struggle to find anyone to play against. They're free to bring whatever army they want and I'm equally free to refuse to waste an evening's gaming watching three drakes fry my marines when I can find an oppoenent with a more balanced list that I'll enjoy playing against more.

More on topic, from the rumours so far am I right in thinking that the new codex's terminators will still be limited to a minimim 5 man squad? That sucks a bit if the standard Landraider now only has space for 10, so no termies plus special character :(

Right, casually you have a right to refuse to play anyone you wish, but Antario was mentioning competition, and I assume he meant local tournaments and local tournament meta. In such a case you have to weigh the goal of keeping lists like that out for fun purposes against the right of people to play whatever list they choose to play competitively.

Also, have not heard anything about terminator squad minimums. The rumors say same base cost, so I assume they mean minimum of 5, which would indeed be limiting in terms of carrying an SC on the godhammer variant.

 Nevelon wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:
Landraider Redeemer?

I've not seen anything to suggest that terminators will be less then 5, or an option for command squads.

I dislike the LRR/LRC personally. I liked the fact that the stock LR had long range guns as well as the transport capacity. With the short range guns on the variants, your only option was to close with your foe and drop off the cargo. I liked sitting back, shooting for a few turns, then committing the assault terminators + HQ to where they were needed. Not really a valid option with the new rules.

I'm not sure which path I'll take. I can stick with the LR/terminators, just dropping the HQ, and hope they work. Swap my beloved godhammers for flamestorm cannons or hurricane bolters, and keep the chaplain. Not something I want to do. The last option is to look at other assault troops. Command squads, honor guard, or vanguard vets could all fit the role. As could normal assault marines or CC scouts, but if I'm springing for the LR, I want something MEAN inside. Once I get the book, I can look at all the pricing and wargear options and see what I'll go with.

It's not a surprise that the stock LR is returning to 10 man, but I need to figure out how to react to the change.

Hm, I play Space Wolves so fitting Terminators + Characters into a regular Landraider isn't an issue. (Although cost certainly is!)

I guess only getting 2-3 attacks (plus charge) isn't really enough for Assault Terminators on their own? Who knows, maybe assault Centurions will work?

Regarding the comp discussion; if no one's allowed to tell someone else how to play the game, who are you to say they can't use comp? After all, you're telling them how to play, aren't you?

Disclaimer: I prefer non-comped games but have had just as much fun with comp as without.

DogofWar1 wrote:
You used the word "control." This is what I'm trying to say should be avoided. Sure, tripdrakes are obnoxious, and have the potential to upset local metagames, as do any number of flavor of the month armies, but I shouldn't be telling people how to play their lists. They bought the models, they made the list, and if they checked the legality of it and it is alright, who are we to go to them and demand they change their list for the sake of "meta?"

I'm talking from a perspective as tournament organizer. One playing style is not better than the other, but from my experience it helps to cater to different tastes. In the past I've run hard boys like formats, but also tournaments with house rules that discourage power gaming. At the end of the day people are free to sign up to whatever they like. However when I'm providing space and funds for prize money I'll go along with what the customer wishes, and they will vote with their feet.

Dundas wrote:
More on topic, from the rumours so far am I right in thinking that the new codex's terminators will still be limited to a minimim 5 man squad? That sucks a bit if the standard Landraider now only has space for 10, so no termies plus special character :(

I think it will be the same as for the DA, so a 5 man minimum squad size for termi's.

 streamdragon wrote:

 Nevelon wrote:

 streamdragon wrote:
Landraider Redeemer?

I've not seen anything to suggest that terminators will be less then 5, or an option for command squads.

I dislike the LRR/LRC personally. I liked the fact that the stock LR had long range guns as well as the transport capacity. With the short range guns on the variants, your only option was to close with your foe and drop off the cargo. I liked sitting back, shooting for a few turns, then committing the assault terminators + HQ to where they were needed. Not really a valid option with the new rules.

I'm not sure which path I'll take. I can stick with the LR/terminators, just dropping the HQ, and hope they work. Swap my beloved godhammers for flamestorm cannons or hurricane bolters, and keep the chaplain. Not something I want to do. The last option is to look at other assault troops. Command squads, honor guard, or vanguard vets could all fit the role. As could normal assault marines or CC scouts, but if I'm springing for the LR, I want something MEAN inside. Once I get the book, I can look at all the pricing and wargear options and see what I'll go with.

It's not a surprise that the stock LR is returning to 10 man, but I need to figure out how to react to the change.

Hm, I play Space Wolves so fitting Terminators + Characters into a regular Landraider isn't an issue. (Although cost certainly is!)

I guess only getting 2-3 attacks (plus charge) isn't really enough for Assault Terminators on their own? Who knows, maybe assault Centurions will work?

To be honest, Centurions probably would work OK. Rumors have them at very bulky IIRC, so a minimum sized squad of 3 will take 9 seats in a LR. Add a PA character to fill the last one, and you are good to go. The assault transport will also help counteract the S&P rule.

Of course, I think they look silly, are expensive, don't fit into the lore, and S&P assault troops are just daft. So that's not an option for me. Other people might get some milage from it.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
Regarding the comp discussion; if no one's allowed to tell someone else how to play the game, who are you to say they can't use comp? After all, you're telling them how to play, aren't you?

Disclaimer: I prefer non-comped games but have had just as much fun with comp as without.

The difference, I think, is that tournament organizers aren't "playing" the game, they're organizing it. No one's really telling the organizer how to play since, unless they've entered their own tournament, they have no models on the tabletop. Telling organizers how to run their tournament isn't necessarily good either, but it's a balancing act, seeing whose toes get stepped on and how much.

I think there is something to be said for enforcing army balance where a lack of balance exists (obviously, due to GW's updating system, older armies lack many of the newer goodies), but I feel it's a little more fair to try and bring weaker armies into line with stronger armies than to try and nerf stronger armies to be in line with weaker armies.

Let the rumors end, and the discussion of Actual Things begin!

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/549298.page

Or, you know, continue!