| Author |
Message |
 |
|
|
 |
|
Advert
|
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. |
|
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/11 16:52:26
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Hey Folks,
So I am staring at my 2 BaC Contemptors for my IW army and scratching my head on the loadouts.
I am building them to support my infantry heavy (actually 100% ground pounding) force. Basically they'll provide decent fire support and assist with counter-assaults when my guys start to get in over their heads.
I have been hearing differing opinions on load-outs. Some have told me to build a Mortis pattern with dual Kheres and a standard Contemptor with 2x CCW, but those seem a bit to speicalized and lack-luster, esp the 2x CCW dreadnought who only packs a whopping 4 attacks on the charge anyways.
I am feeling like building both out with a Kherese and DCCW with Havoc launchers on both would be pretty solid. Is there other configs that I may be missing which are better?
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/11 17:00:02
Subject: Re:Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Fiery Bright Wizard
|
kheres/fist is super solid, so don't worry on that front. As for a better build, it's 2 part: 1) not out of the calth box really, MMs are pretty lackluster in 30k, though it could be fun for easy popping a praetor, and 2) it depends on what you want the dread to do. for anti-tank a kheres may not be the worst, but it certainly isn't the best. for my TS contemptor I'm thinking of making one with 2 conversion beamers (or 1 beamer/fist) for the laughs
|
I'll never be able to repay CA for making GW realize that The Old World was a cash cow, left to die in a field. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/11 17:02:09
Subject: Re:Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Loyal Necron Lychguard
|
You could do a Contemptor with Melta/Kheres and the other with Kheres DCCW
Or you could do the Kheres/DCCW w/ Havoc Launcher and inbuilt Melta Gun (A semi-expensive build but I think it effective)
My 2 cents
|
<Dynasty> ~10500pts
War Coven of the Coruscating Gaze ~3000pts
Thrice-Damned Plague Corps ~3250pts
Admech (TBN) ~3500pts +30k Bots and Ulator
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/11 17:17:20
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Ok glad I am on a semi-right track since it's really one of the cooler looking builds too. I am going for style over pure optimization, just didn't want to get stuck with something that isn't at least somewhat killy.
I am kind of ignoring the inbuilt guns, they just all seem so ho-hum for the points. The only exception would be the Heavy Flamer, and then I would only take that if I did 2x DCCW (in which case I would take 2x HF and model him doing an awesome 2 hand blasting Human Torch style pose).
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/11 17:37:05
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Trigger-Happy Baal Predator Pilot
|
I wouldn't ignore the grav gun if I were you, basically automatically -1 HP at whatever vehicle you shoot at, and any blast weapon will force your opponent's infantry to not cluster.
But yeah, other than that, I'd def go mortis with twin kheres to get skyfire + the point cost reduction.
Then use the leftover bits to make a twin close combat dread with a graviton or two, that'd be what I'd do.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/11 17:51:23
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Ah Graviton, that is one I have overlooked. I may consider squeezing some points to upgrade my CCWs with them.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 06:45:08
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Huge Hierodule
|
More Dakka wrote:Ah Graviton, that is one I have overlooked. I may consider squeezing some points to upgrade my CCWs with them.
IIRC, Duel CCW/Graviton is ~200pts = but worth it, the KAssC Mortis is required because of the need for AA, and cheaper than stander contemp. I'm spamming 4;
E-Contemptor Mortis Dreadnought+KPAC = 180
E-Contemptor Mortis Dreadnought+ TLLC = 185
E- Contemptor Dreadnought Talon: 1 Dread +2 x MM(free), 1 Dread+ CCW(free)+
Grav x 2= 380
|
was censored by the ministry of truth |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 08:53:32
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Cog in the Machine
|
More Dakka wrote:
...
esp the 2x CCW dreadnought who only packs a whopping 4 attacks on the charge anyways.
Just want to add, I'm pretty sure you get 6 attacks on the charge.
3 attacks base
1 attack per CCW on a walker, so +2 attacks
+1 for the charge
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 13:18:49
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Fiery Bright Wizard
|
taemu_touhi wrote: More Dakka wrote:
...
esp the 2x CCW dreadnought who only packs a whopping 4 attacks on the charge anyways.
Just want to add, I'm pretty sure you get 6 attacks on the charge.
3 attacks base
1 attack per CCW on a walker, so +2 attacks
+1 for the charge
that's not how it works, sadly :( 2 DCCWs only give you +2 attack, so it would be 3 attacks base, +1 for having 2 CCWs, +1 on the charge, 5 at most. So, you're both wrong, so don't feel bad
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 13:34:23
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Been Around the Block
|
Personally, I run Kheres/CCW with Grav. Provides good anti MEQ but also has strong anti vehicle capabilities with rending and haywire.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 15:58:45
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain
|
Brennonjw wrote: taemu_touhi wrote: More Dakka wrote:
...
esp the 2x CCW dreadnought who only packs a whopping 4 attacks on the charge anyways.
Just want to add, I'm pretty sure you get 6 attacks on the charge.
3 attacks base
1 attack per CCW on a walker, so +2 attacks
+1 for the charge
that's not how it works, sadly :( 2 DCCWs only give you +2 attack, so it would be 3 attacks base, +1 for having 2 CCWs, +1 on the charge, 5 at most. So, you're both wrong, so don't feel bad 
It's a stealth update from 5/6th to 7th, so it no longer works that way, you get +1 for more than 1 ccw now, not per ccw as it used to be.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 16:32:31
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Fiery Bright Wizard
|
Formosa wrote: Brennonjw wrote: taemu_touhi wrote: More Dakka wrote:
...
esp the 2x CCW dreadnought who only packs a whopping 4 attacks on the charge anyways.
Just want to add, I'm pretty sure you get 6 attacks on the charge.
3 attacks base
1 attack per CCW on a walker, so +2 attacks
+1 for the charge
that's not how it works, sadly :( 2 DCCWs only give you +2 attack, so it would be 3 attacks base, +1 for having 2 CCWs, +1 on the charge, 5 at most. So, you're both wrong, so don't feel bad 
It's a stealth update from 5/6th to 7th, so it no longer works that way, you get +1 for more than 1 ccw now, not per ccw as it used to be.
what that to me or to him? I assume him, but didn't this way of extra attacks work the same in 6th as well: you only get +1 extra attack no matter how many extra CCWs you have?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 17:16:45
Subject: Re:Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body
|
40K Rulebook wrote:If a Walker is armed with 2 or more melee weapons, it gains +1 bonus attack for each additional weapon after the first.
|
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 17:18:12
Subject: Re:Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Fiery Bright Wizard
|
Azreal13 wrote:40K Rulebook wrote:If a Walker is armed with 2 or more melee weapons, it gains +1 bonus attack for each additional weapon after the first.
well, if that's actually the rule, then it doesn't change regular dreadnoughts (or contemptors/leviathans) as all as they can only have 2 CCWs max
|
I'll never be able to repay CA for making GW realize that The Old World was a cash cow, left to die in a field. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 17:19:37
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body
|
But isn't there a separate "+1 for having 2 CCW" bonus too?
That's the rule, BTW, lifted it verbatim as I've got the digi rulebook in the tablet I'm typing this on.
|
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 17:25:19
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Fiery Bright Wizard
|
Azreal13 wrote:But isn't there a separate "+1 for having 2 CCW" bonus too?
That's the rule, BTW, lifted it verbatim as I've got the digi rulebook in the tablet I'm typing this on.
There is, but I think this rule overrides that one when it comes to walkers.
|
I'll never be able to repay CA for making GW realize that The Old World was a cash cow, left to die in a field. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 17:30:51
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
The Daemon Possessing Fulgrim's Body
|
Have a look at the BRB when you have the chance. It doesn't look like it. I suspect it is meant to, but there's nothing in the Walker section to say ignore the usual bonus for 2xCCW, merely a bonus attack for each one after the first, and neither is there an exclusion in the Assault Phase section.
|
We find comfort among those who agree with us - growth among those who don't. - Frank Howard Clark
The wise man doubts often, and changes his mind; the fool is obstinate, and doubts not; he knows all things but his own ignorance.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!” Professor Brian Cox
Ask me about
Barnstaple Slayers Club |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 17:34:13
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Fiery Bright Wizard
|
Azreal13 wrote:Have a look at the BRB when you have the chance. It doesn't look like it. I suspect it is meant to, but there's nothing in the Walker section to say ignore the usual bonus for 2xCCW, merely a bonus attack for each one after the first, and neither is there an exclusion in the Assault Phase section.
I'd like to think that (as it would be a huge buff to walkers), though I doubt it as I think it would be a bit more common knowledge with how much people pick through the rules :(
|
I'll never be able to repay CA for making GW realize that The Old World was a cash cow, left to die in a field. |
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 20:47:41
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
As far as I have been reading it you get 2 base, +1 if you take 2x DCCW (instead of the stock 1) and +1 when charging, for max 4.
I do like the idea of dual grav on 2x DCCW, but it's not quite as stylish or thematic for Iron Warriors as one with dual HF. Imagine a contemptor tearing down a wall and then blasting everyone behind it with fire... oh yeah
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 21:00:42
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Crafty Bray Shaman
NOVA
|
More Dakka wrote:As far as I have been reading it you get 2 base, +1 if you take 2x DCCW (instead of the stock 1) and +1 when charging, for max 4.
I do like the idea of dual grav on 2x DCCW, but it's not quite as stylish or thematic for Iron Warriors as one with dual HF. Imagine a contemptor tearing down a wall and then blasting everyone behind it with fire... oh yeah
FW Errata gave them 3 base. There's your problem
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/12 21:04:39
Subject: Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Zah! Ok that makes 2x DCCW Contemptors more appealing for sure.
I'm going to stick to my Kheres AC + DCCW for now, but I will round out the talon with a dual DCCW one that has flamer hands.
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2016/04/16 20:05:26
Subject: Re:Contemptor Conundrum
|
 |
Member of a Lodge? I Can't Say
|
I use a contemptor with Kheres, DCCW with heavy flamer, and a havoc launcher. Costs 215 points but it works pretty well as a fire support/counter charge doohickey.
|
“Because we couldn’t be trusted. The Emperor needed a weapon that would never obey its own desires before those of the Imperium. He needed a weapon that would never bite the hand that feeds. The World Eaters were not that weapon. We’ve all drawn blades purely for the sake of shedding blood, and we’ve all felt the exultation of winning a war that never even needed to happen. We are not the tame, reliable pets that the Emperor wanted. The Wolves obey, when we would not. The Wolves can be trusted, when we never could. They have a discipline we lack, because their passions are not aflame with the Butcher’s Nails buzzing in the back of their skulls.
The Wolves will always come to heel when called. In that regard, it is a mystery why they name themselves wolves. They are tame, collared by the Emperor, obeying his every whim. But a wolf doesn’t behave that way. Only a dog does.
That is why we are the Eaters of Worlds, and the War Hounds no longer."
– Eighth Captain, Khârn |
|
|
 |
 |
|
|