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.

AstraVlad wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

It's more expensive than baneblade which has -3 which is generally mostly enough and S10 isn't that big boost. Not many T5 targets generally you'll shoot.

It seems you do not play a lot against DG, do you?

And considering the amount of cover on the tables, AP-4 + Ignores Cover most of the time equals AP-5 that is a pretty big deal (TEQ in cover will roll 4+ against Baneblade but only 6+ against Hellhammer).

Yeah not much. But 1 army is not that much to deal in tournaments.

And with 8th ed terrain rules ignore cover is pretty much irrelevant. Especially as those are firing often against vehicles. I don't even remember when I last time had vehicle in cover. Having to traverse for example wall up and down(so 3" wall is 6" speed bump), be inside terrain AND have 50% obscurred...Even infantry often enough doesn't get cover since whole bloody squad needs to be in it.

tneva82 wrote:

And with 8th ed terrain rules ignore cover is pretty much irrelevant. Especially as those are firing often against vehicles.

It seems your meta is quite different from ours. Vehicles do not bother me at all: the most common of them is Rhino and it is rarely a primary target. Only IG can field enough heavy tanks to make it difficult to deal with them but I am the only IG player in the city so this is not relevant. But infantry is a problem. And they are ALWAYS in cover. Reapers, Havocs, Obliterators, Death Company (in brief moments when they are out of charge) etc. And other units like Necron Destroyers for example. That is where Hellhammer Cannon in immeasurably valuable -- it can clear infantry in cover (even elite multi-wound infantry) like nothing else.

 Aben Zin wrote:

 rhinoceraids wrote:
How are people liking Hellhounds? Im surprised I never have used them before but I think ill take 2x in a brigade.

Just a quick tip for Hellhounds - Take Track Guards!
Fairly cheap upgrade and a Hellhound can function to full capability even when down to one wound... and it makes it easier to drive one into the opponents battleline when they're about to explode!

I like to use two Hellhounds with Inferno cannons and hull heavy flamers in a 2000 point list. I laughed when I saw your post about track guards because I decided yesterday to add them to my models. Being able to move the full 12" is doubly valuable for Hellhounds so that they can get close enough to shoot their flame weapons and also to get close enough to the enemy to hurt him if the Hellhound explodes.

Good point about the Shadowsword and Vostroyan. Might try that.

Hellhounds and track guards are great. Had one move up. Flame. Then charge in to die to overwatch and blew up all my opponenets characters.

It was a big deal lol.

LOL @ Shadowsword being hard to kill.

It's trivial to blam a single Imperial Guard superheavy to uselessness in 1 turn, so unless it's Tallarn, don't bother. I suspect the reason the Shadowsword did so well in the tournament is because BLAMing the shadowsword meant that the 4 Tank Commanders and Pask were unharmed and could BLAM right back (or alternatively that aforementioned Russes drew fire that was reserved for the Shadowsword).

So do y'all feel that Guard are still dominant after everyone got their codexes? Or did we get left behind or are we still pretty damned good, just not OP.

At my local meta, I've found that I'm still competitive, just not steamrolling as much.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
LOL @ Shadowsword being hard to kill.

It's trivial to blam a single Imperial Guard superheavy to uselessness in 1 turn, so unless it's Tallarn, don't bother.

Obviously casual metas can be different but from a competitive perspective this cannot be reinforced enough.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 deltaKshatriya wrote:
So do y'all feel that Guard are still dominant after everyone got their codexes?

In a mono-Codex environment Guard would still be top or very close to it with many good matchups and a few challenging ones. In the current soup world Guard is a very useful Imperium component but heavy Guard is more of a gatekeeper list than a tournament winner.

 deltaKshatriya wrote:
So do y'all feel that Guard are still dominant after everyone got their codexes? Or did we get left behind or are we still pretty damned good, just not OP.

At my local meta, I've found that I'm still competitive, just not steamrolling as much.

Depends on the tournament pack if its swiss probably good if its ETC style 20-0 your probably medium.

We survive well certainly and its easy to consistently win by holding objectives. What ive found is we are not so good at smashing an opponent for 20pts 11 -14pt wins arn't good enough to place at events

I’ve an ITC tournament of Saturday. Currently in my AM brigade I have 2 Artemia hellhounds and one squad of 7 rough riders with 2 plasma guns. I’m torn between replacing the rough riders with another artmia hellhound Or leaving it as it is(there’s only one point difference). Hellhounds are tougher but the rough riders will help me get recon secondary points. One point to note is that the Artemia hellhounds can’t be given track guards so can lose mobility.

I finally gave in and decided to add a battalion of AM to my Marine lists for CP, had a couple questions since I haven't used them since 5th and don't have the 8th codex yet:

1. Doctrines - I know for 30 screen infantry it's not a big deal either way, but is Catachan the best? If my figures are the generic Cadian style armor, can I use Catachan rules (like how custom paint Marines can claim chapters), or do I need official muscled bandana figures?

2. What HQ? I figure 1 Commander is a given for a cheap guy to hide with the Aquila. I was first thinking I'd take a Primaris as the 2nd for a cheap smite+deny, but I notice most lists seem to use a 2nd Commander instead. Is 16pts not worth it? Do I really want that order giver?

3. Is there anything else I should really consider adding in? I know mortars are cheap, but anti infantry is probably what I need least given my army has a lot of Aggressors. Is only 1-2 basilisks or similar worth considering?

If you wanted another cheap smite and deny, use a 30pt astropath with the psychic maelstrom power. It's really useful as it can be used to target characters.

 DoomMouse wrote:
If you wanted another cheap smite and deny, use a 30pt astropath with the psychic maelstrom power. It's really useful as it can be used to target characters.

Hmm, that's not bad. Seems to average about 1 mortal wound vs 1.4 for 2nd Primaris smite, but 10pts cheaper and target-able, I will definitely consider it. Only shame is dropping an Aggressor for it. Mortals would help fill my biggest weakness, Custodes bike types and superheavies, but boltstorm/mortar team mass rolls is so much more generally useful.

And that new post on picking a regiment seems to answer my modeling question. I can't go official <Catachan> without the muscled dudes, but I could go <Catachann> using the generic dudes as long as I don't take named characters, which I did not plan to. I might still go Cadia for mortar rerolls, but I'm assuming my infantry will generally be moving to screen my marine units and get slightly more from +1S when charged than reroll 1s when still.

bort wrote:

And that new post on picking a regiment seems to answer my modeling question. I can't go official <Catachan> without the muscled dudes, but I could go <Catachann> using the generic dudes as long as I don't take named characters, which I did not plan to. I might still go Cadia for mortar rerolls, but I'm assuming my infantry will generally be moving to screen my marine units and get slightly more from +1S when charged than reroll 1s when still.

You absolutely can go <catachan> with cadian figures and still take named characters, you just have to be clear to your opponent before the battle who is which character. Yea it's better to get the "official" model for the named characters, but I know local tournaments out of my nearest GW store allowed custom built figures (with GW parts obviously) to be used as Creed/Straken.

Anyone running SWS? I am thinking of adding 2 squads with 2x plasma and a demo charge. Comes out to 43 points, I could also add a platoon commander to give them rerolls of 1. It would be a small unit that can pack a punch.

I would either put them in taurox with platoon commanders or taurox primes with gatling/hsvg.

bort wrote:
I might still go Cadia for mortar rerolls, but I'm assuming my infantry will generally be moving to screen my marine units and get slightly more from +1S when charged than reroll 1s when still.

It will make no difference at all. Guardsmen die like flies and are usually literally taken into the list to die (instead of something more valuable). If they are charged with anything decent in melee they are wiped out before they can strike back and even if they charge themselves their damage output is pathetic. If you want to advance your troops then just give them Tallarn doctrine and throw in some special weapons to shoot. Or better leave them in your deployment zone as backfield objective holders and do not bother moving them out.

Recently got an extended budget for miniatures and one of things I wanted was to expand my army with some IG heavy support( I mainly play GK and the only "heavy" things i have are venerable dread and a GMDK). I have budget for either 1 Shadowsword, or 3 Leman Russes though I dunno which would be better, any more experienced IG player could says which would be a better purchase?

Also if if I go the Russ route, is it optimal better to field them in a spearhead detachment (Pask and 3 Russes, I already own a Leman Russ) or the slightly point wise cheaper but more elite supreme command detachment (Pask and 2 Tank Commander).

 GuardStrider wrote:

Also if if I go the Russ route, is it optimal better to field them in a spearhead detachment (Pask and 3 Russes, I already own a Leman Russ) or the slightly point wise cheaper but more elite supreme command detachment (Pask and 3 Tank Commander).

I for myself prefer Tank Commanders. They are so much better than regular Russes that I can not force myself into not taking them. Lone Commander or Pask will be a HUGE fire magnet and probably die turn 1 leaving other Russes without orders and orders ARE important in IG army.

As a gunline army how does AM deal with mapcontrol? What's your goto?

I use scions, some advancing hellhounds and inf, but at times it hasn't been enough. What do you do?

w1zard wrote:

bort wrote:

And that new post on picking a regiment seems to answer my modeling question. I can't go official <Catachan> without the muscled dudes, but I could go <Catachann> using the generic dudes as long as I don't take named characters, which I did not plan to. I might still go Cadia for mortar rerolls, but I'm assuming my infantry will generally be moving to screen my marine units and get slightly more from +1S when charged than reroll 1s when still.

You absolutely can go <catachan> with cadian figures and still take named characters, you just have to be clear to your opponent before the battle who is which character. Yea it's better to get the "official" model for the named characters, but I know local tournaments out of my nearest GW store allowed custom built figures (with GW parts obviously) to be used as Creed/Straken.

Running those Cadian models as Catachan is silly. It's also pointless considering Cadia is a better doctrine overall unless your specifically trying to run a staken/priest list or running combat officers. If your playing a marine list and farming CP's and looking to screen/spam morters, just take cadia they do it better anyway, and it definitely will look better on the table and come across less gamey. Claiming catachan is the same as the paint scheme on marines is a bit of a stretch, it's more like playing your black legion as death guard because you like disgustingly resilient. Catachan is an odd regiment, they used to have their own book because they are so different.

 UMGuy wrote:
Anyone running SWS? I am thinking of adding 2 squads with 2x plasma and a demo charge. Comes out to 43 points, I could also add a platoon commander to give them rerolls of 1. It would be a small unit that can pack a punch.

I would either put them in taurox with platoon commanders or taurox primes with gatling/hsvg.

Are you using the index rules for your detachment instead of the codex? Or is there another way to get access to the demo charge?

I occassionally use SWS for snipers in my Cadian army. The unit only costs 30 points.

Won another tournament yesterday vs Chaos, Tau and Eldar (With flyer wing)

1500 pts.

Pask, BC, PC, LC
TC, BC, LC

3 inf squads

6 Bullgryn (2 with brute shields)
Astropath with Barrier
Priest

2x Hell hounds with track guards

Hydra
Manticore
Wyvern.

At the end of the final game eldar player just had his warlord.

I had everything but a squad of infantry and the wyvern.

And I technically ended up losing because we were"Out of time" And my oppenent wanted to finish the game. Cool. Gave him the win. Asked to finish the game after and he failed his psychic phase and I didnt move because I was on 2 Defend X objectives and I won. Took 30 seconds

Bit salty. But everybody there knew I won.

Hellhounds are amazing for map control. My new fav unit.

 JB wrote:

 UMGuy wrote:
Anyone running SWS? I am thinking of adding 2 squads with 2x plasma and a demo charge. Comes out to 43 points, I could also add a platoon commander to give them rerolls of 1. It would be a small unit that can pack a punch.

I would either put them in taurox with platoon commanders or taurox primes with gatling/hsvg.

Are you using the index rules for your detachment instead of the codex? Or is there another way to get access to the demo charge?

I occassionally use SWS for snipers in my Cadian army. The unit only costs 30 points.

If option exists in index it is 100% legal to use in the army regardless of what is or is not in codex

 Red Corsair wrote:

w1zard wrote:

bort wrote:

And that new post on picking a regiment seems to answer my modeling question. I can't go official <Catachan> without the muscled dudes, but I could go <Catachann> using the generic dudes as long as I don't take named characters, which I did not plan to. I might still go Cadia for mortar rerolls, but I'm assuming my infantry will generally be moving to screen my marine units and get slightly more from +1S when charged than reroll 1s when still.

You absolutely can go <catachan> with cadian figures and still take named characters, you just have to be clear to your opponent before the battle who is which character. Yea it's better to get the "official" model for the named characters, but I know local tournaments out of my nearest GW store allowed custom built figures (with GW parts obviously) to be used as Creed/Straken.

Running those Cadian models as Catachan is silly. It's also pointless considering Cadia is a better doctrine overall unless your specifically trying to run a staken/priest list or running combat officers. If your playing a marine list and farming CP's and looking to screen/spam morters, just take cadia they do it better anyway, and it definitely will look better on the table and come across less gamey. Claiming catachan is the same as the paint scheme on marines is a bit of a stretch, it's more like playing your black legion as death guard because you like disgustingly resilient. Catachan is an odd regiment, they used to have their own book because they are so different.

IMO, your opinion is much more silly. You can use whatever lore you want and paint your models however you want. You can use catachan rules to represent your own custom regiment whose background matches the in-game bonuses of the Catachans. Or people might not like/have access to the old catachan troops.

Plus, Catachan regiment bonuses are very competitive and pretty on par with Cadia. D6 vehicle weapon re-rolls are great on hellhounds and russes, two of the strongest units in the AM codex- with tank orders/harker they're neck and neck with Cadia, with catachan coming out ahead when moving.

tneva82 wrote:
If option exists in index it is 100% legal to use in the army regardless of what is or is not in codex

It may be legal in your gaming group but not in others. There are many groups and tournaments that require players to use the most current datasheet. For SWS, this means they use the codex datasheet which does not allow demo charges.

GW has left this question as a hanging chad with no clear RAW answer.

Edit: Personally, I like demo charges in SWS.

Codex datasheet, index options. That's legal. Now albeit if your tournament house rules differently that's one thing but you can't factor in every house rule. Some tournaments house rule super heavies out. Should one not get super heavies because you MIGHT run into such tournament?

 JB wrote:
GW has left this question as a hanging chad with no clear RAW answer.

Please reference the last page of this errata: https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/warhammer_40000_designers_commentary_en-1.pdf

 JB wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
If option exists in index it is 100% legal to use in the army regardless of what is or is not in codex

It may be legal in your gaming group but not in others. There are many groups and tournaments that require players to use the most current datasheet. For SWS, this means they use the codex datasheet which does not allow demo charges.

GW has left this question as a hanging chad with no clear RAW answer.

Edit: Personally, I like demo charges in SWS.

This is incorrect. GW have FAQed that you can use the index options if you wish to take a unit that has a weapon option that does not appear in the codex datasheet. It's tournament legal as well. They even made a nifty flowchart about it too, and I'm seriously scratching my head over why people are still getting this wrong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Red Corsair wrote:
Claiming catachan is the same as the paint scheme on marines is a bit of a stretch, it's more like playing your black legion as death guard because you like disgustingly resilient. Catachan is an odd regiment, they used to have their own book because they are so different.

I would agree with you if you were actually claiming your troopers to be ACTUAL catachans, however many guard players have their own custom regiments that have their own ways of fighting that might be more similar to catachans, even if they use cadian models. For example, my regiment uses the <VALHALLAN> keyword because the valhallan combat doctrines fit their backstory and war methodologies very well. However, I do not ever claim they are valhallans, they are just using valhallan rules, and I would be very miffed if my opponent tried to make the argument that in order to utilize the valhallan keyword, I needed an entire army of the old metal valhallan figurines that look horrible, cost an arm and a leg, and are extremely difficult to obtain.

Your argument is analogous to saying that making up your own space marine chapter which is a blood angels successor that uses blood angels rules shouldn't be allowed because you are trying to use vanilla marine models instead of using proper blood angels figurines or blood angels iconography.

w1zard wrote:

 JB wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
If option exists in index it is 100% legal to use in the army regardless of what is or is not in codex

It may be legal in your gaming group but not in others. There are many groups and tournaments that require players to use the most current datasheet. For SWS, this means they use the codex datasheet which does not allow demo charges.

GW has left this question as a hanging chad with no clear RAW answer.

Edit: Personally, I like demo charges in SWS.

This is incorrect. GW have FAQed that you can use the index options if you wish to take a unit that has a weapon option that does not appear in the codex datasheet. It's tournament legal as well. They even made a nifty flowchart about it too, and I'm seriously scratching my head over why people are still getting this wrong.

Please tell me which page of which FAQ.

Last page of Designer's Commentary.

 Chris521 wrote:
Last page of Designer's Commentary.

Thanks! OK, now I see your point. Locals are using the older 4 page version of the commentary and not the new six page version.