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.

Spera wrote:
Yup as i said, they are there to be versatile, not specialized. They are good, just not as good as other specialized options. I rated them 7,5/10 when Onagers are 8,5/10 and Dakkastelans are 10/10 in my opinion.

I'll work on that entry to clarify that. Thank you on your insights and opinions.

I'd wager they're mor efficient using the autocannon option, 4 str 7 -1 2D shots at 3+ is a more reliable option to the sink or swim of lascannons.

Also another decent point to add is that for 2cp (rage against the machines, protector doctrine) you can advance them and still hit something that's -1 on a 2+ And for another 1cp you could advance them 2d6 and do the same. Quite why you'd need them to move so much with 48" weapons is probably a very good question, but the option is there.

Also if you don't have the option of a second detachment, or don't want the associated HQ tax, you can't field 3 onagers AND robots in a batallion. If you needed more heavy firepower you can field 12 lascannon or 24 autocannon shots for a single fast attack entry. Leaving you the remaining two fast attack slots in your batallion for more dragoons

Spera wrote:
I just find this mistake incredibly funny and wanted share my reason to laugh with you guys.

I'm glad for you, i really am. but it pisses me off. because it fundamentally shows the level of not giving a gak they put into the admech codex. probably going to get some triarios or other admech transports and run them as chimeras until GW gets off it's ass and fixes this. maybe get some vorax and run them as..... feth if i know.

It's a shame we don't have an advance and charge strategm, you'd be able to pull the same shenanigans with dragoons as well. Move 10 + 2d6 + 2d6 charge and hit on a 2+ with 4+ explodes. It's almost like that would be pretty synergistic...ya know having abilities that work with the strength of our units.


Unlike The Ryza dogma...that we have a canticle that replaces it -_-

Octovol wrote:


I'd wager they're mor efficient using the autocannon option, 4 str 7 -1 2D shots at 3+ is a more reliable option to the sink or swim of lascannons.

5.33 average wounds vs 7.777 being generous and saying T7 with a 3+ all for the same points (4 autocannon balistarii vs 3 lascannon balistarii) it does okay against infantry but it's still only 4 shots on a 75 point model.... it's got it's places but it's not more efficient mathhammer wise.

gendoikari87 wrote:

Octovol wrote:


I'd wager they're mor efficient using the autocannon option, 4 str 7 -1 2D shots at 3+ is a more reliable option to the sink or swim of lascannons.

5.33 average wounds vs 7.777 being generous and saying T7 with a 3+ all for the same points (4 autocannon balistarii vs 3 lascannon balistarii) it does okay against infantry but it's still only 4 shots on a 75 point model.... it's got it's places but it's not more efficient mathhammer wise.

That's a shame. I suppose if you were trying to shift infantry you'd give that task to your robots anyway. Be nice to have another option for massed light firepower other than robots. Eradication Beamer d6 shots or plasma culverin d6 shots maybe. shame destroyers are so expensive, I'd take cognis culverins on an iron strider in a heart beat lol

Yeah. I mean i'm sure there's some secret use for auto cannon balistarii where they aren't entirely outclassed by other options in an otherwise sub par codex. the whole line of chicken walkers is really just let down by being 6w and thus well over 60 points they should have been closer to 4 wounds and much cheaper. could almost say the same for the kataphrons. except they could do with a point decrease at their current statline.

And I concur concerning Ballistarii, so I guess the aye's have it. Triple stamped and it is law now.

Plus... They suffer from being a kit that is a pain in the ass to build and paint, so any excuse to avoid them is good in my book.

I'd just ordered 5 ironstriders and 3 of them are definitely dragoons. Considering changing my order and swapping the other 2 for something else though. i don't have enough models to split into a dual detachment so ATM I have 2 onager, 2 robots, some vanguard/rangers couple of TPD and infiltrators.

I may consider a sextuplet of breachers. aiming for 1500pts for the time being and even though robots are more durable and just all round better at massed gunfire breachers are more flexible. Plus robots are OOS for repackaging ATM. Those heavy arc rifles are a bargain points wise, especially if you're shooting at vehicles, which is what you'd be doing with your lascannon balistarii. And breachers don't just roll over in CC, arc claws are still pretty decent.

Hmm 2 *2 dragoons and 3 breachers. Or 1*3 dragoons and 2 * 3 breachers.

torsion cannons even worth taking?

gendoikari87 wrote:
torsion cannons even worth taking?

Not unless they become cheaper. Range is too short and the still-absence of their lost special rules from 7th makes them short range expensive lascannons.

I just don't get why Balistarii don't have the same cloud effect Dragoons do. They're like basically the same model.

Main benefit of the Autcannon is it does the whole Advance and Shoot better than the Lascannon due to number of shots. That's about it though.

I'm disgusted by the new Astra Militarum upcoming codex, it just looks like the most well-written and most powerful of all codexes for now. They have free orders that should be stratagems, most of their <Regiments> traits aren't totally unusable like us, and they most likely got point decreases on stuff that will shot 40 times at S5. How could they half-piss our codex and then release a broken codex like that ? It's not out yet of course but I'm not holding my breath.

Fires of Cyraxus better be good, and better be soon.

Ah yes the mythical world of Cyraxus
Where GW hold an annual bonfire festival to burn the hopes and dreams of all Ad Mech players

 Rolsheen wrote:
Ah yes the mythical world of Cyraxus
Where GW hold an annual bonfire festival to burn the hopes and dreams of all Ad Mech players

*Soldier 76 voice* I've got you in my signature

 Aaranis wrote:
I'm disgusted by the new Astra Militarum upcoming codex, it just looks like the most well-written and most powerful of all codexes for now. They have free orders that should be stratagems, most of their <Regiments> traits aren't totally unusable like us, and they most likely got point decreases on stuff that will shot 40 times at S5. How could they half-piss our codex and then release a broken codex like that ? It's not out yet of course but I'm not holding my breath.

Fires of Cyraxus better be good, and better be soon.

I don't even play AdMech, and I can see just how shafted they got by GW. Their codex was a copy/paste joke, with no creativity or real changes.

The upcoming AM Codex is a slap in the face of anyone that plays Warhammer40k; especially those who have received their codexes already.

Autocannons are okay against T6 and lower vehicles or two wound infantry. Some armies run those but a lot don't. Whereas there is almost always something worth shooting with lascannons. They are not much worse versus basic MEQ.

Breachers seem like the worst unit in the roster. Far too expensive for what they do. 3 attacks on WS 4+ is terrible for a minimum of 47 points. The Hydraulic Claw should also have been AP -3 but as it is you just add insult to injury. So they are not a melee unit, just not quite as bad in combat as other choices.
So are the guns good? No, not really.
Unlike most I don't hate the Torsion cannon. It has a good stat line its just stupidly overcosted. Should be about half the points cost. Same for Heavy Arc. The base model should be about 10 points cheaper. Still probably wouldn't get picked for lack of synergy but at least it wouldn't be an auto-skip.

The top 3 trash ones are:
Breachers
Ruststalkers
Servitors

in any order. The 4th ones are Destroyers.
Everything else is just straight better than these 4.

Speaking of Breachers, even against the most optimal target, they do less damage than: Balistarii, Kastelans, Onagers. How did that get past the testing. AND they're about 2x more vulnerable per point. I don't get it.

 Aaranis wrote:
I'm disgusted by the new Astra Militarum upcoming codex, it just looks like the most well-written and most powerful of all codexes for now. They have free orders that should be stratagems, most of their <Regiments> traits aren't totally unusable like us, and they most likely got point decreases on stuff that will shot 40 times at S5. How could they half-piss our codex and then release a broken codex like that ? It's not out yet of course but I'm not holding my breath.

Fires of Cyraxus better be good, and better be soon.

Yeah... if I played Guard, I honestly would have a hard time choosing between all these new regiments. My only solace is that WYSIWYG probably will apply more strictly to Guard, so a lot of people can't just change their armies willy-nilly, whereas we can just use stickers to mark Forge Worlds.

Anyway, we needed some relic to give our infantry a bubble shield of some sort, and we need Forge World synergies that make better sense. Ryza, for example, should have Graia's warlord trait (Plasma Vanguard with Sicarians), and Agripinaa should have Graias's dogma (synergizes with Servitors/Kataphrons, makes sense that you need a tech-priest to make them stand down).

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
The top 3 trash ones are:
Breachers
Ruststalkers
Servitors

in any order. The 4th ones are Destroyers.
Everything else is just straight better than these 4.

Speaking of Breachers, even against the most optimal target, they do less damage than: Balistarii, Kastelans, Onagers. How did that get past the testing. AND they're about 2x more vulnerable per point. I don't get it.

Yeah im over second guessing my 5 iron strider purchase. for 1cp i dont need to take an icarus onager at all. flexibility.

Incidentally warlord traits: is monitor malevous an auto take for anyone else? I guess you're all going Cawl anyway. So many chances to roll a 6 and get CP back though. Also all those 1cp strategms we have on a 6 we get them free. There's not a huge number of good warlord traits outside cawl

Lascannon balistari compare to onagers neutron. And in order to see a big differnce you gotta take more than 4 subbing 2 onagers. Not really good. And that would even close if we didnt get 2 x stubbers for 145 new codex neutronagers.

Autcannon balistarii vs icarus. Same seem close 8 shots str 7 vs 12 mixed shots. Its mobility they get same buff bla bla onagers are more resilient but.

What i try ti pinpoint some time now. In a good list now Reece already confirmed it if you going to invest in onagers take 3.

Since i cant find any optimal detachment for ad mech i ll say this.

Onagers reroll ones only if same dogma. So pairs work better.
We need 3 neutronagers to be antitank efficient.
Robots are also heavy slot.
And a dragoon unit 3+ is vital.
Cawl has worth only if you give him enough to buff so.

Since i want dragoons stygia no matter what. And since the tax is so big.

I believe i see a reason for balistarii.

Mars spearhead
Heavy slots
Robots
Neutronager
Neutronager

Stygia outrider
1*3-4+ dragoons
1-2 balistarii lasc
1-2 balistarii lasc. Or autoc.

With an extra battalion seems to have 8-9 command point if you se graia +1 cp as i am.

Octovol wrote:

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
The top 3 trash ones are:
Breachers
Ruststalkers
Servitors

in any order. The 4th ones are Destroyers.
Everything else is just straight better than these 4.

Speaking of Breachers, even against the most optimal target, they do less damage than: Balistarii, Kastelans, Onagers. How did that get past the testing. AND they're about 2x more vulnerable per point. I don't get it.

Yeah im over second guessing my 5 iron strider purchase. for 1cp i dont need to take an icarus onager at all. flexibility.

Incidentally warlord traits: is monitor malevous an auto take for anyone else? I guess you're all going Cawl anyway. So many chances to roll a 6 and get CP back though. Also all those 1cp strategms we have on a 6 we get them free. There's not a huge number of good warlord traits outside cawl

Cawl is locked with mars trait, but I used Monitor on Stygies TPD. In last game it gave me 3 cp, i think this is huge value and people underestimate it. Thing is that This trait scales with game size. But I argue that on 2000 its it is one of best. Anything above that and we have clear winner.And it will be even better with time, since codex armies go for cp heavy lists.

I can't agree that Ruststalkers are bad. They are mediocre, but not bad. Clue is that other Melee options are clearly superior. so there is no point to take them when you have fulgurites, dragoons and infiltrators to choose from.

"I can't agree that Ruststalkers are bad. They are mediocre, but not bad. Clue is that other Melee options are clearly superior. so there is no point to take them when you have fulgurites, dragoons and infiltrators to choose from."

Which makes them terrible. Because of the "streamlining" of 8th and removing of special rules, it is a lot clearer which units are just straight up better than others. Ruststalkers compared to the other 3 are just straight up worse and therefor terrible.

BTW, I actually did the math and they should be TWICE as cheap to be viable... It's a joke

Breachers i like wish arc was str 7 but it wont. I already tried to fit them in my list its just so much tax . For having enginseers healing dogma specific units and troops doing zero that we cant even pay for nothing? If even consider taking anything but bare troops ranger your list is done.(cometitive with mars)

Kataprhins need to be in par with their points.

Cant invest 76 points for d6. Make it 4 shots. Make it 3/6 move or stationary. Make it rapid 2-3 all i care. But not that.

Same goes for wounds or invu. Either give the fnp or a 5+invu.
Some factors need to be resolved. Either we pay points for a complete unit or we pay for paper but heavy hitter.

And risk 3 wound plasma kill and low armor and low invu ans d6 shots and 76 points. Grav 5 shot is better but still need lower cost to be a cheap option that we can Risk taking just in case we benefit from an enemy army suitable.

Once more another unit nerfed but not fixed. Same crap gw for most ad mech.

Rustalkers are in the same category. They forgot they nerfed their scout dunestrider fearless abilities and they are trash.

 rvd1ofakind wrote:
"I can't agree that Ruststalkers are bad. They are mediocre, but not bad. Clue is that other Melee options are clearly superior. so there is no point to take them when you have fulgurites, dragoons and infiltrators to choose from."

Which makes them terrible. Because of the "streamlining" of 8th and removing of special rules, it is a lot clearer which units are just straight up better than others. Ruststalkers compared to the other 3 are just straight up worse and therefor terrible.

BTW, I actually did the math and they should be TWICE as cheap to be viable... It's a joke

Competitively not viable sure, but that not makes them bad. I assume this guide will be also for new and casual players. They aren't willloseyougamebad as servitors are in even casual play. Yeh, in in tournaments and other competitive environment you want to take units that i would rate at least 7,5/10, but if you don't have other options Ruststalkers will do fine in FLGS matches.

I have to say it winds me up the way people talk in such black and white terms as if everyone is fighting for top table at tournaments and only ever want to play the most ruthlessly efficient min/max units. Surely these tactica threads are for two purposes:

1) to discuss which units to purchase and play that are the most efficient and theoretical "best", AND
2) to discuss how to use ALL the codex units effectively rather than dismiss them out of hand because mathhammer says they are "not viable".

Ruststalkers are very good against MEQ or elite infantry. If used against the right target they are effective.
The problem is: they don't do enough wounds for hordes which are the current meta, and they aren't very survivable to get into CC with no tranports.

Are they top tier? Of course not - they lack one additional special rule - e.g. a better FNP or a better move like they had before.

But: 100 pts for 5 as a counter assault unit to hang in your backfield and defend your kastelans isn't terrible - particularly if you don't have or don't like the Electropriests. Alternatively, use them to charge up the table straight at an enemy unit that the opponent values and doesn't want to lose. They will probably get shot to death - maybe without even killing anything - but it's something the opponent needs to deal with and every bullet hitting them is not hitting your army's all-stars.

5 ruststalkers act like far more of a threat than 10 vanguard for pretty much the same points.

No they wont if they dont get a way other than cp to work.
Run charge .
Fearless
survive
All of the above

No you cant compare vanguard with rustalkers cause they cant shoot.has nothing to do one units utility with comparison you nonmcompetitive to do.

Rustalkers suck bad . And if you take them you cant hide them you cant charge them you can sacrifice them theyndont cost 45 they cant shoot. Priets do it with 6" better since they sit where you said near your Robots. Cheaper again. Sorry they suck. The story of competitive and fluffy games need to stop. You dont want to win? What you bubbling about competitive. The unit has issues its worse than all other options so dont take it. What is this offensive vs competitive we are form the moon we dont play with our friends. None plays to loose so cut it. Its tactis threat and this unit sucks badly

Even if you talked friendly games only still a lot more fun easy to play same model better utility take inflitrators . Or dragoons or priests

Sure, you talk about the obviously subpar units. I'll continue to dismiss them as they're not worth my time.

Also "I don't like <model>" is not an argument in a tactics thread
Fulgurites crap all over Ruststalkers . I use mine as Infiltrators now, who despite being not the best, actually have a role in the army, while Ruststalkers are just playing second fiddle to Fulgurites.

If you use Ruststalkers over Fulgurites, you are objectively making your army worse. And that's what I want to inform people about so they don't make bad purchase decisions.
Heck, they were buried into the ground by InControl during the FLG podcast

So what we're agreeing is that this "tactics" thread is not actually about "how to use the units you have in a tactically sound way", it's just about buying the best units. Yes?

 Silentz wrote:
I have to say it winds me up the way people talk in such black and white terms as if everyone is fighting for top table at tournaments and only ever want to play the most ruthlessly efficient min/max units.

not to mention such a list does not exist. warhammer can be very rock paper scissors and so even if you come up with a theoretical best list something can and will come along to crush it.

 Silentz wrote:
So what we're agreeing is that this "tactics" thread is not actually about "how to use the units you have in a tactically sound way", it's just about buying the best units. Yes?

Like I said, you can feel free to discuss them all you want. I will not.
And, yes, I do think that to a degree is what this thread is about. Using bad units is a bad tactic.