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) 2013/11/15 16:32:39
Subject: Inquisitorial Retinues
|
 |
Lieutenant Colonel
|
henchmen with bolters are the bomb diggity, 5 pts for abolter? yes please, I take them 12x6 squads... maybe with a single jokaro in each squad, maybe with 2 units with ST bolters, but the core of bolter henchmen is awesome, 5 pts for a ld8 guardsmen with a bolter, I will buy that all day.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/11/15 22:10:27
Subject: Inquisitorial Retinues
|
 |
Daemonic Dreadnought
|
easysauce wrote:henchmen with bolters are the bomb diggity, 5 pts for abolter? yes please, I take them 12x6 squads... maybe with a single jokaro in each squad, maybe with 2 units with ST bolters, but the core of bolter henchmen is awesome, 5 pts for a ld8 guardsmen with a bolter, I will buy that all day.
I've been running them 3 plasma guns 2 storm bolters and 7 bolters and they work great. My only complaint about the unit is that I run out of troops under force org.
|
Chaos isn’t a pit. Chaos is a ladder. Many who try to climb it fail, and never get to try again. The fall breaks them. And some are given a chance to climb, but refuse. They cling to the realm, or love, or the gods…illusions. Only the ladder is real. The climb is all there is, but they’ll never know this. Not until it’s too late.
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/11/16 12:49:52
Subject: Inquisitorial Retinues
|
 |
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?
|
So with codex:inq now out, what I've seen so far may well mean I need to change the plan here. It seems that, one way or another, I'm going to need to run them as GK with Coteaz to get the 6 warbands, as it would appear that codex:inq only works as a pseudo-allied detachment, as it's 0-2 HQ and 0-3 Elites. If there's something I'm missing there then can someone please correct it, but from the discussion in N&R it seems that's how it works. I've seen mentioned that when taken as primary the Warbands become scoring, and it can ally with itself, but I'm not quite sure how that works. So, a few questions:
1) Can I take C:I primary allied with C:I allies and get 6 scoring units/max 4 inquisitors and still take normal allies?
2) If I am running just one allied detachment as per the new rules (2 inqs, 3 warbands) then what units, from the ones from my list on the last page, would you pick?
3) Are priests now worth taking in a DCA/Crusader squad for the re-rolls on attacks or saves?
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/11/16 13:43:33
Subject: Inquisitorial Retinues
|
 |
Veteran Inquisitorial Tyranid Xenokiller
|
1-Yes
2-Only like units #3
3-yes
|
Inquisitor Jex wrote:Yeah, telling people how this and that is 'garbage' and they should just throw their minis into the trash as they're not as efficient as XYZ.
Peregrine wrote:So the solution is to lie and pretend that certain options are effective so people will feel better? |
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/11/16 14:34:25
Subject: Inquisitorial Retinues
|
 |
Is 'Eavy Metal Calling?
|
Thanks. Good to know this army can still work without Coteaz being needed. I know he's great but I'm not a fan, he just doesn't fit the fluff of my inquisitors and I'd rather not counts-as.
|
|
|
 |
 |
![[Post New]](/s/i/i.gif) 2013/11/16 14:36:03
Subject: Inquisitorial Retinues
|
 |
Longtime Dakkanaut
|
Are you guys *sure* you can take the Inquisition as the primary and also have an inquisition detachment at the same time? I've read in a couple of places that wasn't allowed, comments from people I mean, not from the codex
|
|
 |
 |
|