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.

Valhalla130 wrote:do you base your heavy weapons, or leave them free like they originally were made?

Base them.

Im looking to expand my army to 2000 points, and I was wondering; is it actually worth putting veterans in a vendetta? Or should I give the two lots of passengers chimeras?

Im currently running;
Ccs, chimera
vets, chimera x2
Harker vets
vendetta vets x2
Vendetta x2
Demolisher x2

To give you an idea of my armour saturation. Is it worth using the vendettas as lone gunships than veteran-vomiting torpedoes?

Valhalla130 wrote:do you base your heavy weapons, or leave them free like they originally were made?

I've got about 8k in old cadians. I MIGHT get around to rebasing mine when all of them are painted. The only real advantage to do it is that people get less confused around templates..."Yes, I know there's two bases there, but the new rules states they are to be treated as one dude with 2 wounds." I actually let people take 2 hits against the gun due to the fact that I have two models and tbh...I don't mind. The new rules for teams are dumb, but if I get to keep them as two bases it only seems fair to let them take advantage of it.

The reason not to do it are legion. The new bases are huge and the new shooting rules aren't kind to a model that sticks out a full inch further then all of his squad mates. It's easier to keep up with wounds...you just remove the loader from the table. They don't fit in my cases. They don't fit in ANYONE'S terrain. Moving them feels like I'm serving dinner at Denny's. If they really wanted to change them, they should have made them man-portable like the old orlock heavies from necromunda...instead they did what they did and will spend the next few editions trying to undo it. It's just needlessly copmlicates something that was pretty simple before.

I don't understand. Why doesn't the loader just count as a wound?

The rules for weapon's teams changed...like the loader can no longer fire his lasgun like he used to could. IT's a team. One unit within a unit working as a single model. If you have a multibase team, you just remove the loader to represent you've lost a wound. Quick and easy. If they are on a single base you're now in the same boat as all your buddies who carry around extra dice and funky counters for their greater demons. You've got to use rubber bands, dice, markers, or wtf ever to represent those wounds in such a way that people can track it. It's makes a board already loaded with 100 friendly modles that much more crouded.

The confusion in using two bases for a team comes in when you do something like place a flamer template. It's covering the guy on the gun and the loader who are both on seperate bases. Now your opponent wants to roll 2 wounds. I'm pretty sure in the new rules, using the new bases, he'd only actually get one wound because it's actually supposed to be a single model with 2 wounds. It's sorta like squig stands or nurglings. In this situation the bases are to your advantage. I don't want to rebase my models so I allow my opponents to take both wounds. I think it's a fair trade off, but in no way official.

GW is saying use the bases they came with...but not really thinking it through. If they were, they'd give us rules on how to treat our multi-base heavy weapons squads since I know alot of guys who multibased heavy weapon squads even after the new cadians came out.

There are other things as well. For example, a PCS that gets killed down to one guy can rally normally, rather than at insane heroism, because there were only 4 models in the squad once two become a single heavy weapons team. Also, they suffer instant death from S6+ weapons.

It really isn't just two dudes any more.

That's a really good point, but it's easy to miss in the rules because they often says 2 men can form a team. In reality what's happening is 1 man is being canablized to give this new gun 2 wounds. You have to think of the squads at actually 9 guys when you have a heavy weapon.

A Heavy Weapons team is two models, regardless of the number of bases they're on. Hitting them with a flamer or any other kind of weapon would do damage to the team, and if you only lose one wound, you remove the loader to show that. They should always be together anyway, so I don't understand the confusion here. Maybe I just haven't read the new rules on that enough. I'll get back to you.

Yeah, you've got to read that again. Go look at page 38 of your codex.

Two W1 models becomes a single W2 model.

If you're going to keep your gunner and loader as separate models, then it would be more accurate to leave the loader off the table and just say that the gunner has two wounds.

My plan was to have one base that the loader sat on top of. That would represent the wound accurately enough, I would think. As long as I understood the rules (still thinking from a 3rd ed mindset here) well enough, there shouldn't be that much confusion, I would hope. But see... stuff like this is why I've put the guard on the backburner.

If you're going to keep your gunner and loader as separate models, then it would be more accurate to leave the loader off the table and just say that the gunner has two wounds.

I've considered doing this...

Problem with this is then they have a much smaller footprint which your opponent might be upset about.

That was the reason I opted not to do it. It felt to much like taking and giving nothing in return. You put another model on the board...and while the base may not be as large new models at least it's a bigger foot print to work with. I started collecting in 1994. I can remember at some point gw was selling missile launcher with cav bases. Sometimes they sold the weapons with no bases. Until recently, they never really got it all together in that regard.

Until I rebase, I think I'll make a point of keeping my loaders in base to their guns. You put a cav base and a normal base next to each other and it may not be as big as the current bases, but you're still taking up alot of space.

or just buy big bases and lay them on like I do, or get something else that's roughly 60mm and circular. You don't have to glue anything down.

If i do put mine on big bases I'll probably do that. Not like I move them a great deal during a game

Maybe a big base with with a smaller base cutout to set the loader's base into? Then you could claim the team as one "model" but still remove the loader to represent losing a wound.

And stick magnets in em so they don't fall off when you move the buggers.

Good idea. Now... back to Ig Tactics!

Somebody tell me how to incorporate giant groups of infantry with Leman Russ' and Demolishers.

/Leman Russ's?
//Leman Russes?

There's nothing particular to it. Just field them both.

At the moment, I'm seeing russes as a multimelta/lascannon delivery system (because my meltagun/lascannon spam in the infantry just doesn't quite cut it), and so I'm choosing a turret that doesn't cause a conflict now that they got rid of lumbering behemoth.

For myself, I'm going with the punisher, but I'd begrudgingly accept exterminators for price reasons.

 Ailaros wrote:
You know, my way of scaling things has been changing over time. I really don't consider it an anti-AV12 weapon anymore unless it's S8 Ap1, S9 Ap2, or S10.

After half a rules edition of trying to peel paint with autocannons and missile launchers, I just want to shoot AV12 and have it just friggin die already.

its true, Dark Lances are terrible at killing AV12

 Exergy wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
You know, my way of scaling things has been changing over time. I really don't consider it an anti-AV12 weapon anymore unless it's S8 Ap1, S9 Ap2, or S10.

After half a rules edition of trying to peel paint with autocannons and missile launchers, I just want to shoot AV12 and have it just friggin die already.

its true, Dark Lances are terrible at killing AV12

IG doesn't get Dark lances. We get autocannons, meltaguns, plasma, lascannons, and missile launchers as our only serious infantry carried antitank weapons.

Meltas kill all armor up close.

Plasma kills light armor at fairly close.

Autocannons kill light armor at range.

Lascannons kill heavier armor at range.

Missiles fail at everything.

I guarantee you that if IG had access to lances, we would spam the hell out of them, but we don't. When looking at Anti tank from a purely IG perspective, Ailaros pretty much has it covered. It better be so strong that it's always penning, or have an AP bonus so that when it does pen, it can actually do damage. Hence why a lot of people are getting frustrated with autocannons (like myself) They don't have a high enough strength to really cut through armor most of the time, and by the time you've got enough glances to kill something, said unit has either done its job or eaten half your army's shots on the first turn, both of which are bad.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Missiles fail at everything.

...

 TheCaptain wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Missiles fail at everything.

...

You knew full well what you were getting into when you bought those. You only brought it on yourself

Well, who knows? Maybe in the next codex they'll get access to flakk missiles for +5 points per launcher.

... nope, would still rather take lascannons...

 Ailaros wrote:
Well, who knows? Maybe in the next codex they'll get access to flakk missiles for +5 points per launcher.

... nope, would still rather take lascannons...

I don't know, I might take a HWS of them...

Maybe...

 Happygrunt wrote:

 Ailaros wrote:
Well, who knows? Maybe in the next codex they'll get access to flakk missiles for +5 points per launcher.

... nope, would still rather take lascannons...

I don't know, I might take a HWS of them...

Maybe...

If they stayed at 15pts and gained flak missiles, I think they would have a good middle ground, as they would be the "swiss army knife" option of the heavy weapons. Mortars give you infantry carried barrage weapons, heavy bolters give you (terrible) anti horde, autocannons are for hitting harder infantry and light vehicles, Lascannons would be for killing heavier vehicles/infantry/creatures, and a missile launcher would be a well rounded, utility weapon. It can spit out templates, provide a reasonable threat to armor, and would even allow a modest AA ability.

at 15pts, it wouldn't be a must take, but if you were thinking "well, I have no idea what I'll run into today." It would actually make it a halfway tempting choice. I would go from taking white out to that entry in the codex to actually considering it at least

Breaks my heart that it's the best heavy weapon Elysian Guard gets.

FML

It hurts that I think the missile launchers and grenades launchers are some of the best sculpts the Valhallans have.

Why are those guy's carrying coffee tins? They must be headed to a daybreak mission and didn't want to get groggy during the attack.

Java is the most important thing to remember when heading to a nightmare warzone on the other side of the galaxy.