722
Post by: Kanluwen
 Trickstick wrote: Kanluwen wrote:So does this magical stratagem called "Consolidate Squads".
I don't see 10 being 'horde' sized. 15 or higher would be right for a start.
Consolidate squads is extremely limited though. You can't use it to theme an army, pretty much just save the last few men from a squad.
And Consolidated Squads were the actual issues with 'hordes', not 'masses of 10 mans'. Conscript Squads were the problems, Grot Blobs, etc.
79639
Post by: TheNightWillEnd
I personally hope they find ways of making morale being more of a factor if that allows guard to actually operate larger squads again. I've never stopped being annoyed that footguard has effectively become an MSU army and 4 company commanders are on the battlefield commanding 50-100 dudes.
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
We'll see, with what they said about morale being more important, the IG stand to be one of the most negatively impacted armies out there.
110187
Post by: U02dah4
But with there low cp demand they are one of the best soupers
Long live the 32
112753
Post by: Colonel Cross
Finally my lascannon armed Valkyries won't be hitting on 5s when they move!
Hellhounds can fire more than once a game now, hopefully.
Tallarn regimental doctrine will be pretty much hot garbage until it gets revamped if all vehicle keyword units ignore penalties to hit with heavy weapons ...
Punisher tanks will be even better, right? Finally, my armored company list will not get rolled the instant it gets touched in melee.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
Could be interesting, if they shifted the Tallarn superheavy bonus to all Tallarn vehicles. So everything heavy becomes assault. It would keep the general theme of a highly mobile army and would only require to change "superheavy" into "vehicle".
119704
Post by: Kcalehc
 Colonel Cross wrote:
Tallarn regimental doctrine will be pretty much hot garbage until it gets revamped if all vehicle keyword units ignore penalties to hit with heavy weapons ...
I mean they may get to ignore the -1 to hit with Heavy Weapons against units in combat with them at least, so that's not quite as bad as you might think, but yeah, its still disappointing that its no where near as good as it used to be.
Maybe it'll just get changed to be the same as what the Infantry get; Advance and still fire - one can dream.
79639
Post by: TheNightWillEnd
So we've already gotten some hint that stuff is going to get 50% or so more expensive points-wise. With Tanks now not getting negative modifiers for moving and shooting heavy weapons and being able to shoot them in combat, how expensive is a Russ going to be now? Like 500 points?
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
 TheNightWillEnd wrote:So we've already gotten some hint that stuff is going to get 50% or so more expensive points-wise. With Tanks now not getting negative modifiers for moving and shooting heavy weapons and being able to shoot them in combat, how expensive is a Russ going to be now? Like 500 points?
Depends. If you're a Marine Tank, probably something like a 20% increase. For the NPC factions, looks like 50% increases.
52054
Post by: MrMoustaffa
It's a pretty cool way to handle vehicles in melee. Also, did you read the rule entry? If the tank can clear itself out of melee with the sponsons, the turret can engage other targets normally
Sponsons now serve the Tactical purpose they would in real life, hose off close quarters infantry so the turret can engage targets at will. Heavy flamer sponsons could have a legitimate use for tank regiment players now. 3 flamers with reroll shot amount can clear most weaker infantry easily to let the turret fire at will.
I really like the way they did this rule. Charging tanks to tie them up still has a purpose but the tanks are no longer defenseless. Well done, hopefully there's not something were missing to this. Also, it lets sentinels be less useless when moving, an added bonus!
79639
Post by: TheNightWillEnd
The blast weapon changes are potentially a gamechanger as well. Interested to see whether the formerly small template blast weapons will get that keyword again as well. Like plasma cannons and the melta cannon on the Devil Dog.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
The blast rules might also make the (frag) missile launcher a pretty good option against larger blobs.
Compared to the heavy bolter it is now better against 11+ T3 6+ targets like conscripts or cultists
ML: 6 x 1/2 x 2/3 x 5/6 = 5/3
HB: 3 x 1/2 x 2/3 x 6/6 = 1
Or against boyz
ML: 6 x 1/2 x 1/2 x 5/6 = 5/4
HB: 3 x 1/2 x 2/3 x 6/6 = 1
And meanwhile the ML would still have its krak profile. But with all the "anti-horde-changes" we might not really see bigger units any more
79639
Post by: TheNightWillEnd
I was thinking that too. Even moreso with the new PA custom regiment rules (for as long as they still exist). I've been planning to run my guys with the 18" rapid fire and -1 AP on everything within 9" of an officer. That extra bit of AP really helps both missile types.
5951
Post by: Ravajaxe
Hello.
The seigneurial approval for extra AP around officers only works in melee, right ?
So no frag at AP -1.
52054
Post by: MrMoustaffa
 Ravajaxe wrote:Hello.
The seigneurial approval for extra AP around officers only works in melee, right ?
So no frag at AP -1.
Yep, only works in melee. Officers giving infantry shooting -1 AP in 9" would be busted as all get out. FRFSRF guardsmen would be some of the deadliest shooting around point for point at that point
119704
Post by: Kcalehc
 MrMoustaffa wrote: Ravajaxe wrote:Hello.
The seigneurial approval for extra AP around officers only works in melee, right ?
So no frag at AP -1.
Yep, only works in melee. Officers giving infantry shooting -1 AP in 9" would be busted as all get out. FRFSRF guardsmen would be some of the deadliest shooting around point for point at that point
Though the Scions doctrine that gives -1 AP (Lambdan Lions) also applies to grenades, and the Grenadiers Stratagem will work on them, so you can get 10x -1 AP frag grenades. And with a precision drop, you can drop them from a Valk, at 5.1", then Grenadiers 10 guys all over an enemy infantry unit (of 11+). Maybe not the best use, but would be amusing.
52054
Post by: MrMoustaffa
 Kcalehc wrote: MrMoustaffa wrote: Ravajaxe wrote:Hello.
The seigneurial approval for extra AP around officers only works in melee, right ?
So no frag at AP -1.
Yep, only works in melee. Officers giving infantry shooting -1 AP in 9" would be busted as all get out. FRFSRF guardsmen would be some of the deadliest shooting around point for point at that point
Though the Scions doctrine that gives -1 AP (Lambdan Lions) also applies to grenades, and the Grenadiers Stratagem will work on them, so you can get 10x -1 AP frag grenades. And with a precision drop, you can drop them from a Valk, at 5.1", then Grenadiers 10 guys all over an enemy infantry unit (of 11+). Maybe not the best use, but would be amusing.
Given those grenades hit on 3's it'd be a heck of a drop on an Ork Boyz mob or something. That'd be an insane return on investment. A niche trick, but a good one to remember when you face a horde army.
100848
Post by: tneva82
So maybe in 10th edition.
119704
Post by: Kcalehc
MrMoustaffa wrote: Kcalehc wrote:
Though the Scions doctrine that gives -1 AP (Lambdan Lions) also applies to grenades, and the Grenadiers Stratagem will work on them, so you can get 10x -1 AP frag grenades. And with a precision drop, you can drop them from a Valk, at 5.1", then Grenadiers 10 guys all over an enemy infantry unit (of 11+). Maybe not the best use, but would be amusing.
Given those grenades hit on 3's it'd be a heck of a drop on an Ork Boyz mob or something. That'd be an insane return on investment. A niche trick, but a good one to remember when you face a horde army.
Some quick back of an envelope maths; I get ~15 dead Ork Boyz (on average) for an attack like that, from 10 Scions with a Re-Roll 1's to hit order. (assuming of course you can get all 10 in range), earning back their points and 50% more for 2CP.
Against a conscript/ GEQ squad, or similar its even more devastating, as they are only T3 (theoretically you could kill ~23!) obviously assuming 11+ in the squad and you can get all 10 Scions in range.
79639
Post by: TheNightWillEnd
MrMoustaffa wrote: Ravajaxe wrote:Hello.
The seigneurial approval for extra AP around officers only works in melee, right ?
So no frag at AP -1.
Yep, only works in melee. Officers giving infantry shooting -1 AP in 9" would be busted as all get out. FRFSRF guardsmen would be some of the deadliest shooting around point for point at that point
Good call! Misread that one. Good thing I never actually got a chance to play it against some unsuspecting victim.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Do you stop the rampaging Trygon from smashing a tank or that horde of 30 Hormagaunts from shredding an infantry platoon? No easy choice.
Caught this in the Overwatch blurb today...looks like we might have Infantry Platoons coming back. 
79639
Post by: TheNightWillEnd
This would please me.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
It wouldn't please me at all, unless there's some kind of activation benefit. Because it's a nonsensical fluffy bit at this point, which doesn't even hold up because characters aren't part of units anymore.
8927
Post by: Salted Diamond
Kanluwen wrote:It wouldn't please me at all, unless there's some kind of activation benefit. Because it's a nonsensical fluffy bit at this point, which doesn't even hold up because characters aren't part of units anymore.
If they return characters like Company/Platoon commanders to their respective command squads it would be fix many issues IMO.
The problem with not having platoons is the FOC if you do not want more then 1 detacment for CP reason, you'll be capped at the number of squads you can bring.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Something in the wording of look out sir has been scratching at the back of my mind all day:
"...cannot target a unit that contains any character models..."
Part of me thinks that we could see the return of the 5 man command squad, where the officer makes the whole unit untargetable. Combine that with 20-50 man squads and you have a great platoon, especially as platoon commanders with a single order work well with large blobs.
Obviously just a bit of guesswork, but it would be interesting.
23433
Post by: schadenfreude
Blasts are going to be the great double edged sword for IG and a source of endless debate.
The bad news
Engagement range is the new term for CC. Vehicles can shoot at units they are in CC with at -1, but blast weapons cannot fire when a vehicle is in CC. Blast weapons can theoretically fire at a different target if the vehicles other weapons kill everything it's in CC with.
For the most part charging a vehicle with a blast weapon will almost always shut down the big gun. Publishers can grinding advance units they are in CC with. Demolishers can not shoot their main gun.
The good news
# of shot dice is minimum 3 for squad size 6-10, auto 6s on 11+. High risk high reward
125055
Post by: Dukeofstuff
Don't use the grenade strat with your scions -- a ten man barebones scion squad precision dropping with FRFSRF will fire 37 lasgun shots, which are all s3 and can be boosted to s4 (well, 36 of them) while the grenades are a lacklust average of 35 shots of s3 and can't be boosted. If you are lambda lions, then s4/-3/1 x 36 is always better than s3/-1/1 x 35, and that's ignoring the hslp shot from the sarge (he can throw a grenade if you are really fixated on it.)
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
Is it only blast weapons that can't be shot when in CC? So the Punisher and Exterminator will still be able to fire?
81759
Post by: BaconCatBug
 Pyroalchi wrote:Is it only blast weapons that can't be shot when in CC? So the Punisher and Exterminator will still be able to fire?
Seems so.
Melee Punisher goes brrrrrrrrrrrt
52054
Post by: MrMoustaffa
Dukeofstuff wrote:Don't use the grenade strat with your scions -- a ten man barebones scion squad precision dropping with FRFSRF will fire 37 lasgun shots, which are all s3 and can be boosted to s4 (well, 36 of them) while the grenades are a lacklust average of 35 shots of s3 and can't be boosted. If you are lambda lions, then s4/-3/1 x 36 is always better than s3/-1/1 x 35, and that's ignoring the hslp shot from the sarge (he can throw a grenade if you are really fixated on it.)
Well yeah, in a normal situation you would average 35 shots or so. That's not a huge deal but still not bad.
We're pointing out that if you threw them at a unit of 11+ models in 9th, they would roll a max guaranteed 60 shots. I do guess it would be more cost effective on veterans than stormtroopers, but either way 60 BS3+ shots will hurt something. Especially since vets can do the Experienced eye strat so it would be 60 Ap1 S3 shots. Throw an order onto them to reroll hits/wounds and that's a lotta damage potential out of a simple 10 man squad of guardsmen.
11
Post by: ph34r
Dukeofstuff wrote:Don't use the grenade strat with your scions -- a ten man barebones scion squad precision dropping with FRFSRF will fire 37 lasgun shots, which are all s3 and can be boosted to s4 (well, 36 of them) while the grenades are a lacklust average of 35 shots of s3 and can't be boosted. If you are lambda lions, then s4/-3/1 x 36 is always better than s3/-1/1 x 35, and that's ignoring the hslp shot from the sarge (he can throw a grenade if you are really fixated on it.)
How do you get the basic hotshot lasguns up to strength 4 like you say?
81759
Post by: BaconCatBug
 ph34r wrote:Dukeofstuff wrote:Don't use the grenade strat with your scions -- a ten man barebones scion squad precision dropping with FRFSRF will fire 37 lasgun shots, which are all s3 and can be boosted to s4 (well, 36 of them) while the grenades are a lacklust average of 35 shots of s3 and can't be boosted. If you are lambda lions, then s4/-3/1 x 36 is always better than s3/-1/1 x 35, and that's ignoring the hslp shot from the sarge (he can throw a grenade if you are really fixated on it.)
How do you get the basic hotshot lasguns up to strength 4 like you say?
The "Point-Blank Efficacy" stratagem from Psychic Awakening: The Greater Good.
119427
Post by: gbghg
Colonel Cross wrote:
Tallarn regimental doctrine will be pretty much hot garbage until it gets revamped if all vehicle keyword units ignore penalties to hit with heavy weapons ...
Their regimental order is gonna be busted as hell with obscuring terrain however. Park your tank commander just behind the terrain piece, out of LOS. In your turn move him 6" forward onto the terrain piece so he becomes visible and can see/shoot through it. Pop the order, shoot then move back 6" off the terrain piece and become invisible again as you're no longer in los.
8927
Post by: Salted Diamond
 gbghg wrote: Colonel Cross wrote:
Tallarn regimental doctrine will be pretty much hot garbage until it gets revamped if all vehicle keyword units ignore penalties to hit with heavy weapons ...
Their regimental order is gonna be busted as hell with obscuring terrain however. Park your tank commander just behind the terrain piece, out of LOS. In your turn move him 6" forward onto the terrain piece so he becomes visible and can see/shoot through it. Pop the order, shoot then move back 6" off the terrain piece and become invisible again as you're no longer in los.
So pretty much back to the old Tau trick of move-shoot-jump.
123526
Post by: Cleric
I'm finding more reasons to run my Punisher tanks it seems... Screen against hormagaunts for my tanks? No, my tanks are the screen!
77970
Post by: Arcanis161
Cleric wrote:I'm finding more reasons to run my Punisher tanks it seems... Screen against hormagaunts for my tanks? No, my tanks are the screen!
Well, if they don't bring back the Annihilator in the Forgeworld Codex, then I'll be replacing mine with Punishers.
Also glad I haven't glued the turret on my Demolisher.
101313
Post by: ArikTaranis
Is it a pretty safe bet at this point that GW will FAQ the tallarn doctrine for regular vehicles? Maybe give them the tallarn super heavy rules?
I too am thinking of the possibilities for tallarn tank commanders. It's just hard to give up the gunnery experts/brutal strength/cadian order for the rerolls on the turret weapon! I think the tallarn order could really help with the fragility of the leman russ chassis though. Decisions decisions.
123526
Post by: Cleric
I really hope Tallarn gets a hotfix for that. Valhallans will need a look at too (morale) and Mordians might get free overwatch? I can only hope.
Speaking of hope, I hope with the points increases, conscripts will be cheaper than infantry squads model per model again. I'd love to run them as a screen or for holding an important objective (backed up by a commissar and some Bullgryn)
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Conscripts just need to be 6+ save with trash leadership, autoguns, and zero ability to receive Orders.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Kanluwen wrote:Conscripts just need to be 6+ save with trash leadership, autoguns, and zero ability to receive Orders.
Nah, they should have the same equipment as regular Guardsmen but suffer in the areas of training and LD. So pretty much the same but maybe have a -1 to the new combat attrition tests.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Trickstick wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Conscripts just need to be 6+ save with trash leadership, autoguns, and zero ability to receive Orders.
Nah, they should have the same equipment as regular Guardsmen but suffer in the areas of training and LD. So pretty much the same but maybe have a -1 to the new combat attrition tests.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaah...no. That time is long gone. Until the Guard book is rebuilt from the ground up? They need to make Conscripts viable as nothing but meaty speed bumps.
6+ save, absolute trash stats, Militarum Auxilia keywords( because they're not a Regimental unit in the first damn place), autoguns, etc.
And frankly, Conscripts as a concept don't add anything to the entirety of the army. They're really only in the book to placate the people who think Guard are nothing but "SEND IN THE NEXT WAVE!" pseudo-Stalingrad nonsense.
81759
Post by: BaconCatBug
Kanluwen wrote: Trickstick wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Conscripts just need to be 6+ save with trash leadership, autoguns, and zero ability to receive Orders.
Nah, they should have the same equipment as regular Guardsmen but suffer in the areas of training and LD. So pretty much the same but maybe have a -1 to the new combat attrition tests.
Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaah...no. That time is long gone. Until the Guard book is rebuilt from the ground up? They need to make Conscripts viable as nothing but meaty speed bumps.
6+ save, absolute trash stats, Militarum Auxilia keywords( because they're not a Regimental unit in the first damn place), autoguns, etc.
And frankly, Conscripts as a concept don't add anything to the entirety of the army. They're really only in the book to placate the people who think Guard are nothing but "SEND IN THE NEXT WAVE!" pseudo-Stalingrad nonsense.
I'd like to see what happens if you told a Cadian Whiteshield s/he wasn't a Cadian. 
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Kanluwen wrote:Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaah...no. That time is long gone. Until the Guard book is rebuilt from the ground up? They need to make Conscripts viable as nothing but meaty speed bumps.
6+ save, absolute trash stats, Militarum Auxilia keywords( because they're not a Regimental unit in the first damn place), autoguns, etc.
And frankly, Conscripts as a concept don't add anything to the entirety of the army. They're really only in the book to placate the people who think Guard are nothing but "SEND IN THE NEXT WAVE!" pseudo-Stalingrad nonsense.
Guard regiments comprise of a huge range of different doctrines, from elite special forces all the way down to meat for the grinder. I don't see the problem with having cheap conscripts available in the list. "Pseudo-Stalingrad nonsense", as you put it, is a fun and thematic army style.
I don't understand why they would get a 6+ save. They have the same standard issue kit as everyone else. They don't make a lesser form of flak armour to give to new recruits, then re-issue proper armour later. That would be odd. Also, Conscripts would mostly be considered part of a regiment. They are mostly just Guardsmen that are newly raised or have had reduced training for other reasons. The ones who survive their first battle would probably be considered true Guardsmen anyway.
Of course, you could always make a regiment where all these things are wrong. That's the joy of Guard really, anything can be acceptable in your own little sector of the galaxy.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Read what Conscripts have been fluffed as since Robin Cruddace's book. In case you don't want to hunt the quote down, here it is: Codex: Imperial Guard 2008 wrote:
The Doctrines book that preceded it had zero fluff on what a "Conscript Infantry Platoon" was, but did directly copy/paste the "Youth Army Platoon" from Codex: Eye of Terror. Compare that Robin Cruddace bit to this: Codex Eye of Terror 2003 wrote:
Want a bit more "compare and contrast"? Youth Army Platoon/Conscript Platoons were 2-5 squads per Platoon which were a 1:1 ratio with each normal Infantry Platoon taken. They had lasguns and flak armor because they were actually training with and equipped by the Cadian Interior Guard(another thing that Cruddace's book refluffed into oblivion) with a Flamer or Grenade Launcher per squad and a Heavy Bolter/Autocannon/Missile Launcher per squad. Conscripts in the Cruddace book...none of those options. They're taken as part of an Infantry Platoon and literally have an option for Commander Chenkov's "Send in the Next Wave" special rule to be added to them at 75 points. So forgive me for not thinking that Conscripts are something that should be part of the main Guard force anymore or that they should be equipped the same as Guardsmen at large. These aren't the days of the Cadian Youth Armies. The Cruddace-headed book butchered that fluff, turning a 'signature unit' of Cadia into a trash concept that literally was just there for Chenkov's nonsense to be showcased. If they want to keep Conscripts as "Guardsman Lite"? Then what the hell is the point of Guardsmen or Veterans at this juncture? This isn't Ye Olde Days where people weren't number crunching every little thing on forums or just copy/pasting netlists into things. There needs to be a viable place for each of these units to exist. Points alone will not change this from being a fact.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
I share the sentiment. I appreciate the humble conscript as they fit nicely when building less "professional" regiments. Think of tribal warriors that have just been handed lasguns and flak vest and experience military command structures for the first time. And if they are in the defense on their own planet, why should the guard only rely on those soldiers that have completed their training.
What I could see would be to make the "standard equipment kit" an upgrade. So something like T3, 6+, Autoguns for 4 points, 5+ and lasguns for 5 (assuming normal guardsmen are at 6)
23433
Post by: schadenfreude
Send in the next wave should have special unarmored conscripts and every other man gets a gun.
84825
Post by: Maxurugi
Codex: Imperial Guard 2008 wrote:
[...]This name stems from the fact that they show no regimental, company or platoon markings until they have earned the right to do so on the battlefield.[...]
Of course they're part of the regiments, but as rookies, they're simply not yet allowed to show that on the battlefield. In my opinion, they should basically be guardsmen with a lack of skill, morale and specialized gear, just like they are now. They're not a viable option right now, but that's because GW overreacted a little bit with all the nerfs they received since codex release.
101313
Post by: ArikTaranis
Personally I think it'd be really cool for them to bring back penal legion squads like they had in 5th ed, purely for the cool factor. Give them some rules for sneaking and backstabbing/fighting dirty etc.
I do wonder if they'll move veterans back to troops, as they seem to be not a commonly used unit.
70601
Post by: ragnorack1
I'm probably jumping the gun here but couldn't see any mention of "rule of three" or "boots on the ground" in the leaked rules.
Air cavalry scions might be a bit more viable if that's the case, no worries about not being able field enough HQ's for order saturation and although still probably not worth their points aircraft will not be as easily ignored in favour of blasting infantry off the table, especially if they have a little more damage output from no movement penalty to heavy weapons.
81759
Post by: BaconCatBug
ragnorack1 wrote:I'm probably jumping the gun here but couldn't see any mention of "rule of three" or "boots on the ground" in the leaked rules.
Air cavalry scions might be a bit more viable if that's the case, no worries about not being able field enough HQ's for order saturation and although still probably not worth their points aircraft will not be as easily ignored in favour of blasting infantry off the table, especially if they have a little more damage output from no movement penalty to heavy weapons.
Rule of 3 still exists.
70601
Post by: ragnorack1
Damn it! Ah well
23433
Post by: schadenfreude
Big 9E rumor for guard.
The space marine leaks have melta guns going down in cost to the same price as plasma in 9th
30489
Post by: Trickstick
I did love my old melta + shotgun vets. Had a real engineer look to them, as I gave them all the hwt backpacks and extra equipment.
101313
Post by: ArikTaranis
I read on one of the goonhammer articles that Prepared Positions has been removed. If true, I feel like this is a shame for Imperial Guard, even if we are more likely now to get first turn with a straight roll off. It was a very fluffy strategem for us too, with guardsmen hunkering down in trenches or catachans waiting in ambush etc.
20963
Post by: Kommissar Kel
 BaconCatBug wrote:ragnorack1 wrote:I'm probably jumping the gun here but couldn't see any mention of "rule of three" or "boots on the ground" in the leaked rules.
Air cavalry scions might be a bit more viable if that's the case, no worries about not being able field enough HQ's for order saturation and although still probably not worth their points aircraft will not be as easily ignored in favour of blasting infantry off the table, especially if they have a little more damage output from no movement penalty to heavy weapons.
Rule of 3 still exists.
Just to be pedantic:
No, now Rule of 3 exists.
"Rule of 3" was never the correct designation, just the most common occurrence. In a 1000 or < point game you only got 2, in a > 2,000 game you could take 4.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Points are fun! I linked the Guard timestamp. Not even listened to it all yet, just heard Guardsmen/Conscripts = 5pts and thought I would pass it on.
p.s. do we start a 9th edition thread at some point? Is it best to do that on official release day, to keep all the random rumour stuff locked up in here when it dies?
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
I listened through it and tried to take notes. Overall not too bad Price increases with some reaaaaally odd decisions.
The one most strange were the Leman Russ weapons. After saying that blast weapons would go up in price because they are now so good against hordes they left Demolisher, Eradicator Executioner at the same price, made the Battlecannon 2 points cheaper and increased the Punisher by 5 and the Exterminator by 13 (!!!). I mean... really? The Exterminator? A Twin Autocannon now costs 150% as much as two single autocannons?
It's just... why? Am I blind and the Exterminator suddenly got some rules that make it tremendously powerful? Or am I going deaf and have misheard?
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Pyroalchi wrote:It's just... why? Am I blind and the Exterminator suddenly got some rules that make it tremendously powerful? Or am I going deaf and have misheard?
It can fire in melee, which is nice. Probably still better to take a punisher though.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
Ok... fair enough. But as you said, the Punisher is likely still better.
I think I'm just a bit bummed because I really like the look of the Exterminator while being aware that it was pretty subpar in 8th mathematically. So I hoped the price changes would make it at least slightly competetive in 9th. Guess I was wrong.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Vulture with punishers is now 225? Ouch. I know everything went up, but it was already pretty expensive.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Sentinels seem to be doing alright. No increase, only weapon increases to worry about. Scout flamers only +1 point too. Plus no more restrictions on move and shoot.
I can see 3x sentinels being in every army now, to unlock brigades.
105913
Post by: MinscS2
Bullgryns barely went up.
Ogryns stayed the same.
Guardsmen barely went up.
Priests barely went up.
*Laughs in close combat*
29049
Post by: Maxzero
 MinscS2 wrote:Bullgryns barely went up.
Ogryns stayed the same.
Guardsmen barely went up.
Priests barely went up.
*Laughs in close combat*
Regular Russ got mauled. Might have no choice.
Plasms Scions and Valks got through fairly unscathed as well.
Melee guard + Scion drop force?
Would contest objectives very well.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
So, plasma seems to be the king of infantry squad weapons now. 5 pts, same cost as everything else? I can see meltas maybe being useful in some applications, but who is going to take a grenade launcher or flamer?
Also, what do people think of 2pt sergeant bolters? My go to this edition has been bolter/plasma tallarn, but 2pts seems harder to justify then 1pt.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
They really want to kill off the idea of sergeants with rifle-class ranged weapons instead of pistols is about all I think of that.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Kanluwen wrote:They really want to kill off the idea of sergeants with rifle-class ranged weapons instead of pistols is about all I think of that.
You see, that is where we differ. I don't think there is a motive. I think they created some sort of general guidelines for point changes, and just fed them through. So many things have gone to nearest 5pts, or had 5pt increases across the board. I just think 1pt weapons went to 2pts generally or something. All hail the mighty algorithm!.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Oh I believe there's a motive. It's the same motive that keeps Guardsmen at the same points as Conscripts.
Cruddace is a big part of it. He's always been an advocate of patterning the Guard after WWI stuff.
29049
Post by: Maxzero
Trickstick wrote:So, plasma seems to be the king of infantry squad weapons now. 5 pts, same cost as everything else? I can see meltas maybe being useful in some applications, but who is going to take a grenade launcher or flamer?
Also, what do people think of 2pt sergeant bolters? My go to this edition has been bolter/plasma tallarn, but 2pts seems harder to justify then 1pt.
Plasma Scions + custom regiment 18" RF range and 4+ save infantry core with more Plasma.
Some Indirect fire: Basi double shot, Full payload Manticore and some 95 point Medusa Batteries?
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Maxzero wrote:Plasma Scions + custom regiment 18" RF range and 4+ save infantry core with more Plasma.
I don't think scions can use custom traits.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
Trickstick wrote:Maxzero wrote:Plasma Scions + custom regiment 18" RF range and 4+ save infantry core with more Plasma.
I don't think scions can use custom traits.
They cannot. Anyone who attempts to use them is a cheating git.
29049
Post by: Maxzero
Trickstick wrote:Maxzero wrote:Plasma Scions + custom regiment 18" RF range and 4+ save infantry core with more Plasma.
I don't think scions can use custom traits.
I mean 2 Battlions. Once Scion Plasma and 1 custom regiment.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
Interesting thing though: if I heard correctly Melta Special Weapons Squads went from 57 to 45. And Plasma SWS at least stayed at 45.
@ Trickstick
but who is going to take a grenade launcher or flamer?
*sigh*, I will keep them. I liked them in 8th because of their look even though they seemed pretty subpar at 3points vs. Plasma/Melta. But you are right, from a competetive point of view it's hard to see why they got 66% more expensive while the most effective Special weapons both got drops.
28269
Post by: Red Corsair
Maxzero wrote: MinscS2 wrote:Bullgryns barely went up.
Ogryns stayed the same.
Guardsmen barely went up.
Priests barely went up.
*Laughs in close combat*
Regular Russ got mauled. Might have no choice.
Plasms Scions and Valks got through fairly unscathed as well.
Melee guard + Scion drop force?
Would contest objectives very well.
The Russ kind of had to increase. Your going to flame broil anything that tags them now, which was their biggest weakness lol. You can actually field an armored column now and not really need screeners. 107 was absolutely stupid before if I am honest.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
FAQ has been updated. Automatically Appended Next Post: And Tallarn is simply advancing makes heavy into assault. Ok I guess but I'm not attached to it.
73007
Post by: Grimskul
Surprised they didn't change Mordians to being able to overwatch for free tbh. They were already a regimental trait that almost no one took outside of flavour reasons, being unique in having army-wide overwatch and hitting on 5's while doing so would have at least made them worth considering at some level. Now they're even worse than when they started off at.
Tallarn changes kinda suck, at least tanks wise. Are they still worth taking for the relic/strat now that outflanking is a generic rule?
119704
Post by: Kcalehc
Not that bad for Hellhounds, Flamer Sentinels, and a triple heavy flamer LRBT. Probably some niche uses, but overall most won't be advancing with their Leman Russ's as the double shot is generally more valuable.
Though a TC, using the Tallarn Order, and advancing, could get in range of heavy flamers on turn 1 (10+ D6+6 inch move, 8" range); not amazing, but a nasty surprise for those not expecting it.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
You are giving up your double turret by doing that though.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
I'm not really sure if it is worth it but Tallarn could now take 3 Heavy Flamer Scout Sentinels, make the Scout Move (9''), then normal move (9''), then advamce (D6'') and thus might(!) be in range to flame things in the opposite deployment zone. Also if you add on "crush them" they might then even be close enough for a charge.
I'm also really hoping that the Cyclops is somehow reworded in a way that Tallarn Cyclopes can detonate after advancing. That alone might make Tallarn worthwhile.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
So I have been looking at the indirect fire, and wondering which to take. What do people think of manticores vs basilisks now? Both got only small points increases, mainly through their hull gun. I can see a pair of either being very useful.
I'll probably be avoiding the wrath detachment, as I need the hammer of sunderance and don't want to take a second detachment like I used to. So that evens the two units out a bit.
I think indirect fire is going to be pretty important, with the new terrain rules.
105913
Post by: MinscS2
Game ever only lasting 5 turns is indirectly a buff to the Manticore, since it can now shoot 80% of the time, instead potentially only 57% of the time.
In a vacuum I'd probably take the Manticore over the Basilisk:
1 less AP and 1 less shot (assuming both survive to the 5th turn) but averaging 7 shots instead of 4,47, and on occasion that extra point of Strength will help.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Did they ever clarify how 2d6 shots work against 6-10 models? It is min 3 on 2d6, or min 3 on each die? I get the feeling it will be the former.
81759
Post by: BaconCatBug
Trickstick wrote:Did they ever clarify how 2d6 shots work against 6-10 models? It is min 3 on 2d6, or min 3 on each die? I get the feeling it will be the former.
They don't need to clarify anything because the rule is, for once, crystal clear. The problem is with the players not liking the rule or being unable to read, not with the rule. It's the former. Regardless of what type of dice or how many you roll against a unit of 6-10, the final result, if it's less than 3, become a 3. D6 vs 6-10 models is a range of 3-6 shots. 2D6 vs 6-10 models is a range of 3-12 shots. 4D6 vs 6-10 models is a range of 4-24 shots. 3D3 vs 6-10 models is a range of 3-9 shots.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
BaconCatBug wrote: Trickstick wrote:Did they ever clarify how 2d6 shots work against 6-10 models? It is min 3 on 2d6, or min 3 on each die? I get the feeling it will be the former.
They don't need to clarify anything because the rule is, for once, crystal clear. The problem is with the players not liking the rule or being unable to read, not with the rule.
It's the former. Regardless of what type of dice or how many you roll against a unit of 6-10, the final result, if it's less than 3, become a 3.
D6 vs 6-10 models is a range of 3-6 shots.
2D6 vs 6-10 models is a range of 3-12 shots.
4D6 vs 6-10 models is a range of 4-24 shots.
3D3 vs 6-10 models is a range of 3-9 shots.
Oh I agree that it was pretty clear, but you know how GW is. It is clear, until it suddenly was wrong the whole time. (-:
So, I found out that the rocket pod vulture actually dropped by 2 points, making it 50pts cheaper than a punisher vulture. Do people think that such a saving is worth the reduction in firepower? Exactly how much worse is 4d6 blast with -1ap, rather than 40 shots? I know it is worse, but is it 50pts worse?
23433
Post by: schadenfreude
Regular Russ tanks took a hit but tank commanders with a single heavy flamer are only up 10 points. I still see 3 as competitive.
With the changes to rerolls do manticore and wyvern reroll all of their dice now?
The big winner that I see is SWS and CCS with the big cut in special weapons costs. What's going to make them really good is they are 2PL and new outflank 10PL worth of units.
The cyclops is even more of a beast now. For 1 CP reserve 2 SWS/CCS and 2 cyclops. When they come in on your own board edge they can come in as close to the enemy as you want. If someone tags a vehicle with a blast weapon at the edge of your deployment zone there is nothing they can do about a cyclops rolling in and going boom.
100848
Post by: tneva82
Pyroalchi wrote:I listened through it and tried to take notes. Overall not too bad Price increases with some reaaaaally odd decisions.
The one most strange were the Leman Russ weapons. After saying that blast weapons would go up in price because they are now so good against hordes they left Demolisher, Eradicator Executioner at the same price, made the Battlecannon 2 points cheaper and increased the Punisher by 5 and the Exterminator by 13 (!!!). I mean... really? The Exterminator? A Twin Autocannon now costs 150% as much as two single autocannons?
It's just... why? Am I blind and the Exterminator suddenly got some rules that make it tremendously powerful? Or am I going deaf and have misheard?
Twin autocannon vs autocannon explanation is that twin autocannon is exclusively vehicle weapon while autocannon is also on infantry. And vehicles can move and shoot that without penalty and shoot in combat. Same thing can be seen with heavy bolters(10/30) in SM/SOB for example.
Though still expensive but that explains why some twin weapons cost more.
Incidentall means individual heavy bolter/autocannon is either too expensive on infantry or too cheap in vehicle 
23433
Post by: schadenfreude
Any vehicle weapon without blast went up in points. That's why heavy bolter and punishes became so expensive.
Thunderer siege tanks and cheaper than Russ tanks for now. They will likely raise the price after people finish their conversions.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
 schadenfreude wrote:Any vehicle weapon without blast went up in points. That's why heavy bolter and punishes became so expensive.
Thunderer siege tanks and cheaper than Russ tanks for now. They will likely raise the price after people finish their conversions.
Thunderers can't double shoot their cannon though.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
@tneva82: a that makes sense now, thanks. It's still... odd that the blast weapons of the LR did not went up too. But maybe the new CC rules really make the Exterminator worth 30 points. I can at least hope to be pleasantly surprised
23433
Post by: schadenfreude
Trickstick wrote: schadenfreude wrote:Any vehicle weapon without blast went up in points. That's why heavy bolter and punishes became so expensive.
Thunderer siege tanks and cheaper than Russ tanks for now. They will likely raise the price after people finish their conversions.
Thunderers can't double shoot their cannon though.
They lack the Leman Russ keyword but still have grinding advance. They can not take any additional weapons.
81759
Post by: BaconCatBug
schadenfreude wrote: Trickstick wrote: schadenfreude wrote:Any vehicle weapon without blast went up in points. That's why heavy bolter and punishes became so expensive.
Thunderer siege tanks and cheaper than Russ tanks for now. They will likely raise the price after people finish their conversions.
Thunderers can't double shoot their cannon though.
They lack the Leman Russ keyword but still have grinding advance. They can not take any additional weapons.
They don't have Grinding Advance.
1) Their "Grinding Advance" rule was different to that of Leman Russes and gave a different effect.
2) It was errata'd to be called "Lumbering Advance" instead, which as shown by the Monolith and Land Raider errata, will just be yeeted since the Core Rules let you do the same effect.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
schadenfreude wrote:They lack the Leman Russ keyword but still have grinding advance. They can not take any additional weapons.
Thunderers don't have grinding advance. The IA FAQ renamed it to lumbering advance to prevent confusion.
100848
Post by: tneva82
Pyroalchi wrote:@tneva82: a that makes sense now, thanks. It's still... odd that the blast weapons of the LR did not went up too. But maybe the new CC rules really make the Exterminator worth 30 points. I can at least hope to be pleasantly surprised
Well I'm not sold it's right price but that's at least explanation why some twin weapons cost more than 2x individual weapons. There's certain logic on it though is the lack of melee shooting on blast weapons that much of harm that the benefit you get from having blast effect is so outweighed(though as hordes generally are going to die you rarely actually USE the blast rule for auto shot count)
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
From what I picked up, I gathered the Salamander Scout Tank, Tauros Assault Vehicle and Tauros Venator are all being removed? Makes me sad a bit as I really liked those and had some counts as of those.
On a more positive note for those still liking their horses (like me) if I heard correctly the deathriders with lances all went down 2 points (and are still there which might be more important).
22133
Post by: Spartan089
It seems scions are over all the big winners of our points adjustments, before covid I saw a lot of tournament lists take them in large numbers, no small part due to psychic awakening giving them some really good buffs. Now that hordes are even more weakened I can see MSU plasma scions being very very competitive.
I would also say with the new blast rules Leman Russ' would have been competitive but then they went up 28 points for a bone stock one and plasma sponsons DOUBLED in cost. I mean you can still do it in a spearhead, which gives them objective secured. You can can field about 8-9 Leman Russ and 2 tank commands in a 2k list with a few points left over for upgrades. Remove a Russ and you can kit them all out with a hull heavy flamer and flamer sponsons which they can now fire in melee, no more getting tagged and taken out of commission. Even with the point hike this WOULD have been my go to plan if GW didn't create those abominations known as Eradicators, the fact they can literally make more than twice their points back or more a turn on this list just makes me want to weep. I literally cant think of more poorly designed and under-costed unit that completely counters so many other units, I know I'm going on a tangent but I feel their mere existence will completely skew the entire game's balance going into 9th.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
I'm trying to cross the first hurdle of Guard list building: regiment choice. I used to choose Tallarn exclusively, due to hating move and shoot penalties. Now that that is no longer a thing, I have the whole range to choose from. Let's look at what I could take:
Cadian: not for me. I do not like incentives to stay still, as I find myself always using them. This leads me to playing gunline, which I hate. I want a mobile force (hence Tallarn), so no.
Catachan: interesting. I know that this has been super popular but now I am thinking it could be my thing. The reroll blasts is quite nice. Against 6+ units you are guaranteed a 3, so rerolling 2s and 3s no longer has a disadvantage. Plus str4 Guardsmen sound fun.
Tallarn: hmmmm. They did get some cool new tricks. Hellhounds and flame sentinels that can advance and shoot could be interesting, plus I still like advance and shoot infantry.
Valhallan: I like the vehicle durability but they just don't seem as good as other Regiments. I like the idea of using the relic bolt pistol to make an old-fashioned commissar, but that's not exactly something to base an army off of.
Vostroyan: I don't know why but I tend to brush these guys off. Maybe I should reconsider them, 1cp for +1 to hit is nice, and having longer range on things like Demolishers and Punishers could be interesting.
Armageddon, Mordian: Eh, I don't love mech and unfortunately Mordian seem a bit weak now.
Custom: I used to like the idea of custom, although my hatred of moving penalties won out. Now? I would want to use 2 detachments of them and can't stomach the CP hit.
Anyway, this is more of a way to organise my thoughts and maybe start some regiment discussion. With the #1 reason for my regiment choice being moot, the choice is now completely open for me. I guess I could experiment a bit now.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
When I went over my collection to readjust costs, I had the impression that my tallarn vehicles now have quite some arguments going for heavy flamers.
1. Since they now cost the same as heavy bolters they are not the more expensive hull weapon anymore
2. advance + shoot for tallarn vehicles adds D6'' to their threat range
3. now that you can fire into melee getting close is not that bad anymore.
As Trickstick said: Tallarn Flamersentinels, Hellhounds, Bane Wolfs, Chimeras with flamers... all seem significantly more attractive than in 8th to me.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
I'm wondering just how effective that d6" will be, against the massive benefits that you get from Catachan. Rerolling flamer shots would be really useful.
Btw, I think there has been a subtle change to the way Commissars work, and would like other opinions. In 8th, if you had a +1ld, for example from a Catachan officer, along with a Commissar, you couldn't +1 to the Commissars ld when used by a squad. However, reading the basic rules (free rules, pg 8, "modifying characteristics"):
If a rule instructs you to replace one characteristic with a specified value, change the relevant characteristic to the new value before applying any modifiers that apply from other rules (if any) to the new value.
The way I am reading this, you could replace your Guardsman's ld with an 8/9, then apply buffs like Catachan officers, or banners. This seems a nice little buff, as ld11 Guardsmen would be nice.
Edit: Ehhhhh, on second reading I think this is going to be one of those RAW-holes. The commissar's ability doesn't replace the ld, it says "use the Commissar’s Leadership instead of their own.". It may work, it may be slightly too different wording? I may as well YMDC it I guess.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
I just realised that our +2 to hit sentinel strat doesn't really work that well any more...
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
It seems it only gets full benefit against things that are -1 to hit. But as far as I understand that's the effect of light cover terrain, so might be pretty common
119704
Post by: Kcalehc
Trickstick wrote:I just realised that our +2 to hit sentinel strat doesn't really work that well any more...
Yep, though useful against anything with a -1 to hit, as you still end up with +1, but yeah, it'll not be quite as good as it looks like it should be on paper. Nice perhaps for Tallarn Plasma Cannon Sentinels, (unless they change the plasma thing to natural 1's) to advance and shoot and not risk blowing up, even against a -1 to hit target. But very niche really.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
I guess it makes them ok anti-air too.
125055
Post by: Dukeofstuff
astropaths still strip cover saves, right? has that changed in any way with terrain in ninth / does that interact with the new terrain?
same question for the catachan rule "burn them out" where a flamer can cost the unit being in cover.
I reckon its stripping the cover save specifically, and not affecting any minuses to be hit from any of the new terrains?
119704
Post by: Kcalehc
Dukeofstuff wrote:astropaths still strip cover saves, right? has that changed in any way with terrain in ninth / does that interact with the new terrain?
same question for the catachan rule "burn them out" where a flamer can cost the unit being in cover.
I reckon its stripping the cover save specifically, and not affecting any minuses to be hit from any of the new terrains?
Both rules specifically state that the targeted unit gains "no bonus to their saving throws" for bring in cover, so any other cover effects would still apply (i.e. -1 to hit).
125193
Post by: morpheusgotmeout
What do you think about AMs ability to earn the full 45 Primary Mission points against Marines?
I've been trying to come up with strategies to win these points, and while I feel confident against several factions, I think we are auto-lose against marines.
The combination of eradicators, eliminators, infiltratrators, tough dreadnoughts, smash captains, drop pod terminators, bikers and scouts, I think our ability to reach and hold midboard objectives until our next command phase is pretty much impossible.
We can't ignore midboard objectives and just sit back and shoot as they will outscore us = marine auto win.
I had this idea to take a super heavy detachment of Gorgons (with their 5+ invuln) filled with bullgryn and massed bodies, but even the Gorgon looks to have been legended, not to mention there's an easy 15 secondary points for titan Slayers. Stormlord are too expensive and flimsy, Crassus are too flimsy. Chimera don't have capacity and are paper thin and expensive.
I have hope in a Deft Manoeuvring trio of armoured sentinels and infantry being able to hold one objective in our own deployment zone, maybe for up to 3 turns. Possibly if we get first turn we can crash midboard objective with massed bodies in Chimera and hold them for a turn, possibly two. But 3 turns virtually impossible. With second turn, no way Scoring Hold More in any scenario, forget it. I don't think it is possible against marines, and therefore we go into that matchup with a starting 15 point handicap. Thus auto-lose.
Anyone have some hopeful ideas?
116670
Post by: Ordana
Bullgryns same like a unit made to just park their ass on an objective and refuse to be moved.
Moral is less dangerous so even those 10 guardsmen, while squishy for sure, take a bit of shooting to remove.
Plus your example seems to focus a lot on the Guard getting shot off objectives but not the Marines.
Those Basilisks and Manticores will require marines to commit to holding objectives aswell to survive a turn.
37701
Post by: Zond
How is an all or almost all infantry horde looking in 9th?
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Zond wrote:How is an all or almost all infantry horde looking in 9th?
Personally I think it is looking nice, even though people are saying it isn't. Denying some of the easier secondaries is good, and we have nothing that is hit too much by blast rules.
125193
Post by: morpheusgotmeout
 Ordana wrote:Plus your example seems to focus a lot on the Guard getting shot off objectives but not the Marines.
Yah, because I don't think we can outshoot marines anymore.
The fact that we have to take (and hold until next command phase) midboard objectives to win on points means we can't just screen out our deployment zone anymore with troops, which also can no longer conga line. Opponent can simply pay 1 CP to outflank a trio of Eradicators and one shot a Tank Commander when they please. Any troops we do send up the board to take objectives will be wiped away effortlessly with bolter fire. We can't bad touch those tactical warsuits, nor even tri-point anything. Almost our entire army will not get a save of any sort against marines, and any vehicles we take to try to survive will just give up Secondaries too easily with their lack of invulnerable saves.
I'm afraid we will spend the whole game struggling to claim a second objectives when the marine opponent will easily be scoring Hold More every turn.
122056
Post by: Asymmetric
I mean, you can take a lot of bullogyrns in a 2,000pts list if you really want to try to muscle Astartes off an objective. They seem winners out of the point changes.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
Kanluwen wrote:Cruddace is a big part of it. He's always been an advocate of patterning the Guard after WWI stuff.
Ironic, considering the most WW1-like regiment can actually outfit its sergeants and officers with all sorts of rifles.
722
Post by: Kanluwen
 Bobthehero wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Cruddace is a big part of it. He's always been an advocate of patterning the Guard after WWI stuff.
Ironic, considering the most WW1-like regiment can actually outfit its sergeants and officers with all sorts of rifles.
I've actually been considering running DKoK as the basis for a Kasrkin Regiment lately. I know you and some others gave me guff for my Kasrkin unit concepts being 'ripoffs' of Grenadiers, but the unit is incredibly well designed for the roles it can take.
116670
Post by: Ordana
Asymmetric wrote:I mean, you can take a lot of bullogyrns in a 2,000pts list if you really want to try to muscle Astartes off an objective. They seem winners out of the point changes.
I think Bullgryns are pretty much an auto-include to have a touch unit capable of taking and holding objectives.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Ordana wrote:Asymmetric wrote:I mean, you can take a lot of bullogyrns in a 2,000pts list if you really want to try to muscle Astartes off an objective. They seem winners out of the point changes.
I think Bullgryns are pretty much an auto-include to have a touch unit capable of taking and holding objectives.
But how many? Do you go for a full 9? Plus, what shields are best now? I know that the rules change on wound allocation removes a lot of the flexibility that they used to have, but a couple of invulnerables could still do a bit of tanking.
83742
Post by: gungo
Kanluwen wrote: Bobthehero wrote: Kanluwen wrote:Cruddace is a big part of it. He's always been an advocate of patterning the Guard after WWI stuff.
Ironic, considering the most WW1-like regiment can actually outfit its sergeants and officers with all sorts of rifles.
I've actually been considering running DKoK as the basis for a Kasrkin Regiment lately. I know you and some others gave me guff for my Kasrkin unit concepts being 'ripoffs' of Grenadiers, but the unit is incredibly well designed for the roles it can take.
DKOK are a point more expensive but has a ton of different options and some strong stuff like engineers... it all depends on the fw book to update the rules from the original index which they claimed they did... should be a essentially a whole new codex.
125193
Post by: morpheusgotmeout
Trickstick wrote: Ordana wrote:
I've been thinking if I'm going to take them then I'll take 2 full squads, so 18, to claim/hold 2 midboard objectives. Though I think any list that can put out a heap of mortal wounds will just toast them.
Also they're a bit slow for 5/8 GT missions to reach midboard objectives T1 unless charging or via a lucky advance roll, so they really need to be backed up by something fast and ideally obsec.
So what I'm thinking is cheap scout Sentinel squads as a forward screen/speedbump and shoot smoke launchers, followed by a Chimera each that together sits on the objective leaving no room for obsec to get on. Bullgryn follow behind and sure up that objective for a couple turns. Tallarn punisher tank aces dart in and out of obscuring cover using Get around behind them and remove enemy obsec threatening those midboard objectives.
If I can get hold more for 2-3 turns, that will be close to a win. Dont know if it actually has the ability to pull this off, and will be easily countered by many lists getting 1st turn
125055
Post by: Dukeofstuff
So the big news is, competitive play will outlaw the vigilis detachments and the whole "gaurd basilisk vs manticore" discussion just shifted against the basilisk and wyvern.
There is no removing cover for the wyvern's double shot. Cause it only shoots once, and full cover effects make this gun near unto useless against marines, sisters, or similar.
There is no doubletapping your manticore cause its not a thing now. So it clearly lacks oomph in competitive lists compared to the manticore (also favored in a short game.)
similarly, there is no scion stormtrooper drop detachment because GW doesn't like the gaurd to shoot as well as marines, which they prefer to sell (seriously, what is with these morons?) .. and because there is no emperor's fist, tallarn doctrines suddenly have value again (there is no "this tank full moves and fires everythign and hits you a lot" strat for LRBT now.)
So... annnoying.
I think this favors scions that have extra range, OR lambda lions (extra ap and a very good warlord/relic combo) OR iotan gorgonnes (shadows of the stormtrooper ability in their extra hits on a natural six).
I think it very much favors manticores over other gaurd artillery pieces, as well.
As GW continues to jerk us all aroudn with the ever evolving ruleset of what will or won't be nerfed or permitted in ninth (what donkey-caves) ... we wait to see if valkyries will still be permittedd to drop troops on the move or if they are nerfed to act like other transports, leaving only the drop pod with any first turn alpha strike abilities, or the hated ravengaurd aggressor squads.
Anyway. Someone had to say it. Also, I just noticed you can't stack -1 from an astropath on -1 from hovering anymore, so, well, screw me. Most armies are so shooty that only -1 doesn't make the birds very survivable.
I really am starting to not like ninth and I have not eVen Met It Yet.
122056
Post by: Asymmetric
Was thinking of brining my 1,500points 5/6th edition Guard army i havent touched in 8 years up to a 2,000points 9th edition army since a mass mechanised force looks better now. Basically just have to paint up the bullgyrns and add and a third hellhound so hopefully wouldnt take much addtional painting/modelling for myself.
1xBat
Jury Rigged Repairs
Gunnery Experts
HQ
Tank Commander 195
Battle Cannon / Lascannon Hull
Tank Ace - Master Mechanic
Relic - Kurov aquila
Tank Commander 195
Battle Cannon / Lascannon Hull
Tank Commander 195
Battle Cannon / Lascannon Hull
Elites
9 x Bullgyrns 342
Power Maul / brute shield
Troops
10x Guardsmen 140
Melta
Chimera (ML/HF)
10x Guardsmen 140
Melta
Chimera (ML/HF)
10x Guardsmen 140
Melta
Chimera (ML/HF)
Fast Attack
HellHound 120
Heavy Flamer Hull
HellHound 120
Heavy Flamer Hull
HellHound 120
Heavy Flamer Hull
Heavy Support
Manticore 145
Support Ace - Full Payload
Heavy Flamer Hull
Manticore 145
Heavy Flamer Hull
1,997pts.
3x Chimera squads, 3x hellhounds and 9xbullgyrns to throw at objectives. 3 tank commanders & 2 manitcore firebase.
Maybe I'll swap a LR turret for some variety, just more modelling time. Luckly I modelled my LRs in an era when sponsons were bad and now they are way overcoasted I dont feel so bad about not having any.
125055
Post by: Dukeofstuff
I think the ettiquite is to put lists in the list forum, or at minimum to put them inside spoiler markers here so they don't confuse thread folowers.
Re this I reckon ninth is anything's ballgame. My own ninth list is under revision since the surprise announcement that we can't use specialty detachments in competitive (torney) play in ninth, which, hehehe, "failed to amuse me".
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Goonhammer has a nice little article up, about Guard in 9th. Automatically Appended Next Post: Hmmm, I'm really getting tempted by the Disciplined Shooters and Wilderness Survivors combo, using bolter/plasma squads. Permanent cover frees up so much worry about your movement phase, and 18" rapid fire does the same thing. I'm going to have to at least test it.
However, I think this spoils my original brigade idea. Any vehicles you bring basically get no traits. I had written off the second detachment, but maybe 3cp isn't a huge ask for extremely powerful traits. It really is the sort of thing that would need to be playtested, as if I have sufficient CP then it is a great investment to get Gunnery Expert, with repairs/pyromaniacs/spotter. Plus it could make Russes obsec in a spearhead.
I just have this odd feeling that after trying 18" double taps, I will never go back.
55178
Post by: Gibblets
Hot tip: Devil Dogs will be the new thing with no move penalty and things being vehicle/monster heavy. Then once the meta shifts to hordes and objective play then bring back Hellhounds.
Also +1 to Sentinels and Flamers
106383
Post by: JNAProductions
 Gibblets wrote:Hot tip: Devil Dogs will be the new thing with no move penalty and things being vehicle/monster heavy. Then once the meta shifts to hordes and objective play then bring back Hellhounds.
Also +1 to Sentinels and Flamers
Didn't Devil Dogs already ignore the penalty, since their main cannon is Assault?
Or am I misremembering?
81759
Post by: BaconCatBug
 JNAProductions wrote: Gibblets wrote:Hot tip: Devil Dogs will be the new thing with no move penalty and things being vehicle/monster heavy. Then once the meta shifts to hordes and objective play then bring back Hellhounds. Also +1 to Sentinels and Flamers
Didn't Devil Dogs already ignore the penalty, since their main cannon is Assault? Or am I misremembering?
No, you're right. Also the Devil Dog is the anti tank pattern (Melta Cannon). And the other two turret heavy weapons auto-hit anyway. Now they can fire in Melee though makes them surprisingly good anti-hoard melee options though, since most hoards can't realistically punch T7 all that well. The Chem Cannon will be good against tough enemies (2+ wound, -3AP), while the Inferno cannon wounds T3 on a 2+ anyway, so the extra D6 shots is more beneficial. Plus Hellhounds get +2 to explode, so they can take a handful down when they die too.
49087
Post by: IVIOOSE
Did forge world discontinue the centaur light assault carrier? It got new points but not sure if it went to legends as they don’t sell it anymore that I can find
10335
Post by: Razerous
So am I right in reading, from the points, no more leman russ conqueror? 
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
@ Centaur: it looks like it. Would be sad, I liked it a lot.
One other thing I'm currently trying to wrap my head around: with a lot of things going up, the Multilaser Carnodon went down (Edit: 8) points (for 80 total or 85 if you take that 5th ML) since the Twin Multilaser is now costed like two single MLs. Its 10 T7 3+ wounds for 160% of one barebones infantry squad or 1/2 of the cheapest Leman Russ. Sure the damage sucks and the model is not cheap in real money, but... maybe? It can also shoot in melee with all its weapons since non of the options is blast.
But I completely lack experience to make a well funded decision if that has a quality of its own.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Pyroalchi wrote:@ Centaur: it looks like it. Would be sad, I liked it a lot.
One other thing I'm currently trying to wrap my head around: with a lot of things going up, the Multilaser Carnodon went down 10 points (for 80 total or 85 if you take that 5th ML) since the Twin Multilaser is now costed like two single MLs. Its 10 T7 3+ wounds for 160% of one barebones infantry squad or 1/2 of the cheapest Leman Russ. Sure the damage sucks and the model is not cheap in real money, but... maybe? It can also shoot in melee with all its weapons since non of the options is blast.
But I completely lack experience to make a well funded decision if that has a quality of its own.
Carnodon looks kinda nice, although it does suffer in one area. It is FW, so you have no idea if it is suddenly going to double in points, or just disappear. Plus I am a bit more partial to the volkite carnodon, but that's mainly because volkite weapons are cool.
122056
Post by: Asymmetric
Since LR's are objective secured in a spearhead, is anyone got any plans/thoughts on just rocking up with a full tank company in 9th? i.e. 2 tank commanders and gratious numbers of LR? Probably all sponsons removed to keep cost down.
Should be able to fill out a list with 2 Tank Commanders & 9 Leman Russ's + 1 support unit at 2,000points.
119515
Post by: Gnollu
Asymmetric wrote:Since LR's are objective secured in a spearhead, is anyone got any plans/thoughts on just rocking up with a full tank company in 9th? i.e. 2 tank commanders and gratious numbers of LR? Probably all sponsons removed to keep cost down.
Should be able to fill out a list with 2 Tank Commanders & 9 Leman Russ's + 1 support unit at 2,000points.
Was thinking the same but with triple heavy flamers and custom regiment: reroll wound rolls of 1 for flamers and reroll number of hits xD. It could be interesting to park t8 w12 model on objective with 3d6 auto hitting s5 ap-1 shots xD
119704
Post by: Kcalehc
Gnollu wrote:Asymmetric wrote:Since LR's are objective secured in a spearhead, is anyone got any plans/thoughts on just rocking up with a full tank company in 9th? i.e. 2 tank commanders and gratious numbers of LR? Probably all sponsons removed to keep cost down.
Should be able to fill out a list with 2 Tank Commanders & 9 Leman Russ's + 1 support unit at 2,000points.
Was thinking the same but with triple heavy flamers and custom regiment: reroll wound rolls of 1 for flamers and reroll number of hits xD. It could be interesting to park t8 w12 model on objective with 3d6 auto hitting s5 ap-1 shots xD
Interesting, but its only one model. If someone gets a squad up to it and close enough and you only kill all but 2, your opponent may still claim the objective if that squad has Objective Secured (or whatever equivalent they have), squishy bodies may still be useful even if they die a lot!
Now if you're parking 3 Leman Russ's on one, that's another story; still going to be difficult to claim more than 2 objectives reliably even with a large number of tanks, if your opponent can just drown you in bodies.
10335
Post by: Razerous
What's the haps witth the Forge World Leman Russ Conqueror?
76685
Post by: Singleton Mosby
I noticed the new rules for heavy weapons is awesome for our flyers. Thunderbolts and Vultures now hit on 3s and Vendettas on 4s. Flyer heavy lists will have a bit of a problem however, as it is only 0-2 flyers per detachment and there doesn't seem to be a flyer detachment anymore. I am also curious how flyers work on a smaller table.
125055
Post by: Dukeofstuff
"It looks like the conquerer has no points list associated in ninth, however, don't forget the annihilator does, and you can put one of those on the table with 5 lascannon shots per turn, which makes a good "back of the table" tank that hangs out near astropath buffers, and engenseer, and has the range to pick optimal cover to fire out of. Give uparmor to it, put -1 on it from the astropath, give it +1 save from an astropath, set it inside +! save cover and viola, your tank is -1 to be hit, has an engenseer nearby,. and is 0+ save. People will go flying rodent gak trying to kill that sucker.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
DKOK still get the conqueror, although it has to be a mars alpha pattern.
Speaking of dkok, I did watch a rather interesting video by Mordian Glory, extolling the virtues of dkok in 9th. The basic crux was that Grenadiers were not hit nearly as much by point increases as other troops, only being 2 points more than infantry. Plus they still get the conqueror. I don't know if I would say they are the #1 regiment, but they did get better.
At least for the 1 to 79 weeks it takes for the index to arrive...
55178
Post by: Gibblets
I was thinking of using my Stormlord (which is modelled with 4 HFsponsons and has an extra HStubber for a total of 3) to transport around 3 veteran squads (probably kitted with plasma and AC) and some assorted support characters to hold the middle of the board and pick fights. Is this a good use of points and CPs or am I being befuddled by the rule of cool?
29049
Post by: Maxzero
Asymmetric wrote:Since LR's are objective secured in a spearhead, is anyone got any plans/thoughts on just rocking up with a full tank company in 9th? i.e. 2 tank commanders and gratious numbers of LR? Probably all sponsons removed to keep cost down.
Should be able to fill out a list with 2 Tank Commanders & 9 Leman Russ's + 1 support unit at 2,000points.
My current temp list runs a Spearhead and Bat (both custom regiments) that use ObjSec LR as the core.
Basically:
6 LRs (1 TC, 5 regs) in the Spearhead (Spotter, Gunnery) runnings Demo or Executioner ( TC) with 2 Fully Loaded Manticores.
The Bat is Wilderness Surv and Jury Rig with 2 CCs, 5 Infantry Squads and 9 Armoured Sentinels with Autos.
I use the Sentinels and Infantry to screen and run interferance for the LRs and Manti's. Might try Armageddon just for the ignore -1 AP on Sents.
It does...okay versus Primaris. Honestly okay is about the best you can hope for at the moment with AM. Waiting for the new Codex.
The only other option I can think of would be Death Korps of Krieg. Grenadiers are basically Scions that can't deep strike but only cost 7 points a model and their Alpha pattern LR can take Conqueror cannons.
Made I a purely theoretical list that has like 90 Grenadiers and 7 LR Conquerors across a Spearhead and Battalion.
The Grenadiers have a 3+ save in cover and don't take moral checks from shooting casualities so they are a bit of a pain to remove. They also have BS 3+ Hotshot Lasguns to keep Primaris honest. LR Conqerors for the attack rerolls.
Main concern is that GW will mess it all up once the codex comes out but it is any option now if you have $$$ to burn.
29049
Post by: Maxzero
Been looking at SM lists a fair bit since they seem to be everyone's nemesis at the moment and I have been noticing a trend. The firepower in SM lists tend to fall strictly down into 2 catagoeries: Bolter (Heavy/Rifle/etc) that is str 4 or 5 with a 0 or -1 AP that is used for cleaning infantry and screens and heavier firepower on Dreads and Eradicators to target anything bigger. There is tends to be little if any 'mid range' firepower between them. Anything that can't be dealt with by Bolter fire simple gets handed off to the heavies.
I am wondering if there is a way to exploit this? Contest objective with units that are resistant to Bolter fire forcing the SM to use their much more limited heavy AT weapons on sub optimal targets.
I had an earlier attempt that used Wilderness Survivor Infantry but I then realised that even with a 4+ save Intercessors and the like will still target them simply because they have nothing else to shoot at.
So I came up with this:
Standard LR Spearhead with 1x TC Executioner HQ, 5 x Demo LR and 2 x Manticore Aces.
Then...
A OUTRIDER (yes really) detachment that is an Armageddon regiment:
Tempestor with Rod and Auto reliquary (for 3 orders)
3 x Scion with +2 Plasma
7 x Armoured Sentinels with Auto
3 x Centaur Dedicated transports for Scions (count as ObjSec)
The idea being you use the Sentinels and Centaurs to contest objectives and screen. In cover they have a 2+ save and ignore -1 AP due to regiment bonus. Which makes clearing them off with Bolter fire almost impossible. So the SM player has to use their heavy weapons if they want to clear having to use their best firepower to kill 40 and 60 point vehicles while the LRs and Manticores get to remain unmolested . The Scions not only provide complete target denial but also force the SM to keep some troops back for screening.
Even if they all Scions and Centaurs die the LR still have ObjSec so they can still contest well.
While I have no infantry screens most gunlines remove them anyway with trival ease leaving you exposed anyway.
100848
Post by: tneva82
Vehicles don't get armour save bonuses from cover. Infantry, swarm and some other(most def not vehicles). So unless you have some way besides terrain to get +1 armour save they have 3+ save. And plenty of marines have -2. Their bolters for example will have on turn 2 and 3. Heavy bolters and assault cannons T1
29049
Post by: Maxzero
tneva82 wrote:Vehicles don't get armour save bonuses from cover. Infantry, swarm and some other(most def not vehicles). So unless you have some way besides terrain to get +1 armour save they have 3+ save. And plenty of marines have -2. Their bolters for example will have on turn 2 and 3. Heavy bolters and assault cannons T1
Are you sure? If a vehicle is within cover and is 50% obscured from the shooter it got cover in 8th did it change in 9th?
Change the third paragraph of rules text to read: ‘Infantry units that are entirely on or within a ruin receive the benefit of cover. Other units that are entirely on or within a ruin only receive the benefit of cover if at least 50% of every model is obscured from the point of view of the shooting model.’
Psychic power gives +1 save.
Either way they will be far more survivable then an infantry squad if you need to hold an objective.
The ultimate goal is simply have something cheap and effective that can survive Bolter fire to contest.
100848
Post by: tneva82
Book lists keywords needed to gain benefit of cover. Infantry, swarm and I think it was beast.
You get the -1 to hit from dense and LOS blocking but armour save bonus, better overwatch etc? Lack of those is one thing infantry got over vehicles/monsters in 9th.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Infantry, swarms, and beasts get the cover benefit from area terrain whilst they are inside it. Vehicles can't get this, but can still get the benefits from being obscured behind the terrain.
10335
Post by: Razerous
Do we need infantry bodies in this edition?
119515
Post by: Gnollu
Cheap mass ObSec is always good
44971
Post by: Wakshaani
Speaking of cheap mass ObSec…
A basic Brigade can have 120 Infantry for just 600 points.
Add a Battalion for 3 CP and 300 more points pushes that to 180.
That's 90 ObSec bodies per midfield objective, outnumbering any number of Marines that they care to bring, where it'll take a ludicrous number of shots to push off.
And still you have more than half the force for bringing the boom...
10335
Post by: Razerous
I would ask what units do we need to capture / score points.
MSU is going to be better than larger (6+) sized squads, right? Therefore DKOK feels like a good shout for lots of small squads, leaving lots of points for massed vehicles.
The tricky thing i'm finding is that I want troops (lots of slots) and heavy support from DKOK and HQ & fast attack from AM (gunnery & jury rigged repairs). Oh because I love conquorers and 5-man grenadier squads seem like a good deal.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Glancing at the IA FAQ, they gave the full grinding advance rule to malcador defenders, malcador annihilators, and thunderers? They seem to have missed the standard battle cannon version though.
I think I must have just missed that rule when I looked over the FAQ. I remember malcadors having a weird "not double shooting" version of grinding advance.
This seems a bit weird. By RAW, the annihilator gets to double shoot both the twin lascannon and the demolisher, as both are in the turret weapon list. So for 305 points, you get 6 lascannon shots and 2d6 demolisher shots, on an 18 wound platform. I know 18 wounds is a bad break point for terrain rules, but that is a lot of firepower.
Edit: Looking at it some more, the Thunderer seems extremely viable. 155 points for a double tapping demolisher cannon, with +1 wound over a Russ. You could really put some armour on the table for not many points with them.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
I just read over it and it really is a bit weird. It seems to be intended that the Malcadors can shoot their hull Demolisher twice, at least that would explain why the Defender is mentioned gut the Battle tank is not. Bit calling that a turret weapon is a stretch
52054
Post by: MrMoustaffa
Perhaps we should make a new IG thread as we're in 9th now? Anyone trying to play catch up has 255 pages to thumb through and 99% of them are out of date now. I think it's safe to say the title alone is a bit dated.
On topic, been working a lot, not had a lot of time to digest 9th changes. I'm not liking the look of things for IG out of the gate, but I need games before I can say with certainty. At bare minimum I expect games against marines to be rough.
I have a feeling to win we're gonna need to completely rethink how we play. The old ways are dead, all hail 9th edition. Instead of lamenting the loss of vigilus and conga lines, we need to be abusing the hell out of outflanking vets/sws/command squads, the fact that morale is a bad joke so morale buffs aren't needed, and figuring out ways to punish enemies for holding the midfield.
I think good points were brought up about Bullgryn, they seem like a strong initial unit to build on. I only own 3 but I may try a unit of 9 and see how they do. From there I think we're going to need more infantry than before, or go all in on vehicles. I have a feeling hybrid is going to suffer when opponents have so many ways to get right where they want to be to nullify tanks. Airplanes may have some new utility with the reserve rules, ability to fire on the move without penalties, etc. But I worry they're going to be fragile for the points.
30489
Post by: Trickstick
I'm getting more and more interested in a DKOK grenadier force, backed up by thunderers. Having 90 hotshot guns, without losing sergeant weapons, sounds fun. Plus add in some manticores or other indirect weapons to laugh at cover.
Of course, who knows how stable the build will be?
119704
Post by: Kcalehc
MrMoustaffa wrote:Perhaps we should make a new IG thread as we're in 9th now? Anyone trying to play catch up has 255 pages to thumb through and 99% of them are out of date now. I think it's safe to say the title alone is a bit dated.
On topic, been working a lot, not had a lot of time to digest 9th changes. I'm not liking the look of things for IG out of the gate, but I need games before I can say with certainty. At bare minimum I expect games against marines to be rough.
I have a feeling to win we're gonna need to completely rethink how we play. The old ways are dead, all hail 9th edition. Instead of lamenting the loss of vigilus and conga lines, we need to be abusing the hell out of outflanking vets/ sws/command squads, the fact that morale is a bad joke so morale buffs aren't needed, and figuring out ways to punish enemies for holding the midfield.
It does not appear that you can sit back and shoot stuff to win now. I think you'll need to aggressively move up and take at least one mid board objective, preferably both, and hold them. Durable and/or mobile units that can take and hold those objectives will likely become key, Ogryns, Bullgryns, Sentinels, even Crusaders; backed up by ObSec troopers and tanks to thin the enemies that will also be rushing to do the same thing. But yes, a 9th thread should probably be started as this is virtually all old stuff here.
124276
Post by: Pyroalchi
Definitly yes on a new threat. Until then: I also have some Rough riders that I wanted to count as Death Riders in 8th. Funny enough they went down 2 points in 9th, so now they are 15 with their lances while most stuff went up. It's especially interesting as they are relatively sturdy against S4 bolter fire thanks to their FNP, relatively fast, can be ordered and with a bit of luck one might get them within the +1A aura of a DKOK command squad.
The hunting lances are also (at least on paper) not bad at killing T4 W2 models or T5 W3 models.
Bonus points for the cavalry keyword allowing to trap knights and similar gimmicks that work because they are neither infantry mir vehicle.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
Of course, the one edition where Grenadiers are looking to be awesome, they're not available on FW site...
Low blow
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Bobthehero wrote:Of course, the one edition where Grenadiers are looking to be awesome, they're not available on FW site...
Low blow
It could well change at any time. You don't buy grenadiers to chase meta, you do it because of the call...
52054
Post by: MrMoustaffa
Well if you guys want I can make a new one. I may not always be the most competitive player but I've been around for a while so I'll be able to add/remove relevant stuff to the OP over time. Automatically Appended Next Post: And here we go, 9th edition thread up and running
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/790726.page#10888054
30489
Post by: Trickstick
Goodbye 8th Edition Tactica, you go to meet The Emperor now.
51866
Post by: Bobthehero
Trickstick wrote: Bobthehero wrote:Of course, the one edition where Grenadiers are looking to be awesome, they're not available on FW site...
Low blow
It could well change at any time. You don't buy grenadiers to chase meta, you do it because of the call...
I know, it's just bad timing.
29049
Post by: Maxzero
Yeah its a risk Codex wise since you don't know what GW will do in the future but a Grenadier/Thunderer build is very cost efficient.
Talking like 90 Grenadiers and 8 Thunderers. Maybe some Death Riders to mix it up.
Really basic and simple but a lot of beef.
125055
Post by: Dukeofstuff
I think lambda lions is good now, I think taurox primes are solid, I believe vendettas and valkyries dropping crusaders and midsized piles of bullygryn (NOT ogryn, sheesh) is good, or even MSU scions (obsec)+ ogryn bodygaurd in the middle + 4 crusaders in a chimera is solid.
My own current thinking is to layer the transport .. then the troops // then the officers // and to use the flyers to put a second vehicle next to the officer, such that the objective gets gaurded by at least the character protected officer until someone shoots BOTH valkyries down.
|
|
