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.

Inspired by Turtleflop's thread on the Tyrant Legion, I decided to come outof my shell and straight up ask:

How does the Badab war's Siege list look in todays meta? It allows me to take a huge amount of heavy armor, and lets me play to a theme I always loved.

Any advice?

I've given the list an extensive look-over in the past, because it's a wonderfully badass concept, and allows you to model your army off of some pretty obscure and neat chapters. If you love the idea of a heavy-mech siege army, go for it.

But as far as competitiveness goes, I'm going to have to say it'll be mid-tier at best, due to the fact that vehicles aren't terribly well situated in the present meta, and...

You have a token in the enemy deployment zone that you MUST capture, or no matter what, you lose. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

I would assume that it would be ok to use as part of a "normal" game though if you wanted provided you avoid the superheavies and stuff.

But then I may be wrong!

Try orks if you want a good siege list they destroy everything; just stay away from Imperial Guard

 TurtleFlop wrote:
You have a token in the enemy deployment zone that you MUST capture, or no matter what, you lose. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

This is probably the biggest problem. If you ignore the special objective it's C:SM with a few unit swaps, and probably not really very different in power level (for example, you get squadrons of tanks, but marine tanks aren't really worth taking in such large numbers anyway). However, the special objective makes the whole thing a huge gamble, and I don't think you really gain enough over C:SM to justify the additional risk.

Well, maybe I would have to build a list around takeing the siege objective.

I could have a squadron of vindicators pushing forwards with a few land raiders, have a couple mortis dreadnoughts in a corner with an Achilles, and to top it off I could take a castus assault ram in F/A


It's not impossible to take the objective, so I would have to play offensively to get it. also, I think not getting the objective means it is a draw at times too (if your winning)

No-one else is willing to help... please direct me to where I can get the most help for this?

You might try the Bolter and Chainsword forums.

IA lists aren't that popular, and this one was competing with the Tyrant's Legion list that came out at the same time. And now it's competing with the new Chaos Space Marine codex and the Horus Heresy Forge World book/codex.

 kronk wrote:
You might try the Bolter and Chainsword forums.

IA lists aren't that popular, and this one was competing with the Tyrant's Legion list that came out at the same time. And now it's competing with the new Chaos Space Marine codex and the Horus Heresy Forge World book/codex.

I was thinking of that too... alright, thanks!

I'm working on a Sons of Horus army for he HH book, but also working in units and options so that I can use it for Chaos Space Marines and/or a 30k HH army.

It offers a lot of the Seige Army options and more, to be honest. Scoring units with boarding shields, heavy tanks, and so on. I can't wait to use them.

Hmmmm... what are the similarities?