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.

Btw do I read that correctly that I can disembark my troops from a Valkirie safely without it having to use hover jets when I fly the minimum distance of 20"? Valk movement has to be 20"-45" and the grav chute insertion states "if the unit moves MORE than 20"". Or is that cheesecake for the FAQ?

Also the Valk can only hit on 5+ when moving? Or did I miss a special rule? I can't see my Valk ever using Lascannons if that's the case. I'll probably go for max shots with 2x heavy bolter; 2x multi rockets + multi laser.

 Mr.Moe wrote:
Also the Valk can only hit on 5+ when moving? Or did I miss a special rule? I can't see my Valk ever using Lascannons if that's the case. I'll probably go for max shots with 2x heavy bolter; 2x multi rockets + multi laser.

Yeah, -1 to hit. Firing from planes is hard. )-:

I have to build 6 heavy weapon teams. I am glad that I waited until the rules were leaked. What do you suggest? 3 Autocannons and 3 Lascannons?

 Mr.Moe wrote:
Also the Valk can only hit on 5+ when moving? Or did I miss a special rule? I can't see my Valk ever using Lascannons if that's the case. I'll probably go for max shots with 2x heavy bolter; 2x multi rockets + multi laser.

The multi-laser is pretty crappy as a weapon now. It's 10 more points to upgrade to the LC, which actually has some bite when it hits.
You are correct, the valk hits on a 5+ unless it enters hover mode and stands still.

 Paintalist wrote:
I have to build 6 heavy weapon teams. I am glad that I waited until the rules were leaked. What do you suggest? 3 Autocannons and 3 Lascannons?

Why not both? Seriously, mix and match them. I would start with 2 LC and 1 AC. I expect as the edition starts, lots of people will take vehicles because having a model with 10-24 wounds just sounds sexy.
Last night I was looking at a daemon army for this Friday and the first thing I grabbed were 3 soul grinders, because who does not love a 14 wound model with a 3+ save and 5++ and FNP. At the start I expect there to be lots of that thinking.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Therion wrote:
A list along those lines will be very strong, no matter the faction. A lot of armies will stock up on multiwound guns and won't have even nearly enough anti-infantry weaponry to take out that many guys. Everyone who can do hordes to support points efficient shooting will be doing well, I'm guessing. If you don't have even one model with more than one wound, you're nerfing your opponents weaponry before the game even begins. All the excess damage will be lost automatically.

You can throw a Culexus Assassin or two in there if psykers become a thing in the meta.

That's good advice on the assassins. It will take some playtesting, and I'll need to make some movement trays.
I worry about horde assault armies. I think that a green tide or 80 slannesh daemonettes would tear right through it.

 labmouse42 wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Therion wrote:
A list along those lines will be very strong, no matter the faction. A lot of armies will stock up on multiwound guns and won't have even nearly enough anti-infantry weaponry to take out that many guys. Everyone who can do hordes to support points efficient shooting will be doing well, I'm guessing. If you don't have even one model with more than one wound, you're nerfing your opponents weaponry before the game even begins. All the excess damage will be lost automatically.

You can throw a Culexus Assassin or two in there if psykers become a thing in the meta.

That's good advice on the assassins. It will take some playtesting, and I'll need to make some movement trays.
I worry about horde assault armies. I think that a green tide or 80 slannesh daemonettes would tear right through it.

I very much doubt Daemon hordes will be a thing, due to the cost and effort in building such an army, and the comparable rarity of such dedicated Daemon players. Footslogga Orks might make a big return though. They can really flood the table. Tyranids might do the same with Stealers and Gaunts of all kinds. All the other armies will just have to try to keep up. 6 Razorbacks with twin assault cannons is probably a decent starting point for Marines.

I'm wondering if 'elite' armies consisting of a lot of vehicles or monsters, or armies that have Titans/Knights have any chance at all in this edition. The only large model that I like a lot is Magnus, due to the fact he's 'only' 415 points and charges and destroys one unit on turn one already. But even him would be almost useless against your IG infantry list.

That kind of meta expectation is also why I'm wondering if missile launchers might be worth taking instead of lascannons, especially with the change to toughness meaning they have extremely similar performance against a wide variety of targets (though there is the d3 vs d6 damage to consider).

If high-wound models are relatively rare overall and have a poor point/wound ratio, and running into a horde that you don't have enough dakka to clear is a bigger concern, it might be useful to have my anti-tank weapon capable of toggling into a fairly decent anti-infantry mode.

Alternatively, especially since heavy weapons teams apparently keep their lasguns now, I could just assume that I have enough lasguns (and mortars, and grenade launchers) to handle all my anti-infantry needs, and therefore run with lascannons because I don't actually need any more anti-infantry.

Wtf pretty much everything gets -1BS for firing a heavy weapon if the model moves except the turret weapon of a LRBT.

Even a baneblade gets -1BS dammit

Yeah, I was really disappointed in the Baneblade getting hit by the -1 rule considering that Tau superheavies and Knights get an exception. All superheavy walkers do actually, which is kind of funny, you would think it'd be harder to aim while bouncing up and down on legs, than it would be while smoothly rolling on tracks with good suspension and a gyro-stabilized turret...

Edit: A Baneblade is surprisingly good in melee though. It gets 9 S9 AP-2 D3 attacks, is WS5+ instead of the 6+ most IG vehicles get, and it can fire up to eight flamers while in melee. And it can fire all its other weapons at other targets, so it has no reason to even want to leave. And while it's locked in melee, it's sitting still...

I think I know how you're supposed to use a Baneblade now. To troll melee armies, just park it in the center of their blob and start smashing.

 ross-128 wrote:
Edit: A Baneblade is surprisingly good in melee though. It gets 9 S9 AP-2 D3 attacks, is WS5+ instead of the 6+ most IG vehicles get, and it can fire up to eight flamers while in melee. And it can fire all its other weapons at other targets, so it has no reason to even want to leave. And while it's locked in melee, it's sitting still...

Also, vehicles can overwatch now. Charging a unit with 8 heavy flamers could be a bit painful. I would probably still go with bolters though, generally a lot more useful and cheaper.

 Paintalist wrote:
I have to build 6 heavy weapon teams. I am glad that I waited until the rules were leaked. What do you suggest? 3 Autocannons and 3 Lascannons?

Get some spare 60mm bases and use some left over guardsmen (if you use heavy weapons in your infantry squads you will have two per squad left over anyways) to build three or six mortar squads. They are extremely cheap and efficient and put Wyverns to shame.

Yeah, I'm not sure why they made the heavy flamer 17 points. There's really not enough difference between it and the regular flamer to justify such a huge price difference, there's no reason for infantry squads (well, veterans/stormtroopers really) to ever take the heavy flamer when the regular flamer has similar enough performance and is only 7 points.

Honestly I would have priced the heavy flamer closer to 10 points, considering how it compares to the regular flamer and the heavy bolter.

 ross-128 wrote:
Yeah, I'm not sure why they made the heavy flamer 17 points. There's really not enough difference between it and the regular flamer to justify such a huge price difference, there's no reason for infantry squads to ever take the heavy flamer when the regular flamer has similar enough performance and is only 7 points.

Honestly I would have priced the heavy flamer closer to 10 points, considering how it compares to the regular flamer and the heavy bolter.

There are vehicles that you can put the HF on that you cannot put a flamer on -- like a Chimera.

I do agree though. A cost of 12 points for the HF would have been more palatable.

 labmouse42 wrote:
I do agree though. A cost of 12 points for the HF would have been more palatable.

I really like the idea of fireball demolishers or punishers (3xhf, stormbolter), the 24" range really goes well with flamers. They are pretty expensive though. 205 for a punisher or 225 for the demolisher. Hell, I can get 2 banewolves with flamers and stormbolters for 214...

Heavy Flamer is significant in that it wounds marines and t4 on 3s instead of 4s and it has a -1 ap. Strength is the biggest differentiator of damage output for most armies with the new wound tables.

Look at things like terminators: It goes from a 1/6 failed to 1/3, effectively doubling its damage output against those units while also having an easier time wounding.

Heavy flamers are more for dealing with elite infantry compared to the flamer which is better against hordes. As such it makes sense that it is more expensive.

One thing I really like is that supplemental weapons like storm bolters are really really cheap now. As such it is easy to get a lot more fire power on our relatively expensive vehicles.

The hilarious thing is that the Hellhound Chem-Cannon seems to only cost 13 points (I think, might be 15, my leak is rather blurry and I'm not 100% sure), while being much, MUCH better than a Heavy Flamer. S5 vs autowound on 2+ and -3 AP instead of -1 AP, same range. For four points LESS. And no one cares about only wounding vehicles as well (ESPECIALLY if you still retain the -3AP against them). I think 1-2 Hellhounds with Chem cannons should be more than enough to cover any barbeque needs, especially if you slap on a regular heavy flamer as hull-mount. Ba dum-tsch, Chem cannon + heavy flamer combo that murders even an entire MEQ squad for 103 points on a vehicle with 12" movement and as a result an effective 20" threat range. Also 11 wounds instead of 10 compared to a chimera.

The regular Hellhound will still be better against Tyranids and Orks, you pay 7 points more but you'll have another 8" of range on your main gun, murder their hordes as efficiently as a chem-gun and it's also still good against monsters and shooting vehicles is a valid choice as well thanks to the D6 S6 -1AP autohits with Damage 2.

With that in mind, if you want those extra 9 command points you'll need 3 fast attack choices anyway, so no real need to spend extra points on heavy flamers if you are going to take 1-2 Hellhounds anyway. You would be mad not to with how good they are Unless you can convert Rough Riders (conversions from historic models are rather cheap... but will be banned in GW stores) or have too much money to spend on FW squads of them, the only other choice is sentinels anyway.

When the first general's handbook comes out in a year they better cut the point cost for heavy flamers dramatically, it should be 10-12 points max, particularly for infantry. And buff the Exterminator-autocannon, that thing is an overprized joke now.

 Leth wrote:

Look at things like terminators: It goes from a 1/6 failed to 1/3, effectively doubling its damage output against those units while also having an easier time wounding.

Heavy flamers are more for dealing with elite infantry compared to the flamer which is better against hordes. As such it makes sense that it is more expensive.

Except that Plasma cannons are better at that, will get far more shots off thanks to their range... and are two points cheaper than a heavy flamer.
Also when two heavy bolters still cost one point less than a single heavy flamer, that pushes the odds in their favor as well as auxiliary weapon.

 Leth wrote:
Heavy Flamer is significant in that it wounds marines and t4 on 3s instead of 4s and it has a -1 ap. Strength is the biggest differentiator of damage output for most armies with the new wound tables.

Look at things like terminators: It goes from a 1/6 failed to 1/3, effectively doubling its damage output against those units while also having an easier time wounding.

Heavy flamers are more for dealing with elite infantry compared to the flamer which is better against hordes. As such it makes sense that it is more expensive.

One thing I really like is that supplemental weapons like storm bolters are really really cheap now. As such it is easy to get a lot more fire power on our relatively expensive vehicles.

Oh sure, they should certainly cost more than flamers. No argument about that. It's just that 17 points is a little bit too much more.

I'd put them around 10 points on the low end or 14 points (ie exactly two flamers) on the high end. The often-suggested 12 points is a pretty good compromise between the two.

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:
The hilarious thing is that the Hellhound Chem-Cannon seems to only cost 13 points (I think, might be 15, my leak is rather blurry and I'm not 100% sure), while being much, MUCH better than a Heavy Flamer. S5 vs autowound on 2+ and -3 AP instead of -1 AP, same range. For four points LESS. And no one cares about only wounding vehicles as well (ESPECIALLY if you still retain the -3AP against them). I think 1-2 Hellhounds with Chem cannons should be more than enough to cover any barbeque needs, especially if you slap on a regular heavy flamer as hull-mount. Ba dum-tsch, Chem cannon + heavy flamer combo that murders even an entire MEQ squad for 103 points on a vehicle with 12" movement and as a result an effective 20" threat range. Also 11 wounds instead of 10 compared to a chimera.

The regular Hellhound will still be better against Tyranids and Orks, you pay 7 points more but you'll have another 8" of range on your main gun, murder their hordes as efficiently as a chem-gun and it's also still good against monsters and shooting vehicles is a valid choice as well thanks to the D6 S6 -1AP autohits with Damage 2.

With that in mind, if you want those extra 9 command points you'll need 3 fast attack choices anyway, so no real need to spend extra points on heavy flamers if you are going to take 1-2 Hellhounds anyway. You would be mad not to with how good they are Unless you can convert Rough Riders (conversions from historic models are rather cheap... but will be banned in GW stores) or have too much money to spend on FW squads of them, the only other choice is sentinels anyway.

When the first general's handbook comes out in a year they better cut the point cost for heavy flamers dramatically, it should be 10-12 points max, particularly for infantry. And buff the Exterminator-autocannon, that thing is an overprized joke now.

 Leth wrote:

Look at things like terminators: It goes from a 1/6 failed to 1/3, effectively doubling its damage output against those units while also having an easier time wounding.

Heavy flamers are more for dealing with elite infantry compared to the flamer which is better against hordes. As such it makes sense that it is more expensive.

Except that Plasma cannons are better at that, will get far more shots off thanks to their range... and are two points cheaper than a heavy flamer.
Also when two heavy bolters still cost one point less than a single heavy flamer, that pushes the odds in their favor as well as auxiliary weapon.

You are paying a premium for the guaranteed hits, including on overwatch, as well as the ability to fire it after advancing with no penalties. Plasma cannons still need to roll to hit, flamers do not. Once again I am not saying that the pricing is 100% accurate, I am just saying that it makes sense. Also you have to remember that the plasma cannon was priced with the types of models that can use it in mind. Many more units can get a heavy flamer than a plasma cannon. We cant just look at one options pricing as a X or Y without factoring in the limitations of what it can be mounted on. A vindicators main gun is zero points, well thats not fair. O wait it can only take that right now and it is the only model that can take it? Well then

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:
The hilarious thing is that the Hellhound Chem-Cannon seems to only cost 13 points (I think, might be 15, my leak is rather blurry and I'm not 100% sure)

They are 15. I'm rather liking the idea of banewolves, as they can pop smoke turn 1 if they can' get the weapons on target. In 7th, the main advantage of the hellhound over the banewolf was not so much the range but the special template placement. Now, that isn't a problem. Also, being within 8" isn't as bad at all. No side armour to worry about and if they charge you then you can hose them down with more chems!

 Ragnar Blackmane wrote:
Unless you can convert Rough Riders (conversions from historic models are rather cheap... but will be banned in GW stores) or have too much money to spend on FW squads of them, the only other choice is sentinels anyway.

I don't think that rough riders are a good unit, and I say that as someone with cold one riding guardsmen who really wants to use them. They may be a good counter charge unit, if you can keep them alive. However the outflanking move relies on their ability to make a 9" charge roll, something that is far too unreliable to base a unit around. If they has some kind of "roll 3 and discard lowest" rule, to represent cavalry, then I think I would use them.

What is the "best" choice for Pask (of course it always depends on your playstyle and the opponent you face).

Pask in a Punisher: hits on 2+ (+ 3xHB, 1xHS)--> Infantry killer
Pask in an Executioner: (plasma sponsons, lascannon) again nice hits but you cannot be affected by your own orders, so no overcharge,
Pask in LMBT: (mulitmelta sponsons, lascannon) decent antitank unit

What do you think?

I think 27 point mortar squads will be really good. Bring 2-3 of those to clean up whatever your line of sight weapons fail to kill, since you have great targeting flexibility. It's also one of the only things that puts a dent into hordes of stuff at a really good price point.

I'm also looking at the 4-man Command Squads as cheap special weapon carriers. Vets or SWS have more bodies, so they get Melta or Plasma, but you can bring 4 BS3+ Sniper Rifles for 32 points, or 4 Grenade Launchers for 44 points. They'll contribute, but be a lot lower priority than the hotter squads.

50 points for a unit of 5 who can also be really good at taking objectives? Heck yeah. It is pretty cheap for what they can do, add in the potential to clear a unit off an objective with the hunting lances. Not bad for what you are paying

Biophysical wrote:
I'm also looking at the 4-man Command Squads as cheap special weapon carriers. Vets or SWS have more bodies, so they get Melta or Plasma, but you can bring 4 BS3+ Sniper Rifles for 32 points, or 4 Grenade Launchers for 44 points. They'll contribute, but be a lot lower priority than the hotter squads.

The BS3+ is pretty cool.
The lack of bullet catchers hurts.

I just don't understand how they converted template weapons.

Like, you guys are talking about the Hellhound.

101 points, right? Hits 3.5 times on average with S6 and 1 times with S5 when moving.

Yet, a 100 point Razorback with twin Assault Cannons hits 6 times with S6 when moving, and 9 times if not moving.

Wasn't the Hellhound supposed to be an awesome short range anti-horde tank? It has damage 2, yes, which is great against... not hordes of infantry.

I really don't like how they converted blasts and flamer templates to D6 shots or D6 hits. They're too ineffective, and they don't punish masses of infantry that stack up too close to each other at all.

 Therion wrote:
I just don't understand how they converted template weapons.

Like, you guys are talking about the Hellhound.

101 points, right? Hits 3.5 times on average with S6 and 1 times with S5 when moving.

Yet, a 100 point Razorback with twin Assault Cannons hits 6 times with S6 when moving, and 9 times if not moving.

Wasn't the Hellhound supposed to be an awesome short range anti-horde tank? It has damage 2, yes, which is great against... not hordes of infantry.

I really don't like how they converted blasts and flamer templates to D6 shots or D6 hits. They're too ineffective, and they don't punish masses of infantry that stack up too close to each other at all.

Because it forced people to spend all this time micromanaging their movement to limit the effects of blast weapons. I used to literally walk up to a game and ask "Do you have any blast weapons or not" if not it would shave a good 20-30 minutes off the game because I didnt have to micromange unit coherency and the like during every phase of the game. Does it add some realism? Maybe but the additional annoyance factor is not worth it IMO

Also its 3.5 auto hits, which you can still fire at 16 inches even after moving. That is really good, especially when you consider it does two wounds automatically.

So lets compare, Twin autocannon razorback moves, gets 6 hits, 4 wounds on a terminator causes 1.33 wounds
Inferno cannon gets 3.5 hits, 2 wounds, 2/3 chance to outright kill a terminator so 1.33 wounds

So roughly the same, only one is guaranteed while the other is more variable and subject to +s and -s to hit.

 labmouse42 wrote:

Biophysical wrote:
I'm also looking at the 4-man Command Squads as cheap special weapon carriers. Vets or SWS have more bodies, so they get Melta or Plasma, but you can bring 4 BS3+ Sniper Rifles for 32 points, or 4 Grenade Launchers for 44 points. They'll contribute, but be a lot lower priority than the hotter squads.

The BS3+ is pretty cool.
The lack of bullet catchers hurts.

Yeah, that's why I was thinking cheaper special weapons are preferred. Most people aren't going to target them in preference of a Veteran plasma squad, but the grenade CS is still more firepower for the points than an Infantry squad is.

7-point flamers are more impressive with infantry models (with the obvious caveat that you've got to get them within 8" of something, but there's ways to do that).

A 45 point SWT (24 for models, 21 for three flamers) is getting 10.5 automatic hits at S4, plus an average of 3 S3 hits for rapid-firing their lasguns.

A 40 point infantry squad in rapid-fire is only looking at 9 S3 hits, though they can jump to an impressive 18 if they FRFSRF, but still S3.

I kind of wish I had 4-point Guardsman and/or 3-point Conscript versions of Command Squads. Something like "Junior Command Squads" and "Conscript Cadets" maybe. I'd love to be able to take 16/12 points of infantry models, give them 28 points of flamers, and kick them out the back of a plane for a barbecue. Low BS? No BS? No problem!

 Leth wrote:

 Therion wrote:
I just don't understand how they converted template weapons.

Like, you guys are talking about the Hellhound.

101 points, right? Hits 3.5 times on average with S6 and 1 times with S5 when moving.

Yet, a 100 point Razorback with twin Assault Cannons hits 6 times with S6 when moving, and 9 times if not moving.

Wasn't the Hellhound supposed to be an awesome short range anti-horde tank? It has damage 2, yes, which is great against... not hordes of infantry.

I really don't like how they converted blasts and flamer templates to D6 shots or D6 hits. They're too ineffective, and they don't punish masses of infantry that stack up too close to each other at all.

Because it forced people to spend all this time micromanaging their movement to limit the effects of blast weapons. I used to literally walk up to a game and ask "Do you have any blast weapons or not" if not it would shave a good 20-30 minutes off the game because I didnt have to micromange unit coherency and the like during every phase of the game. Does it add some realism? Maybe but the additional annoyance factor is not worth it IMO

Also its 3.5 auto hits, which you can still fire at 16 inches even after moving. That is really good, especially when you consider it does two wounds automatically.

So lets compare, Twin autocannon razorback moves, gets 6 hits, 4 wounds on a terminator causes 1.33 wounds
Inferno cannon gets 3.5 hits, 2 wounds, 2/3 chance to outright kill a terminator so 1.33 wounds

So roughly the same, only one is guaranteed while the other is more variable and subject to +s and -s to hit.

Yeah man I get why they did that. Simplicity and convenience. Yet, a flamer is now a lot more effective against a single model than it was before, and a lot less effective against infantry which it was intended against. The Hellhound's Inferno Cannon is actually pretty good vs tanks and monsters or characters. Lots of auto-hits that all do 2 damage each. Yet, 60 points of Brimstone Horrors, which is 30 models with 4+ invulnerable saves, stacked and moving with a movement tray, now completely laugh at that weapon. You won't kill even 10 points of models with the Hellhound.

THAT's the price of "simplicity and convenience" and bad balancing. All types of hordes are nearly impossible to deal with. Astra Militarum hordes included.

I want to touch base on just how awesome the 4 point guardsman is...

Chaos cultists have a worse LD, a worse save and cost 5 points.
Acolytes, getting 1 more attack are 8 points each.

Guard also get the ability to form heavy weapons teams.
Guard also get the ability to benefit form commissars to only lose 1 model max from morale.
Guard get the ability to receive orders.

Guardsmen are top contenders for the best-low cost unit in the game. It's arguably the best feature of the new list.

One thing about vehicle flamers that I haven't seen mentioned is that they retain their effectiveness no matter how hurt the vehicle is. That razorback is going to get worse as as it takes wounds. Hell, a Russ that has 3 wounds can't even use it's sponsons if it moves.

Also, with regards to mortars. A Wyvern is 93 points for 4d6 str4 reroll wounds. You can get 6 mortars and a company commander for 84, or just 9 mortars for 81. I don't think that rerolls are as good as double the fire power. It seems really weird that mortars may actually be good. Especially with how indirect fire is able to pick off any unit that tries to use LOS shenanigans.

What's everybody's preferred HQ to bring en mass? We're gonna need a lot of HQ to open up the huge quantities of cheap elites and heavies we can field.

Company Commander is pretty cheap and supports the squads, and for a few points can contribute modestly in combat or close-range shooting. 30 points base is nice.

Primaris Psyker gives psykic defense, and the protection power seems really solid to keep key squads protected. He's also okay in a counter-attack role, although I'm not sure this is going to be important in this edition. He's 40.

Tempestor Prime is 40 base, with some wargear options. A lot like the Company Commander, but only works on Tempestus squads. If you've got those, probably a good choice.

Tank Commander: Good, but not cheap enough to take just to unlock slots.

Lord Commissar: 55 with the required Power Sword and Bolt Pistol. Best generic close combat character, and awesome special rules. Regular Commisar has the same special rules, but isn't as tough, so there's a bit of a tax if you don't want your Commissar to fight