I know it's not the most optimised list but it was supposed to be a launchpad to tweak from.
We played 4 pillars
I used scanner decoys and the nexos to basically have 2 deployments, one for going first and one for going second, and mathed out to expect to lose 1 goliath, and most of a squad of acolytes.
Instead by my first turn I'd lost 2 goliaths and a ridgerunner to d-cannons, and the acolytes to the remaining fire.
My return fire onto the one d-cannon I could see took of 2 wounds total, with the 4++ and 5+fnp that was put on them.
2nd turn I lost the remaining 2 ridgerunners, my patriarch, and a third goliath.
So bottom of turn 2 i'd lost basically all of my assault and all of my anti-tank. Lost 3 abberants to forewarned, wiped out a single screening unit of dire avengers, and lost the rest top of turn 3, after which I gg'd with 10 acolytes, nexos, clamavus, abominant and the sentinels remaining.
Drakeslayer wrote: It's also interesting because you're all (presumably) playing the new 9th edition missions with 9th ed rules.
My dad and I have decided to stick with 8th for the time being (tired of the constant codex expenditure), and I've been running my Genestealer Cult with 8th rules and points to some considerable success - against CSM, Space Wolves and even Iron Hands among others.
Did the 9th points update treat us this harshly? Is it the codex creep of other factions? Or are the core rules/missions making the difference?
Would be interested to hear people's thoughts on this.
(9th missions are a major part.
The need to stand on objectives for a turn with what are basically guardsmen is a huge problem.
The importance of scoring from early on while our deepstrike means we are not on the table until t2 and probably not scoring until t3 unless your doing deepstrike charges.
The ability to move out of combat, even when surrounded thanks to a strat.
Power creep in general.
Like we used to rely a lot on hostaging units to stop from getting shot. Now even a basic Primaris has 3 attacks so your going to take to many casualties.
So, presumably you went second? And you set yourself up a separate deployment for if you did go second, that's a good idea.
Probably in future when you set up that second deployment, start your heavy targets outside the range of the D-cannons. Ridgerunners are 36" range and 14" move, and the total threat range of a d-cannon is 30", and even if you're within that you can give them a -1 to hit and force them (probably) to get out from behind Obscuring terrain and move into that terrain to target you.
Since they're not Infantry, the terrain essentially does nothing for them if they're within it rather than behind it. In my "if second turn" deployment I'd place my sentinels within 30" of the guns to attempt to bait them into moving out of Obscuring terrain. No sentinels and can target many D-cannons is a better turn 1 setup than 2 sentinels and can only target 1 D-cannon. Another option if you want to keep him bottled is to start the multilaser sentinel already within range but behind obscuring terrain, in the hopes that he keeps his stuff where it is and just blows that away, rather than going for the move that opens him up more to your firepower.
the timing on forewarned is critical, he has to declare it IMMEDIATELY after a unit deep strikes. If you declare your movement phase over, he can't go back and forewarn against your most recent unit, or a previous unit you've deep striked, and he can't wait until all your stuff is down on the table to use it and pick the best target. If you're in a situation where you don't want to lose models off of a critical bomb squad you can begin dropping less critical units like the 5-man acos and asking "do you want to use forewarned now? Do you want to use forewarned now?" and if he's really stubborn in waiting until the aberrants are down, get the acolytes, clamavus and abominant down and then end your movement phase. Delay the aberrants until turn 3.
In your situation though I don't know how critical it is to have the aberrants at full strength, even 7 of them with the biophagus and abominant is going to carve up basically anything worth attacking in your opponents list, as you experienced obviously.
another thing to consider is: do you actually need those 10-man aco squads in those trucks in this situation? personally, I don't think you do, and I think you're better off dropping them after the abberants take Forewarned on the chin. Splitting your hand flamers and your heavy weapons is strategically a better move IMO, but if you do have them together, you have to realize your flamers are a more important tool in this matchup than your heavies, or your aberrants. a hand flamer acolyte gets a 96% points return against a 4++ dire avenger, without even calculating the 160pts your opponent is putting into having Asurmen on the table, a character who is close to literally worthless except for his capacity to grant a 4++ to DAs. If you can guarantee them a good deep strike in range of 2 squads I'd strongly consider Perfect Ambushing to double shoot them rather than bothering to perfect ambush the aberrants closer.
Your win condition in this situation is to pop off as hard as is possible on his infantry unless he hands you a real perfect opportunity to attack his cannons. if you get first turn, it's probably worth attacking the wraithseer if he was deployed aggressively before he gets defense buffs up, though acolytes can handle him fairly well with buffs and Overththrow, ehs' really just a big threat to aberrants. Otherwise you can probably target a wave serpent to try and get at more infantry.
If you get second turn, like I said either stay out of range of the cannons or give them some bait in the form of the sentinels to get them to try and move out of position.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Though it's not as good imo, if you got an opportunity to really style on the D-cannons you could probably also turn that into a win condition with the amount of armor you have on the table. If you did for example bait most of them out of obacuring cover top of t1 youve got enough juice to kill 3-4 of them with your shooting and still put decent hurt into some DAs with stubbers and autoguns.
The problem with baiting out the obscuring was that with quarters deployment and 4 goliaths +3RR I simply couldn't get everything out of range. The support weapons sitting just off the centre of the board had perfectly fine range into my deployment
I wanted to do something new. I guess I'm just a little depressed that the game for us now is just flamer bombs, with as many heavy mining weapons as you can afford. I wanted to try the truck delivery to play in a different way. There's that 120 acolyte list that I tried out for a game. I snuck a win with it against necrons but it's not fun to play. It's the same decision over and over again. But this was over the minute I rolled a 4 to go first rather than a 5, so is that any better.
dammit wrote: The problem with baiting out the obscuring was that with quarters deployment and 4 goliaths +3RR I simply couldn't get everything out of range. The support weapons sitting just off the centre of the board had perfectly fine range into my deployment
I wanted to do something new. I guess I'm just a little depressed that the game for us now is just flamer bombs, with as many heavy mining weapons as you can afford. I wanted to try the truck delivery to play in a different way. There's that 120 acolyte list that I tried out for a game. I snuck a win with it against necrons but it's not fun to play. It's the same decision over and over again. But this was over the minute I rolled a 4 to go first rather than a 5, so is that any better.
oh - I mean in this map you do have the option of just flat-out turn 1 charging I suppose if he's going to be that aggressive with his D-cannons. Sorry - I was operating off the assumption you were on one of the 5 maps with 24" or more of no-mans land. If his entire army is literally 100% in-your-face 18" away and you've got ambush blips, absolutely you should abuse that fact and give him a 50-50 chance of eating 100% of your melee units turn 1, no question about it.
Start your sentinels on the board to scout them up 9" to screen the Wraithseer away from the trucks, put the neos in deep strike and fill 2 trucks with 10 acos, 1 truck with 10 aberrants, and 1 truck with 5x aberrants, clam and abominant. All the trucks can deploy sitting outside your Dz and with the charge buff from the clamavus you can absolutely blitz in an a ton of stuff pretty much immediately.
If you go second, you can decide instead to deep strike everything valuable (the 10x aco flamer squads and the aberrrant squads and supporting characters) and try to direct him to target the trucks containing 5x acolytes by placing them aggressively near the center of the board.
You've actually got quite a few options with this list. I really don't think you're as limited as you think you are. You can win by targeting his infantry exclusively and saccing your anti-tank, you can win by targeting his cannons and saccing your infantry, and you can threaten a hyper-aggressive deployment in order to push his cannons back during deployment.
If he sees this map setup, and you start just PILING blips up right front and center on the deployment line, and he still puts his cannons down right in the middle of the board...well, let's just say the first time you win the roll for first turn he won't be doing that again.
Automatically Appended Next Post: If you want to start talking about list optimizations we can talk about list optimizations, I think there's some room for your list to get better, but I also think you have tactical solutions to this problem, with the list you have this game is winnable, even with the turn 1 state of 2 goliaths+1 ridgerunner destroyed - which you're entirely right, is EXTREMELY unlucky with the 6 d-cannons I'm estimating would be in the list.
dammit wrote: then I've completely misunderstood your point and you'll need to elaborate.
You deploy via blips, and you have enough extra blips that you can have an 'if I go first' and an 'if I go second' deployment. AND you can choose which units start off the board and on the board via "shrodinger's transports" - you don't actually have to decide who's in reserves or who's in the transports until you reveal blips.
Assume he's got an absolutely perfect position for his d-cannons - they're both right up on the deployment line, so there's nowhere to hide, and they're screened from all sides, and they're behind obscuring terrain so you can't attack them from your DZ very well. All that granted, that means your win condition in this is going to be "kill stuff that threatens infantry, mostly ignoring cannons unless it's literally free to pile into them and shut them up". If I'm understanding his setup correctly, he's got like a spiritseer casting protect on either a wraithseer or a D-cannon, and he's got Asurmen buffing the DAs, then he's got basically D-cannons, Dire Avengers, and 2 wave serpents presumably armed with anti-infantry weaponry and full of shadow specters.
You deploy 4 blips and your sentinels on the board right on your deployment edge, and the rest of your blips farther back. start with the aggressive blips and the sentinels. Assume your opponent still goes for the exact setup with the cannons right on the deployment line, rather than pushing them back.
Roll off to see who goes first. If you win, you scout the sentinels 9" forward, deploy 4 trucks 1" over the line into no-man's land (as discussed, you can do that via blip deployment) and those 4 trucks contain your 10-man acolyte squads, your aberrants, and your supporting characters. Your opponent is indescribably fethed, you get turn 1 charges with literally everything and you even have sentinels to deny overwatch.
If you lose, deploy 2 trucks on (but not over) the deployment line and put 5 unarmed acolytes in each truck. The other two trucks have neophytes in them, the aberrants and acolytes are off the board in deep strike. If you can, try to put the trucks containing neophytes behind Dense cover since they're your best pieces on the board, and you want to encourage your opponent to target the Sentinels and Acolyte Trucks if you can.
Math says 6 d-cannons should kill approximately 2 goliath trucks, so you can assume you'll lose both acolyte trucks most likely. You focus all your antitank fire on the wave serpents because those have infantry in them, and all your anti-infantry fire on dire avengers. You should kill approximately 1 wave serpent and 10 DAs with your firepower on the board. Charge a sentinel into a squad of specters if you can to tie them up.
Turn 2, assume you'll lose the neophyte trucks to the combined firepower, maybe also one of the ridgerunners. Eat Forewarned to the face with aberrants (assume you lose 3 as you said before) and A Perfect Ambush in the aberrants. On average with a clamavus 1 of the 2 10-man acolyte squads will make it into combat, and so will the aberrants. Assume each acolyte squad can kill 1 DA squad or 1 Specter squad with shooting, and the aberrants and the 10-man that got in can kill either the wraithseer (with help from the remaining mining lasers) or a squad of DAs in melee.
End of turn 2 you can have 50 DAs or 40 DAs and 5 Specters in the ground, depending on the board position. Your opponent probably has 1-2 squads that are threatening to infantry left on the board, assuming you were only able to kill 1 of the 2 serpents and he hasn't gotten the other specter squad out of the serpent. That's a winnable board position for you to be in going into turn 3.
Is it great? No, it's probably less than a 50% chance of a win, and it's dependent on a few factors and can swing on a few factors. Maybe he gets unlucky and doesn't manage to kill both goliaths turn 1, in which case you've got an extra piece to play with an be annoying with. Maybe he gets lucky as he did in your game and manages to take out both trucks and a ridgerunner, in which case you are in trouble and may not manage to kill a serpent. On this particular map, with this particular deployment from your opponent where he goes hyper hyper aggressive with the cannons, you've got close to a 100% chance of a win if you go first, and less than 50% if you go second and play optimally.
I understand it can be frustrating to try and play into a situation where you don't have an amazing chance of winning - and this absolutely is that - but my point to take home here is: even in that suboptimal situation, you did make your chances somewhat worse by selecting the Cannons as your desired target and regarding the infantry as 'screens' when in reality the infantry should have been your primary target. Also, i'm guessing the strategic option of going flat-out for a turn 1 charge if you went first didn't occur to you, because it isn't obvious from your army setup that the aberrants and crew can be swapped into the trucsk and the trucks can be deployed over the line.
the_scotsman wrote: You deploy via blips, and you have enough extra blips that you can have an 'if I go first' and an 'if I go second' deployment. AND you can choose which units start off the board and on the board via "shrodinger's transports" - you don't actually have to decide who's in reserves or who's in the transports until you reveal blips.
...
Also, i'm guessing the strategic option of going flat-out for a turn 1 charge if you went first didn't occur to you, because it isn't obvious from your army setup that the aberrants and crew can be swapped into the trucsk and the trucks can be deployed over the line.
That's not true though.
10. DECLARE RESERVES AND TRANSPORTS
These missions use the Strategic Reserves rules.
Both players now secretly note down on their army roster which of the units in their army will start the battle in Strategic Reserves, which of their units will start the battle in a location other than the battlefield (if a player has access to any Stratagems that enable them to set up units from their army in a location other than the battlefield, they must use such Stratagems now), and which of their units will start the battle embarked within TRANSPORT models (they must declare what units are embarked on what model). When both players have done so, they declare their selections to their opponent.
If you set up a TRANSPORT model in ambush, you must still tell your opponent what units are embarked within it when it is set up in ambush
ah, mb - that rule works differently than I thought then.
In that case, I'd probably start the aberrants in a truck on the board and 1 of the 10 acolyte squads, and start a neophyte squad off the board.
Lying in Wait deploy the neophytes right next to cannons/dire avengers and you'll probably bait out Forewarned with that, especially if you up their firepower a little bit with a couple flamers.
Drakeslayer wrote: It's also interesting because you're all (presumably) playing the new 9th edition missions with 9th ed rules.
My dad and I have decided to stick with 8th for the time being (tired of the constant codex expenditure), and I've been running my Genestealer Cult with 8th rules and points to some considerable success - against CSM, Space Wolves and even Iron Hands among others.
Did the 9th points update treat us this harshly? Is it the codex creep of other factions? Or are the core rules/missions making the difference?
Would be interested to hear people's thoughts on this.
It's more the change to the missions. GSC Codex was designed to take advantage of the intricacies of 8th edition, and the codex was amazingly designed with it in mind - points costs, abilities, CP costs, etc. Most other armies were more designed to be more generally good, and so moving to 9th didn't mean as much. We were designed to be good specifically in regards to the missions of 8th, where usually we just needed to tag an objective rather than actually holding it, and just kill something rather than remove a whole front. We are very good at the former, very poor at the latter, and the latter is how armies in 9th edition interact.
GSC lists get way, way better (still not great, but way better) if you bring a kronos nids patrol with a neurothrope, a unit if 5-6 hive guard, and your choice of an exocrine or some zoanthropes depending on whether you want more MEQ killing or more defense + MW output (and 3 rippers for 36 points to satisfy the troops). The GSC book really doesn't work well on its own in 9th; the lack of any unit that can hold an objective means you really need that no-LOS shooting to give you a threat that can't be easily neutralized and that requires your opponent to take the initiative, to give you a chance to then punish them. If you do want to see success with the faction before the new codex (and that could easily be a year or more from now with how things are going), it's probably the easiest way to get some strength into your list.
To hold objectives "perhaps" we will get the genestealer 5++ on all our infantry (BCog rerolling 1s or something). You read it here first no need to thank me
yukishiro1 wrote: GSC lists get way, way better (still not great, but way better) if you bring a kronos nids patrol with a neurothrope, a unit if 5-6 hive guard, and your choice of an exocrine or some zoanthropes depending on whether you want more MEQ killing or more defense + MW output (and 3 rippers for 36 points to satisfy the troops). The GSC book really doesn't work well on its own in 9th; the lack of any unit that can hold an objective means you really need that no-LOS shooting to give you a threat that can't be easily neutralized and that requires your opponent to take the initiative, to give you a chance to then punish them. If you do want to see success with the faction before the new codex (and that could easily be a year or more from now with how things are going), it's probably the easiest way to get some strength into your list.
Yeah, and then the list becomes EVEN better by not bothering with the GSC at all and just bringing some Dimachaeron to become a decent contender for top spots.
addnid wrote: To hold objectives "perhaps" we will get the genestealer 5++ on all our infantry (BCog rerolling 1s or something). You read it here first no need to thank me
I mean, honestly, I have no idea why GSC infantry is as flimsy as it is. Acolytes are absolutely huge to be T3 5+. with marines cleared out of W1 town, they could easily bump up acolytes to T4 4+ and aberrants to T5 W2 5+.
yukishiro1 wrote: GSC lists get way, way better (still not great, but way better) if you bring a kronos nids patrol with a neurothrope, a unit if 5-6 hive guard, and your choice of an exocrine or some zoanthropes depending on whether you want more MEQ killing or more defense + MW output (and 3 rippers for 36 points to satisfy the troops). The GSC book really doesn't work well on its own in 9th; the lack of any unit that can hold an objective means you really need that no-LOS shooting to give you a threat that can't be easily neutralized and that requires your opponent to take the initiative, to give you a chance to then punish them. If you do want to see success with the faction before the new codex (and that could easily be a year or more from now with how things are going), it's probably the easiest way to get some strength into your list.
Absolute true. I call this the "Bio Bug Detachment", just like how Guard had their Loyal 32 for a time. Anyone going to a tourney that isn't trying to make a name for themselves as mono-GSC should absolutely consider this detachment in their list.
However, if you do go the mixed GSC & Bug route, I believe it's far more effective to take a mostly Nid list with GSC backup rather than the other way around. GSC can do some amazing charges from deep strike with proper support, and the only thing holding them back is CP and not having a strong core in their own home zone. In this case, I'd recommend a minimalistic Cot4AE Patrol with Primus and Acolytes w/Rock Saws to just go in and make mincemeat of 1 unit with no other support necessary.
Had another successful game with my aberrant-based GSC setup. Really loving the flexibility that having multiple melee units on the table is giving me.
I played against a fairly aggressive opposing list:
-Iron Warriors heavy detachment
-Daemon prince with a bunch of upgrades (2+ armor that makes him regenerate)
-Defiler with twin HF -Contemptor with assault cannons+Cyclone
-Maulerfiend
We played a mission with short edge deployment, 5 objectives in a "5 on D6" pattern, with a mission objective that was an action you'd try to take on as many objectives as possible to score points at the end.
Because the action could be done by any model, not just infantry, I decided to take it as I had lots of transports and jackals. I also took Engage and Scramblers.
basically, anything I tried to do with melee units failed this game. Turn 2 I used genetic legacy to get a squad of acolytes into combat with the defiler but failed to kill it by one wound, Aberrants had nowhere good to show up turn 2, then turn 3 they rolled a 1 on perfect ambush and failed the charge with a re-roll, and also on turn 3 I realized I'd set up a situation where I would just hand my opponent a CP interrupt with my 2 remaining acolyte squads and so I decided to just not charge one of them to make my opponent have to shoot them off the board.
But still, just off of how good this list setup is at scoring and denying opponent scoring, I ended up winning 68 to 38. I successfully performed the mission objective on the middle objective and my own 2 home objectives using jackals and transport vehicles for 9pts, I had my 2 5-man squads of acolytes easily do Deploy Scramblers, and just by playing the game I got 12 from engage on all fronts.
the achilles+alphus just kept cracking one key target each turn, slowly getting whittled down to one achilles by the end of the game but still managing to finish off the oblit squad. aberrants flubbed their charge turn 3 but by then my opponent had lost the units that could have been the biggest threat to them, and just had a discolord and daemon prince left with mostly D2 weaponry - they happily lost a couple members to each and then they ate the discolord and the abominant rolled in the next turn to bonk the DP on the nose with the help of the hypermorph and last remaining lumpy boy.
I quite like that we are S4T3 as it makes for an interesting stateline for the game. Very different then others. Although I just wish they did not cost so much because they die like flies. It feels like we are worse guard in some respect.
Also, why only so few of our units benefit from cult creeds is very weard.
But you can't make the mounted come to Mohammed, so we just have to strip it for all its resources with the codex we have.
yukishiro1 wrote: GSC lists get way, way better (still not great, but way better) if you bring a kronos nids patrol with a neurothrope, a unit if 5-6 hive guard, and your choice of an exocrine or some zoanthropes depending on whether you want more MEQ killing or more defense + MW output (and 3 rippers for 36 points to satisfy the troops). The GSC book really doesn't work well on its own in 9th; the lack of any unit that can hold an objective means you really need that no-LOS shooting to give you a threat that can't be easily neutralized and that requires your opponent to take the initiative, to give you a chance to then punish them. If you do want to see success with the faction before the new codex (and that could easily be a year or more from now with how things are going), it's probably the easiest way to get some strength into your list.
Absolute true. I call this the "Bio Bug Detachment", just like how Guard had their Loyal 32 for a time. Anyone going to a tourney that isn't trying to make a name for themselves as mono-GSC should absolutely consider this detachment in their list.
However, if you do go the mixed GSC & Bug route, I believe it's far more effective to take a mostly Nid list with GSC backup rather than the other way around. GSC can do some amazing charges from deep strike with proper support, and the only thing holding them back is CP and not having a strong core in their own home zone. In this case, I'd recommend a minimalistic Cot4AE Patrol with Primus and Acolytes w/Rock Saws to just go in and make mincemeat of 1 unit with no other support necessary.
Oh for sure, I'm not saying it's the best Nids superfaction list by a long shot. Just that if you do want to play a mostly GSC army but not feel like you totally suck, it's an easy way to upgrade your army significantly for only the cost of a 500ish point detachment, so you can still have 1500 points of GSC and not feel totally gimped. The non-LOS shooting and the big ranged threat from the exocrine greatly enhances the viability of the GSC core, even if you'd still be better off just taking more real bugs.
Funny you say that. I always felt GSC lasers supplemented my nids better then the other way around. Although shoot twice hive guards are good, I agree on that.
I feel like GSC are good in the shooting department. We good on melee, or can be. I think it is mostly a matter of our units costing to much because they die like flies. I do not mind that. It is a good fun theme for the army. But when we are, in general, having so much trouble winning with GSC there is something wrong.
Shooting good, melee good, but winning is abscent. I suggest points are to exspsnesive. There are some arguing for abberants. Acolytes are OK. Purestrain and metamorphs are just worse versions. Our tanks lack the stratagem IG guard tanks have. And they always take tank commander BTW, not BS4 tanks. (PS try running the numbers on tank commander VS 2 ridge runners, it does not look good for the ringe runner, one of our best units. And the tank commander is not a topp choise.) Our brood brother squad can take 2 flamers/grenades, so that is something, but get no orders.
That is how I feel about it as an explanation for why it is so hard to winn. I would rather not throw salt at it. Instead focus on how fun the army is. Who does not like blips and signposts?
The problem with GSC shooting is the same problem as with the rest of the army, it just dies to a stiff breeze. The game-changing thing about Hive Guard is that because they don't need LOS to shoot, only the rarest of lists is going to have any way to threaten them at range (this is assuming you pay the 1CP for the ignore AP1 and AP2, which neuters virtually all of the non-LOS shooting you commonly see). So this means the opponent has to come at you if they want to deal with them, and that's the only way GSC has play in 9th.
Having something that can output damage without dying totally changes how you play, and it's something completely missing from the GSC book.
Niiai wrote: Funny you say that. I always felt GSC lasers supplemented my nids better then the other way around. Although shoot twice hive guards are good, I agree on that.
I feel like GSC are good in the shooting department. We good on melee, or can be. I think it is mostly a matter of our units costing to much because they die like flies. I do not mind that. It is a good fun theme for the army. But when we are, in general, having so much trouble winning with GSC there is something wrong.
Shooting good, melee good, but winning is abscent. I suggest points are to exspsnesive. There are some arguing for abberants. Acolytes are OK. Purestrain and metamorphs are just worse versions. Our tanks lack the stratagem IG guard tanks have. And they always take tank commander BTW, not BS4 tanks. (PS try running the numbers on tank commander VS 2 ridge runners, it does not look good for the ringe runner, one of our best units. And the tank commander is not a topp choise.) Our brood brother squad can take 2 flamers/grenades, so that is something, but get no orders.
That is how I feel about it as an explanation for why it is so hard to winn. I would rather not throw salt at it. Instead focus on how fun the army is. Who does not like blips and signposts?
What are the numbers on a Tank Commander compared to ridge runners? You get 3 ridge runners for just 15 points more than a barebones TC.
Niiai wrote: Funny you say that. I always felt GSC lasers supplemented my nids better then the other way around. Although shoot twice hive guards are good, I agree on that.
I feel like GSC are good in the shooting department. We good on melee, or can be. I think it is mostly a matter of our units costing to much because they die like flies. I do not mind that. It is a good fun theme for the army. But when we are, in general, having so much trouble winning with GSC there is something wrong.
Shooting good, melee good, but winning is abscent. I suggest points are to exspsnesive. There are some arguing for abberants. Acolytes are OK. Purestrain and metamorphs are just worse versions. Our tanks lack the stratagem IG guard tanks have. And they always take tank commander BTW, not BS4 tanks. (PS try running the numbers on tank commander VS 2 ridge runners, it does not look good for the ringe runner, one of our best units. And the tank commander is not a topp choise.) Our brood brother squad can take 2 flamers/grenades, so that is something, but get no orders.
That is how I feel about it as an explanation for why it is so hard to winn. I would rather not throw salt at it. Instead focus on how fun the army is. Who does not like blips and signposts?
What are the numbers on a Tank Commander compared to ridge runners? You get 3 ridge runners for just 15 points more than a barebones TC.
I dunno but I feel like my money is on the 3 ridgerunners tbh.
It’s a bit like comparing apples to oranges, but I’m inclined to agree. Like others have mentioned though, the main problem with GSC seems to be that there isn’t a single unit to hold objectives without being wiped by your opponent in one turn of shooting. That’s why I’m leaning towards laser neophytes in trucks. At least that way your opponent has to pop a truck and wipe a squad in one turn. Large squads of Jackals might work too? Lots of 2W T4 models with -1 to hit and a dirt cheap price..
The trouble with using units in trucks to hold objectives is unless your opponent kindly shoots the truck out from under you, it still only counts as 1 non-ObSec model on the objective - so they can take the objective off you with pretty much anything without having to kill your stuff at all.
hangnailnz wrote: The trouble with using units in trucks to hold objectives is unless your opponent kindly shoots the truck out from under you, it still only counts as 1 non-ObSec model on the objective - so they can take the objective off you with pretty much anything without having to kill your stuff at all.
Well either that happens, or you have commited a singular squad on an objective with a guard statline.
In many ways i think that is the issue, if we want to really hold an objective we need to commit more squads then other factions (just like guard incidentally) in order to even stand a chance of having a squad remainig on an objective.
And whilest bladed cog and an iconward can help out, let's be honest here, 6++ and 6+++ or 5+ and 6+++ for a 6ppm model with t3 is trivial to remove, especially for Meq equivalents. It doesn't help either that even though we could expand most of our units size to more then 10 that blast just improves and morale can become an issue, and using a patriarch for morale babysitting duty is, well, also a lot of pts wasted
canonized wrote: It’s a bit like comparing apples to oranges, but I’m inclined to agree. Like others have mentioned though, the main problem with GSC seems to be that there isn’t a single unit to hold objectives without being wiped by your opponent in one turn of shooting. That’s why I’m leaning towards laser neophytes in trucks. At least that way your opponent has to pop a truck and wipe a squad in one turn. Large squads of Jackals might work too? Lots of 2W T4 models with -1 to hit and a dirt cheap price..
I don't know, honestly, my gsc is the army I feel like scores like gangbusters no matter what I do. Mostly that's off the back of 50-pt handflamer acolyte squads and cheapo characters that I drop down to score, usually out of line of sight behind some chunk of building wall.
Jackals in theory do that job, but mainly they're there as a screen/unit to grab me 3pts from engage on turn 1. Many objectives can't be done by jackals. Also remember you have Lurk in the Shadows - even the shittiest, paper-thinnest infantry squad can make themselves functionally invincible if they have to get their objective hold on.
Lurk requires the unit to be entirely on or in terrain. The rules of 9th don't allow you to put terrain on objective markers. Now admittedly it's only the 40mm marker itself that terrain can't go on, so you can still have terrain within the 3" control zone, and therefore it's still possible to have a squad fully within a terrain feature and able to control an objective because you have a model or two just barely in range. But that's a very tenuous control, and more importantly, the big L-ruins that are the most common 40k terrain pieces usually aren't run as area terrain in order to avoid the problem with that stopping LOS-blocking, so often there isn't actually a terrain feature you can be wholly on or in within range of an objective. It's great when it works, but it'd be so much stronger without the "wholly on or within" caveat.
The strat says "wholly on or within a terrain feature" not just "benefitting from cover." If that's been FAQ'd to something else, I wasn't aware of it.
The latter would make a lot more sense with 9th edition design, I agree.
It's a cool strat, but I honestly haven't come across many situations where it's been overly useful. Usually I have far more threatening stuff such that my opponent can't afford to shoot at a back-field unit that is just holding onto an objective. Partially this is because my opponents have had a lot less shooting than in 8th (as 9th rewards brawler units far more), and partially because, as stated, you usually can't flood an objective with models and still achieve this, making using this on a unit close to an opponent's forces not ideal.
I expect to use this strat in my next game vs Admech though, and could see folks playing vs T'au or Eldar getting a lot of use out of this as well.
A lot of missions involve objectives that reward the player heavily for managing to hold on to an objective in their opponent's DZ for a single turn. At least, the last 3 or so I've played have heavily incentivized that - in one I had an action that could burn down an opposing objective that would not only deny that to my opponent the rest of the game but also give me a large number of secondary points, and in the other I had an action I could perform on all the objectives as a secondary, which included the ones in my opponent's DZ.
In both instances I was able to use Lurk to prevent the unit performing the action from dying.
Really? I guess I just haven't been in that situation. Usually stuff in my opponent's DZ is close enough to their units that making my unit be the closest one is trivial to the point of non-necessity, so using the strat on them would've been pointless.
the_scotsman wrote: A lot of missions involve objectives that reward the player heavily for managing to hold on to an objective in their opponent's DZ for a single turn. At least, the last 3 or so I've played have heavily incentivized that - in one I had an action that could burn down an opposing objective that would not only deny that to my opponent the rest of the game but also give me a large number of secondary points, and in the other I had an action I could perform on all the objectives as a secondary, which included the ones in my opponent's DZ.
In both instances I was able to use Lurk to prevent the unit performing the action from dying.
But were you playing Lurk under your previous interpretation though? Because that makes a pretty big difference going forward.
It really comes down to how much area terrain there is on the board. If there's area terrain within 3" of an objective marker, it's quite a useful strat. And it was great in 8th, because everybody had big blocks of area terrain all over the board. But in 9th, I find people tend to have recategorized those big L ruins as obstacles instead, to avoid the problems with how the obscuring keyword works.
But that really depends on how your playgroup does their boards. If they still have a bunch of ruins that are ruins, not obstacles, it can be very useful.
the_scotsman wrote: A lot of missions involve objectives that reward the player heavily for managing to hold on to an objective in their opponent's DZ for a single turn. At least, the last 3 or so I've played have heavily incentivized that - in one I had an action that could burn down an opposing objective that would not only deny that to my opponent the rest of the game but also give me a large number of secondary points, and in the other I had an action I could perform on all the objectives as a secondary, which included the ones in my opponent's DZ.
In both instances I was able to use Lurk to prevent the unit performing the action from dying.
But were you playing Lurk under your previous interpretation though? Because that makes a pretty big difference going forward.
no, I guess we just play with an unusual amount of large block area terrain from 8th, because when building the terrain for our tables I tried to make it as game-functional as possible for 8th edition. So we have a lot of large, true-LOS blocking pieces with large areas for units to be able to get wholly into as that was the only way to actually get cover in 8th.
Now that smaller pieces can finally be functional, I'll probably start adding more in as Small Ruin Walls and Forests and whatnot.
By the way, aberrants are just heartbreaking - not, contrary to the memes, because they're terrible, but because they are so close to being what the army needs. It really wouldn't take a lot and GSC would actually have a points efficient objective-holding unit - if they were ~26 points instead of 30, for example, and/or if they got transhuman (which would certainly fit them as well as it fits marines). Their offense is not very good, but IMO that's fine - GSC has plenty of offense, what it lacks is anything that can take a hit in a semi-efficient way, and aberrants are really not far off that.
They do have some good stuff. Refuse damage by 1. That is good. Having a 5+ feel no pain is good. That you can boost to 4+ with 2 CP. Have the banner around to re-roll 1's.
Hammers are good. The pick model has 4 attacks each, quite nice.
Only SM have so much T5 3+ transhuman. Comparing them to say blade guard, attack bikes, outriders or Terminators. They should really not cost 30 points.
They could cost 30 points of vigulus was stil legal. Getting a 3+ to charge with 4 armed emperor would make them good.
Also, why do twisted helix have the fight twice on abberants stratagem? They are the one unit who benefits the least from getting S+1.
the_scotsman wrote: A lot of missions involve objectives that reward the player heavily for managing to hold on to an objective in their opponent's DZ for a single turn. At least, the last 3 or so I've played have heavily incentivized that - in one I had an action that could burn down an opposing objective that would not only deny that to my opponent the rest of the game but also give me a large number of secondary points, and in the other I had an action I could perform on all the objectives as a secondary, which included the ones in my opponent's DZ.
In both instances I was able to use Lurk to prevent the unit performing the action from dying.
But were you playing Lurk under your previous interpretation though? Because that makes a pretty big difference going forward.
no, I guess we just play with an unusual amount of large block area terrain from 8th, because when building the terrain for our tables I tried to make it as game-functional as possible for 8th edition. So we have a lot of large, true-LOS blocking pieces with large areas for units to be able to get wholly into as that was the only way to actually get cover in 8th.
Now that smaller pieces can finally be functional, I'll probably start adding more in as Small Ruin Walls and Forests and whatnot.
Nice, I tend to play with dense tables as well as it makes the game a little more dynamic. It's always tough discussing tactics online when it involves terrain I find so I just firgured I would ask.
yukishiro1 wrote: By the way, aberrants are just heartbreaking - not, contrary to the memes, because they're terrible, but because they are so close to being what the army needs. It really wouldn't take a lot and GSC would actually have a points efficient objective-holding unit - if they were ~26 points instead of 30, for example, and/or if they got transhuman (which would certainly fit them as well as it fits marines). Their offense is not very good, but IMO that's fine - GSC has plenty of offense, what it lacks is anything that can take a hit in a semi-efficient way, and aberrants are really not far off that.
The problem with Aberrants is that I can't help but glace sideways at a Bladeguard Veteran and think that its everything I wish an Aberrant would be.
yukishiro1 wrote: By the way, aberrants are just heartbreaking - not, contrary to the memes, because they're terrible, but because they are so close to being what the army needs. It really wouldn't take a lot and GSC would actually have a points efficient objective-holding unit - if they were ~26 points instead of 30, for example, and/or if they got transhuman (which would certainly fit them as well as it fits marines). Their offense is not very good, but IMO that's fine - GSC has plenty of offense, what it lacks is anything that can take a hit in a semi-efficient way, and aberrants are really not far off that.
The problem with Aberrants is that I can't help but glace sideways at a Bladeguard Veteran and think that its everything I wish an Aberrant would be.
Bladeguars are not as good VS S8, but otherwise you are probably right.
yukishiro1 wrote: By the way, aberrants are just heartbreaking - not, contrary to the memes, because they're terrible, but because they are so close to being what the army needs. It really wouldn't take a lot and GSC would actually have a points efficient objective-holding unit - if they were ~26 points instead of 30, for example, and/or if they got transhuman (which would certainly fit them as well as it fits marines). Their offense is not very good, but IMO that's fine - GSC has plenty of offense, what it lacks is anything that can take a hit in a semi-efficient way, and aberrants are really not far off that.
The problem with Aberrants is that I can't help but glace sideways at a Bladeguard Veteran and think that its everything I wish an Aberrant would be.
It's tough because so much of our army is paying out the nose for our hyper-reliable deep strike. I definitely agree that durability, rather than damage, should be the defining trait of an aberrant to differentiate it from metamorphs, acolytes, and purestrains, wheras currently they're all just right on top of each other in terms of role.
If you had me design them...
Acolytes: best anti-heavy damage or cheapest, basically I think they're pretty solid as-is in terms of role. I'd probably make them T3 4+ and increase their points accordingly as we have another GEQ troop
Metamorphs: Rather than trying to give every weapon a slightly different statline I'd give them one weapon called "Monstrous Biomorphs" and allow the player to choose 1 profile for them before the game starts to tailor against the opposing army. So similar to now you'd have weapons that aren't quite as good at purestrains at clearing hordes, or quite as good as acolytes at killing heavy stuff, etc, but they'd be flexible. Also they'd be T4 4+ to further differentiate them from acos.
Aberrants: Make 'em the tough guys of the bunch. Hammer aberrants should be less efficient at damaging tanks for the points than heavy weapon acos, and pick aberrants less efficient at clearing elites than purestrains, but they should be solidly tougher than either for the points. give them 'anvil status.'
Purestrains: ffs incorporate them into the army proper but then just have them be the most efficient at clearing out elite infantry. keep the rend on Acolytes the same but make purestrain rending claws AP-4 and D2 on a 6 and give them the attacks to back it up, and then make scythes into a "bonus attacks" item. Scythe purestrains should be the last word in shredding GEQ and claw purestrains in shredding MEQ for the points.
the_scotsman wrote: A lot of missions involve objectives that reward the player heavily for managing to hold on to an objective in their opponent's DZ for a single turn. At least, the last 3 or so I've played have heavily incentivized that - in one I had an action that could burn down an opposing objective that would not only deny that to my opponent the rest of the game but also give me a large number of secondary points, and in the other I had an action I could perform on all the objectives as a secondary, which included the ones in my opponent's DZ.
In both instances I was able to use Lurk to prevent the unit performing the action from dying.
But were you playing Lurk under your previous interpretation though? Because that makes a pretty big difference going forward.
no, I guess we just play with an unusual amount of large block area terrain from 8th, because when building the terrain for our tables I tried to make it as game-functional as possible for 8th edition. So we have a lot of large, true-LOS blocking pieces with large areas for units to be able to get wholly into as that was the only way to actually get cover in 8th.
Now that smaller pieces can finally be functional, I'll probably start adding more in as Small Ruin Walls and Forests and whatnot.
Nice, I tend to play with dense tables as well as it makes the game a little more dynamic. It's always tough discussing tactics online when it involves terrain I find so I just firgured I would ask.
Yeah, understandable. Our tables are unusual because we have someone (me) actively trying to manage and keep up our terrain collection. So during early 8th we had a large windfall of sector mech terrain brand new in box, and my mission with it was to try and make it as game functional for 8th as possible, because just straight out of the box it just could not have been more worthless for use as anything but table decoration for 8th. I mounted large chunks together on wide bases to allow units to fit easily both on top of and under the structure, and tried to strategically place the large pipes to create true-LOS blocking zones underneath the structures.
We also had a lot of the old GW ruins that I bought and added bases to in order to increase their impact on the table and make "wholly within" very clear and easy to understand, and I also got a lot of nice looking MDF terrain that both have bases and are big chunky bunkers with zero holes in them.
For 9th, I've created a bunch of themed terrain sets that have their own box and have laminated rulesets with the various terrain traits that go along with each piece. Every table has Obscuring, Light, and Dense cover bare minimum in fairly common supply, with the occasional houseruled trait to make terrain management easier (e.g. our trees are based individually, so Forests on some of the maps have a special trait where any trees placed within 1" of each other are treated as a single Forest entity with a footprint equal to the outer diameter of the imaginary shape formed by the bases, and any gaps between the bases should be ignored)
On the risk of venturing into design philosophy - I agree with a lot of your assessments of wishing that these guys had different roles. However, I think Purestrains are really just held back by not being able to be given cult traits, because otherwise everything else they need is in the dex. +1 to hit from Patriarch, they can intrinsically advance and charge out of a truck, and all the different cult traits are actually useful on them. I think Genestealer Rending Claws should go to 6+'s to hit AND 6+'s to wound are auto-wound, AP-4 and 2dmg (both GSC and Nids version), but that's actually secondary for where I'd like to see them.
After 9th edition dropped a lot of the stuff that made the genestealers good disapeared in the rules. On topp of that they increased to 15 points. Except some very try hards very few take genestealers in tyranid lists any more. The once that do co bine it with the swarmlord, not a broodlord.
Even if GSC stealers had a cult trait (and that would be awsome!) it is very unlikly they would be good. You have no swarmlord to support. On topp of that they are somehow 17 points instead of 15.
Agreed with purestrains actually benefitting from the Cult Creed.
I kinda wish there was a metamorph unit that had options to take ranged bio-weapons like devourers or something - in addition to T4, 4+ to really make them feel like an elite unit, but firmly keeping them focused on anti-infantry. I think this would help further differentiate them from acolytes.
Yarium wrote: On the risk of venturing into design philosophy - I agree with a lot of your assessments of wishing that these guys had different roles. However, I think Purestrains are really just held back by not being able to be given cult traits, because otherwise everything else they need is in the dex. +1 to hit from Patriarch, they can intrinsically advance and charge out of a truck, and all the different cult traits are actually useful on them. I think Genestealer Rending Claws should go to 6+'s to hit AND 6+'s to wound are auto-wound, AP-4 and 2dmg (both GSC and Nids version), but that's actually secondary for where I'd like to see them.
The only issue I have with these ideas to fix pure-strains are the abilities procing on 6's for more damage. That would mean technically each wound roll would have to be rolled individually verse other multi wound units. I am sure most folks would compromise on using dice pools, but for competitive play that's a messy call. I honestly don't have a problem with them having single damage but they absolutely should just have 4 attacks, dropping the silly +1 attack on units over 10 models which never made any sense to me. I mean, they have 4 arms lol. I also think they should just hit on a 2+ seeing as they have had a long history of weapon skill stats on level with most characters in the game. Give the patriarch some other buffing ability.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Drakeslayer wrote: Agreed with purestrains actually benefitting from the Cult Creed.
I kinda wish there was a metamorph unit that had options to take ranged bio-weapons like devourers or something - in addition to T4, 4+ to really make them feel like an elite unit, but firmly keeping them focused on anti-infantry. I think this would help further differentiate them from acolytes.
Yea it was one of the most mind numbingly stupid skullduggery on GW's part when they excluded genestealers from gaining the army bonus in an army modeled around themselves lol.
Really? Because Tyranid genstealers benefits from their hivetype. You do not think that genestealer DNA contains spesific markers?
Actually, if I where to argue the way you do it would make sence that the purestrains and patriarch has a seperet cult creed identical to that of the parent hiveship. Like how the dark eldar has 3 different creeds within their army at the same time.
I choose hivefleet behemot or kraken for my genstealers.
canonized wrote: It makes sense that purestrains wouldn’t have a cult creed, it doesn’t make sense that they are completely outclassed by hybrids and metamorphosis.
Is this still an issue? I've been away from the game for basically all of 8th and 9th so far, but this was a big problem for GSC back in 7th - can't believe they haven't fixed this yet lol
Purestrains and the Broodlord should get some other sort of built-in trait that's universal across all Cult Creeds (so the fluff makes sense) but helps keep them from being flat outclassed by fleet 'Stealers (not that the Broodlord has this problem but obviously it needs to be consistent).
And of course they shouldn't be more expensive than fleet 'Stealers.
Madjob wrote: Purestrains and the Broodlord should get some other sort of built-in trait that's universal across all Cult Creeds (so the fluff makes sense) but helps keep them from being flat outclassed by fleet 'Stealers (not that the Broodlord has this problem but obviously it needs to be consistent).
And of course they shouldn't be more expensive than fleet 'Stealers.
Belive it or not they used to be cheaper. And with excelent deployment options. No Swarmlord though.
Seems like a big group of jackals would make a really nice screen for a patriarch.
E: completely unrelated, but I think under RAW you can use Unquestioning Loyalty with vehicles. Could be worth it in some situations to sacrifice a low wound vehicle to prevent a killing blow.
E2:v this is why I shouldn’t be trying to read my codex late
canonized wrote: Seems like a big group of jackals would make a really nice screen for a patriarch.
E: completely unrelated, but I think under RAW you can use Unquestioning Loyalty with vehicles. Could be worth it in some situations to sacrifice a low wound vehicle to prevent a killing blow.
No because the model you re-direct to has to have the rule. and vehicles don't get it.
canonized wrote: It makes sense that purestrains wouldn’t have a cult creed, it doesn’t make sense that they are completely outclassed by hybrids and metamorphosis.
Is this still an issue? I've been away from the game for basically all of 8th and 9th so far, but this was a big problem for GSC back in 7th - can't believe they haven't fixed this yet lol
Every army that's not marines gets meaningfully touched by the attention of the GW design team once per edition. Last edition was a crazy freak edition because every army got 2 (so obv marines got 3, to keep it fair) with the index and codex.
if they don't fix your problems when you get your codex, youuuuuuuuve just gotta live with those problems for 3 years.
Every army that's not marines gets meaningfully touched by the attention of the GW design team once per edition. Last edition was a crazy freak edition because every army got 2 (so obv marines got 3, to keep it fair) with the index and codex.
if they don't fix your problems when you get your codex, youuuuuuuuve just gotta live with those problems for 3 years.
My biggest problem with 8th edition is that there was very little revision, statline-wise, from Index to Codex for most armies, despite player (and therefore GW's) understanding of how the new rules actually break down in practice growing and making issues with those statlines clear. Lots of weapon statlines and unit statlines that felt sort of experimental in the way they tried to translate stuff that disappeared or changed dramatically (lost USRs, AP values, Initiative, AV statlines, Unit types) in the Indexes just... carried on into their 8th edition codex, which was inevitable for some of the earlier armies to get a codex but by the twilight of the edition they were bizarrely still stubbornly sticking to them. To use our own codex as an example: what was done to the Seismic Cannon, heavy or normal, was a crime that wasn't addressed even though we were one of the last armies to get an 8th edition book.
Fortunately, so far in 9th they do seem to be allowing/asserting themselves to make notable changes to the statlines they established with the 8th edition indexes, so I will allow myself to be optimistic.
I do not know if that was the biggest problem of 8th edition. Or even if it was a problem playing GSC in 8th edtion.
From my understanding GSC did quite well in 8th edition as long as you have some 30 CP and spammed trops etc. I only had GSC as allies then (I have them as a whole army now) so I am rellyig on a bad memory of reports from other people.
The biggest 'nerf' in 8th edition was how the rules to reserves changed. It is a good change for the game. But I think our current codex was not written with those in mind. I do not know the timing of when they planed the changes to when the codex was written.
But the changes to those reserve rules, 9th edition rules changes in general and 9th edition point increases all pile on to make things very difficult.
I would not think it fair to say the 8th edition codex was not well written. For the most part it has been adequit. You can of course arest them on smaller things.
GSC were very good in 8th, and while the reserve rules were a big change for us from how the army played in 7th (see random table of fun(TM)), I think the biggest change that negatively affected the army as a whole was the buff to marines.
Infiltrators, Doctrines, and Super-Doctrines countered our deep-strike shenanigans, and the prevalence of AP2 made Rusted Claw largely defunct (apart from the atalan jackal suicide squad).
Specifically, Iron Hands were a very hard-counter to GSC, with invincible dreadnoughts and overwatching on a 5+
How are people feeling about psychic summons as a way to get around 1/4/5 deep strike?
2cp is a cost for sure, but that + return to the shadows is a way to get two units anywhere we want on the board right at the end of the game, or to pressure a back objective before the first turn of scoring.
Requires keeping that magus alive throughout but it's something i'm looking at alongside the abberants to have a bit more flexibility in my lists, being able to have less sunk points at deployment and react to the game a bit better.
My understanding is that reinforcement points aren't counted against the reserve limits?
I found the best use of Psychic Summons was to summon a squad and move-block turn 1. Super effective against some armies, but I've found advance and charge with Psychic Stimulus to just be better. The CP cost is just crazy, as we're already so starved on it, and it eats up a caster who has very valuable psychic powers. The only thing I could consider doing with it would be to bring a second set of characters, since we're also not allowed to double up on our Characters - but then I think you might as well just bring a real 2nd detachment as a Patrol for the same number of CP.
Niiai wrote: I would not think it fair to say the 8th edition codex was not well written. For the most part it has been adequit. You can of course arest them on smaller things.
That was not what I was talking about. I'm talking about poor translation of 7th edition unit and weapon profiles to their 8th edition Index versions, and how GW basically refused across all armies to significantly reassess if these were good translations or not as they progressed to 8th edition codexes. To once again use the Seismic Cannon as an example: this weapon used to function at 12" or less as a Krak Missile launcher that had AP1 on a wound/penetrate roll of 6, or a Heavy Bolter with the same AP1 bonus at 12" or more. The only difference between the Heavy vehicle mounted one or the infantry carried one was the number of shots it had in either profile. Compare that to what the Index implemented and the 8th edition codex followed through on, it's completely unrecognizable as the weapon it was - the Heavy version at least does have S8 like it used to at the short range, but still lost a point of strength on the other one, while the infantry version... absolutely silly. You find examples of these totally off the mark statlines across plenty of armies, not just GSC, where it appears to me that GW was just in crunch mode trying to get all armies 8th ready for their Index version, but then never took the time to reconsider if those were the best translation of the 7th edition rules when it came to release the codex rules.
As another example, consider Monster units vs. Vehicles. Functionally identical now, Monsters used to trade slightly less potential for shooting firepower for greater durability by virtue of having 0 potential to be destroyed by any single anti-armor weapon, but not being impervious to small arms fire. Now, they still tend to be equipped with less guns than their vehicle equivalents, but have vastly lost out on that durability, typically having as many or less wounds than a lot of vehicles serving similar roles, while also being more vulnerable to both small arms fire and anti-armor.
It's the same kind of sentiment that led to 2W Firstborn Marines - it had become apparent that the new rules did not accommodate whatever GW had thought, at the time of writing the Indexes, worked for translating statlines from 7th to 8th. Players vocalized this enough that GW listened. And we're seeing bits of it in non-Marine armies come 9th edition as well, most notably the armory update. Which is why I said I was hopeful that things would change for even the armies that typically spend several years languishing with poorly balanced rules.
dammit wrote: How are people feeling about psychic summons as a way to get around 1/4/5 deep strike?
Just returning to this point, any units going underground from they came from below is able to come onto the board in turn 4. I'm pretty sure this got FAQ'd in 8th to be before the end of turn 3, so either that FAQ got pulled or it was never there to begin with and I had been playing the entire edition wrong.
This definitely reframes my thinking about competing into the later turns.
In Eternal War missions, Strategic Reserve and Reinforcement units can never arrive on the battlefield in the first battle round. Any Strategic Reserve or Reinforcement unit that has not arrived on the battlefield by the end of the third battle round counts as having been destroyed, as do any units embarked within them (this does not apply to units that are placed into Strategic Reserves after the first battle round has started).
I'd love to have the balls to argue that the parenthesis applies to the entire paragrah but it definitely doesn't.
You can definitely summon daemons in the first battle round (unless that changed in 9th? you could in 8th despite the language about no turn-1 ), so I dunno why the same wouldn't be true of GSC summoning.
From the 2019 8th edition FAQ:
". Also note, that no part of this matched play rule applies to units that are added to your army
during the battle (such as those that require reinforcement points to be added); these units cannot be set up anywhere
(on the battlefield or otherwise) during deployment because they do not exist until the point where the rule that
‘creates’ them is used, and that point is always after deployment has finished."
I don't see any reason why this would be changed for 9th. Summoned units aren't Reinforcements because they don't start the game off the battlefield; they don't exist at all at the start of the game.
Thought that had occurred to me. If I deploy a unit of scout sentinels on my forward deployment line and put an ambush token right in amongst them; I should be able to pregame move my scout sentinels out of the position, allowing another unit (say Jackals, Cult Armoured sentinels, ect) to then deploy there via cult ambush at the start of my movement phase/end of opponent's movement phase; right?
(I want to play a very aggressive "Push them back" sorta play style to prevent my opponent from even reaching the centre objectives.)
Yes you can, and I've done this myself . Move-blocking is phenomenal when your opponent is unable to counter it because their list concept is too defensive. You keep them off scoring until turn 3, and you'll almost surely win the game even getting tabled on turn 4.
However, I've found that anyone whose played a bit of 9th knows that they need things to push up super fast, and this strategy is useless if your opponent can Fly. So, yes it's good, but you'll only see a small window of it being actually effective.
I'm planning to get a Hydra or two, and I figure they should be able to put a dent in any "fly" units, so I'm not going to be fussed if my opponent brings lots of targets for them.
Aside from "fly" units, or say, something like the Tyranid "Overrun" rule, how else do people break through moveblocks?
(Things are still largely locked down here so, haven't been able to play a game with my new models yet.)
I'm planning to get a Hydra or two, and I figure they should be able to put a dent in any "fly" units, so I'm not going to be fussed if my opponent brings lots of targets for them.
Aside from "fly" units, or say, something like the Tyranid "Overrun" rule, how else do people break through moveblocks?
(Things are still largely locked down here so, haven't been able to play a game with my new models yet.)
Well, here's how folks have countered me once they move-blocking started to lose its luster here:
#1 - Just fight them - Everyone. They choose not to shoot the unit to death, so they can charge. They use the distance of the charge to get around the unit and as far forward towards other objectives as possible. The Space Marines just WRECK the unit in combat, because they're bananas strong and we're thinner than paper, but it applies to most other armies too.
#2 - Fights twice - Many. Same as above, but they can get extra distance by fighting twice, further reducing the viability of the move-block.
#3 - Double-move - Chaos & a few others. They hop through walls and other breachable cover with their dudes, then move again. Pretty much, they move to establish a line against yours.
#4 - Pre-game moves - Mechanicus, Chaos, Space Marines, heck even Scout Sentinels from Guard. Anything to keep you from move-blocking their path onto objectives.
#5 - Effective Deep Strike + Chargers - Blood Angels, Orks. They don't really care too much about your move block.
#6 - They go first and are fast - Lots of folks. Move-blocking only works if you're actually in the spot you need to be to move-block them.
So yeah, most armies have ways around this once the person realizes that there's this threat at the start of the game that many armies, not just ours, can do. There's probably even more, but I've encountered almost all of these myself with my move-blocking forces, and had to give it up. For a short while though, it really was effective! Called it the NPC army, which is probably a dozen pages back by now.
Patriarch advances behind the jackals. Primus, acolytes, and the two barebones neophytes squads will start off the table. The mining laser neophytes will try to stay in the truck.
E: it just occurred to me that the transport rules might not allow the neophytes to benefit from the Jackal Alphus’ aura while embarked. I’ll need to check that next time I have the rule book handy.
E2: they can benefit from the Alphus because they benefit from any modifiers given to the Goliath.
I haven't come up against an opponent where they give up a single good (11+ point) secondary against us, leading us to really only being able to run teleport homers/deploy scramblers and linebreaker/engage.
I find that almost every other army has at least 3 decent options and we don't.
Automatically Appended Next Post: We need a really good codex secondary when we get our codex in late 2022.
It went well, but by my turn 3 it was over. (He was on the play.)
I have left 2 abberants, 1 alpha Jackal, 1 ridge runner, 1 leman russ and 15 acolytes who failed their charge. 5 acolytes randomly around.
He had left 1 undamaged gorkanaught with the upgraded gun, 1 Dakkajet, 1 truck with 1 wound left and 10 flashgits in it. 5 rocket boys and 1 rocket boys leader.
It is just so overwhelming screening against all his deep strike shenanigans. And the gorka or morkanaught is just so damn dangerush. And I never manage to kill the airplane. That airplane just has to die if I am to hold objectives with small guard like units.
It went rather good for while. If some rolls had gone better it might have worked.
Next time I think maiby I can cut the 3 deploy scrambler units and shotgun unit. They did rather little. Perhaps things could improve if I could kill the airplane.
The abberants where a mistake. I need more power tool acolytes instead.
I'm having a lot of fun and success with 6 firetrucks and 6 lazer cars with the (yuck) hivecult. I was able to sprinkle 15 10 point rocksaws throughout the list to pump my melee damage output.
But i want to talk about Rock cutters. I think this is the answer to death guard. They are d3 and each time to deal damage you can just kill a guy. It kills plague marines on 2+ and terminators on 3+
Im trying them out today but I think they are going to murder characters.
I asume you are playing on some form of program? And not not the tabletopp? Getting together 12 trucks seems impossible IRL. At the very least far to exspensive.
Hivelord lets you reroll 1s to hit with the Mining laser cars and the rock trucks.
You can fall back with acolytes and fire Xd6 autohitting flamer shots and open up a unit for shooting.
Each truck carries 10d6 12 inch flamers which can be fired in combat because they are pistols.
Its an overwatch threat as well.
you get about 30-40 hits and usually about 8 wounds on T6+ i was able to flamer off 8-10 wounds off a knight with them
Automatically Appended Next Post: Just checking back in. Can confirm rock cutters are amazing. D3 damage and the instant kill is totally worth the -1 to hit. Killed 4 characters with the cutters with single hits where I would have needed 4+ rocksaw wounds.
Hivelord lets you reroll 1s to hit with the Mining laser cars and the rock trucks.
You can fall back with acolytes and fire Xd6 autohitting flamer shots and open up a unit for shooting.
Each truck carries 10d6 12 inch flamers which can be fired in combat because they are pistols.
Its an overwatch threat as well.
you get about 30-40 hits and usually about 8 wounds on T6+ i was able to flamer off 8-10 wounds off a knight with them
Automatically Appended Next Post: Just checking back in. Can confirm rock cutters are amazing. D3 damage and the instant kill is totally worth the -1 to hit. Killed 4 characters with the cutters with single hits where I would have needed 4+ rocksaw wounds.
Ever since the increase in 3W models with the Gravis models Cutters have become more and more worth it, glad to see they worked for you.
dreadlybrew wrote: For those interested in the vehicle and character portion of the list. This is a solid footprint
Sorry but Hive Cult there makes no sense: for a reroll 1s to hit on shooting (that applies only to the vehicle part) you lose out on REROLL ALL HITS IN MELEE for all your Acolytes which also have a rock cutters there where it's ABSOLUTELY a necessity.
Nah man. Rerolling 1s in combat is enough. Rerolling 1s on 6d3 heavy mining laser shots, 20ish autocannons and an average of 42 stubber shots is worth more than re rolling 2s on cutters.
In a perfect world you don't even need to get out of the trucks with the acolytes.
I agree with you if I am deep striking blobs of 20 with 8 cutters re rolling everything is a force multiplier but not in this list.
You only get to reroll 1s within 6” of the Hive Lord Alphus, and with Pauper Princes you get to reroll all hits on the charge. You could use this to save ~60 points on banners and pick up an additional neophyte squad or 5 more flame hybrids.
yukishiro1 wrote: Yeah, it's only a reroll hits within 6", which is not going to impact more than a small fraction of that army at a time.
Thats true. But a long model with a 6 inch aura is more like an oblong 8 to 10 inch aura.
Plus the biker can keep up. And re roll her own cruddy sniper rifle. The other side of the coin is that you need all the vehicles to alpha strike targets. So target priorities matter and you can chain yourself to the biker and primus until the re rolling wounds targets are dead. Included a photo with a game against knights i played.
yukishiro1 wrote: Yeah, it's only a reroll hits within 6", which is not going to impact more than a small fraction of that army at a time.
Thats true. But a long model with a 6 inch aura is more like an oblong 8 to 10 inch aura.
Plus the biker can keep up. And re roll her own cruddy sniper rifle. The other side of the coin is that you need all the vehicles to alpha strike targets. So target priorities matter and you can chain yourself to the biker and primus until the re rolling wounds targets are dead. Included a photo with a game against knights i played.
If you are using trucks and ridgerunners thi way with their mobility, you're playing an AM Armored Company without the armored part
Which is useless if they destroy the trucks first and easily kill 10 T3 5+ wounds afterwards.
HF are for Deepstriking Acolytes, Truck ones are melee only that use Run + Charge Stratagem + Psychic Power to have an enormous threat range
But the hand flamer acolyte profile is unique. While T3 5+ sucks infantry do not want to eat 10 handflamer overwatch and they have a good offensive profile on a suksessfull charge.
Trucks are OK as well. Gets even better VS the new dark eldar with 2 autocannons on each.
But the hand flamer acolyte profile is unique. While T3 5+ sucks infantry do not want to eat 10 handflamer overwatch and they have a good offensive profile on a suksessfull charge.
Trucks are OK as well. Gets even better VS the new dark eldar with 2 autocannons on each.
HF Overwatch which is not possible from the truck itself since it's a stratagem and you can't use it from inside Transports
But the hand flamer acolyte profile is unique. While T3 5+ sucks infantry do not want to eat 10 handflamer overwatch and they have a good offensive profile on a suksessfull charge.
Trucks are OK as well. Gets even better VS the new dark eldar with 2 autocannons on each.
HF Overwatch which is not possible from the truck itself since it's a stratagem and you can't use it from inside Transports
Its for when your out of the truck and getting charged.
If someone charges your trucks you don't really mind. He can't kill the unit inside, if he consolidates into you you get to attack for free, if he doesn't you get a guaranteed charge and either way he is getting flamed because pistols.
The trucks are open topped. If I recall correctly if the truck is eligible to fire overwatch the occupants inside are as well. I havent done it yet mostly I use the hand flamers from inside the truck to clear infantry. I also charge trucks into targets to pull more movement for the guys inside. Tagging enemy units with trucks means they aren't shooting at my more important assets. This also means they are falling back qnd not shooting or they stay in combat and usually don't kill the truck. Staying in combat with a truck full of hand flamers means they are going to hand flame you.
dreadlybrew wrote: The trucks are open topped. If I recall correctly if the truck is eligible to fire overwatch the occupants inside are as well. I havent done it yet mostly I use the hand flamers from inside the truck to clear infantry. I also charge trucks into targets to pull more movement for the guys inside. Tagging enemy units with trucks means they aren't shooting at my more important assets. This also means they are falling back qnd not shooting or they stay in combat and usually don't kill the truck. Staying in combat with a truck full of hand flamers means they are going to hand flame you.
I don't think that's the case. The open topped rule states:
"In YOUR SHOOTING PHASE, units embarked within this transport can be selected to shoot with..." it says nothing at all about the enemy charge phase, and units firing from open topped transports are not usually able to use stratagems, only make use of rules that exist on the unit itself (datasheet or from army-wide rules).
Next weekend, I am playing in a one-day 1250 point tournament, using a cut down version of this flame- and laser-trucks idea. I have a couple each of the Ridgerunners and acolyte flame trucks, plus a neo laser and flamer squad in a third truck, a neo squad to sit at home with the magus and a couple of mortar squads. Min acolyte unit to drop for objectives and a Jackals squad to drive there, plus,a Keler and a sanctus to snipe characters. Warlord is a Jackal Alphus. I expect to get smashed, as I have only played one game of 9th. We shall see.
Nice! If you go full into this at 1250 you are pretty close to unstoppable. Just because you can sit at i think 4 to 5 trucks full of flamers and cutters.
Choose your engagements with the lazer cars carefully. Make sure you put it on the board aggressively and scout move them into hiding if you dont go first. If you have a unit of 3 maximize their damage out put with overcharged capacitors and raking fire. This lets you splitfire to kill screens with the stubbers and still take down the primary target with the lasers.
Don't be afraid to shoot marine squads of 6+ with the laser car lasers. They are blast so you'll get 9 shots. Maximize that value!
Well, I gave it a go, but to be honest I didn't lean into this nearly hard enough. I had just two ridge runners and 2 flame trucks with 6 acolytes each, because I wanted to get other things... Those other things were mostly just filler and the heavy lifting was done by the RRs and flame trucks. Even then I was frustrated by playing mostly marines with 3+ and 2+ saves, so 6D6 hand flamer hits rarely did more than a couple of wounds. Next time I will field all my RRs in a squad, and more trucks with more flamers. Otherwise I found I was leaving jobs half done.The small table sizes meant that maneuverability wasn't worth much, and everyone was on me so fast!
Yeah you need to go all in. Splashing an 80 point demo squad of bikers can be worth it. Those extra 4d6 flamers really change the math. Staying grouped and forcing your opponents to come into your death zone is key. Use the maneuverability to make that death zone where you want it.
The ridgerunners need to be in a squad together so you can use the over charged capacitors to wound tanks on 2s. Its an insane improvement.
Niiai wrote: Ridgerunners needs the alpa jackal to give then +1 to hit and the over charge capacitors to have thet 3d3 3+, 2+ Ap3 D1d6.
The raking fire is also great on a group of 3. 3+/3+ often.
If you do not do that then do leman russes istead.
190 points for 12 T8 3+ save. 2d6 battlecannon shots, and 9 heavy bolter shots seems to me very comparable to the 2 or 3 ridgerunnergroups.
To anybody reading this thread to get advanced gameplay advices about GSC, for the love of God don't follow this advice unless you want to waste your money on units that aren't decent in AM let alone in GSC with 0 rules support.
Leman Russes are not comparable to Ridgerunners in any single case, they are worse in every possible aspect and offer nothing that GSC really wants/needs.
I was able to make a list with a little cult soup. Leman russes are neat but the lack of support means basically the only way I can stomach using them is a brood brothers spearhead with 2 tank commanders to give them orders and on sec. But even then.... I would rather have 3 to 9 ridgerunners for the chunk of points that spearhead would cost.
Niiai wrote: Ridgerunners needs the alpa jackal to give then +1 to hit and the over charge capacitors to have thet 3d3 3+, 2+ Ap3 D1d6.
The raking fire is also great on a group of 3. 3+/3+ often.
If you do not do that then do leman russes istead.
190 points for 12 T8 3+ save. 2d6 battlecannon shots, and 9 heavy bolter shots seems to me very comparable to the 2 or 3 ridgerunnergroups.
To anybody reading this thread to get advanced gameplay advices about GSC, for the love of God don't follow this advice unless you want to waste your money on units that aren't decent in AM let alone in GSC with 0 rules support.
Leman Russes are not comparable to Ridgerunners in any single case, they are worse in every possible aspect and offer nothing that GSC really wants/needs.
So the leman russ is 10 points more. It has 4 less wounds.
It is much better at killing 2 wound space marines for it's points. It has a superior threath range. It is hardre to wound vs S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8 and S10 attacks. It is better against AP1 and AP2. It has a smaller footprint.
You can also use the model as an IG model that unlocks more options, like stratagems or BS3+. Neither of these options is very good, but they seem to be the best GSC has to offer in many senarioes. Of course the ridgerunner is much easier to make better by aditional points and CP usages. But if you are pinched on fast attack slots, and can not have multiple bikes snipers you could utelise the leman russ. Bottom line is that GSC are just above Tau on competetiveness.
Niiai wrote: Ridgerunners needs the alpa jackal to give then +1 to hit and the over charge capacitors to have thet 3d3 3+, 2+ Ap3 D1d6.
The raking fire is also great on a group of 3. 3+/3+ often.
If you do not do that then do leman russes istead.
190 points for 12 T8 3+ save. 2d6 battlecannon shots, and 9 heavy bolter shots seems to me very comparable to the 2 or 3 ridgerunnergroups.
To anybody reading this thread to get advanced gameplay advices about GSC, for the love of God don't follow this advice unless you want to waste your money on units that aren't decent in AM let alone in GSC with 0 rules support.
Leman Russes are not comparable to Ridgerunners in any single case, they are worse in every possible aspect and offer nothing that GSC really wants/needs.
So the leman russ is 10 points more. It has 4 less wounds.
It is much better at killing 2 wound space marines for it's points. It has a superior threath range. It is hardre to wound vs S3, S4, S5, S6, S7, S8 and S10 attacks. It is better against AP1 and AP2. It has a smaller footprint.
You can also use the model as an IG model that unlocks more options, like stratagems or BS3+. Neither of these options is very good, but they seem to be the best GSC has to offer in many senarioes. Of course the ridgerunner is much easier to make better by aditional points and CP usages. But if you are pinched on fast attack slots, and can not have multiple bikes snipers you could utelise the leman russ. Bottom line is that GSC are just above Tau on competetiveness.
Except that 2 Ridgerunner kill more 2W AND 3W Marines statistically even when not using Stratagems or Alphus, can benefit from +1 BS, can use +1 to Wound on Lascannons and +1 To Hit/Wound on Stubbers and most of all do their damage whilst maintaing full effiency unless dead (Leman Russes are forced to move LESS than half and degrade to the point of 6+ BS)
I have absolutely no idea what kind of math you did but you're wrong again.
It also ignores the wound benefits of having several multi-wound models in a unit. Even with perfect rolling, three lascannons cannot kill two ridgerunners.
Not Online!!! wrote: Isn't a GSC leman russ 140 + 15 for the HB + 5 for the BC?
So total 160`?
Yep, it's even pricier than 2 Ridgerunners.
gak unit
If we had other Cheap over T7 units it might be worth in a skew list, and it's cult ambush properties allow in the right list for some not to underestimate shenanigans, but indeed pts wise it's .... like most older MBT's ... gak.
Not that the rockgrinder variant looks much better on paper really. But then again i think that ridgerunners just profit far to much from not having a damage table...
Thanks! I have 9 now. Im still working out thr fine details on their paint jobs but im having a lot of fun with them.
Automatically Appended Next Post: I love love love rock grinders. Pair them with a primus and they hit on 3s. They do need a re roll stratagem. I refuse to take anything other than the flamer version though. Its stupid strong against hordes and it hits planes.
Yes in the sense that the trucks themselves benefit from the re rolls. So you get autocannon and stubber woun re rolls but the units inside do not. When they get out they can benefit from wound re rolls. I made a list and threw it in the list section which combines bladed cog fire trucks with a single minded obsession magus, and the hivecult hivelord primus in the laser car patrol.
Short answer you can re roll wounds with the flamers in the trucks, but you want the primus regardless.
canonized wrote: Are there actual rumors, or is this just rumors about rumors?
Not really, though GW's MO for 9th so far seems to be at least 1 new model per codex release so an obviously GSC rumor engine is a point to a codex in the near-ish future, though I don't know if I'd be counting on this year.
I would expect that we will be after every power armour codex, supplement, update and errata is released, and just before 10th changes the core rules again [if we are lucky].
So the scout sentinel only costs 35 points. It deploys 9" out with a scout move. From there it can move 9. It dies to a stiff breeze.
How do people like these to deny deep strike and to get onto the table and be a nusiance early? Seems like it coud have some use in lists with trucks to push up early?
If you are using sentinels you should use the armored ones with flamers. They tarpit extra well and can tank a lascannon hit. Move them to deny movmet and be shameless about charging them into your opponents forces. They can eat overwatch for your better units too.
If you want something with a scout move take ridge runners. They rock and mix well with every cult
I can see the value in a Scout Sentinel, but are they better at their role than Jackals are?
It looks like armored sentinels are the same price as the scout variant. I’d go with those instead if I had to choose so that you can still deploy in ambush. Gives your opponent something to waste a lascannon shot on.
Here's the thing. The flamer armored sentinel won't die to the melee of 10 guardsmen and gets d6 autohitting flamer hits in the shooting phase. The scout sentinel will perish to most things.
No one deep strikes on turn 1 anyway. Use blips to keep your enemies at bay and you can push them like 12 inches away.
I think I am confused at what the allure for the scout sentinel is.
I’m waffling a bit here now that I’m getting into the math.
A HF scout sentinel still only takes an average of one wound a turn from 10 GEQ in melee and will kill an average of two of them each battle round. The armored sentinel would be better against S3, but will die to bolters at a similar rate and both crumple to las/auto cannons. It all just comes down to whether you prefer an extra 9’ of movement or a slightly more durable screen.
a Scout sentinel or 2 is cheap enough to not really matter if they do anything or not and can help to provide some early objective pressure.
Yes they die to a stiff breeze but if it walks onto a midfield objective turn 1 its still a thing your opponent needs to deal with, which draws attention away from the rest of your army.
That is also why I would prefer the Scout over the Armoured version. You want that distance to be able to force an immediate response.
Im trying to understand the regular tactical significance of what you are doing. it seems like you are arguing for the usefulness of the ability to throw away a unit.
-Its cheap
-it moves really fast
-it dies to everything
But if you are not charging with it turn 1 and successfully shooting with it turn one, or blocking movement... you are just playing with less points than your opponent by choice.
there is an argument to be made to run a unit of 3 with flamers. that's a scary unit. but just 1 doesn't play well enough to justify its points.
dreadlybrew wrote: Im trying to understand the regular tactical significance of what you are doing. it seems like you are arguing for the usefulness of the ability to throw away a unit.
-Its cheap
-it moves really fast
-it dies to everything
But if you are not charging with it turn 1 and successfully shooting with it turn one, or blocking movement... you are just playing with less points than your opponent by choice.
there is an argument to be made to run a unit of 3 with flamers. that's a scary unit. but just 1 doesn't play well enough to justify its points.
If your opponent feels the need to target your 35 point Sentinel with a unit (or units) that would otherwise target a 75 point Goliath truck packed with 110 points of Acolytes, then the Sentinel has made its points back without having to charge, block movement, shoot, or do anything at all.
You can theoretically use the scout move to force your opponent to choose an inconvenient target. To shoot the Sentinel off of a point or to prevent it from tar pitting one of their units as an example.
It occurs to me that in a pinch, Raking Fire stubbers can be relied on to knock wounds off enemy transports - about 1 per Ridgerunner, so nothing earth shattering but if your opponent is meched up, every little bit counts. +1 to wound means the stubbers are wounding T7 on 4s. That means it is not all on the autocannons to clean up transports if your mining lasers are committed to bigger targets.
Also, I ran the numbers, and for 1250 points on the nose, you can get a Jackal Alphus, 3x Goliaths with 10 handflamer acolytes/ 4 rock saws/ cult icon, 6 ridgerunners and a mortar squad. Not bad - if you have the models for it... (which I am building toward).
hangnailnz wrote: It occurs to me that in a pinch, Raking Fire stubbers can be relied on to knock wounds off enemy transports - about 1 per Ridgerunner, so nothing earth shattering but if your opponent is meched up, every little bit counts. +1 to wound means the stubbers are wounding T7 on 4s. That means it is not all on the autocannons to clean up transports if your mining lasers are committed to bigger targets.
Also, I ran the numbers, and for 1250 points on the nose, you can get a Jackal Alphus, 3x Goliaths with 10 handflamer acolytes/ 4 rock saws/ cult icon, 6 ridgerunners and a mortar squad. Not bad - if you have the models for it... (which I am building toward).
Yeah. I am a bit short on hand flamers. But I think I can make 20 or so. I only have 2 trucks and 1 rock grinder.
This army has a very long 'build lag' and getting the models is ever so expensive.
Mantic GCPS Mule trucks for Goliaths and Tehnolog Hunters for the Ridgerunners (both very similar footprints) are the way that I am going... Then I am using a mixture of third party hand flamers and arms from a Veer-Myn sprue with some sort of chemical weapons that looks close enough. It has powered through all of my heavy stubbers from AM kits and I have had to swap for more, but have plenty of lascannons floating around!
Yeah I've been collecting over 2 years. The best practice is to buy 9 getting started packs. It covers your acolytes minus 15, you can convert theniconwards to regular acolytes with extra bits, you get your 9 ridge runners and you get 90 neophytes so you can play the army more than one way.
Buy trucks and don't glue the grinders to the front. They fit just fine without falling off after painting.
Its a lot of money... but smart eBay sleuthing might help from.time to time.
That looks cool. I like the familiar count as. A great solution. Also, who doe not like a snake familiar?
I doubt I will get up to all 6 rockgrinders. But perhaps I can grab one more, up to 3.
It looks like we all will get our models in line in time for a corona vaxine and a codex change. I really hope that trucks remains good. (Although all 9th edition codexes so far has had great internel and external balance.)
dreadlybrew wrote: So your tactic is to hinge on the hope that your opponents have bad target priorities?
Don't take this the wrong way, but it sounds like you haven't played with the unit or tactic before.
I regularly used SC to take mid field and most importantly move block. This cannot be math hammered. Too many people think they can run numbers on every unit to squeeze max efficiency but the game doesn't play out exactly like that.
Having a dirt cheap, fast unit that is resilient to most other GEQ small arms is and can move 18" outside your DZ turn 1 is hugely beneficial. You can move block lanes as mentioned earlier, as well as zone out alternate deployments, soak indirect abilities like smite etc. Or you can easily hide it in a quarter for behind enemy lines or engage points, all while threatening other similar units abilities to perform actions by assaulting them. You can even engage units to shut down shooting and assaults.
For those reasons I think the unit has a ton of merit, especially with the HF since you can threaten small action monkey infantry units.
One thing I have not thought about the heavy flamer is that it is ouer furthest reaching flamer turn 1 I think. 9+9+12 = 30 inch of flamer threat turn 1. That is quite good for killing chaff. It might not be a problem GSC often have (I do not know) but it is not that bad.
Automatically Appended Next Post: What do people think of the pop up explosives? Popping lying in wait. Get within 3", use the stratagem to throw X greandes, and then throw 4d6 explosives S8? Acolytes or bikers. Alternativly have them running out of trucks with 4 explosives.
What are peoples experiences? I am considering it as an alternative.
What do people think of the pop up explosives? Popping lying in wait. Get within 3", use the stratagem to throw X greandes, and then throw 4d6 explosives S8? Acolytes or bikers. Alternatively have them running out of trucks with 4 explosives.
What are peoples experiences? I am considering it as an alternative.
Most of my experience with Acolyte bombers is that they are very good at blowing up large squads where you can benefit from blast (*cough* Necron Warriors *cough*), but they are a bit less consistent than bikes against bigger targets and are obviously squishier. I'm a bit uncomfortable with hand flamers on them after the range extension and associated points increase, just feels like a poor use of points when the squad can get a similar volume of dice from their free Blasting Charges (basically trade reliability on hit rolls with reliable volume of shots via blast)
Operating out of a Truck is a bit different. I prefer two squads of five (2x5) instead of one squad of ten. Extra Explosives can't be used while embarked, but two squads can each throw one demolition charge each so they can still unload their payload fairly quickly. These squads I feel a bit better giving Hand Flamers to, as the Truck helps a bit with survivability and they will probably have some targets available while driving into range for bombing.
Jackal Bombers I've generally found best against big targets. Drive-by Demolitions and naturally doubled Alphus aura range gives them added consistency and since each can take a demolition charge they aren't leaving bodies standing around doing nothing. My biggest problem is that I tend to use my bikes for screening and early turn objective pressure, so reserving a squad for bombing duty is a hard trade. I have considered using Psychic Summons to cheat out a fourth squad, but points and command points being as tight as they are makes it hard to set them aside.
Use the great fire snake if you want to do the biker bombs. Max out a unit of 12 bikers with 10 demo charges and shotguns. If you want to include wolfquads with flamers on them its always worth it.
Pay 2 cp to arrive just outside 3", pay 3 cp to shoot, use extra explosives, shotgun and grenades with the ones you arent democharging with, then in the shooting phase extra explosvies with drive by demolitions. You can't move (legally i think you arent allowed to move) but +1 to hit and wound is a big bang. Ill dig up a picture of a biker snake I used in 8th to ruin an ork army.
Its cp heavy like...7 cp at once but you can clear a lot off the table.
Niiai wrote: One thing I have not thought about the heavy flamer is that it is ouer furthest reaching flamer turn 1 I think. 9+9+12 = 30 inch of flamer threat turn 1. That is quite good for killing chaff. It might not be a problem GSC often have (I do not know) but it is not that bad.
Or another 30", have acolytes in a truck in ambush. That's 1" from DZ + 5" length of truck + 12" movement + 12" flamer.
Niiai wrote: One thing I have not thought about the heavy flamer is that it is ouer furthest reaching flamer turn 1 I think. 9+9+12 = 30 inch of flamer threat turn 1. That is quite good for killing chaff. It might not be a problem GSC often have (I do not know) but it is not that bad.
Or another 30", have acolytes in a truck in ambush. That's 1" from DZ + 5" length of truck + 12" movement + 12" flamer.
SK
Ah yes by deploying them as blips, indeed you can use their lengh once the opponent's movement phase ends, or when you start.
I suppose one could use Perfect Ambush off of an ambush token, roll a 6 for the extra movement, and then make a normal 6'' move. Exceedingly unlikely to work, but technically possible.
I'm hoping to get some test games with a mechanized GSC list against my brother's Dark Eldar (ideally see if I can get him to build something similar to the popular configurations). I think a build with lots of "fire trucks", bikes (to screen), a squad of Ridgerunners, and maybe some whip-morphs (to intercept Incubi or melee characters) might be able to put up a good fight. Trucks bring a fair amount of autocannon fire which is good for cracking Raiders/Venoms and we don't care as much about Dark Technomancer-boosted liquefiers (basically a flamer with extra AP for most of our units).
Kellermorph might also get some time to shine. Theoretically he should be able to mow down Drukhari infantry and characters and, as far as I know, they don't have any interception tricks to stop him from popping up and gunning stuff down.
My most regular opponent is a Drukhari player. We only had 1 game with the new dex so far, but we've found that his Drukhari suffer vs the Cult. Our blips keep them in a far more restrictive space turn 1, and their lethality is somewhat "wasted" on our really bad units. Our weapons are also really good against them, since massed S3 guns are pretty good against them. Firetrucks especially are potent vs the Dark Eldar, but their Flyers are very strong against us. If their units dive in on our Ridgerunners, the Ridgerunners are actually likely to survive, which makes us very able to slice apart whatever unit they threw in. Worst case, we can leave the Ridgerunners in close combat, because the Heavy Stubbers firing at close range are still a threat to Wych Cults.
Hi, fellow GSC player here. I have been trying out pure GSC all through 9th edition and got my first winn last saturday. Here are some of my opinons.
GSC are in such a rough place, to make a good list you need to work hard for it. By good, I mean one that has a chance of winning in even a very cassual setting. The book is quite bad: 1. Everything dies to a stiff breese, 2. very few units has any potensial to kill anything, 3. it has poor internal balance, 4. some 'tools' are missing from the codex and 5. it just costs to much CP to run efficiently.
Everything dying to a stiff breese you can not do anything with. Transports are how ever few enough in points that you can now use them. All goliath variants are gravy. And you characters are almost not worth taking because they are so hard to keep alive, and they do to little before they die. Trying to hold objectives through many bodies and attricion does not work as you are paying to much points for the models.
There are few units with a good potensial to kill anything. Hand flamers is our best ranged weapon vs troops. Heavy mining lasers are our best ranged weapon vs heavy thing. Grab these. Most of our killing potensial comes from close combat. All sign points to ridgerunners and acolytes.
The book has terrible internal balance. The only descent ranged anti tank is the ridgerunner with sniper girl backup. The closest comparison is the leman russ and that one is quite bad. (Leman russes is not taken by IG(AM), and that is with stratagems and synergies. BB has no stratagems or synergies in our current codex.) Metamorph Hybrids, Aberrants, Purestrain Genestealers and Acolytes are all variations of the same role. Acolytes is the only good one as it is cheaper and performs the job better then the other models. Now you have your units for ranged anti tank, ranged anti infantery, close combat anti tank and close combat infantery. This is due to bad internal balance, but you should be starting your army with ridgerunners and acolytes.
We are missing some tools in the codex. The most glaring one is that we have no good way to kill flyers. Flyers that are good at killing T3 5+ models is a problem. A dakkajett for instance kills on averadge 7 models each turn, mounting up to 35 dead models in a game. Any army with anti infantery flyers means you can not hold objectives in an atrition game. We can not charge planes, ridgerunners is the best awnser.
You can not rely on stratagems. We bleed trhough CP very fast. You can maximum pull of one 3CP 'A Perfect Ambush' once in the game, perhaps not even that. And 'Lying in Wait' is not worth 2 CP. The solution again is acolytes in transports, or reserves. The transports means they survive to charge. Hand flamers beeing range 12" means you save CP on Lying in Wait. You can of course use Hybrid Metamorphs for this. But you pay 2 more points for upgrading a dagger attack to a rending claw attack and loosing the troops abilaty to deny objectives. You are in fact paying more for a worse unit. It is again a problem with internal balance.
Take your choise of cult creed. Twisted Helix is good for S5, meaning you wound marines on 3+ and T8 on 5+. Four Armed Emperor makes charges easier. (3 CP to delay a stratagem might not be worth it.) Hivecult lets you fall back and shoot handflamers (if you are into that) and your warlord trait is not bad for ridgerunners. Bladed Cog would be good if neophytes where good, but they are not. I can not speak for Pauper Princes or Rusted Claw.
Sadly as the game is now, you should include acolytes and ridgerunners as the major parts of your list. Build your list how you want and have fun.
Fire trucks and lazer cars are the only thing im being super successful with. I still advocate replacing your rocksaws with snippers.
I did find that a 20man blob of 20 flamers, 8 rocksaws and an icon is a pretty solid threat. At this point I just apa to shoot 40d6 hand flamers. That is super fun to roll.
Lazer cars need a jackal alphas and a primus to be good. It lets you rip apart 2 targets with heart of creed.
Other tricks I have found. If you want to cult mix, you can run a hivecult patrol for your lazer cars and use the broodcoven strat to give the primus the hivelord trait. This stops your trucks from getting that juicy +1 to hit but if you like other cults to dont have to suffer through playing hive cult.
The things that murder me now are d6 damage mining lasers. 9 lasers vary from 3 to 18 damage assuming they all go through.
Fire snakes an rusted cult bombs jusy bounce now. Everything moved into 9th and got too tuff
I hope the new point adjustments announced yesterday leave Britney alone and reduses the points on aberrant, purestrain and hybrids so that there is a reason to take them.
The broodbrothers stuff except chimera is to expensive. But they are priced as IG, so I hope the reduce the cost of both of them. But as long as they leave Britney alone at least I can stil play firetrucks.
Yeah they are quiiiite bad, to OK. I think their top contender is the double flamer chimera at 85 point. It can do some jobs and it is very independent for 85 points. And while it dies easaly, it is not as fragile as T3 5+.
Guaranteed we are overlooked in the Chapter Approved points adjustments. I wouldn't bet on any of our stuff being reduced by more than 1 point, and that'll probably be on the Jackal Alphus.
There are 'leaks' out there. But they included many mistakes. And the points made little sence. No way to verify if they are real. (I do in fact feel slight confident they are not real.) We must wait and seen.
Will abberants be playable at 17pts a model? 30 per model right now is such a point sink that its 1000 points for 30 of them. Shrinking that cost down. To 600 to 750 would make them super playable imo.
dreadlybrew wrote: Will abberants be playable at 17pts a model? 30 per model right now is such a point sink that its 1000 points for 30 of them. Shrinking that cost down. To 600 to 750 would make them super playable imo.
I just saw that one as well. Sounds too good to be true. I would say YES they will be playable with a damn near 50% points drop! I'd almost say you'll need 30 of them per list just because they're the only unit we have that can actually survive on objectives.
After playing around with the fire trucks and laser cars list a bit. Im going to switch it up and run 9 cars. It seems like I need a little more punch midgame and the swing d6 damage weapons kill me more often than I want. The nice thing is that I only sacrifice 1 firetruck to pull this off
Played a couple games with 9 cars this weekend. Its the correct amount. It gives you more mobility on a strong mobile list and the mid game punch you need. Its also really really hard to kill them all. So even with their dedicated anti tank fire you can end the game with 3 to 4 cars. That shooting focused the cars also gives your 5 trucks the ability to have free reign on the board. Charging the trucks is a trap but they have just enough punch to keep heavy infantry pinned down. Final ratio im settling on is 9 cars 5 trucks. Taking this list to a local semi competitive league just to see how it does
A primus, a magus with 2 familiars, and a jackal alphus.
4 units of 10 acolyte hybrids with hand flamers, icon and 3x rock cutters(these instant kill most characters, necron stargods, and mortarion...eventually)
1 unit of 8 acolytes with hand flamers an icon and 2 cutters.
How are you deploying? I’m finding Scanner Decoys and Meticulous Uprising to be our two most important stratagems. Combined they allow the cult to completely overwhelm a chosen flank.
Laser cars is aggressive with the laser cars not as blips to utilize the scout move to get back into cover or be more aggressive with better shots.
If im playing a balanced list I cant spend cp on any of those stats because we are so starved of cp making something resembling a playable army. However if they have flyers you can zone them out of your Deployment by grid bliping 9 to 15 inch bubbles. Thats super neat.
So I just completed my fourth game in my league with the firecult. I am 3-1 and it looks like we get a buy as well. My bracket contains a necron player with the silent king and sort of an unworkable list. 2 death guard players running death shrouds. And a white scars competitive list.
My only loss was against the white scars because I forgot that his banner was in range of some multimelta attack bikes and he went hot on the extra shots. If I had staged my turn one a little better I could have easily won that game.
Playing cult has been fun. No one expects to see the entire army on turn 1 and there are so many blip shenanigans that keep your opponents at bay.
I haven't been able to have a game in a couple weeks, but I have been having success against some lists with a Acolyte heavy list. It has 60 Acolytes in it; 2 squads of 20, and 4 squads of 5. It's also got about 60 neophytes in it, 16 bikers, 3 ridgerunners, and then just Patriarch, Magus, Primus, Acolyte Iconward, and Nexos. I run them as Rusted Claw so that I have access to both Drive-By Demolitions (for the double-move, the bikes don't carry demo charges) and to +1 to my save vs AP0 and AP-1 (very useful if your meta is lower on Space Marines; most stuff out there is AP-1, which gives you more survivability than if you were Bladed Cog).
The list just tries to gum up the ground, get in the way, and score points. The 60 Neophytes and bikers allow you to block early and do banners or actions in your table, and start controlling where your opponent can go. You can threaten 2 turns in a row of Perfect Ambush for the Acolytes so you can actually kill stuff, or just do Lying in Wait for the 3" but no charge to really block things off.
Your goal isn't to kill your opponent, but just to make their scoring game really hard, and you can score really easily. The 5-man Acolyte squads are great action monkeys, being small enough to get places, and cheap that you don't mind them spending a turn raising a banner or retrieving some data, or spending 2CP to show up on an opponent's objective and steal it from them for just 1 turn.
I went 2-0 at a mini-vent (had to drop before 3rd game, but I'm pretty sure I'd have lost vs Admech) and won vs T'au (close to the current meta build) and Death Guard w/Morty (actually killed Morty - but he threw him in unsupported and dropped 100% of his CP turn 1 to do very little).
I had to run my list as double-battalion, but it'd be better if it had 3x3 Mortar Teams for Heavy Support, and 2x Metamorphs for Elites, and drop some Neophytes and 2 squads of 5-man Acolytes to do this. Would give more CP to allow actually using drive-by demolitions, or having CP to use Lurk in the Shadows on some crucial turns.
Just give up any concept of killing your opponent, and it actually plays very well.
Good to know.
I soonish Finish my GSC project and i got mostly infantry.
30 acolythes, 20 neophytes, 16 aberrants, a "Patriarch" , sadly only 4 Bikers and 2 ridgerunners , but i could add in cult russes and mortar teams.
Iconward with an actual flag, basically all minor charachters and a jackal.
I did think about 3 x 10 acolythes 1 with four demo charges 2 with a drill and saw each. Probably better to instead Run 2 x 10 one with saws and drills one with charges and 2x 5 Objektive monkeys..
My current list, by being so Acolyte and Neophyte heavy, is more about spamming the board in all the places I need to be to score points - so often my ability to cover a core of units for buffs is severely limited. As such, I don't get a lot of benefit in being able to reroll wounds against just a few units. I really do miss the 6+ Inv vs high AP stuff, but having my dudes have an effective 3+ save in cover vs small arms fire more than makes up the difference.
Losing out of the 5+ FnP hasn't been a big deal for me, since my opponent normally can just ignore that unit anyways (again, because I'm pretty spread out in my approach as it is). What has been a big deal for me is losing Death to the Oppressors strat for exploding hits. Thankfully, the Inescapable Decay psyker power has oddly been remarkably useful - far more than I've expected it to be (turns my really bad shooting into only somewhat bad shooting; nickel and dime'ing my opponent's vehicles to death), and Drive By Demolitions for extra movement shenanigans for movement shenanigans on bikers can be clutch.
Inescapable decay is solid. I wish it worked on things other than vehicles though.
I run hivecult for the warlord trait on a jackal alphus. Fall back and flame is also pretty useful. Halving the units that run from combat attrition is actually insane. It garuntees that you will have at least one obsec model where you want it. And the next turn all you have to do is add d6 back to the unit.
I'll add another 20 Neophytes with mining lasers...
I guess with that many bodies my patriarch will atleast be decent ...
As an aside, since he has to be warlord, what are the traits one picks for him? I toyed around with the +1 A and S, which ontop of extra galactic might would put him to S8 and 8A?
Or people nowadays just forgoe the patriarch?
If you are taking the patriarch you are best off taking a primus and a Magus for 3 traits.
I pretty much always give him DR1 because it means he can survive failing his saves.
If he is solely a support role character for you I would give him the added range to his auras with that many bodies.
Also with that many mining lasers and neophytes (i have about 150 myself) it might be worth it to consider having them in a detachment of one of the custom creeds (yuck) that gives them AP-1 on autoguns and rerolling mining weapons.
dreadlybrew wrote: If you are taking the patriarch you are best off taking a primus and a Magus for 3 traits.
I pretty much always give him DR1 because it means he can survive failing his saves.
If he is solely a support role character for you I would give him the added range to his auras with that many bodies.
Also with that many mining lasers and neophytes (i have about 150 myself) it might be worth it to consider having them in a detachment of one of the custom creeds (yuck) that gives them AP-1 on autoguns and rerolling mining weapons.
I only have atm 20 Neopphytes in 2 x 10 blocks with twin stubber.
I'll make another 20 Neophytes with mining lasers so that i am on 40 "Neophytes" *
2 Ridgerunners
4 Atalan Jackals and a wolfquad, 4 democharges and a GL
Nexos
Sanctus with Rifle.
Total if not added up wrong 1491 pts.
Theorethically i also have 16 aberrants but at 30 pts a pop...... i just don't see them as particulary viable nor effective, i technically also can just skip the rifle on the sanctus since i kitbashed/ converted mine.
It kind of annoys me that i am in a sense back at 8.5th marine era when i still played my renegades and used the blob list. Otoh, this list atleast has some potential bite with democharges galore.
The bonus traits are a bit of a nobrainer when you have a patriarch, but it'd be a better strat if GSC were atleast able to hand the traits to all HQ choices and not just Primus and magus, i'd have prefered it on the iconward. A nexos primus combo atleast allows for some maintenance and semblance of maintaining momentum ... but i honestly can't estimate how well that list would work.
*its a daemoncult, i kinda wanted an army to inherit the mantle of my now legended Renegades.
If Bladed Cog - Single Minded Annihilation for the extra reroll of wound rolls. Since it's all and not just 1's it's massively useful, and is both either alongside a Primus for latter reroll support and close combat buffs, or can also be used in lieu of a Primus if the close combat buffs aren't that important for you.
If Pauper Princes - Benevolent Grandsire is just a must, as it makes the Patriarch so hard to kill.
Otherwise, I tend to default to Biomorph Adaptation, because being able to more reliably jump out and kill combat characters that get too close unsupported is vital.
Aberrants need an overhaul if they want them to stay in that price range when the 9th edition book comes.
S5 is good, they could be T5 and I think 3W is a must. 3A also needed. It's hard to justify improving their armor save or FnP, but all around they feel as much of a paper unit as anything else in the army.
dreadlybrew wrote: The way the amount of attacks are going im hoping for base 4+ on these guys
That would step on the acolythes and metamorphs toes tho.
I think it'd be better if they'd get a better quality Heavy Melee attack capability and the toughness to stand and wither something down. Like the shock troops they are supposedly.
As an aside,if one just compares them in a bubble, the most identical unit i know is the CSM terminator, fullfills the same role, is cheaper, and quite a bit more durable..
And sure if one then regards the factions design it is arguably a toughness at premium cost case for GSC, but i don't think that some mutants out of the proverbial gutter of the dregs that are GSC should cost more pts than a chaos terminator....
As an aside, what are peoples thoughts on the Kelermorph?
I thought about bladed cog (5+/4++) might make it an annoying model to deal with.
He maybee also would work well in tandem with a Acolythe bomb squad.
Other than that we don't really have much that shoots good and potentially could profit from a reroll 1's
My thoughts? He works for everyone but me. I shoot with him and routinely only get 6 hits total, that's including his double-shooting, and rolling hits 1 at a time because as soon as he kills a dude he gets to reroll his own 1's to hit. I roll awful.
Even in Bladed Cog, a 4++ isn't much on T3 - he needs to be with dudes.
Now, a big part of this is that my regular opponents are Space Marines and Dark Eldar, so I'm often not getting that close to my opponent without charging them where I can really take advantage of his aura with shooting.
At his current points level; he's way too expensive. He really feels like he could be 45 points right now.
Yarium wrote: My thoughts? He works for everyone but me. I shoot with him and routinely only get 6 hits total, that's including his double-shooting, and rolling hits 1 at a time because as soon as he kills a dude he gets to reroll his own 1's to hit. I roll awful.
Even in Bladed Cog, a 4++ isn't much on T3 - he needs to be with dudes.
Now, a big part of this is that my regular opponents are Space Marines and Dark Eldar, so I'm often not getting that close to my opponent without charging them where I can really take advantage of his aura with shooting.
At his current points level; he's way too expensive. He really feels like he could be 45 points right now.
i don't think he is that overpriced tbf, but then again i 'd say at 60 pts hed be fine.
my question lies more what with his potentiall reroll 1's for infantry, what units would actually be able to take advantage of that?
Honestly that would probably a case for armor penetration custom trait? but that's giving up mining weapons ignore movement and a 6++
I only run the kelermorph has bladed cog or rusted claw. If you give him the amulet to add +1 to his saves against shooting he will get a 3+ invuln and no overwatch. The nice thing about his pistols is he nukes a squad in melee range if her survives . But he will die to a guardsmen unit.
I maintaine that our real problem is we can't bring a desperados vanguard of 3 of them without losing 6+ cp
dreadlybrew wrote: Metamorphs are worse acolyte hybrids. just because they aren't obsec.
There's an interesting caveat to note on this; you only need 1 obsec model at the objective. If your opponent likewise does the same, it goes to total "models", and not total "obsec models". We often have so much obsec that losing a little bit of it for a unit that might do better punching, is something that should be considered! I plan on trying out the metamorphs soon, as I play vs Dark Eldar quite a bit here, and fighting back on death vs them in that matchup seems like it would be very beneficial.
sure. But why buy the model with basically the exact same profile that cant take heavy weapons and isn't obsec for the same points?
Also flamers.
They dont have more wounds they cost 3 more points for 1 more attack. for those three points to can make a acolyte hybrid have a flamer and engage in 2 more phases. d6 auto-hitting shots per guy you can fire in melee is worth way more than 1 attack imo
I mean, you can equip metamorphs with flamers aswell.
But the standard version with one metamorph talon , normal talon and a Autopistol is 13ppm.
A normal acolythe is 8ppm for basically the same profile, sans the 4th +1 attack.
Msu Metamorphs look at 65 pts that way, which are incidentally 8 acolythes and a point left over.
Metamorphs are then 21 attacks. (5 attacks at 2+)
Acolythes are 25 attacks.
So chaff removal normal acolythes do better.
The ultimate anti chaff build with dual metamoprh talons turns them into 5 A.
Costs 15 ppm. Thats 75 pts for 26 Attacks at 2+ but without AP. And at that pricetag i can start considering Purestrains which are also not so hot units but atleast can advance and charge without babysitting requirements.
Incidentally i can get 9 acolythes 28 Attacks and 3 pts.
I think that dual metamorph talon build can have a place in a horde heavy meta in MSU form (especially their smaller footprint can help them for a deepstrike), incidentally i'd also equip the unit potentially with Handflamers. But again there i am with 17ppm T3 5+ models.
Otoh, i can do the same with Acolythes, troop slots are easier to have many compared to Elite slots. I have other options for a similar insert and tear appart style unit in these slots aswell, between a dagger sanctus and a locus, both of which are better at dealing with bigger things tougher things, and or more CP efficient.
then there's the kelermorph which costs only 5 pts more than a dual Talon squad but is just as effective at tearing things up AND can target Charachters.
Then there's the main issue, targets that they like, aka soft squishy GEQ i can deal with Neophytes Autoguns, Random heavy stubbers i will have lying around anyways because Ridgerunners are a must imo, Goliaths for when i am anyways pulling movement shenanigans (and why wouldn't i with 16 Abberrants) Random Autopistols from acolythes, random flammer pistols from acolythes, etc.
And if they run into anything heavier like marines or other things than their 2+ hits matter little either way since they bounce away from the armour harmlessly but will suffer significant losses against the marines due to T3 and SV5...
In many ways, whatever they excell at is rare to find, they lack significant staying power with a really absurd pricetag too boot. And anything they do i can just do anyways from range better or cheaper with acolythes and other troop units?
That leaves me with Whipmorphs, which i admit, look fun and "durable" of sorts... (also 11ppm cheaper than the normal standard version) but there i only have 3 Attacks either way with the same profile as acolythes....with the exception that i can guaranteed strike in melee.
TL: DR i am honestly hard pressed between to find a good use for Metamorphs which i couldn't do cheaper, better or anyways with a normal GSC list since they excell really only in chaff removal.
Anyways, is it just me or seem metamorphs just bad / obsolete?
Whip-morphs are still fairly useful as a counter melee/melee piece trade tool. They don't care about fight last abilities since they still get their swings in even if killed before their turn to go, and they are reasonably priced compared to the other configurations (+1 point over an Acolyte for an extra Rending Claw attack and the fight insurance ability). I've seen at least two tournament-minded lists that included whip-morphs, so it isn't just my experiences.
I agree as far as the other configurations go, with the caveat that the main issue is their pricing rather than the underlying stats. If they were to revert to their pre-9th pricing (whip is same as Acolyte, other weapons +1 point) I think they would be decent again.
Whipmorphs sounds like a resonable trade into drukari. just getting them into combat with enough attacks to take out a unit seems far feteched. ill try it out
I was just poking around in the Drukhari codex and their raiders are just insane. If that is worth 95 points then a Goliath Truck ought to cost like 50.
canonized wrote: I was just poking around in the Drukhari codex and their raiders are just insane. If that is worth 95 points then a Goliath Truck ought to cost like 50.
My friends and I approximate that giving us an extra 200 points (10% cut codex-wide) wouldn't even result in a blip of difference. It would take about a 25% slash to make us "competitive". But no point being wishy-washy now! Get as good as you can with what we have right now, because if you can win any game right now, or even just end game as a close loss, you will be a TERROR once our codex gets its 9th ed update.
below is a pure GSC list that went 4-1 at a recent major tournament. Note the flamer metamorphs which were used to absorb Ork/Drukhari charges. Hand flamer over watch combined with whips makes them almost guaranteed to trade squad for squad. .
New to the cult, what is the reason for the BB squad instead of Neophytes?
Edit: in Eds list, that is
2nd edit: someone pointed out, they can do unquestioning loyality regardless of the <CULT> keyword. Then the other question: what offer neophyte hybrids over brood brothers?
3rd and hopefully last edit: neophytes receive the cult tactics, got it myself
dreadlybrew wrote: Change the popper princess to hive cult and snag the hivelord for that primus
I don’t think so. That trades rerolls on all close combat attacks for rerolls on 1s on ranged attacks (and even then only if the Primus is within 6”). It also slows the effective move range of the ridgerunners to 6” and keeps the Primus out of play for his close combat capabilities and melee buff. Too valuable a unit to let languish in the back line.
He got four armed for the deny strat and the blender Patriarch ?
Pauper for the rest.
2 x 10 4 cutter acolythes for blending and heavy dutty work
1 x 10 4 saw for the above.
In combination with the bigger aura primus.
Another saw mini squad.
2 normal msu for capping and annoying.
I guess the saw mini squad is there to bully something tougher off an objective? or for a smaller footprint insertion.
the 10 metamorphs with hand flamers he can use like a flamer bomb or as a defensive tool as noted.
I don't get the brood brothers over neophytes.
The 9 ridgerunners are baseline with the alphus i guess. ( i hate the state of such units... that you can't circumvent more or less)
Its imensly versatile, btw is broodcoven allowed over multiple cults?
But i'd be a bit concerned about durability?
Then again thats where the goliaths come in i guess?
It’s not on the list I posted, but he took the 4AE warlord trait for the Magus. Not sure exactly how he was using the acolytes, but he took brood brothers because they can use unquestioning loyalty with any cult.
Just wanted to pop in and say congrats, GW has proclaimed that you are competitive in the recent metawatch article! Sure the army is abysmal and the win rate shows it, but it must be nice to have a real chance to win!
Although if you look closely, there was only one GSC player at the tournament, so they are probably just blaming them for the faction's lack of success. Whereas the 14 Drukhari players with their 64% win rate... I am sure we could take them, given a chance
hangnailnz wrote: Although if you look closely, there was only one GSC player at the tournament, so they are probably just blaming them for the faction's lack of success. Whereas the 14 Drukhari players with their 64% win rate... I am sure we could take them, given a chance
Also normalizing torwards 50% for specific factions doesn't happen because mirror matches are somthing that doesn't exist... right?
He got four armed for the deny strat and the blender Patriarch ?
Pauper for the rest.
2 x 10 4 cutter acolythes for blending and heavy dutty work
1 x 10 4 saw for the above.
In combination with the bigger aura primus.
Another saw mini squad.
2 normal msu for capping and annoying.
I guess the saw mini squad is there to bully something tougher off an objective? or for a smaller footprint insertion.
the 10 metamorphs with hand flamers he can use like a flamer bomb or as a defensive tool as noted.
I don't get the brood brothers over neophytes.
The 9 ridgerunners are baseline with the alphus i guess. ( i hate the state of such units... that you can't circumvent more or less)
Its imensly versatile, btw is broodcoven allowed over multiple cults?
But i'd be a bit concerned about durability?
Then again thats where the goliaths come in i guess?
If you want deeper insights in his thoughts, he uploaded a video about his list and the tournament.
I get it. Its saucy. Honestly going 2 rocksaws 1 cutter with the banner is probably best. Mixed weapons are the name of the game these days. Especially in hivecult. Turning the laser cars into more reliable hitting machines is more important imo.
So I hope this doesn't come off badly. I have dark eldar and I sort of want to try a new army. The weird thing is my most common opponent plays craftworld eldar and imperial guard. I think he's often out of practice and mostly priced out of the hobby like I am but our factions seem horribly mismatched in power level.
The faction I want to play are either admech or gsc. Admech sound fun but each kit is ungodly expensive and it's another top tier army. Gsc is very low tier if I recall but by the time I get enough models it might completely change with a 9th ed codex and with the arms race we've had it could likely outpace everything else.
Anyway I'm in a predicament. I haven't fought admech enough to see their playstyle which could be fun and gsc while unique and very hard hitting early 9n seemed to fall apart like literal paper even vs dark eldar last I played. I'm not sure if gsc is my jam.
One of my big issues is I want various tier armies so I don't throw a top tier army against a low tier one or a low tier one for me vs a top tier army. That just isn't fun for anybody.
Genestealer cults are positioned very badly. It is also one of the most exspensive armies to collect uless you do some out of the box thinking.
One of the problems is that the codex has 4 units that do the same thing, but only one of them is worth taking in every thinkable senario. (Acolytes.)
There are very few non hero units in the codex. Most of the heroes are crap in 9th edition. Many of the non-hero unist are quite bad.
In my own experience the only good thing is spamming acolytes with handflamers in trucks with ridgerunner backup. This is OK. The rest of the codex is hot garbage.
I think my last list ran some 70 acolytes, 4 or 5 trucks and 6 ridgerunners. You do the math.
On to the good news. The acolyte hybrid pack comes with lot extra parts. It is easy to take other models and saw/file down their sides and stick some arms on there. It is also easy to kitash hand flamers. If they are holding a banner you do not need a hand to hold a hand flamer per say. The start collecting GSC kit comes with 5 acolytes, 10 neophytes and a ridgerunner. With some thinkering you can easaly build 15 acolytes from that.
If you like to kitbash childs toys or 3D print things I have seen some amasing and cheap goliath truck conversions.
If you want something mid-tier then roll up some space marines. Space marines are cheap to collect. And outside of a few outstanding units they are mostly mediocer.
SnotlingPimpWagon wrote: Is it possible to legally play GSC + Tyranids alliance in 9th? And is there any merit to that, if it is?
It is legal. You can even use the GSC to smugle in a 3rd detachments of imperial guard.
As to why, that is a good question. The rule of cool or you want some GSC stratagem (A plan years in the making.) Neither army feel like they are missing something the other offer. Or rather tyranids can stand on an objective where GSC just vapirise.
I keep getting this urge to try a Pauper Princes mass flamer spam list built around double shooting, then dying and double shooting again with the relic banner and psychic power.
But that’s too much cash to invest in them right now.
SnotlingPimpWagon wrote: Is it possible to legally play GSC + Tyranids alliance in 9th? And is there any merit to that, if it is?
It is legal. You can even use the GSC to smugle in a 3rd detachments of imperial guard.
As to why, that is a good question. The rule of cool or you want some GSC stratagem (A plan years in the making.) Neither army feel like they are missing something the other offer. Or rather tyranids can stand on an objective where GSC just vapirise.
All of those three armies are sort of in a gutter tier wise then, huh?
I would not say so. Tyranids puts up good result. But you need to be a wizard with the codex.
IG I can not speak of. But I have not heard anything good with it. GSC are bottom of the barrel. Best build as far as the internett consesus is some combination of trucks, handflamers and ridgerunners.
I think you will find the pattern beeing 8th edition codexes in a 9th edition world.
One of the problems is that the codex has 4 units that do the same thing, but only one of them is worth taking in every thinkable senario. (Acolytes.)
I'd disagree that the four melee units do "the same thing" outside of a very broad "hit things in melee" and "die fast when targeted". Metamorphs are anti-light infantry/anti-melee, they have high volume of low damage attacks and tech that allows them to swing even if killed. Aberrants are kitted for multi-wound targets (picks for infantry, hammers for bigger things) and are a bit tougher so they can brawl with heavy infantry. Purestrains are arguably the weakest of the lot due to a variety of factors, but looking only at their unit profile they are the most mobile of our melee options with a mild durability boost (T4 and 5++).
The main reason Acolytes see play while the others are less common is that they are the only one of the four that did not receive a heavy price increase with 9th, making them the only one that can consistently "trade up" easily. Metamorphs have also been seeing increasing play in tournament lists as an anti-melee tool, thanks to an increase in fragile (1 wound) but hard/fast hitting melee squads.
Niiai wrote: There are very few non hero units in the codex. Most of the heroes are crap in 9th edition. Many of the non-hero unist are quite bad.
The melee Sanctus and Locus are both decent for action secondaries. The rest are mostly just suffering from being pricey or their associated unit is pricey (Biophagus to Aberrants).
One of the problems is that the codex has 4 units that do the same thing, but only one of them is worth taking in every thinkable senario. (Acolytes.)
I'd disagree that the four melee units do "the same thing" outside of a very broad "hit things in melee" and "die fast when targeted". Metamorphs are anti-light infantry/anti-melee, they have high volume of low damage attacks and tech that allows them to swing even if killed. Aberrants are kitted for multi-wound targets (picks for infantry, hammers for bigger things) and are a bit tougher so they can brawl with heavy infantry. Purestrains are arguably the weakest of the lot due to a variety of factors, but looking only at their unit profile they are the most mobile of our melee options with a mild durability boost (T4 and 5++).
The main reason Acolytes see play while the others are less common is that they are the only one of the four that did not receive a heavy price increase with 9th, making them the only one that can consistently "trade up" easily. Metamorphs have also been seeing increasing play in tournament lists as an anti-melee tool, thanks to an increase in fragile (1 wound) but hard/fast hitting melee squads.
Niiai wrote: There are very few non hero units in the codex. Most of the heroes are crap in 9th edition. Many of the non-hero unist are quite bad.
The melee Sanctus and Locus are both decent for action secondaries. The rest are mostly just suffering from being pricey or their associated unit is pricey (Biophagus to Aberrants).
Only aberrants offer any real meaningfully distinct role in the current paradigm.
if you are not interested in discussing weapons that are demonstrably worse than other weapons for the point costs on the platform (Scything talons, metamorph crab claws, aberrant hammers) then Metamorphs, Acolytes, and Purestrains are all essentially identical S4 AP-1 D1 AP-3 on a 6 melee glass cannons. The distinguishing factors (metamorphs can fight when they die, acolytes are Troops and can take heavy weapons, purestrains are T4 5++ instead of T3 5+) are INCREDIBLY minor, and basically result in acos being the go to pick 99% of the time with the slight edge case of metas if you want another unit to come in alongside a T2 bomb unit that you want to have insurance against fight-last and interrupt mechanics.
Aberrants are distinct, being the only unit that brings some anti-elite teeth with their D3 damage weapons and base S5, but they are also heavily heavily overpriced compared to special weapon spamming acos, so their splash in the pond is more like a drop in the bucket.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Now, Genestealers CAN be a distinct unit....but just not, you know, in our codex.
If you ally them in from codex 'nids, genestealers can be given various buffs to durability to act as an anvil unit, or double-move slung across the board as a T1 tempo melee unit.
While you do have good points that I could probably go into with you and we find good use of all the other 3 units the problem is that currently acolytes are the only thing that makes sence.
Abberants are very cool and perform good roles. But buying acolytes with the right mining tool is better for the points you pay.
Hybrids are very cool. Whip is a cool option in 9th. Also making a blending unit that hits on 2's with 5 attacks is cool. I have some of them from 8th. But in 9th they cost to much compared to acolytes.
Trueborn are just worse tyranid sealers, and you have no Swarmlord support. If you really want the mobilaty acolytes in twisted helix and charge and advance stratagem is better.
If any of these units gets cheaper then yes they will be good. But currently acolytes are better IMHO. It is a points issue. Many of them are actually quite interesting. Just to expensive.
if you are not interested in discussing weapons that are demonstrably worse than other weapons for the point costs on the platform (Scything talons, metamorph crab claws, aberrant hammers) then Metamorphs, Acolytes, and Purestrains are all essentially identical S4 AP-1 D1 AP-4 on a 6 melee glass cannons.
I thought I did allude to the other weapon configurations in analysis? Admittedly, the opinions on unit roles in the prior post are more from a "what is this unit intended to do based on its stats and abilities" perspective rather than a points efficiency one in this instance. As noted, all of the non-Acolyte units are priced out of being competitive options (Whipmorphs are still pricey, but they can cost effectively hold down other glass hammers).
The little quirks of the different units does change how they are used though and what are their ideal targets. Whipmorphs are much more comfortable going up against other melee units than the others as nothing will stop them from getting their swings in. They also have the highest volume of rending attacks of the three (16 to 21 from a min unit) and stop consolidation moves on the part of the opponent. Acolytes have the fewest rending attacks but can supplement them with their heavy weapons. Genestealers (especially Tyranid ones) are the fastest so they aren't as reliant on deepstrike or transports to get around the map.
I suppose to expand beyond whipmorphs, the duel talon configuration is a low-save horde killer, but 9th edition generally discourages that type of unit on top of their being pricey. The claw just needs a rewrite since its entire gimmick is a relic from 7th edition.
I suppose to reiterate, I do not disagree that Acolytes are generally the best option. I just think it is overly-simplifying things to say that the units do the exact same role.
If they where better price balanced, witch the codex is not, it would be a discussion with some merit. Right now it is a discussion where people end up taking acolytes. If they play GSC at all.
if you are not interested in discussing weapons that are demonstrably worse than other weapons for the point costs on the platform (Scything talons, metamorph crab claws, aberrant hammers) then Metamorphs, Acolytes, and Purestrains are all essentially identical S4 AP-1 D1 AP-4 on a 6 melee glass cannons.
I thought I did allude to the other weapon configurations in analysis? Admittedly, the opinions on unit roles in the prior post are more from a "what is this unit intended to do based on its stats and abilities" perspective rather than a points efficiency one in this instance. As noted, all of the non-Acolyte units are priced out of being competitive options (Whipmorphs are still pricey, but they can cost effectively hold down other glass hammers).
The little quirks of the different units does change how they are used though and what are their ideal targets. Whipmorphs are much more comfortable going up against other melee units than the others as nothing will stop them from getting their swings in. They also have the highest volume of rending attacks of the three (16 to 21 from a min unit) and stop consolidation moves on the part of the opponent. Acolytes have the fewest rending attacks but can supplement them with their heavy weapons. Genestealers (especially Tyranid ones) are the fastest so they aren't as reliant on deepstrike or transports to get around the map.
I suppose to expand beyond whipmorphs, the duel talon configuration is a low-save horde killer, but 9th edition generally discourages that type of unit on top of their being pricey. The claw just needs a rewrite since its entire gimmick is a relic from 7th edition.
I suppose to reiterate, I do not disagree that Acolytes are generally the best option. I just think it is overly-simplifying things to say that the units do the exact same role.
I guess in theory I agree, I just don't think something like "S6 AP-1 d1" and "S4 AP-1 d1 AP-3 on a 6 to wound" with an identical T3 5+ defensive statline and identical deep strike and identical ranged weaponry is enough of a distinction to actually warrant calling that unit 'A distinct role.' It's a bit like claiming Reivers with bolt carbines have 'a distinct role' from Primaris Infiltrators or Incursors because Reivers Deep Strike and don't get any special rules on their boltguns, so their role is "Worse than the other two" and you take reivers when you're certain that you want to shoot things with boltguns but you know for a fact you don't want to do it until turn 2.
Also, point costs can put paid to 'a distinct role.' For the points, dual-talon metamorphs are inferior to acolytes in terms of damage per point against any target with at least a 6+ regular save, and acolytes are nearly twice as durable (8ppw vs 15ppw), and have obsec. Saying that dual-talon metas have a role because you might know FOR CERTAIN that you're going to be fighting Daemons and Harlequins and you just DESPERATELY are going to need that extra 10% damage boost SO MUCH and you definitely can't bring a Primus to give the acolytes +1 to hit anyway to erase the advantage...it's a major stretch.
Metamorphs sorely need a role changeup. Personally, I think it'd be cool (and, tbh, fitting with GW's push away from 'buy lots of third party bitz to fully equip the squad with the same weapon') if metamorphs could have any of the melee weapon profiles they're able to bring, and could change what they are in the command phase. The value of Claw vs Talons vs Whip is basically equivalent, they could all be 0pts and the unit would be fine, so why not remove 'WYSIWYG' as a concern entirely and assume that someone building metamorphs is going to build them the only way you're able to with the kit?
In theory if the brood brother model costed 1 points it would be the best model for any job. What would you want 1 acciles ridgerunner or 70 models? Points do matter.
In fact all of the 4 identical units could alle see play if they where costed well. Aberant as a heavy hitter and tanky unit. Trueborn as long range strikers. Acolytes as objective secure, heavy weapons and hand flamers. Metamorphs can have whips, hand flamers and the no AP loads of attack blendering but oose objective secure.
In fact all of those things are alreay in the profile. But with the points beeing as they are there is no real distiction there. I do not know where the points should be exactly. But if metamorphs costed the same as acolytes do with all the bells and whistels there would at least be some consideration. Sid Meyer defined games a series of interesting choises. I have some problems with that definition, but it has a good point. And the four units in question do not really have interesting choises at the moment.
With how assault works in 40k there's essentially no difference to blending termagaunts, marines or tanks. If you really can't do one, you are probably in trouble and not a viable unit.
Which is why I think punching variety is a bit meaningless - be it talons, claws, saws, or hammers. You are either pointed up the curve or you are not. Obviously metamorphs are more attractive if they are the same points as acolytes rather than considerably more - but its not giving them a different function.
If you want variety, the four units need to have something else going for them. Abberants for example could be DG Terminator level tough and therefore potentially serve as an anvil. Purestrains could infiltrate for first turn charge potential (kind of lame, but its a thing). Metamorphs could get some rule to deny the opponent obsec, or otherwise mess with them in some way. Not very inspired but hopefully gets the point across.
That is not true, the claim about blending. A gaunt is T3 1W 6+. A scything Hierodule is T8 18W 3+.
You need very different weapons for killing them. And they have very different roles meaning you meet them in different places on the battlefield.
Say acolyte remains the same.
Purestrain where 12 points.
Abberants 20 points, hammer where 5.
Hybrid Metamorphs 8 base, flamer 3, whip 1, Metamorphs claw 1.
Those would be some interesting points. And I am not sure witch units I would take for each role. There is stil plenty of use in each. And not picking acolytes means you loose objective secure. And you have to juggle the elite slot.
An aspect of metamorphs that is just recently been recognized is their ability to prevent your opponents from taking a point during their turn. Because of how the whip rule is worded, if you place your metamorphs in between an objective and an opponent, it is very difficult for your opponent to take that objective in their turn. Either they shoot you off the objective and cannot charge, or they charge and consolidate into your still-standing metamorphs. Not too many 55 point units I know of that are guaranteed to survive a charge for consolidation purposes.
So as anticipated the new codex is coming by the end of the year. Not much rules info but two things were specifically mentioned on the stream today:
- stronger shooting potential, including "combo" play between units arriving from cult ambush, an example cited of "deadly cross-fire" coordinated on a target by a unit on the board and one which has just arrived in a flanking position. No indication if this is an army rule or a stratagem.
- less reliance on stratagems for the deployment tricks we are already familiar with, but instead units will pay points or PL to be upgraded with delivery options. By this it's fair to assume we will see something like Perfect Ambush as a paid point upgrade for a unit.
It's sounding interesting so far, the second part in particular. Could be nice depending on the cost, and if Return to Shadows remains a stratagem trick rather than a similar point upgrade, some units could get extra mileage from it. Hoping next week will show an early preview of rules like they've done a few times now.
Probably either Autocannons or Heavy Flamers. They are <Brood Brothers> and not <Cult> so they probably don’t gain creeds or the benefits of being near an Alphus, so youd use them to either screen your backfield for a cheap 45pt unit that can potshot some autocannons or to try and clear off things running actions.
Realistically if Creeds help vehicles you’re more likely looking at more viability in Ridgerunners and Goliaths, especially if Neophytes get some additional shooting power. Running 10 Neophytes w/ 2 Seismic Cannons/Grenade Launchers inside a Goliath is a decent amount of shots if the price is right, and as Bladed Cog you’d ignore movement penalties for Heavy and have an Invuln save on top of the FNP.
Character preview is up, just gives us a look at her wargear. Very anti-vehicle focused, both abilities get better targeting vehicles or monsters, otherwise fairly underwhelming effects. I'm scratching my head a bit on the reductus explosives getting a bonus to the trigger roll against bikes in addition to vehicles and monsters, but then still only doing 1 mortal wound to bikes? I'm also wondering if she might possibly not be a Character, due to the Clandestine rule. Obviously a Character can still get use out of such a rule but it seems like it could alternatively be a means of pseudo-character shooting protection.
Character preview is up, just gives us a look at her wargear. Very anti-vehicle focused, both abilities get better targeting vehicles or monsters, otherwise fairly underwhelming effects. I'm scratching my head a bit on the reductus explosives getting a bonus to the trigger roll against bikes in addition to vehicles and monsters, but then still only doing 1 mortal wound to bikes? I'm also wondering if she might possibly not be a Character, due to the Clandestine rule. Obviously a Character can still get use out of such a rule but it seems like it could alternatively be a means of pseudo-character shooting protection.
The reductus looks like a nice character that can easily get its worth back in points by striking vehicles. Even against Infantry, she's still not useless. 2d3 strength 8 AP -3 attacks at 24'' is pretty darn good. Considering her ballistic kill is going to be at 3+, that's pretty impressive. Plus, it shouldn't be to hard to keep her alive for a turn or two. It's not mind blowing, but that's pretty darn good. I am a bit concern about the quantity of characters the GC have at the moment though.
She seems cute but not really anything the army needed. Thats now the 12th character in the army lol.
The mine just doesn't work and most likely will depend on some strat to break it.
The ranged attack is OK'ish, assuming she hits on a 3+ she averages 4.5 wounds on a Rhino equivalent tank (T7 3+ save) so she will require 3 rounds to kill a 10 wound vehicle assuming no other defensive abilities like damage reduction.
Against infantry she is really bad. 2d3 shots blast means she still only mins 3 shots on squads of 6-10 so the average roll of 4 is better, but the 1 damage is so bad. She averages 1.9 wounds verse a marine. So rounding up in her favor she kills a single marine a turn. Pretty poor. Verse GEQ she will kill about 3.4 a turn, which is laughably bad for some IED's going off amongst your chaf.
She had better be pretty cheap and not eat up an full slot.
Red Corsair wrote: She seems cute but not really anything the army needed. Thats now the 12th character in the army lol.
The mine just doesn't work and most likely will depend on some strat to break it.
The ranged attack is OK'ish, assuming she hits on a 3+ she averages 4.5 wounds on a Rhino equivalent tank (T7 3+ save) so she will require 3 rounds to kill a 10 wound vehicle assuming no other defensive abilities like damage reduction.
Against infantry she is really bad. 2d3 shots blast means she still only mins 3 shots on squads of 6-10 so the average roll of 4 is better, but the 1 damage is so bad. She averages 1.9 wounds verse a marine. So rounding up in her favor she kills a single marine a turn. Pretty poor. Verse GEQ she will kill about 3.4 a turn, which is laughably bad for some IED's going off amongst your chaf.
She had better be pretty cheap and not eat up an full slot.
What’s your math on 4.5 wounds per turn against T7 3+sv? I’m dogshit at math but I keep coming up to a little over 5 wounds a turn. Average of 4 shots, hitting with a little over 2.6, wounding a bit more than 1.7, and totaling ~5.3 damage. She has got to have a better damage output against transports than a single Ridgerunner.
Edit: I wasn’t accounting for the armor save. Still better output than a single Ridgerunner tho.
It's even worse verse things with a 5++ like DE raiders, although it still works out to needing 3 turns to kill one on average.
I just hate how they wrote the mines rules. Should have been like aircraft bombs, when a unit triggers it within 3" role a die for each model in the target unit up to a maximum of 10 and on a 4+ they suffer that many mortals. Done.
Verse vehicles and monsters role 5 dice only they cause mortals on 2+
The way they wrote it infantry can easily weather it with minimal damage and if you role a 1 verse tanks its a total dud.
Whats even more bizarre is the fact it is designed to set off more often on bikers but still only does a single mortal to them lol.
Oh well, hopefully shes at least cheap because she does still have fun rules despite them being overly complex with minimal impact.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ordana wrote: A marine surviving stepping on an anti tank mine is rather funny...
Would just being a blanket 4 mortal wounds really be to much?
Honestly this is also another simple solution. Letting the mine go off on a 2+ for any target and causing a flat 4 mortals. Would also scare off characters that way, whats funny about the rules now is any old infantry character can walk over it and only takes a single mortal on a 4+.
Yea for having to take a turn dedicated to laying the mine, it's really underwhelming. She's probably not going to deploy on the table t1, so t2 maybe she gets to drop it and that assumes she is allowed to DS somewhere useful and drop it immediately. She really just seems better starting on the board and using her shooting the entire time.
But there's parts of the picture we may yet be missing.
Maybe I'm missing something, but the way this reads:
You roll a D6 for each model within the 3" range of the mine, right?
Wouldn't that mean it can do multiple mortal wounds to units, not "just one"?
Like I said, maybe I'm missing something but looking at this from the perspective of throwing it into a chokepoint near an objective or the like it seems like it can definitely play the part of deterrence.
Kanluwen wrote: Maybe I'm missing something, but the way this reads:
You roll a D6 for each model within the 3" range of the mine, right?
Wouldn't that mean it can do multiple mortal wounds to units, not "just one"?
Like I said, maybe I'm missing something but looking at this from the perspective of throwing it into a chokepoint near an objective or the like it seems like it can definitely play the part of deterrence.
I think you are right. It also can hit Friendly's. So you can't just plant one in your group. (Well, I guess you could.)
Kanluwen wrote: Maybe I'm missing something, but the way this reads:
You roll a D6 for each model within the 3" range of the mine, right?
Wouldn't that mean it can do multiple mortal wounds to units, not "just one"?
Like I said, maybe I'm missing something but looking at this from the perspective of throwing it into a chokepoint near an objective or the like it seems like it can definitely play the part of deterrence.
Yes. but 40k is a game of (technically) perfect information. A remotely competent opponent isn't going to put 10 models within 3" of the bomb. Outside of using it for charge defence where are you going to force your opponent to eat it with a bunch of models? If its in a chokepoint you stop infront of it and move across the next turn (yes this is technically a small win). If its on an objective just 1 guy needs to be in range.
Niiai wrote: What if you have models standing on an objective and your opponents creatures only have melee weapons?
How about placing it between two terrain pieces as tanks can not drive over terrain pieces?
Corner cases. Fun. Probably not strong.
Placing it between two pieces of terrain forming a narrow pass as you illustrate is probably the best use I can think of. Unfortunately it also reads as needing an enemy unit within 3" at the end of those phases. Which means you could drive over it and so long as you move more then 3" past it, it won't fulfill the requirement to detonate it. Again, it's such horrible rules writing.
The other example you gave is also possibly interesting however a couple things again. First, as you noted earlier it can also kill your own stuff and if your 1 wound obsec verse 2 wound obsec this is potentially a bad move. But ignoring your own friendlies, they could still charge in a chain so a minimal amount of units are within threat range at the end of assault, then use pile ins and consolidate moves to swamp the objective.
I love the idea of sappers placing mines, but in a game like 40k that has zero fog of war, the rules really need to be written in a simple streamlined manner.
Example:
Any enemy unit that moves within 3" takes a mortal on the role of a 4+. Roll a die for every model in the unit up to a maximum of 10. For vehicles bikes and monsters roll 1 die, that unit suffers 4 mortal wounds on a the roll of a 2+
I am sure even that has some issue and isn't ideal but I haven't really put any time or play testing into it either and personally I think it would work better.
I'd also have let her place a mine anywhere outside the enemy deployment zone during the deployment phase of the GSC army. Just let her place the single mine and possibly a strat to place a second. This way she can be in reserve or in your own deployment and still have the impact, without forgoing her shooting to boot.
Obviously points matter here, if shes 40 points she'll be fine anyway. I just really like the idea and wish it was executed in a way where my savvy play group won't minimize it's impact before we ever even roll a die
Replacing cp with character abilities is pretty dope in my book. Purestrains getting cult benefits probably means bladed cog is losing +1 invuln. But that would be pretty neat.
Also made props to regular tyranid genestealers getting 4 attacks each. Thats gonna be dirty.
dreadlybrew wrote: Replacing cp with character abilities is pretty dope in my book. Purestrains getting cult benefits probably means bladed cog is losing +1 invuln. But that would be pretty neat.
Also made props to regular tyranid genestealers getting 4 attacks each. Thats gonna be dirty.
I just ask that everything works together in a fun unified way and stuff isn't over cost. I don't want them to be over tuned like my DE. Somewhere between Necrons and Sisters would make me smile for sure. I like having to think harder for my wins, but not at the point where we are now where I'm just banging my head against the wall.
Toughness bump for Acolytes and Cult Icon has been reworked to be a mini-Cult Reinforcements (D3 model replenish instead of D6), presumably every turn? It might require an Action in the command phase, if it does then Cult Icons took a big hit. I'm frankly not a fan of the toughness boost either as it will probably lead to a point bump on Acolytes, T3>T4 on a 5+ save does not matter much in the current environment, Acolytes will still feel like they're made of paper and will trade less efficiently at a higher PPM.
Toughness bump for Acolytes and Cult Icon has been reworked to be a mini-Cult Reinforcements (D3 model replenish instead of D6), presumably every turn? It might require an Action in the command phase, if it does then Cult Icons took a big hit. I'm frankly not a fan of the toughness boost either as it will probably lead to a point bump on Acolytes, T3>T4 on a 5+ save does not matter much in the current environment, Acolytes will still feel like they're made of paper and will trade less efficiently at a higher PPM.
T4 is WAY better than T3. Gives a comparative -1 to wound for every strength of weapon except S5 and S8+. New Cult Icon is good assuming it doesn’t take an action to complete; what would make you think it takes an action?
Toughness bump for Acolytes and Cult Icon has been reworked to be a mini-Cult Reinforcements (D3 model replenish instead of D6), presumably every turn? It might require an Action in the command phase, if it does then Cult Icons took a big hit. I'm frankly not a fan of the toughness boost either as it will probably lead to a point bump on Acolytes, T3>T4 on a 5+ save does not matter much in the current environment, Acolytes will still feel like they're made of paper and will trade less efficiently at a higher PPM.
T4 is WAY better than T3. Gives a comparative -1 to wound for every strength of weapon except S5 and S8+. New Cult Icon is good assuming it doesn’t take an action to complete; what would make you think it takes an action?
At 8ppm, presumably going to 9ppm, it matters very little. If they stay 8ppm I'll happily take it, of course, but I doubt that will be the case. I am only hypothesizing on the action part, but the actual rules clipping is extremely sparse and leaves what "summoning the cult" means to the text of the article, which leads me to believe there's more wording there and opens the possibility of it requiring an action.
I don't see the Cult Icon's reroll 1s as a big loss. Since we're working with the present information, you'd still have pauper princess for your rerolls (hits not misses).
I like the idea of models pouring out of every dark corner on the table to reinforce. Like some mole menn.
The game mechanic is not that good as units get wiped all the time. (Yet Necrons somehow manages it.) I hope it is either not to expansive or very viable.
But if this means Acolytes become more expensive I'm afraid they will follow Ork Boys and get priced out of existance.
This sums up my concerns too. There is also the question of Metamorphs as well. They presumably will get the toughness bump as well but they are already pricey.
On the plus-side, it does lend a bit of credence to the rumor of Aberrants going to T5. I think the icon rework should be good too. Right now it is fairly pointless on anything other than an Acolyte squad (Neophytes generally don't want to be in melee, Metamorphs are generally taken in smaller units) and entirely pointless if you are playing as Pauper Princes. It makes me wonder if the Iconward will have a similar ability since he is basically carrying a much larger icon.
Also regarding the earlier discussion regarding the Saboteur, I think the mine ability is probably going to be best used as a melee tool. Drop it in an ongoing combat (say after wrapping a vehicle with Neophytes/Brood Brothers) and detonate at earliest opportunity. The extra damage against vehicles may also prove relevant when T'au drop, as some of their larger battlesuits may get the Dreadknight treatment and swap their monster keyword for the vehicle one.
It specifically calls out the D3 in regard to Acolytes which makes me assume Neophytes will get D6 models back.
This isn't as bad as you may think, as a Necron player I can tell you that stealing objectives in the command phase is a really big deal. Of course it will depend on how the models are returned to the unit. But GW has a sloppy track record here.
The T4 is also pretty massive. I mean, your reducing incoming damage from bolt weapons by 25% and las weapons by 33% and anything greater but not S8 by 20%. So even if they jump from 8 to 9ppm thats only a 12.5% increase in cost for such improved durability. Now, of course they were priced high at 8ppm before and probably should have been 7 so I think it will put them right where they should be.
If the icons are 10 points your probably auto taking them on 10+ model acolytes and neophytes. The ability to cheat forward onto points and the fact the icons would repay you after a single use is just too good. Especially if trucks become a staple as your probably surviving with the units inside them, but losing models in wrecks only to bring them back and cheat them closer in the command phase.
If units of 20 is a thing then you can use the banner to bring stuff back. Patriarch makes them fearless. But most of my units drive cars... And that stops at 10.
Red Corsair wrote: It specifically calls out the D3 in regard to Acolytes which makes me assume Neophytes will get D6 models back.
I suppose there is precedent with the Chaos Daemon Icons (though those currently work differently from what the community article described for our icons). I believe they have some units that get back D6 models (Daemonettes), some D3 models (I think Bloodletters and Plague Bearers), and some a single model (Blood Crushers).
As another bit of speculation, I wonder if the summon the cult action will be replacing the current psionic summoning stratagem (or possibly replace psionic blast as a psychic power)? Say instead of summoning a new unit it allows a psyker to summon the cult to replenish a unit?
This is probably going to sum up the fate of the entire book. I'm hoping that pricing will be evenhanded, but I'm a bit worried that things will either be too expensive or too cheap... Too expensive is what we are dealing with now, but too cheap could cause us to be a nightmare akin to an unholy union of Druhkari lethality with potentially Ork-like light vehicles (assuming Rugged Construction will go to -1 damage like Ramshakle or Disgustingly Resilient).
Obviously though, Strat_N8, we wouldn't take advantage of a situation where some of our models are too cheap - GSC players are far too noble minded for that!
Red Corsair wrote: It specifically calls out the D3 in regard to Acolytes which makes me assume Neophytes will get D6 models back.
I suppose there is precedent with the Chaos Daemon Icons (though those currently work differently from what the community article described for our icons). I believe they have some units that get back D6 models (Daemonettes), some D3 models (I think Bloodletters and Plague Bearers), and some a single model (Blood Crushers).
As another bit of speculation, I wonder if the summon the cult action will be replacing the current psionic summoning stratagem (or possibly replace psionic blast as a psychic power)? Say instead of summoning a new unit it allows a psyker to summon the cult to replenish a unit?
This is probably going to sum up the fate of the entire book. I'm hoping that pricing will be evenhanded, but I'm a bit worried that things will either be too expensive or too cheap... Too expensive is what we are dealing with now, but too cheap could cause us to be a nightmare akin to an unholy union of Druhkari lethality with potentially Ork-like light vehicles (assuming Rugged Construction will go to -1 damage like Ramshakle or Disgustingly Resilient).
I think it’s more likely to replace the current “Cult Reinforcements” stratagem that lets us bring back D6 models from a Troops unit at the start of the movement phase. I’d be sad to see that one go. I typically get a lot of use out of it. It allows acolytes to absorb a near-fatal blow and come back the next turn with all/most of their mining weapons.
I think it’s more likely to replace the current “Cult Reinforcements” stratagem that lets us bring back D6 models from a Troops unit at the start of the movement phase. I’d be sad to see that one go. I typically get a lot of use out of it. It allows acolytes to absorb a near-fatal blow and come back the next turn with all/most of their mining weapons.
It could return, just altering the amount of summoned models on a unit with an icon. I'd be just as unsurprised to see it gone though.
Unprepared foes find themselves trapped in a cage of gunfire from all sides, as cultists spring up from prepared positions to blanket them in bullets. Whenever a unit with the Crossfire keyword shoots and scores at least five hits (or a hit with a Damage characteristic other than 1) their target gains a crossfire marker.
Once an enemy unit has a crossfire marker, it becomes especially vulnerable to attack. First, any further Crossfire units shooting at them add 1 to their hit rolls. Then, if the target is Exposed, they’re in for a world of hurt.
How does a target become Exposed? If you draw a line from the attacking unit’s base to another friendly Crossfire model within sight, and that line passes over the targeted unit, that targeted unit is Exposed.
Attackers add 1 to their wound rolls against the Exposed unit, and if the attackers are within 12” of their target, they ignore enemy cover too. Enemies taking cover in Obscuring terrain have some protection, but unsuspecting foes will fall victim to the Cult’s diabolic pincer attacks.
If that sounds powerful already, you’d be right, and that’s far from all the Genestealer Cults can do with their Crossfire units. Coming under such heavy fire often renders enemies completely unable to defend against an incoming charge and gives their attackers plenty of time to hack away before risking retaliation.
You can even upgrade one of your units to be able to use the Crossfire rule as soon as they arrive from Reinforcements, meaning that your enemies are never safe from the Genestealer Cults.
If this is what they're doing for GSC, I'm cautiously optimistic to see what Guard and Tau are getting.
Mixed feelings. It seems like a really fun mechanic to play around, and decently strong depending on how our shooting armory pans out (with most armies getting heavy revisions to profiles this edition, my hopes for Seismic Cannons are high). I really wish there was more of a benefit to charging an Exposed Target besides turning off overwatch and set to defend. Especially if Perfect Ambush is gone. I'm not ready to cry doom yet as there are plenty of potential avenues for them to reintroduce better charges out of deep strike, but that was our signature tool for melee deep strike and the name has gone to something completely different, which is alarming.
Madjob wrote: Mixed feelings. It seems like a really fun mechanic to play around, and decently strong depending on how our shooting armory pans out (with most armies getting heavy revisions to profiles this edition, my hopes for Seismic Cannons are high). I really wish there was more of a benefit to charging an Exposed Target besides turning off overwatch and set to defend. Especially if Perfect Ambush is gone. I'm not ready to cry doom yet as there are plenty of potential avenues for them to reintroduce better charges out of deep strike, but that was our signature tool for melee deep strike and the name has gone to something completely different, which is alarming.
We're only seeing a small glimps here. Its doubtful that is the only stratagem that keys off a crossfire marker and I believe some rumor mentioned that GSC deepstrike shenanigans are moving to character abilities rather then being stratagems.
Madjob wrote: Mixed feelings. It seems like a really fun mechanic to play around, and decently strong depending on how our shooting armory pans out (with most armies getting heavy revisions to profiles this edition, my hopes for Seismic Cannons are high). I really wish there was more of a benefit to charging an Exposed Target besides turning off overwatch and set to defend. Especially if Perfect Ambush is gone. I'm not ready to cry doom yet as there are plenty of potential avenues for them to reintroduce better charges out of deep strike, but that was our signature tool for melee deep strike and the name has gone to something completely different, which is alarming.
We're only seeing a small glimps here. Its doubtful that is the only stratagem that keys off a crossfire marker and I believe some rumor mentioned that GSC deepstrike shenanigans are moving to character abilities rather then being stratagems.
Of course we are, I did take pains to emphasize that there were plenty of avenues for them to include buffs for deep strike charges, but my main point was the name for what had previously been our main tool for deep strike charges now has very little to do with deep strike charges. That's a little worrying. Especially since we are still totally in the dark about how deep strike is going to work for us in this book, in an edition where mass deep strike is a hard thing to sell with reduced board sizes, forward deploying units controlling midfield early and denying deep strike, some of them with an increased range. Are we going to have any tools to deal with those obstacles to what I assume is still meant to be our main strategy?
Also the rumor you're mentioning was a complete load. Absolutely nothing in it has lined up with the official info so far.
It's kind-of bizarre to introduce a mechanic like that for only one faction. Why are GSC the only ones whose guns cause people to get exposed in crossfires?
The effect seems powerful enough, it's just weird that apparently having tyranid DNA suddenly makes your guns perform differently than everyone else's.
yukishiro1 wrote: It's kind-of bizarre to introduce a mechanic like that for only one faction. Why are GSC the only ones whose guns cause people to get exposed in crossfires?
The effect seems powerful enough, it's just weird that apparently having tyranid DNA suddenly makes your guns perform differently than everyone else's.
It feels like a core rule they thought of after 9th was launched. Sort of like 8th edition orks always hitting on a 6, which rolled into the main rules.
That being said, I also feel that folks wouldn't have been making these comments had the rules not been named very generic warfare conditions like crossfire and exposed. Had they named it hive mind tactics or whatever GSC specific name you could think of with the same rules applied, I'd wager nobody raises an eyebrow.
I for one am happy it is at least a very solid buff to the neophytes, who have always been tax units until now (doesn't hurt I own 120 of the devils) I am also eternally grateful that the rules are very straight forward and clean. I wanted deepstrike and infiltrate in place of ambush tokens which we already are rumored to get plus this added benefit also plays cleanly which is a must with a horde faction.
Meanwhile I look at the custodes and feel even more grateful we dodged that convoluted mind
Madjob wrote: Mixed feelings. It seems like a really fun mechanic to play around, and decently strong depending on how our shooting armory pans out (with most armies getting heavy revisions to profiles this edition, my hopes for Seismic Cannons are high). I really wish there was more of a benefit to charging an Exposed Target besides turning off overwatch and set to defend. Especially if Perfect Ambush is gone. I'm not ready to cry doom yet as there are plenty of potential avenues for them to reintroduce better charges out of deep strike, but that was our signature tool for melee deep strike and the name has gone to something completely different, which is alarming.
We're only seeing a small glimps here. Its doubtful that is the only stratagem that keys off a crossfire marker and I believe some rumor mentioned that GSC deepstrike shenanigans are moving to character abilities rather then being stratagems.
Of course we are, I did take pains to emphasize that there were plenty of avenues for them to include buffs for deep strike charges, but my main point was the name for what had previously been our main tool for deep strike charges now has very little to do with deep strike charges. That's a little worrying. Especially since we are still totally in the dark about how deep strike is going to work for us in this book, in an edition where mass deep strike is a hard thing to sell with reduced board sizes, forward deploying units controlling midfield early and denying deep strike, some of them with an increased range. Are we going to have any tools to deal with those obstacles to what I assume is still meant to be our main strategy?
Also the rumor you're mentioning was a complete load. Absolutely nothing in it has lined up with the official info so far.
The rumor he is referring to was the one that predicted a Custodes/GSC release in late 2020 and has been correct about everything so far.
Madjob wrote: Mixed feelings. It seems like a really fun mechanic to play around, and decently strong depending on how our shooting armory pans out (with most armies getting heavy revisions to profiles this edition, my hopes for Seismic Cannons are high). I really wish there was more of a benefit to charging an Exposed Target besides turning off overwatch and set to defend. Especially if Perfect Ambush is gone. I'm not ready to cry doom yet as there are plenty of potential avenues for them to reintroduce better charges out of deep strike, but that was our signature tool for melee deep strike and the name has gone to something completely different, which is alarming.
We're only seeing a small glimps here. Its doubtful that is the only stratagem that keys off a crossfire marker and I believe some rumor mentioned that GSC deepstrike shenanigans are moving to character abilities rather then being stratagems.
Of course we are, I did take pains to emphasize that there were plenty of avenues for them to include buffs for deep strike charges, but my main point was the name for what had previously been our main tool for deep strike charges now has very little to do with deep strike charges. That's a little worrying. Especially since we are still totally in the dark about how deep strike is going to work for us in this book, in an edition where mass deep strike is a hard thing to sell with reduced board sizes, forward deploying units controlling midfield early and denying deep strike, some of them with an increased range. Are we going to have any tools to deal with those obstacles to what I assume is still meant to be our main strategy?
Also the rumor you're mentioning was a complete load. Absolutely nothing in it has lined up with the official info so far.
The rumor he is referring to was the one that predicted a Custodes/GSC release in late 2020 and has been correct about everything so far.
Which, while none of the GSC stuff is overtly contradicted by what GW's shown so far, a lot of it doesn't jive (why wouldn't we have heard about the Saboteur's ambush bonus when that character was previewed?), and most of the Custodes stuff is flat out wrong so we can discard the GSC stuff as a consequence.
Not exactly sure if it will survive, but a unit of hand flamer acolytes using "lying in wait" to pinch in behind your opponent and sprinkle crossfire tokens all over while gifting "exsposed" to every unit between them and your army could be very fun.
dracpanzer wrote: Not exactly sure if it will survive, but a unit of hand flamer acolytes using "lying in wait" to pinch in behind your opponent and sprinkle crossfire tokens all over while gifting "exsposed" to every unit between them and your army could be very fun.
Wonder how long these crossfire tokens last.
Since they last longer then a single phase the next logical point is probably our next command phase. Having them stick around for more then 1 turn would be broken.
dracpanzer wrote: Not exactly sure if it will survive, but a unit of hand flamer acolytes using "lying in wait" to pinch in behind your opponent and sprinkle crossfire tokens all over while gifting "exsposed" to every unit between them and your army could be very fun.
We don't know much of anything about it yet. Just enjoying the moment of speculation while it "still?" appears GSC might be getting some good fun rules.
Thinking about it, if you are firing at a unit of 11+ models, a single handflamer gives you enough hits to put a crossfire token on them, meaning you can split fire pretty efficiently against larger units. And if you string out a unit on arrival, you should be able to qualify a wide arc of your units for the 'exposed' bonus, other than flankers.
I wonder if we get any assault buffs, or DS improvements, so that we have a better chance of following up on these improved shooting rules.Otherwise we might as well be called 'gunslinger cults' because the purestrains will be irrelevant again
There is simply no way that Acolytes will have the Crossfire special rule. You would be guaranteed to proc. the effect with a single squad of five with flamers. That being said a min squad of neophytes with flamers is extremely likely to proc crossfire against two units(average 7 flamer hits and 8 shotgun/autogun hits)
canonized wrote: There is simply no way that Acolytes will have the Crossfire special rule. You would be guaranteed to proc. the effect with a single squad of five with flamers. That being said a min squad of neophytes with flamers is extremely likely to proc crossfire against two units(average 7 flamer hits and 8 shotgun/autogun hits)
I would wait on assuming we are allowed to equip a 10 man squad with two of the same special weapon until we see it in writing, given the trends in 9e so far. It's good odds we'll be limited to one of each (Webber, GL, Flamer) per 10 men because that's what can be built from a single box.
canonized wrote: There is simply no way that Acolytes will have the Crossfire special rule. You would be guaranteed to proc. the effect with a single squad of five with flamers. That being said a min squad of neophytes with flamers is extremely likely to proc crossfire against two units(average 7 flamer hits and 8 shotgun/autogun hits)
I would wait on assuming we are allowed to equip a 10 man squad with two of the same special weapon until we see it in writing, given the trends in 9e so far. It's good odds we'll be limited to one of each (Webber, GL, Flamer) per 10 men because that's what can be built from a single box.
Good point. In fact, now that you’ve mentioned it, the crossfire changes might give the webber a place in GSC lists. Long range guaranteed hits without regard to actually wounding kinda makes sense in the context of crossfire.
Madjob wrote: Pricing is 80 points for the saboteur, which doesn't feel worth it.
Oof, thats not a great sign for a GEQ support model most likely in the elite slot. I mean, a succubus post nerf is 80 lmao. A Haemonculus is 75 and has an aura that adds +1 toughness, plus auto heals.
No idea why GW overvalues GSC characters like this. I mean, I'll pray for the best, but after seeing her profile and weapons/abilities there is no way in hell that model is worth 80pts. Cut that in half and I still might not take her. I REALLY hope the other support models went down but this is a warning shot for sure.
Niiai wrote: Big if, but if she has crossfire she will be worth it with 2d3 blast D3 vs vehicles and monsters.
Yea that was my other takeaway, if she has Crossfire she could be worth bringing, not amazing but useable - assuming base bs3+ she'd hit on 2+ and wound most vehicle targets on 2+/3+.
So, 80 points gets you a model that is -1 to be hit against ranged attacks and is untargetable while within Area Terrain features (unless the enemy models are within 12" of it) and gains an additional +1 to its save vs ranged attacks while in cover. She can throw demo charge markers out that she can opt to detonate alongside of her normal ranged attack to stack some not insubstantial damage out against things that might come after her or an objective she's camped around.
They also strongly imply that she's an Infiltrating model, which is just...yeeeeeeeep.
As with most of these things, we need to wait for the full rules before making final judgements. That said, IF we have most of the rules already, then she is putting out fractionally more damage to VEHICLES and MONSTERS than a Ridgerunner does, for fractionally more points, but there are many things the Ridgerunner has that she does not (and we know for certain that a Ridgerunner benefits from Crossfire).
So, count me in the group of "not impressed with points cost".
That said, there may be other things still that make her worth it. Maybe she improves the effectiveness of Blast weapons in the army. Maybe she can set up her explosives from 24" away and not give up any moving or shooting to do so. Maybe her explosives prevent units from performing actions and inflict "fight last". There's enough "maybes" here that she could be worth 80pts, but based on what is currently being shown, I would hazard that's a "no".
So, 80 points gets you a model that is -1 to be hit against ranged attacks and is untargetable while within Area Terrain features (unless the enemy models are within 12" of it) and gains an additional +1 to its save vs ranged attacks while in cover. She can throw demo charge markers out that she can opt to detonate alongside of her normal ranged attack to stack some not insubstantial damage out against things that might come after her or an objective she's camped around.
They also strongly imply that she's an Infiltrating model, which is just...yeeeeeeeep.
You have a lot of respect for those defensive abilities, but I'll remind you it's probably on a T3 4W 5+ frame. We are the glass cannon army, in theory anyways, so first and foremost any GSC unit should be looked at for it's offensive power relative to points spent, survivability second. And I certainly hope she has forward deploy, and that our codex has a healthy amount of forward deploy in addition to her, to make up for the fact that we can't play the game the way out army was designed to in this edition without already having a strong midboard presence T1.
If you can get her in a spot where she benefits from exposed She will be solid verse vehicles and monsters but still not great verse infantry, which is fine, however I would have figured that limitation would keep her much cheaper.
Also the mine still kinda sucks unless theres more to it since it takes a turns shooting to deploy, there could be a cult trait that allows for shooting and actions though however. Either way rules as written they can still just run right past it or over it so long as they end their move over 3" from it which annoys me, targets should remain eligible to target with it for the entire phase once coming into range at any point during their movement, even if they move past it's 3" range.
I am still not sold on the cost though since a ridge runner (implied by the crossfire diagram to benefit from the new rules) currently costs less and threatens more stuff, that can easily change though.
Remember that her explosives some how get 3 times less effective against none vehicle none monster targets. Most vehicles used currently have damage reduction -1 or an invuln. With 4 shots on average shes still unlikely to kill a buggy/raider/dreadnought/deathguard demon engine etc. But she will likely finish targets as she will likely come in from reserve on turns 2+ anyway. Imagine shooting her at the plethora of multiwound infantry/bikes that currently are in the game as well, I mean she absolutely sucks verse those.
I can't see deploying her forward turn 1 very often though as it lets them play around her too easily and probably give away VP's for the likely assassinate, a redeploy makes this very interesting though.
She is looking better upon the crossfire reveal though, but then again so does anything with a gun on it. Will need to see the cost of her competition still.
As an aside, I would wager that nearly everything with a gun is getting crossfire. I think some folks are over reading into what will or won't get it. I am betting purestrains, metamorphs and abbs lack it and possibly brood bros since GW hates them but everything else will likely have the crossfire mechanic.
No idea why some folks think acolytes would lack the crossfire mechanic, it would make zero sense thematically and mechanically. I mean, it is looking like a real joke of a hurdle to activate. The odd grenade launcher here or their, or autocanon plinking just needs a hit.
Either way it has me excited to play shootier versions of the cult!
That said, there may be other things still that make her worth it. Maybe she improves the effectiveness of Blast weapons in the army. Maybe she can set up her explosives from 24" away and not give up any moving or shooting to do so. Maybe her explosives prevent units from performing actions and inflict "fight last". There's enough "maybes" here that she could be worth 80pts, but based on what is currently being shown, I would hazard that's a "no".
Reading the article and her fluff, it had me thinking how cool it would be if she buffed blasting charges to strength 4, or maybe gave them an AP -1 to units nearby.
You have a lot of respect for those defensive abilities, but I'll remind you it's probably on a T3 4W 5+ frame.
She literally has an ability that makes her untargetable by ranged weapons, if she's in an Area Terrain feature...assuming whatever shoots at her isn't in 12". And then she still gets a -1 modifier to the hit rolls and an additional +1 to saves.
It's pretty hard to pretend that is not really a good defensive ability.
We are the glass cannon army, in theory anyways, so first and foremost any GSC unit should be looked at for it's offensive power relative to points spent, survivability second. And I certainly hope she has forward deploy, and that our codex has a healthy amount of forward deploy in addition to her, to make up for the fact that we can't play the game the way out army was designed to in this edition without already having a strong midboard presence T1.
Every army is a "glass cannon army" in 9E...at least that's what the interwebs would have you believe.
She literally has an ability that makes her untargetable by ranged weapons, if she's in an Area Terrain feature...assuming whatever shoots at her isn't in 12". And then she still gets a -1 modifier to the hit rolls and an additional +1 to saves.
It's pretty hard to pretend that is not really a good defensive ability.
It depends. -1 to hit and bonuses on cover? Of course, solid, pretty common but solid. The value decreases on an inherently more kill-able profile though, which as I said: T3 and 5+ save normally. As far as the terrain hiding goes, well that's just Character protection except with terrain instead of other units in your army. Now they're not exactly the same of course, there's give and take - this has far more forgiving qualifications (doesn't matter where she is relative position to the enemy shooting her, you don't have to pay for said meat shields, and they can't be shot off exposing her), but a very trivial way to turn it off (walk closer to the unit that probably is already inside the neutral board area). That said she is obviously likely to be a Character herself, so she can overlap those protections, but it still doesn't feel like a game changer given the defensive profile she's rocking.
dreadlybrew wrote: Her mine is mortal wounds. Dr 1 won't save them. I can imagine a situation where 3 of these bad girls can lock down a table quarter
The mine is mostly useless as you need to end your movement within 3" and unless there are strats (certainly possible) its not really a ranged attack. Its most likely use is charge deterrent on an objective.
The "gun' is what will decide if the unit is usable.
