Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 08:26:19


Post by: Peregrine


One important fact about the suppressing fire stratagem: it doesn't require you to inflict wounds, or even hit the target. You just spend 1 CP and get the buff. Got a 1 HP Wyvern that isn't going to accomplish anything? Had to fall back and can't shoot anyway? Use it for suppressing fire instead. Even if you don't have melee-oriented allies that benefit from the overwatch removal reducing movement speed is probably going to do more than fishing for 6s at that point.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 09:40:01


Post by: Trickstick


Halving movement speed is no joke, it can be the difference between a win or a loss. How often does a unit run up and grab an objective to win the game? I think that the stratagem would be a decent reason to take a hydra for once. The cheapest of the units that can use it, and gives it something else to do if the enemy doesn't have fly units.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 09:48:50


Post by: Fishborne


Or a Hydra that shoots twice with no cover.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 09:54:21


Post by: Trickstick


 Fishborne wrote:
Or a Hydra that shoots twice with no cover.


I know that the Hydra is an oft-maligned unit, but I don't think that things like Jetbikes would enjoy that too much.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 13:11:10


Post by: schadenfreude


Mellon wrote:
 schadenfreude wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
 gbghg wrote:
Ecdain wrote:
 Xenomancers wrote:
I wonder if this makes wyverns playable with this artillery detachment. 1 Wyvern can choose not to shoot and for 1 cp stop any enemy infantry unit from shooting the next turn. could be pretty strong in some battles plus the relic to give all your wyverns ignore cover if they shoot the same target. That is a decent damage boost.


I haven't read the book yet, is there really a strategem that says "opt out of shooting, those dark reapers can't shoot next turn?"

Xeno's remembering incorrectly I think. Stratagem stops the unit from firing overwatch and halves it move characteristic. It's a fairly situational stratagem but it has it's uses I think, being able to have the movement characteristic of fast melee threats like genestealers or stop a unit overwatching in order to get a melee unit into combat intact will come in handy.

That said I'm not sure if it would be worth the opportunity cost of losing the extra shooting and hence damage you could just outright inflict on that unit instead.

You are correct. That is a garbage strat lol. They can shoot just fine against things far away but not the guys charging them. Brilliant....



It's a good strat that was placed in an army that doesn't need it. The ability to deny overwatch really helps a lot of CC armies especially if they go up against auto hit weapons like d scythes
It's a garbage stat for a shooting army, but it's rock solid in some situations for a CC army.


Agreed. It is a really useful stratagem for the quite common combination of Astra Militarum and Genestealer Cults.


Owwie NOOOoOooo


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 15:27:56


Post by: Unit1126PLL


Wait the artillery company works on Hydras :O

AIR DEFENSE REGIMENT HOOOOOOO lol.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 15:30:33


Post by: gbghg


A thought occurs, does it state anywhere at all that you can't stack the movement halving effect? Because if you combined that strat with a banehammer's tremor cannon you could cut a unit to 1/4 of it's move characteristic and stop it advancing for good measure. Which will absolutely cripple the mobility of just about every unit in the game.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 15:35:30


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 gbghg wrote:
A thought occurs, does it state anywhere at all that you can't stack the movement halving effect? Because if you combined that strat with a banehammer's tremor cannon you could cut a unit to 1/4 of it's move characteristic and stop it advancing for good measure. Which will absolutely cripple the mobility of just about every unit in the game.


I'm not sure! Good question.

Worth noting that the EWAC strat only works on "Infantry" units though, so not really that helpful against Knights or Monsters or whatever. Tremor Cannon still works though!


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 15:36:10


Post by: CaptainO


It only works on the artillery units that gain a keyword.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 15:37:11


Post by: Unit1126PLL


CaptainO wrote:
It only works on the artillery units that gain a keyword.


No I mean, the enemy unit that is suppressed has to be an Infantry unit. The firing unit is still an EWAC tank.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 15:44:18


Post by: gbghg


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 gbghg wrote:
A thought occurs, does it state anywhere at all that you can't stack the movement halving effect? Because if you combined that strat with a banehammer's tremor cannon you could cut a unit to 1/4 of it's move characteristic and stop it advancing for good measure. Which will absolutely cripple the mobility of just about every unit in the game.


I'm not sure! Good question.

Worth noting that the EWAC strat only works on "Infantry" units though, so not really that helpful against Knights or Monsters or whatever. Tremor Cannon still works though!

ah, thats true. There goes my dreams of reducing supersonic flyer's to 20" or less movement with a superheavy tank and an artillery piece. Still, Infantry is a vast keyword and there's a fair few units you might want to reduce the movement on for whatever reason.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/17 16:21:37


Post by: MrMoustaffa


 Trickstick wrote:
 Fishborne wrote:
Or a Hydra that shoots twice with no cover.


I know that the Hydra is an oft-maligned unit, but I don't think that things like Jetbikes would enjoy that too much.

Well they did get a discount in chapter approved, maybe they're more worth it now.

Problem is Icarus Onagers got an even bigger discount and as long as those exist I'm going to take them over hydras every time. I'm just kind of spoiled by them


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/18 02:02:21


Post by: gbghg


Something else that just occured to me, both Aerial/Mechanised fire support states that that the chosen unit can fire over watch even if it's not the target of the charge. How does that interact with things like the banshee's mask which denies overwatch? Does the overwatch denial apply to all units or just the targeted ones?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/18 02:07:53


Post by: Trickstick


 gbghg wrote:
Something else that just occured to me, both Aerial/Mechanised fire support states that that the chosen unit can fire over watch even if it's not the target of the charge. How does that interact with things like the banshee's mask which denies overwatch? Does the overwatch denial apply to all units or just the targeted ones?


It would depend on the wording of the rule. For the Banshees specifically, it states "Enemy units cannot fire Overwatch at this unit.", so you wouldn't get to overwatch. However, if another unit said something like "charged units cannot fire overwatch", then you could.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/18 18:17:39


Post by: Unit1126PLL


I am considering running a Mechanized Company using the Emperor's Blade stuff, something like

5x Chimeras with Stubber, Twin Heavy Flamer (just for the 90 pts even)

and then flavor to taste. I am finally considering Armageddon regimental doctrine as well! But I can't for the life of me figure out what models I want to use, as I envision the army making good use of plasma guns and flamethrowers, which... well, Steel Legion don't really have. I just kind of hate painting Cadian models differently and going "here be guys not using cadian doctrine!"

EDIT:
Actually, in closer examination, this wouldn't be so bad as a Catachan regiment, for re-rolls on the Chimera flamers and the Flamers order for infantry. Does a catachan mechanized regiment make sense fluffwise? I suppose they do... hm... *strokes beard*


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/18 21:52:06


Post by: CaptainO


Emperors blade would allow a command squad (or two) of catachans to drive up to an enemy, drop out the unit uaing the strat and then use the catachan order to reroll no. Of flamer attacks from the 3 normal and one heavy flamer theyd be equipped with.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/18 21:57:51


Post by: Trickstick


CaptainO wrote:
Emperors blade would allow a command squad (or two) of catachans to drive up to an enemy, drop out the unit uaing the strat and then use the catachan order to reroll no. Of flamer attacks from the 3 normal and one heavy flamer theyd be equipped with.


Don't forget that only one unit can disembark with Rapid Redeploy. It isn't like the Scion one where the whole transport can dismount.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/18 22:25:50


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
CaptainO wrote:
Emperors blade would allow a command squad (or two) of catachans to drive up to an enemy, drop out the unit uaing the strat and then use the catachan order to reroll no. Of flamer attacks from the 3 normal and one heavy flamer theyd be equipped with.


Don't forget that only one unit can disembark with Rapid Redeploy. It isn't like the Scion one where the whole transport can dismount.


Can you do Emperor's Blade with Death Korps? Hop out and start throwing Gas Grenades?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/18 22:32:24


Post by: Trickstick


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Can you do Emperor's Blade with Death Korps? Hop out and start throwing Gas Grenades?


Death Korps don't have the right units to use the formation. For example, they don't have Chimeras, they have DKOK storm chimeras. They don't have company commanders. they have marshals. So there are no units that can get the blade keyword.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/18 23:12:31


Post by: ghenghis_Ken


Question about the Implacable Determination Warlord trait. can I use with move move move order for another 12 inch advance in the shooting phase? also the trait limits to one friendly unit per movement phase, would orders in the shooting phase bypass this rule and let multiple ordered units move move move 12 inches?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/18 23:23:47


Post by: Trickstick


ghenghis_Ken wrote:
Question about the Implacable Determination Warlord trait. can I use with move move move order for another 12 inch advance in the shooting phase? also the trait limits to one friendly unit per movement phase, would orders in the shooting phase bypass this rule and let multiple ordered units move move move 12 inches?


It says it only works in the movement phase, so I don't think you can use it. Then again, the order says as if in the movement phase.

No idea, I would take it to YMDC.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 05:17:26


Post by: Unit1126PLL


New Question, but actually old question.

I swear it was answered somewhere, but can the Armageddon Order, Mount Up! be used to shoot and then mount up in a transport after falling back from combat?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 10:34:36


Post by: schadenfreude


 Trickstick wrote:
ghenghis_Ken wrote:
Question about the Implacable Determination Warlord trait. can I use with move move move order for another 12 inch advance in the shooting phase? also the trait limits to one friendly unit per movement phase, would orders in the shooting phase bypass this rule and let multiple ordered units move move move 12 inches?


It says it only works in the movement phase, so I don't think you can use it. Then again, the order says as if in the movement phase.

No idea, I would take it to YMDC.


Even if the answer is no 18+1D6 is still fast. If it is 24" you should have to model your guys as Kenyan marathoners.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 13:21:23


Post by: gbghg


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
New Question, but actually old question.

I swear it was answered somewhere, but can the Armageddon Order, Mount Up! be used to shoot and then mount up in a transport after falling back from combat?

I think it might be a no, looking at the order it states "Until the end of the phase, the ordered unit can shoot then immediately embark within a friendly armageddon transport vehicle, as long as all models in the unit are within 3" of the the vehicle."

Get back in the fight however states "The ordered unit can shoot this phase even if it fell back in its movement phase". Fall back rules explicitly stop units from shooting if they don't have fly and get back in the fight makes a clear and explicit exception for the ordered unit, which mount up doesn't. That said, I'm gonna take a crawl through the faq's see if there's an answer anywhere.

Edit: Can't see anything in the faq's regarding it.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 13:25:40


Post by: Hawky


Combining it with Laurels of Command might work, though, but there is still the 4+ roll to pass the second command.

Retreat > order Get back in the Fight > Laurels > order Mount up > Shoot > Embark


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 14:08:21


Post by: Unit1126PLL


Alright! Follow on then, can the Unit "Mount Up!" without shooting after it falls back?

I know that doesn't mean anything, as you can fall back and embark anyways in the movement phase, but what this lets you do is fall back, then move the Chimera up, then embark afterwards? IDK.

I want armageddon to be good, so I can use it for my Emperor's Blade.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 14:20:39


Post by: Trickstick


The 18" rapid fire and ignore -1ap are already pretty good. I don't think that the order would really do anything.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 14:29:46


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
The 18" rapid fire and ignore -1ap are already pretty good. I don't think that the order would really do anything.


Hm.

Part of the issue is I'm warring, in my mind, with Catachan - I'm leery to use high-speed Chimeras without the Tallarn buff, so now that twin-heavy-flamer Chimeras really aren't that bad (budget Immolators imo), I am going to have 5 twin-flamer Chimeras, which benefit strongly from Catachan. Plus, every unit except one command squads will have at least 1 flamer or heavy flamer for the Catachan order, and every unit except command squads have vox casters (to synergize with the Emperor's Blade warlord trait).

So essentially, the question is: do I buff my Flamers (with the Catachan order and vehicle doctrine), or my plasma (with the Armageddon doctrine and disembark stratagem?).

The regiment's models are third-party models with GW weapons, so they could pass for either one, I think. They look a bit like Armageddon, but could easily be fluffed as Catachan with their masks dispensing combat drugs that make them superhumanly strong for short periods (at the cost of many deaths after each battle of course )


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 14:32:10


Post by: gbghg


It's still pretty decent I think, Armageddon vets in a chimera will be able to hop out after the chimeraa moves, rapid fire plasma at 18", then come the next turn they can move alongside the transport, get another round of shooting off and hop back in. Armageddon definitely seems pretty decent for the emperor blade, it just whether its worth making a whole detachment Armageddon to let you do this with 1 unit.

The real problem with the emperor blade though, is that the tempestus drop force is basically a straight up better version of it, dismount strat affects multiple unit not just one, said unit's will have a higher density of special weapons (2 tempestus command squads rocking a full plasma/melta loadout +2 tempestors for orders), will be hitting on 2's with the warlord trait, rerolling wounds with the scion order and the overwatch strat is much, much scarier with a valk with rocket pods and heavy bolters than a chimera will ever be. fair bit more expensive though, but such is the scion life.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 14:38:15


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 gbghg wrote:
It's still pretty decent I think, Armageddon vets in a chimera will be able to hop out after the chimeraa moves, rapid fire plasma at 18", then come the next turn they can move alongside the transport, get another round of shooting off and hop back in. Armageddon definitely seems pretty decent for the emperor blade, it just whether its worth making a whole detachment Armageddon to let you do this with 1 unit.

The real problem with the emperor blade though, is that the tempestus drop force is basically a straight up better version of it, dismount strat affects multiple unit not just one, said unit's will have a higher density of special weapons (2 tempestus command squads rocking a full plasma/melta loadout +2 tempestors for orders), will be hitting on 2's with the warlord trait, rerolling wounds with the scion order and the overwatch strat is much, much scarier with a valk with rocket pods and heavy bolters than a chimera will ever be. fair bit more expensive though, but such is the scion life.


I want to play regular guard, though, not Glory Boys.

Plus, I'm struggling to make my list meet 1000 points, even with 5 chimeras with 10 heavy flamers, a vet squad with max plasma and a heavy flamer, infantry squads with flamers, command squads with flamers/RGB/medic and command squad with 4 plasma, and 2 officers with upgrades.

I'm sort of shocked about how much I can fit it. The only question is what regimental doctrine to use.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 14:44:21


Post by: Trickstick


I would rather have 73 point Chimeras hitting on 5+ than 88 point heavy flamers with only 8" range. The low range means you will probably only get one round of shooting, and the overwatch stratagem is going to be out of range a fair amount. Over 5 Chimeras, a 75 point saving is quite significant, especially at 1k points.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 14:56:56


Post by: gbghg


Could toss some sentinels in to make up the points, somewhat fluffy addition for a mechanised unit and the weapon loadout could make a regimental doctrine more obvious to choose. Could double down on the flamers and go catachan, could pick whatever and run armageddon and make your opponent use dedicated AT in order to kill them.

Given the sheer amount of flamers in your list though you probably want catachan, 8" flamers and 18" rapidfire lasguns don't exactly have a great overlap.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 15:02:29


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
I would rather have 73 point Chimeras hitting on 5+ than 88 point heavy flamers with only 8" range. The low range means you will probably only get one round of shooting, and the overwatch stratagem is going to be out of range a fair amount. Over 5 Chimeras, a 75 point saving is quite significant, especially at 1k points.


Yeah, but I want the list to be 2k, lol. I am planning to throw in Tank Commanders or... something. I am struggling to reach 1k, even with the flamers. I don't need "75 pts free" I need to spend an extra 50 or something, lol.

I'm not so sure about the low range meaning I get only one round of shooting. First turn you dive forwards, go for cover, and take the -1 to hit from smoke, then you make the enemy make hard choices. My experience playing Sororitas Immolators (which are ~100 points (a good bit over twin flamer chimeras), but otherwise identical save 4" of range) tells me that people won't be able to kill all of them.

Put track guards on the Chimera and you always get a 20" threat range with the heavy flamers until each single chimera is dead forever - no worries about degrading. Your opponent has to /slay/ them. That's actually quite a bit of effort for 50 T7 3+ wounds, especially if my other 1k points is just more stuff, like Russes or something.

You're correct about the overwatch stratagem being out of range most of the time, but it's only usable once per phase anyways, so all I have to do is make sure the unit I am most afraid of being charged is very near the Chimera, and the rest can do whatever. Honestly, this stratagem doesn't strike me as particularly good even with the 73 pt chimera: vs MEQ, it'll do (3 shots, 4+/3+/3+ save means 0.33 dead Space Marines from the Multilaser, and 3 shots, 4+/3+/4+ save means 0.5 dead marines) ≤ 1 casualty on average rolls, for the cost of 1CP. I'd rather just use the twin heavy flamers, which is a credible deterrent, and move my units carefully to try to maximize it. I think the real value in the stratagem is to deter chargers (without spending any CP at all) and forcing them to move carefully. It can be used on any chimera as well, so if I keep the units interwoven amongst the tanks, it should be easy to let the chimeras fire their heavy flamers with the strat. Lastly, the heavy flamers are a huge deterrent to units trying to charge the Chimerae themselves, which a regular 73 pt chimera isn't.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 15:10:34


Post by: Mellon


I'd like to make a case for the heavy flamer.

One round of double heavy flamer shooting averages 7 hits. The double havy bolter needs to shoot for 3,5 turns to match that (if moving). That should about average out over a game, with the added bonus that a double flamer chimera is a noticeable threat when it is at optimal range.

I do agree that the longer overwatch range of heavy bolters gives a lot more freedom for positioning the Infantry.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 15:21:04


Post by: Unit1126PLL


Mellon wrote:
I do agree that the longer overwatch range of heavy bolters gives a lot more freedom for positioning the Infantry.

Yeah, this is just about the only disadvantage of the THF Chimera. I'm not willing to make major changes over a single stratagem that will only cause ~0.83 dead marines anyways.

EDIT:
What do you guys think about adding Hellhounds? 3 Hellhounds or so should make a credible threat, so my opponent is forced to make even more hard choices between the Flamer Tanks (with long range and more hits) or the Flamer Transports with Flamer Infantry inside....


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 15:45:01


Post by: Trickstick


I love hellhounds. Just finished adding stubbers to mine after CA. I go with Tallarn, HB/Stubb with track guards. The idea is to stay at max range and kite. If I wasn't going Tallarn I would be tempted by banewolves with HF/stormbolter, to get within 8" and melt stuff.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 15:52:33


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
I love hellhounds. Just finished adding stubbers to mine after CA. I go with Tallarn, HB/Stubb with track guards. The idea is to stay at max range and kite. If I wasn't going Tallarn I would be tempted by banewolves with HF/stormbolter, to get within 8" and melt stuff.


Yeah, in my case (not Tallarn) I'd be torn between the Hellhound ad the Banewolf. I'm going Catachan, and wouldn't be afraid of getting within 8", so it's basically 2d6 but one wounds on a 2+ vs 3d6... lol. I think Track Guards really make them neato, for sure.

The biggest question is "What should I do about Anti-Tank?" I have ~1k points left; was thinking 3 Tank Commanders with Hammer of Sunderance (my only army relic, unless I spring for Laurels) on one and either Demolisher Cannons or Battle Cannons on the others, but I am open to any and all answers . It doesn't even have to be mono-guard, though I'd like it to be thematic lol.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 16:08:35


Post by: gbghg


I'll be honest when I list build these days the process is less "should I take hellhounds?" and more "Is there a reason to not take hellhounds?". They're just a really solid unit and a lot of my games end up as being against eldar so they're my go to for removing crap like rangers which stack minus's to hit.

Catachan hellhounds are pretty nasty in my experience, they just shred infantry and with the 4+ explosion you can even make your opponent regret killing them, nothing like a hellhound going boom in the middle of a bunch of shining spears, warlock's on jetbike and an autarch on a jetbike.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 16:08:43


Post by: Trickstick


I think the demolisher is the best choice of gun against vehicles. An overcharged executioner draws with it against t7, but that has some risk. As long as you can deal with the range issue of course. Then again, demolishers have to move to be effective. That would hurt your hull weapons, making the use of a tank commander less beneficial.

I have not really run the numbers, but a Catachan Devildog could be an option. The turret gun is assault so would not be hit with the -1. These are issues I specifically sidestep by taking Tallarn, so have not really given deep consideration.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 16:18:02


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
I think the demolisher is the best choice of gun against vehicles. An overcharged executioner draws with it against t7, but that has some risk. As long as you can deal with the range issue of course. Then again, demolishers have to move to be effective. That would hurt your hull weapons, making the use of a tank commander less beneficial.

I have not really run the numbers, but a Catachan Devildog could be an option. The turret gun is assault so would not be hit with the -1. These are issues I specifically sidestep by taking Tallarn, so have not really given deep consideration.


Well, I'd be running the tanks in a different detachment (probably a Supreme Command) so they could be Tallarn with Hull Lascannons.

The only problem is I can basically get to 2k with a couple Hellhounds and then a couple Malcador Infernuses which makes me upset because I own two of the latter but they're 340 with two heavy flamers. So I can spend nearly 700 points on Malcador Infernuses, which would be fluffy (because FIRE!!!!) but not helpful...

*ahem* setting aside that dumb, I could probably go any other regiment entirely with the Tank Commanders. Do you think they'd be a valid option? I could do Vostroyan for the Demolisher guns to be 30" - they'd still have to move, but could stay in the chimera phalanx. Alternatively, keep them Catachan and put heavy flamers on them


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 16:53:42


Post by: Trickstick


Catachan fireball demolishers could be quite good. I don't like putting flamers on bs3+ units, but that may just be me not wanting to waste the better shooting chance. I'm also not sure how effective flamers would be if you only move at 5". So you would have to give up grinding advance to move 10" and flame.

Now that I think about it, that could be a good use for the Unyielding Advance stratagem. Would give you the ability to move at 10" and double shot whilst flaming. Used to think a fireball demolisher was wasted with the bs3+ upgrade, although now that TCs are cheaper it could be less of an issue.

The Malcador Infernus is one of my favourite models FW does. It is too bad that FW rules seem to be falling behind in effectiveness. The only model I actually use anymore is the Vulture, even though a punisher is probably a better choice these days.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 16:55:42


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
Catachan fireball demolishers could be quite good. I don't like putting flamers on bs3+ units, but that may just be me not wanting to waste the better shooting chance. I'm also not sure how effective flamers would be if you only move at 5". So you would have to give up grinding advance to move 10" and flame.

Now that I think about it, that could be a good use for the Unyielding Advance stratagem. Would give you the ability to move at 10" and double shot whilst flaming. Used to think a fireball demolisher was wasted with the bs3+ upgrade, although now that TCs are cheaper it could be less of an issue.

The Malcador Infernus is one of my favourite models FW does. It is too bad that FW rules seem to be falling behind in effectiveness. The only model I actually use anymore is the Vulture, even though a punisher is probably a better choice these days.


Do you think I should bring a Catachan supreme command with a fireball demolisher, a Hammer of Sunderance tank commander (who sits in the back), and ... some other HQ?

I could also bring one (1) single Infernus, just as a nod to the model.... idk.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 17:09:13


Post by: Trickstick


An Infernus would be a nice centrepiece model, as long as you accept it is probably not the best choice. That 2d6 explosion could be a very nasty surprise if you are not careful about your movement. Don't forget that it is not a super heavy or a lord of war, so it has problems getting tied up in combat. It also seems expensive for a suicide unit.

As for tank commanders, I tend to go with a Hammer of Sunderance and then two more identical tanks. I like backup and redundancy. I've been using las/plas demolishers, athough non-Tallarn would probably melt themselves. You could go for triple bolter. They still hit on a 4+ when moving, and would be a bit cheaper. Triple flamer could work too.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 17:16:58


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
An Infernus would be a nice centrepiece model, as long as you accept it is probably not the best choice. That 2d6 explosion could be a very nasty surprise if you are not careful about your movement. Don't forget that it is not a super heavy or a lord of war, so it has problems getting tied up in combat. It also seems expensive for a suicide unit.

As for tank commanders, I tend to go with a Hammer of Sunderance and then two more identical tanks. I like backup and redundancy. I've been using las/plas demolishers, athough non-Tallarn would probably melt themselves. You could go for triple bolter. They still hit on a 4+ when moving, and would be a bit cheaper. Triple flamer could work too.


So just battlecannons, then, no Demolishers?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 17:26:17


Post by: Trickstick


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So just battlecannons, then, no Demolishers?


Sorry, I meant identical to each other. So a pair of demolishers, or maybe executioners. Which one would depend on if you want to move or not. I guess you could go bolter executioner and still move.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 17:27:29


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So just battlecannons, then, no Demolishers?


Sorry, I meant identical to each other. So a pair of demolishers, or maybe executioners. Which one would depend on if you want to move or not. I guess you could go bolter executioner and still move.


Honestly, I am thinking sponsonless. Planning on 2 Demolishers + Hammer of Sunderance. I know sponsons are /good.../... I could bring multi-meltas after the price break lmao.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 17:31:14


Post by: Trickstick


Sponsonless does have certain benefits. They are easier to fit in small gaps and harder to capture in assault. If you are planning to move then a simple demolisher, maybe with a storm bolter, could work.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 17:41:22


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
Sponsonless does have certain benefits. They are easier to fit in small gaps and harder to capture in assault. If you are planning to move then a simple demolisher, maybe with a storm bolter, could work.


If sponsonless, should Hull Lascannons still be a thing? And should they be Vostroyan for range, Tallarn (should bring sponsons :X) for extra 6" move, or Catachan for re-rolls, do you think?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 17:58:49


Post by: Trickstick


Honestly, anything that is not Tallarn is beyond my practical experience for 8th Edition. However, Leman Russ loadouts have been a bit of a fixation of mine since 3rd Edition, so I like to think I have some theory experience on them. In fact, my old-style russes have gone through a fair few iterations over the years.

If I was not going Tallarn, I think my next port of call would just be long ranged stationary tanks. Las/plas executioners or standard battlecannons would be my go to. I will full admit that I see the -1 to hit as a really bad debuff, maybe I overreact to it in fact. A TC would still hit on a 4+, which isn't horrible.

I have been thinking of an old idea I had, which was a fireball demolisher using ambush. The tactic fell down in the past because ambushing prevented double shooting the turret. Howver, the new stratagem helps overcome this. You ambush and then use the Tallarn order to get in triple flamer range. Add a couple of infantry squads for some support, maybe along with a Tu'sakh officer for orders, and you have a nice little force.

BTW, I am using this page as a reference for weapon comparisons. I haven't checked the maths though, and so am making a bit of an assumption that it is accurate. I guess that is bit naughty.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 18:20:13


Post by: Unit1126PLL


Well the turret doesn't give a crap if you move or not. So on sponsonless tanks you are getting -1 To-Hit on a single heavy bolter, which is meh..


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 18:29:44


Post by: Trickstick


What is your stance on Conquerors? They can't be tank commanders but they do get a nice boost to turret fire power. I can definitely see them running sponsonless with little issue. I just don't know if they are still worth it now that commanders are cheaper. +1bs and orders vs possible reroll to hit.

I could see a catachan spearhead with 2 commanders and 3 conquerors possibly working out. Again, depends on how you rate conquerors vs commanders. you would have the added benefit of obsec too.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 18:44:57


Post by: Unit1126PLL


I don't own any conquerors and they're OOP. I could convert some.

The issue is that I am looking for anti-tank solutions, to things like Knights, and I am not sure Str 8 really cuts the mustard.

I am willing to look mostly anywhere as well. I have a Macharius, too. Or I would be willing to chase down a battery of artillery, or anything. Basically I have about 1k points to spend on support for the Emperor's Blade I have been talking about.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 19:18:42


Post by: Trickstick


Did you rule out a Shadowsword? I know they are a bit of a risk though. Other than that, you have basilisks, manticores and mass lascannons. Maybe a Valdor, although I get the feeling that the Valdor is a victim of being too expensive for what it does.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 19:45:27


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
Did you rule out a Shadowsword? I know they are a bit of a risk though. Other than that, you have basilisks, manticores and mass lascannons. Maybe a Valdor, although I get the feeling that the Valdor is a victim of being too expensive for what it does.


No, I haven't ruled out a Shadowsword. They get one-shot pretty easily though. I also own some Valdors, but 370 base is *bad* for what it does.

Mass indirect fire or Leman Russes, it sounds like. Demolishers and the Hammer of Sunderance perhaps.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 19:53:55


Post by: Horst


The Shadowsword getting one shotted isn't that big of a deal for it's points, because you gotta consider that it's 7% more expensive than las/plas executioners, and it's also 7% more wounds. Since you're limited on how many tank commanders you can take anyway, taking Pask + 3 Tank Commanders + a Shadowsword for an armored core of your army is the strongest armored formation I can think of.

Plus, if you get to go first... that Knight is getting completely nuked.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 19:58:58


Post by: Trickstick


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Demolishers and the Hammer of Sunderance perhaps.


That is my go to. I'm still undecided on taking a Shadowsword, especially taking into account Ambush. You could also do stuff like taking the new drop formation and having melta-scions get within 6". Or the classic melta vets in a blade formation.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/19 20:21:16


Post by: Unit1126PLL


Melta vets would be something that tempts me but they are no longer the best option, even among infantry. Melta got hit hard in 8th.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 04:16:22


Post by: Stus67


Anybody still using Scions to any major effect? I was thinking about making a non-competitive Scion/Knight list just for the aesthetics.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 08:28:43


Post by: Peregrine


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I have a Macharius, too.


Maybe you can proxy it as a LRBT? It's sure not going to help you as a Macharius, those rules are utter . Worse firepower than a LRBT at over twice the cost.

 Trickstick wrote:
Maybe a Valdor, although I get the feeling that the Valdor is a victim of being too expensive for what it does.


You feel correctly. The Valdor is just bad, it costs almost as much as a Shadowsword but has much worse firepower. It makes a decent proxy as a Shadowsword though, if your opponent is willing to be flexible on the size/footprint issue.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
No, I haven't ruled out a Shadowsword. They get one-shot pretty easily though.


It can get one-shot, but so can anything that can match its firepower. Its durability per point is pretty good, and if you get to shoot first god help whatever is on the other end of that gun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Well the turret doesn't give a crap if you move or not. So on sponsonless tanks you are getting -1 To-Hit on a single heavy bolter, which is meh..


Two things:

1) Tallarn tanks take sponsons and hull LCs. Why wouldn't you?

2) JSJ is worth is weight in gold. Take tank commanders, play with a decent amount of terrain, and you can JSJ your way out of trouble while still keeping up a good level of firepower.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 13:39:24


Post by: Smotejob


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't own any conquerors and they're OOP. I could convert some.

The issue is that I am looking for anti-tank solutions, to things like Knights, and I am not sure Str 8 really cuts the mustard.

I am willing to look mostly anywhere as well. I have a Macharius, too. Or I would be willing to chase down a battery of artillery, or anything. Basically I have about 1k points to spend on support for the Emperor's Blade I have been talking about.


Ez to convert. Just put a storm bolter on the turret in line with the barrel of the conqueror Cannon


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 14:03:22


Post by: Trickstick


 Smotejob wrote:
Ez to convert. Just put a storm bolter on the turret in line with the barrel of the conqueror Cannon


I probably wouldn't bother, or at least not in a way that couldn't be easily reverted. The FW units are probably just going to fall further behind over time. I was going to convert some Annihilators but now I don't think I will.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 14:45:05


Post by: Unit1126PLL


I think I'll go with a Shadowsword and some TCs in a Tallarn tank detachment; not sure if I'll go Emperor's Fist, but that gives me the option to Ambush if I don't get first turn, which I should know way ahead of time in the new CA mission structure.

The question is: Is it worth 2CP (1 for Detachment, 1 for Extra Relic, possibly) just to get Hammer of Sunderance?

I'd also like to stick in a battalion of something else; alternatively, I could boost my Emperor's Blade to a Brigade with some more Chimeras and infantry, or Scions... Russes would probably get demoted out of HQ to fill my HS slots, though, which is suboptimal. And my Fast Attack might have to be demoted from Hellhounds to Sentinels, depending on points, if I want to squeeze the Shadowsword in.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 14:51:20


Post by: Horst


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think I'll go with a Shadowsword and some TCs in a Tallarn tank detachment; not sure if I'll go Emperor's Fist, but that gives me the option to Ambush if I don't get first turn, which I should know way ahead of time in the new CA mission structure.

The question is: Is it worth 2CP (1 for Detachment, 1 for Extra Relic, possibly) just to get Hammer of Sunderance?

I'd also like to stick in a battalion of something else; alternatively, I could boost my Emperor's Blade to a Brigade with some more Chimeras and infantry, or Scions... Russes would probably get demoted out of HQ to fill my HS slots, though, which is suboptimal. And my Fast Attack might have to be demoted from Hellhounds to Sentinels, depending on points, if I want to squeeze the Shadowsword in.


IMO Emperor's Fist is worth it if you also spend 1 extra CP to get Field Commander, since re-rolling overwatch is a pretty sweet boost. You can combine it with Defensive Gunners to put a smackdown on anything charging your russes.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:05:26


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Horst wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think I'll go with a Shadowsword and some TCs in a Tallarn tank detachment; not sure if I'll go Emperor's Fist, but that gives me the option to Ambush if I don't get first turn, which I should know way ahead of time in the new CA mission structure.

The question is: Is it worth 2CP (1 for Detachment, 1 for Extra Relic, possibly) just to get Hammer of Sunderance?

I'd also like to stick in a battalion of something else; alternatively, I could boost my Emperor's Blade to a Brigade with some more Chimeras and infantry, or Scions... Russes would probably get demoted out of HQ to fill my HS slots, though, which is suboptimal. And my Fast Attack might have to be demoted from Hellhounds to Sentinels, depending on points, if I want to squeeze the Shadowsword in.


IMO Emperor's Fist is worth it if you also spend 1 extra CP to get Field Commander, since re-rolling overwatch is a pretty sweet boost. You can combine it with Defensive Gunners to put a smackdown on anything charging your russes.


Eugh, this is looking like a CP sink more and more, though.

1 CP for Emperor's Blade (taking warlord trait from here and Laurels of Command relic)
1 CP for Emperor's Fist
1 CP for extra Relic (Hammer of Sunderance)
1 CP for Emperor's Fist Warlord Trait.

That's 4 just in army construction. If I want to outflank my Shadowsword to protect it from an opening salvo, that's 7, before the game starts. With a Supreme Command, Battalion, and regular battleforged, I have only 9 CP... [Hence why I am looking at freeing up points for another BN and/or changing Emperor's Blade to a Brigade. The latter might help more, but has some drawbacks).


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:15:00


Post by: Trickstick


You don't need the fist trait, it is just a bonus if you can afford it. You could also drop the Laurels if you really want to save 1cp. I would probably go for a brigade, although that really depends on what heavy/fast choices you are taking. Working out detachments is very list dependant.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:25:48


Post by: Horst


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Horst wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I think I'll go with a Shadowsword and some TCs in a Tallarn tank detachment; not sure if I'll go Emperor's Fist, but that gives me the option to Ambush if I don't get first turn, which I should know way ahead of time in the new CA mission structure.

The question is: Is it worth 2CP (1 for Detachment, 1 for Extra Relic, possibly) just to get Hammer of Sunderance?

I'd also like to stick in a battalion of something else; alternatively, I could boost my Emperor's Blade to a Brigade with some more Chimeras and infantry, or Scions... Russes would probably get demoted out of HQ to fill my HS slots, though, which is suboptimal. And my Fast Attack might have to be demoted from Hellhounds to Sentinels, depending on points, if I want to squeeze the Shadowsword in.


IMO Emperor's Fist is worth it if you also spend 1 extra CP to get Field Commander, since re-rolling overwatch is a pretty sweet boost. You can combine it with Defensive Gunners to put a smackdown on anything charging your russes.


Eugh, this is looking like a CP sink more and more, though.

1 CP for Emperor's Blade (taking warlord trait from here and Laurels of Command relic)
1 CP for Emperor's Fist
1 CP for extra Relic (Hammer of Sunderance)
1 CP for Emperor's Fist Warlord Trait.

That's 4 just in army construction. If I want to outflank my Shadowsword to protect it from an opening salvo, that's 7, before the game starts. With a Supreme Command, Battalion, and regular battleforged, I have only 9 CP... [Hence why I am looking at freeing up points for another BN and/or changing Emperor's Blade to a Brigade. The latter might help more, but has some drawbacks).


Yea, that's why I'm going with a brigade + supreme command. I ended up like this in my list. 16 CP to start, minus 4 from Emperor's Wrath and Emperor's Fist, so 12 CP, which isn't that much since I'm planning on using 4 CP per turn with overlapping fields of fire and pounding barrage.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:38:21


Post by: Unit1126PLL


In that case, what I am looking at right now would require 3 more Infantry Squads, and 3 more Chimeras, to fill out the Troops for a Brigade, and then to support them.

Without doing the math, my ideal brigade might look like this:
Emperor's Blade
HQs:
Company Commander x3 (one is warlord; rule of 3 hurting Orders coverage here I think)
Tank Commander (regular battlecannon russ?)

Troops:
6x Infantry Squad, 6x Chimera

Elites:
Veteran Squad, Chimera
2x Command Squad, Chimera

Fast Attack
3x Hellhounds (would drop to sentinels easily if it is a maths issue)

Heavy Support
This is the hard one:
3x Mortars, Chimera (?)
3x Lascannons (? need an officer to back these guys up if they stay behind...)
Leman Russ (?) Hydra? Basilisk? Somethin'?

So, if I do 2k points, I'd have to drop the Hellhounds to Sentinels, and all three Heavy Supports would have to be HWSs, which means I'd need to attach another Officer somewhere to control them, unless they're good enough without it. That seems like a list with significant gaps. Other option is to fill out BDE with Scions in the HQ and Troops, to save some points on Chimeras, lol. Like 1 Scion HQ and two Troops, saving me the price of 2 infantry squads, 1 Company Commander, and importantly, 2 Chimeras.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:43:34


Post by: Trickstick


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Company Commander x4 (one is warlord)


Typo or do you not play rule of three?

As for heavy support, I'm really tempted to recommend Cyclops. They are not that expensive at 60 points and are so small that they can stay out of LOS behind vehicles. They are also pretty powerful if used right.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:50:21


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Company Commander x4 (one is warlord)


Typo or do you not play rule of three?

As for heavy support, I'm really tempted to recommend Cyclops. They are not that expensive at 60 points and are so small that they can stay out of LOS behind vehicles. They are also pretty powerful if used right.


Oh, right, we don't play Rule of 3. But we might start, so I'll fix it. I'm worried about Orders coverage without though... :X.

And I'd not mind Cyclops but the models are hella expensive. They kinda make sense for a Mech regiment though; a Chimera can carry 2, right? Or is that old?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:51:46


Post by: Horst


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
In that case, what I am looking at right now would require 3 more Infantry Squads, and 3 more Chimeras, to fill out the Troops for a Brigade, and then to support them.

Without doing the math, my ideal brigade might look like this:
Emperor's Blade
HQs:
Company Commander x4 (one is warlord)
Tank Commander (regular battlecannon russ?)

Troops:
6x Infantry Squad, 6x Chimera

Elites:
Veteran Squad, Chimera
2x Command Squad, Chimera

Fast Attack
3x Hellhounds (would drop to sentinels easily if it is a maths issue)

Heavy Support
This is the hard one:
3x Mortars, Chimera (?)
3x Lascannons (? need an officer to back these guys up if they stay behind...)
Leman Russ (?) Hydra? Basilisk? Somethin'?


Hmm. Looking at battlescribe, you're probably better off with 2 battalions then, Shadowsword + 3 tank commanders in a supreme command eats too many points otherwise. But you could do 2 officers + 3 mounted squads in each battalion and have a few points left over for some astropaths or sentinels or something if you just use battalions.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:55:31


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Horst wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
In that case, what I am looking at right now would require 3 more Infantry Squads, and 3 more Chimeras, to fill out the Troops for a Brigade, and then to support them.

Without doing the math, my ideal brigade might look like this:
Emperor's Blade
HQs:
Company Commander x4 (one is warlord)
Tank Commander (regular battlecannon russ?)

Troops:
6x Infantry Squad, 6x Chimera

Elites:
Veteran Squad, Chimera
2x Command Squad, Chimera

Fast Attack
3x Hellhounds (would drop to sentinels easily if it is a maths issue)

Heavy Support
This is the hard one:
3x Mortars, Chimera (?)
3x Lascannons (? need an officer to back these guys up if they stay behind...)
Leman Russ (?) Hydra? Basilisk? Somethin'?


Hmm. Looking at battlescribe, you're probably better off with 2 battalions then, Shadowsword + 3 tank commanders in a supreme command eats too many points otherwise. But you could do 2 officers + 3 mounted squads in each battalion and have a few points left over for some astropaths or sentinels or something if you just use battalions.

The issue there is that you have to pay 1 CP per Detachment with the Emperor's Blade, so it costs me 2 CP to have two Emperor's Blade detachments. If I have 6 Chimeras and 6 Infantry, I would like to be able to have the same rules for all of them - perhaps paying 2 CP is worth it?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:56:36


Post by: Trickstick


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
...a Chimera can carry 2, right? Or is that old?


Not any more, chimeras can only carry infantry now.

Without rule of 3, you could try some crazy stuff like 4+ tank commanders.

When you talk about order coverage, are you trying to get 100%? I find that is overkill most of the time, and usually aim for 2/3rds. You can get 1 order for a cp anyway, which helps.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 15:57:56


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
...a Chimera can carry 2, right? Or is that old?


Not any more, chimeras can only carry infantry now.

Without rule of 3, you could try some crazy stuff like 4+ tank commanders.

When you talk about order coverage, are you trying to get 100%? I find that is overkill most of the time, and usually aim for 2/3rds. You can get 1 order for a cp anyway, which helps.


true. And I would like to try to respect the rule of 3, because I play at several different stores in the local meta, so you were right to point it out and I'll respect it. 2/3rds Order coverage sounds sufficient, but with something like 8 squads needing orders, that's crazy...


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 16:04:49


Post by: Horst


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
 Horst wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
In that case, what I am looking at right now would require 3 more Infantry Squads, and 3 more Chimeras, to fill out the Troops for a Brigade, and then to support them.

Without doing the math, my ideal brigade might look like this:
Emperor's Blade
HQs:
Company Commander x4 (one is warlord)
Tank Commander (regular battlecannon russ?)

Troops:
6x Infantry Squad, 6x Chimera

Elites:
Veteran Squad, Chimera
2x Command Squad, Chimera

Fast Attack
3x Hellhounds (would drop to sentinels easily if it is a maths issue)

Heavy Support
This is the hard one:
3x Mortars, Chimera (?)
3x Lascannons (? need an officer to back these guys up if they stay behind...)
Leman Russ (?) Hydra? Basilisk? Somethin'?


Hmm. Looking at battlescribe, you're probably better off with 2 battalions then, Shadowsword + 3 tank commanders in a supreme command eats too many points otherwise. But you could do 2 officers + 3 mounted squads in each battalion and have a few points left over for some astropaths or sentinels or something if you just use battalions.

The issue there is that you have to pay 1 CP per Detachment with the Emperor's Blade, so it costs me 2 CP to have two Emperor's Blade detachments. If I have 6 Chimeras and 6 Infantry, I would like to be able to have the same rules for all of them - perhaps paying 2 CP is worth it?


Good point. Perhaps a larger Battalion of mounted infantry for the Emperor's Blade, and then a small batallion of Scions to deep strike in? 3 5 man plasma squads and a pair of Tempestor Primes.

Messing around in battlescribe, you could do this:

2 Battalions, 1 Supreme Command.

Supreme Command -
3x Leman Russ, 3x Heavy Bolter + Battle Cannons
Shadowsword

Battalion 1 - Emperor's Blade
2x Company Commander
Command Squad, 4x Plasma
4x Infantry Squads
5x Chimeras, 2x Heavy Bolter each

Battalion 2 - Scion Drop Force
2x Tempestor Prime
3x 5 man Scion teams, 2x Plasma each
1 5 man Scion team, 1 Plasma, 1 Hot Shot Volley Gun.

Exactly 2000 points.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/20 18:01:45


Post by: Unit1126PLL


That could work. What' I've been trying to make work is the following 940 pt BN though; this is what I want, minimum:

2 Company Commanders
- 1 pf/plasma
- 1 ps/laspistol

3 Infantry Squads
- 3 Vox Casters
- 3 Flamers

1 Veteran Squad
- Vox Caster, 3 plasma, heavy flamer

2 Command Squads
- 4 plasma
- 2 flamer, medic, lasgun

5 Chimeras
- 5 Track Guards
- 10 Heavy Flamers

I can mess around, see if adding a scion detachment would help...


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/22 22:53:05


Post by: gbghg


So, I'm thinking of running the tempestus drop force in my next game, Valk with 2 command squads loaded with special weapons and 2 tempestor's with plasma pistols. It'll be pricey (somewhere around 400pts) but the return should be worth it. What I'm not sure about though is whether to take melta or plasma, plasma's been the holy grail this edition and is a little cheaper, but since you can move after you drop out the valk you can actually make use of the melta's special rule.

Should I go for the increased flexibility of the plasma or the sheer damage of the melta's?



Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/22 23:14:26


Post by: Apple Peel


 gbghg wrote:
So, I'm thinking of running the tempestus drop force in my next game, Valk with 2 command squads loaded with special weapons and 2 tempestor's with plasma pistols. It'll be pricey (somewhere around 400pts) but the return should be worth it. What I'm not sure about though is whether to take melta or plasma, plasma's been the holy grail this edition and is a little cheaper, but since you can move after you drop out the valk you can actually make use of the melta's special rule.

Should I go for the increased flexibility of the plasma or the sheer damage of the melta's?



You could always just drop the melta troops into range already, maybe not needing to move them.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/23 02:23:05


Post by: MrMoustaffa


He's talking about them being able to get into melta range, i.e. 2d6 pick highest for damage.

On an unrelated note, what's everyone's thoughts on Yarrick now? He's a flat 100pts. For that you are getting

*A Lord commissar essentially equipped with a storm bolter and power claw (theoretically worth 40pts)
*Ability to reroll 1's in shooting and assault, something few guard units can do, especially since this can stack with orders. That's easily worth 30, probably far more, especially when you factor in he can buff any regiment and even multiple ones at the same time
*Orks seem to be very popular now and he gives us flat rerolls to hit entirely
*Gets a 4+/4++/3+++ on final wound helping to keep him in the fight longer.

He seems like a good addition to most pure IG armies. Placed well he can do everything from buff your artillery without range restriction like MoO, he can buff Bullgryns in melee for a counterattack, allow guardsmen to do an order and still get reroll 1's guaranteed (so you can fire into cobat and reroll 1's as Valhallans, snipe characters and reroll 1's for plasma on mordians, reroll 1's to hit and wound for most units, etc) all while still doing basic commissar duties and fighting back in CQC against weaker targets. And he let's you just double down against orks who seem to be more popular now.

I don't know if he's a no brainer, but he definitely seems solid now at least. I know that price tag can be hard to swallow but I feel he will pay for himself in most matchups somehow since no matter the matchup he always has at least one relevant ability.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/23 13:29:14


Post by: Trickstick


I can see Yarrick making a good warlord. It is always nice to have those anti-death mechanics on your warlord. He would also get to give an order with the warlord trait he gets. I see him being an auto-take in an Ork heavy meta, and a pretty good choice even if not.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 06:42:52


Post by: schadenfreude


Yarrick would be best with Catachans. A MOO is dirt cheap and Harker is an auto include. Keep them towards the rear and advance with Yarrick to buff the FRFSRF and S4 CC. Against orks FRFSRF is ridiculous with full rerolls to hit.

That being said without 3s4 attacks on infantry there is little point to giving them rerolls to hit on a single s3 attack.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 06:45:12


Post by: Apple Peel



Any opinions on how competitive this might be? This is the list I want to aim for in the next coming months.

 Apple Peel wrote:
This will probably be my final product for my Militarum Tempestus list. It will take me a long while to actually get it built.

Let’s start with my chaff chewing. Two Valkyries will escort two ten man Scion squads with Hot-Shot (hs) lasguns to the chaff the enemy has. The grav-chute commando Tempestor Prime, the Lord Commissar, and the Astropath will be their as well and jump out. One squad will take the front and probably deploy close enough that the enemy (should they survive) can charge, but can’t pile into the next squad. The Commissar will intervene to save the day, maybe.

The two hs volley gun teams will be deployed in separate Taurox Primes (Gatling Cannon armed) to go and take objectives.

The two MSU squads will drop to provide support wherever. I imagine probably on those hs volley guns.

The two Battle Cannon armed Taurox Primes will act as medium-ranged heavy support. The Warlord may deploy in one of these, either that or he will drop into a safely secured area and Vox orders out.

The final Valkyrie will transport a ten man melta squad with the Primaris Psyker and the Fleet Officer. This will be the big kill bomb. They receive Execution Protocol Sanctioned, I activate Grenadiers for 6 Krak Grenades from the squad, the psyker might smite, and the officer of the fleet will call in an air raid. The lascannons on the Valkyries will all probably be pointing at the target as well.

The plasma command Scion squads will drop in and annihlate with the help of a Laurels of Command Tempestor Prime.

Both detachments will be Tempestus Drop Forces, just so I can benefit from Valkyrie overwatch anywhere. And I will, of course, spend a CP for field commander, so I will have 10 CP to use in the match.

++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (Imperium - Astra Militarum) ++

+ No Force Org Slot +

Regimental Doctrine: Regiment: Millitarum Tempestus

+ HQ +

Primaris Psyker: Force Stave, Gaze of the Emperor, Psychic Barrier

Tempestor Prime: Chainsword, Master of Command, Tempestus Command Rod, Warlord

Tempestor Prime: Chainsword, Relic: The Laurels of Command, Tempestus Command Rod

+ Troops +

Militarum Tempestus Scions
. Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Hot-shot Volley Gun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Hot-shot Volley Gun
. Scion w/ Vox-caster: Hot-Shot Lasgun, Vox-caster
. Tempestor: Bolt pistol, Chainsword

Militarum Tempestus Scions
. Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Hot-shot Volley Gun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Hot-shot Volley Gun
. Scion w/ Vox-caster: Hot-Shot Lasgun, Vox-caster
. Tempestor: Bolt pistol, Chainsword

Militarum Tempestus Scions: 4x Scion
. Tempestor: Bolt pistol, Chainsword

Militarum Tempestus Scions: 4x Scion
. Tempestor: Bolt pistol, Chainsword

+ Elites +

Astropath: Laspistol, Psychic Barrier

Militarum Tempestus Command Squad
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun

Militarum Tempestus Command Squad
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun

+ Dedicated Transport +

Taurox Prime: Storm Bolter, Taurox Gatling Cannon, Two Hot-shot Volley Guns

Taurox Prime: Storm Bolter, Taurox Gatling Cannon, Two Hot-shot Volley Guns

Taurox Prime: Heavy Stubber, Taurox Battle Cannon, Two Autocannons

Taurox Prime: Heavy Stubber, Taurox Battle Cannon, Two Autocannons

++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (Imperium - Astra Militarum) ++

+ No Force Org Slot +

Regimental Doctrine: Regiment: Millitarum Tempestus

+ HQ +

Lord Commissar: Bolt pistol, Power sword

Tempestor Prime: Chainsword, Tempestus Command Rod

+ Troops +

Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 8x Scion
. Scion w/ Vox-caster: Hot-Shot Lasgun, Vox-caster
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Hot-shot Laspistol

Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 8x Scion
. Scion w/ Vox-caster: Hot-Shot Lasgun, Vox-caster
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Hot-shot Laspistol

Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 4x Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Meltagun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Meltagun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Meltagun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Meltagun
. Scion w/ Vox-caster: Hot-Shot Lasgun, Vox-caster
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Hot-shot Laspistol

+ Elites +

Militarum Tempestus Command Squad
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun
. Tempestus Scion: Plasma gun

Officer of the Fleet

+ Flyer +

Valkyries
. Valkyrie: 2x Multiple Rocket Pods, Lascannon
. . 2x Heavy Bolters: 2x Heavy bolter
. Valkyrie: 2x Multiple Rocket Pods, Lascannon
. . 2x Heavy Bolters: 2x Heavy bolter
. Valkyrie: 2x Multiple Rocket Pods, Lascannon
. . 2x Heavy Bolters: 2x Heavy bolter

++ Total: [101 PL, 1993pts] ++


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 10:40:27


Post by: Singleton Mosby


 Trickstick wrote:
I love hellhounds. Just finished adding stubbers to mine after CA. .


Why adding the stubbers?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 10:52:54


Post by: Trickstick


 Singleton Mosby wrote:
 Trickstick wrote:
I love hellhounds. Just finished adding stubbers to mine after CA. .


Why adding the stubbers?


Because stubbers at 2 points are so good of a price I find it hard to resist. I also run Tallarn, so being heavy is not a problem. They are better than stormbolters when outside of 12", which is where my Hellhounds try to sit, at maximum inferno range.

I may also have had a DKOK stubber crewman lying around, which looks perfect on a Hellhound.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 11:04:17


Post by: Tiberius501


Hey friends, I made a list of my whole collection of Death Korps and it comes to 1000pts. But it includes a Baneblade. Is that too much for that size game?

Here’s the list:

Spoiler:
HQ
- Marshal Karis Venner
- Field Officer w/ Dagger of Tu’Sakh

TROOP
- 3x infantry squad w/ grenade launcher and Vox Caster

ELITE
- Command Swuad w/ Regimental Standard and Vox
- 10x Combat Engineers (goes with dagger Officer)

FAST ATTACK
- 7x Death Riders

SUPPER HEAVY
- Baneblade w/ 2x sponson lascannons/heavy bolters (Tallern Trait)


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 11:10:51


Post by: Trickstick


 Tiberius501 wrote:
Hey friends, I made a list of my whole collection of Death Korps and it comes to 1000pts. But it includes a Baneblade. Is that too much for that size game?

Here’s the list:

Spoiler:
HQ
- Marshal Karis Venner
- Field Officer w/ Dagger of Tu’Sakh

TROOP
- 3x infantry squad w/ grenade launcher and Vox Caster

ELITE
- Command Swuad w/ Regimental Standard and Vox
- 10x Combat Engineers (goes with dagger Officer)

FAST ATTACK
- 7x Death Riders

SUPPER HEAVY
- Baneblade w/ 2x sponson lascannons/heavy bolters (Tallern Trait)


That really depends on you opponent. Some people are not going to like a Baneblade at 1k, some won't mind.

Are you using the super heavy auxiliary detachment? Tallarn doesn't really give you much besides the ambush stratagem, as that detachment prevents you gaining doctrine bonuses. You could consider going Vostroyan for the +1bs stratagem.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 11:35:43


Post by: Tiberius501


 Trickstick wrote:
 Tiberius501 wrote:
Hey friends, I made a list of my whole collection of Death Korps and it comes to 1000pts. But it includes a Baneblade. Is that too much for that size game?

Here’s the list:

Spoiler:
HQ
- Marshal Karis Venner
- Field Officer w/ Dagger of Tu’Sakh

TROOP
- 3x infantry squad w/ grenade launcher and Vox Caster

ELITE
- Command Swuad w/ Regimental Standard and Vox
- 10x Combat Engineers (goes with dagger Officer)

FAST ATTACK
- 7x Death Riders

SUPPER HEAVY
- Baneblade w/ 2x sponson lascannons/heavy bolters (Tallern Trait)


That really depends on you opponent. Some people are not going to like a Baneblade at 1k, some won't mind.

Are you using the super heavy auxiliary detachment? Tallarn doesn't really give you much besides the ambush stratagem, as that detachment prevents you gaining doctrine bonuses. You could consider going Vostroyan for the +1bs stratagem.


That’s a good idea. I’m just avoiding Catachan and Valhallan mainly, as they seem to be the most insane on it. But the Vostroyan one seems good. Gives the Demolisher cannon 30” range too.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 12:01:02


Post by: Trickstick


 Tiberius501 wrote:
That’s a good idea. I’m just avoiding Catachan and Valhallan mainly, as they seem to be the most insane on it. But the Vostroyan one seems good. Gives the Demolisher cannon 30” range too.


It doesn't if taken in a Super-heavy Auxiliary Detachment (Codex, page 132, "Regimental Doctrines"). You can't gain any of the doctrine bonuses unless you take a Supreme Command or Super-heavy detachment, which have extra slot requirements. So no +6" range, no reroll Catachan or Cadian stuff. All you get is the extra stratagem, orders and warlord trait. So basically take the one with the stratagem you like.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 12:22:51


Post by: Tiberius501


 Trickstick wrote:
 Tiberius501 wrote:
That’s a good idea. I’m just avoiding Catachan and Valhallan mainly, as they seem to be the most insane on it. But the Vostroyan one seems good. Gives the Demolisher cannon 30” range too.


It doesn't if taken in a Super-heavy Auxiliary Detachment (Codex, page 132, "Regimental Doctrines"). You can't gain any of the doctrine bonuses unless you take a Supreme Command or Super-heavy detachment, which have extra slot requirements. So no +6" range, no reroll Catachan or Cadian stuff. All you get is the extra stratagem, orders and warlord trait. So basically take the one with the stratagem you like.


Ah that makes sense. Thanks for the info I’ll still go Vostroyan as that +1 stratagem looks neat and pretty much the only one that seems useful for it.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 12:27:07


Post by: Trickstick


Yeah it is nice. Tallarn can be ok if you want to reserve the Baneblade, although it is expensive at 3cp. You also miss out on turn 1 shooting, as it can't come in before turn 2.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 12:31:33


Post by: Tiberius501


 Trickstick wrote:
Yeah it is nice. Tallarn can be ok if you want to reserve the Baneblade, although it is expensive at 3cp. You also miss out on turn 1 shooting, as it can't come in before turn 2.


Yeah at first reserving it and flanking with it seemed good but it has such long range it doesn’t seem like it needs to and, yeah just seems to waste it’s big guns for a turn. Also can’t see a monster of a tank sneaking around to ambush haha.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/24 17:59:42


Post by: Booger ork


 Tiberius501 wrote:
 Trickstick wrote:
Yeah it is nice. Tallarn can be ok if you want to reserve the Baneblade, although it is expensive at 3cp. You also miss out on turn 1 shooting, as it can't come in before turn 2.


Yeah at first reserving it and flanking with it seemed good but it has such long range it doesn’t seem like it needs to and, yeah just seems to waste it’s big guns for a turn. Also can’t see a monster of a tank sneaking around to ambush haha.


Have you never spent time seeing the tactical genius of CREEEEEEEEEEDDDDD!!!!!!


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/26 19:02:58


Post by: stratigo


 Tiberius501 wrote:
 Trickstick wrote:
Yeah it is nice. Tallarn can be ok if you want to reserve the Baneblade, although it is expensive at 3cp. You also miss out on turn 1 shooting, as it can't come in before turn 2.


Yeah at first reserving it and flanking with it seemed good but it has such long range it doesn’t seem like it needs to and, yeah just seems to waste it’s big guns for a turn. Also can’t see a monster of a tank sneaking around to ambush haha.


It was used to prevent the baneblade from being one shot. Then you deployed it in your zone first turn. But they changed those rules


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/26 20:54:22


Post by: Trickstick


If you give an Officer of the Fleet the Dagger of Tu'sakh, you can outflank any infantry unit. What would be the most devastating Imperial infantry unit to outflank with? Probably something that can't deepstrike on its own, and it can't be something with a regiment keyword.

What is a great shooting unit @9", or has enhanced charge which has difficulty getting close?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/26 21:05:13


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Trickstick wrote:
If you give an Officer of the Fleet the Dagger of Tu'sakh, you can outflank any infantry unit. What would be the most devastating Imperial infantry unit to outflank with? Probably something that can't deepstrike on its own, and it can't be something with a regiment keyword.

What is a great shooting unit @9", or has enhanced charge which has difficulty getting close?


Lmao. Outflank Sororitas Repentia of the Bloody Rose. No enhanced charge range, but usually very difficult to wield effectively and DEVASTATING if you can make the charge. This makes me giggle.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/26 21:08:52


Post by: BaconCatBug


Warden Custodians are a good choice, or Kataphron Destroyers perhaps.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/26 21:37:06


Post by: Trickstick


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Lmao. Outflank Sororitas Repentia of the Bloody Rose. No enhanced charge range, but usually very difficult to wield effectively and DEVASTATING if you can make the charge. This makes me giggle.


I think that a normal 9" charge is too unreliable. I was hoping that there was a charging act of faith, but there is only a +3" movement one, which doesn't help.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/26 21:41:29


Post by: BaconCatBug


52% if you burn a Command Re-roll, very much unreliable.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/26 22:33:05


Post by: MrMoustaffa


 Trickstick wrote:
If you give an Officer of the Fleet the Dagger of Tu'sakh, you can outflank any infantry unit. What would be the most devastating Imperial infantry unit to outflank with? Probably something that can't deepstrike on its own, and it can't be something with a regiment keyword.

What is a great shooting unit @9", or has enhanced charge which has difficulty getting close?

Pretty sure they faqd it to only work for regiment units


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/26 22:35:16


Post by: BaconCatBug


 MrMoustaffa wrote:
 Trickstick wrote:
If you give an Officer of the Fleet the Dagger of Tu'sakh, you can outflank any infantry unit. What would be the most devastating Imperial infantry unit to outflank with? Probably something that can't deepstrike on its own, and it can't be something with a regiment keyword.

What is a great shooting unit @9", or has enhanced charge which has difficulty getting close?

Pretty sure they faqd it to only work for regiment units
If you're only "pretty" sure, why post before checking what they actually did? Read the rule again and read the errata (which only added "INFANTRY OFFICER model only." to the start). If we've missed an FAQ somewhere, please cite it.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/26 22:45:27


Post by: Trickstick


 BaconCatBug wrote:
 MrMoustaffa wrote:
 Trickstick wrote:
If you give an Officer of the Fleet the Dagger of Tu'sakh, you can outflank any infantry unit. What would be the most devastating Imperial infantry unit to outflank with? Probably something that can't deepstrike on its own, and it can't be something with a regiment keyword.

What is a great shooting unit @9", or has enhanced charge which has difficulty getting close?

Pretty sure they faqd it to only work for regiment units
If you're only "pretty" sure, why post before checking what they actually did? Read the rule again and read the errata (which only added "INFANTRY OFFICER model only." to the start). If we've missed an FAQ somewhere, please cite it.


Come on BCB, you don't need to come out of the gate as confrontational. Flies with honey and all that...

They FAQed it to only work with officers. However, the Officer of the Fleet is the only Officer without a regiment. No idea why, it doesn't seem to use the officer keyword for anything. But it technically lets you outflank any infantry unit you want, as long as it isn't a regiment. I think it is definitely an unintended consequence, they probably thought that limiting it to officers was enough and forgot about the OotF, but those are the rules.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/27 14:07:38


Post by: Polonius


 MrMoustaffa wrote:
 Trickstick wrote:
If you give an Officer of the Fleet the Dagger of Tu'sakh, you can outflank any infantry unit. What would be the most devastating Imperial infantry unit to outflank with? Probably something that can't deepstrike on its own, and it can't be something with a regiment keyword.

What is a great shooting unit @9", or has enhanced charge which has difficulty getting close?

Pretty sure they faqd it to only work for regiment units


It’s always only worked on the same regiment, if they have one. The FAQ added “Infantry Officer only,” probably because of stuff like s primaris outflanking with bullgryn.

As for the actual answer: the really fun option might be hellblasters.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/27 14:21:59


Post by: Horst


So I just bought a Macharius Vulcan for my Christmas Present... how do I best use it in an army? I'm almost considering just running 2 Shadowswords + a Macharius Vulcan, and then a solid infantry brigade.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/27 14:29:51


Post by: Trickstick


Step 1: Keep it still.
Step 2: Laugh maniacally as you hose down units.
Step 3: Eh, you could worry about what doctrine to give it I guess. Maybe some psyker support.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/27 19:33:44


Post by: C4790M


Just noticed the precision drop force stratagem for the Valkyrie/scion detachment doesn’t require the special keyword for whatever is dropping out. Could be a fun way to guarantee Bullgryn/melta/plasma drops without losing guys on the way down


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 12:49:31


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


C4790M wrote:
Just noticed the precision drop force stratagem for the Valkyrie/scion detachment doesn’t require the special keyword for whatever is dropping out. Could be a fun way to guarantee Bullgryn/melta/plasma drops without losing guys on the way down


Why would you want to put anything other than Stormtroopers with Plasma that hits on 2's, re-rolls ones, and gets extra shots on a 5 in there?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 15:18:32


Post by: Apple Peel


AdmiralHalsey wrote:
C4790M wrote:
Just noticed the precision drop force stratagem for the Valkyrie/scion detachment doesn’t require the special keyword for whatever is dropping out. Could be a fun way to guarantee Bullgryn/melta/plasma drops without losing guys on the way down


Why would you want to put anything other than Stormtroopers with Plasma that hits on 2's, re-rolls ones, and gets extra shots on a 5 in there?

I would consider putting a 10 man hot shot lasgun squad in there when it drops, it would absolutely destroy chaff. Besides, plasma already deepstrikes into rapid fire range. Taking out the screen turn one, the. Mopping up with plasma sounds good to me.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 15:23:50


Post by: Trickstick


 Apple Peel wrote:
...absolutely destroy chaff.


Catachan shotgun veterans with 3x flamer, heavy flamer, a priest and commander. Nice chaff killers. Unload, flame and charge.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 15:48:12


Post by: Apple Peel


 Trickstick wrote:
 Apple Peel wrote:
...absolutely destroy chaff.


Catachan shotgun veterans with 3x flamer, heavy flamer, a priest and commander. Nice chaff killers. Unload, flame and charge.

That doesn’t work for a Militarum Tempestus only army.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 18:33:41


Post by: Unit1126PLL


What is the math on Catachan with d3 shot guns like the Demolisher? Reroll only 1s? Reroll 2s and hope for 2s or 3s? Obviously don't reroll 3s lol


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 18:39:09


Post by: Horst


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
What is the math on Catachan with d3 shot guns like the Demolisher? Reroll only 1s? Reroll 2s and hope for 2s or 3s? Obviously don't reroll 3s lol


Re-roll ones only I think, re-rolling a 2 seems like a bad idea.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 19:19:40


Post by: Trickstick


 Horst wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
What is the math on Catachan with d3 shot guns like the Demolisher? Reroll only 1s? Reroll 2s and hope for 2s or 3s? Obviously don't reroll 3s lol


Re-roll ones only I think, re-rolling a 2 seems like a bad idea.


Yeah, don't reroll 2s. Unless you absolutely need the 3 to win, like if it is final-turn-last-shot sort of thing, and you need to kill three things on an objective.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 20:48:00


Post by: vipoid


How are you guys finding Grenade Launchers, now that they're just 3pts?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 21:06:33


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


 Apple Peel wrote:
AdmiralHalsey wrote:
C4790M wrote:
Just noticed the precision drop force stratagem for the Valkyrie/scion detachment doesn’t require the special keyword for whatever is dropping out. Could be a fun way to guarantee Bullgryn/melta/plasma drops without losing guys on the way down


Why would you want to put anything other than Stormtroopers with Plasma that hits on 2's, re-rolls ones, and gets extra shots on a 5 in there?

I would consider putting a 10 man hot shot lasgun squad in there when it drops, it would absolutely destroy chaff. Besides, plasma already deepstrikes into rapid fire range. Taking out the screen turn one, the. Mopping up with plasma sounds good to me.


The plasma doesn't deepstrike with a +1 to hit bubble from the Drop Force Commander - Making it impossible to overheat, and upping it's accuracy from 3's to 2's, still re-rolling ones.
It also means that the 'Extra Shot' from being a Millitum Tempestus force now triggers on a 5, making your 4 Plasmaguns average out at about -12- hits.

Now that's value.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 21:12:34


Post by: Horst


AdmiralHalsey wrote:
 Apple Peel wrote:
AdmiralHalsey wrote:
C4790M wrote:
Just noticed the precision drop force stratagem for the Valkyrie/scion detachment doesn’t require the special keyword for whatever is dropping out. Could be a fun way to guarantee Bullgryn/melta/plasma drops without losing guys on the way down


Why would you want to put anything other than Stormtroopers with Plasma that hits on 2's, re-rolls ones, and gets extra shots on a 5 in there?

I would consider putting a 10 man hot shot lasgun squad in there when it drops, it would absolutely destroy chaff. Besides, plasma already deepstrikes into rapid fire range. Taking out the screen turn one, the. Mopping up with plasma sounds good to me.


The plasma doesn't deepstrike with a +1 to hit bubble from the Drop Force Commander - Making it impossible to overheat, and upping it's accuracy from 3's to 2's, still re-rolling ones.
It also means that the 'Extra Shot' from being a Millitum Tempestus force now triggers on a 5, making your 4 Plasmaguns average out at about -12- hits.

Now that's value.


Especially considering you can fit a Tempestor and 2 4 man command squads into a Valkyrie... anything short of a Knight with rotated ion shields is gonna have a real bad day.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 21:55:48


Post by: Apple Peel


 Horst wrote:
AdmiralHalsey wrote:
 Apple Peel wrote:
AdmiralHalsey wrote:
C4790M wrote:
Just noticed the precision drop force stratagem for the Valkyrie/scion detachment doesn’t require the special keyword for whatever is dropping out. Could be a fun way to guarantee Bullgryn/melta/plasma drops without losing guys on the way down


Why would you want to put anything other than Stormtroopers with Plasma that hits on 2's, re-rolls ones, and gets extra shots on a 5 in there?

I would consider putting a 10 man hot shot lasgun squad in there when it drops, it would absolutely destroy chaff. Besides, plasma already deepstrikes into rapid fire range. Taking out the screen turn one, the. Mopping up with plasma sounds good to me.


The plasma doesn't deepstrike with a +1 to hit bubble from the Drop Force Commander - Making it impossible to overheat, and upping it's accuracy from 3's to 2's, still re-rolling ones.
It also means that the 'Extra Shot' from being a Millitum Tempestus force now triggers on a 5, making your 4 Plasmaguns average out at about -12- hits.

Now that's value.



Especially considering you can fit a Tempestor and 2 4 man command squads into a Valkyrie... anything short of a Knight with rotated ion shields is gonna have a real bad day.

I don’t know, I think I’d rather have the two Valkyries transporting two ten man squads to destroy chaff, then drop three command squads and a Tempestor Prime with Laurels to mop up after the screen is destroyed.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 22:02:08


Post by: jaxor1983


In that situation, you're better off using Elimination Protocol Santioned! over Take Aim! (referring to shooting a knight)


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 22:16:17


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


jaxor1983 wrote:
In that situation, you're better off using Elimination Protocol Santioned! over Take Aim! (referring to shooting a knight)


Laurels of Command with a CP reroll is a 75 chance of doing both.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/28 22:22:37


Post by: Horst


In any case it's a good way to deliver firepower

You can achieve similar levels of destruction with a pair of tank commander executioners, but you they don't have anywhere near the mobility that the stormtroopers do of course. And the tanks are significantly more costly.... and require CP to get the most out of them (overlapping fields of fire).


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/29 14:03:46


Post by: Apple Peel


jaxor1983 wrote:
In that situation, you're better off using Elimination Protocol Santioned! over Take Aim! (referring to shooting a knight)

That’s what the third Valkyrie with a ten man melta squad is for. Give them grenadiers so the six other Scions can toss Krak Grenades as well.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2018/12/31 16:10:51


Post by: Azuza001


What are peoples thoughts on crusaders? I am thinking about making a squad to go with my growing guard army and on paper they look good with the power swords, 3++, able to get to 2++, and acts of faith. Add a priest in and they seem like they could do some work vs chaff units and still survive vs big elite squads.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/01 12:26:27


Post by: U02dah4


Use the AM datasheet


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/01 17:10:43


Post by: MrMoustaffa


U02dah4 wrote:
Use the AM datasheet

Chapter approved overrode it. You can see it in the sisters beta codex section. So they now use the new faith point system instead of the old one.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/01 22:09:40


Post by: U02dah4


Where does it say the datasheet in the AM codex is overridden.

It overode the datasheet in the SoB index 2 but the datasheet in the AM Codex is current with the right keyword


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/01 22:21:02


Post by: Unit1126PLL


U02dah4 wrote:
Where does it say the datasheet in the AM codex is overridden.

It overode the datasheet in the SoB index 2 but the datasheet in the AM Codex is current with the right keyword


It says it in the Designers Note on Page 69 of Chapter Approved, at the beginning of the Adepta Sororitas Beta Codex section. It specifically calls out the Crusaders, and explicitly instructs Astra Militarum players to use the Datasheet from the beta Codex.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/01 22:27:42


Post by: U02dah4


Its phrased as a request based on them wanting feedback not a requirement.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 02:59:35


Post by: Trickstick


The current sheets in the Guard codex can't be overwritten, as the Sister's codex is still only a beta. Sure, you are free to use it but it isn't "compulsory", like a true codex would be. Of course, the concept of "compulsory" is a bit woolly anyway.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 06:09:07


Post by: Unit1126PLL


"if you are using Crusaders as part of an Astra Militarum army, please use the datasheet and all rules for them as presented in this beta codex until the full Codex: Adepta Sororitas is published, whereupon we will also make any necessary updates to Codex: Astra Militarum ."

I suppose the inclusion of the word please does make it a request. It's still naff to keep using the AM one though, since there is a more recently published set of rules you are being asked to use by the designer lmao


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 06:36:06


Post by: stratigo


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
"if you are using Crusaders as part of an Astra Militarum army, please use the datasheet and all rules for them as presented in this beta codex until the full Codex: Adepta Sororitas is published, whereupon we will also make any necessary updates to Codex: Astra Militarum ."

I suppose the inclusion of the word please does make it a request. It's still naff to keep using the AM one though, since there is a more recently published set of rules you are being asked to use by the designer lmao


Some people go to any length to break a thing to win or to point at the developers and call them stupid for using polite language and giving even the tiniest wiggle room. The problem with that is, of course, you can always find someone dumb enough to fail at reading a rule and still do this


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 06:43:44


Post by: daedalus


I'd give benefit of the doubt to just about anyone playing IG who is still using the old Crusader datasheet to be unaware that there was an updated one in the SoB codex.

I mean, it's an IG player; not a SoB player.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 06:43:55


Post by: Horst


List building question... I've got Pask, 2 tank commanders, and a Shadowsword in my army. I have the points left to add a 3rd Tank Commander and a Scout Sentinel, or a pair of Hellhounds. I'm thinking the Hellhounds are the better choice, but I'd like a second opinion on that.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 06:45:14


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


 Horst wrote:
List building question... I've got Pask, 2 tank commanders, and a Shadowsword in my army. I have the points left to add a 3rd Tank Commander and a Scout Sentinel, or a pair of Hellhounds. I'm thinking the Hellhounds are the better choice, but I'd like a second opinion on that.


Is that the whole army? Or are there other screening/support units?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 06:47:14


Post by: Horst


AdmiralHalsey wrote:
 Horst wrote:
List building question... I've got Pask, 2 tank commanders, and a Shadowsword in my army. I have the points left to add a 3rd Tank Commander and a Scout Sentinel, or a pair of Hellhounds. I'm thinking the Hellhounds are the better choice, but I'd like a second opinion on that.


Is that the whole army? Or are there other screening/support units?


Rest of the army is Shadowsword, Pask, 2 Tank Commanders, 2 Armored Sentinels, 1 Basilisk, 2 Mortar HWS, 2 astropath, 1 techpriest, 3 company commander, 80 infantry.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 06:47:47


Post by: MrMoustaffa


 daedalus wrote:
I'd give benefit of the doubt to just about anyone playing IG who is still using the old Crusader datasheet to be unaware that there was an updated one in the SoB codex.

I mean, it's an IG player; not a SoB player.

Yeah I'm kind of surprised I even noticed it. It's in a weird spot. I would've never noticed it if I hadn't been interested in running sisters and was reading through their beta dex. They're not listed in the updated profiles in the back if I remember right so it's easy to miss.

That said I feel it's pretty clear that the sister version is the official version now. Maybe not *technically* mandatory I wouldn't be surprised if they put a faq out saying that's the official profile now.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 13:25:51


Post by: Azuza001


Yeah i wasnt aware of the request / change myself. I dont have sisters of battle, never bothered to look at the beta dex because no one in the local meta has them either. Still, good to know.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 13:45:14


Post by: Unit1126PLL


I wouldn't expect them to know right away, but if I pointed it out to them, I'd expect them to start using the new Datasheet (though perhaps not literally midway through our game).

I would also probably mention it before the game, and if it requires any list changes, I'd allow them the luxury as well, if I think they're using crusaders (e.g. pulling them out of a pack, showing me their list, etc).

The only problem is if they don't have a copy of CA2018, but then I reserve the right to make fun of them for using the new points but not actually having the rules


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 14:52:54


Post by: Azuza001


I have chapter approved 2018, but again i haven't bothered to look at the sisters beta codex much. Acts of faith seem like a pain in the butt to keep track of on top of command points. But whatever, this is a AM tactics thread not sisters. I will have to look at the book later and decide if its worth crusaders with the changes or not.

But since we are talking about sisters of battle anyone have any experience with mixing them into astra militarum? I would love to have my old witch hunters force back again. A few sisters (not just celestine and her 2 bff's) in a force instead of space marines could work out better points wise for getting more bodies on the field...


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 15:19:21


Post by: Unit1126PLL


Azuza001 wrote:
I have chapter approved 2018, but again i haven't bothered to look at the sisters beta codex much. Acts of faith seem like a pain in the butt to keep track of on top of command points. But whatever, this is a AM tactics thread not sisters. I will have to look at the book later and decide if its worth crusaders with the changes or not.

But since we are talking about sisters of battle anyone have any experience with mixing them into astra militarum? I would love to have my old witch hunters force back again. A few sisters (not just celestine and her 2 bff's) in a force instead of space marines could work out better points wise for getting more bodies on the field...


I play both Astra Militarum and Sororitas, and I can tell you now that Sororitas, while terrible as a mono army ( ) are fantastic as soup. They have a relic that can give every single <ORDER> unit a deny on a 2d6, so you can get an entire Battalion of 2d6 deny-the-witch units. You also get access to the Purity of Faith stratagem, which automatically denies a psychic power on a 4+ because the Sororitas said so. Lastly, you get a strat to re-roll wounds against Psykers, giving you a fairly cheap way to shut down enemy psychic armies, especially combined with native Deny-the-Witch from the cheapo IG psykers.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 17:39:02


Post by: necron99


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Azuza001 wrote:
I have chapter approved 2018, but again i haven't bothered to look at the sisters beta codex much. Acts of faith seem like a pain in the butt to keep track of on top of command points. But whatever, this is a AM tactics thread not sisters. I will have to look at the book later and decide if its worth crusaders with the changes or not.

But since we are talking about sisters of battle anyone have any experience with mixing them into astra militarum? I would love to have my old witch hunters force back again. A few sisters (not just celestine and her 2 bff's) in a force instead of space marines could work out better points wise for getting more bodies on the field...


I play both Astra Militarum and Sororitas, and I can tell you now that Sororitas, while terrible as a mono army ( ) are fantastic as soup. They have a relic that can give every single <ORDER> unit a deny on a 2d6, so you can get an entire Battalion of 2d6 deny-the-witch units. You also get access to the Purity of Faith stratagem, which automatically denies a psychic power on a 4+ because the Sororitas said so. Lastly, you get a strat to re-roll wounds against Psykers, giving you a fairly cheap way to shut down enemy psychic armies, especially combined with native Deny-the-Witch from the cheapo IG psykers.


Wow, that's awesome - now if GW would just come out with plastic infantry...$80 for 10 models is a bit steep


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 19:09:08


Post by: PuppetSoul


 necron99 wrote:

Wow, that's awesome - now if GW would just come out with plastic infantry...$80 for 10 models is a bit steep


Only 7 of the models in that set are actually useful to the standard Devoted17 loadout, so you'd actually be better off buying the models individually for $10 each.

That said, I wouldn't suggest even considering buying the models for $10 each, and recommend using proxies instead.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 21:33:25


Post by: necron99


PuppetSoul wrote:
 necron99 wrote:

Wow, that's awesome - now if GW would just come out with plastic infantry...$80 for 10 models is a bit steep


Only 7 of the models in that set are actually useful to the standard Devoted17 loadout, so you'd actually be better off buying the models individually for $10 each.

That said, I wouldn't suggest even considering buying the models for $10 each, and recommend using proxies instead.


...or apparently wait a couple of months and proxy in the meantime as I just saw on warhammer community they're coming out with SOB on sprue


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 21:45:21


Post by: tneva82


stratigo wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
"if you are using Crusaders as part of an Astra Militarum army, please use the datasheet and all rules for them as presented in this beta codex until the full Codex: Adepta Sororitas is published, whereupon we will also make any necessary updates to Codex: Astra Militarum ."

I suppose the inclusion of the word please does make it a request. It's still naff to keep using the AM one though, since there is a more recently published set of rules you are being asked to use by the designer lmao


Some people go to any length to break a thing to win or to point at the developers and call them stupid for using polite language and giving even the tiniest wiggle room. The problem with that is, of course, you can always find someone dumb enough to fail at reading a rule and still do this


Largely depends also on tournament/group. Not everybody use beta rules after all. Expecting BETA rules to be default option is bit of odd to begin with


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 22:02:53


Post by: Unit1126PLL


tneva82 wrote:
stratigo wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
"if you are using Crusaders as part of an Astra Militarum army, please use the datasheet and all rules for them as presented in this beta codex until the full Codex: Adepta Sororitas is published, whereupon we will also make any necessary updates to Codex: Astra Militarum ."

I suppose the inclusion of the word please does make it a request. It's still naff to keep using the AM one though, since there is a more recently published set of rules you are being asked to use by the designer lmao


Some people go to any length to break a thing to win or to point at the developers and call them stupid for using polite language and giving even the tiniest wiggle room. The problem with that is, of course, you can always find someone dumb enough to fail at reading a rule and still do this


Largely depends also on tournament/group. Not everybody use beta rules after all. Expecting BETA rules to be default option is bit of odd to begin with


I assume those same groups would allow me to use the much stronger Index Sororitas rather than the currently weak beta codex then?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/02 22:08:33


Post by: necron99


tneva82 wrote:
stratigo wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
"if you are using Crusaders as part of an Astra Militarum army, please use the datasheet and all rules for them as presented in this beta codex until the full Codex: Adepta Sororitas is published, whereupon we will also make any necessary updates to Codex: Astra Militarum ."

I suppose the inclusion of the word please does make it a request. It's still naff to keep using the AM one though, since there is a more recently published set of rules you are being asked to use by the designer lmao


Some people go to any length to break a thing to win or to point at the developers and call them stupid for using polite language and giving even the tiniest wiggle room. The problem with that is, of course, you can always find someone dumb enough to fail at reading a rule and still do this


Largely depends also on tournament/group. Not everybody use beta rules after all. Expecting BETA rules to be default option is bit of odd to begin with


In most cases that would be true but poor sisters of battle always seem to get the short end of the stick...I mean really a beta codex?! I think SOB has a legitimate sexual harassment suit against GW. It will force TOs all over the world into making that decision which just seems silly to me...beta codex...good grief....like GW never came out with a crappy codex or an OP codex before.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 00:13:52


Post by: U02dah4


Even beta rules being permitted nothing in the am book or faq removes it.

The intention as stated is to change it in the am faq in the final version however until they do its legal

Sure they would like for us to playtest their new rules for feedback but if im travelling to a tourney im takeing the best availiable list and the old crusaders are better.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 00:26:27


Post by: COLD CASH


anyone tried 9 plasma sentinels yet? they seem very very good for the points.

Im considering running them in a brigade, alongside a supreme command of pask and 2 TC's all with BC and hbolters. 6 infantry creed and 2 comp C. 3 plat C. 3 mortar teams and a valkyrie. Crusader knight. Cadian.

This list covers armor/horde/elite and would seem on paper to cover the new changes to CA with massive board control.

14 vehicles also offer a lot of hard choices for target priority.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 03:13:03


Post by: MrMoustaffa


Eh, I think I'd rather have more Russe's personally, just for the fact that a 1 doesn't mean I lose up to 6 wounds. With the amount of -1 out there, I like the ability to overcharge even though I know I overheat on 2's and not die due to a 2 or 1.

A bog standard executioner with plasma sponsons is roughly equal in cost to 4 plasma armored sentinels. The Russ can move and fire 2/3rds of it's guns without penalty in every regiment, and with Tallarn it becomes a wash. Russe's get tank orders, sentinels do not. Russes have much higher Toughness to shrug off things like missile launchers and autocannons, armored sentinels can be hurt by far more weapons. The Russ does have half the wounds though, I agree that is a big benefit for sentinels. From there you're deciding if you like 2d6+2d3 plasma shots and a heavy bolter, or 4d3 plasma shots. Keep in mind that's a bog standard tank I'm using as comparison, not a commander. Executioner gets you halfway to the 5th sentinel but now you have bs3 and order itself vs roughly 2-2/12 times it's wounds. So I guess it depends on what you want to do.

My problem with sentinels as a fire support unit is they take up a massive footprint and I don't think they synergize well with Russe's or infantry, my main units. I think they'd do far better in a mechanized/artillery list, where everything is T6-7 and you can really saturate that mid range. At that point you're just going for it and if you mix them with hellhounds, flamer chimeras, and manticore/basilisks in the backline it could make them much more difficult to deal with.

Since I mainly run infantry and Russe's, I have little reason to run sentinels. In a pure infantry list every weapon heavier than a bolter murders them since it has nothing better to do. In a tank list they attract all the guns that normally would just struggle to pen my tanks. In a balanced infantry/Russ list they start to hurt your ability to overwhelm target priority by providing nice little profiles that every weapon your opponent takes should have some use for.

Tl;Dr I can see them working well for mechanized with lots of T6-7 vehicles, but if you're planning on mixing them with Russe's and guardsmen I don't think it would work well.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 03:22:06


Post by: Horst


Plasma sentinels are great in a cadian army to fill up a brigade, my 2000 pt list has 2 of them and they've performed well so far. They're small priority compared to the russes or hellhounds, so they don't get bothered. Running 9 of them could be cool, but like moustaffa said, minus to hit kills them, so I'm not sure that's a great way to go.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 11:37:38


Post by: vipoid


 Unit1126PLL wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:
Where does it say the datasheet in the AM codex is overridden.

It overode the datasheet in the SoB index 2 but the datasheet in the AM Codex is current with the right keyword


It says it in the Designers Note on Page 69 of Chapter Approved, at the beginning of the Adepta Sororitas Beta Codex section. It specifically calls out the Crusaders, and explicitly instructs Astra Militarum players to use the Datasheet from the beta Codex.



Does that me we also need to abide by the footnote on p94, saying that a detachment without any Ministorum Priests can only include one unit of Ecclesiarchy Battle Conclave unit (one of which is Crusaders)?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 11:46:43


Post by: U02dah4


No the only limit on crusaders in the am codex or faq is rule of 3. P69 is not mandatory


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 11:49:20


Post by: ragnorack1


With all the talk of ecclesiarchy units it's just reminded me, can Uriah Jacobus be taken as a HQ in a guard force as he has the astra militarum key word? Or does he break the doctrines/battleforged somehow?
With the price drop he might be worth while if your some how struggling to fill a HQ slot or could work nicely with a catachan force instead of a normal priest by boosting their leadership along with their officers for a +2.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 14:05:06


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 vipoid wrote:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:
Where does it say the datasheet in the AM codex is overridden.

It overode the datasheet in the SoB index 2 but the datasheet in the AM Codex is current with the right keyword


It says it in the Designers Note on Page 69 of Chapter Approved, at the beginning of the Adepta Sororitas Beta Codex section. It specifically calls out the Crusaders, and explicitly instructs Astra Militarum players to use the Datasheet from the beta Codex.



Does that me we also need to abide by the footnote on p94, saying that a detachment without any Ministorum Priests can only include one unit of Ecclesiarchy Battle Conclave unit (one of which is Crusaders)?


Yes, I assume so. If it had said "Adepta Sororitas" detachment, then the case may be that IG can ignore the restriction. But as it stands, if you have a detachment, whether you are Imperial Guard, Space Marines, Ynnari, Chaos Daemons, or Tau, you can only bring one "Ecclesiarchy Battle Conclave" unit per detachment, unless you also include a Ministorum Priest.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 14:31:47


Post by: Azuza001


Yeah, for now i am just going to skip the crusaders. The new rules for them dont help at all, it just makes them worse. I hope gw doesnt stick to this plan. I shouldnt have to buy a sisters codex when it comes out to use crusaders from the Astra militarum codex, thats like saying "hey, the new space marine codex came out, all you dark angels/blood angels/space wolves players need to buy it because we changed how the rhino works". Bah, thought this was supposed to be the edition that cut down on books...


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/03 15:26:18


Post by: MrMoustaffa


Well GW did say they're going to FAQ it into the IG codex, so theoretically you shouldn't need any additional books, just the FAQ that we're already probably lugging around anyways. As best I can tell, any changes they make to IG crusaders rules wise will be free to access in our FAQ, no different than when they changed how the commissar ability works or added the 50/50 order test for conscripts.

It is annoying though, definitely confusing


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/06 04:23:39


Post by: tankboy145


So I finally got around to trying out that emperors wrath artillery company.

All I used for the bonuses were wyverns. Let me tell you a Wyvern firing twice, with -1 ap, and possibly ignoring cover is super deadly!

Couple it with over lapping or the aerial spotters and you’ve got a nasty artillery piece!

I’ve mainly been playing with the emperors fist tank company and that reroll overwatch bubble is huge! Coupled with defensive gunners and now your opponent is going to lose some models or the model for just charging!


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 02:27:47


Post by: Ecdain


 tankboy145 wrote:
So I finally got around to trying out that emperors wrath artillery company.

All I used for the bonuses were wyverns. Let me tell you a Wyvern firing twice, with -1 ap, and possibly ignoring cover is super deadly!

Couple it with over lapping or the aerial spotters and you’ve got a nasty artillery piece!

I’ve mainly been playing with the emperors fist tank company and that reroll overwatch bubble is huge! Coupled with defensive gunners and now your opponent is going to lose some models or the model for just charging!


I haven't read it but I thought you only got extra -1 on hit rolls of 6?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 13:03:44


Post by: Silentz


Hi

Did a tournament with a pure AM army this weekend so thought I would share my list and experience. I used 2 of the Vigilus Defiant specialist detachments.

List was...

== Cadian Battalion ==

Company Commander (Old Grudges, Kurov's Aquila)
Company Commander
Primaris Psyker

3 infantry squads

Heavy Weapons Squad: Mortars

== Cadian Supreme Command Detachment ==
Specialist Detachment: Emperor's Fist Tank Company

Pask with Battle Cannon
Tank Commander with Hammer of Sunderance relic Battle Cannon
Tank Commander with Punisher - Field Commander with "Unflinching Resolve" warlord trait

Tech-priest enginseer

Shadowsword (barebones no sponsons)

== Militarum Tempestus Battalion ==
Specialist Detachment: Tempestus Drop Force

Tempestor Prime - Chainsword, Command Rod. Field Commander with "Grav-Chute Commando" warlord trait
Tempestor Prime - Chainsword, Command Rod.

Scions squad with 2 x Hotshot Volley Guns
Scions squad with 2 x Hotshot Volley Guns
Scions squad with 2 x Meltaguns

Scions Command Squad with 4x Plasmaguns

Valkyrie with Rockets and Multilaser

Taurox Prime with gatling, hotshot volley guns and storm bolter.



-----------

I think the list has potential although there are plenty of sub-optimal choices here... for example the scions loadout is "what can I build from 4 boxes of scions?" rather than "what is the best loadout possible?". You only get 1 plasmagun per box.

The shadowsword was a total waste of 420 ish points. I think it killed 5 marines and 4 cultists over 3 games or something. I went second in every game and it was either useless (shooting a volcano cannon at chaos cultists!) or dead.

I horribly misplayed the tanks in games 2 and 3 (put infantry WAYYYY too close to them so the opponent charged the infantry then piled into/consolidated into 1" of the tanks... so their wonderful overwatch was wasted as they were never charged) and I also forgot to use Overlapping Fields of Fire all tournament (never played Cadian before and forgot about it) which might have made a difference in a couple of instances.

The Drop Force formation is LEGIT though. 4 plasma scions and a Tempestor Prime... jump out 9" away from something and get 8 shots, hitting on 2s... and 1s don't kill them due to the +1 to hit. Within half range so 5s and 6s create extra shots. I gave them the tempestus "reroll all wounds against vehicles and monsters" order instead of reroll 1s to hit. They are all-stars. Killed a tank commander in 1 volley. They are absolute all-stars.

They die immediately after doing their thing but that's not hugely surprising.

Anyway there you go.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 15:55:49


Post by: Apple Peel


I’m still building my Scion army, and with specialist detachments, I’m wondering if I should change my approach.

Pre-specialist detachments, my plan was having two Valkyries with two ten man hot-shot lasgun squads aboard, as well as a Tempestor Prime for FRFSRF. There could be other things as well, like a Lord Commissar and an Astropath, but that is not important now.

I basically wanted to alpha strike the enemy infantry (or, if lacking infantry, maybe spend a CP for grenadiers and throw ten Kraks). I would then have three plasma Scion Command squads and a Tempestor Prime deepstrikes the next turn for a beta strike on either whatever the infantry is guarding or something else. Laurels of Command on that Tempestor Prime, too.

But with Tempestus Drop force, would it be more efficient to put plasma squads in a Valkyrie and have the appropriate supporting officers in the second Valkyrie?

I’m still on the fence, as hot-shot lasguns can’t deepstrike into rapid fire range while plasma can, and with Laurels, I have a fair chance of getting both Take aim and Elimination Protocol Sanctioned off on the plasma squads anyway. And the plasma squads would have the benefit of less infantry to immediately fire at them if I alpha strike the enemy’s infantry.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 16:20:53


Post by: Horst


 Silentz wrote:



The shadowsword was a total waste of 420 ish points. I think it killed 5 marines and 4 cultists over 3 games or something. I went second in every game and it was either useless (shooting a volcano cannon at chaos cultists!) or dead.

I horribly misplayed the tanks in games 2 and 3 (put infantry WAYYYY too close to them so the opponent charged the infantry then piled into/consolidated into 1" of the tanks... so their wonderful overwatch was wasted as they were never charged) and I also forgot to use Overlapping Fields of Fire all tournament (never played Cadian before and forgot about it) which might have made a difference in a couple of instances.


Anyway there you go.


Well, if the enemy nuked the Shadowsword turn 1, consider the alternative would be losing Pask + your relic tank commander, since the Shadowsword is about as durable as both combined. I'd usually rather lose the Shadowsword. Did you try assaulting things with it? I discovered in a game this weekend that the Shadowsword (if you use the 1 CP stratagem Crush Them) is a god damn beast in close combat, 9 str9 AP-2 hits, each doing D3 damage is absurd for a tank.

On your other tanks, when they were consolidated into, was that a turn 1 charge by the enemy? I'm playing a similar list (Shadowsword + Pask and 2 Tank Commanders as supreme command) and wondering how best to protect them turn 1. If it was a turn 2 charge, probably just move the infantry screens out a bit so there's a 7" gap between the tanks and the infantry, so they can't consolidate into the tanks?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 16:24:19


Post by: Silentz


Sounds like a fun army to play

My advice would be that you don't actually need to decide this right now. You can see your opponent's army and think...
yikes! Loads of tanks and a knight! I am putting my plasma in the Valkyries!
or alternatively
yikes! 200 ork boyz! I am putting my hot shots in the valkyries.

Some sort of alterate, ground based transport system is also useful... e.g. taurox primes, chimeras. You need some board presence.

Note that as far as I can understand (although there seems to be some disagreement on this) you don't get to move your troops after they disembark from a Valkyrie. They can disembark after the 45" move but I believe they then don't get to move again. So they will always be outside the hotshot lasgun half range. You can just get them into the opponent's backfield on turn 1, which you can't do with native deepstrike.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 16:29:34


Post by: Unit1126PLL


My experience with IG Superheavy tanks is that you should probably bring 3 or 0, unless you have a plan to deal with them. It's like the old phrase "Two is one, and one is none." You need redundancy. My superheavy tank companies often lose a tank on the first turn fairly easily, but fortunately I've got two more to maneuver and engage with. The lack of giving a crap about getting Stuck In, plus their own ability to overrun enemy units getting Stuck In themselves (as aptly noted by Horst) makes them quite good.

I typically leave a single vehicle back and rather isolated, while having two maneuver vehicles that move forwards to engage the enemy. If the terrain is dense enough (e.g. an apoc urban board on a 12x8), then I leapfrog the overwatching (military term, not 40k term) tanks. Usually, a 6x4 is small enough that no leap-frogging forwards is required. The goal is to absolutely get the vehicles stuck in.

Remember, a Baneblade is more at home stuck in combat than it is anywhere else. In combat, it can still effectively engage the enemy with both its guns and its formidable CC power, while the enemy is both prevented from firing at it with guns and from falling back and charging something else (disregarding special rules to the contrary of course).

One hilarious way to protect a Shadowsword from an enemy Castellan, while still being able to blast the Castellan in the face, is to stick the Shadowsword into combat with something. Use a mob of Guardsmen to pin the enemy unit in place, and then run the shadowsword in. I've done this to a unit of deep-striking Terminators - the Shadowsword didn't use Crush Them! so it was unreliable, and of course the regular Guard mob didn't wipe them out either. The Terminator's power fists were solidly meh against the Shadowsword itself and lacked volume against the Imperial Guardsmen. The trapped Terminators made the Shadowsword immune to the Castellan's guns, but the Shadowsword could happily blaze away at the Castellan for however long it wished...


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 16:38:05


Post by: Silentz


 Horst wrote:
 Silentz wrote:



The shadowsword was a total waste of 420 ish points. I think it killed 5 marines and 4 cultists over 3 games or something. I went second in every game and it was either useless (shooting a volcano cannon at chaos cultists!) or dead.

I horribly misplayed the tanks in games 2 and 3 (put infantry WAYYYY too close to them so the opponent charged the infantry then piled into/consolidated into 1" of the tanks... so their wonderful overwatch was wasted as they were never charged) and I also forgot to use Overlapping Fields of Fire all tournament (never played Cadian before and forgot about it) which might have made a difference in a couple of instances.


Anyway there you go.


Well, if the enemy nuked the Shadowsword turn 1, consider the alternative would be losing Pask + your relic tank commander, since the Shadowsword is about as durable as both combined. I'd usually rather lose the Shadowsword. Did you try assaulting things with it? I discovered in a game this weekend that the Shadowsword (if you use the 1 CP stratagem Crush Them) is a god damn beast in close combat, 9 str9 AP-2 hits, each doing D3 damage is absurd for a tank.

On your other tanks, when they were consolidated into, was that a turn 1 charge by the enemy? I'm playing a similar list (Shadowsword + Pask and 2 Tank Commanders as supreme command) and wondering how best to protect them turn 1. If it was a turn 2 charge, probably just move the infantry screens out a bit so there's a 7" gap between the tanks and the infantry, so they can't consolidate into the tanks?

Game 1 was a massive win for me - playing a fully footslogging Crimson Fists army. Great guy, thematic army but not really a tournament-grade force.

2nd match was against Chaos Soup. I didn't think he could get a first turn charge off but forgot that Dark Crystal relic existed. So it wasn't the mased cultists that got me is was the Tzangors who suddenly appeared 9" away on turn one.

Hard to know how to defend against this - particularly in Dawn of War deployment where you get hardly any space to play with. I think should have deployed my Emperor's Fist tanks on the back edge of the table. without any screen. At least they would have then been able to get some overwatch in.

Didn't actually take a photo of this game but here's the deployment for the 3rd game...

https://imgur.com/gallery/SjdVV0h

Making similar mistakes. The Russes should be on the back line and the Shadowsword should be in the opposite corner. I made it so that if they get to me, my army is shut down and I am completely boxed in.

I lose many of my games during deployment. Lack of practice really.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Unit1126PLL wrote:
My experience with IG Superheavy tanks is that you should probably bring 3 or 0, unless you have a plan to deal with them. It's like the old phrase "Two is one, and one is none." You need redundancy.


I agree completely.

One reason I will never be a proper competitive player is that I take the painting part too seriously and it takes me ages. Plus I rarely want to paint the same unit over and over again.

When I bought the Shadowsword in February 2018, Leman Russes and Shadowswords could tallarn Ambush outflank on T1. I think I finished it in November? By the time I had painted it the Ambush stratagem and T1 deepstrike had been nerfed not once, but twice! You can't even deep strike it in your own deployment zone now.

The idea of painting 2 more of the same model just doesn't get me going.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

One hilarious way to protect a Shadowsword from an enemy Castellan, while still being able to blast the Castellan in the face, is to stick the Shadowsword into combat with something.

Yeah... I should defo be more aggressive with it. You have infinite more experience with these models than I do. I've used my Shadowsword... 7 times. 2 x 3-game tournaments and a one off homehammer game.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 16:49:14


Post by: C4790M


 Silentz wrote:
Sounds like a fun army to play

My advice would be that you don't actually need to decide this right now. You can see your opponent's army and think...
yikes! Loads of tanks and a knight! I am putting my plasma in the Valkyries!
or alternatively
yikes! 200 ork boyz! I am putting my hot shots in the valkyries.

Some sort of alterate, ground based transport system is also useful... e.g. taurox primes, chimeras. You need some board presence.

Note that as far as I can understand (although there seems to be some disagreement on this) you don't get to move your troops after they disembark from a Valkyrie. They can disembark after the 45" move but I believe they then don't get to move again. So they will always be outside the hotshot lasgun half range. You can just get them into the opponent's backfield on turn 1, which you can't do with native deepstrike.


The rules for transports say that disembarking models get to move normally, don’t see why the valk would be any different


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 16:53:48


Post by: Silentz


C4790M wrote:


The rules for transports say that disembarking models get to move normally, don’t see why the valk would be any different

There's a big thread on this in YMDC at the moment.

The rules for transports say that disembarking models get to move normally - that is correct
The rules for transports also say that disembarking is always done BEFORE the transport moves
The rules (FAQs) also say that units disembarking via some special rule AFTER a transport has moved also count as having moved.

I don't see that GW could possibly have intended to make Valkyries the single exception to the pretty much hard and fast universal rule that you don't get to jump out 9" away and then move closer.

What else in the game allows you to do that?

I could be wrong but I am pretty sure I am not


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 17:20:38


Post by: Horst


Silentz, looking at your list, I think a major difference is that I'm using a lot more infantry (80 vs 30), so I think I'll try a different approach... spread the russes out (12" apart at least), and surround them with bubble-wrap. Don't bother to wrap the Shadowsword, because it cannot be locked in combat.

I think the only time I'll need to consolidate all my russes together is if the enemy has a Knight Castellan, so I can use my Warlord's Old Grudges ability to re-roll wounds against it. Most lists like that shouldn't be able to achieve a turn 1 charge, and if they are I doubt they can clear two 10 man screens... though I may have to spend some CP to pass a morale test or two to keep them locked if they have like Custodes Jetbikers in my face turn 1.

Looking at going to my first tournament in 2 weeks, so your experiences are helpful


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 17:22:52


Post by: Unit1126PLL


 Horst wrote:
Silentz, looking at your list, I think a major difference is that I'm using a lot more infantry (80 vs 30), so I think I'll try a different approach... spread the russes out (12" apart at least), and surround them with bubble-wrap. Don't bother to wrap the Shadowsword, because it cannot be locked in combat.

I think the only time I'll need to consolidate all my russes together is if the enemy has a Knight Castellan, so I can use my Warlord's Old Grudges ability to re-roll wounds against it. Most lists like that shouldn't be able to achieve a turn 1 charge, and if they are I doubt they can clear two 10 man screens... though I may have to spend some CP to pass a morale test or two to keep them locked if they have like Custodes Jetbikers in my face turn 1.

Looking at going to my first tournament in 2 weeks, so your experiences are helpful


Indeed, you'll be able to trap more enemy units with those 80 guardsmen as well, using them like a wave of dirt to bury units in, if you, say, wish to prevent a unit from falling back from the Shadowsword... lol.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 18:17:13


Post by: Apple Peel


 Silentz wrote:
Sounds like a fun army to play

My advice would be that you don't actually need to decide this right now. You can see your opponent's army and think...
yikes! Loads of tanks and a knight! I am putting my plasma in the Valkyries!
or alternatively
yikes! 200 ork boyz! I am putting my hot shots in the valkyries.

Some sort of alterate, ground based transport system is also useful... e.g. taurox primes, chimeras. You need some board presence.

Note that as far as I can understand (although there seems to be some disagreement on this) you don't get to move your troops after they disembark from a Valkyrie. They can disembark after the 45" move but I believe they then don't get to move again. So they will always be outside the hotshot lasgun half range. You can just get them into the opponent's backfield on turn 1, which you can't do with native deepstrike.

I know, I made the thread in YMDC that you are referencing. It seems, however, that the vast majority play as units can move after disembarking, so I’m playing under that assumption.
I’ve got Tauroxes in the list as well, it’s for a full 2000 point army, I was only curious about this specific tactic involving some of my units. I’m just wondering which is more mathematically efficient, really.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 19:54:17


Post by: ghenghis_Ken


 Silentz wrote:
C4790M wrote:


The rules for transports say that disembarking models get to move normally, don’t see why the valk would be any different

There's a big thread on this in YMDC at the moment.

The rules for transports say that disembarking models get to move normally - that is correct
The rules for transports also say that disembarking is always done BEFORE the transport moves
The rules (FAQs) also say that units disembarking via some special rule AFTER a transport has moved also count as having moved.

I don't see that GW could possibly have intended to make Valkyries the single exception to the pretty much hard and fast universal rule that you don't get to jump out 9" away and then move closer.

What else in the game allows you to do that?

I could be wrong but I am pretty sure I am not


good points, however, wouldn't the valk be the exception as no other supersonic transport has the grav-chute insertion? it is the only rule to suggest the transport move first then disembark, presumably, as normal. also, which FAQ are you are you referencing? the only thing I can find is the ork errata pertaining to blood axes falling back and shooting/charge, and the rulebook errata about gate of infinite and heavy weapons having count as moved. Both of which do not seem to directly influence disembarking rules?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 20:02:14


Post by: Apple Peel


ghenghis_Ken wrote:
 Silentz wrote:
C4790M wrote:


The rules for transports say that disembarking models get to move normally, don’t see why the valk would be any different

There's a big thread on this in YMDC at the moment.

The rules for transports say that disembarking models get to move normally - that is correct
The rules for transports also say that disembarking is always done BEFORE the transport moves
The rules (FAQs) also say that units disembarking via some special rule AFTER a transport has moved also count as having moved.

I don't see that GW could possibly have intended to make Valkyries the single exception to the pretty much hard and fast universal rule that you don't get to jump out 9" away and then move closer.

What else in the game allows you to do that?

I could be wrong but I am pretty sure I am not


good points, however, wouldn't the valk be the exception as no other supersonic transport has the grav-chute insertion? it is the only rule to suggest the transport move first then disembark, presumably, as normal. also, which FAQ are you are you referencing? the only thing I can find is the ork errata pertaining to blood axes falling back and shooting/charge, and the rulebook errata about gate of infinite and heavy weapons having count as moved. Both of which do not seem to directly influence disembarking rules?

BRB FAQ page 6 is the issue.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 21:30:56


Post by: ghenghis_Ken


ah gotcha. "having count as moved" seems to suggest embarked units have moved their full extent.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 21:33:05


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


ghenghis_Ken wrote:
ah gotcha. "having count as moved" seems to suggest embarked units have moved their full extent.


I think really it implies they count as having moved, which means they fire heavy weapons at -1 to hit, no? They don't count as having moved they're full distance, they're not 'Unable to move further this phase', they simply count as having moved for the purpose of any rules which check if a unit has undertaken any form of movement this turn.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/07 22:42:54


Post by: ghenghis_Ken


AdmiralHalsey wrote:
ghenghis_Ken wrote:
ah gotcha. "having count as moved" seems to suggest embarked units have moved their full extent.


I think really it implies they count as having moved, which means they fire heavy weapons at -1 to hit, no? They don't count as having moved they're full distance, they're not 'Unable to move further this phase', they simply count as having moved for the purpose of any rules which check if a unit has undertaken any form of movement this turn.


I just read through the full YMDC and now my head hurts...personally, I'm slightly leaning toward yes to moving after disembark but I'm gonna check with my opponent first to see if they are cool with it.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/08 09:28:29


Post by: Silentz


Yeah I have realised I am like a lone voice in the wilderness who thinks this is totally no bueno.

I don't believe GW have intentionally given any transport the ability to get people closer than 9". They sort of did it with the old infiltrate rules, but there was an inherent risk in that if you didn't get first turn you could be a bit stranded. I think the "you can die on a roll of 1" is the amount of risk you would expect to pay from being able to deploy after a 45" transport move.

Anyway if my opponents are cool with me dropping scions anywhere on a 45" line, deploying them within 3" then moving them a further 6"... well, more power to me! Maybe I should buy another Valkyrie! The turn 1 objective capture could be legendary.

Not a huge difference for Scions but will allow them to nudge into half hotshot range (while keeping within 6" of the valkyrie so it can overwatch on a 4+!)


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/08 11:10:45


Post by: tneva82


 Horst wrote:
Well, if the enemy nuked the Shadowsword turn 1, consider the alternative would be losing Pask + your relic tank commander, since the Shadowsword is about as durable as both combined. I'd usually rather lose the Shadowsword. Did you try assaulting things with it? I discovered in a game this weekend that the Shadowsword (if you use the 1 CP stratagem Crush Them) is a god damn beast in close combat, 9 str9 AP-2 hits, each doing D3 damage is absurd for a tank.


Pask and russ would be easier to hide in LOS though.

Not that shadowsword would be all that hard to cover most of LOS around here anyway though.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/09 21:51:02


Post by: Horst


So I'm considering replacing the Shadowsword with a Knight Gallant in my army. It will serve a similar role, anti-superheavy, but it will do it with melee, and it will be a hell of a lot more durable. Has anyone done something like this, where you have just a single cheap Knight, backed by a lot of Tank Commanders for ranged firepower? Here's an example list of what I'm thinking of.

IG Brigade, Cadian -

3x CC
8x Infantry
2x Astropath
1x Techpriest
2x Hellhound
1x Armored Sentinel
3x Mortar HWS

IG Supreme Command, Cadian

Pask, Executioner (las/plas sponsons)
TC Executioner (las/plas sponsons)
TC Leman Russ (3x Heavy Bolter)
TC Leman Russ (3x Heavy Bolter)

Aux Superheavy

House Terryn, Exalted Court, Heirlooms of Household for -2 CP

Knight Gallant w/ Ion Bulwark + Paragon Gauntlet


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/10 11:08:45


Post by: GuardStrider


 Horst wrote:
So I'm considering replacing the Shadowsword with a Knight Gallant in my army. It will serve a similar role, anti-superheavy, but it will do it with melee, and it will be a hell of a lot more durable. Has anyone done something like this, where you have just a single cheap Knight, backed by a lot of Tank Commanders for ranged firepower? Here's an example list of what I'm thinking of.

IG Brigade, Cadian -

3x CC
8x Infantry
2x Astropath
1x Techpriest
2x Hellhound
1x Armored Sentinel
3x Mortar HWS

IG Supreme Command, Cadian

Pask, Executioner (las/plas sponsons)
TC Executioner (las/plas sponsons)
TC Leman Russ (3x Heavy Bolter)
TC Leman Russ (3x Heavy Bolter)

Aux Superheavy

House Terryn, Exalted Court, Heirlooms of Household for -2 CP

Knight Gallant w/ Ion Bulwark + Paragon Gauntlet



You can only take an household in a super heavy detachment, in an auxilary superheavy (aka a single knight) you can only be a freeblade


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/10 11:24:41


Post by: tneva82


Household is still decided for aux superheavies. They don't get the bonus(extra help for making the charge) but can still use house teryn "fight twice" strategem.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/10 16:00:46


Post by: Horst


Bummer. I mean I can do the normal thing of dropping 2 tank commanders and just taking my brigade + the 2 executioners, and just up the Knights to a full Superheavy Detachment with 2 Helvarins, but I liked the idea of Pask + 3 Tank Commanders in a Supreme Command.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/10 17:03:16


Post by: UMGuy


You get a household with an aux, just not the household trait.

That being said, I'd go with landstrider instead of ion bulwark. The improved invul in ranged is not going to help you as much, as that thing should be in combat every round and landstrider makes sure its there


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 11:15:32


Post by: Silentz


 Horst wrote:
Bummer. I mean I can do the normal thing of dropping 2 tank commanders and just taking my brigade + the 2 executioners, and just up the Knights to a full Superheavy Detachment with 2 Helvarins, but I liked the idea of Pask + 3 Tank Commanders in a Supreme Command.

Yeah in case you missed it tGuardStrider has read the rules wrong. You can be anything you like in a Super Heavy Aux Detachment and use all the strategems, even the ones that only apply to your household.

What you don't get is the "Chapter Tactic" - which is called a Household Tradition in that codex.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 14:53:31


Post by: CaptainO


The vigalus artillery special detachment fire twice strat is awesome with a catachan basilisk and yarrick nearby. Took out a squad of 5+ dark reapers in a turn even with - 1 to hit.

Im playing an itc tournament tomorrow and my first opponent is running nothing but 3 x great brass scorpions of khorne. Ill be combining that strat with vengeance for cadia. Any other tips for taking on 3 cc based super heavies who can fire out of cc are appreciated.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 15:41:14


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


CaptainO wrote:
The vigalus artillery special detachment fire twice strat is awesome with a catachan basilisk and yarrick nearby. Took out a squad of 5+ dark reapers in a turn even with - 1 to hit.

Im playing an itc tournament tomorrow and my first opponent is running nothing but 3 x great brass scorpions of khorne. Ill be combining that strat with vengeance for cadia. Any other tips for taking on 3 cc based super heavies who can fire out of cc are appreciated.


Shadowsword.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 16:07:20


Post by: jaxor1983


Running into a shadowsword would be a hilariously bad matchup for scorpion guy


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 17:12:28


Post by: vim_the_good


Hey all
I am curious as to how you all balance the ratio of order givers to order receivers in your army? My group normally play 1000pts games so rule of two applies. Up until recently I have been trying to have a 1 to 1 ratio but this is probably a little too much. What do the dakkanoughts think?

Vim


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 18:10:31


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


 vim_the_good wrote:
Hey all
I am curious as to how you all balance the ratio of order givers to order receivers in your army? My group normally play 1000pts games so rule of two applies. Up until recently I have been trying to have a 1 to 1 ratio but this is probably a little too much. What do the dakkanoughts think?

Vim


Run it fluffy! One officer per company, one junior per platoon. Job done.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 18:22:28


Post by: Horst


 vim_the_good wrote:
Hey all
I am curious as to how you all balance the ratio of order givers to order receivers in your army? My group normally play 1000pts games so rule of two applies. Up until recently I have been trying to have a 1 to 1 ratio but this is probably a little too much. What do the dakkanoughts think?

Vim


My 2000 pt list has 3 company commanders for 8 infantry squads and 2 heavy weapons teams. So I always keep the Warlord back to order around the mortars where it's safe, and the other two officers advance with the infantry. I tend to lose infantry REALLY fast, so more than 4 orders to my 8 squads is never really needed, because I don't have 8 squads for long


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 19:29:20


Post by: ronjamin1022


Quick question about how much infantry units I should carry in my army. The current 1750 point list I'm running has the following:

2x Tank Commander w/ BC, LC
Pask w/ BC, LC, Plasma Sponsons
2x Company Commander w/ Bolter, Chainsword

3x Infantry Squad w/ Bolter, Grenade Launchers
3x Infantry Squad w/ Bolter, Plasma Gun

3x Armoured Sentinels w/ Autocannons

Astropath w/ Psychic Barrier
Commissar w/ Bolter, Power Sword
Ministorum Priest
3x Bullgryns w/ Maul and Slabshield

2x Mortar Team
3x Basilisk

1x Chimera w/ Double Heavy Flamer (to transport Elite Units)


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 19:34:38


Post by: Horst


Yea, you probably need more infantry and a third tank commander. I'd drop the Chimera to make room for them. I'd probably drop the Priest and the Commissar to take another Astropath and a Tech Priest as well, but that's just me


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 22:01:41


Post by: ronjamin1022


 Horst wrote:
Yea, you probably need more infantry and a third tank commander. I'd drop the Chimera to make room for them. I'd probably drop the Priest and the Commissar to take another Astropath and a Tech Priest as well, but that's just me


Doing that would leave me with 10 points if I add three infantry squads with Grenade Launcher/Boltgun. Any idea what I should spend the remaining points on? Maybe a Storm Bolter for each Tank Commander?

I do think the Tech Priest would be a good addition, especially with having three tanks.

Do you think the Bullgryns are still worth it if I don't have the Priest buffing them or the Chimera to transport them? I guess if anything they're a cheaper bullet magnet or something my opponent might ignore in favor of my Tank Commanders.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/11 22:09:43


Post by: Horst


ronjamin1022 wrote:
 Horst wrote:
Yea, you probably need more infantry and a third tank commander. I'd drop the Chimera to make room for them. I'd probably drop the Priest and the Commissar to take another Astropath and a Tech Priest as well, but that's just me


Doing that would leave me with 10 points if I add three infantry squads with Grenade Launcher/Boltgun. Any idea what I should spend the remaining points on? Maybe a Storm Bolter for each Tank Commander?

I do think the Tech Priest would be a good addition, especially with having three tanks.

Do you think the Bullgryns are still worth it if I don't have the Priest buffing them or the Chimera to transport them? I guess if anything they're a cheaper bullet magnet or something my opponent might ignore in favor of my Tank Commanders.


Ah, I didn't even see the Bullgryns in there, lol. Didn't look close enough. I'd drop Grenade Launchers until you have room for the Priest. Maybe ditch the Commissar and some plasma guns to get the Chimera back in for them, plasma guns in infantry squads aren't that great, they only hit on a 4+ anyway, and if you're close enough to rapid fire FRFSRF makes a lasgun a damn good weapon anyway.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/12 00:30:28


Post by: CaptainO


AdmiralHalsey wrote:
CaptainO wrote:
The vigalus artillery special detachment fire twice strat is awesome with a catachan basilisk and yarrick nearby. Took out a squad of 5+ dark reapers in a turn even with - 1 to hit.

Im playing an itc tournament tomorrow and my first opponent is running nothing but 3 x great brass scorpions of khorne. Ill be combining that strat with vengeance for cadia. Any other tips for taking on 3 cc based super heavies who can fire out of cc are appreciated.


Shadowsword.


He gets 8 s14 flat 6 damagr attacks at ws3+... Thats questionable advice. And there are 3 of them.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/12 00:39:59


Post by: Horst


CaptainO wrote:
AdmiralHalsey wrote:
CaptainO wrote:
The vigalus artillery special detachment fire twice strat is awesome with a catachan basilisk and yarrick nearby. Took out a squad of 5+ dark reapers in a turn even with - 1 to hit.

Im playing an itc tournament tomorrow and my first opponent is running nothing but 3 x great brass scorpions of khorne. Ill be combining that strat with vengeance for cadia. Any other tips for taking on 3 cc based super heavies who can fire out of cc are appreciated.


Shadowsword.


He gets 8 s14 flat 6 damagr attacks at ws3+... Thats questionable advice. And there are 3 of them.


If it's a Cadian Shadowsword, it should be able to kill a Brass Scorpion per turn on average if it sits still. Bring a techpriest to heal it and some astropaths to buff it, and throw waves of guardsmen at the Brass Scorpions to act as meatshields to keep it off your tank while it blows them up one by one.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/12 00:55:48


Post by: ronjamin1022


 Horst wrote:
ronjamin1022 wrote:
 Horst wrote:
Yea, you probably need more infantry and a third tank commander. I'd drop the Chimera to make room for them. I'd probably drop the Priest and the Commissar to take another Astropath and a Tech Priest as well, but that's just me


Doing that would leave me with 10 points if I add three infantry squads with Grenade Launcher/Boltgun. Any idea what I should spend the remaining points on? Maybe a Storm Bolter for each Tank Commander?

I do think the Tech Priest would be a good addition, especially with having three tanks.

Do you think the Bullgryns are still worth it if I don't have the Priest buffing them or the Chimera to transport them? I guess if anything they're a cheaper bullet magnet or something my opponent might ignore in favor of my Tank Commanders.


Ah, I didn't even see the Bullgryns in there, lol. Didn't look close enough. I'd drop Grenade Launchers until you have room for the Priest. Maybe ditch the Commissar and some plasma guns to get the Chimera back in for them, plasma guns in infantry squads aren't that great, they only hit on a 4+ anyway, and if you're close enough to rapid fire FRFSRF makes a lasgun a damn good weapon anyway.


Follow up question. Would I absolutely need 9 infantry squads in this list or could I get away with only 8? The front 5 squads would have Bolter/GL, the back three screening the tanks with the Sentinels would be bare bones. If I did that, the list could still fit the 3 TC's, Bullgryns in a Chimera w/ Priest and Astropath, and a decent number of troops.

Or if I ditched the Bullgryn/Chimera combo, I could fit 3 more infantry squads along with the Tech Priest and 2nd Astropath replacing them and the Ministorum Priest. That would leave me with 148 points to spare, plus would let me run a Battalion in addition to the Brigade. I figure that might be used to give my backline Infantry Squads a HWT and keep one of the TC's as Pask. That would leave me with 45 points that I'm not sure what I would do with, but I feel like it's a much more efficient use of points.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/12 12:18:20


Post by: Maxamato


A quick question regarding to the relic cannon: Hammer of Sunderance:
Can I do shoot twice with this weapon according the grinding advance rule?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/12 12:20:04


Post by: CaptainO


Catachan basilisk with artillery drtachment double shoot combo'd with vengence for cadia killed one. Grudges combod with 3 tanks (conquerer, 2 tank commamders with punisher and battle cannon killed the other) it helped i went first. Tabled him by t2.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
CaptainO wrote:
Catachan basilisk with artillery drtachment double shoot combo'd with vengence for cadia killed one. Grudges combod with 3 tanks (conquerer, 2 tank commamders with punisher and battle cannon killed the other) it helped i went first. Tabled him by t2.


Against the 3 brass scorpions of khorne.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/12 20:33:20


Post by: DoomMouse


Hey, just a thought here - can you take regular infantry squads with the 'death korps' regiment?

I was wondering if you could squeeze down the loyal 32 to cost just 166pts with their field marshals only costing 23pts to my knowledge?

Thanks for any help!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Answering my own question: apparently not! They can't get the keyword according to the imperial armour book.

But regardless, I believe they could still be taken in a mixed regiment detachment e.g.

Death korps Field officer 23
Death korps Field officer 23
Other regiment infantry squad 40pts
Other regiment infantry squad 40pts
Other regiment infantry squad 40pts

I know that it usually makes more sense to shell out for the company commanders cos of their great orders, but it would allow me to field the horror that is:

Castellan
Gallant
Gallant
Gallant

2x loyal 32

At 2K points.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/12 20:43:35


Post by: BaconCatBug


 DoomMouse wrote:
Hey, just a thought here - can you take regular infantry squads with the 'death korps' regiment?

I was wondering if you could squeeze down the loyal 32 to cost just 166pts with their field marshals only costing 23pts to my knowledge?

Thanks for any help!
You cannot. The book has an explicit list of what may be DKOK and normal codex Infantry Squads are not one of them. You have to take the 50 point DKOK version listed in the FW book. You can, however, take a DKOK Battalion using the units in the FW book. You can take Two Field Officers and three units of Grenadier Storm Squads for 166 points.

Or you could just take an Admech Battallion for the CP which is 165 points.

If you just want a CP battery you're better off just taking an Admech and a normal Guard Codex ones, but if people are willing to let you use DKOK rules for non-DKOK models then go and take the DKOK 17 model battalion.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/12 20:48:10


Post by: DoomMouse


 BaconCatBug wrote:
 DoomMouse wrote:
Hey, just a thought here - can you take regular infantry squads with the 'death korps' regiment?

You cannot. The book has an explicit list of what may be DKOK and normal codex Infantry Squads are not one of them. You have to take the 50 point DKOK version listed in the FW book. You can, however, take a DKOK Battalion using the units in the FW book. You can take Two Field Officers and three units of Grenadier Storm Squads for 166 points.

Or you could just take an Admech Battallion for the CP which is 165 points.

If you just want a CP battery you're better off just taking an Admech and a normal Guard Codex ones, but if people are willing to let you use DKOK rules for non-DKOK models then go and take the DKOK 17 model battalion.


Cheers, didn't know of the existence of grenadier storm squads - I'll look into them. Mainly after something to cap objectives that can also get orders to move-move-move at crazy speeds so they sound pretty awesome.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/12 20:56:16


Post by: BaconCatBug


You might be better off with a codex battalion then. 180 points but 10 extra wounds and can take orders, a mixed battalion will lack orders.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 08:50:18


Post by: Peregrine


Maxamato wrote:
A quick question regarding to the relic cannon: Hammer of Sunderance:
Can I do shoot twice with this weapon according the grinding advance rule?


Yes. It's a battle cannon. Ignore any attempt at an over-literal RAW argument, pretending that it isn't a battle cannon means attempting to argue that GW deliberately made a relic that is worse in every relevant situation than the basic weapon it replaces.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 09:34:58


Post by: BaconCatBug


 Peregrine wrote:
Maxamato wrote:
A quick question regarding to the relic cannon: Hammer of Sunderance:
Can I do shoot twice with this weapon according the grinding advance rule?


Yes. It's a battle cannon. Ignore any attempt at an over-literal RAW argument, pretending that it isn't a battle cannon means attempting to argue that GW deliberately made a relic that is worse in every relevant situation than the basic weapon it replaces.
No, it's not a battle cannon. Ignore any attempt at ignoring the rules because you don't like it, pretending that it is a battlecannon ignores an explicitly clear rule, the same way that taking the relic still means you have to roll to hit with your models. It's not "worse in every relevant situation" because it's a flat 3 damage.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 10:45:39


Post by: Peregrine


Ignore BCB's over-literal RAW nonsense, their sole purpose in posting it is to congratulate themselves on how clever they are for finding GW's mistakes. The vast majority of people you will encounter in real life understand that the relic is a battle cannon and will play it that way. For purposes of a tactics thread, where the goal is to help people get better at playing IG and win real games and not to obsess over theoretical RAW that never applies in the real world, the relic is a battle cannon and that's the only reasonable way to discuss it.

And yes, being a flat 3 damage is worse when you have half the shots. There is no target type where the BCB version of the relic does more average damage per turn than the basic gun it replaces. The only conceivable situation where you could possibly benefit is if you are moving more than half speed and therefore don't get to shoot twice with either gun, but that's almost never going to be the case with a LRBT. And that edge-case scenario is not anywhere near enough of an advantage to justify spending a relic slot (which you probably bought with CP) to get it.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 11:17:22


Post by: U02dah4


BCB is correct its not a battal cannon - it should be faq'd that way but right now it isnt and you can't fire it twice


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 11:40:58


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


U02dah4 wrote:
BCB is correct its not a battal cannon - it should be faq'd that way but right now it isnt and you can't fire it twice

I agree. It's pretty explicit that it replaces a Battlecannon, the opposite of being one. All Relic's replace their respective weapons, but they're not their respective weapons.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 20:38:39


Post by: diagramdude


The issue is NOT is it a battle cannon or not. The issue is whether it is a turret weapon or not. Grinding Advance lets you fire your turret weapon twice, so you have to find someone asinine enough to argue the relic is not a turret weapon because it doesn't appear on a list written before the relic existed.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 21:29:02


Post by: Apple Peel


Has anyone tried the Emperor’s Benediction bolt pistol relic? How bitey does it make your Commissars?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 22:01:12


Post by: MrMoustaffa


 Apple Peel wrote:
Has anyone tried the Emperor’s Benediction bolt pistol relic? How bitey does it make your Commissars?

It's fun but don't expect miracles. It's going on a commissar, he can only do so much. Keep in mind unless you're fighting orks, GSC, or IG, most characters are beefy enough with armor/invuln to take it to the face and not really care.

It's a good relic to take for fun games against a new player or in a narrative game where running a commander with old grudges and relic of cadia would be seen as poor taste.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 23:13:36


Post by: U02dah4


diagramdude wrote:
The issue is NOT is it a battle cannon or not. The issue is whether it is a turret weapon or not. Grinding Advance lets you fire your turret weapon twice, so you have to find someone asinine enough to argue the relic is not a turret weapon because it doesn't appear on a list written before the relic existed.


And it then specifically defines which weapons are turret weapons if it is not on that list you dont get grinding advance.

The following weapons are turret weapons: battle cannon, Conqueror battle cannon, Demolisher cannon, Eradicator nova cannon, Executioner plasma cannon, Exterminator autocannon, Punisher gatling cannon, Stygies Vanquisher battle cannon, twin lascannon and Vanquisher battle cannon.

So currently its not on that list.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 23:28:41


Post by: Kanluwen


U02dah4 wrote:
diagramdude wrote:
The issue is NOT is it a battle cannon or not. The issue is whether it is a turret weapon or not. Grinding Advance lets you fire your turret weapon twice, so you have to find someone asinine enough to argue the relic is not a turret weapon because it doesn't appear on a list written before the relic existed.


And it then specifically defines which weapons are turret weapons if it is not on that list you dont get grinding advance.

The following weapons are turret weapons: battle cannon, Conqueror battle cannon, Demolisher cannon, Eradicator nova cannon, Executioner plasma cannon, Exterminator autocannon, Punisher gatling cannon, Stygies Vanquisher battle cannon, twin lascannon and Vanquisher battle cannon.

So currently its not on that list.

Model with battle cannon only. Hammer of Sunderance replaces the bearer's battle cannon and has the following profile:


This is a ridiculous argument to try to make and you should feel bad for making it.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/13 23:49:22


Post by: DoomMouse


I also think that when something is so clearly RAI it just looks bad when people try and undermine it. I'd take the side of the player who is using this as a turret weapon, just as I'd take the side of the player who is shooting his pistols when in CC even though (as I understand) that technically RAW you can't do this


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 07:01:36


Post by: U02dah4


It's Raw and the convention is that Raw trumps Rai


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 08:24:24


Post by: schadenfreude


RAW it can not grinding advance. Not the worst GW RAW mistake I have seen them make. Back in 5th ed turret mounted template weapons on many tanks like the Baal predator technically couldn't fire at all because when the tip of the template touched the edge of the barrel it would catch the firing tank under it's own template.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 11:18:18


Post by: Silentz


U02dah4 wrote:
It's Raw and the convention is that Raw trumps Rai

In your world, perhaps.

In competitive 40k the convention is that the Judges/TOs make a ruling.

I used Hammer of Sunderance in a 50 player ITC rated tournament and the TO said "of course it's an effing battle cannon it literally says it right there! Who is saying it's not?"

Not everyone plays "AHHH! GOTCHA!" with the rules like that.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 11:43:28


Post by: BaconCatBug


 Silentz wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:
It's Raw and the convention is that Raw trumps Rai

In your world, perhaps.

In competitive 40k the convention is that the Judges/TOs make a ruling.

I used Hammer of Sunderance in a 50 player ITC rated tournament and the TO said "of course it's an effing battle cannon it literally says it right there! Who is saying it's not?"

Not everyone plays "AHHH! GOTCHA!" with the rules like that.
So the TO made a house rule, what's your point?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 11:44:09


Post by: U02dah4


And the covention of those ruleings is usually that RAW overrules RAI because RAI is subjective and while it might have been GW's intention to allow it to double fire as I would suspect. GW might have intended you to only single fire it and make a choice of better gun vs fire twice.

The ruling of one TO doesnt stand for all TO's and where does it say its a battle cannon rules quote please note is a vattle cannon is not the same as replaces.

Your making the choice most advantageous to yourself and thats fine but RAW it doesn't work that way and as such I would rule against you and I expect that many TO's would.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 13:56:30


Post by: Polonius


The events I play in, the TOs use ITC, but when they make rulings, they do apply RAI when it is reasonably clear.

And, btw, it's clear here. The Hammer is described as a battle cannon in the text. It's is clearly intended to be a relic battlecannon.

And that, thus, is the perennial failure of RAW: nothing is designed to be read exactly as written, with no context or interpretation. I've been on dakka for a long time, and people keep arguing that RAW is the only true way to avoid ambiguity, which I suppose is true. But the rules aren't designed to read that way. Almost nothing is.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 14:25:11


Post by: Silentz


Strict RAW is pretty much the entirely wrong way to play 40k.

To quote from the rulebook for this game...
"THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE: In a game as detailed and wide-ranging as Warhammer 40,000, there may be times when you are not sure exactly how to resolve a situation that has come up during play. When this happens, have a quick chat with your opponent and apply the solution that make the most sense to both of you (or seems the most fun!). If no single solution presents itself, you and your opponent should roll off, and whoever rolls highest gets to choose what happens. Then you can get on with the fighting!"


Clearly in a tournament situation you would hope for a third party ruling, and clearly the rules as written in a rulebook play a MASSIVE part in the decision.

But, GW do not write rules which are intended to withstand strict RAW.

You are forcing your own mindset on a game then complaining when it breaks.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 14:31:05


Post by: BaconCatBug


 Silentz wrote:
Strict RAW is pretty much the entirely wrong way to play 40k.

To quote from the rulebook for this game...
"THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE: In a game as detailed and wide-ranging as Warhammer 40,000, there may be times when you are not sure exactly how to resolve a situation that has come up during play. When this happens, have a quick chat with your opponent and apply the solution that make the most sense to both of you (or seems the most fun!). If no single solution presents itself, you and your opponent should roll off, and whoever rolls highest gets to choose what happens. Then you can get on with the fighting!"


Clearly in a tournament situation you would hope for a third party ruling, and clearly the rules as written in a rulebook play a MASSIVE part in the decision.

But, GW do not write rules which are intended to withstand strict RAW.

You are forcing your own mindset on a game then complaining when it breaks.
Ok, I want you to allow all your opponents to automatically hit and wound from now on, since RaW doesn't matter to you.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 14:44:17


Post by: Silentz


Come on lad you're smart enough to not just chuck reductio ad absurdum around all the time.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 14:46:11


Post by: daedalus


 BaconCatBug wrote:
 Silentz wrote:
Strict RAW is pretty much the entirely wrong way to play 40k.

To quote from the rulebook for this game...
"THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE: In a game as detailed and wide-ranging as Warhammer 40,000, there may be times when you are not sure exactly how to resolve a situation that has come up during play. When this happens, have a quick chat with your opponent and apply the solution that make the most sense to both of you (or seems the most fun!). If no single solution presents itself, you and your opponent should roll off, and whoever rolls highest gets to choose what happens. Then you can get on with the fighting!"


Clearly in a tournament situation you would hope for a third party ruling, and clearly the rules as written in a rulebook play a MASSIVE part in the decision.

But, GW do not write rules which are intended to withstand strict RAW.

You are forcing your own mindset on a game then complaining when it breaks.
Ok, I want you to allow all your opponents to automatically hit and wound from now on, since RaW doesn't matter to you.


According to RAW: You're not his opponent, so you have little say in the matter.

I doubt that makes much since to him either.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 14:46:52


Post by: Silentz


Anyway... it's now RAW as well as RAI

New FAQ

Q: Does the Hammer of Sunderance Relic count as a turret
weapon for the purposes of Grinding Advance?
A: Yes.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 15:39:14


Post by: BaconCatBug


 Silentz wrote:
Anyway... it's now RAW as well as RAI

New FAQ

Q: Does the Hammer of Sunderance Relic count as a turret
weapon for the purposes of Grinding Advance?
A: Yes.
It's actually a Special Snowflake FAQ that ignores the RaW, and only applies to this specific situation, but I'm glad it's sorted.

Also, the answer to what counts as a MILITARUM TEMPESTUS Detachment means it's totally broken, since you cannot include a Valkyrie in a detachment that has the Storm Troopers Regimental Doctrine if you're running actual MILITARUM TEMPESTUS models, but you can if you pick a custom <REGIMENT> with the Storm Troopers doctrine. GW why do you hate us so?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 16:10:40


Post by: Silentz


 BaconCatBug wrote:
 Silentz wrote:
Anyway... it's now RAW as well as RAI

New FAQ

Q: Does the Hammer of Sunderance Relic count as a turret
weapon for the purposes of Grinding Advance?
A: Yes.
It's actually a Special Snowflake FAQ that ignores the RaW, and only applies to this specific situation, but I'm glad it's sorted.

Also, the answer to what counts as a MILITARUM TEMPESTUS Detachment means it's totally broken, since you cannot include a Valkyrie in a detachment that has the Storm Troopers Regimental Doctrine if you're running actual MILITARUM TEMPESTUS models, but you can if you pick a custom <REGIMENT> with the Storm Troopers doctrine. GW why do you hate us so?

the flying guys... Aeronautica Imperialis? Don't break <REGIMENT> So it's fine. I think commisars are the same.... Officio Prefectus or something. Both can be included without breaking regiment rules


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 18:13:18


Post by: gbghg


Problem is militarum tempestus specifies that a detachment must consist solely of tempestus units. The rules are in conflict and GW have never bothered to clear it up. That said the existence of the tempestus drop force lends weight to the interpretation that you can include valk's etc while keeping stormtroopers.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 18:24:50


Post by: Apple Peel


 gbghg wrote:
Problem is militarum tempestus specifies that a detachment must consist solely of tempestus units. The rules are in conflict and GW have never bothered to clear it up. That said the existence of the tempestus drop force lends weight to the interpretation that you can include valk's etc while keeping stormtroopers.

And where there is smoke in valks, there is fire in the rest of the Advisors and Auxillia list.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 18:25:49


Post by: BaconCatBug


 Silentz wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
 Silentz wrote:
Anyway... it's now RAW as well as RAI

New FAQ

Q: Does the Hammer of Sunderance Relic count as a turret
weapon for the purposes of Grinding Advance?
A: Yes.
It's actually a Special Snowflake FAQ that ignores the RaW, and only applies to this specific situation, but I'm glad it's sorted.

Also, the answer to what counts as a MILITARUM TEMPESTUS Detachment means it's totally broken, since you cannot include a Valkyrie in a detachment that has the Storm Troopers Regimental Doctrine if you're running actual MILITARUM TEMPESTUS models, but you can if you pick a custom <REGIMENT> with the Storm Troopers doctrine. GW why do you hate us so?

the flying guys... Aeronautica Imperialis? Don't break <REGIMENT> So it's fine. I think commisars are the same.... Officio Prefectus or something. Both can be included without breaking regiment rules
MT have a more restrictive rule than other regiments. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/755709.page#9947889 You lose the Doctrine if you include anything except MILITARUM TEMPESTUS.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 18:56:38


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


 BaconCatBug wrote:
 Silentz wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:
 Silentz wrote:
Anyway... it's now RAW as well as RAI

New FAQ

Q: Does the Hammer of Sunderance Relic count as a turret
weapon for the purposes of Grinding Advance?
A: Yes.
It's actually a Special Snowflake FAQ that ignores the RaW, and only applies to this specific situation, but I'm glad it's sorted.

Also, the answer to what counts as a MILITARUM TEMPESTUS Detachment means it's totally broken, since you cannot include a Valkyrie in a detachment that has the Storm Troopers Regimental Doctrine if you're running actual MILITARUM TEMPESTUS models, but you can if you pick a custom <REGIMENT> with the Storm Troopers doctrine. GW why do you hate us so?

the flying guys... Aeronautica Imperialis? Don't break <REGIMENT> So it's fine. I think commisars are the same.... Officio Prefectus or something. Both can be included without breaking regiment rules
MT have a more restrictive rule than other regiments. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/755709.page#9947889 You lose the Doctrine if you include anything except MILITARUM TEMPESTUS.


I think you're on your own with this one BCB.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 19:08:07


Post by: ragnorack1


 BaconCatBug wrote:

MT have a more restrictive rule than other regiments. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/755709.page#9947889 You lose the Doctrine if you include anything except MILITARUM TEMPESTUS.


Gutted that this still hasn't been cleared up. While it's not been an issue on my local scene I've been tempered to switch my Dkok air cavalry "storm troopers" to normal scions for the sake of simplifying rules disagreements if I want to play with other groups, since the points reductions and the formation benefits.
But if there's still grey areas not sure it worth giving up the points savings, ws3 and flexibility in taking other units like priests, for a few units getting +1bs for a turn, or two if they get lucky n manage to jump back in.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 20:09:30


Post by: Polonius


ragnorack1 wrote:
 BaconCatBug wrote:

MT have a more restrictive rule than other regiments. https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/755709.page#9947889 You lose the Doctrine if you include anything except MILITARUM TEMPESTUS.


Gutted that this still hasn't been cleared up.


I mean, indirectly it was.

The Drop Troops detachment gives a keyword to Valkyries in an MT detachment, and they define MT detachment as those detachments that have the stormtrooper doctrine. You can argue a tortured reading, or you can accept that the MT rules basically say "you can add MT to another regiment and keep doctrine, but you can't add another regiment to MT and keep doctrine."

I think GW wants to give valkryies in detachments with the stormtrooper doctrine a rule, all while calling it an MT detachment. I feel very comfortable allowing it.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 21:28:52


Post by: ragnorack1


 Polonius wrote:

I mean, indirectly it was.

The Drop Troops detachment gives a keyword to Valkyries in an MT detachment, and they define MT detachment as those detachments that have the stormtrooper doctrine. You can argue a tortured reading, or you can accept that the MT rules basically say "you can add MT to another regiment and keep doctrine, but you can't add another regiment to MT and keep doctrine."

I think GW wants to give valkryies in detachments with the stormtrooper doctrine a rule, all while calling it an MT detachment. I feel very comfortable allowing it.


Would this have any impact on being able to take priests in an MT detachment in your opinion?
If I try and follow the logic of RAW I end up in a bit of a loop of being able to take a valkyrie because they have the storm trooper Doctrine but the can't have the Doctrine because they have a valkyrie.
My interpretation is that RAI is that the allowances made for none regiment units must not break the doctrines for the MT detachment like with other regimental detachments, which would be nice for offering a bit more freedom. But that definitely wouldn't be RAW. (sorry for venturing into you make da call territory here)


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 21:51:52


Post by: Polonius


ragnorack1 wrote:
 Polonius wrote:

I mean, indirectly it was.

The Drop Troops detachment gives a keyword to Valkyries in an MT detachment, and they define MT detachment as those detachments that have the stormtrooper doctrine. You can argue a tortured reading, or you can accept that the MT rules basically say "you can add MT to another regiment and keep doctrine, but you can't add another regiment to MT and keep doctrine."

I think GW wants to give valkryies in detachments with the stormtrooper doctrine a rule, all while calling it an MT detachment. I feel very comfortable allowing it.


Would this have any impact on being able to take priests in an MT detachment in your opinion?
If I try and follow the logic of RAW I end up in a bit of a loop of being able to take a valkyrie because they have the storm trooper Doctrine but the can't have the Doctrine because they have a valkyrie.
My interpretation is that RAI is that the allowances made for none regiment units must not break the doctrines for the MT detachment like with other regimental detachments, which would be nice for offering a bit more freedom. But that definitely wouldn't be RAW. (sorry for venturing into you make da call territory here)


Yeah, it's really weird. The RAW argument makes some sense, essentially applying the doctrine of "the specific overrides the general." that said, most TOs I've seen use the broader interpretation that you can include non-MT units and keep Stormtrooper.

Basically, under that interpretation of RAW there is no way to have both Scions and Valks in a detachment. I would argue that GW creating rules for detachments with both is a clear sign that the "correct" interpretation is to allow non-regimental units in an MT detachment. That would include things like priests.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 22:06:57


Post by: MrMoustaffa


This is ridiculous arguing. The hammer of sunderance is described in it's entry as a battlecannon. "The Hammer of Sunderance is a battlecannon with a glorious history". That's not paraphrasing, that is verbatim in the book. In addition, it is explicitly stated it replaces the battlecannon, which is a turret weapon.

Open your codex right now and go to page 86. Read the effing Grinding Advance rule. "If a model moves under half speed in the movement phase (i.e. it moves a distance in inches less than half of it's current move characteristic) it can shoot it's turret weapon twice in the following shooting phase." It then goes on to list the turret weapons just in case a player wasn't familiar with their names. One of which is, shockingly, a battlecannon.

Where is the Hammer of Sunderance mounted? In the turret. You know how I know? Because it replaces the default battlecannon, and last I checked those aren't mounted in sponsons or the hull. RAW, it is a turret weapon, it interacts with grinding advance. RAW, it is a battlecannon, it interacts with grinding advance. This argument represents the worst side of players in the hobby, deliberately employing language that would make a lawyer blush. It is incredibly clear that this works unless you are and twisting words around just to feel clever over pointing out how dumb GW is. GW writes some bad rules, don't get me wrong, but this isn't one. It doesn't need to be FAQ'd because if this is the stuff we need faqd to make the game work then pistols can't even function in combat.

And while I'm at it, the argument that commissars, Valkyries, and other auxiliary break the stormtrooper doctrine is also asinine. The start collecting box comes with a commissar and the new formation includes Valkyries. It is blatantly clear that they are intended to allow the stormtrooper doctrine to function and that the Auxilia rule is what takes precedence. You know, like it always has and was written in the first place.

Can we please put these two arguments to rest? Unless you are intentionally trying to break the game, these interactions are perfectly clear. GW has shown that, any TO worth running an event has shown it, even most players who don't even know our codex understand it. I don't get why this is so hard to grasp.

Edit: got a little heated and realized I had let language slip through, censored to save models the trouble


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 22:09:43


Post by: Polonius


Keep Kicking MrMoustaffa! I want to see blood coming out of his mouth!


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 22:47:17


Post by: ragnorack1


Glad I just saw Moustaffa's post had just rejigged my list as if I couldn't use priests and ended up with an army that I actually preferred, then realised that if I went with the no auxiliary units ruling the list was still broken as it had yarrick in it, and then realised MT wouldn't even be able to have 2 battalions and still have doctrines.
So yeah think I'll go with the more sensible RAI interpretation.

Going back to tactics, how do people feel about having the warlord grav chute commando with two 5 man squads maxed out with plasma and power fists instead of 2 plasma command squads? The +1 to hit should balance out the - 1 ws, and I've only just noticed the tempestor sergeants have ws3 making them quite attractive for blasting and charging something for n the first turn.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 22:49:04


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


ragnorack1 wrote:
Glad I just saw Moustaffa's post had just rejigged my list as if I couldn't use priests and ended up with an army that I actually preferred, then realised that if I went with the no auxiliary units ruling the list was still broken as it had yarrick in it, and then realised MT wouldn't even be able to have 2 battalions and still have doctrines.
So yeah think I'll go with the more sensible RAI interpretation.

Going back to tactics, how do people feel about having the warlord grav chute commando with two 5 man squads maxed out with plasma and power fists instead of 2 plasma command squads? The +1 to hit should balance out the - 1 ws, and I've only just noticed the tempestor sergeants have ws3 making them quite attractive for blasting and charging something for n the first turn.


Sound idea. Not sure why I didn't think of it. Hitting on 3's with Power fists is an okay use of points in an emergency, but remember these are strength 6 fists with only 2 attacks.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 23:20:04


Post by: ragnorack1


Aye originally was going for power mauls and a priest, but realised the points saved dropping the priest would pay for the fists with change to spare and the quality of hits would balance the drop in number.

Another point of contention I'm having is in another valkyrie having two 5 man squads with just hotshots and a maul on the sergeant along with a tempestor prime for a little better cc and flexibility in covering objectives. The alternative being a 10 man squad to save a few points and more effective use of the grenadier stratagem incase there's no target suitable for their hotshots?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 23:21:50


Post by: U02dah4


 MrMoustaffa wrote:
This is ridiculous arguing. The hammer of sunderance is described in it's entry as a battlecannon. "The Hammer of Sunderance is a battlecannon with a glorious history". That's not paraphrasing, that is verbatim in the book. In addition, it is explicitly stated it replaces the battlecannon, which is a turret weapon.

Open your codex right now and go to page 86. Read the effing Grinding Advance rule. "If a model moves under half speed in the movement phase (i.e. it moves a distance in inches less than half of it's current move characteristic) it can shoot it's turret weapon twice in the following shooting phase." It then goes on to list the turret weapons just in case a player wasn't familiar with their names. One of which is, shockingly, a battlecannon.

Where is the Hammer of Sunderance mounted? In the turret. You know how I know? Because it replaces the default battlecannon, and last I checked those aren't mounted in sponsons or the hull. RAW, it is a turret weapon, it interacts with grinding advance. RAW, it is a battlecannon, it interacts with grinding advance. This argument represents the worst side of players in the hobby, deliberately employing language that would make a lawyer blush. It is incredibly clear that this works unless you are and twisting words around just to feel clever over pointing out how dumb GW is. GW writes some bad rules, don't get me wrong, but this isn't one. It doesn't need to be FAQ'd because if this is the stuff we need faqd to make the game work then pistols can't even function in combat.

And while I'm at it, the argument that commissars, Valkyries, and other auxiliary break the stormtrooper doctrine is also asinine. The start collecting box comes with a commissar and the new formation includes Valkyries. It is blatantly clear that they are intended to allow the stormtrooper doctrine to function and that the Auxilia rule is what takes precedence. You know, like it always has and was written in the first place.

Can we please put these two arguments to rest? Unless you are intentionally trying to break the game, these interactions are perfectly clear. GW has shown that, any TO worth running an event has shown it, even most players who don't even know our codex understand it. I don't get why this is so hard to grasp.

Edit: got a little heated and realized I had let language slip through, censored to save models the trouble



1) anything in italics is fluff text it does not effect the rules so irrelevant
2) replaceing a battle cannon does not make it one irrelevant
3) opening grinding advance clearly lists all turret weapon no emperors fist therefore you are wrong by this reasoning
4) where it is physically mounted on a model is irrelevant when turret weapons are clearly defined

5) if you bothered to read you would find that it has been FAQ'd as a turret weapon and that is the only reason it works

As to MT ask your TO but the faq ruling is clear and gw level stupid

1) By faq : For the purposes of the Tempestus Drop Force Specialist
Detachment, what is a Militarum Tempestus Detachment?
A: A Militarum Tempestus Detachment is an Astra
Militarum Detachment that has the Storm Troopers
Regimental Doctrine.

2)To have the doctine every unit in the detatchment must be militarum tempestus

3)Auxillia includeing aeronautica dont have the regiment keyword so are not tempestus

4)Therefore the MT rule means you don't get the doctrine if you include one

5)This means the specialist detatchment doesnt work because of the faq as you cant take a valkyrie in it.

If you go for a generous interpretation whats the point of the limitation i mean you can take all tempestus all auxillia and anything regiment can be tempestus so what are you left with
Not takeing non-tempestus special characters - which you couldnt do and get a doctrine anyway.

Either way we now have redundant rules and unfortunately its most likely the new ones- and if in doubt use the interpretation most punishing to yourself

oh well its not like we are the only ones the orks have an apocalypse scale only detatchment. We will have to make do with 3.

N.B. What models come in a box set is irrelevant and you can take valkyrie storm troopers and commisars in the same detatchment legally it just doesn't then benefit from the storm trooper doctrine just any of the others


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/14 23:47:58


Post by: Smirrors


Maxamato wrote:
A quick question regarding to the relic cannon: Hammer of Sunderance:
Can I do shoot twice with this weapon according the grinding advance rule?


Q: Does the Hammer of Sunderance Relic count as a turret
weapon for the purposes of Grinding Advance?
A: Yes.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 00:40:56


Post by: MrMoustaffa


U02dah4 the FAQ that just dropped proves I was right on both accounts. Again you are really twisting words around. It was blatantly clear that the hammer of sunderance was a battlecannon, just because it was written in italics didn't mean that it didn't exist. Yes, the italics are usually just flavor text but in this instance when the flavor text says "this is a battlecannon" I'm pretty sure it's safe to say that ruleswise, it was a battlecannon. Could have GW made it a little more blatant by putting it in plain text as well? Probably, but was it really needed, I don't think so.

On the stormtrooper thing, the FAQ has this to say

Q: For the purposes of the Tempestus Drop Force Specialist
Detachment, what is a Militarum Tempestus Detachment?
A: A Militarum Tempestus Detachment is an Astra
Militarum Detachment that has the Storm Troopers Regimental Doctrine


If taking commissars and Valkyries (who were in the 7th Ed stormtroopers codex as unit options) broke their regiment keyword, this would be impossible. As if I didn't have enough to back up what I had just typed, this seals the deal. GW intends that Advisors and Auxilia does not break Stormtroopers, and further confirms that yes, you can take commissars to fill out an additional stormtrooper batallion for example, or give them Valkyrie support with no issues.

I really don't see any room to argue further on this. If you wish to play it the other way, that's fine, I won't stop you. But I think it would be really asinine and foolish to think any player loses stormtrooper doctrine at this point because they had the audacity to take a commissar and valkyrie in the same detachment. This also means that things like ogryn, pyskers, ratlings, master of the fleet, etc. Can be taken as well.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 01:16:50


Post by: daedalus


U02dah4 wrote:

1) anything in italics is fluff text it does not effect the rules so irrelevant

Page number?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 01:23:51


Post by: Peregrine


Can we remember that this is the tactics thread, where we discuss how to win real games, not YMDC where masturbating over how clever we are for finding broken rules is acceptable? Obviously in real games the storm trooper + Valkyrie formation is possible to use, so can we get back to discussing how best to use it and just ignore BCB's absurd tangents?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 07:24:57


Post by: U02dah4


 daedalus wrote:
U02dah4 wrote:

1) anything in italics is fluff text it does not effect the rules so irrelevant

Page number?


Pg 193 even he says its fluff text

The Hammer of Sunderance is a battle
cannon with glorious reputation. It is said the
blows it deals the enemy are the Emperor’s
wrath made manifest, and as it punches
into enemy tanks and fortifications, it leaves
grievous wounds and crippled armour in
its wake.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 Peregrine wrote:
Can we remember that this is the tactics thread, where we discuss how to win real games, not YMDC where masturbating over how clever we are for finding broken rules is acceptable? Obviously in real games the storm trooper + Valkyrie formation is possible to use, so can we get back to discussing how best to use it and just ignore BCB's absurd tangents?


I feel dirty saying it but BCB is right the valkrie formation can currently be taken but only without valkyries so tactically the best thing is not to take it unless a TO has specifically ruled otherwise


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 07:39:32


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


Guys.

Guys.

You don't seriously believe GW Published a formation that they actually intend to be impossible to play with, right?

I get that they're god-awful at rules writing, I do. But I don't think the rules writers literally go out of their way to publish expensive hardback suppliments with formations in, and then you go down to Warhammer World and play in an offical GW Tournament and the judge comes over and goes,

AH HA! GOTCHA! That formation doesn't work. You lose. Thanks for playing the GW Lottery!


The FAQ Specifically calls out the fact they have to have the Doctrine to be able to take the formation, so it's not even a question of feeling like it has to be a AM Formation full of Scions, but feel there's balence implications with extra shots on a +5 so want you to take the formation but lose the Doctrine as a tradeoff for the +1 to hit. This is really cut and dried and if your TO disagrees then I'm really not sure what to say.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 08:35:11


Post by: U02dah4


No i would assume as usual that what gw intended and what gw actually wrote were different.

As to the detatchment you can legally take it just as long as it doesnt contain a valkyri

Just as the orks can take theirs as long as you take 3 stompas which you cant at 2k


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 08:49:59


Post by: Peregrine


Oh FFS this is ridiculous. No, GW did not publish a formation with multiple rules involving interactions between the detachment's Valkyries and infantry units just to say "lol, just kidding, you can't legally take both of the units required for this stratagem to work". Nobody gives a about some over-literal RAW interpretation that nothing about the detachment works, out in the real world every reasonable player sees a stratagem that says "pick a TEMPESTUS DROP FORCE VALKYRIE" and concludes that yes, a TEMPESTUS DROP FORCE VALKYRIE is a thing that must be able to exist and any rule interpretation otherwise must be wrong.

So, again, can we please stop with the inane tangents about "LOOK HOW CLEVER I AM I FOUND A BROKEN RAW" and deal with the reality that when people are actually playing the game they're going to assume that using the detachment is in fact possible? This is the tactics thread, for figuring out the best way to win real games, not YMDC.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 09:20:53


Post by: BaconCatBug


You could just stop talking about it, you know?

It's not my fault GW can't write rules properly. If you ignore one rule you allow ignoring them all.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 09:22:30


Post by: Silentz


 BaconCatBug wrote:

It's not my fault GW can't write rules properly. If you ignore one rule you allow ignoring them all.

False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which two completely opposing arguments appear to be logically equivalent when in fact they are not. This fallacy is categorized as a fallacy of inconsistency.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 09:24:09


Post by: BaconCatBug


It's not a fallacy. Explain to me why it's OK to ignore Rule A but to not ignore Rule B?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 09:35:04


Post by: U02dah4


Because ots arbitrarily in his interest


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 10:37:48


Post by: Peregrine


 BaconCatBug wrote:
It's not a fallacy. Explain to me why it's OK to ignore Rule A but to not ignore Rule B?


It's a fallacy because, while there is not mathematical proof or a signed statement from GW endorsing the position, there is overwhelming evidence that it is possible to take a Valkyrie in the detachment because the detachment rules explicitly refer to a Valkyrie in the detachment. If GW's rules refer to a TEMPESTUS DROP FORCE VALKYRIE then such a thing must exist. Any argument otherwise might be entertaining YMDC fodder but in the real world if you try to argue that the stratagem doesn't function and their army isn't legal you're going to get called a TFG and booted from the community.

The same is not true of all of your various false equivalencies. There is no rules support whatsoever for whatever your latest example is, no reason at all to believe that GW intended it to work that way other than your desire to create an example in a YMDC argument. If you told your theory about "all my attacks always hit" or whatever to a group of players the would, again, call you a TFG and tell you to stop bothering them with your nonsense.

You can pretend that the two situations are equivalent because you enjoy derailing threads with inane YMDC arguments, but no amount of BUT THE RULES SAY SO is going to matter in the real world. Nobody gives a about RAW when RAW is absurd, just like nobody played by RAW with 5th edition LOS. And, again, this is the tactics thread, not YMDC. RAW masturbation isn't helping anyone figure out how to win games in the real world.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 10:56:56


Post by: tneva82


 Polonius wrote:
And that, thus, is the perennial failure of RAW: nothing is designed to be read exactly as written, with no context or interpretation. I've been on dakka for a long time, and people keep arguing that RAW is the only true way to avoid ambiguity, which I suppose is true. But the rules aren't designed to read that way. Almost nothing is.


Top of that not only is it not intended it's not even possible. Your game will sooner or later halt into situation where rules don't cover it and ergo you either abandon the game or apply RAI. Ergo anybody claiming they play pure RAW is flat oyt lying.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 11:11:23


Post by: Dr. Mills


So, let's steer this back onto tactics shall we?

A friend of mine has a large collection of Tempestus Scions, and he likes the look of the new formation in the Vigilus book.

ALL RAI/RAW RULES BOLLOCKS ASIDE, what would be strong but not fully min/maxed list look like? He has... Literally triples of most things and loads of troops etc. Main opponents are Custodes (pure foots logging, no bikes) Orks (massed Boyz) Tyranids (lots of bugs and a few big ones) Space marines (Ultramarines) and Chaos (Black Legion with berserkers)


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 12:30:26


Post by: CaptainO


I played in the Last Chance Open this weekend with a Catachan Conclave Brigade, Catachan Emperors Wrath Artillery Spearhead and a 3 jetbike Custodes Supreme detachment. Full list is below.

Spoiler:
++ Brigade Detachment +12CP (Imperium - Astra Militarum) [78 PL, 1091pts] ++

Emperors conclave Detachment

Regimental Doctrine: Regiment: Catachan

+ HQ [28 PL, 423pts] +

Colonel 'Iron Hand' Straken [4 PL, 75pts]

Tank Commander [12 PL, 172pts]: Heavy Bolter [8pts]
. Command Battle Tank [22pts]: Battle Cannon [22pts]

Tank Commander [12 PL, 176pts]: Heavy Flamer [14pts]
. Command Punisher [20pts]: Turret-mounted Punisher Gatling Cannon [20pts]

+ Troops [18 PL, 246pts] +

Infantry Squad [3 PL, 46pts]
. 8x Guardsman [32pts]
. Guardsman W/ Special Weapon [10pts]: Flamer [6pts]
. Sergeant [4pts]: Laspistol

Infantry Squad [3 PL, 40pts]: 9x Guardsman [36pts]
. Sergeant [4pts]: Laspistol

Infantry Squad [3 PL, 40pts]: 9x Guardsman [36pts]
. Sergeant [4pts]: Laspistol

Infantry Squad [3 PL, 40pts]: 9x Guardsman [36pts]
. Sergeant [4pts]: Laspistol

Infantry Squad [3 PL, 40pts]: 9x Guardsman [36pts]
. Sergeant [4pts]: Laspistol

Infantry Squad [3 PL, 40pts]: 9x Guardsman [36pts]
. Sergeant [4pts]: Laspistol

+ Elites [6 PL, 71pts] +

Commissar [2 PL, 16pts]: Bolt pistol [1pts] WARLORD

Ministorum Priest [2 PL, 35pts]: Chainsword, Laspistol Specialist Detachment Fiery denouncer

Platoon Commander [2 PL, 20pts]: Chainsword, Laspistol

+ Fast Attack [9 PL, 130pts] +

Rough Riders [3 PL, 60pts]
. 2x Rough Rider [20pts]: 2x Hunting Lance [4pts]
. Rough Rider Sergeant [10pts]: Chainsword, Hunting Lance [2pts], Laspistol
. Rough Rider w/ Special Weapons [15pts]: Plasma gun [7pts]
. Rough Rider w/ Special Weapons [15pts]: Plasma gun [7pts]

Scout Sentinels [3 PL, 35pts]
. Scout Sentinel [3 PL, 35pts]: Multi-laser [5pts]

Scout Sentinels [3 PL, 35pts]
. Scout Sentinel [3 PL, 35pts]: Multi-laser [5pts]

+ Heavy Support [17 PL, 221pts] +

Heavy Weapons Squad [3 PL, 33pts]
. Heavy Weapon Team [11pts]: Mortar [5pts]
. Heavy Weapon Team [11pts]: Mortar [5pts]
. Heavy Weapon Team [11pts]: Mortar [5pts]

Heavy Weapons Squad [3 PL, 33pts]
. Heavy Weapon Team [11pts]: Mortar [5pts]
. Heavy Weapon Team [11pts]: Mortar [5pts]
. Heavy Weapon Team [11pts]: Mortar [5pts]

Leman Russ Conquerors [11 PL, 155pts]
. Leman Russ Conqueror [11 PL, 155pts]: Heavy Bolter [8pts], Turret-mounted Conqueror Battle Cannon [25pts]

++ Total: [78 PL, 1091pts] ++
++ Spearhead Detachment +1CP (Imperium - Astra Militarum) [27 PL, 419pts] ++

Emperors wrath artillery specialist Detachment

Regimental Doctrine: Regiment: Catachan

+ HQ [7 PL, 100pts] +

Commissar Yarrick [7 PL, 100pts]

+ Heavy Support [20 PL, 319pts] +

Basilisks [7 PL, 108pts]
. Basilisk [7 PL, 108pts]: Heavy Bolter [8pts]

Basilisks [7 PL, 108pts]
. Basilisk [7 PL, 108pts]: Heavy Bolter [8pts]

Wyverns [6 PL, 103pts]
. Wyvern [6 PL, 103pts]: Heavy Bolter [8pts]

++ Total: [27 PL, 419pts] ++

++ Supreme Command Detachment +1CP (Imperium - Adeptus Custodes) [27 PL, 490pts] ++

+ HQ [27 PL, 490pts] +

Shield-Captain on Dawneagle Jetbike [9 PL, 160pts]: Hurricane Bolter [10pts]

Shield-Captain on Dawneagle Jetbike [9 PL, 165pts]: Salvo Launcher [15pts]

Shield-Captain on Dawneagle Jetbike [9 PL, 165pts]: Salvo Launcher [15pts]

++ Total: [27 PL, 490pts] ++

Total 2000 Points 17 CP ( 15 CP after specialist detachments)



I won the first two games, then lost two and won my last for a 3-2 finish. Super enjoyable games and the guys from Dice and Decks ran a slick operation.



My games were:



T1: 3 x Greater Brass khorne Scorpions

T2: Chaos Soup with Bloodletter bomb, 2 deamon princes, cultist blob, 2 nurgle leviathans and blightlord terminators

T3: Tau soup with shield drones, battle suits and a big dude

T4: Castellan, Deathwatch plasma chaps and Ad mech battalion

T5: Eldar with 3 hemlocks and shining spears


Tactics from a guard perspective were:
Spoiler:




The emperors wrath artillery Fire twice strat and V for C combo with basilisks against Chaos is awesome especially with catachans reroll number of shots.



The Old grudge Warlord trait that allows reroll for wounds combined with a punisher tank commander can take a surprisingly high number of wounds off a titan.



The Conclave specialist detachment didn’t blow me away. My army can deal with assault armies pretty well already by thinning them out with all the tank and artillery fire and using swooping dive on the jetbike shield captains to throw them off balance. Fighting after death would be good if the enemy attacks the combined squad that is buffed by Straken and a Priest but they’d be foolish to not shoot that squad and just assault another. 3 x S4 attacks is scary… 1 is not.



I gave a platoon commander the martyr of snod relic. It basically means you need to charge him first hope he dies to overwatch so he can buff the unit behind giving them a +1 attack and fearless. A second priest would do as well and not rely on getting a charge, save CP and not result in giving the opponent Headhunter.



I used infantry squads to act as meat shields for the jetbike shield captains. They put the fear of god into people so 3 squads minimum in front was needed against gunlines.



I castled up with the wyvern, 2 x basilisks 2 x mortar squads and two infantry squads as bubble wrap. Bubble wrap wasn’t needed against Tau or the Castellan list as they were gunlines so I should have had them moving forward earlier. When 2 infantry squads were needed as bubblewrap then Straken (with his two orders) and the platoon commander (with his 1/2 using the strat) actually gave plenty of orders to the remaining squad who were moving forward. I always mobbed up 2 squads anyway and it could be assumed that at least one (probably more) infantry squads were going to be wiped out if I went second so I think peoples obsession with having lots of company commanders to give orders is misplaced.



The wyvern was pretty good combo’d with yarrick (although I didn’t get to play any orks so Sgt harker would probably have been better). With the number of fly models around a Hydra would be an interesting replacement (saving 10 points too)



Yarrick V Harker is an interesting one. He would have been very helpful against orks and against the eldar his power Klaw killed a shining spear but I wonder if it was worth the 50 points. An extra heavy bolter probably would have done as much damage.



The rough riders with 2 x plasma were my only reserve unit. They never failed to kill at least one of themselves (they ride horses to battel, no way they weren’t over charging). They actually took one wound off a castellan in a shooting phase and then made a charge. They lost all but the sergeant to overwatch but he managed to take two wounds off the knight. His real purpose was to prevent overwatch on a shield captain as he charged in which he achieved. With the plasmas they’re 25 points more expensive than a sentinel with multilaser but their ability to ambush distracted many people and they always resulted in a point for Recon.



I lost against the Tau due to poor secondary choices (shield drones make head hunter hard to get and with the sheer number of models I take, recon would have been much easier to achieve), using infantry squads as needless bubble wrap (yarrick, who was commanding my artillery could have dealt with any assault element they would have thrown at me) and by not meat shielding my shield captains properly.



The castellan build was really hard to deal with. He had clearly read the vigilus book so knew to target the basilisks first. Once again my characters weren’t sufficiently meatshielded and Butchers Bill was a poor choice for a secondary against such a resilient army. Against a multi knight list I could have drawn out the ion shield strat and then switched fire to another but with only 1 knight it meant it wasn’t an option. The guard element of my army simply didn’t have the tools to deal with him so once the jetbikes were killed I was screwed.



I had no psychic phase although I did use the custodes deny strat once or twice. Honestly I didn’t think it effected me too badly. A primaris psyker or astropath wouldn’t have been in range to deny anything anyway and against the Castellan my understanding is that he’d have to be the closest model to smite and my enemy could have denied anyway.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 13:16:17


Post by: Apple Peel


 Dr. Mills wrote:
So, let's steer this back onto tactics shall we?

A friend of mine has a large collection of Tempestus Scions, and he likes the look of the new formation in the Vigilus book.

ALL RAI/RAW RULES BOLLOCKS ASIDE, what would be strong but not fully min/maxed list look like? He has... Literally triples of most things and loads of troops etc. Main opponents are Custodes (pure foots logging, no bikes) Orks (massed Boyz) Tyranids (lots of bugs and a few big ones) Space marines (Ultramarines) and Chaos (Black Legion with berserkers)

I’ve got a list I’m building that has different feedback and perspectives on it in the list section if you like.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 13:34:17


Post by: daedalus


 Dr. Mills wrote:
ALL RAI/RAW RULES BOLLOCKS ASIDE, what would be strong but not fully min/maxed list look like? He has... Literally triples of most things and loads of troops etc. Main opponents are Custodes (pure foots logging, no bikes) Orks (massed Boyz) Tyranids (lots of bugs and a few big ones) Space marines (Ultramarines) and Chaos (Black Legion with berserkers)


If you're playing that grav-chute deployment counts as deploying so you still get movement after? I'd do this at 2000 points (leaves you with about 49 points left):

Spoiler:


++ Vanguard Detachment +1CP (Imperium - Inquisition) ++

Inquisitor: Combi-plasma, Ordo Hereticus, Power sword
. Psyker: Terrify
Inquisitor: Combi-plasma, Ordo Hereticus, Power sword
. Psyker: Dominate

Acolytes: Ordo Hereticus
. Acolyte: Bolt pistol, Boltgun
. Acolyte: Bolt pistol, Boltgun
Acolytes: Ordo Hereticus
. Acolyte: Bolt pistol, Boltgun
. Acolyte: Bolt pistol, Boltgun
. Acolyte: Bolt pistol, Boltgun
Acolytes: Ordo Hereticus
. Acolyte: Bolt pistol, Boltgun
. Acolyte: Bolt pistol, Boltgun
. Acolyte: Bolt pistol, Boltgun

++ Battalion Detachment +5CP (Imperium - Astra Militarum) ++

Tempestor Prime: Tempestus Command Rod
Tempestor Prime: Tempestus Command Rod

Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 2x Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Plasma pistol
Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 2x Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Plasma pistol
Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 2x Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Plasma pistol
Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 2x Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Plasma pistol
Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 2x Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Plasma pistol
Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 2x Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Plasma pistol

Militarum Tempestus Command Squad
. Tempestus Scion: Meltagun
. Tempestus Scion: Meltagun
. Tempestus Scion: Meltagun
. Tempestus Scion: Meltagun
Militarum Tempestus Command Squad
. Tempestus Scion: Hot-shot Volley Gun
. Tempestus Scion: Hot-shot Volley Gun
. Tempestus Scion: Hot-shot Volley Gun
. Tempestus Scion: Hot-shot Volley Gun

Valkyries
. Valkyrie: 2x Multiple Rocket Pods, Multi-laser
. . 2x Heavy Bolters: 2x Heavy bolter
Valkyries
. Valkyrie: 2x Multiple Rocket Pods, Multi-laser
. . 2x Heavy Bolters: 2x Heavy bolter

Taurox Prime: Storm Bolter, Taurox Gatling Cannon, Two Hot-shot Volley Guns
Taurox Prime: Storm Bolter, Taurox Gatling Cannon, Two Hot-shot Volley Guns

++ Patrol Detachment (Imperium - Astra Militarum) ++

Tempestor Prime: Hot-shot Laspistol

Militarum Tempestus Scions
. 2x Scion
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Scion w/ Special Weapon: Plasma gun
. Tempestor: Chainsword, Plasma pistol

Militarum Tempestus Command Squad
. Tempestus Scion: Meltagun
. Tempestus Scion: Meltagun
. Tempestus Scion: Meltagun
. Tempestus Scion: Meltagun

Avenger Strike Fighter: Defensive Heavy Stubber, 2x Lascannon, Tactical Bombs
Valkyries
. Valkyrie: 2x Multiple Rocket Pods, Multi-laser
. . 2x Heavy Bolters: 2x Heavy bolter


Here's how I'd set up.

Spoiler:

on board:

valk
1 Prime
5 scions
4 melta command
1 inq

valk
1 prime
5 scions
4 melta command
2 Acolyte

valk
1 prime
5 scions
5 scions
1 inq

avenger

taurox
3 acolytes

taurox
3 acolytes

deep strike:

5 scions
5 scions
5 scions

4 volly command


Notes:

I'd make the prime that rides with the two scion squads the warlord for the trait so that you can supercharge everything and get away with it.

I don't think the relic on the datasheet is that good, so I'd stick with the regular ones. Laurels / Kurov's / Auto-Reliquary are always solid choices, and it might be worth flirting with the idea of the Dagger to set up a melta-scion bomb since they can just walk up to something, though bubblewrap will help negate that since Tempestus is a fairly close range list.

Your taurox should keep at range and kite the enemy as much as possible, with the acolytes jumping on objectives as needed. They could be buffed up to make them more resilient with the remaining points, but don't go crazy otherwise you'd be better off just cramming more scions in.

The hotshot volly guys drop 23.5" away from something and all fire 16 hotshots into it, and keep firing at that range as needed. They're meant to be really annoying.

The avenger is meant as a big scary distraction while the rest of your stuff does the real job. I'd expect it to be focus fired 90% of the time, which is okay because that's how you keep your valkyries alive. Other than that, everything else is pretty straightforward. Move transports up, drop troops out, move troops up, murder (preferably more of them than yourself). The trick is to figuring out how best to drop everything at once when you can only protect one set of valkyrie passengers from the grav-chute risk.

This also starts out with a ton of things on the table, so if you want to deep strike more for some reason, it's always an option.



Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 18:42:24


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


I approve of this list. Excellent work.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/15 18:56:59


Post by: Radikus


I played in the Last Chance Open this weekend with a Catachan Conclave Brigade, Catachan Emperors Wrath Artillery Spearhead and a 3 jetbike Custodes Supreme detachment. Full list is below.


Hey thanks for the write up. I've been very interested in allying in wyverns with my guard battalion for my Knights. Typically I just run guard battalion with 3x3 mortars. I am interested in your experience more with the Wyverns, did you ever use the half movement strat? I was thinking of allying them in just to use this strat but with it only able to work on infantry kind of limits it. Would the Wyvern be better off as 3x3 more mortars?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/17 15:32:57


Post by: CaptainO


Radikus wrote:
I played in the Last Chance Open this weekend with a Catachan Conclave Brigade, Catachan Emperors Wrath Artillery Spearhead and a 3 jetbike Custodes Supreme detachment. Full list is below.


Hey thanks for the write up. I've been very interested in allying in wyverns with my guard battalion for my Knights. Typically I just run guard battalion with 3x3 mortars. I am interested in your experience more with the Wyverns, did you ever use the half movement strat? I was thinking of allying them in just to use this strat but with it only able to work on infantry kind of limits it. Would the Wyvern be better off as 3x3 more mortars?


No problem dude. I never got to use the half movement/no overwatch strat. It never seems like it would be more beneficial that just shooting the same unit. I suppose as the Wyvern got degraded and its BS decreased it may have become a better option but to be honest my army can take on Assault armies pretty well. Its gunlines that were the issue. The Tau wouldn't have been overly effected as "for the greater good" would allow the surrounding units to shoot for them. Thinking about it now it might have helped a bit though. The fact its limited to infantry does suck though.

I have been toying with getting rid of the wyvern and taking another mortar squad and Creed as well. With a bit of rejigging I could take Creed and the 3x3 mortars in a spearhead. His 3 orders would be able to allow full rerolls for all 3 mortar squads and the 2 free extra CP would be well worth it. They'd also be able to use the Cadian Strat...The mortars ability to hide within buildings on the bottom floor meant they were harder to target due to ITC rules.The wyvern did act as a distraction from the basilisks which were the real star of the show and the reroll to wound is nothing to sneer at. I had all my artillery paired with Yarrick for reroll 1s to hit (hoping I'd face orks for reroll all misses but no luck) which combo'd with the Wyvern did work well.

4d6 is scary but it averages only approx 15 shots. 3x3 mortars equals 30 shots on average and with creed they'd all be able to reroll hits which means I'll probably take the 3x3 mortars (ideally with Creed) if its a 1 for 1 choice.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/17 17:49:56


Post by: Apple Peel


Does anybody use the Bldae of Conquest on their Commissars/Lord Commissars? Does it make your Commissars more bitey. Does it improve their chances as a counter to charges?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/18 10:46:27


Post by: CaptainO


I realise that to get the two extra CP Creed has to be your warlord and his compulsory warlord trait is pretty pump.



Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/18 15:00:23


Post by: jaxor1983


Yeah it's a damned shame that you have to choose between 2 CP and a good warlord trait. He's still not a terrible value for 3 12" orders though.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/18 16:07:36


Post by: stratigo


U02dah4 wrote:
diagramdude wrote:
The issue is NOT is it a battle cannon or not. The issue is whether it is a turret weapon or not. Grinding Advance lets you fire your turret weapon twice, so you have to find someone asinine enough to argue the relic is not a turret weapon because it doesn't appear on a list written before the relic existed.


And it then specifically defines which weapons are turret weapons if it is not on that list you dont get grinding advance.

The following weapons are turret weapons: battle cannon, Conqueror battle cannon, Demolisher cannon, Eradicator nova cannon, Executioner plasma cannon, Exterminator autocannon, Punisher gatling cannon, Stygies Vanquisher battle cannon, twin lascannon and Vanquisher battle cannon.

So currently its not on that list.


Man I wish people like this stuck to war machine


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/19 07:59:46


Post by: Apple Peel


 Apple Peel wrote:
Does anybody use the Blade of Conquest on their Commissars/Lord Commissars? Does it make your Commissars more bitey? Does it improve their chances as a counter to charges?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/19 10:42:23


Post by: U02dah4


No


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/21 11:11:25


Post by: CaptainO


 Apple Peel wrote:
 Apple Peel wrote:
Does anybody use the Blade of Conquest on their Commissars/Lord Commissars? Does it make your Commissars more bitey? Does it improve their chances as a counter to charges?


Being honest the only "bitey" guard in assault are ogryn/bullgryns and straken. You might take a few wounds if you get to fight first and youve catachans buffed with a priest but outside that t3 & t-shirt saves just means we're going to die once the clubbing starts. I find that we're better off taking the 1 relic and for me thats the aquilla. Our relics arent that spectacular compared to other armies (which is kind of fluffy i suppose)


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/21 13:21:13


Post by: AdmiralHalsey


CaptainO wrote:
 Apple Peel wrote:
 Apple Peel wrote:
Does anybody use the Blade of Conquest on their Commissars/Lord Commissars? Does it make your Commissars more bitey? Does it improve their chances as a counter to charges?


Being honest the only "bitey" guard in assault are ogryn/bullgryns and straken. You might take a few wounds if you get to fight first and youve catachans buffed with a priest but outside that t3 & t-shirt saves just means we're going to die once the clubbing starts. I find that we're better off taking the 1 relic and for me thats the aquilla. Our relics arent that spectacular compared to other armies (which is kind of fluffy i suppose) [/quote

Does nobody think of the rough riders?
Sniff.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/21 15:30:49


Post by: jaxor1983


As of Vigilus Defiant, AM now has a relic battle cannon that's just.. fantastic.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/21 15:51:57


Post by: CaptainO


Hammer of Sunderance is pretty good I'll give you that. It does effectively costs an additional CP to use it (it costs a CP to upgrade your detachment to that specialist detachment)

The point I was trying to make was that the close combat relics are pretty meh when you're giving them to at best a company commander/lord commisar. I would rather steer towards guard stratagems rather than their relics and the Aquilla enables that. Its just my personal preference though.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/23 09:27:53


Post by: CaptainO


Anyone have any luck taking down a castellan with a majority AM force. I take 3 shield Captain jetbikes with my force and they were the only ones that had much luck taking some of his wounds in cc although I did take two wounds using 5 x rough riders overcharging plasma guns and gloriously charging to their doom. One died to overcharging (without wounding him) and then 3 more died to overwatch but the sergeant managed to stick him. He then proceeded to leg it. The 3++ strat fagainst shooting was a pain and the "counts as having full wounds" strat was disheartening.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/23 12:03:31


Post by: Horst


I killed a Knight Crusader through his 3++ the other day with a pure AM force... Pask in an executioner with lascannon and plasma fired first, declared overlapping fields of fire, then another executioner commander with the same setup fired, then my relic battle cannon tank commander with 3x heavy bolters finished it. Very important to have a warlord with old grudges too, so you can reroll wounds. Force so many 3++ saves, and he only needs to fail like 14 of them, less from the relic gun, since each shot is multi damage.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/23 16:17:34


Post by: CaptainO


Old grudges seems to be the way to go alrite. I dont have access to overlapping fields of fire with catachans unfortunately. Would i be right assuming you went first? With the number of drops i have i have to assume ill be going second. Tank commanders and basilisks are high on a castellans kill list. With the "treat as if on full wounds" strat it really means that a castellan cannot be allowed to survive a turn. A lascannon might need to replace at least 1 of my 3x3 cadian mortars.



Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/23 16:45:48


Post by: Horst


Yea, I had first turn. He was playing pure knights, turn 1 I nuked two of his non-warlord Knights since they were easier targets, his turn 1 he crippled my Shadowsword, and I returned fire with my tanks and blew through his 3++ with the Tank Commanders. But yea, that relies heavily on BS3 from Fields of Fire and re-rolling 1's and re-rolling all dice for number of shots.

One other solution I've seen people talk about is Manticore Batteries... 150 points each, each one has four missiles, each missile is D6 attacks, STR 9 AP-3 D6 Damage. They don't have the "fire one per turn" rule that regular manticores do, so you could just unload all of them in a single alpha strike. 3 Manticore Batteries look like they'd be able to on average kill a 3++ Castellan if they have Old Grudges and Harker nearby to let them re-roll 1's to hit and re-roll wounds, so that's 450 points to kill 600.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/23 19:48:16


Post by: RogueApiary


 Horst wrote:
Yea, I had first turn. He was playing pure knights, turn 1 I nuked two of his non-warlord Knights since they were easier targets, his turn 1 he crippled my Shadowsword, and I returned fire with my tanks and blew through his 3++ with the Tank Commanders. But yea, that relies heavily on BS3 from Fields of Fire and re-rolling 1's and re-rolling all dice for number of shots.

One other solution I've seen people talk about is Manticore Batteries... 150 points each, each one has four missiles, each missile is D6 attacks, STR 9 AP-3 D6 Damage. They don't have the "fire one per turn" rule that regular manticores do, so you could just unload all of them in a single alpha strike. 3 Manticore Batteries look like they'd be able to on average kill a 3++ Castellan if they have Old Grudges and Harker nearby to let them re-roll 1's to hit and re-roll wounds, so that's 450 points to kill 600.


That's freaking hilarious. Be a real pain to convert up three Manticore platforms using the old dimensions though.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/23 19:48:57


Post by: Kcalehc


 Horst wrote:


One other solution I've seen people talk about is Manticore Batteries... 150 points each, each one has four missiles, each missile is D6 attacks, STR 9 AP-3 D6 Damage. They don't have the "fire one per turn" rule that regular manticores do, so you could just unload all of them in a single alpha strike. 3 Manticore Batteries look like they'd be able to on average kill a 3++ Castellan if they have Old Grudges and Harker nearby to let them re-roll 1's to hit and re-roll wounds, so that's 450 points to kill 600.


I think Chapter approved made them 110 points each, and yes its weird that they chose to write it as one use per rocket, but not 'one rocket per turn'. So yes, you could fire all 4 rockets at once, or 1, 2 or 3 at once depending on how many are left.




If only the regular Manticore could be 'squadroned' to have 3 in a single choice. :(


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/28 14:41:33


Post by: schadenfreude


 Kcalehc wrote:
 Horst wrote:


One other solution I've seen people talk about is Manticore Batteries... 150 points each, each one has four missiles, each missile is D6 attacks, STR 9 AP-3 D6 Damage. They don't have the "fire one per turn" rule that regular manticores do, so you could just unload all of them in a single alpha strike. 3 Manticore Batteries look like they'd be able to on average kill a 3++ Castellan if they have Old Grudges and Harker nearby to let them re-roll 1's to hit and re-roll wounds, so that's 450 points to kill 600.


I think Chapter approved made them 110 points each, and yes its weird that they chose to write it as one use per rocket, but not 'one rocket per turn'. So yes, you could fire all 4 rockets at once, or 1, 2 or 3 at once depending on how many are left.




If only the regular Manticore could be 'squadroned' to have 3 in a single choice. :(


Still 150 points because the rockets cost 10 each.

T7 W7 4+ save. An opponent should shoot them first.

Sloppy forge world writing forget to say 1 per turn, but they also forgot to mention it can ignore LOS. It's fragile and needs direct LOS.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/29 16:30:59


Post by: CaptainO


Anyone had any games against orks. I play both guard and orks and the orks ability to da jump t1 can cause a guard gunline problems. I currently run 2x scount sentinels and their initial move is vital for pushing the anti deepstrike bubble up but being honest a 3rd is required to have a 48" wide bubble (9+18+18+9 (this doesnt include the bases)) This is kind of a moot point if youre not playing a mission where you set up on the short board edge (hammer and anvil and kind of spearhead assault). Basically what im saying is that its highly likely the orks are going to be in your lines t1 bypassing the sentinel shield line.

My ork list runs 2 x 30 orks. I da jump 1 t1 and deepstrike the other t2. If 1 of those units ends their movement phase with less than half i just green tide them and boom wave 3 "ambushing" from the side. Im trying to figure out how to combat this.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/29 16:49:42


Post by: Horst


CaptainO wrote:
Anyone had any games against orks. I play both guard and orks and the orks ability to da jump t1 can cause a guard gunline problems. I currently run 2x scount sentinels and their initial move is vital for pushing the anti deepstrike bubble up but being honest a 3rd is required to have a 48" wide bubble (9+18+18+9 (this doesnt include the bases)) This is kind of a moot point if youre not playing a mission where you set up on the short board edge (hammer and anvil and kind of spearhead assault). Basically what im saying is that its highly likely the orks are going to be in your lines t1 bypassing the sentinel shield line.

My ork list runs 2 x 30 orks. I da jump 1 t1 and deepstrike the other t2. If 1 of those units ends their movement phase with less than half i just green tide them and boom wave 3 "ambushing" from the side. Im trying to figure out how to combat this.


I think I can counter things like that by adding a Knight Gallant and some Hellhounds to my list. The Gallant (house Terryn) can get 30 stomps in a single turn, hitting on 2+ killing on 2+ if I use the "fight twice" stratagem, and the hellhounds should be able to roast at least 15-20 boyz by themselves. I'll need to sacrifice a bunch of Guardsman to keep you back T1, but even if you kill 40 of them turn 1 I'll be fine.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/30 00:54:02


Post by: Smirrors


I participated at a 140 person tournament on the weekend in Australia. Some guard stats:

8 Lists with AM as the main detachment. 4 of those were mono.

Mono Ranked 97th, 110th, 112th and 126th (2 or 3 wins from 8)
Soup Ranked 29th, 34th, 51st and 69th. (4 or 5 wins from 8)

All the soup lists took a Castellan.

29th double battalion - 7 bullgryn, pask, 2 bassies
34th brigade/spearhead- bassie, 2 manticores, 2 wyverns
51st brigade - 3 tank commanders
69th brigade - 9 bullgryn, 3 bassies


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/30 09:59:05


Post by: CaptainO


 Horst wrote:
CaptainO wrote:
Anyone had any games against orks. I play both guard and orks and the orks ability to da jump t1 can cause a guard gunline problems. I currently run 2x scount sentinels and their initial move is vital for pushing the anti deepstrike bubble up but being honest a 3rd is required to have a 48" wide bubble (9+18+18+9 (this doesnt include the bases)) This is kind of a moot point if youre not playing a mission where you set up on the short board edge (hammer and anvil and kind of spearhead assault). Basically what im saying is that its highly likely the orks are going to be in your lines t1 bypassing the sentinel shield line.

My ork list runs 2 x 30 orks. I da jump 1 t1 and deepstrike the other t2. If 1 of those units ends their movement phase with less than half i just green tide them and boom wave 3 "ambushing" from the side. Im trying to figure out how to combat this.


I think I can counter things like that by adding a Knight Gallant and some Hellhounds to my list. The Gallant (house Terryn) can get 30 stomps in a single turn, hitting on 2+ killing on 2+ if I use the "fight twice" stratagem, and the hellhounds should be able to roast at least 15-20 boyz by themselves. I'll need to sacrifice a bunch of Guardsman to keep you back T1, but even if you kill 40 of them turn 1 I'll be fine.


Currently my third Fast attack is a hellhound. The best counter would be to try and funnel/tempt the orks to charge the hellhound using the scout sentinels. That 2d6 could do damage. I'm trying to figure out how best to deploy to force this. A nice big arrow pointin to the barrel of the hellhound perhaps

A knight could be an option. Its a pity the guard don't have anything that could handle it on their own. Even then the 30 x evil sun shoota boys that will "probably" (75%ish chance) manage the charge only cost 210 points. After some rough mathhammer they'd average approx 7 wounds on the knight before he got to attack. Bear in mind the orks also have the fight twice strat and as they'd have charged they'd get to fight again before the Gallant who would be down to their second tier. This is assuming the boyz were on their own and not supported by either a wartrike or a warboss on a bike, both of whom have a ridiculous threat range and if the boyz ate the overwatch could easily take down a knight (either with fight twice or fight after death)

When my bother played my Guard and I played the orks it just struck me how hard the orks hit T1 and how they don't let up. They have so many deep striking options (teleportas, stormboyz and kommandos) that guard bubble wrapping has to be on point.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/30 11:45:18


Post by: Lothar


 Smirrors wrote:
I participated at a 140 person tournament on the weekend in Australia. Some guard stats:

8 Lists with AM as the main detachment. 4 of those were mono.

Mono Ranked 97th, 110th, 112th and 126th (2 or 3 wins from 8)
Soup Ranked 29th, 34th, 51st and 69th. (4 or 5 wins from 8)

All the soup lists took a Castellan.

29th double battalion - 7 bullgryn, pask, 2 bassies
34th brigade/spearhead- bassie, 2 manticores, 2 wyverns
51st brigade - 3 tank commanders
69th brigade - 9 bullgryn, 3 bassies


Wow! That is not a lot of guard players....and very bad placings by mono guard AND soup guard...meanwhile, people keep talking about how guard is the best army overall...thanks to the guys like almostprogaming on YouTube and others...


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/30 13:10:02


Post by: U02dah4


Statistical data has consistenly shown mono guard to not be strong.

Personally i find its the bad player thing of whineing because they dont like allies and its directed primarily at the 32+ or - mortars

When your only occupying 2-300pts really performance is about the rest of the list not the guard itself and thats the bit the weak players don't take into account. Guard has only been good as a battery what matters is the engine


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/30 15:16:38


Post by: Ratius


Guys whats the logic behind two commanders in a loyal 32 (no other IG in it).
Surely two psykers would be better for some psychic defense/offense as the orders to the 30 guardsmen are going to be pretty tame?
Am I missing a trick?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/30 15:19:43


Post by: Horst


 Ratius wrote:
Guys whats the logic behind two commanders in a loyal 32 (no other IG in it).
Surely two psykers would be better for some psychic defense/offense as the orders to the 30 guardsmen are going to be pretty tame?
Am I missing a trick?


Well, the entire point of the Loyal 32 is to be as cheap as possible while making it a battery for CP. Of course there are good options in the Guard codex you could take, but then it's no longer the cheapest option, and you might need the room for other things in your list. Like, I'd argue you should always take 2-3 Mortar HWS if you're running the Loyal 32 as well, since those are very good for their points costs. Eventually though, you keep adding in "good, cheap Guard units", and you're playing a mostly Astra Militarum army, lol.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/30 15:23:07


Post by: Ratius


Aye but Im thinking here of loyal 32 and some knights and arms/helvs. 2 psykers better then?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/30 15:37:59


Post by: Horst


I don't know, the orders are very good. Move Move Move can help you secure a far off objective if you need it, and FRFSRF makes them decent at anti-horde. If you need anti-psyker, I'd consider taking the normal Loyal 32, and tossing in a pair of Astropaths. It would be 20 points more expensive than your Loyal 32 with Primaris Psykers, but that 20 points buys you orders, which I think are totally worth it.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/30 15:42:54


Post by: Ratius


Cool, thx!


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/31 09:21:48


Post by: DoomMouse


One 26pt astropath with psychic maelstrom is an auto include for me. It's a rare game that he doesn't get his points back in mortal wounds, and his denials can be game changing.

My take on it is usually 1 commander, one primaris psyker, 1 astropath, 3 infantry squads, 3 mortar squads (and add in more infantry squads and orders if points allow)


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/31 12:20:14


Post by: U02dah4


Yes he was an auto include before the pts reduction


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/31 20:00:09


Post by: Horst


My issue with Psychic Maelstrom is that it's a 50/50 casting chance with Warp Charge 7, and then has a 16% chance of doing nothing after it succeeds. So it isn't exactly reliable.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/31 20:27:38


Post by: U02dah4


Yes but at 26 points it makes its points back in 2 mortal wounds vs a lot of armies and its not casting just once a game. Its also really useful because it doesn't require line of sight. The astropath also gives you a deny.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/01/31 20:31:04


Post by: Horst


U02dah4 wrote:
Yes but at 26 points it makes its points back in 2 mortal wounds vs a lot of armies and its not casting just once a game. Its also really useful because it doesn't require line of sight. The astropath also gives you a deny.


Oh they're definitely good, I already have 2 of them for Nightshroud and Barrier to try to keep my tank commanders alive longer... I don't think I could find the points for a third in my list.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/03 02:32:18


Post by: Incognito15


Hey guys!

Just got two start collecting Tempestus Scions before the price gike.

Was wondering if anyone can help me with how to equip the Taurox or Taurox Primes?

I run Black Templars so dont mind them as a firebase or as a push forward as i do both.

I suck with magnets too.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/03 04:25:37


Post by: Horst


Incognito15 wrote:
Hey guys!

Just got two start collecting Tempestus Scions before the price gike.

Was wondering if anyone can help me with how to equip the Taurox or Taurox Primes?

I run Black Templars so dont mind them as a firebase or as a push forward as i do both.

I suck with magnets too.


I'd probably run them cheap, just regular Tauroxes, with the normal twin autocannons. Taurox prime is interesting, but it's just too many points for too little firepower. It's nearly doubling the cost for 2 krak missile shots.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/03 04:46:00


Post by: Incognito15


Good call. I like that idea. Can they transport bullgryns? Or just melta vets?

Also struggling with finding a place with my scions and wondered how people ran them.

Sure i can deep strike plasma and shoot but i can never be in rapid fire with the hot shot las.

Thoughts?


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/03 05:07:41


Post by: Horst


Yea, normally you're just not going to get to rapid fire those hotshot lasguns.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/03 12:48:06


Post by: Gnollu


Actually taurox is kinda easy to magnetize.

Also, taurox prime with gatling is two volley guns is damn fun to run. Even more if you put it in batallion for storm troopers discipline . There will be always some sixes in 28 shots


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/03 15:32:10


Post by: Apple Peel


Incognito15 wrote:
Hey guys!

Just got two start collecting Tempestus Scions before the price gike.

Was wondering if anyone can help me with how to equip the Taurox or Taurox Primes?

I run Black Templars so dont mind them as a firebase or as a push forward as i do both.

I suck with magnets too.


You can run Taurox Primes with Scions in lots of ways. Gatling Cannon with Storm Bolter and Hot-Shot Volley Guns cuts chaff, throw in Scions with rifles or four hot-shot volleyguns, you will have great chaff killers or objective holders.

Run with Battle Cannon, autocannons, and heavy stubber, you have a long to medium range medium/light armor shooter.

The Scions themselves can be dropped into objectives, perform suicide plasma strikes, etc. Just don’t ever mix the weapons in a squad. It’s either all plasma, melta, or hot-shot volley guns, never mix. Scions are only good in extremes like that.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/03 15:38:32


Post by: Bobthehero


IF you want to double tap with HSL you'll have to drop Scions from Valkyries or Vendettas. Those were apparently overpriced before the CA point adjustements, I don't know if they still are.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/03 15:51:24


Post by: Wolf_in_Human_Shape


117 points with base loadout now, I believe.


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/04 11:43:16


Post by: Lothar


152 points is most efficient loadout...

Btw. The dakka Taurox prime is not bad, but the range is kinda killing it. In my games there were very few turns when i did not need to move...so the BS was -1...which means lower firepower and no chance to exploding sixes...


Astra Militarum: More Competitive in 8th Edition? @ 2019/02/06 01:55:36


Post by: Khadorstompy


Hmm I have been testing Tread-head Mono guard fielding 10+ Lemans Russes. I had been using Vostroyan Conquerors but with the Price Drop on Executioners I now find them the superior option as Cadian.

Honestly it might just be that I play mostly only the people at my club and on TTS but I have had great success with the Armor heavy list but hear so many seem to think the LR isn't worth it. So I'm curious as to what I'm not running into that seems to to be busting the tanks chops so much.