The Invictus Tactical Warsuit is out!

And it looks........like a Space Marine recreating Avatar.


Exosuited marines aren't new. Dreadknights and Centurions have been around quite a few years now...

But the question is this:

What's the point of taking a Redepmtor Dreadnought over a Warsuit now?

A redemptor is:

a 13 wound S7 T7 vehicle with a 30" range main weapon (Heavy 12 S5 Ap-1 D1) and heavy flamer. it can target flying units with an ircarus rocket pod. Has to footslog across battlefield or arrive by Lucius Drop Pod.

an invictor is:

a 13 wound, S7 T6 vehicle with either a 12" 2D6 autohitting incendium cannon or a 36" twin ironhail stubber (Heavy S4 AP-1 D1), twin irohnhail autocannon (Heavy 6 S7-1 D2). It can set up ANYWHERE ON THE BATTLEFIELD THAT IS MORE THAN 9" from enemy!!!! Oh and it has a heavy bolter it uses as a PISTOL!


So the Invicttor:

Outshoots the Redemptor
Is T6 compared to T7 but that's the only bad point
Can scout and Alpha Strike
Costs less than Redemptor (in points)


Are dreads dead??

I agree on all points.

The Redemptor desperately needs some real heavy weapons to make it an interesting choice. It was never really attractive, but now even less.
Or maybe let it give up the melee arm for mirrored weapons. Give it useful support stuff, like the Atomantic Barrier from the Deredeo (which is now outclassed by the Impulsor).

 Corennus wrote:
The Invictus Tactical Warsuit is out!

And it looks........like a Space Marine recreating Avatar.


Exosuited marines aren't new. Dreadknights and Centurions have been around quite a few years now...

But the question is this:

What's the point of taking a Redepmtor Dreadnought over a Warsuit now?

A redemptor is:

a 13 wound S7 T7 vehicle with a 30" range main weapon (Heavy 12 S5 Ap-1 D1) and heavy flamer. it can target flying units with an ircarus rocket pod. Has to footslog across battlefield or arrive by Lucius Drop Pod.

an invictor is:

a 13 wound, S7 T6 vehicle with either a 12" 2D6 autohitting incendium cannon or a 36" twin ironhail stubber (Heavy S4 AP-1 D1), twin irohnhail autocannon (Heavy 6 S7-1 D2). It can set up ANYWHERE ON THE BATTLEFIELD THAT IS MORE THAN 9" from enemy!!!! Oh and it has a heavy bolter it uses as a PISTOL!


So the Invicttor:

Outshoots the Redemptor
Is T6 compared to T7 but that's the only bad point
Can scout and Alpha Strike
Costs less than Redemptor (in points)


Are dreads dead??

Yeah probably.

Buy the new thing!

In three months, we will release the IRONSPECTRE TACTICOOL DREADSUIT, which will be a slightly better version of this thing.

THen, buy that new thing!

 Corennus wrote:
The Invictus Tactical Warsuit is out!

And it looks........like a Space Marine recreating Avatar.

And that, there, is more than enough reason to continue using proper Dreadnoughts.

We really don't need Giant Marines trying to cosplay as things from a different license, thankyouverymuch.

It makes this specific dread more unique in my opinion. That being said I agree, why take the redemptor unless you know you're facing a horde? (we all know no ones using the macro plasma)

And to make matters worse bolter discipline is now an official rule and much easier to use. Plus aggressors exist


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Another thing is I could put the redemptor and the invictor beside each other and ask someone which do you think is tougher. It's a fair bet they'll say the redemptor has the higher toughness. But if I set an ironclad next to a normal dread, I doubt my friends would know the ironclad is T8

No for nothing, but if they gave the Redemptor some form of heavy anti-tank dakka, maybe say a quad las-fusil pistol lol.

I do like that you get a Heavy 6 Autocannon. Twin Autocannon Dreads are my favorite, but they are Index only. That said, the Incendium cannon Invictus is probably the rignt choice since it can set up in range to immediately torch some stuff.

I still think Twin Las/ML Ven Dreads are a viable option to still back and pew-pew. Their higher T, access to anti-tank weapons and relatively small size make them more durable and able to get in multiple turns. They also do not have a damage chart.

But if you want a "Dread" to be up close and personal, the Invictus is the only real choice

-

LOL you are missing. The 6 shot str 5 ap -1 you get on the redemptor. It has a fair amount more firepower.
18 str 5 ap-1 - plus 2 storm bolters that put out 8 shots all the time and the d3 shot icarus rocket pod. Plus you also get a d6 damage fist too.

The Invictor has 6 autocannon shots (this is nice) 6 str 4 ap-1 3 str and 5 ap -1 and d6 str 4 shots. So it has less overall shots and less overall toughness for about 20 points less. I don't see an issue here. Except maybe that the main gun is too powerful on the invictor. Why is it 3 autocannons?

 Xenomancers wrote:
LOL you are missing. The ther 6 shot str 5 ap -1 you get on the redemptor. It has a fair amount more firepower.
18 str 5 ap-1 - plus 2 storm bolters that put out 8 shots all the time and the d3 shot icarus rocket pod. Plus you also get a d6 damage fist too.

The Invictor has 6 autocannon shots (this is nice) 6 str 4 ap-1 3 str and 5 ap -1 and d6 str 4 shots. So it has less overall shots and less overall toughness for about 20 points less. I don't see an issue here. Except maybe that the main gun is too powerful on the invictor. Why is it 3 autocannons?

The flamethrower is the better gun given the platform. I think a lot of lists will hate this model.

Edit: And by hate I mean people will hate playing against it.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
LOL you are missing. The ther 6 shot str 5 ap -1 you get on the redemptor. It has a fair amount more firepower.
18 str 5 ap-1 - plus 2 storm bolters that put out 8 shots all the time and the d3 shot icarus rocket pod. Plus you also get a d6 damage fist too.

The Invictor has 6 autocannon shots (this is nice) 6 str 4 ap-1 3 str and 5 ap -1 and d6 str 4 shots. So it has less overall shots and less overall toughness for about 20 points less. I don't see an issue here. Except maybe that the main gun is too powerful on the invictor. Why is it 3 autocannons?

The flamethrower is the better gun given the platform. I think a lot of lists will hate this model.

Edit: And by hate I mean people will hate playing against it.

It will probably be annoying, but I bet it will act a lot like fire dragons - it'll do some damage, scare your opponent, and then immediately die because it only has T6. It may have 13 wounds, but that toughness isn't going to do anything to protect it. The only reason why Necron Arks are so tough is because of quantum shielding.

Screening will still be useful against it, just move your backline further back than usual to compensate for the flamer range and movement.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
LOL you are missing. The ther 6 shot str 5 ap -1 you get on the redemptor. It has a fair amount more firepower.
18 str 5 ap-1 - plus 2 storm bolters that put out 8 shots all the time and the d3 shot icarus rocket pod. Plus you also get a d6 damage fist too.

The Invictor has 6 autocannon shots (this is nice) 6 str 4 ap-1 3 str and 5 ap -1 and d6 str 4 shots. So it has less overall shots and less overall toughness for about 20 points less. I don't see an issue here. Except maybe that the main gun is too powerful on the invictor. Why is it 3 autocannons?

Isn't it a twin Ironhail Autocannon? More like 1.5 more shots than an autocannon.
But yeah, its weird that it has more shots than a normal autocannon, while the Ironhail Heavy Stubber has the same number of shots as a heavy stubber, but better AP.
Its a bit inconsistent imo, and I find that to be wonky design.

You know who I feel sorry for...

All those players who have spent loads getting Redemptors and Centurions.

Are dreads dead??

Yes, until GW nerfs the new dread in order to bring it back in line.
Like the Hellturky.
And other such NEW AND IMPROVED things.

Dreadnoughts have their place. For example people who don't like their mechs to be killed by a pistol to the face because the Mechanicus lost the front.

hey, after you hit 3 Invictus suits...you can then start adding Redemptors!
Redemptor isn't bad, especially if you stay in Devatsator Doctrine. It's also decent for deathwatch since it can deep strike and they don't get access to the Invictor.

The Invictor is basically Redemptor Light, there is a place for both and the Redemptor is still pretty darn cheap.

Adn hillarity starts once again.

But to your information, THE front wasn't lost by the servants of the Omnisiah.
It just got stuck in the Burocracy of the imerium of man.

The point of dreadnoughts is TwinLas+Missile.

The Invictor is at best a mild inconvenience to tanks, and while VenDreds don't degrade, it does and is low toughness.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
LOL you are missing. The ther 6 shot str 5 ap -1 you get on the redemptor. It has a fair amount more firepower.
18 str 5 ap-1 - plus 2 storm bolters that put out 8 shots all the time and the d3 shot icarus rocket pod. Plus you also get a d6 damage fist too.

The Invictor has 6 autocannon shots (this is nice) 6 str 4 ap-1 3 str and 5 ap -1 and d6 str 4 shots. So it has less overall shots and less overall toughness for about 20 points less. I don't see an issue here. Except maybe that the main gun is too powerful on the invictor. Why is it 3 autocannons?

The flamethrower is the better gun given the platform. I think a lot of lists will hate this model.

Edit: And by hate I mean people will hate playing against it.

Yeah but the flame thrower isn't any better than the chaingun. The autocannon is arguably better than the chaingun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think the invictor is a nice piece. It doesn't make redemptor useless though. I actually think the redemptor is better. ESP with that 2 damage icarus now. If they have a fly target in their army. With the +1 to hit you are basically getting half of the invictors main gun.

Comment on the looks:
Could have tried harder to make it a SM version of the Scout Sentinel, it could have looked pretty good.
They just borrow too much plating and the overall shape of a dread so you wonder why they made a competing not-half-dead marine piloting the thing.
The full cage right down to the feet just looks wrong, some plating up to the neck would have looked "appropriate" BUT they had been showing helmets on dreads so they had to go that step further to differentiate.
I would have set the legs in "chicken-walker" to make it really clear.
I guess they wanted to stay away from the Dreadknight "baby-carrier".

Design Thoughts:
It really boils down to what role did they envision this thing to fill?
They say it is to better support their deep-strike friends.
Is a gunslinger HB that much needed for cool factor? Just under-arm sling the darn thing like the HF and SB dreadnaughts have.
Or a slide-drop over-forearm to be different (for either fist or gun, not both).
Some Grav-chute gear would have improved the look of the thing and really made it clear of it's role.
It would have looked a bit funny with the "Phobos" look and have a BIG left shoulder pad (or not?).
The new emphasis on the "Heavy Stubber" look is getting away from the marine bolters in general, it does however ensure it's guns are not included in the various SM rules that allow firing twice.

General Thoughts:
I am curious how they would measure up to the Centurion with the twin heavy bolters and the double firing hurricane bolters in it's chest.
Differing slots but similar roles for sure., I will have to add it up and check the stats and points more.

I would point out that there are Dread-only strats that don't work on the Invictus, so there's some utility in there too. Also that a dread is over the line where Might of Heroes (?) gets it up to T8.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
LOL you are missing. The ther 6 shot str 5 ap -1 you get on the redemptor. It has a fair amount more firepower.
18 str 5 ap-1 - plus 2 storm bolters that put out 8 shots all the time and the d3 shot icarus rocket pod. Plus you also get a d6 damage fist too.

The Invictor has 6 autocannon shots (this is nice) 6 str 4 ap-1 3 str and 5 ap -1 and d6 str 4 shots. So it has less overall shots and less overall toughness for about 20 points less. I don't see an issue here. Except maybe that the main gun is too powerful on the invictor. Why is it 3 autocannons?

The flamethrower is the better gun given the platform. I think a lot of lists will hate this model.

Edit: And by hate I mean people will hate playing against it.

Yeah but the flame thrower isn't any better than the chaingun. The autocannon is arguably better than the chaingun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I think the invictor is a nice piece. It doesn't make redemptor useless though. I actually think the redemptor is better. ESP with that 2 damage icarus now. If they have a fly target in their army. With the +1 to hit you are basically getting half of the invictors main gun.

Raw stat wise? Probably. The flamethrower is better IMO since the invictor infiltrates. It can start burning the enemy turn 1 and the flamethrower is great on the overwatch. The Invictor seems best against Melee infantry like ork Boyz.

I tried out the invictor with the flamethrower yesterday. It is great unit to bully infantry with. At 131pts it is a steal IMO.

The autocannon seems a bit of a waste on a unit that infiltrates.

Also I don't think the invictor invalidates dreads either.

 Corennus wrote:
You know who I feel sorry for...

All those players who have spent loads getting Redemptors and Centurions.

Who both got improved and are not invalid.

What’s the point difference between the Invictus and the Redemptor? As long as the Invictus is paying for being better, there’s still reason for the other.

 Stormonu wrote:
What’s the point difference between the Invictus and the Redemptor? As long as the Invictus is paying for being better, there’s still reason for the other.

Redemptor Fist is D6 VS Flat 3
Redemptor is T7 VS T6
Redemptor move 8 VS 10

And then there's weapons and rules

Do any of them measure up to a Venerable Contemptor? That thing is cheap and excellent.

 Elbows wrote:
Do any of them measure up to a Venerable Contemptor? That thing is cheap and excellent.

Oh it is excellent but it is in a different class than a redemptor I'd say. Redemptors are anti infantry dreads that run around with d6 damage powerfists and 13 wounds. Contemptors spam lascannons for what 170?

 Corennus wrote:
The Invictus Tactical Warsuit is out!

And it looks........like a Space Marine recreating Avatar.


Exosuited marines aren't new. Dreadknights and Centurions have been around quite a few years now...

But the question is this:

What's the point of taking a Redepmtor Dreadnought over a Warsuit now?

A redemptor is:

a 13 wound S7 T7 vehicle with a 30" range main weapon (Heavy 12 S5 Ap-1 D1) and heavy flamer. it can target flying units with an ircarus rocket pod. Has to footslog across battlefield or arrive by Lucius Drop Pod.

an invictor is:

a 13 wound, S7 T6 vehicle with either a 12" 2D6 autohitting incendium cannon or a 36" twin ironhail stubber (Heavy S4 AP-1 D1), twin irohnhail autocannon (Heavy 6 S7-1 D2). It can set up ANYWHERE ON THE BATTLEFIELD THAT IS MORE THAN 9" from enemy!!!! Oh and it has a heavy bolter it uses as a PISTOL!


So the Invicttor:

Outshoots the Redemptor
Is T6 compared to T7 but that's the only bad point
Can scout and Alpha Strike
Costs less than Redemptor (in points)


Are dreads dead??

The repulsor was never alive. It's better than it was thanks to doctrines, point drops, and IH tactic though.

Contemptors and Vendreds are not only still great options, but are better than they've been since 5th. Even standard dreadnaughts are useful if you don't have points for a vendred.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Do any of them measure up to a Venerable Contemptor? That thing is cheap and excellent.

Oh it is excellent but it is in a different class than a redemptor I'd say. Redemptors are anti infantry dreads that run around with d6 damage powerfists and 13 wounds. Contemptors spam lascannons for what 170?

I'm not sure, I run CSM and don't own a Contemptor, but I know the base cost is like 88 points. They get BS 2+, 10" move, 10(?) wounds etc. if I recall correctly. They have a lot of weapon options - heck I think they can run twin-heavy bolters on each arm, or the CSM ones can run conversion beamers, etc. They also have a fist+gun combo, etc. I dunno, I just remember looking at the Contemptor and thinking it was the best combo by far. (two of them still slotting in under a single Leviathan sadly)

Not Online!!! wrote:

Are dreads dead??

Yes, until GW nerfs the new dread in order to bring it back in line.
Like the Hellturky.
And other such NEW AND IMPROVED things.

People keep saying this but primaris were gak for like 2 solid years and their most expensive kits were never competitive and still aren't. If you bought a Redemptor you bought it because you liked it, not because it was good.

The power level of new releases is entirely random.

ERJAK wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

Are dreads dead??

Yes, until GW nerfs the new dread in order to bring it back in line.
Like the Hellturky.
And other such NEW AND IMPROVED things.

People keep saying this but primaris were gak for like 2 solid years and their most expensive kits were never competitive and still aren't. If you bought a Redemptor you bought it because you liked it, not because it was good.

The power level of new releases is entirely random.

Easy there, don't shatter the narrative

I agree that GW seems to be bringing out more and more Primaris at the cost of old (inverted commas) model becoming obsolete (cough CENTURIONS cough)

 Corennus wrote:
I agree that GW seems to be bringing out more and more Primaris at the cost of old (inverted commas) model becoming obsolete (cough CENTURIONS cough)

actually they've been pretty restrained that way in ensuring they don't utterly render any old classic units obselete, to the point where it's proably hurting the Primaris line (Primaris assault Marines would be a nice thing to get)

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
LOL you are missing. The ther 6 shot str 5 ap -1 you get on the redemptor. It has a fair amount more firepower.
18 str 5 ap-1 - plus 2 storm bolters that put out 8 shots all the time and the d3 shot icarus rocket pod. Plus you also get a d6 damage fist too.

The Invictor has 6 autocannon shots (this is nice) 6 str 4 ap-1 3 str and 5 ap -1 and d6 str 4 shots. So it has less overall shots and less overall toughness for about 20 points less. I don't see an issue here. Except maybe that the main gun is too powerful on the invictor. Why is it 3 autocannons?

The flamethrower is the better gun given the platform. I think a lot of lists will hate this model.

Edit: And by hate I mean people will hate playing against it.

They're going to hate it because it's an infiltrating Dreadnought CCW not because of the gun arm. The gun arm options are fairly equivalent for UM Tac Docs.

Breton wrote:

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
LOL you are missing. The ther 6 shot str 5 ap -1 you get on the redemptor. It has a fair amount more firepower.
18 str 5 ap-1 - plus 2 storm bolters that put out 8 shots all the time and the d3 shot icarus rocket pod. Plus you also get a d6 damage fist too.

The Invictor has 6 autocannon shots (this is nice) 6 str 4 ap-1 3 str and 5 ap -1 and d6 str 4 shots. So it has less overall shots and less overall toughness for about 20 points less. I don't see an issue here. Except maybe that the main gun is too powerful on the invictor. Why is it 3 autocannons?

The flamethrower is the better gun given the platform. I think a lot of lists will hate this model.

Edit: And by hate I mean people will hate playing against it.

They're going to hate it because it's an infiltrating Dreadnought CCW not because of the gun arm. The gun arm options are fairly equivalent for UM Tac Docs.

Agreed. I was just saying that the flamethrower seems the better choice IMO.

Orks, Tyranids, and Knights aren't going to be worried about a Warsuit infiltrating closer to them.

BrianDavion wrote:
"PRIMARIS ALL SUCK! OHH AND GW KEEPS INTRODUCING NEW THINGS AND MAKING THEM MORE POWERFUL TO ENCHOURAGE SALES! AND I DON'T SEE ANY CONTRIDICTION BETWEEN THESE STATEMENTS!"

Well you wouldn't would you

So your point of view is Primaris are powerful and there is no power creep?

Overall yes, must agree the Invictus is a platform that’s quick, durable, reasonably tough and attractively priced against the other options. It can’t however fill all the niches of it’s peers though…

I would agree that Dreadnoughts as a whole are in a tricky place right now. In short the main things non-primaris dreads offer are a good lascannon platform, and all dreads have a sweet strat for helping stay alive...

The longer thoughts are...

My experience of Dreads and Ven Dreads is that they very much glass hammers as their 8 wounds don't go very far. Their relatively small silhouette does make it easier to hide from enemy fire or potentially gain the bonus from over the larger dreads (especially when compared to the Invictus/ Redemptor). Whilst comparitively under gunned compared to Primaris designed critically you can configure those guns for whatever job you want, which is often anti-tank.

The Redemptor is awesomely full of massed dakka, but doesn't (yet?) have any options to match twin lascannons. Yes is got the Marco Plasma Incinerator, but it’s not quite the same… A bit more versatile than the lascannons, but then you have to manage the overheating issue of using it as anti-tank and any penalties to hit either makes itself toast it’s self double quick or ½ its damage output… Its volume of shots makes primarily an anti-infantry (light inf with the heavy onslaught, heavy infantry with the marco) platform.

The Contemptor chassis (mainly due to the Forge World options) is in a pretty sweet spot. More durable than the classic dreadnought, and whilst down on wounds compared to the primaris designs it does get an invulnerable save to help it stay alive. So long as you’re good with Forgeworld then the Mortis and Relic variants both allow you to go double ranged weapon (and add a cyclone) for maximum antitank firepower which is something that the Invictus (nor the Redemptor for that matter).

That and you’ve got that sweet ½ damage stratagem…

SeanDrake wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
"PRIMARIS ALL SUCK! OHH AND GW KEEPS INTRODUCING NEW THINGS AND MAKING THEM MORE POWERFUL TO ENCHOURAGE SALES! AND I DON'T SEE ANY CONTRIDICTION BETWEEN THESE STATEMENTS!"

Well you wouldn't would you

So your point of view is Primaris are powerful and there is no power creep?

points wise GW's been pretty conservitive with Primaris Marines. intercessors where priced at 20? 21? PPM when they where introduced

 Corennus wrote:
I agree that GW seems to be bringing out more and more Primaris at the cost of old (inverted commas) model becoming obsolete (cough CENTURIONS cough)

I wouldn't consider Centurions old units. They're like really new and have none of the legacy of real old units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cornishman wrote:
Overall yes, must agree the Invictus is a platform that’s quick, durable, reasonably tough and attractively priced against the other options. It can’t however fill all the niches of it’s peers though…

I would agree that Dreadnoughts as a whole are in a tricky place right now. In short the main things non-primaris dreads offer are a good lascannon platform, and all dreads have a sweet strat for helping stay alive...

The longer thoughts are...

My experience of Dreads and Ven Dreads is that they very much glass hammers as their 8 wounds don't go very far. Their relatively small silhouette does make it easier to hide from enemy fire or potentially gain the bonus from over the larger dreads (especially when compared to the Invictus/ Redemptor). Whilst comparitively under gunned compared to Primaris designed critically you can configure those guns for whatever job you want, which is often anti-tank.

The Redemptor is awesomely full of massed dakka, but doesn't (yet?) have any options to match twin lascannons. Yes is got the Marco Plasma Incinerator, but it’s not quite the same… A bit more versatile than the lascannons, but then you have to manage the overheating issue of using it as anti-tank and any penalties to hit either makes itself toast it’s self double quick or ½ its damage output… Its volume of shots makes primarily an anti-infantry (light inf with the heavy onslaught, heavy infantry with the marco) platform.

The Contemptor chassis (mainly due to the Forge World options) is in a pretty sweet spot. More durable than the classic dreadnought, and whilst down on wounds compared to the primaris designs it does get an invulnerable save to help it stay alive. So long as you’re good with Forgeworld then the Mortis and Relic variants both allow you to go double ranged weapon (and add a cyclone) for maximum antitank firepower which is something that the Invictus (nor the Redemptor for that matter).

That and you’ve got that sweet ½ damage stratagem…

Of some note, neither of the Primaris dreads has any antitank options, and Ven Dreads shoot really, really well.

And the 8 wounds goes far enough, since they don't degrade. Honestly, getting knees is a major drawback for a dreadnought, since a dready is fighting as best as it ever can all the way to the end, but other vehicles loose power only 5 or 6 wounds in.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
...Of some note, neither of the Primaris dreads has any antitank options...

Plasma Redemptor? d6 2-damage shots is roughly equivalent to 2 d6-damage shots from a twin lascannon. Melee? Someone was testing Space Wolf Invictors at my FLGS yesterday and the WS 2+/5A on the charge certainly tore holes in my Custodians.

Well we got the base model for Primaris, now the stealthy one. The next cliché option would be a heavily armoured one which will probably be slow so it'll have a big gun or maybe 2 like a bargain bin castellan

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well we got the base model for Primaris, now the stealthy one. The next cliché option would be a heavily armoured one which will probably be slow so it'll have a big gun or maybe 2 like a bargain bin castellan

I'd like a tougher, purely shooty version, yes, yes!

 Crimson wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well we got the base model for Primaris, now the stealthy one. The next cliché option would be a heavily armoured one which will probably be slow so it'll have a big gun or maybe 2 like a bargain bin castellan

I'd like a tougher, purely shooty version, yes, yes!

Could make an all dreadnaught list work pretty well if they introduced something like that. I am gonna proxy 3 of the invictus dreads this weekend, want to see how well they work with the close range flamer build.

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well we got the base model for Primaris, now the stealthy one. The next cliché option would be a heavily armoured one which will probably be slow so it'll have a big gun or maybe 2 like a bargain bin castellan

I'd like a tougher, purely shooty version, yes, yes!

Could make an all dreadnaught list work pretty well if they introduced something like that. I am gonna proxy 3 of the invictus dreads this weekend, want to see how well they work with the close range flamer build.

I'd really like to hear your hot take after you play.

Maybe we'll get lucky and get a generic dreadnought HQ
Unfortunately it's totally impossible for Primaris since the redemptor burns out the sarcophagus.

 Crimson wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well we got the base model for Primaris, now the stealthy one. The next cliché option would be a heavily armoured one which will probably be slow so it'll have a big gun or maybe 2 like a bargain bin castellan

I'd like a tougher, purely shooty version, yes, yes!

maybe a giant dreadnought with a volcano lance on each arm!

I mean you aren't wrong.

Here's the thing, old dreads still have a point with stand off fire power with las and missiles and no degrading until dead.

Redemptors are really an answer for a problem space marines don't have, especially now so they don't really have a point.

Invictor warsuits have a more robust weapons system and flexible deployment options and a unique placement in their use.

So all dreads aren't dead, but redemptors just don't really have a reason, where as invictors like the look o them or hate them, actually have a place in a list to fit a playstyle.

So I could see old dreads along side invictors, but I doubt unless someone just really loves the redemptor you'll see them around much.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well we got the base model for Primaris, now the stealthy one. The next cliché option would be a heavily armoured one which will probably be slow so it'll have a big gun or maybe 2 like a bargain bin castellan

I'd like a tougher, purely shooty version, yes, yes!

maybe a giant dreadnought with a volcano lance on each arm!

How about Repulsor Laser Destroyers.

That said, it can't be that efficient or coherent. It would be 1 Laser Destroyer w/ Co-Axial Flamer, 1 Dreadnought Chainfist with integrated Ironhail Heavy Stubber, a dreadnought jump pack, and some sort of anti-aircraft gun on it's head that's of insufficient strength, damage, and rate of fire to meaningfully threaten aircraft. Also, 2 Ironhail Heavy Stubbers in it's chest.

I do like very weak AA weapons mounted on everything, go marines !

I like the redemptor in its more classic Dreadnought role, as a light tank that moves directly behind the front line. It has enough range to force the opponent to engage and is just enough of a melee threat to make an opponent hesitate.

The invictor is really just the same thing with a shorter range that does the same thing for Vanguard. I think I would find it more exciting if it wasn't for Tactical Reserves. I'd rather deepstrike my infantry than a light armor unit that would do just as well in the deployment zone.

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Cornishman wrote:


That and you’ve got that sweet ½ damage stratagem…

Of some note, neither of the Primaris dreads has any antitank options, and Ven Dreads shoot really, really well.

And the 8 wounds goes far enough, since they don't degrade. Honestly, getting knees is a major drawback for a dreadnought, since a dready is fighting as best as it ever can all the way to the end, but other vehicles loose power only 5 or 6 wounds in.

As a side note, the Invictor Warsuit is a Warsuit, not a Dreadnought. It does not have the keyword. Armour of Contempt works - its a vehicle, Duty Eternal does not, it's not a Dreadnought.

Breton wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

Cornishman wrote:


That and you’ve got that sweet ½ damage stratagem…

Of some note, neither of the Primaris dreads has any antitank options, and Ven Dreads shoot really, really well.

And the 8 wounds goes far enough, since they don't degrade. Honestly, getting knees is a major drawback for a dreadnought, since a dready is fighting as best as it ever can all the way to the end, but other vehicles loose power only 5 or 6 wounds in.

As a side note, the Invictor Warsuit is a Warsuit, not a Dreadnought. It does not have the keyword. Armour of Contempt works - its a vehicle, Duty Eternal does not, it's not a Dreadnought.

Agree with you about the Invictor not being a dread so being unable to use Duty Eternal. The 1/2 Dam strat comments were me showing what dreads have to offer, that the invictor doesnt (or can't).

BrianDavion wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well we got the base model for Primaris, now the stealthy one. The next cliché option would be a heavily armoured one which will probably be slow so it'll have a big gun or maybe 2 like a bargain bin castellan

I'd like a tougher, purely shooty version, yes, yes!

maybe a giant dreadnought with a volcano lance on each arm!

If you're making it that big, you may as well add some big guns on the shoulders, give it void shields, and maybe the ability to use Titanic Feet...

Centurions were an abomination and a really bad implementation of the much cooler centurions of my childhood

https://youtu.be/hIajdXHRmJ4

 Dysartes wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well we got the base model for Primaris, now the stealthy one. The next cliché option would be a heavily armoured one which will probably be slow so it'll have a big gun or maybe 2 like a bargain bin castellan

I'd like a tougher, purely shooty version, yes, yes!

maybe a giant dreadnought with a volcano lance on each arm!

If you're making it that big, you may as well add some big guns on the shoulders, give it void shields, and maybe the ability to use Titanic Feet...

nah shoulder mounted missle launchers! and we can call it the Angry Feline!

I get that reference

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
The point of dreadnoughts is TwinLas+Missile.

The Invictor is at best a mild inconvenience to tanks, and while VenDreds don't degrade, it does and is low toughness.

It begins degrading at the same point that a Ven Dread is on its last wound.

It also takes wounds from str 3,4,5,8 at the same clip as t7 does. Only easier to wound it with str6,7 firepower. I'd be real glad if someone is focusing Autocannons on the distraction carnifex. Means it achieved its job.

Lemondish wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
The point of dreadnoughts is TwinLas+Missile.

The Invictor is at best a mild inconvenience to tanks, and while VenDreds don't degrade, it does and is low toughness.

It begins degrading at the same point that a Ven Dread is on its last wound.

It also takes wounds from str 3,4,5,8 at the same clip as t7 does. Only easier to wound it with str6,7 firepower. I'd be real glad if someone is focusing Autocannons on the distraction carnifex. Means it achieved its job.

The t6 is a big deal. Just not vs typical anti tank weapons. When you are t6 you now become vunerable to middle str weapons - which tend to have high ROF and multi damage - so if they are wounding you at a high rate...you are going down quick. Then again it is pretty cheap. Its a good unit and maybe a tad undercosted but it's not gamebreaking. Most of the time you aren't even going to be able to utilize its infiltrate ability very well.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
The point of dreadnoughts is TwinLas+Missile.

The Invictor is at best a mild inconvenience to tanks, and while VenDreds don't degrade, it does and is low toughness.

It begins degrading at the same point that a Ven Dread is on its last wound.

It also takes wounds from str 3,4,5,8 at the same clip as t7 does. Only easier to wound it with str6,7 firepower. I'd be real glad if someone is focusing Autocannons on the distraction carnifex. Means it achieved its job.

The t6 is a big deal. Just not vs typical anti tank weapons. When you are t6 you now become vunerable to middle str weapons - which tend to have high ROF and multi damage - so if they are wounding you at a high rate...you are going down quick. Then again it is pretty cheap. Its a good unit and maybe a tad undercosted but it's not gamebreaking. Most of the time you aren't even going to be able to utilize its infiltrate ability very well.

Infiltrate is probably one of it's best qualities, since it'll definitely be obnoxious if it starts from 9" from the enemy deploy zone.

It's got some play, I still suspect that it's either going to be a ravenguard or ironhands prefered model over the other chapters.
As I suspect they are the only chapters that can stop it being just being demolished if it's deployed on the line and your going second.

ChargerIIC wrote:I like the redemptor in its more classic Dreadnought role, as a light tank that moves directly behind the front line. It has enough range to force the opponent to engage and is just enough of a melee threat to make an opponent hesitate.

The invictor is really just the same thing with a shorter range that does the same thing for Vanguard. I think I would find it more exciting if it wasn't for Tactical Reserves. I'd rather deepstrike my infantry than a light armor unit that would do just as well in the deployment zone.

I really like to push my redemptor up w my intercessors and use it as a direct fire support unit, I plan on doing the same with Infiltrators & Warsuit. To be fair I do basically the same thing with my Legion Relic Contemptor tactical squads.

It'll be cool for apoc to have a warsuit directly supporting an entire concealed positions detachment. in 40k it depends on objectives, etc...

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Lemondish wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
The point of dreadnoughts is TwinLas+Missile.

The Invictor is at best a mild inconvenience to tanks, and while VenDreds don't degrade, it does and is low toughness.

It begins degrading at the same point that a Ven Dread is on its last wound.

It also takes wounds from str 3,4,5,8 at the same clip as t7 does. Only easier to wound it with str6,7 firepower. I'd be real glad if someone is focusing Autocannons on the distraction carnifex. Means it achieved its job.

The t6 is a big deal. Just not vs typical anti tank weapons. When you are t6 you now become vunerable to middle str weapons - which tend to have high ROF and multi damage - so if they are wounding you at a high rate...you are going down quick. Then again it is pretty cheap. Its a good unit and maybe a tad undercosted but it's not gamebreaking. Most of the time you aren't even going to be able to utilize its infiltrate ability very well.

Infiltrate is probably one of it's best qualities, since it'll definitely be obnoxious if it starts from 9" from the enemy deploy zone.

Only if you go first and seize the initate is a thing. Otherwise deploying it aggressively is just going to get it killed or mobbed.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Only if you go first and seize the initate is a thing. Otherwise deploying it aggressively is just going to get it killed or mobbed.

That's why I like CA18 missions. If they deploy first, then they go first, but you get to fully react to their deployment.

If you deploy first they can setup with the risk of getting blown off the table.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Only if you go first and seize the initate is a thing. Otherwise deploying it aggressively is just going to get it killed or mobbed.

That's why I like CA18 missions. If they deploy first, then they go first, but you get to fully react to their deployment.

If you deploy first they can setup with the risk of getting blown off the table.

yup CA18 missions are great.

Yeah but the one player deploys everything and then the other player deploys everything had been in the game system for most of the editions of the game. It was pretty much 8th edition that changed it to unit by unit which actually felt a bit more tactical as you had to plan defensively not knowing who would go first or what would be placed where.

I guess it just doesn't feel so new and cool when I deployed like in CA18 for well over a decade of playing the game. It does make it feel more old school though.

I definitely do not like alternating deployment. It feels kinda clunky and slow. I'm glad they went back.

AngryAngel80 wrote:


I guess it just doesn't feel so new and cool when I deployed like in CA18 for well over a decade of playing the game. It does make it feel more old school though.

It didn't matter much when you still had pretty much a straight roll off. CA is considerably different.

Ice_can wrote:
It's got some play, I still suspect that it's either going to be a ravenguard or ironhands prefered model over the other chapters.
As I suspect they are the only chapters that can stop it being just being demolished if it's deployed on the line and your going second.

Use more Scenery.

I think the UM Tactics/Scions/etc works better with the Redemptor, but I think the Warsuit is best used as a distraction/pressure point. Infiltrate the Warsuit, and people will instinctively want to deal with it sooner rather than later because they'll feel like they have less time to do so. The urgency part of Target Prioritization goes up (for most), even if the value part went down a little. That could make them a decent "screening" force for a Repulsor variant. I'm thinking of infiltrating a pair of them to do just that.

Breton wrote:

Ice_can wrote:
It's got some play, I still suspect that it's either going to be a ravenguard or ironhands prefered model over the other chapters.
As I suspect they are the only chapters that can stop it being just being demolished if it's deployed on the line and your going second.

Use more Scenery.

I think the UM Tactics/Scions/etc works better with the Redemptor, but I think the Warsuit is best used as a distraction/pressure point. Infiltrate the Warsuit, and people will instinctively want to deal with it sooner rather than later because they'll feel like they have less time to do so. The urgency part of Target Prioritization goes up (for most), even if the value part went down a little. That could make them a decent "screening" force for a Repulsor variant. I'm thinking of infiltrating a pair of them to do just that.

No amount of scenery short of a barely playable board is going to have enough terrain to keep you out of Line of sight at 9 inches from the enemy deployment zone.

A distraction suit, maybe but it's then not super important which weapons it has, usually cheaper is better.

The Redemptor was already a underperforming unit before; the new dread only cements it.

But the normal dreads are quite useable (and now cheaper!), whily the Leviathan became even more interesting with the new dread strat.

 Vector Strike wrote:
The Redemptor was already a underperforming unit before; the new dread only cements it.

But the normal dreads are quite useable (and now cheaper!), whily the Leviathan became even more interesting with the new dread strat.

I disagree that it was underperforming. After the CA points drops it became a core unit for my ultras. Granted I was using gman to turn it up to 11. However now it has a great chance of getting into CC (cause it can move every turn as ultras and still deal legit damage) and when it does it pretty much 1 shots things. Las game I had one 1 shot Tragen Valoris. It's to the point now where taking 2 redemptors compared to a levi dread seems pretty reasonable. Plus as with most things. It has always benefited form taking multiples of them.

Plus will space marine auras being reroll all hits. Moving and shooting turn 1 is no problem and you get ap-2 on 18 shots. It is great IMO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Only if you go first and seize the initate is a thing. Otherwise deploying it aggressively is just going to get it killed or mobbed.

That's why I like CA18 missions. If they deploy first, then they go first, but you get to fully react to their deployment.

If you deploy first they can setup with the risk of getting blown off the table.

Counter deploy is amazing. In fact it is so strong I'd say go ahead and remove seize the initiate. Which is probably why it's there - to force the winner of the roll off to play more conservative. At least seize has the effect that you might not want to go for an overly aggressive strategy. CA missions really are good. Except for some missions that really favor assault armies or armies with powerful characters. Overall its WAY better than maelstrom. This dread though. Yeah...I'm not sure I'd deploy ay unit 9" away from an opponent without knowing whos going first.

Pretty Nasty combo I found for Ultramarines and Invictors.

Ultras have an ability that allows you to redeploy 3 units. Take 3 invictor dreads and place them super aggressive and if you don't get the first turn you just redploy to another flank OR back into your lines. You could really go all in on alpha strike with this build. Take a bunch of intercessors with auto bolters and any tanks with range to clear screens - maybe a drop pod with grav devs - or hell blasters in the new transports.. Seems like it is a build that will have a hard time losing with the first turn.

 fraser1191 wrote:

TheAvengingKnee wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:
Well we got the base model for Primaris, now the stealthy one. The next cliché option would be a heavily armoured one which will probably be slow so it'll have a big gun or maybe 2 like a bargain bin castellan

I'd like a tougher, purely shooty version, yes, yes!

Could make an all dreadnaught list work pretty well if they introduced something like that. I am gonna proxy 3 of the invictus dreads this weekend, want to see how well they work with the close range flamer build.

I'd really like to hear your hot take after you play.

Maybe we'll get lucky and get a generic dreadnought HQ
Unfortunately it's totally impossible for Primaris since the redemptor burns out the sarcophagus.

I ran the 3 incendiary cannon invictus suits today, they took a good beating one managed to take out my opponents Cawl in 1 round. The other two died before I used them but they ate a full castle of shots from the units around Cawl. The opponent admitted that they forced his hand and made him ignore the rest of my army the first turn. With their relatively low points it was worth it to force my opponent to ignore more dangerous units because of the invictus units being so close. My opponent had first turn and I still came out way ahead at the end of the first round. The flamer with the extra ap from the devastator doctrine was very nice.

I would definitely run them again.

Everyone has that build Xenomancer - it's a Phobos warlord trait. I agree it's naturally suited to Invictors.

 grouchoben wrote:
Everyone has that build Xenomancer - it's a Phobos warlord trait. I agree it's naturally suited to Invictors.

Wow haven't had a chance to read through the whole marine dex yet thoroughly. As a warlord trait though that is pretty steep for something you might not even need to use about 50% of the time. Still though anyone can pull it off so I think we will be seeing a lot of invictors out there.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 grouchoben wrote:
Everyone has that build Xenomancer - it's a Phobos warlord trait. I agree it's naturally suited to Invictors.

Wow haven't had a chance to read through the whole marine dex yet thoroughly. As a warlord trait though that is pretty steep for something you might not even need to use about 50% of the time. Still though anyone can pull it off so I think we will be seeing a lot of invictors out there.

Yeah everyone have access to the WL trait but only UM have the stratagem for it. So it's up for debate on which is better but I'd say the stratagem

 fraser1191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 grouchoben wrote:
Everyone has that build Xenomancer - it's a Phobos warlord trait. I agree it's naturally suited to Invictors.

Wow haven't had a chance to read through the whole marine dex yet thoroughly. As a warlord trait though that is pretty steep for something you might not even need to use about 50% of the time. Still though anyone can pull it off so I think we will be seeing a lot of invictors out there.

Yeah everyone have access to the WL trait but only UM have the stratagem for it. So it's up for debate on which is better but I'd say the stratagem

The stratagem is more flexible, that's for sure. I'd rather save those CP's for making my dreads better later in the game or for other stratagems, but it's comforting to know its there and can really, really mess with your opponent's deployment.

As to the original question, "What's the point of dreadnoughts?", the biggest thing in my mind is the damage tracks. A Dreadnought does not degrade as it takes damage. It's always 6" MV, BS/WS 2+ or 3+ which is huge when you have a model armed with a bunch of heavy weapons. Why, oh why, GW does a Dreadnought NOT ignore the -1 to hit penalty for moving and shooting a heavy weapon? It really sucks when my Redemptor is down to those last 3-4 wounds, and suddenly can't hit anything with all it's weapons. Score one for the Invictor with it's Incenderium Flame Cannon. Yes, I know the Contemptor has a damage track. Also, cost. Regular dreads are cheaper in points over a Redemptor.. Finally, regular dreads fulfill the role of anti-tank much better then a Redemptor or Invictor. If the Redemptor could take a lascannon, it's utility would increase by x10,000. Instead, it has a Plasma weapon that wounds easily, but only causes 1-2 wounds. Oh, and can cause a mortal wound on the Redemptor.

There are several stratagems that can really help out Dreads for Space Marines as well.

The Invictus is a shiny, new toy that doesn't really fulfill a new role, and is a one trick pony that your opponent can see from a mile away if you forward deploy it hoping for that first turn charge. It's best use is during the deployment phase, threatening your enemy and making him modify his deployment somewhat. If you lose that first turn, you'll probably lose the Invictus.

The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

 Tamwulf wrote:


The Invictus is a shiny, new toy that doesn't really fulfill a new role, and is a one trick pony that your opponent can see from a mile away if you forward deploy it hoping for that first turn charge. It's best use is during the deployment phase, threatening your enemy and making him modify his deployment somewhat. If you lose that first turn, you'll probably lose the Invictus.

A unit can achieve value with it's death, and I think this is a major draw of the Invictus, since it must be addressed quickly, and it attracts antitank gun fire, leaving other potential targets like Predators, Vindicators, and Repulsors active and available when they would have died.

 Xenomancers wrote:
The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

BrianDavion wrote:


another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

Excellent point. UM are no joke this time around.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

Totally. Plus you have 0 investment into it as a stratagem so you can deploy them in your lines and make the call after you see the table if you want to be sneaky. Or you can load upfront. Force them to deploy where they don't want to and just bring them back. To be able to do this with infiltrating units seems kinda broken to me but the unit really isn't worth taking over the redemptor without it IMO.

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

Totally. Plus you have 0 investment into it as a stratagem so you can deploy them in your lines and make the call after you see the table if you want to be sneaky. Or you can load upfront. Force them to deploy where they don't want to and just bring them back. To be able to do this with infiltrating units seems kinda broken to me but the unit really isn't worth taking over the redemptor without it IMO.

Just a quick heads up before you go buying 3 of these, some people are claiming that the redeploy has to be within your deployment zone, why I don't understand but they claim you can deploy forward them redeploy to your deployment zone but not the other way around. Don't know why but be aware that somepeople have read this very strangely

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

Totally. Plus you have 0 investment into it as a stratagem so you can deploy them in your lines and make the call after you see the table if you want to be sneaky. Or you can load upfront. Force them to deploy where they don't want to and just bring them back. To be able to do this with infiltrating units seems kinda broken to me but the unit really isn't worth taking over the redemptor without it IMO.

Just a quick heads up before you go buying 3 of these, some people are claiming that the redeploy has to be within your deployment zone, why I don't understand but they claim you can deploy forward them redeploy to your deployment zone but not the other way around. Don't know why but be aware that some people have read this very strangely

That is possible I suppose - I think it says to follow the rules for the mission for deployment. Which infiltration would be allowed. Really the important thing is that you can deploy agressive and pull back if you lose first turn. That would still work with even that interpretation.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

Totally. Plus you have 0 investment into it as a stratagem so you can deploy them in your lines and make the call after you see the table if you want to be sneaky. Or you can load upfront. Force them to deploy where they don't want to and just bring them back. To be able to do this with infiltrating units seems kinda broken to me but the unit really isn't worth taking over the redemptor without it IMO.

Just a quick heads up before you go buying 3 of these, some people are claiming that the redeploy has to be within your deployment zone, why I don't understand but they claim you can deploy forward them redeploy to your deployment zone but not the other way around. Don't know why but be aware that some people have read this very strangely

That is possible I suppose - I think it says to follow the rules for the mission for deployment. Which infiltration would be allowed. Really the important thing is that you can deploy agressive and pull back if you lose first turn. That would still work with even that interpretation.

To be honest I think your right in that it just works.
But I'm not even sure what's going on with some of the utter rubbish rules lawyering that has been going on about the rules of late. It's descend into the ah well technically it doesn't say I can't. Or the plate is red is somehow ambiguous is the plate red or does the plate just appear to be red because it's on a red table.

I just bought and assembled one of the warsuits and my only beef with them is that you have to choose which main weapon to build. They don't give you two of the elbow joints (like in the redemptor) so that you can change out the main weapon. Trying to rig something up is much more difficult. I'm not sure if GW thinks that people are really going to buy so many of these that they would buy 2 just so they can use each main weapon.

I built the flame weapon just because I really don't see myself ever use the long range one (just seems if I wanted a long range weapon on a dred that there are better options).

Other than the roll cage being extremely impractical on a dred, the model looks really good.

 Corennus wrote:
The Invictus Tactical Warsuit is out!

And it looks........like a Space Marine recreating Avatar.


Exosuited marines aren't new. Dreadknights and Centurions have been around quite a few years now...

But the question is this:

What's the point of taking a Redepmtor Dreadnought over a Warsuit now?

A redemptor is:

a 13 wound S7 T7 vehicle with a 30" range main weapon (Heavy 12 S5 Ap-1 D1) and heavy flamer. it can target flying units with an ircarus rocket pod. Has to footslog across battlefield or arrive by Lucius Drop Pod.

an invictor is:

a 13 wound, S7 T6 vehicle with either a 12" 2D6 autohitting incendium cannon or a 36" twin ironhail stubber (Heavy S4 AP-1 D1), twin irohnhail autocannon (Heavy 6 S7-1 D2). It can set up ANYWHERE ON THE BATTLEFIELD THAT IS MORE THAN 9" from enemy!!!! Oh and it has a heavy bolter it uses as a PISTOL!


So the Invicttor:

Outshoots the Redemptor
Is T6 compared to T7 but that's the only bad point
Can scout and Alpha Strike
Costs less than Redemptor (in points)


Are dreads dead??

As always, in the competitive world, there is no reason.

For the rest of us playing toy soldiers with our friends, I can think of a dozen reasons.

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

Totally. Plus you have 0 investment into it as a stratagem so you can deploy them in your lines and make the call after you see the table if you want to be sneaky. Or you can load upfront. Force them to deploy where they don't want to and just bring them back. To be able to do this with infiltrating units seems kinda broken to me but the unit really isn't worth taking over the redemptor without it IMO.

Just a quick heads up before you go buying 3 of these, some people are claiming that the redeploy has to be within your deployment zone, why I don't understand but they claim you can deploy forward them redeploy to your deployment zone but not the other way around. Don't know why but be aware that some people have read this very strangely

That is possible I suppose - I think it says to follow the rules for the mission for deployment. Which infiltration would be allowed. Really the important thing is that you can deploy agressive and pull back if you lose first turn. That would still work with even that interpretation.

To be honest I think your right in that it just works.
But I'm not even sure what's going on with some of the utter rubbish rules lawyering that has been going on about the rules of late. It's descend into the ah well technically it doesn't say I can't. Or the plate is red is somehow ambiguous is the plate red or does the plate just appear to be red because it's on a red table.

Reminds me of 6th when models with helmets couldn't shoot.

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

Totally. Plus you have 0 investment into it as a stratagem so you can deploy them in your lines and make the call after you see the table if you want to be sneaky. Or you can load upfront. Force them to deploy where they don't want to and just bring them back. To be able to do this with infiltrating units seems kinda broken to me but the unit really isn't worth taking over the redemptor without it IMO.

Just a quick heads up before you go buying 3 of these, some people are claiming that the redeploy has to be within your deployment zone, why I don't understand but they claim you can deploy forward them redeploy to your deployment zone but not the other way around. Don't know why but be aware that some people have read this very strangely

That is possible I suppose - I think it says to follow the rules for the mission for deployment. Which infiltration would be allowed. Really the important thing is that you can deploy agressive and pull back if you lose first turn. That would still work with even that interpretation.

To be honest I think your right in that it just works.
But I'm not even sure what's going on with some of the utter rubbish rules lawyering that has been going on about the rules of late. It's descend into the ah well technically it doesn't say I can't. Or the plate is red is somehow ambiguous is the plate red or does the plate just appear to be red because it's on a red table.

I've been really busy playing and building and painting. Haven't had a lot of time to really sit down and grind out the rules because there is a lot of skipping round to different books to figure out exactly what things mean. I remember pausing when I read the redeploy section and wondering if that wording would exclude infiltration.

Ice_can wrote:

Just a quick heads up before you go buying 3 of these, some people are claiming that the redeploy has to be within your deployment zone, why I don't understand but they claim you can deploy forward them redeploy to your deployment zone but not the other way around. Don't know why but be aware that somepeople have read this very strangely

If that were true how does anything deploy outside their zone?

Stratagem says:

At the start of the first battle round, before the first turn
begins, select up to three ULTRAMARINES units from your
army on the battlefield. Remove them from the battlefield and
set them up again as described in the Deployment section of
the mission (if both players have abilities that redeploy units,
roll off; the winner chooses who redeploys their units first).

Mission says (one of them anyway):

The player who did not pick their deployment
zone then deploys their entire army first.
Their opponent then deploys their entire
army. A player’s models must be set up wholly
within their deployment zone.

Invictor says:

When you set up this model
during deployment, it can be set up anywhere on the
battlefield that is more than 9" away from the enemy
deployment zone and any enemy models.

The special rule is an exception to the norm.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

Just a quick heads up before you go buying 3 of these, some people are claiming that the redeploy has to be within your deployment zone, why I don't understand but they claim you can deploy forward them redeploy to your deployment zone but not the other way around. Don't know why but be aware that somepeople have read this very strangely

If that were true how does anything deploy outside their zone?

Stratagem says:

At the start of the first battle round, before the first turn
begins, select up to three ULTRAMARINES units from your
army on the battlefield. Remove them from the battlefield and
set them up again as described in the Deployment section of
the mission (if both players have abilities that redeploy units,
roll off; the winner chooses who redeploys their units first).

Mission says (one of them anyway):

The player who did not pick their deployment
zone then deploys their entire army first.
Their opponent then deploys their entire
army. A player’s models must be set up wholly
within their deployment zone.

Invictor says:

When you set up this model
during deployment, it can be set up anywhere on the
battlefield that is more than 9" away from the enemy
deployment zone and any enemy models.

The special rule is an exception to the norm.

Go argue with the people claiming it doesn't work because first round isnt during deployment, I agree it works fine.
I was just giving a warning that they might get some rules lawyering at the table which would really mess with the strategy / playability of the models.

The argument is pretty weak there. What allows you to deploy a unit normally?

 Xenomancers wrote:
The argument is pretty weak there. What allows you to deploy a unit normally?

Rules Lawyer's gone be Rules Lawyer's, I'd rather not have to deal with them but sometimes you stumble across them.

Azeroth wrote:
I just bought and assembled one of the warsuits and my only beef with them is that you have to choose which main weapon to build. They don't give you two of the elbow joints (like in the redemptor) so that you can change out the main weapon. Trying to rig something up is much more difficult. I'm not sure if GW thinks that people are really going to buy so many of these that they would buy 2 just so they can use each main weapon.

I built the flame weapon just because I really don't see myself ever use the long range one (just seems if I wanted a long range weapon on a dred that there are better options).

Other than the roll cage being extremely impractical on a dred, the model looks really good.

Hold up.

So you can't friction fit either of the main weapons like on the redemptor?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The argument is pretty weak there. What allows you to deploy a unit normally?

What even is deployment? How can anything infiltrate at all?

 fraser1191 wrote:

Azeroth wrote:
I just bought and assembled one of the warsuits and my only beef with them is that you have to choose which main weapon to build. They don't give you two of the elbow joints (like in the redemptor) so that you can change out the main weapon. Trying to rig something up is much more difficult. I'm not sure if GW thinks that people are really going to buy so many of these that they would buy 2 just so they can use each main weapon.

I built the flame weapon just because I really don't see myself ever use the long range one (just seems if I wanted a long range weapon on a dred that there are better options).

Other than the roll cage being extremely impractical on a dred, the model looks really good.

Hold up.

So you can't friction fit either of the main weapons like on the redemptor?

I also picked one up myself so I can confirm the kit only comes with one "elbow joint".

 Tamwulf wrote:


As to the original question, "What's the point of dreadnoughts?", the biggest thing in my mind is the damage tracks. A Dreadnought does not degrade as it takes damage. It's always 6" MV, BS/WS 2+ or 3+ which is huge when you have a model armed with a bunch of heavy weapons. Why, oh why, GW does a Dreadnought NOT ignore the -1 to hit penalty for moving and shooting a heavy weapon?

Mine do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

Just a quick heads up before you go buying 3 of these, some people are claiming that the redeploy has to be within your deployment zone, why I don't understand but they claim you can deploy forward them redeploy to your deployment zone but not the other way around. Don't know why but be aware that somepeople have read this very strangely

I was buying three to have three anyway. Might as well assemble and paint assembly line style. Painting multiples of the same model makes it harder to miss a spot/doodad/bi - you might miss it on the first one, and have to go back after seeing it on the second, but that's better than missing it entirely.

As for why they're saying that - its becasue of the wording of "Concealed Positions" or whatever they've named Infiltrate now, plus the wording of the stratagem/WL Trait. The Stratagem says per the mission rules - not "As if it was the deployment phase". The mission rules don't mention infiltrating etc. Concealed Positions specifically calls out the Deployment Phase. The Stratagem (And I assume the Warlord Trait has the same wording) triggers after Deployment at the start of the first turn, too late for Generic Concealed Position rule to trigger.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Azeroth wrote:
I just bought and assembled one of the warsuits and my only beef with them is that you have to choose which main weapon to build. They don't give you two of the elbow joints (like in the redemptor) so that you can change out the main weapon. Trying to rig something up is much more difficult. I'm not sure if GW thinks that people are really going to buy so many of these that they would buy 2 just so they can use each main weapon.

I built the flame weapon just because I really don't see myself ever use the long range one (just seems if I wanted a long range weapon on a dred that there are better options).

Other than the roll cage being extremely impractical on a dred, the model looks really good.

Hold up.

So you can't friction fit either of the main weapons like on the redemptor?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The argument is pretty weak there. What allows you to deploy a unit normally?

What even is deployment? How can anything infiltrate at all?

I thought I saw all the parts to make both gun arms, but I could be wrong, I haven't gotten mine yet. Worst case you magnetize, or buy arm bits from Ebay/resellers. I'm not buying two kits to make the same model twice (i.e. Invictor Warsuit #2 of the 2nd Company) one with the flamer, one with the autocannon

It has all the parts to make both gun arms. I am going to use the autocannons for venerable dreads since I made the flamer version. If it is the join you are missing then just file it down so it fits into both weapons attached to the upper army and put a magnet inside the gun. Will work fine.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

I think this is a good place to ask. In the Spanish Codex, Lord of Deceit only works on Phobos units. Is it the same in the original?
It appears not, as you wouldn't be talking about redeploying Invictus if it was the case.
Thanks!

DanielFM wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
The interesting thing with ultras compared to other marines utilizing the redeploy invictors trick. Ultras have access to Calgar who generates 2 CP for being your warlord and also regens CP on a 5+ for his trait. That's why I am saying the warlord trait for deploy is a steep cost. ESP because phobos HQ's kinda suck. The reiver LT is probably the best of the bunch but he is also pretty easy to kill for slay the warlord.

I think Ultras pull this off the best. Also with the ability to fall back and shoot flamers and even charge with 1 of them for 1 CP is also pretty huge.

I'm kinda mad about this combo because...I wasn't going to buy any of these...Now I am compelled to!

another thing to consider, if you take the redeploy warlord trait folks are GOING to be onguard against the manuver the UM strat is far more likely to catch them off guard

I think this is a good place to ask. In the Spanish Codex, Lord of Deceit only works on Phobos units. Is it the same in the original?
It appears not, as you wouldn't be talking about redeploying Invictus if it was the case.
Thanks!

Same in the English ebook I have. And I checked, the Invictus is not a Phobos unit as well as not a Dread so you can pretty much only LoD Phobos infantry. The Impulsor also doesn't have Phobos, and I don't think anything else new will/would pick it up if it didn't have it before.

So that ends the WT Vs Stratagem debate. The UM stratagem allows you to do the Invictus shuffling, the WT doesn't.
Pretty useless by only redeploying Phobos imho.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Azeroth wrote:
I just bought and assembled one of the warsuits and my only beef with them is that you have to choose which main weapon to build. They don't give you two of the elbow joints (like in the redemptor) so that you can change out the main weapon. Trying to rig something up is much more difficult. I'm not sure if GW thinks that people are really going to buy so many of these that they would buy 2 just so they can use each main weapon.

I built the flame weapon just because I really don't see myself ever use the long range one (just seems if I wanted a long range weapon on a dred that there are better options).

Other than the roll cage being extremely impractical on a dred, the model looks really good.

Hold up.

So you can't friction fit either of the main weapons like on the redemptor?

I also picked one up myself so I can confirm the kit only comes with one "elbow joint".

Well that's a little obnoxious. I'll probably be able to figure something out when I pick one up

DanielFM wrote:

Pretty useless by only redeploying Phobos imho.

I was honestly hoping they'd get rid of the Phobos Specific stuff. Either dump the Phobos WT and Obscuration, or remove the Phobos keyword from it.

Breton wrote:

DanielFM wrote:

Pretty useless by only redeploying Phobos imho.

I was honestly hoping they'd get rid of the Phobos Specific stuff. Either dump the Phobos WT and Obscuration, or remove the Phobos keyword from it.

I'm glad they didn't dump it, it means no worrying about hanging onto my vanguard mini dex if I wanna use that stuff

BrianDavion wrote:

Breton wrote:

DanielFM wrote:

Pretty useless by only redeploying Phobos imho.

I was honestly hoping they'd get rid of the Phobos Specific stuff. Either dump the Phobos WT and Obscuration, or remove the Phobos keyword from it.

I'm glad they didn't dump it, it means no worrying about hanging onto my vanguard mini dex if I wanna use that stuff

If they dumped it, it would have been use on a Space Marine-ish unit, not a specifically Phobos unit or just merged and pick the best 6 for the regular WT and Librarius discs. The problem with Phobos keyword abilities is there aren't enough phobos keyword units. They're always going to be a subset - and a small one at that - of your army. Really not worth it for the attentions of your Warlord/Commander or his Librarian assistant.

 Xenomancers wrote:

Totally. Plus you have 0 investment into it as a stratagem so you can deploy them in your lines and make the call after you see the table if you want to be sneaky. Or you can load upfront. Force them to deploy where they don't want to and just bring them back. To be able to do this with infiltrating units seems kinda broken to me but the unit really isn't worth taking over the redemptor without it IMO.

I'm a Wolves player, not a UM player so I don't know what the valid stratagem targets are, but I don't feel that this thing would warrant redeploying; if this thing is dying, then my other units that I care more about aren't [because seriously, it's a twin heavy flamer, I'm expecting the targeting priority he forces to be far more valuable than his own offensive power], and I could use such a stratagem to start Devastators or Predators with a good firing position and then move them to a safe position if I lost the first turn [or do the inverse and start them somewhere safe and redeploy them to get a better fire line].

I think this think is definitely good on it's own without pull-back options. I actually think pulling it back to your lines would lose some of its value since the imperative to destroy it over say, a repulsor or some devastators, isn't there if it's living in your deployment zone.


I don't actually know how much I want to buy one though. It really depends on how much I want to go into a armor-skew Space Wolves list, which would be a hefty investment of cash. I definitely think they're really good, though.

Is it worth pointing out that if the Imperium can build a Battleship (it can) then it could just make a a couple million Invictus Warsuits, put every marine existant in them and win the battle for the galaxy in a few years.

Reemule wrote:
Is it worth pointing out that if the Imperium can build a Battleship (it can) then it could just make a a couple million Invictus Warsuits, put every marine existant in them and win the battle for the galaxy in a few years.

Thats not how logistics work

Reemule wrote:
Is it worth pointing out that if the Imperium can build a Battleship (it can) then it could just make a a couple million Invictus Warsuits, put every marine existant in them and win the battle for the galaxy in a few years.

That makes no sense. In no small part because the Invictus is awful.

Reemule wrote:
Is it worth pointing out that if the Imperium can build a Battleship (it can) then it could just make a a couple million Invictus Warsuits, put every marine existant in them and win the battle for the galaxy in a few years.

With that sort of flawed logic, because the US built the Iowa during WW2, there should have been no reason for every US troop to not have been in a M4 Sherman at the least.

Ignore the game for a sec PM713. If I have 10 Invictus Warsuits, and you have 10 intercessors, I'm going to win.

Now the game to make it realistic is going to make me play less than 2, against all 10 Intercessors due to the point system. As it should It is about fairness.

But in the universe, among all the things that make no sense, not giving each and every marine a Invictus Warsuit is kinda silly.

 Stormonu wrote:

Reemule wrote:
Is it worth pointing out that if the Imperium can build a Battleship (it can) then it could just make a a couple million Invictus Warsuits, put every marine existant in them and win the battle for the galaxy in a few years.

With that sort of flawed logic, because the US built the Iowa during WW2, there should have been no reason for every US troop to not have been in a M4 Sherman at the least.

They tried. They made nearly 50k shermans.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

Totally. Plus you have 0 investment into it as a stratagem so you can deploy them in your lines and make the call after you see the table if you want to be sneaky. Or you can load upfront. Force them to deploy where they don't want to and just bring them back. To be able to do this with infiltrating units seems kinda broken to me but the unit really isn't worth taking over the redemptor without it IMO.

I'm a Wolves player, not a UM player so I don't know what the valid stratagem targets are, but I don't feel that this thing would warrant redeploying; if this thing is dying, then my other units that I care more about aren't [because seriously, it's a twin heavy flamer, I'm expecting the targeting priority he forces to be far more valuable than his own offensive power], and I could use such a stratagem to start Devastators or Predators with a good firing position and then move them to a safe position if I lost the first turn [or do the inverse and start them somewhere safe and redeploy them to get a better fire line].

I think this think is definitely good on it's own without pull-back options. I actually think pulling it back to your lines would lose some of its value since the imperative to destroy it over say, a repulsor or some devastators, isn't there if it's living in your deployment zone.


I don't actually know how much I want to buy one though. It really depends on how much I want to go into a armor-skew Space Wolves list, which would be a hefty investment of cash. I definitely think they're really good, though.

Oh I agree youd rather them go after 130 points invitors than 330 point repulsor executioners. However - just handing over 3 dreads to a group of custode jetbikes or something will lose you the game - it also allows you to counter deploy their counter deploy. Basically they are screwed and trapt in their DZ turn 1. This is really freaking powerful.

 Xenomancers wrote:
They made nearly 50k shermans.

And fielded 11 million soldiers give or take. Not the ratio you're looking for.

The Space Marines are the elite though. We ain't talking about giving every guardsman a Invictus, but every spessmarine.. seems doable.

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
They made nearly 50k shermans.

And fielded 11 million soldiers give or take. Not the ratio you're looking for.

One of the old stories [one of those humorous tall tales up there with the fully automatic 25lbr guns, and certainly unverifiable in any case] goes that the German infantry was at one point convinced that each GI was given his own personal jeep .


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Oh I agree youd rather them go after 130 points invitors than 330 point repulsor executioners. However - just handing over 3 dreads to a group of custode jetbikes or something will lose you the game - it also allows you to counter deploy their counter deploy. Basically they are screwed and trapt in their DZ turn 1. This is really freaking powerful.

It is definitely really powerful.

Reemule wrote:
The Space Marines are the elite though. We ain't talking about giving every guardsman a Invictus, but every spessmarine.. seems doable.

But an awful idea.

Sterling191 wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
They made nearly 50k shermans.

And fielded 11 million soldiers give or take. Not the ratio you're looking for.

True but only about 1 million saw combat. Most of those who saw combat were in some kind of vehical. Beit an aircraft or tank or ship or transport. Foot soldiers see most of the casualties though and it's terrible. We did actually try to put as many vehicles in the field as we could.

Reemule wrote:
The Space Marines are the elite though. We ain't talking about giving every guardsman a Invictus, but every spessmarine.. seems doable.

This seems like one of those things where the appropriate response is “Rocks are not Free, Citizen”

Game wise, how does the Invictus compare to Centurions - as it would seem more sensible to equip every oldMarine with one of those - are these supposed to be the Primaris equivalent?

 Stormonu wrote:


Game wise, how does the Invictus compare to Centurions - as it would seem more sensible to equip every oldMarine with one of those - are these supposed to be the Primaris equivalent?

The Invictor doesnt really have a non-Primaris equivalent. It's as close as you can get to a fast attack mech (emphasis on the FAST), of which...bikes of all things are the nearest comparitor id make.

Reemule wrote:
The Space Marines are the elite though. We ain't talking about giving every guardsman a Invictus, but every spessmarine.. seems doable.

It is doable. In an empire the scale of the IoM, scarcity would not exist for marines, nor scions. Only for the rank and file. There's those that handwave this, but 1K per chapter is a rounding error in such an economy. Under harsh examination, marines wouldn't matter at all, regardless of the bolter porn, just as commandoes didn't significantly change the outcome of WWII. There is no magical enemy "command and control" to smash that stops the entire enemy army. Marines are expensive terror weapons for the Emprah and not true weapons of war. For those SG-1 fans, think of the Jaffa staff vs a P-90.

Martel732 wrote:

Reemule wrote:
The Space Marines are the elite though. We ain't talking about giving every guardsman a Invictus, but every spessmarine.. seems doable.

It is doable. In an empire the scale of the IoM, scarcity would not exist for marines, nor scions. Only for the rank and file. There's those that handwave this, but 1K per chapter is a rounding error in such an economy. Under harsh examination, marines wouldn't matter at all, regardless of the bolter porn, just as commandoes didn't significantly change the outcome of WWII. There is no magical enemy "command and control" to smash that stops the entire enemy army. Marines are expensive terror weapons for the Emprah and not true weapons of war. For those SG-1 fans, think of the Jaffa staff vs a P-90.

Nah - Paton for sure changed the tides of battle more than once. Plus in warfare even slight advances in technology can make numbers matter not - just look at desert storm. As a starcraft player you have to aknowledge that putting the right unit in the right place at the right time and completely dominate a battlefield. That is what marines represent.

It just doesn't happen enough in an actual war to make a difference. How did those German uber tanks work out for them? Slight advances aren't enough to overcome numbers, and marine tech seems pretty gakky actually.

The allies had far superior tech in Desert Storm. Not the best example. A single GENERATION can make a big difference, but there are many, many incremental improvement within a generation. One reason I say IoM's anti-tech model is actually impossible to maintain for 10K years.

Martel732 wrote:
It just doesn't happen enough in an actual war to make a difference. How did those German uber tanks work out for them? Slight advances aren't enough to overcome numbers, and marine tech seems pretty gakky actually.

The allies had far superior tech in Desert Storm. Not the best example. A single GENERATION can make a big difference, but there are many, many incremental improvement within a generation. One reason I say IoM's anti-tech model is actually impossible to maintain for 10K years.

Anti tech model is gone. Gman has unleashed the armory that cawl has been hiding away. I think GW figured out what you have. Antitech is kinda of...anti cool.

And unsustainable. And counter to all human experience and history.

US mainline bomber in 1936 was the B-17, by 1956, you are looking at B-52s. That's 20 years. You can't sit that game out, no matter what GW says or claims.

Martel732 wrote:
It just doesn't happen enough in an actual war to make a difference. How did those German uber tanks work out for them? Slight advances aren't enough to overcome numbers, and marine tech seems pretty gakky actually.

The allies had far superior tech in Desert Storm. Not the best example. A single GENERATION can make a big difference, but there are many, many incremental improvement within a generation. One reason I say IoM's anti-tech model is actually impossible to maintain for 10K years.

To also be fair, the "German Uber Tanks" were decidedly less than uber, since while in possession of technically impressive paper stats, they didn't meet the operational and tactical requirements [not to mention that they often didn't work either]. The best German vehicles were the PZIV and the StuGIII; which were approximately comparable to the the Sherman and T-34.

Considering that the M1's and Bradleys were not only considerably more advanced than the monkey model Soviet stuff the Iraqi's had, they met the operational and tactical requirements, were supportable by the US logistical apparatus, and worked reliably, the same which cannot be said about the PZV and PZVIB.

However, the idea that a small number of warriors can defeat a greater enemy by fighting spirit and individual superiority is an idea that has been subscribed to by many, but only sometimes pans out, and arguably there are other factors at play too in such victories.

Martel732 wrote:
And unsustainable. And counter to all human experience and history.

US mainline bomber in 1936 was the B-17, by 1956, you are looking at B-52s. That's 20 years. You can't sit that game out, no matter what GW says or claims.

And 2019 and we still have B52, no matter what you says or claim. That's about 70 years already, and it is supposed to fly until 2050. One century.

 godardc wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
And unsustainable. And counter to all human experience and history.

US mainline bomber in 1936 was the B-17, by 1956, you are looking at B-52s. That's 20 years. You can't sit that game out, no matter what GW says or claims.

And 2019 and we still have B52, no matter what you says or claim. That's about 70 years already, and it is supposed to fly until 2050. One century.

The B52 will rule the skies until our robot overlords take over...

ERJAK wrote:
The repulsor was never alive. It's better than it was thanks to doctrines, point drops, and IH tactic though.

Contemptors and Vendreds are not only still great options, but are better than they've been since 5th. Even standard dreadnaughts are useful if you don't have points for a vendred.

Am I the only one that noticed the Repulsor is now 215 points?

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
The repulsor was never alive. It's better than it was thanks to doctrines, point drops, and IH tactic though.

Contemptors and Vendreds are not only still great options, but are better than they've been since 5th. Even standard dreadnaughts are useful if you don't have points for a vendred.

Am I the only one that noticed the Repulsor is now 215 points?

Nah people flipped their keyboards about it ages ago, same as when GW jacked the price on the executioner.

 Blood Hawk wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

Azeroth wrote:
I just bought and assembled one of the warsuits and my only beef with them is that you have to choose which main weapon to build. They don't give you two of the elbow joints (like in the redemptor) so that you can change out the main weapon. Trying to rig something up is much more difficult. I'm not sure if GW thinks that people are really going to buy so many of these that they would buy 2 just so they can use each main weapon.

I built the flame weapon just because I really don't see myself ever use the long range one (just seems if I wanted a long range weapon on a dred that there are better options).

Other than the roll cage being extremely impractical on a dred, the model looks really good.

Hold up.

So you can't friction fit either of the main weapons like on the redemptor?

I also picked one up myself so I can confirm the kit only comes with one "elbow joint".

I over-trimmed the points so the elbow wouldn't hold at all, but the elbow ball is just thick enough to drill out a standard toothpick peg mount and the guns are hollow. Took me longer to put the bit in the pin vice than it did to actually drill the holes.

(Whatever else you can say about them I'm really glad GW went for all-plastic kits. Sooo much easier to work with.)

b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

ERJAK wrote:
The repulsor was never alive. It's better than it was thanks to doctrines, point drops, and IH tactic though.

Contemptors and Vendreds are not only still great options, but are better than they've been since 5th. Even standard dreadnaughts are useful if you don't have points for a vendred.

Am I the only one that noticed the Repulsor is now 215 points?

It was the first thing I noticed and many can attest it sent me on a literal ravenous tirade.

Martel732 wrote:
It just doesn't happen enough in an actual war to make a difference. How did those German uber tanks work out for them? Slight advances aren't enough to overcome numbers, and marine tech seems pretty gakky actually.

The allies had far superior tech in Desert Storm. Not the best example. A single GENERATION can make a big difference, but there are many, many incremental improvement within a generation. One reason I say IoM's anti-tech model is actually impossible to maintain for 10K years.

The german uber tanks didn't make much of a difference not just because of technology not mattering. Some of the high end tank designs such as the later variant panzers and the panther were exceptionally good tanks with little peer. Even the Tiger 1. However, some of the issues came with rushing too advanced tech out without proper testing in a rushed attempt to save the losing war. The german war machine was stopped by a simple game of numbers and lack of ability to maintain output. Not really the lack of ability of their tanks, but inability to fix them easily and keep making them to near enough of a number to matter. Couple that with being too over engineered for most to deal with on the fly, it was a desperate gamble at the least.

Other tech innovations might have changed things had they gotten them out sooner or in much greater numbers, the sooner being the first assault rifle, Jets, probably a great many more.

Like the first Jets, was a handful ever put into action and they dominated for the Axis where they engaged the enemy, they were so few in number and their tech edge made them impossible to replace and keep sustained with proper fuel or repairs. Tech and industry can go hand in hand with winning a war.

You're once more looking at real life logic and reason in a space opera battle of knights in space with power armor and big boomy guns fueled by religion and magic. The IoM sustains because it can for the story line, plot armor is stronger than any weapon.

Like the first Jets, was a handful ever put into action and they dominated for the Axis where they engaged the enemy, they were so few in number and their tech edge made them impossible to replace and keep sustained with proper fuel or repairs.

It didn't help that the ME-262 was criminally misused thanks to Hitler's insisting it be used as a bomber.

This too, but was a great many issues they had to deal with that led to systematic failure despite any positive tech gains.

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

I have come to the conclusion now that redemptors are a good choice if you're short on funds (a click together model is only £21) and you want a fluffy narrative army where one of your primaris warriors is now a dreadnought.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
There's nothing technically wrong with a redemptor, it is still a T7 13 wound walking boom tomb, but it's now not quite so "now"

"Brother Machius is critically injured, my Lord. We must get his remaining torso, left arm, and top half of his face interred into a Dreadnough Sarcophagi to preserve his years of experience and loyalty!"

"Agreed Apothecary Healus Maximus, inform the 10th Company master to prepare a new wave of recruits to replace our fallen Brother. Give them each a pistol and a knife and have them sneak into the enemy camp and hope for the best. No helmets."

"As you command!"

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
"Brother Machius is critically injured, my Lord. We must get his remaining torso, left arm, and top half of his face interred into a Dreadnough Sarcophagi to preserve his years of experience and loyalty!"

"Agreed Apothecary Healus Maximus, inform the 10th Company master to prepare a new wave of recruits to replace our fallen Brother. Give them each a pistol and a knife and have them sneak into the enemy camp and hope for the best. No helmets."

"As you command!"

It's a Marine training ritual. During their first battle most of them will go bald. Those who keep their hair are destined for greatness. Perhaps even being a protagonist one day.

AngryAngel80 wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
It just doesn't happen enough in an actual war to make a difference. How did those German uber tanks work out for them? Slight advances aren't enough to overcome numbers, and marine tech seems pretty gakky actually.

The allies had far superior tech in Desert Storm. Not the best example. A single GENERATION can make a big difference, but there are many, many incremental improvement within a generation. One reason I say IoM's anti-tech model is actually impossible to maintain for 10K years.

The german uber tanks didn't make much of a difference not just because of technology not mattering. Some of the high end tank designs such as the later variant panzers and the panther were exceptionally good tanks with little peer. Even the Tiger 1. However, some of the issues came with rushing too advanced tech out without proper testing in a rushed attempt to save the losing war. The german war machine was stopped by a simple game of numbers and lack of ability to maintain output. Not really the lack of ability of their tanks, but inability to fix them easily and keep making them to near enough of a number to matter. Couple that with being too over engineered for most to deal with on the fly, it was a desperate gamble at the least.

Other tech innovations might have changed things had they gotten them out sooner or in much greater numbers, the sooner being the first assault rifle, Jets, probably a great many more.

Like the first Jets, was a handful ever put into action and they dominated for the Axis where they engaged the enemy, they were so few in number and their tech edge made them impossible to replace and keep sustained with proper fuel or repairs. Tech and industry can go hand in hand with winning a war.

You're once more looking at real life logic and reason in a space opera battle of knights in space with power armor and big boomy guns fueled by religion and magic. The IoM sustains because it can for the story line, plot armor is stronger than any weapon.

40ks story is poor, and far exceeds my plot armor tolerance. A little plot armor is often necessary, but 40k is way over the top.

Its not even a good space opera compared to something like babylon 5 or the expanse.

 godardc wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

Well just look that the humble bullet. The method for launching a projectile at high speeds really hasn't changed much. Just the targeting systems have changed. Eventually a tech peaks and you just can't improve upon it anymore. Leaps in tech often require a new discovery. Like - the wing or rocket power.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

Well just look that the humble bullet. The method for launching a projectile at high speeds really hasn't changed much. Just the targeting systems have changed. Eventually a tech peaks and you just can't improve upon it anymore. Leaps in tech often require a new discovery. Like - the wing or rocket power.

That's not really true. We have a plethora of different ammo types, and leaving out the slugs, hollow points, buckshot, and fragmentation rounds that everyone has heard of there's some pretty advanced stuff out there. The military actually developed an honest to G-d explosive bullet that operates like a micro-frag grenade. Set the timer and the buller explodes in mid-air to take out targets hidding inside building. It's almost literally a Bolter round. The reason you don't hear about it much is that it's something only a sniper would be using since a) setting the timer is fiddly as hell and b) they're too expensive for mass deployment.

The Newman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

Well just look that the humble bullet. The method for launching a projectile at high speeds really hasn't changed much. Just the targeting systems have changed. Eventually a tech peaks and you just can't improve upon it anymore. Leaps in tech often require a new discovery. Like - the wing or rocket power.

That's not really true. We have a plethora of different ammo types, and leaving out the slugs, hollow points, buckshot, and fragmentation rounds that everyone has heard of there's some pretty advanced stuff out there. The military actually developed an honest to G-d explosive bullet that operates like a micro-frag grenade. Set the timer and the buller explodes in mid-air to take out targets hidding inside building. It's almost literally a Bolter round. The reason you don't hear about it much is that it's something only a sniper would be using since a) setting the timer is fiddly as hell and b) they're too expensive for mass deployment.

The projectiles might change. The method for launching them doesn't change much. It's still a chemical reaction using the same kinds of compounds getting about the same overall force to launch a projectile.

You ask this like dreads have ever been worth taking. Dreadnoughts haven't been more then a 4fun unit since at least 5th edition, and even then it was only GK rifleman dreads that were good.

 Xenomancers wrote:

The Newman wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 godardc wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
b52 is still great for carpet bombing. When you can clear your opponents air defenses with stealth aircraft and remove all threats - how much ordinance a plane can carry becomes the most important factor. B52 still carries a ton of bombs. Plus it's ordinance has improved massively. Kind of like if you took an Iowa class and armed it with railguns it would still be REALLY effective. Without air superiority though more advanced fights and bombers - the B52 is a useless pile of junk. B2 is still kings though - just hugely expensive to operate.

Yes exactly, thank you. Not all technology has to advance or be surpassed, especially as it becomes more and more difficult to advance the more advanced you are.
This example can totally be copied to the imperium: plasma and laser weaponry didn't advance in 10k years ? And ? It works perfectly and only necrons (arguably tau on some stuff now) have better tech. There is no incentive to advance especially with how difficult it is.

Well just look that the humble bullet. The method for launching a projectile at high speeds really hasn't changed much. Just the targeting systems have changed. Eventually a tech peaks and you just can't improve upon it anymore. Leaps in tech often require a new discovery. Like - the wing or rocket power.

That's not really true. We have a plethora of different ammo types, and leaving out the slugs, hollow points, buckshot, and fragmentation rounds that everyone has heard of there's some pretty advanced stuff out there. The military actually developed an honest to G-d explosive bullet that operates like a micro-frag grenade. Set the timer and the buller explodes in mid-air to take out targets hidding inside building. It's almost literally a Bolter round. The reason you don't hear about it much is that it's something only a sniper would be using since a) setting the timer is fiddly as hell and b) they're too expensive for mass deployment.

The projectiles might change. The method for launching them doesn't change much. It's still a chemical reaction using the same kinds of compounds getting about the same overall force to launch a projectile.

That's like saying there is no difference between a stone knife and a chainsword, because the arm that swings them hasn't changed.

I don't think this constitutes thread necromancy since it's only 11 days old, I'm curious if people's opinions have changed now that the Invictus has been out for a while.

It hasn't displaced Dreadnaughts in my lists, but what I do see it putting the final nail in on for me is the Predator. T6 W13 isn't much flimsier that T7 W11, it's cheaper for a similar gun load, and it's not a useless lump if it winds up in melee. I honestly kind of hope that the Invictor winds up as the basic "tank-chassis" model for Primaris marines instead of the Impulsor, it would make for a very distinctive army.

The Newman wrote:
I don't think this constitutes thread necromancy since it's only 11 days old, I'm curious if people's opinions have changed now that the Invictus has been out for a while.

It hasn't displaced Dreadnaughts in my lists, but what I do see it putting the final nail in on for me is the Predator. T6 W13 isn't much flimsier that T7 W11, it's cheaper for a similar gun load, and it's not a useless lump if it winds up in melee. I honestly kind of hope that the Invictor winds up as the basic "tank-chassis" model for Primaris marines instead of the Impulsor, it would make for a very distinctive army.

predators can have quite a bit more heavy firepower though can't it? Invictor's proably the superior unit for clearing infantry, but for popping tanks, a Las pred (or a ajutocanon+las sponsons) is PROABLY still better yeah?

The LasPredator is a better AT platform but it's also significantly more expensive. The Invictor is better compared to the dakka Predator, and it's superior in several ways.

The Newman wrote:
I don't think this constitutes thread necromancy since it's only 11 days old, I'm curious if people's opinions have changed now that the Invictus has been out for a while.

It hasn't displaced Dreadnaughts in my lists, but what I do see it putting the final nail in on for me is the Predator. T6 W13 isn't much flimsier that T7 W11, it's cheaper for a similar gun load, and it's not a useless lump if it winds up in melee. I honestly kind of hope that the Invictor winds up as the basic "tank-chassis" model for Primaris marines instead of the Impulsor, it would make for a very distinctive army.

The Impulsor already is the tank chassis. The Invictor doesn't replace either the Dread or the Predator. It can fill in for either, but realistically has it's own place. The Invictor's appeal comes in the psychological factor, the pressure placed on the opponent with the shortcutting walker with a power fist.

Making me pull up the dex, dang kids.

Ironhail AC Invictor vs Dakka Pred:

Invictor is slightly less resilient vs plasma and ACs; dedicated anti-tank, like lascannons, meltas, and similar, wound both at the same rate. Invictor has more wounds with the same save.

On to weapons: the dakka pred AC has a variable shot gun, that does more damage/ wound. But the Iron hail AC always fires 6 shots.

Vs T7, Mathhammer averages, starting with Pred:
4 shots, hitting 2.666 times vs 6 hots, hitting 4.
2.666 hits wounding 1.333 times vs 4 hits wounding 2.
1.333 wounds .666 getting through vs 2 wounds 1 getting through.
.666 times 3 damage = 2 damage vs 1 wound time 2 damage = 2 damage.

They are equal on average.

So we have secondary guns: 2 heavy bolters vs 1 heavy bolter + 2 ironhail stubbers + fragstorm grenades. The predator simply goes with quality over quantity, but the invictor's quantity helps balance this out; double the lower str shots (if outside 18" range) should about even out the average hits, but invictor can be within 18" first turn, adding just that slight edge on secondary weapon damage.

Our last 2 factors: cost and FOC slot.

Invictor is 9 pts cheaper but in a fairly crowded, yet expanded FOC.

Reality: Dakka pread is not the best build to begin with, but while on average the main guns are equal, the dakka pred has a potential damage output far greater than the Invictor at range. The points disparity from what we "should" see is evened out by the invictor able to dish out some decent damage in the fight phase.

 BlaxicanX wrote:
You ask this like dreads have ever been worth taking. Dreadnoughts haven't been more then a 4fun unit since at least 5th edition, and even then it was only GK rifleman dreads that were good.

The leviathan dread is pretty good especially in an IH army, I have a feeling they will be very popular.

I would really like to see all walkers get some sort of special bonus that differentiates them from tanks. Back in the day they could fight in CC and had less movement restrictions.

I.E. currently vehicles cannot go beyond the first floor of a building, why not walkers? It wouldnt have to be a universal rule either, just a rule tacked onto walkers "Agile Walker: Unit moves in the same manner as infantry"

Breton wrote:

The Newman wrote:
I don't think this constitutes thread necromancy since it's only 11 days old, I'm curious if people's opinions have changed now that the Invictus has been out for a while.

It hasn't displaced Dreadnaughts in my lists, but what I do see it putting the final nail in on for me is the Predator. T6 W13 isn't much flimsier that T7 W11, it's cheaper for a similar gun load, and it's not a useless lump if it winds up in melee. I honestly kind of hope that the Invictor winds up as the basic "tank-chassis" model for Primaris marines instead of the Impulsor, it would make for a very distinctive army.

The Impulsor already is the tank chassis. The Invictor doesn't replace either the Dread or the Predator. It can fill in for either, but realistically has it's own place. The Invictor's appeal comes in the psychological factor, the pressure placed on the opponent with the shortcutting walker with a power fist.

The Invictor can't be the basic "tank chassis" model yet, nothing is based on it. If anything deserves that title right now for Primaris it's the Repulsor since it's the only thing has an official variant. What I was saying was that I hope that when GW does start releasing cheaper vehicle variants for Primaris that most of them are based on the Redemptor/Invictor kit (I suppose technically the Invictor is based on the Redemptor kit...) and not the Impulsor, partly because I never liked the old "we based a bunch of our main fighting vehicles on a cheap transport" paradigm and partly because I think walkers are a lot more interesting.

 AnomanderRake wrote:

 Inquisitor Lord Katherine wrote:
...Of some note, neither of the Primaris dreads has any antitank options...

Plasma Redemptor? d6 2-damage shots is roughly equivalent to 2 d6-damage shots from a twin lascannon. Melee? Someone was testing Space Wolf Invictors at my FLGS yesterday and the WS 2+/5A on the charge certainly tore holes in my Custodians.

Just want to point out that RAW, space wolves invictor tactical warsuits DO NOT benefit from the Space Wolves, Blood Angels, or Dark Angels faction traits as invictors are ONLY vehicles and warsuits; the traits ONLY apply to INFANTRY, CAVALRY, and DREADNOUGHTS... so, pack brothers, we must wait until GW updates this...

So your opponent should not had been doing this to your custodes.

Damn, that is true.
I really need to put half my marines in a separate detachment under normal space marine rules instead of under BA rules. Too bad we dont get doctrines but still just having chapter tactics, pointdrops and some better stratagems make vehicles way way way better as codex marines than BA/SW/DA.

Put all BA/DA/SW unique things in 1 detachment and all the rest in a successor marine detachment of your choice until they update us.

They didn't even revert the cost of "Upon wings of fire" for BA in this FAQ update while Ravenguard have much much better movement stratagems/warlord traits/psychic powers for cheaper.... Like infiltrate any infantry unit + character after who gets turn 1 is decided and give any unit a free move for a 1cp Stratagem. I can give a DC unit a free move for 2cp :(