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.

thehod wrote:The IG have at best an out-dated codex and at worse, obsolete at times.

back to topic.

The new resolution rules really do hurt some armies case in point: Necrons who are used to losing 4-6 necrons during a single assault phase. They relied on their ld 10 to keep from breaking. With 5th edition the brutal combat resolution can simply break a 20 man necron squad who only lost a few and bypassing WBB.

I guess some one who thinks the warrior heavy necron will be good in 5ed could be despairing now ,and those who say necron has good objective holding troops could also shut up now. The new rule forces necron players use destroyer heavy mobile list ,maybe plus a C'tan.

Darrian13 wrote:Augustus,
If your contention is that IG are weaker in 5th than they were in 4th, I disagree.

IG are not now, nor were they in 4th, a top tier army. The problem is their codex. Until they get a new codex, they will be a sub-par army.

Fair enough sir. They might be a sub par army after the new codex too, lets hope!

thehod wrote:The IG have at best an out-dated codex and at worse, obsolete at times.

back to topic.

The new resolution rules really do hurt some armies case in point: Necrons who are used to losing 4-6 necrons during a single assault phase. They relied on their ld 10 to keep from breaking. With 5th edition the brutal combat resolution can simply break a 20 man necron squad who only lost a few and bypassing WBB.

Thats a great point also. I have failed to show other examples, Necrons also wont be very likely to have other CC units, counter charge nearby.

Necrons are somewhat of an example of an army that is a victim of changing editions and the same goes to Tau but we all know Tau die to hand to hand pretty much the same in 4th and 5th.


If they gave Necrons back ATSKNF like they did pre-codex, then I can say Necrons will have a slightly better chance.

Darrian13 wrote:@Kroeger, I am curious as to how I can avoid the speedbump when it is right in front of me and the rest of my opponents army is behind it and I am a HtH army? My Orks are not philosophers, they are killers.
Also, yes your 2-3 cc marines will kill the 10 man squad of IG that they rush but in the following turn when the 70+ IG fire at the 2-3 marines in rapidfire range they are dead too and you spent ALOT more points on your squad than the IG spent on theirs.

When you factor in True LoS (hiding behind your broken transport) and terrain, its rather simple to avoid the bulk of the army in many situations. If you attack a flank as opposed to blindly charging straight at the Guard lines you can sweep up the flank. Also you can send most of your forces up the middle to distract the bulk of the IG army, allowing a small group of SM to hit the army in the flank. As far as getting out of CC in the Guard shooting phase, if you have only 2-3 marines you should move to charge multiple guard squads. Even if you managed to contact 3 full guard infantry squads your only looking at a single marine casualty and 3-4 guard casualties. With those #'s odds are you will remain in combat for the entirety of the IG turn bloking LoS to the rear elements of the IG line. Also you will be so surrounded by Guardsmen that it will be unlikely they can mount a countercharge during their turn. Hopefully you can break the IG during their assault phase. Even if you don't you will have helped to block LoS to the remainder of your army allowing it to close with fewer casualties. And God Help the IG if a SM character gets into their lines!

As a WHFB/Skaven player I've been waiting for everyone else to get how irritating it is to have negative Ld modifiers. Since I play supported choppy marines in 40k though, I don't care at all. If the new codex loses Rite of Battle it'll be slightly annoying, but I'll get over it. It's a counter to the ork situation, and IG players still have their big, extra-meaty templates. But the drive has always been toward encouraging more balanced, flexible armies, so you know, just change your tactics. IG platoons have always been screens and everyone knows it. Now that you can shoot at whatever you want, it's not that unfair to run combats a little more dynamically.

KPs are going to need to be looked at, though. Once we have a good year or so with 5th, maybe.

Oh, and a well-balanced IG list is never something to take lightly. I take three transports and use them heavily for cover, but now that it's technically easier to explode vehicles, that tactic is of a liability.

I take three transports and use them heavily for cover, but now that it's technically easier to explode vehicles, that tactic is of a liability.

It's harder to explode them with shooting. It's easier to get them in CC.

The thing aboot this thread that I don't get, is that we've had a whole new Edition come oot, and people are pissed off because their 4e Guard lists don't work the same in 5e.

It's a whole new edition... The answers are in the questions..

Infantry guard give up lots of VPs? Ok, how aboot Guard with 3 Russes? Russes are very powerful, fairly high cost models. Fewer VPs on the table. And they're harder than ever to kill... And their blast weapons are deadlier than ever... Imagine that...

Plus, even as you complain aboot the VPs Guard give up, you gloss over the fact that when they're doing that they're also fielding a huge number of Troops choices, which gives them a major edge in the OTHER half of missions.

I'm just throwing that oot there. I don't play Guard. Maybe 3 Russes is a poor idea. It's just the first obvious thing that came to mind. But clearly you can't just do the same thing as before and expect the same results.

I know how souring it can be to get beat up and feel like you never had a chance. Doesn't mean you can't switch your list around, get skilled up on the new rules, and be back in business.

Here's the thing: You don't want to prove that your army sucks. If you win that argument, what's your reward? A sucky army.

Its actually KP not VP. VP is a 4th edition thing.

VP still exist in 5th edition. They can be found at the back of the rulebook. Many tournaments are going to use VP rather than KP in Annihilate missions due to the unpopularitey of KP.

Even though what you wrote was pure speculation, I hope you are right and the TO's around So Cal choose to use VP's instead of KP's.

It's not speculation here in Texas. I'm going to a VP tournament tomorrow morning!

Concerning Agustus's bit about the Guard not winning many tournies, well, when 5th ed rules came out, my store ran a 500 point tourney with the new rules. There are 3 guard players in my store; i am one, another was a n00b, and the third was a crusty ol' dude running a mech infantry list.

All three of us came in last.

Concerning Leadership tests for when Guard loses combat, I've actually found that opting to use the squad's normal LD is the way to go, because then they break, and the enemy is now able to be shot. Which now makes the only reason to give LD-boosting stuff to Guard to: 1.) Avoid pinning, 2.) The rare occasion when a combat occurs in your assault phase.

With guard, you should have moved a 'speed bump' unit into position (out of cover) so the Templar unit couldn't move and engage who they wanted in CC.

100% with Yakface on this. Simply put - the best use of a speed bump is to tie up your enemy's charging units in a location with no cover.

I wonder how 3 Tri Bolter Lemans and 3 Hellhounds Might do?
...
Personally, I like 2 Demolishers in the mix. You might not get to fire on the first turn, but AP2 is important in this edition.

IMHO 3 Tri Bolter Lemans and 3 Hellhounds are the new Black.
I'm planning to try the Demolisher with Plasma Cannon combo (that way first turn shooting remains dramatic), but the increase in AP is somewhat negated by cover and I think I'll stick with longer range Russes instead. Although I admit it would be funny to see Terminators diving for cover!

Anyone got a playtested opinion on Demolishers in 5E?

(1) Shooting morale checks very seldom kill enitre units without hitting all the models but CC does.

Thats a problem and its a significant reason why the game is tilted so heavily towards CC and away from shooting. Efficiency: CC gets the job done.

(2) Setting up in ranks cuts your firepower in half. What everyone is forgetting is having staggered line defence REDUCES 50% of YOUR FIREPOWER because they get saves too for the in between units.

Firstly MEQ's don't care about the cover save against most weapon types, since they strut like they are their own terrain and get better saves from their armour.

Secondly it is possible to leave gaps in the ranks infront for a lascannon or other heavy wep to fire out of. If targeting a tank, only the lascannon fires so there is no cover save. If the enemy fire at your lascannon unit, more than half are screened by the men in front, so you get a cover save.

(4) Numbers are worthless in CC

Aint that the truth. We'll just have to adjust. I lost 25 men to a Chaplain because he caused 2 wounds to my 1, and the whole lot fled. 25vs1 and I lost the lot!
It was embarassing, so I will have to adjust.

And for the record, I'm optimistic.

Perhaps I should add that I am REALLY strongly considering adding some Grey Knights to my current vanilla IG list. RRs are harder to hide now due to LOS, and the expensive elite GKs offer a lot of what the cheap horde Guardsman lacks.

There comes a point, even in the best designed layered defence, where you run out of board and want something that can whack the other guy.

Agree with ED209, KP is balanced by the fact that IG can get something like 36 *scoring* units in the other two mission types. They can put a fairly tough unit on every single objective on the board (ten guys in cover with a heavy weapon is not bad by any standard), and still have only used up the rest of the FOC to kill the opponent with.

@Matt-shadowlord, Grey Knights are the natural addition to most IG builds. A unit of GK termies is the second most commonly seen ally squad . Next to a DH inquisitor with mystics in his retinue.

Given the changes to CC morale I see Sisters (not just a canoness) becoming more popular.

Ogiwan wrote:Concerning Agustus's bit about the Guard not winning many tournies, well, when 5th ed rules came out, my store ran a 500 point tourney...There are 3 guard players in my store...All three of us came in last.

Im sorry to hear that, it's nice to get some one else to chime in, but somehow it makes me feel worse. IG were probably my favorite army.

But now...?

PhryxisPlus wrote: ...even as you complain aboot the VPs Guard give up, you gloss over the fact that when they're doing that they're also fielding a huge number of Troops choices, which gives them a major edge in the OTHER half of missions.

Here's the thing: You don't want to prove that your army sucks. If you win that argument, what's your reward? A sucky army.

Well not really, the extra troop choices dont help because they don't take ground at all, they are so vulnerable to CC they are just a liability.

...and yes, it is a melancholy victory, if I could claim that. I agree, I have a sucky army.

**EDIT At least I have an army and not LATD.

Arctik_Firangi wrote:As a WHFB/Skaven player I've been waiting for everyone else to get how irritating it is to have negative Ld modifiers.KPs are going to need to be looked at, though. Once we have a good year or so with 5th, maybe.

Yea they really hurt, especially with the redundancy. What also gets me is all the speedbump tactics, I know IG are cheaper, but the idea of throwing units away because they are not viable just feels like maybe I should get an army where all the troop choices are viable! Planning an army where I am going to throw half of it away just to have a shot seems like a recipe for defeat IMO.

Now if there was mission where one side got to defend, maybe, but there isn't...

der Wiskinator wrote:(ten guys in cover with a heavy weapon is not bad by any standard), ...

Unfortunately IT IS BAD by ever standard, because all assault units have plasma grenades now. With the exception of possibly slowing down an attacking unit distance wise, for strike order, you might as well be in the open, you're not even going to get to swing most of the time at I3. TOTALLY different from before!

Stelek wrote:Given the changes to CC morale I see Sisters (not just a canoness) becoming more popular.

You have got it Stelek, I haven't been able to beat sisters once yet imn the new edition, curiously, because of the book, they completely ignore the lopsided assault modifiers that destroy the IG.

Heck I even tried nidzilla against them and I couldn't even beat them in hand to hand because of the invulnerable save miracle, the eviscerators in CC actually killed my carnifexes.

<SHAMELESSGRIPE=ON>
For the record, I HATE sisters and their magic powers, not even psychic defence works against them:

Instant Invulenrable saves for units? CHECK

Need to break the morale rules completely and ignore all the modifiers? CHECK

Want to regroup instantly even below half CHECK

Want Custom Hit and Run for an assault unit that always flies around and can never be pinned? CHECK

Need instant rending on any unit whenever you need it? CHECK

Need plasma grenades? CHECK

That stupid army is completely broken becasue of faith points and I hope they get the NERF HAMMER HARDER than anything has ever gotten it before!
<SHAMELESSGRIPE=DONE>

Sorry, not really OT.

Hehehe... Your just sore because Bon beat your ass on Friday! We can play this week and you can fight the Cherry Boyz and squish them!

A Tyranid player complaining about an army that breaks the rules? That's really funny. Synapse breaks just about every morale rule in the game.

Auto-rally at below half? CHECK
Always pass all morale checks? CHECK
Immune to instant death and force weapons? CHECK
Need to move over impassable terrain? CHECK
Need to shoot 8 shots a turn, re-rolling misses and re-rolling wounds? CHECK
Heavy Support Units that are at full capacity until completely eliminated through wounds? CHECK

Sisters are good at tarpitting in close combat, but not very good at winning it. The 'Hit and Run' unit you mention has to make an Initiative Check now to even use that power (50% chance). Plasma grenades give them a rocking Initiative score of 1/2 that of Genestealers. Not exactly inspiring. They have the toughness and strength of a gaunt.

Faith points are very limited. They give the Sisters a clock that ticks down faster the harder you press them. Learn to wind down their clock quickly and victory will be at hand.

Ouch, ok point taken on morale. Touche.

But...

Hive mind comes with a weakness, you can kill the hive mind critters, it has a limited range, the sources of hive mind are vulnerable...

The book has no defence
The book has no range
Faith points customize the whole army on a need basis

So...
>Auto-rally at below half? CHECK

Not really, range dependant, hive mind dependant, has drawbacks

>Always pass all morale checks? CHECK

Once again, not really, fails out of range, instinctive behavior etc... Book always works.

>Immune to instant death and force weapons? CHECK

Not really, only if in range....

>Need to move over impassable terrain? CHECK

It's still dice, I have rolled 3 3s before...

>Need to shoot 8 shots a turn, re-rolling misses and re-rolling wounds? CHECK

Uh so, its just a gun in an army that can barely shoot....

>Heavy Support Units that are at full capacity until completely eliminated through wounds? CHECK

This one I agree with, MCs ought to have a chance to have their heads blown off. Ah well.

Democratus wrote:The 'Hit and Run' unit you mention has to make an Initiative Check now to even use that power (50% chance). Plasma grenades give them a rocking Initiative score of 1/2 that of Genestealers.

No they don't need the I test, it was FAQ'd, they just fly around with a special power... (At least I think so.) ?

Still better than the 1 of a carnifex, which would have at least swung simo, see the change? It is crucial!

Democratus wrote:Faith points are very limited. They give the Sisters a clock that ticks down faster the harder you press them. Learn to wind down their clock quickly and victory will be at hand.

Sorry but calling BS there, they have plenty of faith, and when the key units die, yea.... They just get more. I have never seen a well built army run out, EVER. I suppose if you take 20 bolter sisters with no upgrades, but my opponents know what they are doing.

Augustus wrote:Ouch, ok point taken on morale. Touche.

But...

stuff about range of synapse

I've never seen a competent Tyranid commander loose Synapse range on his vital units. Perhaps if he was stumbling around or was hit by a Lash. But this is far less likely than the sisters having a model with the Book sniped by volume of wounds.

>Need to move over impassable terrain? CHECK

It's still dice, I have rolled 3 3s before...

Impassible terrain, not just difficult terrain. This is something flesh hooks really shine at.

No they don't need the I test, it was FAQ'd, they just fly around with a special power... (At least I think so.) ?

The FAQ does not preclude the Initiative Check for Hit and Run. It only states that they ignore Difficult Terrain and gives instructions for how to handle multiple units with H&R in combat. Thus they can still only use the power 50% of the time.

>Need to shoot 8 shots a turn, re-rolling misses and re-rolling wounds? CHECK

Uh so, its just a gun in an army that can barely shoot....

8 shots with near perfect accuracy and wound capacity does not qualify as "barely shooting". Adding to this the fact that this weapons system is a MC which can't be glanced or weapon destroyed makes it a fearsome platform. And it's dirt cheap to boot.

Sorry but calling BS there, they have plenty of faith, and when the key units die, yea.... They just get more. I have never seen a well built army run out, EVER. I suppose if you take 20 bolter sisters with no upgrades, but my opponents know what they are doing.

I play against Sisters regularly and there are ways to bleed them of faith points. Their points are very limited. On a good day, you can force nearly every unit to choose between serious injury or burning faith on every turn past turn 1. No SoB army can sustain that over 5+ turns. Assault just makes this worse as they will need to spend points on both Player Turns.

There are two places to beat Sisters, long range firefights or close combat. If you give them the mid-range game for too long then they will win. If you can segue from shooty to fighty in quick order then you will prevail.

Good luck, broodlord Agustus.

Democratus wrote:A Tyranid player complaining about an army that breaks the rules? That's really funny. Synapse breaks just about every morale rule in the game.

Auto-rally at below half? CHECK
Always pass all morale checks? CHECK
Immune to instant death and force weapons? CHECK
Need to move over impassable terrain? CHECK
Need to shoot 8 shots a turn, re-rolling misses and re-rolling wounds? CHECK
Heavy Support Units that are at full capacity until completely eliminated through wounds? CHECK

Sisters are good at tarpitting in close combat, but not very good at winning it. The 'Hit and Run' unit you mention has to make an Initiative Check now to even use that power (50% chance). Plasma grenades give them a rocking Initiative score of 1/2 that of Genestealers. Not exactly inspiring. They have the toughness and strength of a gaunt.

Faith points are very limited. They give the Sisters a clock that ticks down faster the harder you press them. Learn to wind down their clock quickly and victory will be at hand.

He meant that he hates rules exeptions to the core mechanics of the game and the sisters are a major example of that, Tyranids are also but to a much lesser extent.

Also the Sisters have their own version of Hit and Run outlined in their book ruled over by the latest FaQ, they do not need to have an iniative test to break combat, and if they did it is not a 50% chance (its 66%). The FaQ spevidies they have their own version of Hit and Run.

With Faith the sisters don't need to go before the genestealers, they can simply burn them out of terrain with Divine Guidance and Bolter fire. and even in CC they can Spirit themselves.

But the point was that they dont follow the rest of the normal game mechanics. And with GW's patent lack of playtesting to a suitable level results in really imbalanced rules.

Democratus wrote:I play against Sisters regularly and there are ways to bleed them of faith points. Their points are very limited. On a good day, you can force nearly every unit to choose between serious injury or burning faith on every turn past turn 1. No SoB army can sustain that over 5+ turns. Assault just makes this worse as they will need to spend points on both Player Turns.

How pray-tell do you bleed them of faith every round after one? They only need to spend faith if your hitting them with stuff that ignores their armor, they are still 3+ troops. Do you really have that many AP3 weapons in your army that you can seriously threaten all the squads?

Personally, I really like that there are LD modifiers based on the difference in close-combat resolution. Even when I played 2nd edition, I always wished they had done that like WHFB, because CC would becomes such a tar-pit. Not only did CC troops have to get across the board, dodging fire of all kinds, but once they got INTO CC (IF they made it), they were rewarded with turn after turn of tar-pit action.

CC should be more 'scary' (deadly), and now it is. I don't care if it's ultra-realistic or not. But to me, if 20 guardsmen are hit by marines decked in power armor/termi armor or multi-limbed genestealers, etc, and they see 1/4 of their squad ripped into pieces in the blink of an eye, they SHOULD have a good chance to say, "we're outta here". They're Guardsmen, not Marines, afterall.

The problem I see, though, is like the OP listed, there are some modifiers in WHFB that are applied that we don't see in 5th ed 40k. Some of those modifiers don't make a lot of since in 40k, of course (ranks? banners maybe?), but I do think there should be some benefit for outnumbering. I don't know what sort of modifier it should be, if it should be a simple "+1" in your favor if you outnumber your foe at all, or what. But I really don't think outnumbering your opponent should be enough by itself to make your lines rock-solid.

All in all, I definitely like CC in 5th ed better than any previous edition I've played. Just my opinion, though.

Mort wrote:Personally, I really like that there are LD modifiers based on the difference in close-combat resolution. ...
The problem I see, though, is like the OP listed, there are some modifiers in WHFB that are applied that we don't see in 5th ed 40k. Some of those modifiers don't make a lot of since in 40k, of course (ranks? banners maybe?), but I do think there should be some benefit for outnumbering...
Just my opinion, though.

Sure, I like it too, I just think that there ought to be some more mechanics for weight of numbers, for example, at the end of the melee:

Outnumbered (by any amount) -1
2:1 -1
3:1 -2
4:1 -3
5:1 -4
...
10:1 -9

So that way, one champion wouldn't be able to take down 10 men easily, like they can now. The banners and stuff, well, some armies actually have them, like Marines and IG, why not +1 for a banner to combat resolution? This should also count for every unit in the combat resolution, so if your side lost by 4 wounds but you have 4:1 odds its just an even roll...

Banner in 12 +1

That wouldn't be to silly would it?

(Now Im talking proposed rules though, heh, doesnt matter I guess).