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.

 Marmatag wrote:
Guardsmen will always have a place if you can field them. Mortar teams are fantastic. Absolutely fantastic. Top players running GSC now bring in squads of mortars. Being able to deposit on-demand shots nearly anywhere on the board ignoring LOS is *huge*.

Yeah, I predict 100% every competitive list with GSC to have a brigade with mortars. Unless theyre like splashing for a single CTFAE patriarch just to get Vect and Mental Onslaught.

I think mostly the poster was referring to brood brothers as brood brother infantry squads.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Guardsmen will always have a place if you can field them. Mortar teams are fantastic. Absolutely fantastic. Top players running GSC now bring in squads of mortars. Being able to deposit on-demand shots nearly anywhere on the board ignoring LOS is *huge*.

Yeah, I predict 100% every competitive list with GSC to have a brigade with mortars. Unless theyre like splashing for a single CTFAE patriarch just to get Vect and Mental Onslaught.

I think mostly the poster was referring to brood brothers as brood brother infantry squads.

No, people will go for double/triple battalions

KurtAngle2 wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:

 Marmatag wrote:
Guardsmen will always have a place if you can field them. Mortar teams are fantastic. Absolutely fantastic. Top players running GSC now bring in squads of mortars. Being able to deposit on-demand shots nearly anywhere on the board ignoring LOS is *huge*.

Yeah, I predict 100% every competitive list with GSC to have a brigade with mortars. Unless theyre like splashing for a single CTFAE patriarch just to get Vect and Mental Onslaught.

I think mostly the poster was referring to brood brothers as brood brother infantry squads.

No, people will go for double/triple battalions

Curious why you think so? GSC battalions aren't particularly cheap (min-sized GSC battalion is 50 points more than the loyal 32, 15 or so points cheaper than the min marine battalion) but their brigades seem super cheap with 30-40 point slot fills in Elites HS and FA.

Karol wrote:

Not Online!!! 770982 10338227 wrote:

Why even field broodbrothers?
Serious questions, i feel like the stratagems make the regular GSC units worth more then IG imo.

Aren't ogryns ordered to fight twice kind of a good as a melee unit?

I really doubt this will make it through the 2 week FAQ. No one should bank on this.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_scotsman wrote:


Curious why you think so? GSC battalions aren't particularly cheap (min-sized GSC battalion is 50 points more than the loyal 32, 15 or so points cheaper than the min marine battalion) but their brigades seem super cheap with 30-40 point slot fills in Elites HS and FA.

(Not speaking for him of course) GSC is stupidly CP hungry. The fast attack takes away too much, I think. It sort of makes me think there is no fixed CP change coming or this army would otherwise be terrible.

As an aside...if mortars are still 5 points we can't expect that to change for IG, either, which sucks a bit. The only hope there is penalty to out of LOS shooting.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hot damn! Mortars are 7 points!! (Hey...at least it's something!)

I guess I'm just looking at it like this:

Min Battalion:

237 points (3x5 acolytes, 1x primus 1x iconward, using their existing points value rather than squinting at blurry images so they may be +/- a few)

Min Brigade:

768 (Iconward Primus Alphus, 6x min acolytes, 3 cheap elite characters, 3 scout sentinels with Multilasers, 3 mortar squads)

The min brigade is nearly as cheap (less than 100pts more) than a min AM brigade. The Battalion is nearly as expensive as a marine min battalion.

Realistically some of those troop choices should probably be slightly more expensive BB infantry squads or neophyte squads as 5-man naked acolytes aren't great. but I don't think scout sentinels or mortar teams are at all CP hungry. I think they do their job just fine without any CP at all.

EDIT: 768, I stand corrected. HEAVY mortar nerfs incoming baby!

I’m just going to point out that the iconward FNP applies to MODELS within the aura, not units. So either you cram all the squads entirely into its aura, or the neophyte squad loses the FNP once it takes a few losses. Add in the fact that you are not realistically taking multiple iconwards (only 1 per detachment and the aura is <cult> locked, so if you want more than 2 you have to take 2 detachments of the same cult, limiting you from allies or other cults, and the HQ slot is super crowded)

the_scotsman wrote:
I guess I'm just looking at it like this:

Min Battalion:

237 points (3x5 acolytes, 1x primus 1x iconward, using their existing points value rather than squinting at blurry images so they may be +/- a few)

Min Brigade:

768 (Iconward Primus Alphus, 6x min acolytes, 3 cheap elite characters, 3 scout sentinels with Multilasers, 3 mortar squads)

The min brigade is nearly as cheap (less than 100pts more) than a min AM brigade. The Battalion is nearly as expensive as a marine min battalion.

Realistically some of those troop choices should probably be slightly more expensive BB infantry squads or neophyte squads as 5-man naked acolytes aren't great. but I don't think scout sentinels or mortar teams are at all CP hungry. I think they do their job just fine without any CP at all.

EDIT: 768, I stand corrected. HEAVY mortar nerfs incoming baby!

This is my rough cut totaling 1760. Not sure what to do with the extra 240.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

C4790M wrote:
I’m just going to point out that the iconward FNP applies to MODELS within the aura, not units. So either you cram all the squads entirely into its aura, or the neophyte squad loses the FNP once it takes a few losses. Add in the fact that you are not realistically taking multiple iconwards (only 1 per detachment and the aura is <cult> locked, so if you want more than 2 you have to take 2 detachments of the same cult, limiting you from allies or other cults, and the HQ slot is super crowded)

Good catch - it definitely makes it less useful.

 Daedalus81 wrote:


This is my rough cut totaling 1760. Not sure what to do with the extra 240.

Spoiler:

Sadly, Tyranid Primes can't take cannons, only small arms for some reason. You could always replace them with Neurothropes for the extra psychic powers (though two might be overkill) or flyrants (granted, you don't have any other large targets for saturation). Also, Horms are 5 points each, not 4. Maybe just swap them for rippers at less than a hundred points for all three troops? They're not bad as objective sitters/grabbers.

I'm not sure about the overall plan of this list, though, as it's lacking much punch besides the turn 2&3 hand flamer bomb. That's a couple of extremely dead screen/unfortunately placed units, but what was the strategy beyond that?

 Trimarius wrote:

 Daedalus81 wrote:


This is my rough cut totaling 1760. Not sure what to do with the extra 240.

Spoiler:

Sadly, Tyranid Primes can't take cannons, only small arms for some reason. You could always replace them with Neurothropes for the extra psychic powers (though two might be overkill) or flyrants (granted, you don't have any other large targets for saturation). Also, Horms are 5 points each, not 4. Maybe just swap them for rippers at less than a hundred points for all three troops? They're not bad as objective sitters/grabbers.

I'm not sure about the overall plan of this list, though, as it's lacking much punch besides the turn 2&3 hand flamer bomb. That's a couple of extremely dead screen/unfortunately placed units, but what was the strategy beyond that?

That's a very complex question, because it really depends what I'm facing.

Derp - you're right. Neurothropes it is or that and a Prime with some melee. That was supposed to be Termagants, also. Updated to increase saws, changed to rippers, switch HG to impalers since shock cannons don't work well with Kronos, added jackal and sanctus.

Reposition ambush tokens as needed to exploit deployment and support the plan as much as possible.

Plan would be to march the Neophytes up to cover the Patriarch who Onslaughts and Smites any big model or character that's too close. Sanctus doubles snipes (for 0 CP and no other use at the time, why not?) at Characters or Rubrics who might deny those flamers any real foothold. Jackal and Neos focus on any middling chaff to make room for KMs. Hive Guard go for whatever they can kill.

Second turn is more chaff clearing with flamer bomb. Push closer with whatever is alive. Need to get the Patriach as close to a big target as I can - he should be in range to just about auto-murder an LRBT. Kellers do what they can do.

Turn 3 hopefully a hole has opened to something like a Castellan. Patriarch drops relic onto an acolyte with saw. Turn off the knight's overwatch with hypnosis (hopefully).

The acolytes for in and get +1 to wound. Actually I think the Primus should get the Broodsurge reroll charges trait just in case...hmm. Anyway --

12 * 3.5 * .167 * .333 = 2.3 //if flamers get n range from the D6 walk up
4 * .833 * .833 * 2 = 5.6 // buffed acolyte
12 * .833 * .666 * 2 = 13.3
20 * .833 * .167 = 2.8 // rending claws

24 wounds

You people who say it's overpowered are apparently incapable of reading and are just flipping out over nothing. The GSC book has multiple restrictions that most armies don't have, our army wide rules only apply to like 3 units in the entire codex. The units we have can all be wiped out by 32 points of guard shooting. The entire army relies on a couple attempts to roll 8 or 9 on 2d6, and by turn 3 our entire army is most likely tabled. The fix to soup in the GSC only applies to GSC when it should apply to every army. We don't have a single decent vehicle.

most tactics people are losing their mind over when you actually add up what they're saying it comes to like 600 pts and 7 CP, and somehow 3 overlapping cult rules to pull off. So yeah, great, you blow your entire load on one really cool combo to kill one enemy unit...and that's it. Now you're hanging there swinging in the wind with a t-shirt save, T3, and an empty gas tank.

Sure our psychic powers are amazing, we have some great strategmens, and 2 incredibly good characters, but apparently you've not read any further than that because our army wide rules and our units themselves are sub-par. Then your next argument is "but guard!!!!!" yeah guard are overpowered, we've all known this for months, that's not GSC, that's guard. If you want to argue about how strong guard are then that's a totally different discussion. But given the choice between guard + gsc or guard + knights....which do you think people will keep taking to tournaments?

Danny slag wrote:
You people who say it's overpowered are apparently incapable of reading and are just flipping out over nothing. The GSC book has multiple restrictions that most armies don't have, our army wide rules only apply to like 3 units in the entire codex. The units we have can all be wiped out by 32 points of guard shooting. The entire army relies on a couple attempts to roll 8 or 9 on 2d6, and by turn 3 our entire army is most likely tabled. The fix to soup in the GSC only applies to GSC when it should apply to every army. We don't have a single decent vehicle.

most tactics people are losing their mind over when you actually add up what they're saying it comes to like 600 pts and 7 CP to pull off. So yeah, great, you blow your entire load on one really cool combo to kill one enemy unit...and that's it. Now you're hanging there swinging in the wind with a t-shirt save, T3, and an empty gas tank.

Sure our psychic powers are amazing, we have some great strategmens, and 2 incredibly good characters, but apparently you've not read any further than that because our army wide rules and our units themselves are sub-par. Then your next argument is "but guard!!!!!" yeah guard are overpowered, we've all known this for months, that's not GSC, that's guard. If you want to argue about how strong guard are then that's a totally different discussion. But given the choice between guard + gsc or guard + knights....which do you think people will keep taking to tournaments?

There is a bit of exaggeration here. Much of it addressed in previous posts. I'm not going to say they're unbeatable or whatever, but they're going to require purchasing some antacids.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

Danny slag wrote:
You people who say it's overpowered are apparently incapable of reading and are just flipping out over nothing. The GSC book has multiple restrictions that most armies don't have, our army wide rules only apply to like 3 units in the entire codex. The units we have can all be wiped out by 32 points of guard shooting. The entire army relies on a couple attempts to roll 8 or 9 on 2d6, and by turn 3 our entire army is most likely tabled. The fix to soup in the GSC only applies to GSC when it should apply to every army. We don't have a single decent vehicle.

most tactics people are losing their mind over when you actually add up what they're saying it comes to like 600 pts and 7 CP to pull off. So yeah, great, you blow your entire load on one really cool combo to kill one enemy unit...and that's it. Now you're hanging there swinging in the wind with a t-shirt save, T3, and an empty gas tank.

Sure our psychic powers are amazing, we have some great strategmens, and 2 incredibly good characters, but apparently you've not read any further than that because our army wide rules and our units themselves are sub-par. Then your next argument is "but guard!!!!!" yeah guard are overpowered, we've all known this for months, that's not GSC, that's guard. If you want to argue about how strong guard are then that's a totally different discussion. But given the choice between guard + gsc or guard + knights....which do you think people will keep taking to tournaments?

There is a bit of exaggeration here. Much of it addressed in previous posts. I'm not going to say they're unbeatable or whatever, but they're going to require purchasing some antacids.

Close combat armies like GSC have a huge uphill battle, shooting being exponentially superior in 8th, hell GW has even stated that they dislike when close combat units actually manage to kill things in close combat, and their rules reflect this. Does GSC have some cool stuff, sure, but like i said when you read what people are freaking out about it seems to somehow assume you can stack cult factions on the same unit, spend infinite CP, have infinite points, and your units are never getting shot.

Yikes.

Yeah, like most competitive codexes, realistically about 1 in 5/1 in 4 units is actually worth taking in a tournament setting. Codex GSC definitely has several units that fall pretty flat - Metamorphs, The Biophagus, the Locus, Jackals - but you are most certainly going to see them in tournament play.

Probably not allied to guard, but they are going to be doing wonders with competitive nids, because they provide a number of things that nids really struggle with (a strong answer to a castellan being a biggie).

They're definitely not a Drukhari/Guard level meta game-changer, but they are good enough to make nid soup as big a player as imperial or eldar soup, and seem to have good legs as a standalone army in a casual meta.

I do agree that this board and these threads as a whole have greatly over-estimated the power of the majority of points within a GSC list. I've found from playing with them, all the killer alphastrike combos basically take place to the backdrop of your army that's actually on the board fighting a heavily losing battle.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm gonna throw out a little bit of a [citation needed] on that official GW statement, Danny.

the_scotsman wrote:
Yikes.

Yeah, like most competitive codexes, realistically about 1 in 5/1 in 4 units is actually worth taking in a tournament setting. Codex GSC definitely has several units that fall pretty flat - Metamorphs, The Biophagus, the Locus, Jackals - but you are most certainly going to see them in tournament play.

Probably not allied to guard, but they are going to be doing wonders with competitive nids, because they provide a number of things that nids really struggle with (a strong answer to a castellan being a biggie).

They're definitely not a Drukhari/Guard level meta game-changer, but they are good enough to make nid soup as big a player as imperial or eldar soup, and seem to have good legs as a standalone army in a casual meta.

I do agree that this board and these threads as a whole have greatly over-estimated the power of the majority of points within a GSC list. I've found from playing with them, all the killer alphastrike combos basically take place to the backdrop of your army that's actually on the board fighting a heavily losing battle.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm gonna throw out a little bit of a [citation needed] on that official GW statement, Danny.

warhammer rules team quote on the beta reserve rules, "It's never fun when a close combat unit drops in and wipes out your units first turn without you being able to counter it. that's not fun to play against." Sounds like the perspective of someone who plays a gunline and doesn't realize that those close combat units pay points to be able to actually kill things in close combat. But apparently having half your army shot off the board without being able to counter it is fun? see how one sided and un-objective that quote shows they are? They forget that close combat has a ton of disadvantages over shooting, and just seem butt hurt that sometimes a close combat unit can actually earn it's points and kill their squishy shooting units.

Danny slag wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Yikes.

Yeah, like most competitive codexes, realistically about 1 in 5/1 in 4 units is actually worth taking in a tournament setting. Codex GSC definitely has several units that fall pretty flat - Metamorphs, The Biophagus, the Locus, Jackals - but you are most certainly going to see them in tournament play.

Probably not allied to guard, but they are going to be doing wonders with competitive nids, because they provide a number of things that nids really struggle with (a strong answer to a castellan being a biggie).

They're definitely not a Drukhari/Guard level meta game-changer, but they are good enough to make nid soup as big a player as imperial or eldar soup, and seem to have good legs as a standalone army in a casual meta.

I do agree that this board and these threads as a whole have greatly over-estimated the power of the majority of points within a GSC list. I've found from playing with them, all the killer alphastrike combos basically take place to the backdrop of your army that's actually on the board fighting a heavily losing battle.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'm gonna throw out a little bit of a [citation needed] on that official GW statement, Danny.

warhammer rules team quote on the beta reserve rules, "It's never fun when a close combat unit drops in and wipes out your units first turn without you being able to counter it. that's not fun to play against." Sounds like the perspective of someone who plays a gunline and doesn't realize that those close combat units pay points to be able to actually kill things in close combat. But apparently having half your army shot off the board without being able to counter it is fun? see how one sided and un-objective that quote shows they are? They forget that close combat has a ton of disadvantages over shooting, and just seem butt hurt that sometimes a close combat unit can actually earn it's points and kill their squishy shooting units.

....I don't think that quote says what you think it says. I also think the fact that you're reading into it so hard is why you see it as so damning.

I'll tell you, as someone who was playing in events before that beta ruling, it was definitely NOT fun to play against the kind of extremely reliable turn 1 deep strike shenanigans that were becoming the norm at the time. fight twice psychic buffed tzaangor blobs and sanguinary guard+smash captains were definitely warping the meta in a way that made the game too reliant on the who got first turn roll.

Gunlines are annoying as well, but tbf they have also been adding beta rules like Prepared Positions and the new deployments in CA2018 that help to give players more options versus going second to a gunline list.

And before you ad hominem: I play practically every faction and playstyle. I have imperial armies, eldar armies, a chaos army, a gunline, a horde, mobile MSU, psyker heavy and melee heavy armies. I am not a shill for "big gunline."

I think GSC will change the meta. Especially if Orks perform as well at the LVO as many expect (if they crash and burn then maybe not). Both armies are going to produce a move back towards worrying about hordes. Which might - in turn - cement Knight dominance because you can't typically build to deal with both - but its still a twist.

I think GSC could be very good against an elite Imperial Soup - i.e. your loyal 32 with knights/smash captains/biker shield captains style builds. I personally think Guard Brigade+Castellan (or 2 cheap gallants) is a better, more flexible list, but we shall see.

Its the other thread - but I also think Kellermorphs could also be quite monstrous against Eldar Soups. That critical Ynnari unit? Good chance to drop and kill (plus hive guard throwing in fire etc). Given Deathwatch are also quite effective vs Eldar post CA....

I think the meta could potentially move more than some think.

Tyel wrote:
I think GSC will change the meta. Especially if Orks perform as well at the LVO as many expect (if they crash and burn then maybe not). Both armies are going to produce a move back towards worrying about hordes. Which might - in turn - cement Knight dominance because you can't typically build to deal with both - but its still a twist.

I think the meta could potentially move more than some think.

GSC may well be able to do both. An anti-horde focused Tyrand build that has Hive Guard and splashed Aberants has the tools to deal with Orks and the single super heavy builds. Weak vs multiple big knights, but otherwise a nice counter meta faction.