Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

dominuschao wrote:
TFCs can't shut down knights movement fyi..

Whoops. Didn't think about keywords there.

Quick question:

Is picking an official successor chapter a net disadvantage compared to just playing the founding chapter instead? It seems you need to spend 1CP only to get access to the proper chapter relics.

 BertBert wrote:
Quick question:

Is picking an official successor chapter a net disadvantage compared to just playing the founding chapter instead? It seems you need to spend 1CP only to get access to the proper chapter relics.

Depends on what successor tactics you pick. If you build for the right tactics, it's a bonus-if not, it ain't worth it.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 BertBert wrote:
Quick question:

Is picking an official successor chapter a net disadvantage compared to just playing the founding chapter instead? It seems you need to spend 1CP only to get access to the proper chapter relics.

Depends on what successor tactics you pick. If you build for the right tactics, it's a bonus-if not, it ain't worth it.

Oh, so you are not restricted to picking the Inheritors of the Primarch tactic?

For Raven Guard vs Super-Heavies, look at melee. Assault Centurions, Vanguard Veterans with Thunder Hammers, Terminators, Smash characters, etc. If the super-heavy is a character, even better. Your Eliminators will likely be wounding it on a 3+ once you get to the Tactical Doctrine.

I'm also looking at using Aggressors with a Chaplain giving +1 to wound to just sand-blast things away. Positioning will be important here.

Raven Guard should get to decide when they attack, which can limit how much counter-fire you take.

 BertBert wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 BertBert wrote:
Quick question:

Is picking an official successor chapter a net disadvantage compared to just playing the founding chapter instead? It seems you need to spend 1CP only to get access to the proper chapter relics.

Depends on what successor tactics you pick. If you build for the right tactics, it's a bonus-if not, it ain't worth it.

Oh, so you are not restricted to picking the Inheritors of the Primarch tactic?

You can't really be forced into it as we have tons of rules for successor Characters from FW but no errata. For now, my Raptors with Lias are Stealthy + Marksman (which makes more sense).

The book does seem to imply you're supposed to for known successors, but that is so stupid as it's a handicap vs anyone who ran a custom paint scheme. The one and only nonfluff reason to run Inheritors of the Primarch is if you want the first founding trait, but want to use a FW named character instead of the base chapter named characters. (Ex run Lias, but keep the RG -1 at 12" in terrain). If you don't want the FW name+primary trait combo then you might as well either run it as the first founding anf get access to everything or use the pick 2 custom traits.


And on the RG AT thing, man, that's what I've been going around in circles on since I finally got the book. I hate relying on slow expensive melee or deep striking expensive melee to remove tanks, but they just have 0 bonuses to ranged AT. Best I could think for ranged is use their 1cp deepstrike (or Lias) to drop 4 grav devs and pop the strat, which while strong, is still weaker than IH or UM doing it due to the movement penalty.

That's why for my current list idea I'm thinking trying Aggressors. Range and no UM easy double shooting is a serious disadvantage (I'd probably go Cents if I didn't have a bunch of Aggressors and no Cents), but they actually do pretty decent anti vehicle shooting if you can get a double shot, are scary in melee, and vs the Ironstone they aren't losing anything like a quad las dread would.

Looking for advice on kitting out my eliminators.
I'm building a 2k list, mostly vanguard marines - going for a stealth theme.
All my HS choices are eliminators.
Got one squad all bolt sniper rifles already.
How should I equip the other two squads? I was thinking las fusils as they will be my main anti tank - but I can't decide whether to give the sergeants carbines or another las fusil. I was set on the carbines, but then I realised that master artisans really helps out if your not going for guided aim.
Anyone tried the carbines with las fusils?

For Raven Guard anti-tank, a unit of 8 Vanguard Veterans with jump packs and 4x Thunder Hammers are about 210 points. That's 16 Thunder Hammer attacks on the charge. Shrike let's you reroll all misses, and reroll charge rolls as well. Pay one CP to Infiltrate them first turn for 12+d6 inches pre-game, then you can do the same again in your actual movement turn 1. Maybe throw in a chaplain for +2 charge distance. I'll have a chaplain with the Master of Ambush shepherding a group of Assault Centurions so he's already right in front of the enemy line. Then you hit him with those fast-moving units and use your 6 inch pile in and consolidate moves to wrap something. Repeat next turn.

Have you tried with and without doctrines ? Do you think they are really important / helpful ? I wanna try a Callidus assassin next week so I am hesitating !
Is there any unit that have you personal preference / love (not necessarily a good unit) and why ? Did you notice any bad / average unit becoming good ? I couldn't play when bolter discipline came into existence but it really helps basic tac squad firepower for example !

It depends on how much of your army is Marines. If you're about 50% or above, you might as well go pure at that point.

 godardc wrote:
Have you tried with and without doctrines ? Do you think they are really important / helpful ? I wanna try a Callidus assassin next week so I am hesitating !
Is there any unit that have you personal preference / love (not necessarily a good unit) and why ? Did you notice any bad / average unit becoming good ? I couldn't play when bolter discipline came into existence but it really helps basic tac squad firepower for example !

In my experience, it depends on your army, but generally Doctrines are a massive boon.
Consider that +1 AP can be abstracted into a 16% damage boost against ideal targets. An army built to work in a certain doctrine can easily get more than half of its firepower ever turn working in a single doctrine.
Then, add in your unique chapter buff, which can often be massive. +1 Damage in melee, getting mobility and rerolls for Iron Hands, all sorts of that good stuff.
It easily works out to a 10-20% increase in your army's dps and flexibility by the time it's all said and done. A single assassin simply can't compete with that much utility, and even the Loyal 32 has trouble competing when you can take 17 cheap marines and get similar CPs for about 100 more points while keeping doctrines.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 godardc wrote:
Have you tried with and without doctrines ? Do you think they are really important / helpful ? I wanna try a Callidus assassin next week so I am hesitating !
Is there any unit that have you personal preference / love (not necessarily a good unit) and why ? Did you notice any bad / average unit becoming good ? I couldn't play when bolter discipline came into existence but it really helps basic tac squad firepower for example !

In my experience, it depends on your army, but generally Doctrines are a massive boon.
Consider that +1 AP can be abstracted into a 16% damage boost against ideal targets. An army built to work in a certain doctrine can easily get more than half of its firepower ever turn working in a single doctrine.
Then, add in your unique chapter buff, which can often be massive. +1 Damage in melee, getting mobility and rerolls for Iron Hands, all sorts of that good stuff.
It easily works out to a 10-20% increase in your army's dps and flexibility by the time it's all said and done. A single assassin simply can't compete with that much utility, and even the Loyal 32 has trouble competing when you can take 17 cheap marines and get similar CPs for about 100 more points while keeping doctrines.

Ideal AP is not a 16% increase. It's a 100% increase.

Going from saving on 2s to on 3s doubles your damage dealt.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 godardc wrote:
Have you tried with and without doctrines ? Do you think they are really important / helpful ? I wanna try a Callidus assassin next week so I am hesitating !
Is there any unit that have you personal preference / love (not necessarily a good unit) and why ? Did you notice any bad / average unit becoming good ? I couldn't play when bolter discipline came into existence but it really helps basic tac squad firepower for example !

In my experience, it depends on your army, but generally Doctrines are a massive boon.
Consider that +1 AP can be abstracted into a 16% damage boost against ideal targets. An army built to work in a certain doctrine can easily get more than half of its firepower ever turn working in a single doctrine.
Then, add in your unique chapter buff, which can often be massive. +1 Damage in melee, getting mobility and rerolls for Iron Hands, all sorts of that good stuff.
It easily works out to a 10-20% increase in your army's dps and flexibility by the time it's all said and done. A single assassin simply can't compete with that much utility, and even the Loyal 32 has trouble competing when you can take 17 cheap marines and get similar CPs for about 100 more points while keeping doctrines.

Ideal AP is not a 16% increase. It's a 100% increase.

Going from saving on 2s to on 3s doubles your damage dealt.

That depends on how you count the numbers.
A 2+ save is a 16.6666% chance of failure.
A 3+ save is a 33.3333% chance of failure.
That's a chance of failure that's 16.6666% higher.

Waaaghpower wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Waaaghpower wrote:

 godardc wrote:
Have you tried with and without doctrines ? Do you think they are really important / helpful ? I wanna try a Callidus assassin next week so I am hesitating !
Is there any unit that have you personal preference / love (not necessarily a good unit) and why ? Did you notice any bad / average unit becoming good ? I couldn't play when bolter discipline came into existence but it really helps basic tac squad firepower for example !

In my experience, it depends on your army, but generally Doctrines are a massive boon.
Consider that +1 AP can be abstracted into a 16% damage boost against ideal targets. An army built to work in a certain doctrine can easily get more than half of its firepower ever turn working in a single doctrine.
Then, add in your unique chapter buff, which can often be massive. +1 Damage in melee, getting mobility and rerolls for Iron Hands, all sorts of that good stuff.
It easily works out to a 10-20% increase in your army's dps and flexibility by the time it's all said and done. A single assassin simply can't compete with that much utility, and even the Loyal 32 has trouble competing when you can take 17 cheap marines and get similar CPs for about 100 more points while keeping doctrines.

Ideal AP is not a 16% increase. It's a 100% increase.

Going from saving on 2s to on 3s doubles your damage dealt.

That depends on how you count the numbers.
A 2+ save is a 16.6666% chance of failure.
A 3+ save is a 33.3333% chance of failure.
That's a chance of failure that's 16.6666% higher.

Technically accurate, but not very helpful.

If you shoot an AP0 Bolter and wound Terminators 12 times, you kill 1 Terminator.
If you shoot an AP-1 Bolter and wound Terminators 12 times, you kill 2.

I'm running 3 predators still. Didn't expect them to get rid of killshot, and I just got them painted as ultramarines.

I'm liking having some high toughness models. But I feel I can get something better for my points. What do you suggest?

footfoe wrote:
I'm running 3 predators still. Didn't expect them to get rid of killshot, and I just got them painted as ultramarines.

I'm liking having some high toughness models. But I feel I can get something better for my points. What do you suggest?

Vindicators are tougher for the points.

footfoe wrote:
I'm running 3 predators still. Didn't expect them to get rid of killshot, and I just got them painted as ultramarines.

I'm liking having some high toughness models. But I feel I can get something better for my points. What do you suggest?

Strictly speaking, Contemptor Mortis dreadnoughts are flatly better than Lascannon Predators. For 7 fewer points, you get higher BS, equivalent durability (losing 1 wound but gaining a 5+ invuln, as well as all the durability benefits that come with being a Dreadnought and having lots of stratagems at your disposal that other vehicles can't access. You also have the option to pay more points and add a missile launcher, maximizing damage output over the predator's possible cap damage.
Relic Contemptors are similar, except that you spend 15pts more and get huge durability buffs - 2+ armor, an extra wound, the 5+ invuln, and 6+ FNP. (That last one doesn't help if you're iron hands, but is still nice to have for other factions.)

Finland got first taste of iron hands in competive tournament. 3 iron hand players out of 24 players, all in top 4. Only ultramarines in 2nd place stopped clean sweep.

Results and lists at https://www.gowarhead.com/2019/10/40k-bad-moon-rising-results-and-coverage.html?m=1 if interested. Lots of invictor suits.

tneva82 wrote:
Finland got first taste of iron hands in competive tournament. 3 iron hand players out of 24 players, all in top 4. Only ultramarines in 2nd place stopped clean sweep.

Results and lists at https://www.gowarhead.com/2019/10/40k-bad-moon-rising-results-and-coverage.html?m=1 if interested. Lots of invictor suits.

Interesting. Not a Leviathan in sight.

I'm surprised to see how many Thunderfire cannons got taken. Does anyone know the logic behind that? I don't see the math in bringing three, since you mostly only need one for the stratagem, but every player in the top 4 had maxed out their 4.

EDIT: Does anyone know what the tournament rules were for this event?

Can"t help there. Wasn't there, don't know the people(been crushed by some before i'm sure) so don't talk with them.

Leviathan thing might be due to model issue. Did anybody have model in hand? Takes couple weeks to get one from fw plus assembly and painting(tournaments here have painted requirements and generally people have good paint job. Mine are below average).

tneva82 wrote:
Finland got first taste of iron hands in competive tournament. 3 iron hand players out of 24 players, all in top 4. Only ultramarines in 2nd place stopped clean sweep.

Results and lists at https://www.gowarhead.com/2019/10/40k-bad-moon-rising-results-and-coverage.html?m=1 if interested. Lots of invictor suits.

And only 1 Executioner and 0 Leviathans in there. So many Thunderfires and Hunters...I guess I'm just oblivious on the Hunter thing. I certainly don't think it's bad, I mean I had a post near the end of the old marine thread on how the Hunter/Stalker stood out as an underappreciated cheap T8 body with a passable gun and I was amazed that I could not find turret subs on either 3d printing sites or less reputable vendors as no one cared enough to clone the things back then. But, just seems like the new dex has so many other options beyond paying 75pts for a rerolling lascannon that I'm amazed everyone took 3.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Waaaghpower wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Finland got first taste of iron hands in competive tournament. 3 iron hand players out of 24 players, all in top 4. Only ultramarines in 2nd place stopped clean sweep.

Results and lists at https://www.gowarhead.com/2019/10/40k-bad-moon-rising-results-and-coverage.html?m=1 if interested. Lots of invictor suits.

Interesting. Not a Leviathan in sight.

I'm surprised to see how many Thunderfire cannons got taken. Does anyone know the logic behind that? I don't see the math in bringing three, since you mostly only need one for the stratagem, but every player in the top 4 had maxed out their 4.

EDIT: Does anyone know what the tournament rules were for this event?

Not only 3 Thunderfires, then Whirlwinds on top of that.

Rules are in finnish but summary 2000 pts, max 3 non troop non dt sheet, no detachment limits(this is odd), no index options. Etc scenarios

bort wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Finland got first taste of iron hands in competive tournament. 3 iron hand players out of 24 players, all in top 4. Only ultramarines in 2nd place stopped clean sweep.

Results and lists at https://www.gowarhead.com/2019/10/40k-bad-moon-rising-results-and-coverage.html?m=1 if interested. Lots of invictor suits.

And only 1 Executioner and 0 Leviathans in there. So many Thunderfires and Hunters...I guess I'm just oblivious on the Hunter thing. I certainly don't think it's bad, I mean I had a post near the end of the old marine thread on how the Hunter/Stalker stood out as an underappreciated cheap T8 body with a passable gun and I was amazed that I could not find turret subs on either 3d printing sites or less reputable vendors as no one cared enough to clone the things back then. But, just seems like the new dex has so many other options beyond paying 75pts for a rerolling lascannon that I'm amazed everyone took 3.
Not only 3 Thunderfires, then Whirlwinds on top of that.

Looking at the other lists, it looks like a flyer-heavy meta. It's possible that the Hunters are just there because they're cheap, provide decent firepower, and help out with AA-type support.

If you expect it to always fire at flyers, then why wouldn't you go Stalkers then? 20pts more for like 2x the damage if shooting at flyers.

bort wrote:
If you expect it to always fire at flyers, then why wouldn't you go Stalkers then? 20pts more for like 2x the damage if shooting at flyers.

Real quick, I just want to mention how much I dislike the naming scheme of these two vehicles.
Why is the 'Stalker' the one that sprays bullets into the air, and not the one that methodically follows its target until it inevitably hits?

That being said, it's probably because Hunters are cheap and provide multiple utilities. They work against flyers well, but they can also handle ground targets efficiently.

A Stalker with a reroll source is better vs ground than the Hunter too, but yeah, I guess if you don't plan to have a captain hanging around them then the Hunter is basically the same.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The other interesting thing with those lists is I kinda wonder where they buffed what? I'm assuming the bike captain with the ironstones went with the Invictors and then Feirros hung with the Whirlwinds/Hunters? Feirros's not fast enough to be with Invictors unless you just hung back and shot (and they did take the long range guns, but if you wanted to sit back all game Redemptors are available too, T7, and have the strat options, so I'm assuming Invictors were picked for the mobile potential).

I'm just kinda curious, since sure, Hunters can benefit from a 5+ inv, but who in the world is shooting at a T8/5++/6+++ Hunter when there's pretty much anything else on the table?

What's the best way to add some anti-tank to my army for under 180pts? Predators are bad, and contemptor options are better but I'd need to buy new arms, which I don't want to do.

Yeah, is the Finnish meta famous for being flyers heavy ? The tournament is full of flying models !
It is weird to see so many AA guns in so many IH lists

Well eldar flying circus is pretty darn powerfull. Before this it was generally eldar soap with tons of fliers getting top spots.