I have been looking over the FW Index with the Knights and honestly... I can't say I see one that strikes me as a no-brainer or anything. The price point on them is pretty high and the lack of options make them less ideal than a Crusader.
I think maybe, MAYBE the Styrix might be doable at like 475pt.
str00dles1 wrote: Welcome, and thanks gally912 for posting a knight list. That's pretty much what id take. Wondering if there is any room for RFBC in place of thermal.
I think if my maths right you could switch to 2nd Icarus dunecralwer, loose a sniper and should be good. and might be good if your fighting a lot of flyers. not saying thermal is bad, just personal preference to get that RFBC in there.
Actually, lose 1 Arquebus and the Thermal Cannon swaps for RFBC directly (with a point to spare). If I do that, I drop the second Arquebus and upgrade Icarus Autocannons to Stormspear Pod, and round out the ranger squad to 6 dudes (for total of 3x6 man troops). You'd have a few points left over for an Arc Rifle or Heavy Stubber somewheres. Gonna give it a try after its painted
I tend to agree the lack of Admech keyword for Knight is a tad bit of an oversight. If everyone could repair it, that would be much. But the Master of Machines clause says a model cant be affected by it more than once, regardless of source, so you would only ever heal d3 wounds a turn. Doesnt seem like "that" much. I understand not wanting to grant it re-rolls from cawl, but it could be solved simply by having it be keyworded Admech without a forgeworld.
Unless I'm understanding wrong, lots of cheap fodder out-of-faction to take for bubble wrapping in a second detachment (conscripts, etc.)?
Feel free to elaborate on better bubble wrap. With a full detachment please.
ATM we have 10pts per 3+(canticles)/6++ T3 assault 3 overwatch models that have a -1 toughness aura.
Really asking questions to get a better understanding at this point, as I'm very new.
@RVD1 - thanks for sharing, it's helpful. So the idea is that it's a good compromise between "moderately cheap" (naked vanguard) and "too cheap to actually do anything" (other selections, i.e. conscripts/guard)?
Haywire should not be overlooked, I do agree, its pretty crap against vehicles. (I still have not done a single wound to a vehicle with one) but they are surprising effective against infantry. Hight Strength plus a okay AP for a wonderful 4 pts, is hard to pass up.
So here's something I'd love to get a view on - Crawls special rule says that you can choose to reroll any to hit roll - note that this is not mentioning 'failed' to hit rolls.
Without doing the math, this sounds like incredible synergy to the Electro Priests - allowing you to re-roll anything that isnt a 6 would mean you can end up with a huge amount of exploding 6s and hits on the enemy units!!
bortass wrote: Stupid question time. Would any of the starter box primaris marines fill any useful role as a separate detachment? I have the box set and will be painting them and the death guard once I am done with my key Ad Mech stuff.
Guard probably make more sense but I'm curious if any one sees a gap they might help fill since I already have the models. I think I'll be forced to get a non Ad Mech detachment because of psychers. I'm seeing them on the table at the LGS and I don't like letting GSC or Nids easily pop off a couple powers to help the genestealers get off charges or extra attacks. Smite as well...
See my list on the previous page. It has Greyfax for some Psyker help that's cheap and good. I would not use any of the numarines with admech. 1. They are terrible as they have 0 options 2. They fill no gap.
temoinlanuit wrote:What are thought processes like right now in terms of loadouts for Vanguards/Rangers?
Noticing that there's quite a big spread in the lists I've seen - either barebones with no options or very points heavy loadouts.
Interested what the tradeoffs are in options, and what fits into what kind of list.
Barebones as mentioned. 5 Man units to literally die. Giving them cover helps they live a little longer, but they are there to bubble wrap for super cheap and eat dirt.
MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:So here's something I'd love to get a view on - Crawls special rule says that you can choose to reroll any to hit roll - note that this is not mentioning 'failed' to hit rolls.
Without doing the math, this sounds like incredible synergy to the Electro Priests - allowing you to re-roll anything that isnt a 6 would mean you can end up with a huge amount of exploding 6s and hits on the enemy units!!
You could, yes, but the priests are not good to begin with. Perhaps when we get a transport then I can see using them. But they are way to paper thin to live to actually get into combat.
MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote: So here's something I'd love to get a view on - Crawls special rule says that you can choose to reroll any to hit roll - note that this is not mentioning 'failed' to hit rolls.
Without doing the math, this sounds like incredible synergy to the Electro Priests - allowing you to re-roll anything that isnt a 6 would mean you can end up with a huge amount of exploding 6s and hits on the enemy units!!
woah you're right! Tho it does specify "in the shooting phase."
This also applies to shooting at stuff with a -1 to hit, as rerolls happen before modifiers.
Unfortunately it may not apply to overwatch as that's not during the shooting phase.
MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:So here's something I'd love to get a view on - Crawls special rule says that you can choose to reroll any to hit roll - note that this is not mentioning 'failed' to hit rolls.
Without doing the math, this sounds like incredible synergy to the Electro Priests - allowing you to re-roll anything that isnt a 6 would mean you can end up with a huge amount of exploding 6s and hits on the enemy units!!
You could, yes, but the priests are not good to begin with. Perhaps when we get a transport then I can see using them. But they are way to paper thin to live to actually get into combat.
Interested to know why you feel they are paper thin - with their two 5+ saves, it's statistically nearly power armour, except it can't be modified by the - AP that you tend to see on the multi shot heavy weapons that would be targetting them (Heavy Bolters, Assault Cannons, etc.)
They have a decent threat range of 18", and even if you choose to run, Crawls ability to re roll 3s mean that you can get round the "modifiers after re-rolls" penalty (though no exploding dice)...
Granted, enough small arms fire will bring them down, but thats an argument against anything, and considering for 4 more points you get better defence and fantastic damage output, they feel like a good mid field investment to me
I was thinking. I like my 2 arquebusses on 5 rangers but is it possible to get a vindicare assassin and some nice cheap force multiplier into an admech list (inquisition, ministorum that kond of stuff)? The core of my army is fix now (cawl, 4 kastellans, 3 crawler, 3 vanguard, tpd, infiltrator, datasmith). So i got some points to spare, used them for rangers, dragoons etc but they seem only okayish
Iago40k wrote: I was thinking. I like my 2 arquebusses on 5 rangers but is it possible to get a vindicare assassin and some nice cheap force multiplier into an admech list (inquisition, ministorum that kond of stuff)? The core of my army is fix now (cawl, 4 kastellans, 3 crawler, 3 vanguard, tpd, infiltrator, datasmith). So i got some points to spare, used them for rangers, dragoons etc but they seem only okayish
Curious about this as well - played with the idea in listbuilding. Looks like you would have to use a separate detachment to avoid losing canticles.
Might mix and match. Cheapest imperium hq, 2 cheap elites plus vindicare. But the unit count goes up dramatically. Maybe just an auxiliary and screw the cp? Then again, is it that much better than rangers with arquebusses? I feel like they are needed for certain matchups. Sniping buff characters can be so important esp. in tournaments.
Iago40k wrote: I was thinking. I like my 2 arquebusses on 5 rangers but is it possible to get a vindicare assassin and some nice cheap force multiplier into an admech list (inquisition, ministorum that kond of stuff)? The core of my army is fix now (cawl, 4 kastellans, 3 crawler, 3 vanguard, tpd, infiltrator, datasmith). So i got some points to spare, used them for rangers, dragoons etc but they seem only okayish
How are Vindicare a force multiplier?
To be clear, a force multiplier is a unit taken to improve the performance of your entire army. The two most classic examples IRL being improved communications and combined arms. In the first example, a force with more information can accomplish more than an equivalent force without that same information. In the second example, two complementary forces can accomplish more together than separately.
We are an artillery army, so more long-range static shooting is not a force multiplier. Something that either lets us shoot better (like Cawl or a Datasmith) or mobile CC (like Infiltrators and Dragoons) to tie down threats to the artillery would be force multipliers.
Just a heads up to those still on the fence or think the Electro-priests are not good (or their other counterparts). They are really, really good. Fully worth their points.
If you go ranged, take 10. Throwing 30 shots out with 6s exploding often means you'll get all thirty hits in total, and if you have a Dominus or (hotdamn) Cawl, expect to hit and wound more than you actually shot with. I've had two times now where I shot 30 dice and ended up hitting 40+ (with techpreists buffs). Terminators armor or not, you will not save 30 2+ saves.
The Disco Stick dudes, completely overshadow Sicarians and infilrators, (infiltrators still have their role of deep striking though) so much so, that they made sicarians a meaningless choice. Don't get me wrong, I love the models and still use them because they look cool, but if you want a unit which is more survivable and will always do better in melee, for like 20 pts more, take the disco preists.
The biggest problem with the preists is their lack of good movement (6 is not bad, but still to slow to move across the table). If they had a transport or some other means to move, their lack of good save could be forgivable. Meaning, they are weak to all types of fire, small arms or big. Oddly enough, after a few games, your opponets will not fire their big guns at them, if better targets are avaiable. Their 5++ and 5+++, are shockingly good at ignoring Lazcannons and missles. But surpisingly poor at absorbing Lazguns/autogun fire. Despite their realtivily poor saves, they are still hardier than Sicarians. Whom although have a 4+/6++, simply does not keep the umph and consitution of a 5++/5+++. Making the Priests actually better armored than the Sicarians, math hammer wise and in practical play.
I have still only 8 games of Admech under my belt in 8th, but I can already tell that Sicarians (although much cheaper) are anemic. They lack the punch, movement and survivablity of their last iteration and are wholly outclassed by the priests in range and melee, even in armor saves (with maybe the exception of being in cover/canticles for that nice 3+ save.
My opponents now focus fire on my priests or altogether avoid getting into combat range with them whenvever possible due to the sheer amount of shots and mortal wounds they dish out. So, keep them out of line of sight. Or they'll be dead before they can act.
As a slight tangent, I don't know how I feel about Sicarians... I love the models. I have 25 of them; 15 Sicarians and 10 Infiltrators. But they have never performed in any of my games. Either being shot off the objective they are standing on, or quickly dying to countercharge/retaltiation combat in melee. The transonic razor and blade are simply poor weapons. I actually think GW rules writers, simply didn't know or didn't care on how to make their rules. They are so lack luster and blantantly weak, that I have a feeling, this was intentional. The Razor should be a powersword. S/User/S+1, AP-2/3 on 6 mortal wounds or cause D3 regualr damage. Or keep their old rules, Razor S/User, Ap-1 Blades Attacks +1 (due to two swords) S/+1 or S/+2 AP-2. Tranzsonic aura: After the first round of combat, count the razor/blade as AP -4.
I could understand why they might not want to give it Stregth +2 due to canticles boosting them up to S7 meaning they could seriously threaten vehicales, but I also think that, that threat would make them more viable and reasons to take them.
OR! They could keep their "blah" rules, and make them hardier. Give them a 4+/5++ and a 5+++ or 6+++. Thus granting them some surviablity and making them more hardy than the priests. Giving you a reason and a distinct advantage but different tactical role to the priests. They are fast, have okay melee and decent shooting and can probaly surive a round of shooting from small arms fire like Lazguns or autoguns. Maybe not so much bolters/heavy bolters, but everything less than. Their sorry save of 4+/6++ is crap. And borders on the question of Why? Why not a 5++ like before or many of the other units in the faction. Or at least a 6+++, just to give you that holy grail of "Just maaaybe!".
So, Sicarins are soooo... "feh" rules wise and unit composition that I actually think this is what happened:
Obviously, they want people to buy the priests so they buffed them super hard. But in doing so, they would need to make the Sicarians a different animal, instead, they just made them fill the same rule and make them worse at said role all around. So they intentionally made them worse and borderline removed them as a viable unit to force the other options: Infiltrators or Priests.
Iago40k wrote: I was thinking. I like my 2 arquebusses on 5 rangers but is it possible to get a vindicare assassin and some nice cheap force multiplier into an admech list (inquisition, ministorum that kond of stuff)? The core of my army is fix now (cawl, 4 kastellans, 3 crawler, 3 vanguard, tpd, infiltrator, datasmith). So i got some points to spare, used them for rangers, dragoons etc but they seem only okayish
How are Vindicare a force multiplier?
To be clear, a force multiplier is a unit taken to improve the performance of your entire army. The two most classic examples IRL being improved communications and combined arms. In the first example, a force with more information can accomplish more than an equivalent force without that same information. In the second example, two complementary forces can accomplish more together than separately.
We are an artillery army, so more long-range static shooting is not a force multiplier. Something that either lets us shoot better (like Cawl or a Datasmith) or mobile CC (like Infiltrators and Dragoons) to tie down threats to the artillery would be force multipliers.
-.- the vindicare is supposed to take the rangers role. Force multiplier was referring to inquisition etc. cause we need a detachment for the vindicare and why not use units the imperium offers and help out the rest of our army.
Tsol wrote: Just a heads up to those still on the fence or think the Electro-priests are not good (or their other counterparts). They are really, really good. Fully worth their points.
.
What they have going for them is they are very cheap, but currently I will still disagree and never use them til our codex comes out and then see how they fair. I am happy they work for you in your area.
They can deal a ton of shots but as you said, you need them kept out of LOS first. Your average table should have a few pieces of blocking terrain like that but its never been enough ive ever seen to let them live long.
I'm not sure why someone would waste lascannon shots at them. They are not good taking it eitherway but that's a bad player to use that weapon on them. You fail the invuln, then they roll a 3 for damage, now he has to take 3 saves again and make all 3 or dead
I like the models, and I want them to be good, but I don't see it happening til possibly our codex.
I was at Game Empire on Saturday. I ran the following list. I got tabled by an orc gretchen artillery + void shield combo that had about 90 boys running up the board. Thestr 8 artillery leafblower was too much for my mixed screen and only 3 onagers. I then kill pointed a Harlequin Eldar list that I would have tabled in 2 more turns and then tabled a dreadnaught army.
Some unit reviews. Best units first. Conscripts are amazing, you need to start running 60 of them or you will auto lose to certain deepstrike charging armies. Onagers + Cawl are super stars, you need more Onagers badly. Onagers can move and shoot 8" with no penalty! And they are easier to fix with their 11 wounds. Robots are comparable to Onagers, but vastly less mobile and vulnerable to all kinds of close combat shenanigans that Onagers can more easily resist due to their large bases. Staff priests went HAM in two games but are catastropically bad versus boys. Staff priests are okay if you can hide them out of LOS and then get a charge onto a unit with an invul save. Staff priests are one of the few units that can consistently kill high invul save units like harlequins. Celestine can dominate the board and can get a guaranteed 1st turn charge, I think she added a lot to my admech list because she game the opponent something he had to deal with.
Greyfax was situational. Her ability to suppress overwatch allowed the staff priests to get in ... but they were promptly eaten by shoota boys. Primaris marines I brought because I had them painted and I wanted to try them. For 200 points the 10 of them were a dodgy screen unit that was surprisingly effective against middling targets. I would not take them again in this list and replace them with 120 points of conscripts. The Vanguard were generally crap. If my opponent decided to shoot them, they died and took their fancy guns with them. The datasmith took more shots than he should because my opponent didn't realize he was bad, but on paper he is almost a 52 point 4 wound terminator ... but that is still bad. The lascannon ballistari really failed against anything with an invul save and their immobility from 'heavy' combined with their fragility makes them pretty poor choices. They usually didn't die because they were low threat but the Ballistari consistently let me down when it came to actually killing anything due to failing 3+ to wound rolls over and over again.
Another guy ran the following list: Cawl, 6 Onagers, Celestine, 4 sister squads, 2 exorcists or something. That guy tabled every opponent. If I had infinite money and time I would replace the Ballistari and Robots with 4 more Onagers and pick up 2 retributor squads with heavy bolters (they could do the robots job for a fraction of the cost). I would also throw in 40 more conscripts and a commisar instead of the primaris. Greyfax I still think is worth the points because when the opponent has psychers, she really helps.
Thanks for the review Wulfey, very interesting. I'm also coming to the conclusion that you can't have too many Onagers for the specific reason you state... move & shoot with no penalty & they are only a bit more expensive than a single dakkabot.
Another thing, I think the ideal ratio of ONagers is 2 Neutrons to 1 Icarus. Everyone at game empire feared the icarus more than anything because they are simply devastating to anything with the fly keyword. All flavors of eldar are hard countered by the icarus. If you knew your opponents had more fliers, a ratio of 1:1 would also be acceptable. If you guys check out the mathhammer spreadsheets I saw elsewhere, icarus is more damaging than neutron even without the 'fly' keyword against T4-T6 low wound count targets. The guy with 6 Onagers ran 2:1.
EDIT-RANT: I forgot to mention, I shot the Vanguard radium carbines several times over the course of the day. I think they killed 2-3 boys all day. Shoota boyz have 2 str 4 shots for 4 points? 3 str 3 shots from a 10 point model kinda sucks. Vanguard don't have the body count of Conscripts nor the volume of fire of Conscripts/Boyz, but cost all kinds of points. I get the whole shroudpsalm argument, but the admech troop slot feels bad. The plasmas did get off a round of shooting against the orcs and killed a few boys before they were easily shot to death by cheaper models. The plasma team that wasn't effortlessly rinsed away by basic eldar grav tank fire did manage to put some wounds on a harlequin vehicle. Another problem with vanguard is that the various force organizations really penalize running them MSU. The only way I see them working is something like 6-8 squads of 5 with 1 plasma each, but then you are stuck taking a bunch of TPDs to fill out the HQ slots to keep your canticles working. If you are going to run Cawl, that leads to 500 points in HQs but 250 of those are in 2 TPDs that don't fight well and can't heal vanguard. If you really want to be hyper competitive, I don't think you will see vanguard spam run. The guy that brought Cawl + 6 Onagers really had the right idea.
Well, looks like to be competitive you still need to spam/use borderline unfluffy lists or don't use the cool models like the Vanguards. I got to admit that the Vanguards should either have a transport or the return of the Scout deployment to be more effective, mine rarely finish the game alive (I only played games where I had 10 Vanguards though) and some way for them to not get wiped out in one turn would be nice (yeah cover but... I can't keep them indefinitely hidden).
I think I'll just stay out of tournaments and competitive play altogether, doesn't suit me.
ATM I am working on a spearhead detachment (Cawl, Rangers 2 Arquebusses, Datasmith, Infiltrators, 2x2 Dakkastelans, 2 Neutronagers, 1 Icarus Onager) paired with an Aastra MIlitarum patrol detachment, Lord Commisar and 50 Conscripts. So many points left to use with this dirt cheap conscript screen. Not too sure what to add though
and since i basically I'd have to build 50 conscripts: What models are there that could fit into a nice AdMech army?
Iago40k wrote: ATM I am working on a spearhead detachment (Cawl, Rangers 2 Arquebusses, Datasmith, Infiltrators, 2x2 Dakkastelans, 2 Neutronagers, 1 Icarus Onager) paired with an Aastra MIlitarum patrol detachment, Lord Commisar and 50 Conscripts. So many points left to use with this dirt cheap conscript screen. Not too sure what to add though
and since i basically I'd have to build 50 conscripts: What models are there that could fit into a nice AdMech army?
If you are made of money ... MECHANICUM TECH-THRALL COVENANT WITH LAS-LOCKS are perfect. Otherwise I am going with either cultists or the 10 dollar 5 guardsman snap fit kit.
Aaranis wrote: Well, looks like to be competitive you still need to spam/use borderline unfluffy lists or don't use the cool models like the Vanguards. I got to admit that the Vanguards should either have a transport or the return of the Scout deployment to be more effective, mine rarely finish the game alive (I only played games where I had 10 Vanguards though) and some way for them to not get wiped out in one turn would be nice (yeah cover but... I can't keep them indefinitely hidden).
I think I'll just stay out of tournaments and competitive play altogether, doesn't suit me.
Unfortunately the problem for admech is if you run an imperium army there are other units that does most of what admech does better. So why take Admech when I can just take the better units
Take vanguard
If you want bubble wrap IQ acolytes are 48pts for 6 man and 18 wounds
If you want deepfield shooting Tempests scions can deepstrike in and won't spend a few turns getting there
Worse than that if you mix units to get rid of the rediculous 25% HQ tax you end up losing canticles making your army functionally worse so for any admech unit to justify itself it has to be viable without canticles
Which in my head leaves dunecrawlers and maybe chicken walkers (but guard sentinels are only marginally less effective at a cheaper price)
Sorry to my skitarii you won me many battles in 7th but now you are only a side board choice to support other armies
U02dah4 wrote: Unfortunately the problem for admech is if you run an imperium army there are other units that does most of what admech does better. So why take Admech when I can just take the better units
Take vanguard
If you want bubble wrap IQ acolytes are 48pts for 6 man and 18 wounds
If you want deepfield shooting Tempests scions can deepstrike in and won't spend a few turns getting there
Worse than that if you mix units to get rid of the rediculous 25% HQ tax you end up losing canticles making your army functionally worse so for any admech unit to justify itself it has to be viable without canticles
Which in my head leaves dunecrawlers and maybe chicken walkers (but guard sentinels are only marginally less effective at a cheaper price)
Sorry to my skitarii you won me many battles in 7th but now you are only a side board choice to support other armies
Oh don't get me wrong, I'm going to use other Imperium units too in my army (with a main force of AdMech), but I'm trying to keep it reasonable, the point being I want to run an army of "Mechanicus + Imperial Support" instead of just a mix of Imperial units. I resolved myself not to use Space Marines for exemple, so as to keep the diversity minimal. I'll be having AdMech, Scions and maybe Hellhounds later, my excuse being that we should be able to use the vehicles we build for others.
Yeah until they release our codex (hopefully quickly, not next year please) to fill the holes in our army by adding a decent transport and a cheap HQ we're bound to either spam our Heavy Support or mix with other Imperium units. I just wish everyone would have a TAC list, it would prevent us from having to spam things in order to counter the other spam lists.
Of course they are better units for different roles, and I can understand that a tournament player will use the best options every time he can. However it's kinda sad for the theme of our armies, now I fear we'll have lists consisting of just "Imperium" units instead of "AdMech list" "Astra Militarum list" or "Adepta Sororitas list". It just saddens me to see the fluff side of the game set aside because of the new choice of units we have access to without restrictions.
I'm happy to be able to use Scions or Hellhounds without a specific formation like in 7th, but I'll keep them complementary to the bulk of my army, I still love the visual impact of 30-40 Skitarii troopers on the field personnaly, and I still want them to be the headliner of the show if you see what I mean
Look it at it this way, without some sort of leadership buff, those conscripts will get torn up by a single Icarus Array, Stormraven, TAC Razorback, or Def Pred, etc. Losing 7+ models in the shooting phase alone, plus 3-4 more almost guaranteed in the morale phase, that's with no CC.
Every list has "throw away points" either by design or by "tax". Since we have no Transport options, we'll almost always be going second...
I'm the same way with my Ryboth "lost" forces, except for the Knight House that was with them, they haven't been in contact with the rest of the Imperium for a while, and considering the Forge was under "investigation" by both the Imperium and Mechanicum, they find it a tad hard to make friends...
Pedroig wrote: Look it at it this way, without some sort of leadership buff, those conscripts will get torn up by a single Icarus Array, Stormraven, TAC Razorback, or Def Pred, etc. Losing 7+ models in the shooting phase alone, plus 3-4 more almost guaranteed in the morale phase, that's with no CC.
Lord Commissar, 55 pts, mandatory HQ unit, max loose for a leadership test is 1 model.
Pedroig wrote: Look it at it this way, without some sort of leadership buff, those conscripts will get torn up by a single Icarus Array, Stormraven, TAC Razorback, or Def Pred, etc. Losing 7+ models in the shooting phase alone, plus 3-4 more almost guaranteed in the morale phase, that's with no CC.
Lord Commissar, 55 pts, mandatory HQ unit, max loose for a leadership test is 1 model.
And yet, our cyborgs who have literally no capacity for fear can't be expected to weather a round of shooting.
I find this conscript bubble for admech simply not worth it, especially if you haven't got the models already. We don't know what is coming in the codes, and I find it incredible hyperbole to suggest they are mandatory.
What would an admech player do AGAINST conscripts? I, for one, would ignore them for at least 2 rounds. They provide no one any cover from my shooting, don't move fast enough to even threaten their rather piddly shooting, and take up tremendous space from the opponent cause you can't move thru your own models.
And that's what all shooting armies do. I certainly won't dedicate 10% of my list to a unit that every guard, tau, admech, sisters, marine, Necron, eldar, and dark eldar shooty list would (and should) ignore.
On a different note, I'm also reconsidering some paradigms we've talked ourselves into. Against flyers, specifically. The icarus onager does do well, and independently to boot. However, as my meta likes to include stormraven spam, I decided to crunch some numbers.
If both are in range of a TPD or Cawl, Against t7, 3+ flyers, the neutron imager does pretty much the exact same damage on average, with a much higher, and more likely, top out. Slightly less if supersonic. This includes stormravens and all craftoworld eldar. And even against t6 4+ vehicles, the icarus averages only 2 more wounds. Less against d eldar and their nightshields.
Of interesting note, I decided to run every unit I could think of. Surprisingly, if you are looking for straight damage output, in the reroll bubble...
3 Destroyers with oc plasma do almost more damage, on average, than 2 icarus onagers with rerolls against t7, 3+ flyers (8.7 vs 4.4) . Destroyers in a crawl bubble are actually put most effective, point for point, damage dealer to the rhino/chimera/razorbaxk/Stormraven/valkyrie/wave serpant chassis.
Some food for thought. (Also with an avergae of 10.5 shots, you are likely to get two rounds of shooting in before a gets hot nails one)
pardon all the edits. Mobile autocorrect has produced a significant amount of interesting word changes
Unfortunately the destroyers cost a bomb and are the first thing to die so however good their damage output you have to recoup it in one turn unless you wish to stick them in a bastion
U02dah4 wrote: Unfortunately the destroyers cost a bomb and are the first thing to die so however good their damage output you have to recoup it in one turn unless you wish to stick them in a bastion
Not an awful idea. The Firestorm Redoubt seems pretty decent on paper.
Iago40k wrote: ATM I am working on a spearhead detachment (Cawl, Rangers 2 Arquebusses, Datasmith, Infiltrators, 2x2 Dakkastelans, 2 Neutronagers, 1 Icarus Onager) paired with an Aastra MIlitarum patrol detachment, Lord Commisar and 50 Conscripts. So many points left to use with this dirt cheap conscript screen. Not too sure what to add though
and since i basically I'd have to build 50 conscripts: What models are there that could fit into a nice AdMech army?
If you are made of money ... MECHANICUM TECH-THRALL COVENANT WITH LAS-LOCKS are perfect. Otherwise I am going with either cultists or the 10 dollar 5 guardsman snap fit kit.
Iago40k wrote: ATM I am working on a spearhead detachment (Cawl, Rangers 2 Arquebusses, Datasmith, Infiltrators, 2x2 Dakkastelans, 2 Neutronagers, 1 Icarus Onager) paired with an Aastra MIlitarum patrol detachment, Lord Commisar and 50 Conscripts. So many points left to use with this dirt cheap conscript screen. Not too sure what to add though
and since i basically I'd have to build 50 conscripts: What models are there that could fit into a nice AdMech army?
If you are made of money ... MECHANICUM TECH-THRALL COVENANT WITH LAS-LOCKS are perfect. Otherwise I am going with either cultists or the 10 dollar 5 guardsman snap fit kit.
U02dah4 wrote: Unfortunately the destroyers cost a bomb and are the first thing to die so however good their damage output you have to recoup it in one turn unless you wish to stick them in a bastion
Not an awful idea. The Firestorm Redoubt seems pretty decent on paper.
It's something that needs field testing. the difficulty I see at that points levels is would you be better off with a knight
I was running some of those things as silly stuff to test the models. I liked the Primaris marines and I thought they were cool so I ran them. If WAAC, they should be replaced by conscripts full stop. Greyfax is also a favorite model of mine and I think she was justified .... but the guy who took first didn't run Greyfax. Also, the second Gemini is not WAAC, you only need 1. EDIT: the big problems were that my vanguard couldn't function as a decent screen or as decent horde firepower and that my Phosphor bots and Ballistari didn't do anything that my Onagers couldn't do better. I didn't even run any of my 6 fully magnetized kataphrons that I really like because I knew they were ~220 points of autocannon bait that I could never keep alive if I went second.
EDIT2: to the above about plasma destroyers, YES, point for point they are the highest damage output unit in the admech list when overcharged and full rerolled. But they are such bait. If you get first turn, yeah, okay, you may alpha strike really nice. I got first turn 1 time out of 3 last Saturday even with ITC's +1 rule and if you don't have that ...
U02dah4 wrote: Unfortunately the destroyers cost a bomb and are the first thing to die so however good their damage output you have to recoup it in one turn unless you wish to stick them in a bastion
Not an awful idea. The Firestorm Redoubt seems pretty decent on paper.
It's something that needs field testing. the difficulty I see at that points levels is would you be better off with a knight
It is just an option that is good to consider. Not every format will allow Knights. My current League for instance does not allow LoW. So, having a way to protect Kataphrons (upping durability) while allowing them to do what they do best (shoot OC Plasma) seems decent in those instances when a Knight is a no-go and I don't feel like taking the obvious choices.
For all of the people playing conscripts: As pure bubble wrap, I can see that working out well. But what about grabbing and holding objectives? (Or is our strategy just to table everyone every time?)
Also, in terms of metagame, I am sensing that horde is becoming the norm and everyone will over-prep for it.
Pedroig wrote: Look it at it this way, without some sort of leadership buff, those conscripts will get torn up by a single Icarus Array, Stormraven, TAC Razorback, or Def Pred, etc. Losing 7+ models in the shooting phase alone, plus 3-4 more almost guaranteed in the morale phase, that's with no CC.
Lord Commissar, 55 pts, mandatory HQ unit, max loose for a leadership test is 1 model.
And yet, our cyborgs who have literally no capacity for fear can't be expected to weather a round of shooting.
Good job, playtesters.
Honestly, trying to fit three units of 20 Conscripts into a 6" bubble around the Lord Commissar is going to do terrible things to your mobility. Unless we're really willing to commit to this table-or-nothing mentality, this is fine, but sometimes, you have to play a running battle.
gally912 wrote: I find this conscript bubble for admech simply not worth it, especially if you haven't got the models already. We don't know what is coming in the codes, and I find it incredible hyperbole to suggest they are mandatory.
What would an admech player do AGAINST conscripts? I, for one, would ignore them for at least 2 rounds. They provide no one any cover from my shooting, don't move fast enough to even threaten their rather piddly shooting, and take up tremendous space from the opponent cause you can't move thru your own models.
And that's what all shooting armies do. I certainly won't dedicate 10% of my list to a unit that every guard, tau, admech, sisters, marine, Necron, eldar, and dark eldar shooty list would (and should) ignore.
Of interesting note, I decided to run every unit I could think of. Surprisingly, if you are looking for straight damage output, in the reroll bubble...
3 Destroyers with oc plasma do almost more damage, on average, than 2 icarus onagers with rerolls against t7, 3+ flyers (8.7 vs 4.4) . Destroyers in a crawl bubble are actually put most effective, point for point, damage dealer to the rhino/chimera/razorbaxk/Stormraven/valkyrie/wave serpant chassis.
Some food for thought. (Also with an avergae of 10.5 shots, you are likely to get two rounds of shooting in before a gets hot nails one)
I agree. But I believe the others are using Conscripts to physically block shooting. Icarus and Neutron Crawlers have 48" range, so as long as your Conscript physically occupies the space that enemies would stand, you deny them the ability to shoot you for the one or two turns it takes to remove them. (The downside is that it also blocks you from moving through this area, meaning you're screwed if you have to move around the board.)
Ugh... I caught some flak a few pages back for pointing out that OC Plasma Destroyers pretty much are the hardest hitting unit we have on a point-for-point basis.
Nice. I am actually doing a similar paint scheme, only with burnt orange instead of yellow and more silver over brass/gold.
The pics don't render full justice to my colours, the blue is actually covered with Drakenhof Nightshade on the coats so it looks more nighty, and the yellow is more of an ochre (Tau Light Ochre actually). Do you have pics of yours yet ?
Nice. I am actually doing a similar paint scheme, only with burnt orange instead of yellow and more silver over brass/gold.
The pics don't render full justice to my colours, the blue is actually covered with Drakenhof Nightshade on the coats so it looks more nighty, and the yellow is more of an ochre (Tau Light Ochre actually). Do you have pics of yours yet ?
Caledor Sky with Drakenhof Nightshade?
No, but when I do, I will borrow a real camera rather than use my crappy phone to take pictures. Haha.
Honestly, trying to fit three units of 20 Conscripts into a 6" bubble around the Lord Commissar is going to do terrible things to your mobility. Unless we're really willing to commit to this table-or-nothing mentality, this is fine, but sometimes, you have to play a running battle.
Yeah its a problem. Conscripts are a great screen unit but we already have great problems to roam around the board. In my experience so far it was either table the opponent or loose because of maelstrom. Thats why I am still trying 2 units of infiltrators and vanguard units. The lack of mobility is the main issue for AdMech if playing Artillery heavy (which is what we have to do).
Honestly, trying to fit three units of 20 Conscripts into a 6" bubble around the Lord Commissar is going to do terrible things to your mobility. Unless we're really willing to commit to this table-or-nothing mentality, this is fine, but sometimes, you have to play a running battle.
Yeah its a problem. Conscripts are a great screen unit but we already have great problems to roam around the board. In my experience so far it was either table the opponent or loose because of maelstrom. Thats why I am still trying 2 units of infiltrators and vanguard units. The lack of mobility is the main issue for AdMech if playing Artillery heavy (which is what we have to do).
Exactly. Right now, I have been thinking about doing the Crawler concept, only with Dragoons:
Lord of War - 466 Knight Warden - Reaper Chainsword, Avenger Gatling Cannon, Heavy Flamer, Heavy Stubber
Total: 1995 points 5 Command Points
The plan is basically a walking wall of death. The Dragoons are mediocre in terms of damage, but they are mobile, and as others have pointed out, with Shroudpsalm and Incense Cloud, they are surprisingly durable for their cost. Their job is to grab objectives, screen the Crawlers, and tie down anything that shoots better than it fights. Warden stands behind the Dragoons and otherwise rounds out the army, complementing the Icarus Crawlers to take out hordes; I originally intended for this to be 3 Kastelans and a Datasmith, but I was worried about durability. (On second thought, dropping the Serpenta and yet another Dragoon would let me run RFBC Crusader instead.)
I still haven't found a good place for the Sydonians. The Balistarii are, compared to Neutronagers, pure crap. The Dragoons lost so much since any unit can jump out of CC which was their main purpose in 7th: jump into Khorne Dogs and keep them in fight for the rest of the game. Their output is just so bad. But I guess they can have a i your list.
Why no Kastelans though? I like Onager spam but I feel you need the bots for the sheer volume of shots against any kind of horde army.
Iago40k wrote: I still haven't found a good place for the Sydonians. The Balistarii are, compared to Neutronagers, pure crap. The Dragoons lost so much since any unit can jump out of CC which was their main purpose in 7th: jump into Khorne Dogs and keep them in fight for the rest of the game. Their output is just so bad. But I guess they can have a i your list.
Why no Kastelans though? I like Onager spam but I feel you need the bots for the sheer volume of shots against any kind of horde army.
Right, but the unit that falls back cannot shoot that turn, so mission accomplished. (I have no delusions, those Dragoons will die, but they will die well.)
As stated on the previous page, the idea is to drop everything that cannot move-and-shoot. Icarus and the Warden or Crusader fulfill the anti-horde role of the Kastelans in this list. (To be honest, I am not 100% convinced of the idea, but it does have its appeal.)
As stated on the previous page, the idea is to drop everything that cannot move-and-shoot. Icarus and the Warden or Crusader fulfill the anti-horde role of the Kastelans in this list. (To be honest, I am not 100% convinced of the idea, but it does have its appeal.)
Kastelans are pretty badass even after moving. With Cawl in the background 5+ and rerolls is still good.. Plus most of your opponents will try to kill them over your Onager. I do see your point though.
As stated on the previous page, the idea is to drop everything that cannot move-and-shoot. Icarus and the Warden or Crusader fulfill the anti-horde role of the Kastelans in this list. (To be honest, I am not 100% convinced of the idea, but it does have its appeal.)
Kastelans are pretty badass even after moving. With Cawl in the background 5+ and rerolls is still good.. Plus most of your opponents will try to kill them over your Onager. I do see your point though.
I agree, and I probably will continue running 3 Neutron, 1 Icarus, and 1x2 Kastelans. But the concept of 6 Crawlers is interesting.
I agree, and I probably will continue running 2 Neutron, 1 Icarus, and 2 Kastelans. But the concept of 6 Crawlers is interesting.
.
It sure is. I am thinking on how to play it against my buddy with his nasty nids list. 5 melee flyrants, 3 murlocs and 90 gaunts...yikes.
For you? I think you can stick to the 2x5 Infiltrators and squeeze in 4 Neutron, 2 Icarus Crawlers, and 2x2 Kastelans. (It's just me trying to use Dragoons. Haha.)
Heavy Support - 440 2x Kastelan Robots - 2x Heavy Phosphor Blasters, 2x Twin Heavy Phosphor Blasters
2x Kastelan Robots - 2x Heavy Phosphor Blasters, 2x Twin Heavy Phosphor Blasters
5 Sicarian Infiltrators
- 5 x Flechette blaster and Taser goad
- - - > 130
*************** 2 Fast Attack ***************
1 Sydonian Dragoons
- 1 x Taser lance
- - - > 68
1 Sydonian Dragoons
- 1 x Taser lance
- - - > 68
Points : 1809
Powerlevel: 93
CP : 4
So, 41 points left to spend though I am not that keen on using that patrol detachment. Next game is Ynnari with loads of wave serpents and wraithguard. Should be fun
Iago40k wrote: gakky thing is, we play 1850 over here.
So my list looks like this, with some points to spare (believe me, I want to make Dragoons work as well! )
5 Sicarian Infiltrators
- 5 x Flechette blaster and Taser goad
- - - > 130
*************** 2 Fast Attack ***************
1 Sydonian Dragoons
- 1 x Taser lance
- - - > 68
1 Sydonian Dragoons
- 1 x Taser lance
- - - > 68
Points : 1809
Powerlevel: 93
CP : 4
So, 41 points left to spend though I am not that keen on using that patrol detachment. Next game is Ynnari with loads of wave serpents and wraithguard. Should be fun
Cut the Stubbers on your Crawlers and add another unit of Vanguard or Rangers?
Being able to splash Imperial units have been massive for my Ad Mech army. Pure Admech at the moment suffers greatly from efficient screens, and mobility constraints.
I have been running 1000-1400 points of Mechanicus, while splashing in 2x 30 Conscripts, 1 SoB Contingent and 2-3 units of Scions.
It has been incredible with so many different point efficient threat vectors.
Deshkar wrote: Being able to splash Imperial units have been massive for my Ad Mech army. Pure Admech at the moment suffers greatly from efficient screens, and mobility constraints.
I have been running 1000-1400 points of Mechanicus, while splashing in 2x 30 Conscripts, 1 SoB Contingent and 2-3 units of Scions.
It has been incredible with so many different point efficient threat vectors.
...
As I mentioned before, I don't think there is an option in Imperium that is efficient, mobile, and screens well. Conscripts are efficient and screen well, but they're a nightmare to move around. I prefer Caliver Vanguard over Melta Scions because they get Canticles and rerolling. And I would definitely run 2 Neutron over Icarus for Crawlers, since you have the 2x2 Kastelan already. At worst, 1:1 if your meta is Eldar or Tau-heavy.
Deshkar wrote: Being able to splash Imperial units have been massive for my Ad Mech army. Pure Admech at the moment suffers greatly from efficient screens, and mobility constraints.
I have been running 1000-1400 points of Mechanicus, while splashing in 2x 30 Conscripts, 1 SoB Contingent and 2-3 units of Scions.
It has been incredible with so many different point efficient threat vectors.
Too AM heavy for my taste but I can see it working. Though I am on Suzuteos side when it comes to too many conscripts. Yes we need a screening unit but if they are that large movement becomes a heavier problem than it is already. It leans stronlgy to "I table you round 1 to 3 or else..."
Deshkar wrote: Being able to splash Imperial units have been massive for my Ad Mech army. Pure Admech at the moment suffers greatly from efficient screens, and mobility constraints.
I have been running 1000-1400 points of Mechanicus, while splashing in 2x 30 Conscripts, 1 SoB Contingent and 2-3 units of Scions.
It has been incredible with so many different point efficient threat vectors.
Too AM heavy for my taste but I can see it working. Though I am on Suzuteos side when it comes to too many conscripts. Yes we need a screening unit but if they are that large movement becomes a heavier problem than it is already. It leans stronlgy to "I table you round 1 to 3 or else..."
Check out what is winning the tournaments though. 8 flyer lists are winning. 6 Onager + Celestine lists are winning. The objectives just don't matter that much anymore because tabling is a realistic option at a tournament now. Games are faster. Except for that Dark Eldar player I played who slow played me out of my third turn (I still rolled him on kill points even though I only got 2 turns).
Deshkar wrote: Being able to splash Imperial units have been massive for my Ad Mech army. Pure Admech at the moment suffers greatly from efficient screens, and mobility constraints.
I have been running 1000-1400 points of Mechanicus, while splashing in 2x 30 Conscripts, 1 SoB Contingent and 2-3 units of Scions.
It has been incredible with so many different point efficient threat vectors.
Too AM heavy for my taste but I can see it working. Though I am on Suzuteos side when it comes to too many conscripts. Yes we need a screening unit but if they are that large movement becomes a heavier problem than it is already. It leans stronlgy to "I table you round 1 to 3 or else..."
Check out what is winning the tournaments though. 8 flyer lists are winning. 6 Onager + Celestine lists are winning. The objectives just don't matter that much anymore because tabling is a realistic option at a tournament now. Games are faster. Except for that Dark Eldar player I played who slow played me out of my third turn (I still rolled him on kill points even though I only got 2 turns).
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too early to base any predictions off their limited results in thus far. The whole metagame is going to be fair game for at least 6 months, barring shake-ups from Codices.
Deshkar wrote: Being able to splash Imperial units have been massive for my Ad Mech army. Pure Admech at the moment suffers greatly from efficient screens, and mobility constraints.
I have been running 1000-1400 points of Mechanicus, while splashing in 2x 30 Conscripts, 1 SoB Contingent and 2-3 units of Scions.
It has been incredible with so many different point efficient threat vectors.
Too AM heavy for my taste but I can see it working. Though I am on Suzuteos side when it comes to too many conscripts. Yes we need a screening unit but if they are that large movement becomes a heavier problem than it is already. It leans stronlgy to "I table you round 1 to 3 or else..."
Check out what is winning the tournaments though. 8 flyer lists are winning. 6 Onager + Celestine lists are winning. The objectives just don't matter that much anymore because tabling is a realistic option at a tournament now. Games are faster. Except for that Dark Eldar player I played who slow played me out of my third turn (I still rolled him on kill points even though I only got 2 turns).
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too early to base any predictions off their limited results in thus far. The whole metagame is going to be fair game for at least 6 months, barring shake-ups from Codices.
Agreed. A lot of bloggers and Youtubers have only recently figured out stuff we've been speculating a month ago.
But it is true that flying lists are still a thing, and again, the 6 Crawler concept is intriguing. I suppose really the big question boils down to Heavy Support slots. How many Kastelans do we want to trade for Icarus? At what point does our anti-air and anti-horde game become insufficient?
I don't really understand how Flyers in mass are effective, really. You can't exit by a table edge to come back any more right ? So how do they manage the minimal movement distance with all the terrain and enemy models, and their own models ? Am I missing something ?
Aaranis wrote: I don't really understand how Flyers in mass are effective, really. You can't exit by a table edge to come back any more right ? So how do they manage the minimal movement distance with all the terrain and enemy models, and their own models ? Am I missing something ?
Onagers and cawl can move and fire freely (unlike robots and ballistari). Celestine is just bananas and keeps pressure off your Crawlers. He even beat this completely lame fire raptor list. The fire raptor list was 3 Fire Raptors, 2 hawk gunships, Guilliman, and a VSG. Everything hovers first turn and he tries to shoot you off the table. Only the crawler list was able to fight that and the crawlers almost lost.
Onagers and cawl can move and fire freely (unlike robots and ballistari). Celestine is just bananas and keeps pressure off your Crawlers. He even beat this completely lame fire raptor list. The fire raptor list was 3 Fire Raptors, 2 hawk gunships, Guilliman, and a VSG. Everything hovers first turn and he tries to shoot you off the table. Only the crawler list was able to fight that and the crawlers almost lost.
These are extreme outlier lists trying to define the meta. I can't see them lasting or if they do, they might wind up being a scissor to a rock to some other paper.
These are extreme outlier lists trying to define the meta. I can't see them lasting or if they do, they might wind up being a scissor to a rock to some other paper.
Well, while I don't believe in onager's list, I think ultramarines' gunline will last no less than riptide spam in 7ed.
It is just matter of calculating which units provide best value for points and raptors are insanely good.
These are extreme outlier lists trying to define the meta. I can't see them lasting or if they do, they might wind up being a scissor to a rock to some other paper.
Well, while I don't believe in onager's list, I think ultramarines' gunline will last no less than riptide spam in 7ed.
It is just matter of calculating which units provide best value for points and raptors are insanely good.
Three Fire Raptors is a lot of points in three T7 models with a 3+ save. I mean, they are 400+ points a pop. At 36" they do throw 34 dice between the Bolt Cannon and QHBs though, so they will trainwreck horde lists.
Against a lot of lists though, you just focus-fire each one until they are dead. If they are hovering, won't be hard to hit either.
I agree. Worst comes to worst, we run 1:1 Neutron to Icarus. But if they're just hovering, even Neutron Crawlers should be able to take them out.
My real worry are the hordes. Like I asked, the tradeoff for us seems to be balancing screening elements with anti-air and anti-horde. We've got anti-tank and anti-MEQ/Primaris in the bag.
Hordes can be dealt with Corpuscarii Electro-Priests, Infiltrators with Taser Goads and Flechette Blasters, Radium carbines, Dakkastelans, Kataphrons Destroyers (Grav, Plasma or even the flamers), hell even the Icarus Array could deal with hordes. Honestly I don't see the problem of hordes as much as before, and I have yet to face a horde army at my LGS, people are more inclined towards low body count armies for now, with one of our best players writing dirty lists full of Characters.
Aaranis wrote: Hordes can be dealt with Corpuscarii Electro-Priests, Infiltrators with Taser Goads and Flechette Blasters, Radium carbines, Dakkastelans, Kataphrons Destroyers (Grav, Plasma or even the flamers), hell even the Icarus Array could deal with hordes. Honestly I don't see the problem of hordes as much as before, and I have yet to face a horde army at my LGS, people are more inclined towards low body count armies for now, with one of our best players writing dirty lists full of Characters.
Hordes are more efficient than all of those options but the Kastelans though. For example, consider that Infiltrators need to kill 40 Conscripts to make their points back. Destroyers and Radium Carbines also aren't too great for Hordes. =\
Anyone play hordes regularly and have an opinion? Maybe the most egregious sorts that just carpet the board with models?
Three Fire Raptors is a lot of points in three T7 models with a 3+ save. I mean, they are 400+ points a pop. At 36" they do throw 34 dice between the Bolt Cannon and QHBs though, so they will trainwreck horde lists.
Against a lot of lists though, you just focus-fire each one until they are dead. If they are hovering, won't be hard to hit either.
Well of course you can counter that list. Given enough preparation you can counter anything.
But FW based gunline list for SM can shut down threats efficiently enough to stay in meta for some time.
I wouldn't call it pay to win, but it is closer to that than usual.
Moving back to Martians, I am going to test this list on weekend:
Spoiler:
I tried to include means to deal with characters, vehicles and, most of all, mass infantry.
Eversor is here to lock enemy gunline, but previous tests show that I fail to roll 9" on 3d6 pretty often, thinking about Callidus.
Inquisitor for overwatch denial and conscripts are ideal tarpit to protect vehicles.
Aaranis wrote: Hordes can be dealt with Corpuscarii Electro-Priests, Infiltrators with Taser Goads and Flechette Blasters, Radium carbines, Dakkastelans, Kataphrons Destroyers (Grav, Plasma or even the flamers), hell even the Icarus Array could deal with hordes. Honestly I don't see the problem of hordes as much as before, and I have yet to face a horde army at my LGS, people are more inclined towards low body count armies for now, with one of our best players writing dirty lists full of Characters.
Hordes are more efficient than all of those options but the Kastelans though. For example, consider that Infiltrators need to kill 40 Conscripts to make their points back. Destroyers and Radium Carbines also aren't too great for Hordes. =\
Anyone play hordes regularly and have an opinion? Maybe the most egregious sorts that just carpet the board with models?
Well I played a chaos list with just over 150 brimstone horrors and it has yet to fail. More sofisticated daemon lords are going to field over 300 brimstones on the local team tournament this weekend.
But local master minds muster mass SM sniper scouts with mass sisters of silence list to counter brimstone spam. On paper seems like a solid counter.
Still new and buying painting jupiter forces but I havn't seen anyone talk about servitors yet, I made 2 4borg units 2 plasma cannons each for my army. Plan is they act as my 2 Hqs bodyguards always keeping them cover cuz of chariter rule with added bonus of rerolls of 1 to negate gets hot. Thoughts?
Magos-Macrotek-Danny wrote: Still new and buying painting jupiter forces but I havn't seen anyone talk about servitors yet, I made 2 4borg units 2 plasma cannons each for my army. Plan is they act as my 2 Hqs bodyguards always keeping them cover cuz of chariter rule with added bonus of rerolls of 1 to negate gets hot. Thoughts?
Hey saw your Jupiter army on the forums ! Well there's been talk about the Servitors, the general consensus is that they are really expensive for their limited use, because of the price of the servo-arm that no one will ever use in melee. There is probably potential in your idea, but in my opinion a min squad of Vanguards with one or two Plasma Calivers should do the trick well enough and with a better reliability.
A lot of the flyers can hover, but they still need to move.
Most jet/plane aircraft is 45 inches MUST move and 90 turn, or hover for 20 inch MUST move and turn any direction. Also if for any reason yours flies off the table then its auto dead.
Biggest thing is they mostly wont be in any reroll bubbles and are usually very expensive if you want a good attack plane. As mentioned the Fireraptor is 386PTS with las option. It is murderous but very expensive so loosing it is a big loss. (Also once its crippled its crappy aswell)
Pedroig wrote: Why stop at 6 Onagers? Can get 9 with two spearheads, then flesh out an allied battalion with cheap AMHQ's and troops for under 500 points...
Er... well, one problem is that their bases are like dinner plates, and you can't fit nine of them around Cawl?
Amen to that, if only everyone agreed on playing TAC lists.
As a tournament player I am all for "play the craziest toughest stuff you can imagine". So its okay if someone wants to play 6 to 8 onagers, flyers or whatever. But I am just looking foward that rock/paper/scissors will soon lead to more versatile lists. In a 7 game tournament you most certainly will not win 7 games with a 6 Onagers list. It will just take some time to find the balance between TAC and spam.
Well I guess in the end you need to be able to counter most spam lists, with different flavours of spam, so you'll have to develop some kind of TAC list isn't it ?
Well.. I think this list could work against Eldar (Flyers, Serpents, Knight, Wraithguard). I am not to keen on proxies but I kind of have to for this stresstest. But I just can't...I don't want use anything else than AdMech...not yet!
ross-128 wrote: No, I'm pretty sure hover mode removes your minimum move and allows you to stop.
Your right, (and common sense would dictate that with the name "hover") but I double checked with an ITC organizer. Par for the course, the wording is so poor. Confusion was it doesn't say "up to 20" just says "becomes 20" See below for ability quote.
Hover Jet: "Before this model moves in your Movement Phase, you can declare it will hover. Its Move Characteristic becomes 20' until the end of the phase, looses Airborne, Hard to Hit, and Supersonic abilities until the beginning of your next movement phase"
ross-128 wrote: No, I'm pretty sure hover mode removes your minimum move and allows you to stop.
Your right, (and common sense would dictate that with the name "hover") but I double checked with an ITC organizer. Par for the course, the wording is so poor. Confusion was it doesn't say "up to 20" just says "becomes 20" See below for ability quote.
Hover Jet: "Before this model moves in your Movement Phase, you can declare it will hover. Its Move Characteristic becomes 20' until the end of the phase, looses Airborne, Hard to Hit, and Supersonic abilities until the beginning of your next movement phase"
Pretty straight forward to me. Refer to "Minimum Move" rule. Two values means it has to do that minimum while a single entry for movement treats it like any other unit.
So normally it is 20-45" meaning it has to move at least 20" and up to 45". When it goes to Hover, it just has a 20" movement like any other unit and can move up to that value.
Pedroig wrote: Why stop at 6 Onagers? Can get 9 with two spearheads, then flesh out an allied battalion with cheap AMHQ's and troops for under 500 points...
Er... well, one problem is that their bases are like dinner plates, and you can't fit nine of them around Cawl?
Cawl is 35mm in radius on his shortest side, so 190 - 35 = 165mm = 6.10236 inches
Still don't play with Cawl... Still haven't lost an Admech game, though came close, twice.
Don't use bases on Onager's either. Wouldn't be "bubble walking" them anyway.
Even looking at not playing AdMech, but rather Imperial, get rid of HQ tax almost entirely, can eek out 12 Onagers with 2 Primaris Psykers as HQ's for 40 points each, can still squeeze in an Engineseer for a lil repair help...Just park a threesome on each objective and vaporize anything that gets close... Will have to proxy test that out though, not buying that many Onagers just to theory test...
Pedroig wrote: Why stop at 6 Onagers? Can get 9 with two spearheads, then flesh out an allied battalion with cheap AMHQ's and troops for under 500 points...
Er... well, one problem is that their bases are like dinner plates, and you can't fit nine of them around Cawl?
Cawl is 35mm in radius on his shortest side, so 190 - 35 = 165mm = 6.10236 inches
Still don't play with Cawl... Still haven't lost an Admech game, though came close, twice.
Don't use bases on Onager's either. Wouldn't be "bubble walking" them anyway.
Even looking at not playing AdMech, but rather Imperial, get rid of HQ tax almost entirely, can eek out 12 Onagers with 2 Primaris Psykers as HQ's for 40 points each, can still squeeze in an Engineseer for a lil repair help...Just park a threesome on each objective and vaporize anything that gets close... Will have to proxy test that out though, not buying that many Onagers just to theory test...
Don't you kinda have to use a base if it comes with one? Some folks might not be a fan of that as you rob them of distance for charging (in theory).
Don't you kinda have to use a base if it comes with one? Some folks might not be a fan of that as you rob them of distance for charging (in theory).
Personnaly I never used mine with a base because I still need to paint strip it and then repaint it and I don't want to use adhesive gums to keep it on his base. Plus, it's so ludicrously big that you can't pass corners or small corridors easily on the table and it's just messy. Walkers that big like the Onager or Triarch Stalker shouldn't have bases. In fact the latter doesn't have one. I measure from the tip of the legs and use an imaginary circle, never had any problems and I'm not picky on measures if my opponent wants to charge it and it's blurry.
Pedroig wrote: Why stop at 6 Onagers? Can get 9 with two spearheads, then flesh out an allied battalion with cheap AMHQ's and troops for under 500 points...
Er... well, one problem is that their bases are like dinner plates, and you can't fit nine of them around Cawl?
Cawl is 35mm in radius on his shortest side, so 190 - 35 = 165mm = 6.10236 inches
Still don't play with Cawl... Still haven't lost an Admech game, though came close, twice.
Don't use bases on Onager's either. Wouldn't be "bubble walking" them anyway.
Even looking at not playing AdMech, but rather Imperial, get rid of HQ tax almost entirely, can eek out 12 Onagers with 2 Primaris Psykers as HQ's for 40 points each, can still squeeze in an Engineseer for a lil repair help...Just park a threesome on each objective and vaporize anything that gets close... Will have to proxy test that out though, not buying that many Onagers just to theory test...
Don't you kinda have to use a base if it comes with one? Some folks might not be a fan of that as you rob them of distance for charging (in theory).
Measuring movement PG177. You measure from base or the hull. So in this case, a base would give you small extra movement as the hull is in the middle of the model and not the legs.
The diagrams also show measuring shooting from the base. I would guess this would also fall on the hull? Or maybe not.
Open topped transports state specifically you measure from any point of the transport.
Personally I use a base, as I like the scenic bases I made for them and it makes them far more durable
Don't you kinda have to use a base if it comes with one? Some folks might not be a fan of that as you rob them of distance for charging (in theory).
Personnaly I never used mine with a base because I still need to paint strip it and then repaint it and I don't want to use adhesive gums to keep it on his base. Plus, it's so ludicrously big that you can't pass corners or small corridors easily on the table and it's just messy. Walkers that big like the Onager or Triarch Stalker shouldn't have bases. In fact the latter doesn't have one. I measure from the tip of the legs and use an imaginary circle, never had any problems and I'm not picky on measures if my opponent wants to charge it and it's blurry.
I thoroughly love building bases, so I guess that is why I am partial! If I had it my way, every walker would have a base! That is how my Onagers legs will be kept safe from busting in transit too.
Check out my WiP ones. SO MUCH WORK LEFT!
Next set of bases I am going to try to pull some stuff from the newer terrain kits, if I can get them in time. The League schedule I am working on is rough!
I have the bases, but I end up taking some "scenic" terrain features which have no rule effects, but my walkers can, you know, WALK over, looking all "gangsta" whilst doing so...
Also working on a diorama with part of the concept is two have two Onagers scaling a cliff to join the rest of the Skitarii up top, bases would sort of crimp that pretty hard...
I do have one base where I mounted the "flat feet" for the Onager on it, primed only, could paint it up and temporarily 'mount" it on them if a tourney requires bases.
Don't you kinda have to use a base if it comes with one? Some folks might not be a fan of that as you rob them of distance for charging (in theory).
Personnaly I never used mine with a base because I still need to paint strip it and then repaint it and I don't want to use adhesive gums to keep it on his base. Plus, it's so ludicrously big that you can't pass corners or small corridors easily on the table and it's just messy. Walkers that big like the Onager or Triarch Stalker shouldn't have bases. In fact the latter doesn't have one. I measure from the tip of the legs and use an imaginary circle, never had any problems and I'm not picky on measures if my opponent wants to charge it and it's blurry.
I thoroughly love building bases, so I guess that is why I am partial! If I had it my way, every walker would have a base! That is how my Onagers legs will be kept safe from busting in transit too.
Check out my WiP ones. SO MUCH WORK LEFT!
Next set of bases I am going to try to pull some stuff from the newer terrain kits, if I can get them in time. The League schedule I am working on is rough!
Wonderful bases, well done ! I intend on basing my Onager too, with maybe a dead Eldar or two for good measure, and of course some rocks. But it'll have to wait the repainting
okay little batrep. I played versus Ynnaeri. His list was 3 Hemlocks, 3 waveserpents with fire dragons and 2 autarchs. pretty straight forward. i played cawl, 2 neutronagers, 2 icarus, 4 dakkastelans, smith, tpd, 4 vanguard, 1 ranger 2 arquebusses, infiltrator.
He got 1st turn, I seized but since we are friends I let him go first since I was keen on seeing what could happen. I put my troops as screening units (thats what they are there for anyways). I gave him 3 positions he could move his hemlocks into. In those positions he wasnt able to focus 1 onager with all three. he advanced his serpents and shot vanguards. he smited vanguards and rangers and as i said shot his hemlocks on the onager. got 1 down to 5 and one down to 9. my turn. repaired the onager, switched protocolls on the dakkastelans and shot all three hemlocks with the onager and cawl. did a couple of wounds on one serpent. his turn. disembarked all fire dragons, advanced 2 units and startet shooting. he killed 1 vangaurd unit, soulbursted and shot into dakkastelans. killed one and got 2 MW in return. His shooting was subpar, he basically killed one kastellan, rangers and 1 vanguard squad, in return he lost 1 exarch and 4 fire dragons due to mortal wounds. aftrer that the dakkastelan double tapped and i wiped everything but 5 warpspiders he had hiding and an empty wave serpent. He called game after that turn.
Love this list, Every unit did what the had to do, troops are pretty heavy with 300 pts but they did an excellent job. 6+ invul ftw^^
Pedroig wrote:Don't use bases on Onager's either. Wouldn't be "bubble walking" them anyway.
em_en_oh_pee wrote:Don't you kinda have to use a base if it comes with one? Some folks might not be a fan of that as you rob them of distance for charging (in theory).
Aaranis wrote:Personnaly I never used mine with a base because I still need to paint strip it and then repaint it and I don't want to use adhesive gums to keep it on his base. Plus, it's so ludicrously big that you can't pass corners or small corridors easily on the table and it's just messy. Walkers that big like the Onager or Triarch Stalker shouldn't have bases. In fact the latter doesn't have one. I measure from the tip of the legs and use an imaginary circle, never had any problems and I'm not picky on measures if my opponent wants to charge it and it's blurry.
str00dles1 wrote:Measuring movement PG177. You measure from base or the hull. So in this case, a base would give you small extra movement as the hull is in the middle of the model and not the legs.
Officially, you must use the base that comes with the model (or one of equivalent dimensions), as it represents the "true" size of your models.
That being said, yeah, the 130mm bases suck. They're way too big, and you spend way too much time dealing with wobbly model syndrome. If you go in without bases, you definitely need to bring a 130mm cylinder or just a base for measurement purposes. (I also highly recommend the sand shoes so the feet don't snap as easily...)
Q: What are the official rules regarding specific base sizes for specific models (if any)?
A: The rules assume that models are mounted on the base they are supplied with, but it’s entirely fine to mount them on whichever base you think is appropriate. Sometimes, a player may have models in their collection on unusually modelled bases. Some models aren’t supplied with a base at all. In these cases you should always feel free to mount the model on a base of appropriate size if you wish, using models of a similar type as guidance.
I can count on one hand the number of times I've been required to have models based in twenty plus years. Official events, unofficial events, Adepticon, etc.
So is Cawl's 6" bubble to the base? Or do the foot of the model? If it is to the base, then I would prefer the bases. Otherwise, those bases are killing you.
If it is based it is to the base, if not based it is to the model. Moving the legs to intentionally get in/out of range would be modelling for advantage...
Every spider tank unit no matter the army can be used with or without a base. In order to prevent moving shannanigans, there is a rule: "no part of the model can move more than the M characteristic.
If you want to win and you're using bases - you're a silly person. They're waaaay too clunky.
Q: What are the official rules regarding specific base sizes for specific models (if any)?
A: The rules assume that models are mounted on the base they are supplied with, but it’s entirely fine to mount them on whichever base you think is appropriate. Sometimes, a player may have models in their collection on unusually modelled bases. Some models aren’t supplied with a base at all. In these cases you should always feel free to mount the model on a base of appropriate size if you wish, using models of a similar type as guidance.
I can count on one hand the number of times I've been required to have models based in twenty plus years. Official events, unofficial events, Adepticon, etc.
That section you quoted does not say that models with a supplied base do not need to be based. From what I have gathered, GW is okay with a model being based on any base equal in size to the supplied base. In contrast, many of the major tournaments require you to have the models on the most recent supplied bases. That is why 25 to 32mm nested base adapters are a thing.
Anyhow, if you want to play with an unbased Crawler, that's fine. Just be prepared to show courtesy to those who insist on measuring to your base for charge. (You might give off the impression of modelling for advantage otherwise.) And if you want to bring them to a tournament, feel free do so, but at your own risk. I still highly recommend you bring a 130mm base or cylinder to do measurements, again, because Dunecrawlers are much easier to charge with the base.
rvd1ofakind wrote: Every spider tank unit no matter the army can be used with or without a base. In order to prevent moving shannanigans, there is a rule: "no part of the model can move more than the M characteristic.
If you want to win and you're using bases - you're a silly person. They're waaaay too clunky.
Are you sure? That really doesn't seem to pass the smell test. I mean, they're walkers based on bases roughly double their area (well, less if you're measuring to the tip of the legs, but still quite an increase in size). It would be a huge advantage to force would-be chargers to measure to the model instead of the base.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Okay. So I looked up base policies, here's the one for Nova Open:
Basing Policy
• Models must be played on the bases provided with them.
• Models may be played on scenic bases of identical size to the bases provided with them. If you have a
question, ask ahead of time.
• If your scenic bases are smaller than they should be, be aware that you may be asked not to use
the models at all (if the organizers believe you brought them on such bases to gain an advantage),
or to count them as the appropriate base size.
• If your scenic bases are larger than they should be, the above (in re: smaller bases) applies as
well. Additionally, keep in mind that if an opponent is able to reach one of your larger bases
with a shooting attack or charge, you may not use the excuse of base size to prevent it. The
corollary does NOT apply – you may not gain extra range or charges due to larger bases. In
short, you gain no advantages for unusual base size, but may gain additional handicaps.
• Skimmers must be mounted (but not necessarily glued) on the bases provided with them, save for
situations where the rules allow for / require otherwise.
• We recognize that some skimmer bases are largely impractical for mounting your units on; if you
have a different basing route you’ve gone with, simply give us a heads up ahead of time – we’ll
work with you to make sure your models are both comfortably playable and comfortably stable
So if you intend to participate at a Nova Open, please do bring that 130mm base or cylinder to measure with.
Forgive me if I am being naive, but doesn't base size also affect the size of gap that the model can fit through?
I use based Onagers and I often have severe restrictions about where they can travel on the table because of density of terrain. I'd love to take them off the bases just to get around easier.
Pulled scans from OP because of forum copyright rules.
Here's my "starting" list, as an experiment using my current models, and models on my shopping list. Points and CP not relevant, as I'm just establishing a framework here. Main issue I can see is lack of screening (10 Vanguard don't seem like enough), but I can't fit in more troops without sacrificing my buff character killing power.
rvd1ofakind wrote: Every spider tank unit no matter the army can be used with or without a base. In order to prevent moving shannanigans, there is a rule: "no part of the model can move more than the M characteristic.
If you want to win and you're using bases - you're a silly person. They're waaaay too clunky.
No tournament will let you bring a model without a base or with a different base than supplied if it comes with its own base
This base argument is WAAC"ing of the worst kind and belongs on YMDC
kingyyz wrote: Forgive me if I am being naive, but doesn't base size also affect the size of gap that the model can fit through?
I use based Onagers and I often have severe restrictions about where they can travel on the table because of density of terrain. I'd love to take them off the bases just to get around easier.
I believe 8th edition overhauled the movement rules for terrain; it's now determined by your unit type. Crawlers, as non-infantry, consider all fortifications, forests, ruins, and hills as solid objects and cannot move through them. And yes, you would consider the base the true size of the unit. The model, however, does determine the height.
Verviedi wrote: Pulled scans from OP because of forum copyright rules.
Here's my "starting" list, as an experiment using my current models, and models on my shopping list. Points and CP not relevant, as I'm just establishing a framework here. Main issue I can see is lack of screening (10 Vanguard don't seem like enough), but I can't fit in more troops without sacrificing my buff character killing power.
...
Yeah, you need more screening units. I mean, AdMech in general NEEDS them because our best units are pretty much shut down the instant something CCs them, especially the Kastelans, who practically lose two turns of shooting because of Protector Protocol. In light of this, consider them as a force multiplier, since they give you more turns of shooting and less turns of fighting/falling back.
In fact, I think it should be one of the golden rules that roughly 20% of your points (400 for a tournament standard army) should be taken up by screening units (or units that can act as screening units).
kingyyz wrote: Forgive me if I am being naive, but doesn't base size also affect the size of gap that the model can fit through?
I use based Onagers and I often have severe restrictions about where they can travel on the table because of density of terrain. I'd love to take them off the bases just to get around easier.
I believe 8th edition overhauled the movement rules for terrain; it's now determined by your unit type. Crawlers, as non-infantry, consider all fortifications, forests, ruins, and hills as solid objects and cannot move through them. And yes, you would consider the base the true size of the unit. The model, however, does determine the height.
Verviedi wrote: Pulled scans from OP because of forum copyright rules.
Here's my "starting" list, as an experiment using my current models, and models on my shopping list. Points and CP not relevant, as I'm just establishing a framework here. Main issue I can see is lack of screening (10 Vanguard don't seem like enough), but I can't fit in more troops without sacrificing my buff character killing power.
...
Yeah, you need more screening units. I mean, AdMech in general NEEDS them because our best units are pretty much shut down the instant something CCs them, especially the Kastelans, who practically lose two turns of shooting because of Protector Protocol. In light of this, consider them as a force multiplier, since they give you more turns of shooting and less turns of fighting/falling back.
In fact, I think it should be one of the golden rules that roughly 20% of your points (400 for a tournament standard army) should be taken up by screening units (or units that can act as screening units).
I can't find anything in the terrain rules that say units with the Vehicle keyword can't move through forests, ruins, and hills, etc. Mind citing that for me so I can tag it in my copy.
rvd1ofakind wrote: Every spider tank unit no matter the army can be used with or without a base. In order to prevent moving shannanigans, there is a rule: "no part of the model can move more than the M characteristic.
If you want to win and you're using bases - you're a silly person. They're waaaay too clunky.
No tournament will let you bring a model without a base or with a different base than supplied if it comes with its own base
This base argument is WAAC"ing of the worst kind and belongs on YMDC
I'll admit to not doing too much research here. My friend who's been playing a lot told me this. I've also seen multiple batreps without the bases so I just went with it.
em_en_oh_pee wrote: I can't find anything in the terrain rules that say units with the Vehicle keyword can't move through forests, ruins, and hills, etc. Mind citing that for me so I can tag it in my copy.
Advanced Rules, Battlefield Terrain, P248
EDIT: Bah, on second thought, I actually might have too strict an interpretation of the rules based on the Ruins rules, which explicitly state that only Infantry can move through them, climb, etc. Terrain does seem to be able to "impede" non-infantry, which I took as a requirement that the base has to fit through them physically.
RUINS
The galaxy is littered with the remains of once-proud cities.
Unless they can FLY, VEHICLES, MONSTERS and BIKES can only end their move on the ground floor of ruins.
INFANTRY are assumed to be able to scale walls and traverse through windows, doors and portals readily. These models can therefore move through the floors and walls of a ruin without further impediment.
INFANTRY units that are on a ruin receive the benefit of cover. Other units only receive the benefit of cover if at least 50% of every model is actually obscured from the point of view of the shooting unit.
played against ynnari harlequins yesterday. Heavy loss caused by maelstrom missions, deadlock is just not good for AdMech. IN the end i had 2 dakkastelans and 4 onagers left, he had 1 empty starweaver and 3 jetbikes. After a lot of games against first turn charge armies I am not too keen on using large screens. I use 3 to 4 vanguard units with 5 models. That is simply put enough. Against the Harleys I wouldn't have needed them at all since they are only good for the enemy to trigger soulburst more often and sooner. Larger screens such as 50 conscripts are too stale to use. Our robots and crawlers are fast but will be slowed down by those conscripts. They lack output as well. So, I am certainly in between but i yet have to face a force where I really need a larger screen than 20 models.
em_en_oh_pee wrote: I can't find anything in the terrain rules that say units with the Vehicle keyword can't move through forests, ruins, and hills, etc. Mind citing that for me so I can tag it in my copy.
Advanced Rules, Battlefield Terrain, P248
EDIT: Bah, on second thought, I actually might have too strict an interpretation of the rules based on the Ruins rules, which explicitly state that only Infantry can move through them, climb, etc. Terrain does seem to be able to "impede" non-infantry, which I took as a requirement that the base has to fit through them physically.
RUINS
The galaxy is littered with the remains of once-proud cities.
Unless they can FLY, VEHICLES, MONSTERS and BIKES can only end their move on the ground floor of ruins.
INFANTRY are assumed to be able to scale walls and traverse through windows, doors and portals readily. These models can therefore move through the floors and walls of a ruin without further impediment.
INFANTRY units that are on a ruin receive the benefit of cover. Other units only receive the benefit of cover if at least 50% of every model is actually obscured from the point of view of the shooting unit.
Yea, so no restrictions on movement through terrain that I can see for vehicles excluding where it applies to multi-story ruins.
INFANTRY are assumed to be able to scale walls and traverse through windows, doors and portals readily. These models can therefore move through the floors and walls of a ruin without further impediment.
Yea, so no restrictions on movement through terrain that I can see for vehicles excluding where it applies to multi-story ruins.
The detail is in these words, it says only infantry can move through walls, therefore vehicles can't move through walls.
INFANTRY are assumed to be able to scale walls and traverse through windows, doors and portals readily. These models can therefore move through the floors and walls of a ruin without further impediment.
Yea, so no restrictions on movement through terrain that I can see for vehicles excluding where it applies to multi-story ruins.
The detail is in these words, it says only infantry can move through walls, therefore vehicles can't move through walls.
Well yea, but things like craters and open-ish ruins are doable. The Sector Imperialis kit is usually partial ruins with enough area for a vehicle to pass through depending on who makes the terrain. My FLGS does a great job providing terrain that accommodates all shapes and sizes of stuff.
Just got to be smart with deployment, if possible.
Yeah, the writer did a bad job on the presentation of information.
I wish he just wrote something like this:
1) Infantry have the ability to pass through obstacles unimpeded.
2) Infantry have the ability to climb ruins.
And then give us the cover characteristics of terrain.
Iago40k wrote: played against ynnari harlequins yesterday. Heavy loss caused by maelstrom missions, deadlock is just not good for AdMech. IN the end i had 2 dakkastelans and 4 onagers left, he had 1 empty starweaver and 3 jetbikes. After a lot of games against first turn charge armies I am not too keen on using large screens. I use 3 to 4 vanguard units with 5 models. That is simply put enough. Against the Harleys I wouldn't have needed them at all since they are only good for the enemy to trigger soulburst more often and sooner. Larger screens such as 50 conscripts are too stale to use. Our robots and crawlers are fast but will be slowed down by those conscripts. They lack output as well. So, I am certainly in between but i yet have to face a force where I really need a larger screen than 20 models.
Yeah, as I stated before, I don't think the Conscript plan is viable unless you're willing to accept that your only win condition is to table your opponent with extremely long-ranged artillery.
I cut all of the Vanguard from my 2000-point list awhile ago. I use 4 Dragoons and a Crusader as my screen.
Saw that list and liked it but it seems so weak for maelstrom...holding objectives with that low amount of models seem to to be unlikely but Id love to hear you out.
Fairly new Ad Mech player here (returning to 40K after a several year hiatus) and I just bought my first box of Kastellans and wanted to run some thoughts through here.
So Dakkastellan seems like the premier build, and it's pretty clear to see why. 18 S5 AP-1 Phosphor blast per model negating cover saves is beastly. Putting together my forces so far (to date, a Start Collecting box, one set of infiltrators and now 2 Kastellans) what it really seems like the army is missing is some serious high strength punching power (outside of Neutron Lasers on an Onager).
Number crunching two models with Kastellan Fists and Conquerer Protocol vs two models with Heavy Phosphor and Protector against a high Toughness target (I picked a Leman Russ as an example). I came up with this:
Fists:
12 attacks, 6 hits, 4 wounds, -.6666 saved, times 3 damage is about 10 inflicted wounds
(again, against a T7 Sv 3+ target)
with the Phosphor, it looks something like this:
36 shots, 18 hits, 6 wounds, -2 saved equals 4 inflicted wounds
In this scenario, it seems like the Kastellans have a slightly worse than average chance of one shotting a 12 w model like the Russ in a single combat round?
My question to more experienced 40K/Ad Mech players than I is that with several other units that can dish out large numbers of low damage attacks (like the Electro Priests, Icarus Onagers or even Vanguards with Radium Carbines) does Ad Mech need another-barrage-of-fire unit in the Kastellans and is there a need something to fill the punchy CC unit roll (I hear both Dragoons and Sicarians fail at this).
Just got paid yesterday and ebay'd a little. I decided as my FLUFFY Jupiter allies will be jovian 1057th Cogs of War, buying tech thralls to use as scions with hot shots and mitra locks as volley guns. I don't want to horde and I want my list mainly mech heavy kastelans,servitors, ect, and a thanatar when fires of something comes out for the whole legio cybernetica theme.
Forge world Jupiters moon of calispso is a hive/manufacturing world (canon) and they will be a eltite tech guard/pdf of it. (not canon)
Iago40k wrote: Saw that list and liked it but it seems so weak for maelstrom...holding objectives with that low amount of models seem to to be unlikely but Id love to hear you out.
The game plan is to use artillery to blow up units and then have the Dragoons mop up and grab objectives. But yeah, the low model count is a concern for me as well. I originally ran 6 Dragoons and 3 Crawlers, but I began to think that was not enough artillery. Having an odd number of Crawlers is also a problem; I would much rather have two a large distance apart with overlapping fields of fire. (If you charge one pair, they can fall back and the other pair doesn't need to do gymnastics to get out of the way before shooting back.) I may go back if this doesn't work out.
kinetoscopic wrote: Fairly new Ad Mech player here (returning to 40K after a several year hiatus) and I just bought my first box of Kastellans and wanted to run some thoughts through here.
So Dakkastellan seems like the premier build, and it's pretty clear to see why. 18 S5 AP-1 Phosphor blast per model negating cover saves is beastly. Putting together my forces so far (to date, a Start Collecting box, one set of infiltrators and now 2 Kastellans) what it really seems like the army is missing is some serious high strength punching power (outside of Neutron Lasers on an Onager).
Number crunching two models with Kastellan Fists and Conquerer Protocol vs two models with Heavy Phosphor and Protector against a high Toughness target (I picked a Leman Russ as an example). I came up with this:
Fists:
12 attacks, 6 hits, 4 wounds, -.6666 saved, times 3 damage is about 10 inflicted wounds
(again, against a T7 Sv 3+ target)
with the Phosphor, it looks something like this:
36 shots, 18 hits, 6 wounds, -2 saved equals 4 inflicted wounds
In this scenario, it seems like the Kastellans have a slightly worse than average chance of one shotting a 12 w model like the Russ in a single combat round?
My question to more experienced 40K/Ad Mech players than I is that with several other units that can dish out large numbers of low damage attacks (like the Electro Priests, Icarus Onagers or even Vanguards with Radium Carbines) does Ad Mech need another-barrage-of-fire unit in the Kastellans and is there a need something to fill the punchy CC unit roll (I hear both Dragoons and Sicarians fail at this).
Well, I wouldn't use Kastelans to shoot a tank to death; that is what Neutron Crawlers are for. Furthermore, if you can get a Kastelan close enough to punch a tank, then yes, I can see that working, but the problem is that Kastelans are not the most durable unit we have. Given their point cost, footslogging them across the field seems insanely risky.
kinetoscopic wrote: Fairly new Ad Mech player here (returning to 40K after a several year hiatus) and I just bought my first box of Kastellans and wanted to run some thoughts through here.
So Dakkastellan seems like the premier build, and it's pretty clear to see why. 18 S5 AP-1 Phosphor blast per model negating cover saves is beastly. Putting together my forces so far (to date, a Start Collecting box, one set of infiltrators and now 2 Kastellans) what it really seems like the army is missing is some serious high strength punching power (outside of Neutron Lasers on an Onager).
Number crunching two models with Kastellan Fists and Conquerer Protocol vs two models with Heavy Phosphor and Protector against a high Toughness target (I picked a Leman Russ as an example). I came up with this:
Fists:
12 attacks, 6 hits, 4 wounds, -.6666 saved, times 3 damage is about 10 inflicted wounds
(again, against a T7 Sv 3+ target)
with the Phosphor, it looks something like this:
36 shots, 18 hits, 6 wounds, -2 saved equals 4 inflicted wounds
In this scenario, it seems like the Kastellans have a slightly worse than average chance of one shotting a 12 w model like the Russ in a single combat round?
My question to more experienced 40K/Ad Mech players than I is that with several other units that can dish out large numbers of low damage attacks (like the Electro Priests, Icarus Onagers or even Vanguards with Radium Carbines) does Ad Mech need another-barrage-of-fire unit in the Kastellans and is there a need something to fill the punchy CC unit roll (I hear both Dragoons and Sicarians fail at this).
kinetoscopic wrote: Fairly new Ad Mech player here (returning to 40K after a several year hiatus) and I just bought my first box of Kastellans and wanted to run some thoughts through here.
So Dakkastellan seems like the premier build, and it's pretty clear to see why. 18 S5 AP-1 Phosphor blast per model negating cover saves is beastly. Putting together my forces so far (to date, a Start Collecting box, one set of infiltrators and now 2 Kastellans) what it really seems like the army is missing is some serious high strength punching power (outside of Neutron Lasers on an Onager).
Number crunching two models with Kastellan Fists and Conquerer Protocol vs two models with Heavy Phosphor and Protector against a high Toughness target (I picked a Leman Russ as an example). I came up with this:
Fists: 12 attacks, 6 hits, 4 wounds, -.6666 saved, times 3 damage is about 10 inflicted wounds (again, against a T7 Sv 3+ target)
with the Phosphor, it looks something like this: 36 shots, 18 hits, 6 wounds, -2 saved equals 4 inflicted wounds
In this scenario, it seems like the Kastellans have a slightly worse than average chance of one shotting a 12 w model like the Russ in a single combat round?
My question to more experienced 40K/Ad Mech players than I is that with several other units that can dish out large numbers of low damage attacks (like the Electro Priests, Icarus Onagers or even Vanguards with Radium Carbines) does Ad Mech need another-barrage-of-fire unit in the Kastellans and is there a need something to fill the punchy CC unit roll (I hear both Dragoons and Sicarians fail at this).
Phosphor or heavy phosphor?
Ah! Good catch. Heavy, but at S6 vs S5 it doesn't change the math and I think I got the AP -2 right. Though S6 is certainly a big deal against T3...
Well, I wouldn't use Kastelans to shoot a tank to death; that is what Neutron Crawlers are for. Furthermore, if you can get a Kastelan close enough to punch a tank, then yes, I can see that working, but the problem is that Kastelans are not the most durable unit we have. Given their point cost, footslogging them across the field seems insanely risky.
True! Though with Aegis there's a 2+/4++ running up causing mortal wounds 1/3 of the time they save with invuln.
I guess the follow-up question here becomes: is the loss of the Heavy Phosphor battery that they two of them become in Protector mode irreplaceable. And would gaining a CC can opener any consolation?
True! Though with Aegis there's a 2+/4++ running up causing mortal wounds 1/3 of the time they save with invuln.
I guess the follow-up question here becomes: is the loss of the Heavy Phosphor battery that they two of them become in Protector mode irreplaceable. And would gaining a CC can opener any consolation?
Neutron Lasers do what Kastelan Fists do, but better since it has 48 times the range and more AP and damage. So Kastelans won't be replacing Crawlers in the anti-tank role any time soon.
How about other roles? CC screening unit? Electro-Priests are way more stat efficient. Skirmisher? Dragoons move faster and have better durability per point. Infiltrators can deep strike.
True! Though with Aegis there's a 2+/4++ running up causing mortal wounds 1/3 of the time they save with invuln.
I guess the follow-up question here becomes: is the loss of the Heavy Phosphor battery that they two of them become in Protector mode irreplaceable. And would gaining a CC can opener any consolation?
Neutron Lasers do what Kastelan Fists do, but better since it has 48 times the range and more AP and damage. So Kastelans won't be replacing Crawlers in the anti-tank role any time soon.
How about other roles? CC screening unit? Electro-Priests are way more stat efficient. Skirmisher? Dragoons move faster and have better durability per point. Infiltrators can deep strike.
Well, I'll drop my final two cents here because I'm definitely aware I'm going against the established wisdom. But the numbers seem kind of reasonable when you compare the Fistellans to other units (again vs a Russ as my example)
Onager with a Neutron Laser (135 pts)
4/3 hits, 8/9 wound, no save, average of 4ish damage
Kastellan with Fists (115-121 pts)
1.5 (or 3) hits, 1 (or 2) wound, 1/6 (or 1/3) saved, average of 2.5ish (or 5) damage
And as far as survivability vs a Dragoon's:
A Dragoon is 6, 6T wounds and a 4+ save (-1 hit) for 68-74 points
A Kastellan is 6, 7T wounds with a 3+/5++ or 2+/5++ for 115-121 points
The Dragoon's definitely more efficient W for point-wise, but is miserable in it's attack vs an armored target (e.g. Russ):
2 hits, 4/3 wound, 8/9 wounds saved for 1/3 of a wound (not counting the 1/6 chance of tripling your hits)
I guess I was wondering if a high strength punchy unit had a place in an Ad Mech list. No one's come right out and told me I'm crazy yet... I guess I'll have to try it.
Yes you could probably build a list around Kastelans with fists. They move 8" for some reason. Compare them to dreadnoughts and Hellbrutes. And don't forget the extra attacks from protocols and +1 Strength et al from Canticles.
True! Though with Aegis there's a 2+/4++ running up causing mortal wounds 1/3 of the time they save with invuln.
I guess the follow-up question here becomes: is the loss of the Heavy Phosphor battery that they two of them become in Protector mode irreplaceable. And would gaining a CC can opener any consolation?
Neutron Lasers do what Kastelan Fists do, but better since it has 48 times the range and more AP and damage. So Kastelans won't be replacing Crawlers in the anti-tank role any time soon.
How about other roles? CC screening unit? Electro-Priests are way more stat efficient. Skirmisher? Dragoons move faster and have better durability per point. Infiltrators can deep strike.
Well, I'll drop my final two cents here because I'm definitely aware I'm going against the established wisdom. But the numbers seem kind of reasonable when you compare the Fistellans to other units (again vs a Russ as my example)
Onager with a Neutron Laser (135 pts)
4/3 hits, 8/9 wound, no save, average of 4ish damage
Kastellan with Fists (115-121 pts)
1.5 (or 3) hits, 1 (or 2) wound, 1/6 (or 1/3) saved, average of 2.5ish (or 5) damage
And as far as survivability vs a Dragoon's:
A Dragoon is 6, 6T wounds and a 4+ save (-1 hit) for 68-74 points
A Kastellan is 6, 7T wounds with a 3+/5++ or 2+/5++ for 115-121 points
The Dragoon's definitely more efficient W for point-wise, but is miserable in it's attack vs an armored target (e.g. Russ):
2 hits, 4/3 wound, 8/9 wounds saved for 1/3 of a wound (not counting the 1/6 chance of tripling your hits)
I guess I was wondering if a high strength punchy unit had a place in an Ad Mech list. No one's come right out and told me I'm crazy yet... I guess I'll have to try it.
It's fine to go against established wisdom, it's just that the math doesn't bear out. Neutron Laser has more range, more damage, and the body is more mobile, durable, and efficient. By going Phosphor Kastelan, at least you get to do something the Neutron Crawler cannot do well.
Yeah, Dragoon attack is mediocre. But the idea is to have the artillery doing all the damage while the Dragoon is a screening unit and objective grabber that can mop up. Infiltrators also work, but they are somewhat squishy.
I'm curious as well, I'd love to model my next Robots with Fists but didn't playtest them yet. I can see it working alongside a second unit with full Blasters. Keeping the Aegis Protocols while they're running up the board and the Datasmith close by should let them soak up a bit of fire and return mortal wounds on 5 or 6. Furthermore they will scare the hell out of characters and other tough units the opponent might have, so he'll have to do something before the Robots come out to punch his tanks (I just love to represent this in my head). Don't forget that your Datasmith have a decent anti-armour pistol too, that might just take off the few missing wounds you'd need.
Run in Aegis mode, then the turn before your charges turn on the Conqueror protocols. You'll still be protected by Aegis for the turn where your opponent will shoot at them.
Just got paid yesterday and ebay'd a little. I decided as my FLUFFY Jupiter allies will be jovian 1057th Cogs of War, buying tech thralls to use as scions with hot shots and mitra locks as volley guns. I don't want to horde and I want my list mainly mech heavy kastelans,servitors, ect, and a thanatar when fires of something comes out for the whole legio cybernetica theme.
Forge world Jupiters moon of calispso is a hive/manufacturing world (canon) and they will be a eltite tech guard/pdf of it. (not canon)
Thoughts?
Love the idea, I had the same idea about getting Scions as allied affiliated to my Forge-World but kept the regular models as I think they're beautiful (and not too keen on buying FW models considering the price), just used a darker blue for their colours. I took the time to convert a Lord Commissar so that he looks cyborg, I'll post a pic someday
Run in Aegis mode, then the turn before your charges turn on the Conqueror protocols. You'll still be protected by Aegis for the turn where your opponent will shoot at them.
Only if you went first. If you went second the Aegis protocol will not save you since protocols switch at the start of the battle round.
Run in Aegis mode, then the turn before your charges turn on the Conqueror protocols. You'll still be protected by Aegis for the turn where your opponent will shoot at them.
Only if you went first. If you went second the Aegis protocol will not save you since protocols switch at the start of the battle round.
You do. But if you go second and run upfield and switch your protocol, the switch will happen at the start of the next battle round. So your opponent can shoot at them while melee protocol is active.
Aaranis wrote: I'm curious as well, I'd love to model my next Robots with Fists but didn't playtest them yet. I can see it working alongside a second unit with full Blasters. Keeping the Aegis Protocols while they're running up the board and the Datasmith close by should let them soak up a bit of fire and return mortal wounds on 5 or 6. Furthermore they will scare the hell out of characters and other tough units the opponent might have, so he'll have to do something before the Robots come out to punch his tanks (I just love to represent this in my head). Don't forget that your Datasmith have a decent anti-armour pistol too, that might just take off the few missing wounds you'd need.
Run in Aegis mode, then the turn before your charges turn on the Conqueror protocols. You'll still be protected by Aegis for the turn where your opponent will shoot at them.
Just got paid yesterday and ebay'd a little. I decided as my FLUFFY Jupiter allies will be jovian 1057th Cogs of War, buying tech thralls to use as scions with hot shots and mitra locks as volley guns. I don't want to horde and I want my list mainly mech heavy kastelans,servitors, ect, and a thanatar when fires of something comes out for the whole legio cybernetica theme.
Forge world Jupiters moon of calispso is a hive/manufacturing world (canon) and they will be a eltite tech guard/pdf of it. (not canon)
Thoughts?
Love the idea, I had the same idea about getting Scions as allied affiliated to my Forge-World but kept the regular models as I think they're beautiful (and not too keen on buying FW models considering the price), just used a darker blue for their colours. I took the time to convert a Lord Commissar so that he looks cyborg, I'll post a pic someday
Scions + Infiltrators is an interesting screening choice. They are pricey for what they would be doing, but the ability to threaten opponents 9" from their deployment is really big. Your Crawlers will likely be in range to support them and everything. Of course, if they deepstrike you in return, you won't have much to stop them, so artillery deployment and mutual protection is key.
Run in Aegis mode, then the turn before your charges turn on the Conqueror protocols. You'll still be protected by Aegis for the turn where your opponent will shoot at them.
Only if you went first. If you went second the Aegis protocol will not save you since protocols switch at the start of the battle round.
Don't you start the game in Aegis mode?
To be clear, you are set up in Aegis mode, and you can attempt to switch at the start of your movement phase. If successful, you have to wait until the start of the next round for the protocol to switch. It is preferable to go first because your Aegis will be in effect during your opponent's turn; if you go second, your Conquerer will be in effect, which makes you wayyy squishier.
Just played a game against my sons Necrons and achieved a 9-7 victory after 5 1/2 turns, he conceded at the end of his turn six.
High points were turn one when my Neutronager three shot a unit of Destroyers and killed them all. He deep struck a unit of 15 Flayed Ones in my backfield but failed to make his charge, needed 8" to get within 1" of my Fulgarites. Rolled a 6 and a 1, used a command point and rolled 1 again. In my turn I killed four with shooting, failed my charge with my Knight Gallant but rolled 11" with the Fulgarites and wiped the rest out in combat, loosing only one in return.
Turn two my Icarus Onager dropped his Ghost Arc and my Vindicare Assassin took out his warlord (with a little help from a five man unit of Rangers with two TA's. My dakkabots were not able to take out his 20 man blob of warriors but did a number on a ten man group of Immortals.
At the end I had both of my TPD's my Datasmith, both robots, both Onagers, a five man squad of Rangers. five Infiltrators and from a Vanguard detachment Inquisitor Greyfax, a Vindicare Assassin two Crusaders and two Death Cult Assassins. The Crusaders and DCA's spent the game sitting on an objective that was out of the way enough he never had an opportunity to shoot at them. He had one Lord and about 10 Warriors. Had he not conceded both Onagers were lined up to shoot his Lord. The Warriors were safe as they were locked in combat with my last Fulgarite.
All and all a very fun game that could have gone very differently had his Flayed Ones made that charge into my Fulgarites. This was our first 8th game so to keep it simple we were playing 100 power level lists.
temoinlanuit wrote: What are your thoughts on the Vindicare? Been thinking about taking him as well (and/or Culexus).
5 Skitarii Rangers with 2 Arquebuses are much, much better than a Vindicare. On paper, the Vindicare looks impressive with 2+ WS and Exitus Rifle, which has 12" more range and 2+ to wound infantry. However, Rangers get rerolls from Cawl and TDP, which really brings up their to hit. And though they have a lower chance to wound T4 and up infantry, on a 6+, they deal a mortal wound instead of one bonus regular wound on average. But the real killer? They get double the number of shots.
And Culexus is not really as important since psychic is not as broken as it was in 7th.
Played a game vs blood angels (razorbacks, laspred, death company, sang guard) with someing close to my knight list posted earlier. Thing I did different: swap ironstriders for 3 plasdestroyers (and some other point juggles on wargear).
Things noted:
-Neutron + icarus killed pred in cover turn one.
-Trans you arq put 4 wounds on assback to finish that off.
-Knight putnot much wounds out initiallybut guarded my whole -right flank by himself.
-10 man vanguard squad made fine enough melee bubble wrap. 5 man rangers as deepstrike bubble wrap worked fine
-trip kastelens ate death co and any marines they could get there hands ? On.
-destroyers killed twice their points in sang guard then went forth to shoot 'backs with effectiveness.
In all, like the arty list. Still have huge, gaping mobility problem. Hammer and anvil helped my shooting, but made it so I had to hold my infiltrator still turn three when is hoped to have nearly tabled him by then so they wouldn't get shot trying for his obj.
Page 76 – Sicarian Infiltrators
Change the Attacks value on the Sicarian Infiltrator profile line to read ‘2’.
Change the Attacks value on the Sicarian Princeps profile line to read ‘3’
Also, Crawlers got clarified:
Page 78 – Onager Dunecrawler, Damage Table
Change the first value under Remaining W to read ‘6-11+’.
temoinlanuit wrote: What are your thoughts on the Vindicare? Been thinking about taking him as well (and/or Culexus).
5 Skitarii Rangers with 2 Arquebuses are much, much better than a Vindicare. On paper, the Vindicare looks impressive with 2+ WS and Exitus Rifle, which has 12" more range and 2+ to wound infantry. However, Rangers get rerolls from Cawl and TDP, which really brings up their to hit. And though they have a lower chance to wound T4 and up infantry, on a 6+, they deal a mortal wound instead of one bonus regular wound on average. But the real killer? They get double the number of shots.
And Culexus is not really as important since psychic is not as broken as it was in 7th.
Good call. Haven't mathed it out, but intuitively holds up. The only trouble I see is that with the amount of heavy support, can be trouble to keep everything within Cawl/TPD's bubble.
Also, weird with the Infiltrator nerfs. They weren't one of our best units, IMO.
Anyone finding Dragoons/Ironstriders hard to fit in?
Any time I got to Ironstriders, I'd rather go up to Onagers or down to Scout Sentinels w/ Lascannons. Ironstriders are so far up field they don't get TPD/Cawl either.
Any time I go to Dragoons, the tasers seem mushy and low output (attacks-wise) for the cost of the platform. Flamer scout sentinels seem better for the up field role.
Love the models and trying hard to find a role for them.
Good call. Haven't mathed it out, but intuitively holds up. The only trouble I see is that with the amount of heavy support, can be trouble to keep everything within Cawl/TPD's bubble.
Also, weird with the Infiltrator nerfs. They weren't one of our best units, IMO.
Anyone finding Dragoons/Ironstriders hard to fit in?
Any time I got to Ironstriders, I'd rather go up to Onagers or down to Scout Sentinels w/ Lascannons. Ironstriders are so far up field they don't get TPD/Cawl either.
Any time I go to Dragoons, the tasers seem mushy and low output (attacks-wise) for the cost of the platform. Flamer scout sentinels seem better for the up field role.
Love the models and trying hard to find a role for them.
I'm a game designer by profession. Nerfs occur in two ways. Reducing the power of a strength or exacerbating a weakness. AdMech has the strongest artillery right now, and it would be harsh to nerf our Heavy Support across the board. So they nerf the best unit for mobility instead. (FYI, they clearly see us as a really competitive army.)
Think about it this way: Dragoons aren't there to kill units. That's your artillery's job; they outshoot everything pretty much in terms of range and power. What the Dragoons do is grab objectives that the artillery clears, mopping up weakened units, and tying up enemies in CC, either forcing shooting units and ICs to waste turns falling back or to get assaulters stuck in a slugging match with you rather than your artillery. They will die probably without killing too many things, but they buy your artillery another turn or two of shooting, which is the classic force multiplier.
Uh, it kills it for me, the nerf to the Infiltrators. Here I was wishing for a change from "Elite" to "HQ" for the Techpriest Enginseer, but no we had this.
In the few games I used them they didn't turned out good at all, if I have them Infiltrate they miss their 9" charge (even with CP) and if I footslog them they get shot to death due to the difficulty of hiding them with their enormous bases.
Aaranis wrote: Uh, it kills it for me, the nerf to the Infiltrators. Here I was wishing for a change from "Elite" to "HQ" for the Techpriest Enginseer, but no we had this.
In the few games I used them they didn't turned out good at all, if I have them Infiltrate they miss their 9" charge (even with CP) and if I footslog them they get shot to death due to the difficulty of hiding them with their enormous bases.
Yeah, they're bad now. They deal less damage per point than a Dragoon, but have less durability. Infiltrate doesn't make up for it. Similar point with Ruststalkers. Five more melee attacks.
temoinlanuit wrote: What are your thoughts on the Vindicare? Been thinking about taking him as well (and/or Culexus).
5 Skitarii Rangers with 2 Arquebuses are much, much better than a Vindicare. On paper, the Vindicare looks impressive with 2+ WS and Exitus Rifle, which has 12" more range and 2+ to wound infantry. However, Rangers get rerolls from Cawl and TDP, which really brings up their to hit. And though they have a lower chance to wound T4 and up infantry, on a 6+, they deal a mortal wound instead of one bonus regular wound on average. But the real killer? They get double the number of shots.
And Culexus is not really as important since psychic is not as broken as it was in 7th.
The Rangers are good, but a five man unit with two TA's cost 100 points, compared to the Vindicares 90. The VA hits on a 2, the Rangers need a 4. You can get a re-roll to hit if you park close to a TPD or Cawl but that space is premium as you are also trying to put your robots and Onagers there. Having to bunch up all of your units within 6" of your HQ's really limits you deployment options. Also the VA wounding on a 2+, turning a 2+ armor save into a 5+ save and negating invulnerable saves makes it a much more consistent weapon.
But the big one is survivability. The Rangers will wilt to S4 firepower and there are lots of units that can throw out mass amounts of S4 shooting. The VA has a -2 to being shot at if he is in cover and a 4++ save but these aren't even needed because he is also a Character. As long as you deploy him with other units in front of him he can't even be targeted by your opponent. With the Exitus Rifles 72" range your options for deployment are massive.
I think he's better game wise than the Rangers but I did field 2 units of Rangers with 2 TA's each. I gave his characters a very hard time, and really made him think about moving his characters when he thought they would just have the run of his backfield.
Good call. Haven't mathed it out, but intuitively holds up. The only trouble I see is that with the amount of heavy support, can be trouble to keep everything within Cawl/TPD's bubble.
Also, weird with the Infiltrator nerfs. They weren't one of our best units, IMO.
Anyone finding Dragoons/Ironstriders hard to fit in?
Any time I got to Ironstriders, I'd rather go up to Onagers or down to Scout Sentinels w/ Lascannons. Ironstriders are so far up field they don't get TPD/Cawl either.
Any time I go to Dragoons, the tasers seem mushy and low output (attacks-wise) for the cost of the platform. Flamer scout sentinels seem better for the up field role.
Love the models and trying hard to find a role for them.
I'm a game designer by profession. Nerfs occur in two ways. Reducing the power of a strength or exacerbating a weakness. AdMech has the strongest artillery right now, and it would be harsh to nerf our Heavy Support across the board. So they nerf the best unit for mobility instead. (FYI, they clearly see us as a really competitive army.)
Think about it this way: Dragoons aren't there to kill units. That's your artillery's job; they outshoot everything pretty much in terms of range and power. What the Dragoons do is grab objectives that the artillery clears, mopping up weakened units, and tying up enemies in CC, either forcing shooting units and ICs to waste turns falling back or to get assaulters stuck in a slugging match with you rather than your artillery. They will die probably without killing too many things, but they buy your artillery another turn or two of shooting, which is the classic force multiplier.
Any reason you're going with Dragoons in that role?
I'm thinking of running Penitent Engines for something similar.
Senseless nerf to Infiltrators. I will run them until we get transports since they have useful mobility vs our mostly static army. Such a dumb decision by GW.
rvd1ofakind wrote: I think the infiltrator "nerf" is just a typo fix like most of the things in the FAQ
Yeah. Before it didn't make any sense because they were basically better than Ruststalkers in every way, in addition to having deepstrike, which generally adds a major points hike.
The one problem with "nerfing to create a weakness" in Ad-mech is that you'd have to create a general weakness to the entire available roster to make that work. And the available roster is the entire Imperium.
Good day all.
Quick question about Canticles.
I saw on one Batrep that you can choose your Canticles and roll for them.
For instance, on the first battle round you choose Shroudpsalm and say on the second battle round you want to use it again, but you can't since you chose it and it can not be chosen again.
Can you then on the second battle round try to roll for it?
Qu3nt wrote: Good day all.
Quick question about Canticles.
I saw on one Batrep that you can choose your Canticles and roll for them.
For instance, on the first battle round you choose Shroudpsalm and say on the second battle round you want to use it again, but you can't since you chose it and it can not be chosen again.
Can you then on the second battle round try to roll for it?
yes you can and with cawl youve got a nice +1/-1 modifier on the result.
Although I agree, it probably wasn't a "nerf" as in this is them trying to rebalance infiltrators, but was indeed probaby a misprint, but it is a nerf in the sense, they took an already overcosted and particulary squishy unit and removed its main strength. 3 attacks that explode on 6s.
If I wasn't in love with the model(s), and if they weren't the only means of deepstrike currently, I'd say skip them. Simply not worth it. Right now, I am and most other Admech players I have talked to, view them as a neccesary evil. They take them not because they are good, but because they are all we have. Need to get that linebreaker, need something to attack/deepstrike something away from deployment. This is your only unit option.
I fear 10 attacks at 150 with no AP, for me may not be worth. I thought they were worth their points simply due to their rate of fire and attacks. 15 Macrostubbors and 15 attacks meant, they can throw out a bunch of "light" dakka and "light" attacks in they could get into melee. Now they still dish out lots of light dakka but deal average amount of attacks.
As a Tyranid player I can easily tell you 10 attacks without any AP is pretty crap. If I get a Ravenor squad or Hormagaunt into melee, and I am not throwing at least 30 dice, I assume they aren't going to do gak. Now I'm viewing this same concept with a much more expensive unit and a lot less hardy unit.
In short. They made an already questionably effective unit into a pigion holed unit. You take it now ONLY for deepstriking. It has no other purpose. Don't get me wrong, Admech as an army is still pretty darn strong, but its biggest weakness both in game mechanics and as an army, is it lacks diversity. It has a more redudancy units or units which are simply outclassed in the same field by more effeient points spending/other models that there is no reason to take them than all the other armies I have and played.
This has me very worried that we may see the first signs of 8th editions weakness, uninspired rules writers. I can't speak for the rest of you, but I hope when Admech Codex comes out, we get a complete overhaul. I'd rather see our whole army redone as I don't like the way it plays, nor do I like our rules. I'm not saying we should revert to 7th style (god, was that a rough edition... But if nothing else, all our units were cool and unique and had roles to fill, heck even the priests did, they were just overcosted) but after playing about 10 matches with Admech, I find that I'm leaning more and more towards using only select units instead of diverse forces. Pretty much the opposite of what I'm doing with all other armies; Tyranids, Guard, Marines, whom play very well with combined arms, Admech seem to be just bring big guns and don't bother with anything else.
Quick question guys, "Lithany of the electromancer"...We had some discussions about the rule and I'd like to ask you: If an enemy unit is in close combat (so in 1") to 2 of my units, do I roll one or two dice?
"Litany of the Electromancer
Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that
is within 1" of any affected units; on
a roll of 6, the unit being rolled for
suffers D3 mortal wounds."
Roll 1 die in your example. By wording, no matter how many sources, you only roll for one. However, one unit if in melee with three other enemy units would cause them all to roll a die each.
I recant! I just reread it like three times, you would indeed roll 2 dice in your example. As it says, "Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that is within 1" of any affected units"
I agree with Tsol I want admech redone back to a mobile gun line in the meantime I will take dunecrawlers as an artillery choice in imperial soup and that's it
I know it hurts fellows, but I think the infiltrator nerf isn't all that bad. You won't use them any differently.
However, I'd like the chance to talk about relative number of attacks here- there is general stat squish across the board and 2 base attacks is nothing to sneeze at any longer.
Indeed, consider that the powersword infiltrators put out as many attacks and wounds as vanguard veterans with powerswords. Toss in a certain cantacle and you can outclass them. Heck, can someone crunch the numbers compared to death company with chainswords?
I feel that 2 attacks is a standard for assault troops, and probably appropriate. 3 is for the real stabby stuff (Necron lords, champions, ruststalkers) and 4 are reserved for the buffed or the one trick pony uber attackers.
Just some musings. Where that leaves taser infiltrators, I'm not sure. But I am considering powrrswords now.
U02dah4 wrote: How is under strength dumb it's pretty balanced just makes filling out a formation cheaper but that's the same for everyone
for everyone? its just a real bonus for imperium soup and totally unnecessary. I can't see any TO using this. One can easily fill up whole brigade detachment to get an insane amount of CPs. There is only one kill point mission where it would matter that you have that high amount of MSU so there is almost no drawback.
Understrength. if you don't have enough models to make a minimum sized unit you can field what you have, but must pay the points cost as if it were a minimum sized unit. I don't see how this is an advantage, what am I missing?
Solis Luna Astrum wrote: Understrength. if you don't have enough models to make a minimum sized unit you can field what you have, but must pay the points cost as if it were a minimum sized unit. I don't see how this is an advantage, what am I missing?
The main real advantage is for transports; you can have 9 warriors and an overlord in a ghost ark, for example. All of these exploits people are putting out don't work because you still have to pay for 10 guys when you only brought the 1 guy in a unit.
Solis Luna Astrum wrote: Understrength. if you don't have enough models to make a minimum sized unit you can field what you have, but must pay the points cost as if it were a minimum sized unit. I don't see how this is an advantage, what am I missing?
The main real advantage is for transports; you can have 9 warriors and an overlord in a ghost ark, for example. All of these exploits people are putting out don't work because you still have to pay for 10 guys when you only brought the 1 guy in a unit.
Wow... that is some heavy duty TFG level stuff there. If someone pulled that with me and I knew they owned the requisite models, I would not play them. This is for people who literally don't own the models, not for people looking to game the system.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I managed to get in a 500pt game for my FLGS's Escalation League. I won just barely. It was a hell of a learning curve I I forgot so, so, so many things. So it isn't really indicative of anything. It was my first game of 40k since 5th Ed though and what a refreshing experience. GW did a bang up job on 8th!
Here is the list I am most likely bringing next week - especially since I have seen that folks are bringing flyers and hordes more than anything. The Icarus should help immensely.
Patrol Detachment (Mandatory)
HQ:
Tech-Priest Dominus (PL Limit, can't use Cawl until Week 3)
Volkite Blaster, Macrostubber
[135]
Elites:
Cybernetica Datasmith
Gamma, Power Fist
[52]
I managed to get in a 500pt game for my FLGS's Escalation League. I won just barely. It was a hell of a learning curve I I forgot so, so, so many things. So it isn't really indicative of anything. It was my first game of 40k since 5th Ed though and what a refreshing experience. GW did a bang up job on 8th!
Here is the list I am most likely bringing next week - especially since I have seen that folks are bringing flyers and hordes more than anything. The Icarus should help immensely.
Patrol Detachment (Mandatory)
HQ:
Tech-Priest Dominus (PL Limit, can't use Cawl until Week 3)
Volkite Blaster, Macrostubber
[135]
Elites:
Cybernetica Datasmith
Gamma, Power Fist
[52]
Wow people bring flyers in 500 pts game ? If you mean Drukhari Raiders or such okay but if that's Stormravens you guys have some mean players haha
I don't think the Plasma calivers are necessary at that point level, wouldn't you be better with more Arc weaponry ? Or just more Radium carbines to deal with such hordes. The good thing with Arc weaponry is that it's still S6 and AP-1, nice to deal with a bit of everything, the perfect TAC weapon in my opinion, I need to build some Vanguards with those. Other than that your list looks fine to me !
On another subject, I wish I had some Rocky Balboabots today in the 1500 pts game I had. List of my opponent was a Stormlord with 3 HWS and one Company Commander inside, one Plasma Obliterator with 3 HWS, one Firestorm Redoubt with 3 HWS, and one Imperial Bastion with Sgt. Telion and 9 Sniper Scouts camping in. My list was: 9 Vanguards (one plasma), 1 TPD with Ray, 2 Robots with HPB and Combustor each, 1 Datasmith, 5 Rangers, 5 Rangers with Omnispex and 2 Arquebuses, 5 Infiltrators with Tasers, 1 Laser Dunecrawler, 5 Sisters of Silence with swords, 1 Dragoon with Lance, 1 Taurox Prime with Lord Commissar and 5 Scions inside, and finally 1 Tempestor Prime and 1 Scions Command Squad with 2 Meltas and 2 Plasma rifles.
I get it that my opponent wanted to try a list but seriously screw me and my will to build TAC lists. He had 1st turn of course, and shot down my Sisters instantly (I just wanted to try them, why does nobody plays a regular list with Psykers in this store ) and did some other minor damage (I hid my army as best as the terrain allowed me), then I mercilessly spent four turns shooting down the Stormlord that was decimating my army, after that it was a race for who could grab the objectives in time. We ended 4-3 for him, I lost because my TPD needed a 6 to sprint to one objective and rolled a one (seriously).
Lesson learned: never get out without HEAVY ANTI-TANK WEAPONRY, because a lot of people in my store are going to abuse Super-Heavies like alcoholics at Oktoberfest and I have exactly 2 dedicated anti-armour units, the Laser Dunecrawler and the Command Squad (the squad dropped and took off 10W, the Neutron Laser had only one shooting phase before being destroyed and took off like 8W or something). The Robots didn't shoot hard enough and I didn't dare set them in Protector protocols because I had to keep my best saves and stay mobile, but had I fitted them with the Fists I assure you that Stormlord would've felt it sooner than that. What to say next ? Dragoon just took some shooting and went to die in Overwatch on the Stormlord (yeah now you can shoot at a vehicle if you see the head of the pilot and one antenna remember ?). Infiltrators got charged by the Stormlord but survived a bit and inflicted 1W with two guys alive. Happy of my Snipers but they didn't have any targets except for the Stormlord as everyone was inside a building. TPD and Datasmith were useful because of their resilience to contest objectives endgame, but I kept rolling ones to repair myself.
I placed 2 of the 4 objectives we had to set up dumbly because I didn't realise that it was I who could chose his side of the table before deployment and so I probably would've had better luck had I placed them better. Still, on the few games I played, only 3 had TAC lists. The rest was always a Super-Heavy like a Wraithknight in a 1000 pts game or Roboute and 3 other HQs at the same point level. In the game against the buildings and the Stormlord my Power Level was 71 and his was 102. I'll really ask for a Power Level of the same range as me for the next games, don't care if I appear picky, I'm tired of being nice with the poor lists I have to run all the time because I don't own enough models yet only to face indestructible lists.
End of the rant, feel free to ask questions
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Jackal444 wrote: Bit off topic, but has anyone seen any rules for the Secutarii or the Haemotrope Reactor in 8th?
Not yet for the Secutarii, we'll probably have to wait for the book Fires of Cyraxus from FW to have them. I can't wait to see if they're any good, but I'd prefer a transport to be honest No idea as for the Reactor though.
Solis Luna Astrum wrote: Understrength. if you don't have enough models to make a minimum sized unit you can field what you have, but must pay the points cost as if it were a minimum sized unit. I don't see how this is an advantage, what am I missing?
The main real advantage is for transports; you can have 9 warriors and an overlord in a ghost ark, for example. All of these exploits people are putting out don't work because you still have to pay for 10 guys when you only brought the 1 guy in a unit.
no you don't. You only pay for the models you take i.e. 1 in most cases. As stated in the faq.
You know, while I'm certainly not happy about the Infiltrator nerf, I still think they have an important role to play. The more I play, the more I think the ability to infiltrate is going to be a critical aspect of the game. I'm not talking top-tier tournament lists... just normally competitive, in-the-game-till-the-end kind of lists. Whatever our infiltrators are... good or bad, they're our only option for what appears to be a really important game mechanic. I know mine have been critically important in every game I've fielded them... even if they haven't gotten off their first-turn charges. Infiltrators allow you to react to anything, or force your opponent to react to what you do... buying you time and strategic advantage. I'm still going to use them until time and experience convinces me otherwise.
Wow people bring flyers in 500 pts game ? If you mean Drukhari Raiders or such okay but if that's Stormravens you guys have some mean players haha
I don't think the Plasma calivers are necessary at that point level, wouldn't you be better with more Arc weaponry ? Or just more Radium carbines to deal with such hordes. The good thing with Arc weaponry is that it's still S6 and AP-1, nice to deal with a bit of everything, the perfect TAC weapon in my opinion, I need to build some Vanguards with those. Other than that your list looks fine to me !
Yea... I saw a pic of someone with two Stormtalons during a league match. Rude, right? But I got challenged so I know I am playing Marines so I am reverting to my original list, which will be easier for me to make anyhow (I have the laser almost finished).
Should put a hurt on some Marines, for sure. The Plasma in the other list was for point filler, but this one goes cheap. The Maul is because 4pt leftover and I have the model already painted up from Week 1!
Tsol wrote: "Litany of the Electromancer
Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that
is within 1" of any affected units; on
a roll of 6, the unit being rolled for
suffers D3 mortal wounds."
Roll 1 die in your example. By wording, no matter how many sources, you only roll for one. However, one unit if in melee with three other enemy units would cause them all to roll a die each.
I recant! I just reread it like three times, you would indeed roll 2 dice in your example. As it says, "Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that is within 1" of any affected units"
This is incorrect. You roll 1 for models that are near any affected units as it says. or another way to say this with more words is you roll a dice if your within range of 1 or more units. I understand this confusing but any does many that you are affect once no matter how many models are within range of you. Take this as my TLDR as i will just be repeating myself below giving examples as you why you only roll 1 die.
First we will use the definition and then do a find and replace for the word any. and i will focus only on this line "Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that is within 1" of any affected units" as it's the only line that effects this and the meaning of this line changes the reading of what follows.
So onto our find and replace. First we must know that here any is an adjective that is modifing the word units along side the word affected. So going to dictionary.com and looking up the word any and it's most common us we can see the deifnition is: "one, a, an, or some; one or more without specification or identification." This definition can be used in find and replace and thier are two segments both meaning the same thing, "one, a, an, or some" and "one or more without specification or identification." SO in the line we can just copy and past this into the the rule we are trying to read and we can more clearly see what the rule says:
Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that is within 1" of one, a, an, or some affected unit
or
Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that is within 1" of one or more without specification or identification affected unit (note in this case to keep with grammer and flow, i would add either a "-" or a comma on either side of the "without specification or identifiaction" part to make it a more clear statement, but i didn't)
Now in both of these we can see that any in a lot of ways is the same thing as "any number of" or really it means one or more.... And so you'd only roll 1 time even if you surround a unit with 1 or 20 such units affected by the litany.
now if the definition doesn't help you we can use the word in the same way in other sentences, and do a question and reaction.
So lets say we are all on a fishing trip and i tell you; "People who catch any fish will get a prize" We can note that this is one prize reguarless of how many fish you catch. If you come up to me with 20 fish you'll get the same prize as the guy who caught one.
or we could do "People with any diseases aren't allowed out of the quarintine zone" as such we can see that your just as screwed if you have one disease or multiple.
In this way i hope we can all see that any is a word that quite clearly means one or more. Thus in cases where we see the world any please refrain from double dipping etc.
Solis Luna Astrum wrote: The Rangers are good, but a five man unit with two TA's cost 100 points, compared to the Vindicares 90. The VA hits on a 2, the Rangers need a 4. You can get a re-roll to hit if you park close to a TPD or Cawl but that space is premium as you are also trying to put your robots and Onagers there. Having to bunch up all of your units within 6" of your HQ's really limits you deployment options. Also the VA wounding on a 2+, turning a 2+ armor save into a 5+ save and negating invulnerable saves makes it a much more consistent weapon.
But the big one is survivability. The Rangers will wilt to S4 firepower and there are lots of units that can throw out mass amounts of S4 shooting. The VA has a -2 to being shot at if he is in cover and a 4++ save but these aren't even needed because he is also a Character. As long as you deploy him with other units in front of him he can't even be targeted by your opponent. With the Exitus Rifles 72" range your options for deployment are massive.
I think he's better game wise than the Rangers but I did field 2 units of Rangers with 2 TA's each. I gave his characters a very hard time, and really made him think about moving his characters when he thought they would just have the run of his backfield.
So think of it as paying 10 points to get two shots. Though to be fair, you also lose a Command Point if you are going with an Auxiliary Support detachment.
Rangers hit on rerollable 3s, so it's Vindicare's 83.33% to Rangers' 88.88%. The space is not that big a premium since as long as any model is within the bubble, you're fine. Kastelans are a good unit to pair with the Rangers anyway because both cannot move and shoot.
Vindicare is definitely more durable, but getting shot at is fine. Anything that can hit Rangers 60" away will probably be shooting my Kastelans or Crawlers first anyway.
Vindicare ignoring invulnerable saves is only more reliable than two shots if, all other factors holding equal, that invulnerable save is a 3++ (because two shots against 4++ yields an expected value of 1 shot).
Any reason you're going with Dragoons in that role?
I'm thinking of running Penitent Engines for something similar.
Because I have them, they satisfy the role I need fulfilled, and they get reliable Shroudpsalm. You're right though. I should look into the Imperium Soup.
Not so sure about Penitent Engine though. 7" move is not too mobile. Anyone have recommendations for Fast Attack slots?
Iago40k wrote: Quick question guys, "Lithany of the electromancer"...We had some discussions about the rule and I'd like to ask you: If an enemy unit is in close combat (so in 1") to 2 of my units, do I roll one or two dice?
One. I think. Here's my reasoning: For each enemy, you look if they are near any AdMech units a part of an AdMech detachment. If they are, roll one dice.
Vindicare is definitely more durable, but getting shot at is fine. Anything that can hit Rangers 60" away will probably be shooting my Kastelans or Crawlers first anyway.
You cannot deploy your Rangers that far away from your opponent and still get re-rolls from your TPD unless you also deploy him far back. If you do that you then have to deploy your Kastelans close to the TPD or loose their re-rolls. That puts the robots out of range for at least one turn assuming your opponent moves toward your Kastelans. You can solve this by dedicating a second TPD to support your Rangers but then you loose the other abilities of that TPD. You've now added a 135 point tax to your unit of Rangers, that's 235 points to do what a Vindicare does by himself for 90 points.
oOSkyOo wrote: I like the idea of adding a Vindicare too my force. But what is the best way without looosing Canticles of the Omnisiah?
Probably just another Patrol Detachment. Inquisitor or Primaris Psyker, 1 conscript and the Assassin. You may find a cheaper HQ somewhere but since those can be psykers they are not too bad.
You can always go for an auxiliary detachment and loose 1 CP though.
Without going to abuse the understrenght rule it might be a Vanguard Detachment. Primaris psyker, Akoylte, Akolyte, Vindicare. 146 pts.
oOSkyOo wrote: I like the idea of adding a Vindicare too my force. But what is the best way without looosing Canticles of the Omnisiah?
Probably just another Patrol Detachment. Inquisitor or Primaris Psyker, 1 conscript and the Assassin. You may find a cheaper HQ somewhere but since those can be psykers they are not too bad.
You can always go for an auxiliary detachment and loose 1 CP though.
Without going to abuse the understrenght rule it might be a Vanguard Detachment. Primaris psyker, Akoylte, Akolyte, Vindicare. 146 pts.
agreed, this is one of the few niches for an Inquisitor. And consider just filling a Vanguard detachment with three assassins; Vindicares especially work better in twos and threes. Or mix with Tempestus Scions, who compliment AdMech very well.
Vindicare is definitely more durable, but getting shot at is fine. Anything that can hit Rangers 60" away will probably be shooting my Kastelans or Crawlers first anyway.
You cannot deploy your Rangers that far away from your opponent and still get re-rolls from your TPD unless you also deploy him far back. If you do that you then have to deploy your Kastelans close to the TPD or loose their re-rolls. That puts the robots out of range for at least one turn assuming your opponent moves toward your Kastelans. You can solve this by dedicating a second TPD to support your Rangers but then you loose the other abilities of that TPD. You've now added a 135 point tax to your unit of Rangers, that's 235 points to do what a Vindicare does by himself for 90 points.
You might have missed the previous sentence where I pointed out that Rangers probably should pair with the Kastelans anyway. Anything that can shoot the Rangers can probably also shoot the Kastelans, and I would much rather have them shoot the Rangers in that situation.
A lot of people run two detachments anyway. (Though you did just give me an interesting idea for something else...)
Aaranis wrote: Just my two cents but Rangers hit on 3+, not 4+.
Oops. I knew that, but for some reason thought it was 50% chance to hit. xD
Automatically Appended Next Post: Crazy thought. Are we all aware that unit coherency rules changed in 8th edition?
See P176:
Models move and fight in units, made up of one or more models. A unit must be set up and finish any sort of move as a group, with every model within 2" horizontally, and 6" vertically, of at least one other model from their unit: this is called unit coherency. If anything causes a unit to become split up during a battle, it must re-establish its unit coherency the next time it moves.
Combine this with their FAQ:
Q: What happens if a unit that has become split up during battle cannot re-establish unit coherency the next time it moves? A: In this case the unit cannot move.
Q. Can you clarify what the difference is between ‘wholly within’ and ‘within’ for rules purposes? A. If a rule says it affects units/models that are ‘wholly within’ then it only applies if the entire unit/model is within. If it just says ‘within’, however, then it applies so long as any part of the unit/model is within.
RAW tells me I can leave 2 of my Arquebus models behind at an objective in one group as long as they stay within coherency to one another and the remaining models stay within coherency as a separate group. This separate group can hang out near a TPD and receive benefits that apply to the unit. If one of my Arquebuses dies, it can never move again (unless that second group comes close enough to regain coherency, in which case it is forced to move). If that group hanging out near the TPD dies, you lose the unit benefits.
And yes, I know this probably flies against the intent of the designers, but for anyone who has not played 7th edition starts in 8th edition, there is no way they can know of it as written.
Compare this to the old 7th edition "chain" rule:
… once a unit has finished moving, the models in it must form an imaginary chain where the distance between one model and the next is no more than 2″ horizontally and 6″ vertically. We call this ‘unit coherency’.
Q. Can I set up a unit, or finish any sort of move with a unit,
so that its models form several separate groups (where each
group consists of models from that unit that are within 2"
horizontally and 6" vertically of at least one other model from
their group)?
A. No. The unit must set up or finish any sort of move as
a single group.
So no you can't do that, and it was never intended. I get it you may have understood it wrong but this edition is full of people who lacks common sense to interpret the rules, although I can give it to you, not all GW's rules are logical at all
Aaranis wrote: Man really ? The latest FAQ covered just that:
Q. Can I set up a unit, or finish any sort of move with a unit,
so that its models form several separate groups (where each
group consists of models from that unit that are within 2"
horizontally and 6" vertically of at least one other model from
their group)?
A. No. The unit must set up or finish any sort of move as
a single group.
So no you can't do that, and it was never intended. I get it you may have understood it wrong but this edition is full of people who lacks common sense to interpret the rules, although I can give it to you, not all GW's rules are logical at all
Which FAQ was that? Ah well. It was an interesting thought. I do think that RAW would have allowed for it; I mean, how would we explain it to people who didn't play 7th?
Iago40k wrote: People who didnt played 7th wouldnt have had that kind of idea in the first place^^
Yeah... I mean, it's not like we were trying to Scout bunkers with escape hatches to catapult units into the enemy deployment zone or anything like that...
Aaranis wrote: Man really ? The latest FAQ covered just that:
Q. Can I set up a unit, or finish any sort of move with a unit,
so that its models form several separate groups (where each
group consists of models from that unit that are within 2"
horizontally and 6" vertically of at least one other model from
their group)?
A. No. The unit must set up or finish any sort of move as
a single group.
So no you can't do that, and it was never intended. I get it you may have understood it wrong but this edition is full of people who lacks common sense to interpret the rules, although I can give it to you, not all GW's rules are logical at all
Which FAQ was that? Ah well. It was an interesting thought. I do think that RAW would have allowed for it; I mean, how would we explain it to people who didn't play 7th?
So what was the view on the Fisty Castallans? They might be a good shout, what with Aegis protecting them until they get close, and their surprisingly fast 8" speed!
Also, I thought about a squad of Infiltrators deploying as a bodyguard to a Culexus assasin may be effective - even with the new change to 2 attacks - thoughts?
MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote: So what was the view on the Fisty Castallans? They might be a good shout, what with Aegis protecting them until they get close, and their surprisingly fast 8" speed!
Also, I thought about a squad of Infiltrators deploying as a bodyguard to a Culexus assasin may be effective - even with the new change to 2 attacks - thoughts?
A few pages back, I pointed out that they're pretty much Neutron Crawlers but less durable and with 48 times less range. The fact that Protocols change at the start of a battle round also means going second can be very fatal. >_>
A few pages back, I pointed out that they're pretty much Neutron Crawlers but less durable and with 48 times less range. The fact that Protocols change at the start of a battle round also means going second can be very fatal. >_>
I'm not following you.. Robots are set up with Aegis protocol (2+/4+), with Cantel of Shroudpsalm being activated at the beginning of the battle round (1+/4+).. They sound really great for protecting you against a going second. An enormous amound of firepower will be needed to take them down, heavy weapons will be deflected back on a 5+, etc.
While they would be very effective as a firebase, I do feel like the fisto robotos plug a weakness in our army for screening against melee and putting pressure on their lines
A few pages back, I pointed out that they're pretty much Neutron Crawlers but less durable and with 48 times less range. The fact that Protocols change at the start of a battle round also means going second can be very fatal. >_>
I'm not following you.. Robots are set up with Aegis protocol (2+/4+), with Cantel of Shroudpsalm being activated at the beginning of the battle round (1+/4+).. They sound really great for protecting you against a going second. An enormous amound of firepower will be needed to take them down, heavy weapons will be deflected back on a 5+, etc.
While they would be very effective as a firebase, I do feel like the fisto robotos plug a weakness in our army for screening against melee and putting pressure on their lines
If you go second and turn on Conquerer, then your protocol switches at the start of the next battle round, and your opponent goes first while your robots are sitting ducks without the Aegis protocol on. Same applies for Protector, but at least you can be very far away...
Though if you intend to only keep the robots for screening, then yes, keeping Aegis on all the time and just not having a Datasmith in your army might be the way to go.
gally912 wrote: Fisto robots do perform better than the neutron against medium-heavy infantry. Nobz, termies, paladins, primaris, etc.
Couple with flamers would make for an interesting screen, barring the 240or price tag :-)
Phosphor Blasters do even better. That or Icarus Crawlers or a Crusader.
Suzuteo wrote: If you go second and turn on Conquerer, then your protocol switches at the start of the next battle round, and your opponent goes first while your robots are sitting ducks without the Aegis protocol on. Same applies for Protector, but at least you can be very far away...
Though if you intend to only keep the robots for screening, then yes, keeping Aegis on all the time and just not having a Datasmith in your army might be the way to go.
That's not how it's gonna play, in practice you'll always have the Aegis Protocol on for a full turn. You start the Battle Round (so, player one 1st turn, player two 1st turn) with the Aegis Protocol, even if you don't have the 1st turn. So if you go second, your opponent must shoot at your Aegis Robots, then you have your turn, set the Conqueror protocols for the next Battle Round, and move the Robots in position for your turn two charge. You shoot all the while (at 5+, how come they're not relentless). Then opponent's second turn, he keep shooting at your Aegis Robots, then your turn comes and you finally are able to reduce all his dreams in a pulp in a single glorious charge.
EDIT: On another subject, given the news about the Codices, which modifications and new rules would you like for our own army ? Personally I'd love it if we could have an equivalent to the Scout move if we play our Detachment full AdMech, and of course as they announced they would add new models for some armies, I'm waiting our transport and pray it's a nice one (please 12 transport capacity or more ! ). Wondering if they're going to flesh out our existing rules, like the Canticles, or change the Neurostatic Aura of the Infiltrators so that it's actually useful and a staple of this unit again. Also, make Kataphrons cheaper, because no one wants to buy mine so I'll keep them I guess
So for folks testing Rangers - are you using the Omnispex? Seems like a nice way to help them hit a bit harder. I was tossing around a bot/crawler/knight list and had 107pt leftover... so, I figured that would be a perfect filler that might help snipe out stuff like Commissars.
Aaranis wrote: That's not how it's gonna play, in practice you'll always have the Aegis Protocol on for a full turn. You start the Battle Round (so, player one 1st turn, player two 1st turn) with the Aegis Protocol, even if you don't have the 1st turn. So if you go second, your opponent must shoot at your Aegis Robots, then you have your turn, set the Conqueror protocols for the next Battle Round, and move the Robots in position for your turn two charge. You shoot all the while (at 5+, how come they're not relentless). Then opponent's second turn, he keep shooting at your Aegis Robots, then your turn comes and you finally are able to reduce all his dreams in a pulp in a single glorious charge.
EDIT: On another subject, given the news about the Codices, which modifications and new rules would you like for our own army ? Personally I'd love it if we could have an equivalent to the Scout move if we play our Detachment full AdMech, and of course as they announced they would add new models for some armies, I'm waiting our transport and pray it's a nice one (please 12 transport capacity or more ! ). Wondering if they're going to flesh out our existing rules, like the Canticles, or change the Neurostatic Aura of the Infiltrators so that it's actually useful and a staple of this unit again. Also, make Kataphrons cheaper, because no one wants to buy mine so I'll keep them I guess
The problem is still that your opponent gets one turn to shoot at your Kastelans without Aegis on. And turn two charge into ideal targets seems extremely optimistic, given your opponent will likely have assaulters or screening units to deal with. =\
SCOUT. Or better yet, if they don't give us transports, Dunestrider! I love AdMech as a mobile gun line.
axisofentropy wrote: On twitch, one of the designers hinted that AdMech will get a strategem to self-destruct the robots. Fun!
axisofentropy wrote: On twitch, one of the designers hinted that AdMech will get a strategem to self-destruct the robots. Fun!
Wow, a more reliable version of my kamikaze Dragoon you mean ? That'd give some use to the Dragoon, seeing how useless he is otherwise :(
Wow. Dragoons are the cheapest Explodes unit, right? If so, they would instantly become one of our best units. Charge into a bunch of units, explode for reliable D3 Wounds!
em_en_oh_pee wrote: So for folks testing Rangers - are you using the Omnispex? Seems like a nice way to help them hit a bit harder. I was tossing around a bot/crawler/knight list and had 107pt leftover... so, I figured that would be a perfect filler that might help snipe out stuff like Commissars.
Thoughts?
Omnispex is nice, but not mandatory. Not all targets you will be sniping hide in cover.
Aaranis wrote: That's not how it's gonna play, in practice you'll always have the Aegis Protocol on for a full turn. You start the Battle Round (so, player one 1st turn, player two 1st turn) with the Aegis Protocol, even if you don't have the 1st turn. So if you go second, your opponent must shoot at your Aegis Robots, then you have your turn, set the Conqueror protocols for the next Battle Round, and move the Robots in position for your turn two charge. You shoot all the while (at 5+, how come they're not relentless). Then opponent's second turn, he keep shooting at your Aegis Robots, then your turn comes and you finally are able to reduce all his dreams in a pulp in a single glorious charge.
EDIT: On another subject, given the news about the Codices, which modifications and new rules would you like for our own army ? Personally I'd love it if we could have an equivalent to the Scout move if we play our Detachment full AdMech, and of course as they announced they would add new models for some armies, I'm waiting our transport and pray it's a nice one (please 12 transport capacity or more ! ). Wondering if they're going to flesh out our existing rules, like the Canticles, or change the Neurostatic Aura of the Infiltrators so that it's actually useful and a staple of this unit again. Also, make Kataphrons cheaper, because no one wants to buy mine so I'll keep them I guess
The problem is still that your opponent gets one turn to shoot at your Kastelans without Aegis on. And turn two charge into ideal targets seems extremely optimistic, given your opponent will likely have assaulters or screening units to deal with.
Why would your opponent get a turn to shoot at Kastelans without Aegis? Protocols are decided at the beginning of your movement phase, it sounds like you are mixing them up with Canticles? i.e. Conqueror protocol is set at the beginning of the second movement phase
Aaranis wrote: That's not how it's gonna play, in practice you'll always have the Aegis Protocol on for a full turn. You start the Battle Round (so, player one 1st turn, player two 1st turn) with the Aegis Protocol, even if you don't have the 1st turn. So if you go second, your opponent must shoot at your Aegis Robots, then you have your turn, set the Conqueror protocols for the next Battle Round, and move the Robots in position for your turn two charge. You shoot all the while (at 5+, how come they're not relentless). Then opponent's second turn, he keep shooting at your Aegis Robots, then your turn comes and you finally are able to reduce all his dreams in a pulp in a single glorious charge.
EDIT: On another subject, given the news about the Codices, which modifications and new rules would you like for our own army ? Personally I'd love it if we could have an equivalent to the Scout move if we play our Detachment full AdMech, and of course as they announced they would add new models for some armies, I'm waiting our transport and pray it's a nice one (please 12 transport capacity or more ! ). Wondering if they're going to flesh out our existing rules, like the Canticles, or change the Neurostatic Aura of the Infiltrators so that it's actually useful and a staple of this unit again. Also, make Kataphrons cheaper, because no one wants to buy mine so I'll keep them I guess
The problem is still that your opponent gets one turn to shoot at your Kastelans without Aegis on. And turn two charge into ideal targets seems extremely optimistic, given your opponent will likely have assaulters or screening units to deal with.
Why would your opponent get a turn to shoot at Kastelans without Aegis? Protocols are decided at the beginning of your movement phase, it sounds like you are mixing them up with Canticles? i.e. Conqueror protocol is set at the beginning of the second movement phase
Alright I mixed up some rules but my explanation still works, it says that when this unit is placed the Aegis Protocol is on, just like in 7th. So you still have two shooting phases from your opponent (IF he gets first turn) that goes in the Aegis Protocol. What I mixed up was with the Canticles, which are indeed decided upon each Battle Round. Sorry.
Does anyone know how Litany of the Electromancer works? WHen does the 1" get measured? At the start of the battle round? Once at any time during the battle round? WHose turn does it take place?
Aaranis wrote:
Alright I mixed up some rules but my explanation still works, it says that when this unit is placed the Aegis Protocol is on, just like in 7th. So you still have two shooting phases from your opponent (IF he gets first turn) that goes in the Aegis Protocol. What I mixed up was with the Canticles, which are indeed decided upon each Battle Round. Sorry.
MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:
Why would your opponent get a turn to shoot at Kastelans without Aegis? Protocols are decided at the beginning of your movement phase, it sounds like you are mixing them up with Canticles? i.e. Conqueror protocol is set at the beginning of the second movement phase
I think there may be some misunderstandings here.
Keep in mind three facts:
1) When set up, your Kastelan uses Aegis Protocol.
2) You attempt to change protocols at the start of your Movement phase.
3) The protocol change takes effect at the start of the next battle round. (Before or after Canticles, your choice.)
Here are the rules as written:
Battle Protocols: When this unit is set up, the Aegis Protocol (see below) is in effect. You can attempt to change the unit’s battle protocol at the start of each of your Movement phases if there is a friendly <FORGE WORLD> Cybernetica Datasmith within 6". To do so, roll a D6; on a 2+ the attempt is successful and you can select any one of the three battle protocols to take effect from the start of the next battle round. Otherwise, the attempt fails and the unit’s current protocol remains in effect.
If you go second, you always go second in each battle round. That means there will be one turn where you are exposed to enemy fire without Aegis.
Wulfey wrote:Does anyone know how Litany of the Electromancer works? WHen does the 1" get measured? At the start of the battle round? Once at any time during the battle round? WHose turn does it take place?
At the start of your battle round (which is BEFORE your turn, even if you go first), you roll for Canticles. If you get Litany, then you look at every unit that is in a 100% AdMech detachment (units in detachments with any non-AdMech units are NOT affected by Canticles). Pick out every enemy unit within 1" of these units. Roll a single D6 for each of these enemy units. If you get 6, you roll D3 and deal that many mortal wounds to that unit.
Litany of the Electromancer Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that is within 1" of any affected units; on a roll of 6, the unit being rolled for suffers D3 mortal wounds.
Okay guys, I think I will settle with this list. After a lot of games the sweet spot for Kastelans imho is 3 or 4, while 2 Neutronagers and 1 Icarus Onager are pretty perfect. You shouldnt go with more than 4 of each.
So, this is the list. The only problem: Id love to take 4 squads of vanguard. Good god they are good. But I have to cut some points one way or the other so the question is: Do I take power swords and stubbers on my infiltrators, or do I take Radium Jezzails on the Dragoons instead of the Lances. I learnt that the lances...they suck, kinda. No AP is just crap, 3 attacks usually dont do anything. Since I havent tried the Jezzails yet I think I could cut the lances. The Dragoons are for harrassing only anyways and boy to they do a great job with that. They usually dont do any damage for me but pulling units into CC is just crazy good. Plus they are hard to hit and pretty durable with shroud song...
Iago40k wrote: Okay guys, I think I will settle with this list. After a lot of games the sweet spot for Kastelans imho is 3 or 4, while 2 Neutronagers and 1 Icarus Onager are pretty perfect. You shouldnt go with more than 4 of each.
So, this is the list. The only problem: Id love to take 4 squads of vanguard. Good god they are good. But I have to cut some points one way or the other so the question is: Do I take power swords and stubbers on my infiltrators, or do I take Radium Jezzails on the Dragoons instead of the Lances. I learnt that the lances...they suck, kinda. No AP is just crap, 3 attacks usually dont do anything. Since I havent tried the Jezzails yet I think I could cut the lances. The Dragoons are for harrassing only anyways and boy to they do a great job with that. They usually dont do any damage for me but pulling units into CC is just crazy good. Plus they are hard to hit and pretty durable with shroud song...
Maybe cut the Infiltrators for another Icarus Dunecrawler? I like having an even number of Crawlers because it lets me split them up while keeping the Force Field up. Furthermore, Icarus is the better TAC option, since AA coverage is pretty important in some matchups; two Icarus Crawlers shuts out a ton of lists, including Eldar, Tau, and Imperial flyers.
Maybe cut the Infiltrators for another Icarus Dunecrawler? I like having an even number of Crawlers because it lets me split them up while keeping the Force Field up. Furthermore, Icarus is the better TAC option, since AA coverage is pretty important in some matchups; two Icarus Crawlers shuts out a ton of lists, including Eldar, Tau, and Imperial flyers.
I really think the Infiltrators are necessary. People need to adjust their deployment just because of them. I see you are using 4 Onagers instead of more Kastelan. I ust them too but I got the feeling 2 Kastelans is not enough after people stepped back from playing complete mechanised lists since they didnt win anything. We play Eternal War and Maelstrom put together which is hard for lets say AM conscript screen and 8 tanks.
What are your experiences so far on balancing out onagers and kastelans?
Hey I had a game today of 1000 pts, first time against some T'au. For once my Infiltrators were useful, they allowed me to drop in the back of his army to almost wipe out (one survivor) a whole team of Pathfinders with Markerlights that were contributing to giving hell to my boys, and all with a single Flechette Blaster volley. Then they got worn off a bit by XV-25 shooting, and died in CC against them (you read that right, my luck was bad this game). So I think they're still useful for now, but for a real specific role. Now that my opponent knows them he will certainly modify his deployments because of that though.
Oh and I won 11-5 so Tau are still attractive to me
I really think the Infiltrators are necessary. People need to adjust their deployment just because of them. I see you are using 4 Onagers instead of more Kastelan. I ust them too but I got the feeling 2 Kastelans is not enough after people stepped back from playing complete mechanised lists since they didnt win anything. We play Eternal War and Maelstrom put together which is hard for lets say AM conscript screen and 8 tanks.
What are your experiences so far on balancing out onagers and kastelans?
I don't think Infiltrators are good any more. I mean, they went from 8.125 points per attack to 11.82; that's an 45.46% increase! I would much rather have an extra Icarus. 48" covers a lot of ground; the enemy is rarely 57" away.
One thing to note about my list is that one unit of 2x Kastelans went into a Crusader.
In terms of Kastelans vs. Crawlers, I agree with Wulfey to some extent a few pages back. Icarus and Neutron Crawlers are our bread and butter in a TAC list due to their durability, mobility, reach, and ability to shut out entire classes of enemy. I am enjoying a 1:1 Crawler ratio, with Kastelans supporting the Crawlers as a midfield anti-horde specialist and the Crusader being a mid-field generalist that does a bit of everything. (I find it funny that we consider 36" to be our midfield.) From my view, focusing too much on Kastelans might be a mistake. They definitely are absolutely OP against any high model count army, but they are also rather vulnerable to deep striking units; once that Protector protocol comes on, it becomes super hard to extricate them from CC, and if I am facing an army with that capability, I definitely will be keeping Dragoons and the Crusader close by to peel enemies off.
Whatever our mix though, I think we need a strong screening element. Now, I dislike Conscript blobs because it pretty much clogs your board up and causes you to fall behind in any points match, thus committing you to tabling your opponent, and I find Vanguard too expensive for the durability that they offer (especially when you need to stop people in CC), which is where Dragoons come in. Their damage is mediocre, but they have that mix of characteristics that I find essential for AdMech to play the points game: durability (Incense and Shroudpsalm is awesome), mobility, and not-awful in CC. Even if you charge them suicidally into a bunch of Berserkers, they buy your artillery another turn of shooting; you just fall back next turn and have your artillery open up. (If they explode before then, all the better!)
Aaranis wrote: Hey I had a game today of 1000 pts, first time against some T'au. For once my Infiltrators were useful, they allowed me to drop in the back of his army to almost wipe out (one survivor) a whole team of Pathfinders with Markerlights that were contributing to giving hell to my boys, and all with a single Flechette Blaster volley. Then they got worn off a bit by XV-25 shooting, and died in CC against them (you read that right, my luck was bad this game). So I think they're still useful for now, but for a real specific role. Now that my opponent knows them he will certainly modify his deployments because of that though.
Oh and I won 11-5 so Tau are still attractive to me
As I mentioned earlier, we pretty much shut out Tau and Eldar. Icarus Crawlers are sooo good against their Battlesuits and Jetbikes. They also are great against mid-toughness infantry. Might as well have a sign on them that says "no mobility allowed."
Suzuteo wrote: As I mentioned earlier, we pretty much shut out Tau and Eldar. Icarus Crawlers are sooo good against their Battlesuits and Jetbikes. They also are great against mid-toughness infantry. Might as well have a sign on them that says "no mobility allowed."
Funny thing is that I didn't have the Icarus, it was the Neutron Laser. Still, once I had the LoS to the Broadside I got to OS it. My command squad with two Meltas and two Plasma guns failed to scratch him even with the Orders because of sheer bad luck, even though they survived until the end of the battle, first time it's happening
Funny thing is that I didn't have the Icarus, it was the Neutron Laser. Still, once I had the LoS to the Broadside I got to OS it. My command squad with two Meltas and two Plasma guns failed to scratch him even with the Orders because of sheer bad luck, even though they survived until the end of the battle, first time it's happening
Wow. Well... popping Coldstars is a lot easier with Icarus Crawlers. (The shoot and charge, then next turn fall back and shoot combo is super annoying, so it's best you just kill them in one go.)
While I agree that having the threat of infiltrators looming over the enemy to cause more careful deployment and play while also providing the opportunity for exploiting overextension is important, I wonder if sicarians are really the best choice for that.
We can put another detachment on the board that simply shares the imperial keyword and that allows us to field other imperial deep strikers. We could use tempestus with plasma alongside their HQ, allowing them to reroll 1s when supercharging, thus being able to threaten vehicles or other important units. We can use notoriously hardy assault terminators with storm shields to tie up important targets.
I am still looking for the best option to use as deep strikers alongside AdMech but it seems sicarians aren't simply it and I fail to see a place for them in our army right now.
Any thoughts on lower point games? 1k, 1250, 1.5k? I know we like our tourney 2k thought processes, but there could be lots of new tech priests that need some advice.
gally912 wrote: Any thoughts on lower point games? 1k, 1250, 1.5k? I know we like our tourney 2k thought processes, but there could be lots of new tech priests that need some advice.
Been playing mostly at 1k points myself. Finding I am tending to take robots out of the list - the datasmith tax is only 50 points, but he's 5% of the army at that point.
Replacing with strictly Onagers (Neutron/Icarus) and maxing out on heavy stubbers.
Not very comfortable with our HQ options (TPD) either - relatively expensive, and it's hard to make a TAC list that is well rounded enough that it's fun for both players and have him be effective.
Alternatively I've been toying with just including AdMech as part of a Imperium detachment with cheaper HQ choices (Canoness, Commissar, Tempestor Prime, etc.) and giving up canticles. Shroudsong and Blessings are the two most missed ones, but without Cawl, you don't have an above average chance of getting them either.
Just some random musings from a fairly new player, take it with a grain of salt
I agree, I play IG but dislike the Leman Russ so much in this edition that I got a couple start collecting boxes and love the Kastellan models so much I picked up a set. In my few games with friends I realized the dune crawlers are far superior to the robots, offensively that is. I did enjoy how much the Kastellans dictated my opponents reactions to them setting up in critical locations. Since most of my force is IG, I don't really need the heavy phosphor blasters since I can take care of light vehicles and hordes well enough so they'll probably go from smaller games. I do really like them as IG don't have much in the way of a unit that can take fire and make it to/hold a hot OBJ. I liked them for that.
All I know is, that a battalion of IG and a Vanguard (the heavy support detachment?) of Ad Mech is BRUTAL. Arquebusses are just enough to finish off whatever my ratlings are targeting. The threat bubble of Vanguard compliment my troops extremely well. The Rangers move up and help waste any horde units or trouble my conscripts get in. The onagers just wipe any enemy vehicles off the board. Love the Icarus Array too. Why would I ever choose the Hydra over that beast? Then my artillery hit whatever I want from safety of behind LoS blocking terrain. It's nasty.
Malygon wrote: While I agree that having the threat of infiltrators looming over the enemy to cause more careful deployment and play while also providing the opportunity for exploiting overextension is important, I wonder if sicarians are really the best choice for that.
We can put another detachment on the board that simply shares the imperial keyword and that allows us to field other imperial deep strikers. We could use tempestus with plasma alongside their HQ, allowing them to reroll 1s when supercharging, thus being able to threaten vehicles or other important units. We can use notoriously hardy assault terminators with storm shields to tie up important targets.
I am still looking for the best option to use as deep strikers alongside AdMech but it seems sicarians aren't simply it and I fail to see a place for them in our army right now.
This. I have been looking into Imperium Soup myself, and I think that if I ever do drop my Crusader, it would be for a deep strike detachment, probably Arjac Rockfist (bonus attack plus reroll wound rolls of 1) + Wolf Guard Terminators (with Storm Shields and Thunder Hammers, yum). Oh, and some Plasma Grey Hunters in a Drop Pod for more mayhem.
Hmmm but why drop more dakka? We have everything we need in our arsenal when it comes tp range shooting and infis do at least a good job against infantry. Plus the drop has to have a little melee punch. Infis cover that as well
Iago40k wrote: Hmmm but why drop more dakka? We have everything we need in our arsenal when it comes tp range shooting and infis do at least a good job against infantry. Plus the drop has to have a little melee punch. Infis cover that as well
Because you can't fix everything with slow moving dakka from your deployment zone. How do you deal with artillery? How do you deal with characters behind terrain giving buffs? How do you take objectives? Dropping supercharged plasma in rapid fire range that can reroll 1s can take down a lot of expensive things much faster than your regular dakka.
And if I want melee punch why should I take sicarians? They are a melee glascannon and are probably very dead the turn after dropping. They also have very limited uses and feel a bit wasted against Infantry. They feel simply too expensive for what they bring. I think dropping more sturdy melee specalists would help you more.
I have been kicking around a Tempestus contingent to pair with our artillery. Partially because I love the models and have a short-story I wrote years ago about a unit of Scions and I would love to paint them up!
At just shy of 600pt, it fits into the slot where our Knight usually is point-wise. 9 Plasma shots from each squad - so 36 total. With each Prime having two VoC, you can spread the "Take Aim!" onto all four units of Scions, meaning you can supercharge and won't fry your dudes. Yea, Hot-shots need 5's to wound most stuff, but AP -2 and Rapid Fire mean they can shoot up weaker stuff or go for volume shots on units while the Plasma pumps hurt into something dangerous.
I was going to pair it with:
HQ:
Belisarius Cawl
[250]
Elites:
Cybernetica Datasmith
Gamma, Fist
[52]
Troops:
(5) Vanguard
2x Arc Rifles, Arc Maul
[62]
Heavy:
(3) Kastelan Robot
Triple Heavy Phosphor Blasters
[330]
(3) Kastelan Robot
Triple Heavy Phosphor Blasters
[330]
It's been interesting reading the discussion of the infiltrators. I've also come to the conclusion that some kind of infiltrate/deep strike capability is necessary to make the AdMech into a complete force.
Right now I'm running a unit of infiltrators with taser goads and have re-purposed my rust stalkers into another unit of infiltrators with power swords & pistols. Generally, I've been pretty happy with their performance and with the exception of the dune crawlers... have considered them the most tactically important units in the army.
I hadn't considered using other imperials to fill the same role however. Interesting thought.
Ive been strongly looking at bringing a detachment of elysian drop troops for deepstriking screens and objective grabbers. For like 300-500 points you can bring a huge ammounts of cheap boots (theyre the same cost as stock ig!). With orders they still put out an obscene ammount of lasgun fire and theyre immediatly in rapidfire range.
em_en_oh_pee wrote: I have been kicking around a Tempestus contingent to pair with our artillery. Partially because I love the models and have a short-story I wrote years ago about a unit of Scions and I would love to paint them up!
At just shy of 600pt, it fits into the slot where our Knight usually is point-wise. 9 Plasma shots from each squad - so 36 total. With each Prime having two VoC, you can spread the "Take Aim!" onto all four units of Scions, meaning you can supercharge and won't fry your dudes. Yea, Hot-shots need 5's to wound most stuff, but AP -2 and Rapid Fire mean they can shoot up weaker stuff or go for volume shots on units while the Plasma pumps hurt into something dangerous.
I was going to pair it with:
HQ:
Belisarius Cawl
[250]
Elites:
Cybernetica Datasmith
Gamma, Fist
[52]
Troops:
(5) Vanguard
2x Arc Rifles, Arc Maul
[62]
Heavy:
(3) Kastelan Robot
Triple Heavy Phosphor Blasters
[330]
(3) Kastelan Robot
Triple Heavy Phosphor Blasters
[330]
So, 2k list. Six Robots and triple Crawlers for our artillery with Cawl, of course.
That scion detachment looks pretty similar to what I've been considering, though I was thinking of 2 tempestus scions and 2 tempestus command squads instead of 4 tempestus scions. Same number of plasma guns but cheaper. I'd use a unit of 30 conscripts and a commissar to fill out the Battalion and reach 600 points and us them to provide some bubblewrap to our units. But I am still fiddling with that.
See, I have no want to do the Conscript thing. Just zero appeal modelling or playing it. That was the reason I got rid of my Guard in the first place. At least Scions are pretty rad looking.
em_en_oh_pee wrote: See, I have no want to do the Conscript thing. Just zero appeal modelling or playing it. That was the reason I got rid of my Guard in the first place. At least Scions are pretty rad looking.
I know what you mean. Before the FAQ I was thinking of using a void shield generator to make my formation more safe but that wouldn't work against melee drop troops which I am most afraid of and they also nerfed it. I guess I could use fulgurites for a devastating counter-charge but that would still leave my valuable troops exposed. How would you deal with the threat of melee drop troops? Those can really shut down our formation fast.
em_en_oh_pee wrote: See, I have no want to do the Conscript thing. Just zero appeal modelling or playing it. That was the reason I got rid of my Guard in the first place. At least Scions are pretty rad looking.
I know what you mean. Before the FAQ I was thinking of using a void shield generator to make my formation more safe but that wouldn't work against melee drop troops which I am most afraid of and they also nerfed it. I guess I could use fulgurites for a devastating counter-charge but that would still leave my valuable troops exposed. How would you deal with the threat of melee drop troops? Those can really shut down our formation fast.
I actually just purchased Fulgurites yesterday to see if those would offer a good enough means to counter said drop troops (and other assault units) when combined with a Skitarii screen. It isn't ideal probably, but with good deployment it might help buy us enough time to make a stand and pump Phosphor rounds into whatever lands.
I'm thinking of Allying in some Elysian Drop troops instead of using Infiltrators as part of a patrol detachment I was already thinking of with Greyfax and a Cullexus. Forget what I said earlier. Let's do a vanguard detachment with 2 special weapon squads with 3 plasma guns each for a total of 102 freakin points.
What do you all think? Viable?
em_en_oh_pee wrote: See, I have no want to do the Conscript thing. Just zero appeal modelling or playing it. That was the reason I got rid of my Guard in the first place. At least Scions are pretty rad looking.
Agree really hard on this. I end up looking at a lot of my lists and thinking conscripts would be better, but man I really don't want to model and paint that.
Gitsplitta wrote: It's been interesting reading the discussion of the infiltrators. I've also come to the conclusion that some kind of infiltrate/deep strike capability is necessary to make the AdMech into a complete force.
Right now I'm running a unit of infiltrators with taser goads and have re-purposed my rust stalkers into another unit of infiltrators with power swords & pistols. Generally, I've been pretty happy with their performance and with the exception of the dune crawlers... have considered them the most tactically important units in the army.
I hadn't considered using other imperials to fill the same role however. Interesting thought.
Not so sure about that. We need a mobile unit for screening, objectives, and skirmishing, but not necessarily a Deep Strike unit. Remember, we're an artillery army, and our units got to stay on mission. I mean, honestly, if your opponent is smart, he will stay focused on taking out your Kastelans and Crawlers and not care about the Infiltrators chewing up some of his infantry units.
McGibs wrote: Ive been strongly looking at bringing a detachment of elysian drop troops for deepstriking screens and objective grabbers. For like 300-500 points you can bring a huge ammounts of cheap boots (theyre the same cost as stock ig!). With orders they still put out an obscene ammount of lasgun fire and theyre immediatly in rapidfire range.
Ehhh... Elysians are nowhere close to as dependable as Plasma MEQs.
One thing I wonder though: What if we were to literally surround a unit with a blob of Elysians? Get them into CC, and they can't fall back. Haha.
According to some quick math I did, for Sicarian Infiltrators:
Pistols have about the same damage output per point vs marines and orks.
Taser goad is 54% better per point vs orks than power sword, and power sword is 35% better per point vs marines.
What do people think is best/what are you fielding? I'm building my unit right now and wondering.
ph34r wrote: According to some quick math I did, for Sicarian Infiltrators:
Pistols have about the same damage output per point vs marines and orks.
Taser goad is 54% better per point vs orks than power sword, and power sword is 35% better per point vs marines.
What do people think is best/what are you fielding? I'm building my unit right now and wondering.
I used to go for Taser Goad, but now in 8th I'm leaning towards Power Sword. Str 6 vs Str 4 isn't the game changer it used to be - essentially wounding on 3+ or 4+, and with the reduction in attacks, I'm keener on a consistant -3AP over a shaky 1/6 exploding dice. Plus if I Use them against artilitary vehicles, I believe the sword will also be more effective, despite the taser being higher str.
A related question I want to ask is about the idea of packing an assasin with them - Callidus, Evesor or Cluxeus.. I like the damage output and cost of the Evesor, but the Cluxeus being able to shut down psychers is very appealing..
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Any Assassin works to be honest. Are you looking to delete units immediately is the question.
Artillery can delete any unit but ICs hiding behind stuff. If you want to handle that, a mixed detachment of Melta/Plasma Scions or Plasma MEQs.
Personally, I am more interested in focusing on defending the artillery and getting points, since it is inevitable that we win if they fail to remove our shooting threats.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Any Assassin works to be honest. Are you looking to delete units immediately is the question.
Artillery can delete any unit but ICs hiding behind stuff. If you want to handle that, a mixed detachment of Melta/Plasma Scions or Plasma MEQs.
Personally, I am more interested in focusing on defending the artillery and getting points, since it is inevitable that we win if they fail to remove our shooting threats.
If you want to defend artillery, you're looking to delete units that can threaten them. Eversor is surprisingly the best defensive answer you can get here.
Aaranis wrote:
Alright I mixed up some rules but my explanation still works, it says that when this unit is placed the Aegis Protocol is on, just like in 7th. So you still have two shooting phases from your opponent (IF he gets first turn) that goes in the Aegis Protocol. What I mixed up was with the Canticles, which are indeed decided upon each Battle Round. Sorry.
MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:
Why would your opponent get a turn to shoot at Kastelans without Aegis? Protocols are decided at the beginning of your movement phase, it sounds like you are mixing them up with Canticles? i.e. Conqueror protocol is set at the beginning of the second movement phase
I think there may be some misunderstandings here.
Keep in mind three facts:
1) When set up, your Kastelan uses Aegis Protocol.
2) You attempt to change protocols at the start of your Movement phase.
3) The protocol change takes effect at the start of the next battle round. (Before or after Canticles, your choice.)
Here are the rules as written:
Battle Protocols: When this unit is set up, the Aegis Protocol (see below) is in effect. You can attempt to change the unit’s battle protocol at the start of each of your Movement phases if there is a friendly <FORGE WORLD> Cybernetica Datasmith within 6". To do so, roll a D6; on a 2+ the attempt is successful and you can select any one of the three battle protocols to take effect from the start of the next battle round. Otherwise, the attempt fails and the unit’s current protocol remains in effect.
If you go second, you always go second in each battle round. That means there will be one turn where you are exposed to enemy fire without Aegis.
Wulfey wrote:Does anyone know how Litany of the Electromancer works? WHen does the 1" get measured? At the start of the battle round? Once at any time during the battle round? WHose turn does it take place?
At the start of your battle round (which is BEFORE your turn, even if you go first), you roll for Canticles. If you get Litany, then you look at every unit that is in a 100% AdMech detachment (units in detachments with any non-AdMech units are NOT affected by Canticles). Pick out every enemy unit within 1" of these units. Roll a single D6 for each of these enemy units. If you get 6, you roll D3 and deal that many mortal wounds to that unit.
Litany of the Electromancer Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that is within 1" of any affected units; on a roll of 6, the unit being rolled for suffers D3 mortal wounds.
I think you mispoke here, as all of what you said is correct, except the Ageis part. I double checked the rules on the Robots and they do start with Ageis in effect. Not activating on your turn but on deployment as it says when this unit is setup it is already in Ageis.
PUFNSTUF wrote: Are Icarus crawlers worth taking in an Astra militarum list? Thinking of allying in two to four if them.
I don't know the profile of the other AA options in AM, but the Icarus Dunecrawler sure is a solid choice. Against Flyers that have the -1 to hit the Crawler still have 3+ to Hit, and 2+ against something that flies otherwise. It's three weapons that shoot at once, for a total of I think 8 shots at S7-8, that's really powerful. Plus, it can move 8" without penalty to Hit and is pretty durable. Think about including a Techpriest Enginseer to repair it if needed. If you take the Crawlers set them in pairs close to each other, so that they may reroll 1s on their invulnerable saves.
I think you mispoke here, as all of what you said is correct, except the Ageis part. I double checked the rules on the Robots and they do start with Ageis in effect. Not activating on your turn but on deployment as it says when this unit is setup it is already in Ageis.
Yes, Aegis is in effect at the start of the battle. But you switch your protocols in the movement phase and they activate at the start of the next battle round. Which means that if you are going second in a turn, your opponent can shoot at your Robots without activated Aegis protocol since you switched it the round before.
PUFNSTUF wrote: Are Icarus crawlers worth taking in an Astra militarum list? Thinking of allying in two to four if them.
That's exactly what I'm trying out. They're far cheaper than the Russ, can move and fire without penalty, an invuln save, BS 3+, the Icarus Array and Neutron Laser are phenomenal weapons. The only thing Russes have is +1 T (but I'd rather have the invuln), faster movement, access to orders, and can spit out TONS of shots. But my army already shoots enough low S shots. I need weapons that are going to hit and hurt priority targets.
Heck, even compare the Icarus Array Onager to a Hydra. It's a joke. And don't even look at the comparison of the Neutron Laser to the Russ turret options!
PUFNSTUF wrote: Are Icarus crawlers worth taking in an Astra militarum list? Thinking of allying in two to four if them.
That's exactly what I'm trying out. They're far cheaper than the Russ, can move and fire without penalty, an invuln save, BS 3+, the Icarus Array and Neutron Laser are phenomenal weapons. The only thing Russes have is +1 T (but I'd rather have the invuln), faster movement, access to orders, and can spit out TONS of shots. But my army already shoots enough low S shots. I need weapons that are going to hit and hurt priority targets.
Heck, even compare the Icarus Array Onager to a Hydra. It's a joke. And don't even look at the comparison of the Neutron Laser to the Russ turret options!
Yea exactly what I was thinking. How is your testing going? Are you taking them in a separate detachment with an HQ to get canticles or just using them in the heavy support slot? I am thinking of using some with a superheavy baneblade variant (of which I have an enginseer anyways for repairs.
2. Robots + Protector mode vs. Ultramrine AA Tarantula Sentry Twin Assault Cannons (incl. with Guilliman re-roll wounding buffs and not... this gets very crazy in bulk: 12 shots S6 AP-1 with rerolling hits and wounds on a 40 point model)
Seems like some of the primary competition for Imperium in gunlines. Crazy efficient.
ph34r wrote:According to some quick math I did, for Sicarian Infiltrators:
Pistols have about the same damage output per point vs marines and orks.
Taser goad is 54% better per point vs orks than power sword, and power sword is 35% better per point vs marines.
What do people think is best/what are you fielding? I'm building my unit right now and wondering.
I did mine with Taser and the 5 shot pistol. I like the volume of dice, so I haven't done the math hammer on it to really see whats worth it. I know ive charged 5 to Typhus and did a whooping 1 wound, so its a bad option if your fighting a lot of nurgle, but on Nids its way better then power swords.
temoinlanuit wrote:Has anyone done the mathhammer to justify us taking in-faction AdMech vs. some of the AA/FWIG options?
2. Robots + Protector mode vs. Ultramrine AA Tarantula Sentry Twin Assault Cannons (incl. with Guilliman re-roll wounding buffs and not... this gets very crazy in bulk: 12 shots S6 AP-1 with rerolling hits and wounds on a 40 point model)
Seems like some of the primary competition for Imperium in gunlines. Crazy efficient.
Yea Roboute with twin razorbacks is a boatload of shots and very murderous. But im not sure the question here. If your asking if you should cross admech with roboute with razorbacks id say why would you ever do that. Its very expensive. We already spend 250 for Cawl who is basically a reroll platform. Roboute is 360 and not only does he give much better bonuses, but he murders anything in CC. No reason to cross faction them.
I got in a game at 800pt for my FLGS Escalation League and just felt awful afterwards. Tabled my Space Marine opponent on turn 4. The Dakkastelans killed two Dev Squads and a Tac Squad all on their own. My Neutronager blew up a dread and his Captain. Infiltrators didn't do anything except take a far table quarter and objective... but that was worth it. I didn't lose a single model. Recovering wounds from the TPD and Datasmith really made it impossible for him to remove them without doing it in a single turn and when I wiped out his PCDevs on T1 before they could shoot, that took a lot of wind out of his sails. Again, I felt bad because it was just brutal. Gave me a good idea of just how absolutely rude the Robots are for sure.
Next week (starting technically today, but I am so behind on painting) is 1100pt. I haven't been challenged yet, so no idea who my opponent will be (not that I list tailor anyhow).
Here is my list - notable because this week our HQ Power Levels open up a bit and I can take Cawl!
HQ:
Cawl
[250]
Elites:
Cybernetica Datasmith
Gamma, Power Fist
[52]
I was hoping to get a bit of time in with the Rangers and snipe out pesky characters. Not sure that will actually materialize, but with Cawl for re-rolls and the mortal wound potential, seemed worth it.
Thoughts? Think it will work as a good all-comers list?
Overall I like your list. I would maybe try to switch out the 175 points spent on 6 vanguard and 5 rangers to be 10 vanguard and 5 rangers with 1 arquebus.
In my experience, the only thing that stopped the Kastelans' murderous shooting rampage is assaulting units. You need multiple squads of expendable troops to prevent the enemy deep striking and assaulting you turn 1.
ph34r wrote: Overall I like your list. I would maybe try to switch out the 175 points spent on 6 vanguard and 5 rangers to be 10 vanguard and 5 rangers with 1 arquebus.
In my experience, the only thing that stopped the Kastelans' murderous shooting rampage is assaulting units. You need multiple squads of expendable troops to prevent the enemy deep striking and assaulting you turn 1.
That would be my 6 Vanguard and the 5 Rangers. I can string out the Vanguard in a 15" or so line and the Rangers about 12" (though you can fudge it hard with the oval bases). I don't see the 10-man Vanguard as being a good option. Even 6 isn't "optimal" by most standards.
yesterday I played a very experienced tournament player. Ultramarines: Devs with Grav and Lasca plus Cherub, 5 Razorbacks with Assault Canon, Stormraven, Rowboat Gayman, Librarian and some recruits. I played Cawl, 4 Dragoons, 4 Onager, 2 Dakkastelans, Datasmith, TPD, Rangers with 2 Arquebusses, 4 x Vanguard (2x2 Plasma, 2x2 Arc Rifles).
Won 13:7 due to lucky or for him unlucky explosion results. In turn 4 he was left with Rowboat and the Libbi.
Experience: deployment zones are insanely important. 1. You want to go lsat when setting up marks to roll for the deployment zone (used a command reroll for that -.-) and you want to put 3 of your markers bsically in one corner 2.so we can stay out of assault canon range (we play maelstrom and eternal war plus who ends deployment first goes first).
I stayed out of range for most of his shooting so lost only the ranger squad. in return i killed a stormraven and a razorback. he disembarked his devastators and with cherub and signum they got 1 onager down to 1 hit point and killed the kastellans. in return i got 2 of his razorbacks to explode, killing all his devastators and he had rowboat, 2 razorbacks and the libbi left. I felt confident but man..that dumb rowboat and his 3++...we went the distance to turn 7 where i finally killed Robbored (Icarus overwatch ). He returned from the death so denied me warlord kill but that was okay.
All in all i like my list but a third Kastelan is needed. Will put him in. I am thinking of some defense against psykers but i am already very low on CPs (5) so I don't want to take an auxiliary and I really don't want to spend around 140 points just to get an Assassin into the list.
Iago40k wrote: yesterday I played a very experienced tournament player. Ultramarines: Devs with Grav and Lasca plus Cherub, 5 Razorbacks with Assault Canon, Stormraven, Rowboat Gayman, Librarian and some recruits. I played Cawl, 4 Dragoons, 4 Onager, 2 Dakkastelans, Datasmith, TPD, Rangers with 2 Arquebusses, 4 x Vanguard (2x2 Plasma, 2x2 Arc Rifles).
Won 13:7 due to lucky or for him unlucky explosion results. In turn 4 he was left with Rowboat and the Libbi.
Experience: deployment zones are insanely important. 1. You want to go lsat when setting up marks to roll for the deployment zone (used a command reroll for that -.-) and you want to put 3 of your markers bsically in one corner 2.so we can stay out of assault canon range (we play maelstrom and eternal war plus who ends deployment first goes first).
I stayed out of range for most of his shooting so lost only the ranger squad. in return i killed a stormraven and a razorback. he disembarked his devastators and with cherub and signum they got 1 onager down to 1 hit point and killed the kastellans. in return i got 2 of his razorbacks to explode, killing all his devastators and he had rowboat, 2 razorbacks and the libbi left. I felt confident but man..that dumb rowboat and his 3++...we went the distance to turn 7 where i finally killed Robbored (Icarus overwatch ). He returned from the death so denied me warlord kill but that was okay.
All in all i like my list but a third Kastelan is needed. Will put him in. I am thinking of some defense against psykers but i am already very low on CPs (5) so I don't want to take an auxiliary and I really don't want to spend around 140 points just to get an Assassin into the list.
you are welcome.
Still thinking about getting that stupid Assassin into the list. Inquisitor, 2 x Ratlings and Culexus is not a bad deal at all...55 pts left but noooo Rangers or Vanguard at all.
Had my first 8th victory last week.
I ran a list with 6xKastelan robots(in two groups), 3xNeutronCrawlers, Cawl, Greyfax, Datasmith, 5xInfiltrators, 4xEversor Assassins, and 2xindividual barebones acolytes.
He ran something like: 2xTempestor Primes, 2xTempestus command squad (packed with plasma guns), 2xScions(with some meltas), 3xTaurox Prime (gatling cannon hell), 3xDevestator centurians(Grav), 3xDreadnought(twin las & twin autocannon), Primaris lieutenant & Captain (for re-rolls)
He had turn 1 and started out by deepstrikeing plasma squads in and fired everything at my Robots, destroyed 4 of them in turn one.. The problem here was my deployment really. I deployed everything to far forward, so non of his stuff had to move to shoot me, and thus did not suffer a -1 to BS.
Non the less the shooting of my robots resulted in him loosing 11 plasma guys as well, they died to a mix of overcharge, reflects, and failed moral (11 dead plasma gunnners in HIS turn one). Several other units also suffered a few reflects.
My turn one. The loss of four Robots was a bit of a hit, so I decided to charge my entire army forward. I Deepstriked my 4 eversor assassins in. Cast the Terrify psychic power on the unit with the worst potential for good overwatch.
The NeutronCrawlers started opening up his tanks while cleaning up the plasma squad leftovers with stubbers. During my charge phase his deployment showed its own faults as each of my charging Eversor's managed to lock up serveral units (thus preventing him from shooting next turn.
From there on the game kept going my way and I won 13-5 or something.
My big takeaway was how good the Eversor's are at locking up stuff, since they got 3xD6 charge.
Speaking of deployments, I agree they are absolutely crucial. Especially in denying the deepstrike plasma threat. Luckily, they can't shoot off bubblewrap before the deepstrike turn 1 so I'm a tad less concerned with first turn charge.
I actually used my knight as a protective buffer last game. It worked, and tho he ate plasma not enough to limit his effectiveness. Attached photo was my deployment. I specifically was about 9.5" from the close table edge here to deny any kind of rapidfird into kastellens or destroyers.
My constructive critique on that deployment above is that you are still very close together. It looks reassuring having no gaps between units, but a compact deployment leaves lots of room for deep strike around it.
Remember that a gap of 17" between models prevents any deep strike - which is a huge gap. So if your units were wider apart, you would cover a lot more space without any loss in buff radius.
Cawl in particular doesn't need to be almost in base contact with the Kastelans and Onagers... use the full 6" of the bubble to extend your deployment right across the zone.
The Knight gets no buffs from anything so can be positioned in a corner 9" from each edge totally blocking that side of the board.
To the eye it looks like you don't have such a strong "castle" but in game terms you might be better deployed, and can cover more objectives.
Very fair assessment. I was staring down 3 razorbacks with dudes inside, a quad las predator, and awaiting a full death company and sanguinary guard squad with characters in deepstrike, knowing I was going to go second.
My main concern was that the long castle wall would cut off either the destroyers or kastelens from the deepstrikers if I didn't deploy centrally, if he came down all on one side. Cawl was that close purely to be in the area terrain.
You are absolutely right about that gap. Next time I will split the vanguard and rangers better. Also, I may look towards a second layer of cheep wrap or electro priests of either variety to get that extra cushion in. If they cut thru the wrap I had there, I would have been in trouble.
From that angle it looks like you have much better protection.
My problem with the Skitarii at the moment is that if you take them in 5's, they offer almost no resistance - what in 40k can't kill 5 wounds of S3 4+? You don't even need AP to breeze through them. And in groups of 10 they are susceptible to morale. The Enhanced Data Tether at least gives you another roll but for 9 points??? Seems insanely expensive.
I posted this in B&C but it fits here too...
I also played a game last night against Orks and used an interesting tactic which would work partcularly well in this situation - Paid 100 points for an Imperial Bunker in a Fortification Network detachment.
When I deployed it, I started with Belisarius Cawl, my Tech-Priest Dominus and a unit of Rangers with 2 Transuranic Arquebus inside.
Benefits:
Reduced my drop count for those units from 3 to 1 - more chance to go first.
Protected my HQs/Warlord from a turn 1 alpha strike
Gave my HQ's a free 3" movement boost - they get to disembark on turn one - deploy up to 3" away, move 6", advance d6"... so they can pretty easily slot straight into their ideal buff bubble zone near the Kastelans and Onagers
Snipers are totally protected - they stayed in there almost the whole game - took 4 wounds off the opponent's Warlord in T1 and made him hide the whole game. Great psychological warfare to have 2 S7 mortal wounds dealing snipers with a view across the board!
I am not 100% sure it's worth the 100 points - you could buy an extra Kastelan for 110... but I don't think it's ridiculous.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: If you want to defend artillery, you're looking to delete units that can threaten them. Eversor is surprisingly the best defensive answer you can get here.
With the exception of units hiding out of LOS, the artillery usually does a better job deleting units than the assassins.
Tsol wrote: I think you mispoke here, as all of what you said is correct, except the Ageis part. I double checked the rules on the Robots and they do start with Ageis in effect. Not activating on your turn but on deployment as it says when this unit is setup it is already in Ageis.
I think we're on the same page. Kastelans are set up with Aegis in effect.
PUFNSTUF wrote: Are Icarus crawlers worth taking in an Astra militarum list? Thinking of allying in two to four if them.
That's exactly what I'm trying out. They're far cheaper than the Russ, can move and fire without penalty, an invuln save, BS 3+, the Icarus Array and Neutron Laser are phenomenal weapons. The only thing Russes have is +1 T (but I'd rather have the invuln), faster movement, access to orders, and can spit out TONS of shots. But my army already shoots enough low S shots. I need weapons that are going to hit and hurt priority targets.
Heck, even compare the Icarus Array Onager to a Hydra. It's a joke. And don't even look at the comparison of the Neutron Laser to the Russ turret options!
Going to be honest, there is going to be a point where you realize most of your best shooting assets are AdMech, and you will switch over entirely for the Shroudpsalm, which makes your units even more durable. =P
temoinlanuit wrote: Has anyone done the mathhammer to justify us taking in-faction AdMech vs. some of the AA/FWIG options?
2. Robots + Protector mode vs. Ultramrine AA Tarantula Sentry Twin Assault Cannons (incl. with Guilliman re-roll wounding buffs and not... this gets very crazy in bulk: 12 shots S6 AP-1 with rerolling hits and wounds on a 40 point model)
Seems like some of the primary competition for Imperium in gunlines. Crazy efficient.
1. Crawlers hit harder and are more mobile. The only advantage of Earthshakers is that they can hit anything, any time.
2. Still Crawlers/
2 (again). You already have Cawl, seems really expensive to also have Girlyman.
gally912 wrote: Speaking of deployments, I agree they are absolutely crucial. Especially in denying the deepstrike plasma threat. Luckily, they can't shoot off bubblewrap before the deepstrike turn 1 so I'm a tad less concerned with first turn charge.
I actually used my knight as a protective buffer last game. It worked, and tho he ate plasma not enough to limit his effectiveness. Attached photo was my deployment. I specifically was about 9.5" from the close table edge here to deny any kind of rapidfird into kastellens or destroyers.
Going to echo Silentz. As long as your troops are within 18", you create a massive zone denial. The only thing you have to worry about are things like Coldstar Commanders with their terrifying 40" advance. I also would deploy that Knight further away from your AdMech detachment, 9" from the table corner to lock down an entire flank. (Against hordes, I may shift him to the center with the Kastelans, since I want them to advance together.) One thing I would add is to always put your Kastelans in front of the Crawlers. But then again, you run Skitarii troops as your bubblewrap, so it might be riskier; I use Dragoons to screen. One nice thing is that I can pretty much move the entire line however much I want because the screen is more mobile than the artillery.
So last game we had a massive multiplayer game at 5000 pts each side, I charged my Dragoon in TWO Bloodletters, they saved their 2 wounds, and destroyed me in one go. And just to add the cherry on the top they spawned one more Bloodletter after that due to Morale.
I'm never ever fielding the Dragoon with Lance again, it's just pure trash and its only reason to be is to go explode somewhere crowded.
Just realized my week 3 list was not legal. We are stuck in my league doing either a Patrol or Battalion this week. The former limits me immensely, but the latter taxes me to death.
HQ:
Cawl
[250]
Elites:
Cybernetica Datasmith
Gamma, Power Fist
[52]
(10) Fulgurite Priests
[160]
Troops:
(6) Vanguard
2x Arc Rifles, Arc Maul
[73]
(5) Rangers
2x Arquebus, Omnispex
[107]
Fast Attack:
Ironstrider Balistarii
Twin Cognis Lacannon
[95]
Heavy:
(2) Kastelan Robot
Triple Heavy Phosphor Blasters
[220]
Please keep us informed on the Priests' results, I've read a few time here and there on this thread that they were actually really good in some cases (just wait for our transport). I've been thinking a lot about my last defeats and the problem usually are the following: Terminators, and Robots tied in CC, usually with Terminators. The opponent generally kills the Datasmith somehow and so at the last two games my Robots were tied in CC for three turns without being able to disengage. Given, my actual list doesn't have a lot of bodies but that'll change soon. However so the problem for me were invulnerable saves, Lysander and friends all had Storm Shields so it was really difficult for my guys to hurt them in CC. So I believe the answer to these are mortal wounds of course. Where do we get mortal wounds in a pure AdMech army ?
- Volkite Blaster, on a 6 to Wound it deals a mortal wound;
- Arquebuses, same as above;
- Explosions, not really reliable I admit;
- Sicarian Ruststalkers, to my surprise they actually kept their 3 attacks each (I though the nerf to Infiltrators was to keep them on their level) and each 6 to Wound deals a mortal wound. The Chordclaw deals D3 mortal wounds, I see no reason not to take it;
- Fulgurite Electropriests, now that we saw their potential we're all just waiting for a transport for them or we have to be lucky and clever to get them to their destination alive. However as bodyguards for your artillery they could be really good.
I'd like to write a list pure AdMech when I'll get a second Start Collecting and I'll buy a few more boxes of other stuff. I'm considering ten Fulgurites to keep in a counter-charge role, so protecting my Robots from deep-striking Terminators or other such kind gentlemen. They are actually tough enough to take a light shooting at them with their 5++ and 5+++. You could work with another unit to shoot a target so there's only 2-3 models left and finish them off with a charge from the Fulgurites to render them as tough as Terminators. Really, these guys are ugly but boy they're appealing to play, shame for their € price though.
As for Ruststalkers they're excessively cheaper than in 7th and still pack a decent punch, lack of grenades is sad but let's wait for our codex. For 100 pts you have a 5 man unit with Chordclaws and Transonic Razors, that's dirt cheap to me. Same resistance as 10 Vanguards (10W, T3, 4+/6++) but they're really good in CC. The lack of AP is disheartening but the proc on 6 to Wound is just infinitely better than Taser Goads' proc against MEQ and TEQ. It's good they have kept their number of attacks and hitting at S4 is enough to fulfill their role, don't see any use for the twin Blades personally.
On another subject, I found a real nice use for the Heavy Grav-Cannon, dealing with Thousand Sons (and MEQ all the like). See, due to All Is Dust they have a 2+ save against D1 AP0 weapons so that renders them really durable. However the grav being D3 AP-3 will have them save on their 6++ while still dying instantly (and with a little luck you'll get the Terminators too). I'll bring them in my next few games to see how they perform. They're still 15 shots at AP-3 so that's nice, and as I don't have more than two Robots they're a nice light artillery.
I found the Grav to be somewhat luck dependent. Certainly damned good against Primaris marines and other heavy MEQ/TEQ armies, and with some decent luck can outperform the plas destroyers.
I just wish they either went a full -4 AP or S6/7.
S5 is just killer low when I dont think I've ever seen a 3+ vehicle that wasnt at least T7.
so yesterday i played a nasty ynnari list, 25 shining spears, yncarne, 2 wave serpents with fire dragons and a warlock. Chances to win this for Admech is extremely small. deployment was dawn of war which is basically an auto loss. having 25 2 wound models flyng into your face, all with 2 wounds and a 4++ against shooting showed me yet again after playing harlequins and nids, that one need not only a working screen but actually something that does something in close combat. Vanguard and Rangers are good enough for a screen (so are conscripts...they do suck immensely though) but they dont do anything in melee. Which is what we need to really defend our artillery. Dragoons are good for that, I played 4 and I think thats enough. But up to 6 are possible. I will actually test both variants of Electro-Priests. The Shooty dudes are actually like Vanguards, only with better melee capabilities. and the difference between 12 and 18 inches doesnt really matter. Sure, without melee rerolls they are somewhat okayish. But the chances for mortal wounds, which both priest variants can offer, is very important. Everyone who played against rowboat gayman and other 3++ dudes knows why.
The only question i have is how to keep them alive and let them do their job efficiently. and I am looking for freaking synergies^^
Iago40k wrote: so yesterday i played a nasty ynnari list, 25 shining spears, yncarne, 2 wave serpents with fire dragons and a warlock. Chances to win this for Admech is extremely small. deployment was dawn of war which is basically an auto loss. having 25 2 wound models flyng into your face, all with 2 wounds and a 4++ against shooting showed me yet again after playing harlequins and nids, that one need not only a working screen but actually something that does something in close combat. Vanguard and Rangers are good enough for a screen (so are conscripts...they do suck immensely though) but they dont do anything in melee. Which is what we need to really defend our artillery. Dragoons are good for that, I played 4 and I think thats enough. But up to 6 are possible. I will actually test both variants of Electro-Priests. The Shooty dudes are actually like Vanguards, only with better melee capabilities. and the difference between 12 and 18 inches doesnt really matter. Sure, without melee rerolls they are somewhat okayish. But the chances for mortal wounds, which both priest variants can offer, is very important. Everyone who played against rowboat gayman and other 3++ dudes knows why.
The only question i have is how to keep them alive and let them do their job efficiently. and I am looking for freaking synergies^^
I'm really close to buying 2 boxes of fulgurites and you are inching me closer!
Vanguards can be nice in a bodyguard role due to their -1T, of course they have to work in synergy with another unit. Those Eldars that engaged your Vanguards ? Now my Ruststalkers wound them on 2+. Of course this isn't a all-end solution but I certainly see it as something that can be worked forward.
Aaranis wrote: So last game we had a massive multiplayer game at 5000 pts each side, I charged my Dragoon in TWO Bloodletters, they saved their 2 wounds, and destroyed me in one go. And just to add the cherry on the top they spawned one more Bloodletter after that due to Morale.
I'm never ever fielding the Dragoon with Lance again, it's just pure trash and its only reason to be is to go explode somewhere crowded.
Mala suerte. =\
I hope you consider Dragoons. I mean, given your other post, you know AdMech's weaknesses. Dragoons truly do solve them as long as you temper your expectations.
Iago40k wrote: so yesterday i played a nasty ynnari list, 25 shining spears, yncarne, 2 wave serpents with fire dragons and a warlock. Chances to win this for Admech is extremely small. deployment was dawn of war which is basically an auto loss. having 25 2 wound models flyng into your face, all with 2 wounds and a 4++ against shooting showed me yet again after playing harlequins and nids, that one need not only a working screen but actually something that does something in close combat. Vanguard and Rangers are good enough for a screen (so are conscripts...they do suck immensely though) but they dont do anything in melee. Which is what we need to really defend our artillery. Dragoons are good for that, I played 4 and I think thats enough. But up to 6 are possible. I will actually test both variants of Electro-Priests. The Shooty dudes are actually like Vanguards, only with better melee capabilities. and the difference between 12 and 18 inches doesnt really matter. Sure, without melee rerolls they are somewhat okayish. But the chances for mortal wounds, which both priest variants can offer, is very important. Everyone who played against rowboat gayman and other 3++ dudes knows why.
The only question i have is how to keep them alive and let them do their job efficiently. and I am looking for freaking synergies^^
Bolded for emphasis. I think Fulgurites are a dead end until we get transports. Dragoons are the way to go. I am still debating whether I want four in their own detachment so that I can split them up easily or 6 in pairs. I am leaning toward the former, actually. The TPD is actually rather useful when you need to split up.
I don't think you should be that afraid of Eldar, Ynnari, or Tau; I do acknowledge that they can be challenging though. I actually am much in favor of 2x Neutron and 2x Icarus because it gives me flexibility in separating them while getting full benefit from the Force Fields. The drawback for Icarus is not too great. They do great against hordes and fairly well against MEQs.
Though I have to say, Coldstars are scary as hell. They can advance 40" right through your screen, shoot your Kastelans and Crawlers, then punch them in the face.
Iago40k wrote: What about useful fortifications?
And no...cawl is a must. He is not that great at anything by himself but his buffs are so important.
I refuse to cawl. It's so boring. Plus a ton of points. Seems that what people are losing to is getting their one unit charged because they're wrapping up 80% of their points in cawl and kastelans, and having no bodies on the field. When it's gun line v gun line that's great, I just don't see that as a good TAC list.
Iago40k wrote: What about useful fortifications?
And no...cawl is a must. He is not that great at anything by himself but his buffs are so important.
I refuse to cawl. It's so boring. Plus a ton of points. Seems that what people are losing to is getting their one unit charged because they're wrapping up 80% of their points in cawl and kastelans, and having no bodies on the field. When it's gun line v gun line that's great, I just don't see that as a good TAC list.
Amen to that, have you guys faced a list with a few deep-strikers ? A few lascannons even ? Psykers ? Of course with a blend of 5 factions from Imperium you do have a nice list but as pure AdMech it's tedious and you need more than Robots, they won't grab the objectives for you :/ I don't even know how you field Cawl, he dies in CC the second a Thunderhammer team meets him.
Iago40k wrote: What about useful fortifications?
And no...cawl is a must. He is not that great at anything by himself but his buffs are so important.
I refuse to cawl. It's so boring. Plus a ton of points. Seems that what people are losing to is getting their one unit charged because they're wrapping up 80% of their points in cawl and kastelans, and having no bodies on the field. When it's gun line v gun line that's great, I just don't see that as a good TAC list.
I want to see Cawl with a bubble of at least 10 ranged Electro priests...
Iago40k wrote: What about useful fortifications?
And no...cawl is a must. He is not that great at anything by himself but his buffs are so important.
I refuse to cawl. It's so boring. Plus a ton of points. Seems that what people are losing to is getting their one unit charged because they're wrapping up 80% of their points in cawl and kastelans, and having no bodies on the field. When it's gun line v gun line that's great, I just don't see that as a good TAC list.
I want to see Cawl with a bubble of at least 10 ranged Electro priests...
Cultists could kill them from farther than they shoot though
Iago40k wrote: What about useful fortifications?
And no...cawl is a must. He is not that great at anything by himself but his buffs are so important.
I refuse to cawl. It's so boring. Plus a ton of points. Seems that what people are losing to is getting their one unit charged because they're wrapping up 80% of their points in cawl and kastelans, and having no bodies on the field. When it's gun line v gun line that's great, I just don't see that as a good TAC list.
I want to see Cawl with a bubble of at least 10 ranged Electro priests...
Cultists could kill them from farther than they shoot though
If there's a rush to get forward, they can advance and shoot - in fact with Cawl letting you chose to re-roll ANY dice, you can re-roll the 3's as well, so when the -1 is applied the only issue is that you miss out of the exploding 6s. Even so, two 5++ saves are not far off a 3++ save
Aaranis wrote: Amen to that, have you guys faced a list with a few deep-strikers ? A few lascannons even ? Psykers ? Of course with a blend of 5 factions from Imperium you do have a nice list but as pure AdMech it's tedious and you need more than Robots, they won't grab the objectives for you :/ I don't even know how you field Cawl, he dies in CC the second a Thunderhammer team meets him.
Properly deployed screens should keep your artillery out of charge range after a Deep Strike. Lascannons definitely are a threat, psykers less so, again, due to screens. Thunderhammers are much the same story as Deep Strikers. Once they get into CC, you're borked. Before that, you have many opportunities to whittle them down, maybe even get some of your own CC in.
Also, worst-case scenarios involving CC are another nice advantage of Crawlers over Kastelans: They have fat dinner plate bases that are hard to go around, come in units of one, and can move and shoot.
Using an Imperial Bunker to bring down the number of deployments and to protect your rangers in general and/or protect your characters from a turn 1 alpha strike sounds interesting. If it helps getting first turn more reliably, those 100 points would be worth it. The way the "Fire Points" Rule is worded you could even put 2 5-man ranger squads with 2 transuranic arquebuses each in there and have all of those arquebuses fire.You can draw your firing arc from any point of the bunker's model so line of sight might not be that much of an issue if you deploy it properly. It also protects your infantry from melee deep strikers. You could probably even put vanguard in there and deploy the bunker in the front of your deployment zone to help with bubble-wrapping. There might really be some untouched potential here.
Played against
Dark Angels - Ravenwing Knights x3 + Azreal
Blood Angels - 2 Stormravens + Tacsquad+ Assault Squad+ Mephiston
Black Templars - LRC + 2x Crusader Squad + Termies + Emperors Champ
Went 2nd every time, although the ravenwing player gave me first after deploying out of LOS. Managed to go 3-0. Things noted:
-Kastelens have Move8. Dropped out of protector to secure midfield obj in turn 4-5
-Twice used 2CP to auto pass morale on skitarii to deny first blood
-Neutron Onager has much more damage potential to heavy flyers than icarus onager, but icarus will still be focused
-LR still get a 6+ against the Neutron, and occasionally that will be made (twice! :()
-Probably best to not bother with any specials on skitarii bubblewrap
-Infiltrators are still a must and single handedly won game against templars by deploying turn 3, shooting a 3 man squad off one obj and assaulting a 5 man on another.
Won some store credit. Didnt have any mechanicus so I got some necrons. >>
What the f is this no Cawl stuff. Sure, you can not take him and have an objectively worse admech army, if you want. But if you're taking an admech heavy army, I'd outright call you a Mindless servitor if you didn't take him at 1500+ pts. Dominus is terrible and he's the only other choice for admech HQ. And Cawl is bad in combat? Last few times i've played, he killed pleanty of huge melee specialists, like hive tyrants, daemon princes, etc...
Also every melee army will charge you turn one. So ofc I have faced them. You just need vanguard to stop them and blast them off the table. Every melee army I've faced, charged me turn one and on turn 3 were running away to try to win through VPs since crushed em. And every shooting army is just worse than admech in a shoot-off.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've yet to even come close to a loss in 8th with both my AdMech and Daemon armies and I've played: nids, daemons and a lot of different CSM(for some reason people really like em)
rvd1ofakind wrote: What the f is this no Cawl stuff. Sure, you can not take him and have an objectively worse admech army, if you want. But if you're taking an admech heavy army, I'd outright call you a Mindless servitor if you didn't take him at 1500+ pts. Dominus is terrible and he's the only other choice for admech HQ. And Cawl is bad in combat? Last few times i've played, he killed pleanty of huge melee specialists, like hive tyrants, daemon princes, etc... Also every melee army will charge you turn one. So ofc I have faced them. You just need vanguard to stop them and blast them off the table. Every melee army I've faced, charged me turn one and on turn 3 were running away to try to win through VPs since crushed em. And every shooting army is just worse than admech in a shoot-off.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've yet to even come close to a loss in 8th with both my AdMech and Daemon armies and I've played: nids, daemons and a lot of different CSM(for some reason people really like em)
It's actually not that hard to understand. It's valuing flavor over min-maxing your potential for victory. Plain and simple. If you imagine two types of war gamers, one who goes home and spends time pouring through data sheets to come up with the best possible build-out for their army (and enjoying it), and another who goes home, creates their own Forgeworld, comes up with a new name and paint scheme for their force to make an army that feels like _his_ army (and enjoying it), boom, you have a very clear reason why you wouldn't want to field Cawl.
I only bring this up because, for one, any kind of OMG, so-good, must-include unit like Cawl kind of bores me. The model's cool and I still plan on painting it up and fielding it occasionally because, well, it sounds fun.
The broader, community-facing point is that jumping on Cawl's mechadick as the one-and-only just stifles the fun of the part of the community that takes head canon over spreadsheets (and everyone in between). Hell, I'm painting up a trio of Inquisitors to take as a detachment (alongside my Dominus), because that sounds cool to me. And it's gonna look cool and it's not going to include Cawl and everything's going to be okay.
rvd1ofakind wrote: What the f is this no Cawl stuff. Sure, you can not take him and have an objectively worse admech army, if you want. But if you're taking an admech heavy army, I'd outright call you a Mindless servitor if you didn't take him at 1500+ pts. Dominus is terrible and he's the only other choice for admech HQ. And Cawl is bad in combat? Last few times i've played, he killed pleanty of huge melee specialists, like hive tyrants, daemon princes, etc...
Also every melee army will charge you turn one. So ofc I have faced them. You just need vanguard to stop them and blast them off the table. Every melee army I've faced, charged me turn one and on turn 3 were running away to try to win through VPs since crushed em. And every shooting army is just worse than admech in a shoot-off.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've yet to even come close to a loss in 8th with both my AdMech and Daemon armies and I've played: nids, daemons and a lot of different CSM(for some reason people really like em)
It's actually not that hard to understand. It's valuing flavor over min-maxing your potential for victory. Plain and simple. If you imagine two types of war gamers, one who goes home and spends time pouring through data sheets to come up with the best possible build-out for their army (and enjoying it), and another who goes home, creates their own Forgeworld, comes up with a new name and paint scheme for their force to make an army that feels like _his_ army (and enjoying it), boom, you have a very clear reason why you wouldn't want to field Cawl.
I only bring this up because, for one, any kind of OMG, so-good, must-include unit like Cawl kind of bores me. The model's cool and I still plan on painting it up and fielding it occasionally because, well, it sounds fun.
The broader, community-facing point is that jumping on Cawl's mechadick as the one-and-only just stifles the fun of the part of the community that takes head canon over spreadsheets (and everyone in between). Hell, I'm painting up a trio of Inquisitors to take as a detachment (alongside my Dominus), because that sounds cool to me. And it's gonna look cool and it's not going to include Cawl and everything's going to be okay.
+1 to Kinetoscopic, fluff-wise I don't want Cawl, and even then I don't like the model at all. I hate it when in whatever army you want there's this single character you'll fit everywhere because "he's so good", you end up facing the same character every game and that gets tiring narratively. I also dislike named characters in game because they'll die stupidly in a little skirmish and that sucks too.
As for your games, I really don't mean to insult your skills but I'm wondering if your opponents are as good as you are, because a dedicated CC army that uses deep-strike or GSC ambush tactics will rip through the poor bubblewrap that Vanguards are and get to your Robots and Cawl in half a second. He may be tough and all but if he resists 35 wounds with 6 at -4 rend in one go then you'll have me surprised. Or just a simple possession of your closeby Neutronager will rip him quickly. Then meanwhile your Robots are tied up in melee and so are useless. No really, I can't see a favorable scenario where you face a good player with an aggressive CC army and beat him in CC all the while you can manage to secure half the objectives, with PURE AdMech. If you can shoot his army that fast you guys should consider using more terrain.
Care to show us your usual lists please so that I can understand your tactics a bit more ?
Malygon wrote: Using an Imperial Bunker to bring down the number of deployments and to protect your rangers in general and/or protect your characters from a turn 1 alpha strike sounds interesting. If it helps getting first turn more reliably, those 100 points would be worth it. The way the "Fire Points" Rule is worded you could even put 2 5-man ranger squads with 2 transuranic arquebuses each in there and have all of those arquebuses fire...
As mentioned before, one unit, any number of characters, infantry-only, maximum 10 models. I would not bother with Arquebuses, since you can usually squirrel those away in some faraway place. A nice option that I mentioned some time ago are Kataphron Destroyers. They got great range, scary guns, and piss poor durability.
rvd1ofakind wrote: What the f is this no Cawl stuff. Sure, you can not take him and have an objectively worse admech army, if you want. But if you're taking an admech heavy army, I'd outright call you a Mindless servitor if you didn't take him at 1500+ pts. Dominus is terrible and he's the only other choice for admech HQ. And Cawl is bad in combat? Last few times i've played, he killed pleanty of huge melee specialists, like hive tyrants, daemon princes, etc...
Also every melee army will charge you turn one. So ofc I have faced them. You just need vanguard to stop them and blast them off the table. Every melee army I've faced, charged me turn one and on turn 3 were running away to try to win through VPs since crushed em. And every shooting army is just worse than admech in a shoot-off.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've yet to even come close to a loss in 8th with both my AdMech and Daemon armies and I've played: nids, daemons and a lot of different CSM(for some reason people really like em)
Don't approve of the tone, but I agree with the point. If you are playing TAC, 2000 points, and intending to win, you need Cawl. He makes the army competitive. Dominus is really expensive for what he does; Cawl is a bargain.
And yes, properly deployed screens stop first turn charges and Deep Strike. Abuse that 9" window to keep them out of range; remember that Deep Strike is at the end of a Movement phase.
As for the fluff objections, do what I do: consider him an Archmagos, paint him some not-red color, and call him whatever you want. But the instant a tournament rolls by, they're all from "Mars."
Not sure about never having come close to a loss. We're definitely a competitive army, but a lot of armies can give us a run for the money.
You could even mount your homebrew Dominus on a similar base size and call it a day. You never need official models so long as you got a similar size and concept.
As mentioned before, one unit, any number of characters, infantry-only, maximum 10 models. I would not bother with Arquebuses, since you can usually squirrel those away in some faraway place. A nice option that I mentioned some time ago are Kataphron Destroyers. They got great range, scary guns, and piss poor durability.
Yeah I should've read that more carefully. Still you can put your HQ and any Datasmith in it to bring down the number of deployments and shield them from turn 1 shenanigans if you go second.
Disadvantage of putting Kataphron Destroyers in there would be that those destroyers as an embarked unit would technically not be on the board. They can't benefit from aura's like our HQs re-roll aura that way, if I interpreted those rules correctly. If that's the case you'd have to rely on the destroyer's 4+ BS alone, which might lead to less than stellar results for a unit that expensive. You'd trade fire power for durability. Since I've always seen destroyers go boom pretty quickly that might be worth it still.
Correct. Because they are transports, auras do not affect them. That is why if you are taking them specifically for use in fortifications, your best bet is the Grav variant.
Here is the rule on p183 if anyone is curious:
"Embarked units cannot normally do anything or be affected in any way whilst they are embarked. Unless specifically stated, abilities that affect other units within a certain range have no effect whilst the unit that has the ability is embarked."
rvd1ofakind wrote: What the f is this no Cawl stuff. Sure, you can not take him and have an objectively worse admech army, if you want. But if you're taking an admech heavy army, I'd outright call you a Mindless servitor if you didn't take him at 1500+ pts. Dominus is terrible and he's the only other choice for admech HQ. And Cawl is bad in combat? Last few times i've played, he killed pleanty of huge melee specialists, like hive tyrants, daemon princes, etc...
Also every melee army will charge you turn one. So ofc I have faced them. You just need vanguard to stop them and blast them off the table. Every melee army I've faced, charged me turn one and on turn 3 were running away to try to win through VPs since crushed em. And every shooting army is just worse than admech in a shoot-off.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I've yet to even come close to a loss in 8th with both my AdMech and Daemon armies and I've played: nids, daemons and a lot of different CSM(for some reason people really like em)
It's actually not that hard to understand. It's valuing flavor over min-maxing your potential for victory. Plain and simple. If you imagine two types of war gamers, one who goes home and spends time pouring through data sheets to come up with the best possible build-out for their army (and enjoying it), and another who goes home, creates their own Forgeworld, comes up with a new name and paint scheme for their force to make an army that feels like _his_ army (and enjoying it), boom, you have a very clear reason why you wouldn't want to field Cawl.
I only bring this up because, for one, any kind of OMG, so-good, must-include unit like Cawl kind of bores me. The model's cool and I still plan on painting it up and fielding it occasionally because, well, it sounds fun.
The broader, community-facing point is that jumping on Cawl's mechadick as the one-and-only just stifles the fun of the part of the community that takes head canon over spreadsheets (and everyone in between). Hell, I'm painting up a trio of Inquisitors to take as a detachment (alongside my Dominus), because that sounds cool to me. And it's gonna look cool and it's not going to include Cawl and everything's going to be okay.
+1 to Kinetoscopic, fluff-wise I don't want Cawl, and even then I don't like the model at all. I hate it when in whatever army you want there's this single character you'll fit everywhere because "he's so good", you end up facing the same character every game and that gets tiring narratively. I also dislike named characters in game because they'll die stupidly in a little skirmish and that sucks too.
As for your games, I really don't mean to insult your skills but I'm wondering if your opponents are as good as you are, because a dedicated CC army that uses deep-strike or GSC ambush tactics will rip through the poor bubblewrap that Vanguards are and get to your Robots and Cawl in half a second. He may be tough and all but if he resists 35 wounds with 6 at -4 rend in one go then you'll have me surprised. Or just a simple possession of your closeby Neutronager will rip him quickly. Then meanwhile your Robots are tied up in melee and so are useless. No really, I can't see a favorable scenario where you face a good player with an aggressive CC army and beat him in CC all the while you can manage to secure half the objectives, with PURE AdMech. If you can shoot his army that fast you guys should consider using more terrain.
Care to show us your usual lists please so that I can understand your tactics a bit more ?
Lists are simple:
15-25 vanguard
cawl
Onagers, Kastelans & smith
Knight.
Random stuff I fit in
How do they "rip through your bubble wrap"? The only units that can do things like that are Khorne Berserkers and they need 2 turns to get to you at least. They will hit your bubble wrap. Kill them/fail to kill them. You retreat and unload a crap ton of shots at them. Just place you wrap 3''+ in front so they can't consolidate into you. Protect the robots with literally everything: vangaurd, knight, cawl, heck even onagers. Your opponent should only get to them turn 4, by then they should have like 2 models left.
And the dudes I've played have won your tournaments with less than stellar lists and have played for 7+ years at least.
Also I'm triggered since IMO Cawl is top 3 best models in WH40k. And I'm OK(ish) with people not liking him for his looks or full. I'm not OK with people even considering not taking him as a "strategic move".
A Knight is a very solid choice. Cawl, 2 Dakkabots, 3 Onager, 2 Dragoons, Some Vanguard and you got yourself a nice 1850 list. I like the knight because hes got some melee capabilities, something Mechanicus lacks. Our dedicated melee units are extremely fragile...man, Id love it if Onagers still got their Cognis Manipulator option.
Biggest problems Ive seen after a lot of games is that armies such as Harlequins and melee Ynnari (Shining Spears and Wave Serpents with Fire Dragons to add), all with Yncarne, are way more of a problem than nids or khorne or else. Flipbelts, insane movement, soulburst, Yncarnation and/or a 4++ against shooting really hurts, whether it is radium carbines by vanguard or dakkabots. I dont think we only need screening units but something for a counter charge. Either that or a knight who can be really good in melee plus brings a lot of firepower. Love the Paladin^^
rvd1ofakind wrote: "A knight" for me is "Knight Crusader" or "Renegade Knight" with ranged weapons as the melee weapons are just awful. Even the main testers admit that.
Cutting a wave serpent or a stormraven (in hover) in half in one round of combat is nothing Id call "awful" though.
rvd1ofakind wrote: "A knight" for me is "Knight Crusader" or "Renegade Knight" with ranged weapons as the melee weapons are just awful. Even the main testers admit that.
Cutting a wave serpent or a stormraven (in hover) in half in one round of combat is nothing Id call "awful" though.
Not sure how
It's 30pts sword that takes up a ranged weapon slot vs feet that cost 0 and don't take up the slot.
The feet are better in most circumstances and the sword even on best circumstances is barelly better or equal.
The columns are damage done that starts from T3 6+ and go to heavy vehicle. The last 2 columns are serpend and magnus. As Magnus is so prevelant - you can see that they do exactly EQUAL amount of damage. Isn't that insane?
And it's always more important to have more damage to everyone than most damage to heavy units since they are always screened off with multiple layers of small units
Here's a question. Why in the green hell is the sword only AP 3. So a Marine with a Powersword is just as good a Knight with a giant as sword at slicing through armour? That's just re...dumb
rvd1ofakind wrote: "A knight" for me is "Knight Crusader" or "Renegade Knight" with ranged weapons as the melee weapons are just awful. Even the main testers admit that.
Cutting a wave serpent or a stormraven (in hover) in half in one round of combat is nothing Id call "awful" though.
Not sure how
It's 30pts sword that takes up a ranged weapon slot vs feet that cost 0 and don't take up the slot.
The feet are better in most circumstances and the sword even on best circumstances is barelly better or equal.
The columns are damage done that starts from T3 6+ and go to heavy vehicle. The last 2 columns are serpend and magnus. As Magnus is so prevelant - you can see that they do exactly EQUAL amount of damage. Isn't that insane?
And it's always more important to have more damage to everyone than most damage to heavy units since they are always screened off with multiple layers of small units
Here's a question. Why in the green hell is the sword only AP 3. So a Marine with a Powersword is just as good a Knight with a giant as sword at slicing through armour? That's just re...dumb
Convinced. Well at least mathhammer wise. Basically ttah leaves me up with list as following
Spoiler:
Imperium: Super-Heavy Auxiliary Detachment - 598 Punkte
Plasma calivers on Vanguard because...well, spare points. Might be a good idea to only take 2 Vanguard units and a 5 man Corpuscarii (their close range shooting is better than vanguard and the yhave great melee capabilities...but damn are they fragile...well its a counter charge unit anyways)...Dragoons are just awesome for screening and if a screen is not needed they harrass...AM just hates them.
Eh, I just take more bodies if I have left over pts :/
Melta on Crusader is not really recommended as you usually don't agresively advance with the ranged variant. But I need to test that more.
Dragoons have been getting a lot of hate so not sure about those.
This is preeeeeeeeeeetty sad. 4 attacks because of 1/6 to get 2 attacks(cba to make a formula now)
An equavalent squad of vanguard does about 4x the damage on most targets, had more bodies, can use cover, can capture objectives better... Dragoons are in a pretty bad place right now IMO
I've heard some complaints about how good Kastelens are, and while they are good, what makes them *really* good is Cawl, plain and simple.
Cawl turns Kastelens from good to *amazing*
Cawl turns Destroyers from meh to good.
Basically, he is a significant force multiplier for any of your BS4+ shooting artillery pieces, which happens to be our primary anti-MEQ, anti-light, and anti-medium options.
Unfortunately, Cawl doesnt come with any guns with any kind of range, so he basically turns into a 250pt reroll buff, repair bot, and countercharge unit. Which, while decent, is a pretty significant tax to turn those Kastelens into the monsters they are.
Chapter Masters do a much better buff for much cheaper for Space Marines. They just dont have the weight of shots to take advantage of it. (or maybe they do, given the prevalence of ultramarine gunlines now?)
You can play Admech without him, this is 100% true, but that will significantly hamper the effectiveness of your BS4+ shooting artillery. If you were to run without him, I would be focusing on Onagers, a Knight, and Ironstriders as your main arty.
We're basically TAU that can somewhat fight but can't move.
Cawl makes Kastelans 50% better and a Neutron Onager gets a 32% increase
And you have what... 4-6 Kastelans, 2-4 Onagers?
So if you take cawl that's 313 pts at LEAST of value with 4 and 2 respectivelly. That alone makes him worth it, not counting other units he empowers, his damage potential up close and the CotO +1 -1 that I use all the time to spam shroudpsalm
rvd1ofakind wrote: Eh, I just take more bodies if I have left over pts :/
Melta on Crusader is not really recommended as you usually don't agresively advance with the ranged variant. But I need to test that more.
Dragoons have been getting a lot of hate so not sure about those.
This is preeeeeeeeeeetty sad. 4 attacks because of 1/6 to get 2 attacks(cba to make a formula now)
An equavalent squad of vanguard does about 4x the damage on most targets, had more bodies, can use cover, can capture objectives better... Dragoons are in a pretty bad place right now IMO
Dragoons are not really used for their offensive impact but are great screens and a great harrassment unit. Basically used to tie up units so they cant shoot next turn. Use them as a screen or if not needed rush them at your enemy. Vanguards are just too slow to play an efficient Maelstrom game. Dragoons at least can play that game plus almost every game they got me linebreaker.
With every match I tend to dislike the vanguard more and more...those strength 3 shots are just not doing it for me. And good god do they suck in melee by themselves. Thats why I am thinking about Corpuscarii.
But I am on board with "boys before toys".
No disagreement from me rvd1ofakind. Not in the least when you consider our primary strategy to be a "race to shoot their assaulters before they maul us because we can't run away or screen very effectively" - that extra efficiency is SUPER important.
That said, if you were hung up on not using him, Onagers and Ironstriders can make do with the TPD buff, for the most part. I think.
Ah well of course if you use a Knight things will go differently then they go with me I don't have one so that's normal if I get rolled over easier in CC. Don't get me wrong I'm not saying Cawl is bad or anything, I just find it sad that in 8th Edition there's still auto-take characters because they're so powerful.
Considering mobility I'm eager to try my new Ruststalkers, even if I considered them more as bodyguards to my Robots than anything else, they still move 8". Still keeping the Infiltrators because I'm starting to get the knack of a good deep-strike with them. Problems of my list are the lack of bodies, I'm considerably thinned down after one shooting phase, I can't hide everything at deployment and even then the enemy can still just move his guys to get a LoS.
And I don't believe the TPD is terrible. He's not OP by any means and feel rather overcosted but he still packs nice guns (Volkite Blaster being a cheap source of mortal wounds) and he's not too shabby in CC, especially when he gets the charge. I killed three regular Chaos Terminators in CC, just him and the termies, and he killed one a turn. 2 Damage is nice on the axe, he needed that. I tend to use him as a support unit with my Snipers around him when I can, and the Robots + Onager ALWAYS in his aura. When I'll buy a second Start Collecting I'll build one to accompany the walking infantry, one or two squad of Vanguards with Plasma and Arc Rifles.
TPD becomes terrible when it comes to fielding another one IMO. And since he's just a worse Cawl, he becomes pretty bad already. 1 Cawl, 1 TPD is fine if you can go out of your bubble (aka not facing turn 1 charge). But 1 Cawl 2 TPD and on is almost unplayable, which is sad as I have 3 of those fkers due to 3 start collectings.
My list still only has 2 Kastelans. I cut the other pair to make room for a Knight Crusader. Remember that even without a sword, those Titanic Feet can do some damage in a fight.
My Crusader and Dragoons make up the melee wall in front of my artillery. I mean, given the choice between 200 points of Vanguard or 204 points of Dragoons, I would always take the Dragoons. Much tougher to kill with Shroudpsalm + Incense Cloud, aren't scared to get into CC, and they have a chance to explode when they die.
TPD isn't terrible. But rolewise, he is redundant. He's 135 more points than we can spare most of the time for a function we don't need (unless we're running Caliver Vanguard squads).
Anyhow, have we settled on the best option for Deep Strike? Drop Pod Marines, Scions, Terminators?
Well, here are the lists of the 2017 ETC containing Adeptus Mechanicus. Now, the ETC is a team tournament so I wouldnt recommend pure copy/paste but it gives some ideas
Spoiler:
+ TEAM: AUSTRIA
+ PLAYER 3:
+ PLAYER TOURNEYKEEPER PROFILE: Alandro
+ ARMY FACTION: Imperium
+ TOTAL COMMAND POINTS: 3
+ TOTAL ARMY POINTS: 1974 pts
+ ARMY FACTIONS USED: Adeptus Mechanikus, Adeptus Ministorum
Knife+Storm Shield(35), 4 x Shield+Sentinel Blade(Shield-Captain)(56) [395]
As expected, there are not that many AdMech lists. I talked with a friend of mine who is a team member. He told me that AdMech "is just not up there". Mainly because AdMech is too vincible to good melee armies when playing a combination of progressive and end game objective missions, which is the usual way to go.
Basically it confirms my theory of the "good unit list":
Cawl
Vanguard
Balistarii
Smith
Dakkastelans Onagers
Knight Crusader
Not a single sniper or ranger, kataphron of any kind, no dragoons, sicarians (since other imperials have better versions), electro-priests, Dominus.
And oh look, every list had Cawl. Shocking
Automatically Appended Next Post: Actually Cawl is the ONLY unit that every list has
Aka when creating a 2000pts competitive list you have 1750 to play with
lets not forget that this is a team tournament where your team can choose what you are up against.
I am not sold on Balistarii yet. If they would have the cloud they could be something but I have yet to see them used properly. I wonder against what 18 vanguard in only 2 troops would be any good since they have that slight morale issue.
