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.

 Red Marine wrote:
All these formations dont fix SMs main problem. MEQ & Rhino chasis tanks are way to easy to destroy. Every post about any tactic, formation or unit is always, "But how many MEQ can it kill?". The demi or full company farmation are built on 50-100 MEQ. Theres no forum on any site lacking in "How to kill MEQ" posts.

In most of the new formations the marines didnt get harder to kill. Vindis, whirlwinds, etc are no harder to pop either. Plus the loss of a single vehicle means the survivors lost their USRs. If a single necron warrior died & the decurion stopped working would you call that awesome? How about 1 windrider dies & they lose jink? Does that sound fair?

Space Marine players wanted better marines, not more. Theres multiple threads about "Should marines be more elite?", & the answer is always YES. Instead we've got IG marines. This way eldar & necron players feel like bad asses with cut & paste net lists, while SM remove piles of cheap MEQ. With these new formations we'll feel like we've still got a chance after removing a tank squadron & 20 marines.

Someone gets it!!

Honestly I wouldn't even consider it if the entire detachment didn't have objective secured. However he said that they retain that rule which makes them very, very powerful. Who cares about scatter bikes when they have to kill 20+ separate OS units to be able to score a point and keep it.

Full company + stern guard + Pedro. Amazing.

Honestly considering just running all of the marines with basic bolters/stern guard bolters

Ally in some mechanicus for grav or haywire....good times.

The recent books have been playing to the fluff much better than before. As to people's comments if you read the fluff of marines against necrons and eldar, they die. They die a lot.

Becoming more elite within the current game mechanics would not solve their problems. Hey would still die at the same rate. Instead we are now able to play a much more tactical game with our marines, maneuvering, maximizing our special rules in list building. Most of e options remained. Ravenguard got a boost IMO for the lists they want to run. Couldn't assault after scouting anyway it just put them closer to eat more fire power, especially if going second. I will take improved survival anyday.

@Mort

You & every other xenos player always miss the point about the idea of more elite marines. Just making marines better if you take giant buckets of them doesn't help. I dont want to play Imperial Guard in power armor with ork trukks. I want a smaller meaner army. Like the eldar have. Theres no fluff where 50 necrons cleanse a whole world. In 25 years of 40k ive never heard of 2 tyranids sweeping a fortification clean of the enemy. Not once. There is no other army who's table top performance is so diametrically different than their fluff.

Im tired of pulling out a huge SM army, then packing away a dozen models with a vehicle a turn. That's what every other army is supposed to do. The death of a single marine is supposed to be significant.There are a lot of SM players, but the purpose of my army shouldn't be tohave zero chance of winning so you feel good about your necrons & eldar.

 Red Marine wrote:
@Mort

You & every other xenos player always miss the point about the idea of more elite marines. Just making marines better if you take giant buckets of them doesn't help. I dont want to play Imperial Guard in power armor with ork trukks. I want a smaller meaner army. Like the eldar have. Theres no fluff where 50 necrons cleanse a whole world. In 25 years of 40k ive never heard of 2 tyranids sweeping a fortification clean of the enemy. Not once. There is no other army who's table top performance is so diametrically different than their fluff.

Im tired of pulling out a huge SM army, then packing away a dozen models with a vehicle a turn. That's what every other army is supposed to do. The death of a single marine is supposed to be significant.There are a lot of SM players, but the purpose of my army shouldn't be tohave zero chance of winning so you feel good about your necrons & eldar.

Damn good sense made there sir. Have an exalt.

 Desubot wrote:

WindsOfFury wrote:

 Talys wrote:
Hmmm. Just noticed that Vulkan has FNP instead of Iron Resolve! That's a cool buff.

That is one thing that concerns me about these leaks.
Lysander is also written as FnP, yet picture “leaks” from the digital preview says Lysander have Iron Resolve.
So either they changed the Iron Resolve trait from the old thing to be FnP or parts of these rumors are wrong.

To be fair Iron Resolve sounds very FNP eeeeeee

Iron Resolve is the FNP trait. Both Pedro and Lysander have it, and they both have FNP listed as their trait.

 Red Marine wrote:
@Mort

You & every other xenos player always miss the point about the idea of more elite marines. Just making marines better if you take giant buckets of them doesn't help. I dont want to play Imperial Guard in power armor with ork trukks. I want a smaller meaner army. Like the eldar have. Theres no fluff where 50 necrons cleanse a whole world. In 25 years of 40k ive never heard of 2 tyranids sweeping a fortification clean of the enemy. Not once. There is no other army who's table top performance is so diametrically different than their fluff.

Im tired of pulling out a huge SM army, then packing away a dozen models with a vehicle a turn. That's what every other army is supposed to do. The death of a single marine is supposed to be significant.There are a lot of SM players, but the purpose of my army shouldn't be tohave zero chance of winning so you feel good about your necrons & eldar.

A thousand times this.

This new book IS stronger, that much is irrefutable. But the units that people wanted to be stronger remained unchanged, and instead they're basically only better because "lol formations" bonuses and a broken gun.
At least they took a minor first shot at trying to fix terminators, even if it was the least effort intensive path possible (drop the points some!) rather than going for a more creative fix.

Well damn. My Blood Angels are just going to be red Ultramarines. At least all the razors get to come back out and play.

Also in case no one knew this - confirmed Whites Scars no longer have hit and run, as well as no bike formation in the book.... again....

 Red Marine wrote:
@Mort

You & every other xenos player always miss the point about the idea of more elite marines. Just making marines better if you take giant buckets of them doesn't help. I dont want to play Imperial Guard in power armor with ork trukks. I want a smaller meaner army. Like the eldar have. Theres no fluff where 50 necrons cleanse a whole world. In 25 years of 40k ive never heard of 2 tyranids sweeping a fortification clean of the enemy. Not once. There is no other army who's table top performance is so diametrically different than their fluff.

Im tired of pulling out a huge SM army, then packing away a dozen models with a vehicle a turn. That's what every other army is supposed to do. The death of a single marine is supposed to be significant.There are a lot of SM players, but the purpose of my army shouldn't be tohave zero chance of winning so you feel good about your necrons & eldar.

I don't really get this logic. The fluff is not the crunch. It's been that way for years now.

"Imperial Guard in power armor"? Please. Don't resort to hyperbole because a single squad of marines isn't able to solo an entire army like in the books. That's just not the way the game works, and if you're expecting it to, then you apparently haven't been paying attention to the game for a long time.

Marines are what the game is based around. They are the midpoint around which elite and horde armies/units balance themselves. The marine will never have the statline of a Hive Tyrant while being as numerous as Orks, but that's ok because that's what they're built to do. If that doesn't appeal to you... I dunno? You can look up the rules for Movie Marines on 1d4chan, where a Marine is T6 W2 3+/4++ for 100 points a pop and play with that. But that's not what 40k is, and will never be.

fidel wrote:
Also in case no one knew this - confirmed Whites Scars no longer have hit and run, as well as no bike formation in the book.... again....

I would put money on the fact that the Bike Formation is either going to be in a White Dwarf and usable by DA(for Ravenwing) as well as C:SM, or in the actual DA Codex, and be usable by both DA and C:SM. Never underestimate the ability of GW to pinch every penny they can out of you.

I'm starting to really dislike formations. They're just kind of boring.

 insaniak wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
So I guess play-to-win is in full swing now, huh?

Isn't that the point of a competitive game?

That rather depends on whether you view lists as gaming or metagaming - for me it is the latter. I play to win once we put models down on the tabletop, using these new horrors seems rather cheap to me, like an international sports team clawing in better players from other countries by changing the rules such that someone who's third cousin's aunt twice removed was of that country qualifies them for citizenship. We all know why GW is putting out these "buy 1, get 10 FREE!" formations and detachments, it's so that people will buy a lot more models than they planned to because they don't need to pay any points to use them on the table; cynically embracing their greed to give yourself a 25%+ points advantage isn't being "competitive", it's just unsportsmanlike.

Requizen wrote:

 Red Marine wrote:
@Mort

You & every other xenos player always miss the point about the idea of more elite marines. Just making marines better if you take giant buckets of them doesn't help. I dont want to play Imperial Guard in power armor with ork trukks. I want a smaller meaner army. Like the eldar have. Theres no fluff where 50 necrons cleanse a whole world. In 25 years of 40k ive never heard of 2 tyranids sweeping a fortification clean of the enemy. Not once. There is no other army who's table top performance is so diametrically different than their fluff.

Im tired of pulling out a huge SM army, then packing away a dozen models with a vehicle a turn. That's what every other army is supposed to do. The death of a single marine is supposed to be significant.There are a lot of SM players, but the purpose of my army shouldn't be tohave zero chance of winning so you feel good about your necrons & eldar.

I don't really get this logic. The fluff is not the crunch. It's been that way for years now.

"Imperial Guard in power armor"? Please. Don't resort to hyperbole because a single squad of marines isn't able to solo an entire army like in the books. That's just not the way the game works, and if you're expecting it to, then you apparently haven't been paying attention to the game for a long time.

Marines are what the game is based around. They are the midpoint around which elite and horde armies/units balance themselves. The marine will never have the statline of a Hive Tyrant while being as numerous as Orks, but that's ok because that's what they're built to do. If that doesn't appeal to you... I dunno? You can look up the rules for Movie Marines on 1d4chan, where a Marine is T6 W2 3+/4++ for 100 points a pop and play with that. But that's not what 40k is, and will never be.

Exalted. A thousand times this.

There are plenty of stories in the fluff where Space Marines lose as well. In Farsight Enclaves an entire Strike Force is wiped out when, having heard that his enemies preferred power armor, Farsight had his troops bring nothing but plasma weapons.

It reminds me of the people complaining that "Everything got better!" in the new Eldar codex. Everything in this codex got better too! You now have a reason to take METAL BOXES over drop pods! It's even tied to the lore, with formations mimicking the tactics from the Codex Astartes and Chapter Tactics playing into how each chapter prefers to fight.

Marines are the baseline by which other armies are measured. Even looking at Xenos and Chaos armies, you can see what Space Marine units influenced them.

Has anyone been looking at the whole picture? Space Marines have been made significantly more powerful in this new book. Maybe not to the level of Eldar, and to a lesser extent Necrons and Mechanicus, but that ties into having to balance those armies against everyone else. Anyone who was expecting that level of power was just wishlisting and destined for disappointment.

I for one look forward to playing against new new Space Marine codex. I'll just have to make sure that there's enough terrain on the board, including at least one piece of impassible terrain, and that setup is done before deployment.

I'll have you parking lot make so many dangerous terrain checks, you'll concede out of sheer frustration! (And being immobilized )


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Las wrote:
I'm starting to really dislike formations. They're just kind of boring.

I find them an excellent means of adapting the lore into the tabletop. 7th edition is formation edition. Formations are the future, so get used to them.

So the old Space Marine codex was so very underpowered that GW needed to hand them 550 free points a match to make them on par with the rest of 40k?

 Yodhrin wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
So I guess play-to-win is in full swing now, huh?

Isn't that the point of a competitive game?

That rather depends on whether you view lists as gaming or metagaming - for me it is the latter. I play to win once we put models down on the tabletop, using these new horrors seems rather cheap to me, like an international sports team clawing in better players from other countries by changing the rules such that someone who's third cousin's aunt twice removed was of that country qualifies them for citizenship. We all know why GW is putting out these "buy 1, get 10 FREE!" formations and detachments, it's so that people will buy a lot more models than they planned to because they don't need to pay any points to use them on the table; cynically embracing their greed to give yourself a 25%+ points advantage isn't being "competitive", it's just unsportsmanlike.

How is this functionally different to taking advantage of whichever new toy has the best return on points other than that it's easier for older collectors to put it together and more restrictive than something being good on its own?

 Las wrote:
I'm starting to really dislike formations. They're just kind of boring.

I haven't liked them since they first showed up. Mainly because GW is terribad at making them. We get junk like "3 units of BA terminators that can RUN and SHOOT the turn they enter play!!!" right beside a bunch that are a hodgepodge of tacticals alongside other foot marines that get random junk like stubborn, and finally you flip to one of the ridiculous pages like "these already good shooting units get tank hunter for free, have preferred enemy against several popular armies, and they only drawback is that they are a little better in melee against you, which should never come up" or the exceptionally lazy "you must take these things, but have ALL THE FREE POINTS."

Either fortunately or unfortunately, the ITC doesn't allow redundant detachments, so no doubling down on full companies there for 20 free razorbacks. 10 is still pretty stout though. It's a shame most of the auxiliaries kinda suck. The librarius could be interesting.

I think what we'll probably see is an iron hands gladius full company with razors, with some form of centstar or dual centstars mixed in from another detachment/faction to get stuff done.

 spiralingcadaver wrote:

 Yodhrin wrote:

 insaniak wrote:

 Accolade wrote:
So I guess play-to-win is in full swing now, huh?

Isn't that the point of a competitive game?

That rather depends on whether you view lists as gaming or metagaming - for me it is the latter. I play to win once we put models down on the tabletop, using these new horrors seems rather cheap to me, like an international sports team clawing in better players from other countries by changing the rules such that someone who's third cousin's aunt twice removed was of that country qualifies them for citizenship. We all know why GW is putting out these "buy 1, get 10 FREE!" formations and detachments, it's so that people will buy a lot more models than they planned to because they don't need to pay any points to use them on the table; cynically embracing their greed to give yourself a 25%+ points advantage isn't being "competitive", it's just unsportsmanlike.

How is this functionally different to taking advantage of whichever new toy has the best return on points other than that it's easier for older collectors to put it together and more restrictive than something being good on its own?

I love how people talk about it as if the formation is "free". Free implies that all points are created equal. They are not. It is free points wise, however in return you are giving up efficiency in other areas. You are devoting over half your points to units that dont really....do much other than exist. While that is helpful for winning the mission it doesnt kill your opponents as well as cripples you in KP missions. It makes it very restrictive for bring in other forces as well as removes options like FA drop pods as a option.

They could not just reduce the prices of everything to bring it in line with these units would comparitively be worth, nor can they really change Iconic unit costs since they are in a variety of books. People would just min/max spam them. So instead we get a semblence of points balance by giving "free" options in return for making you buy specific units.

So yes it is points free but you are giving up lots of flexibility and efficiency to do it.

Here is the thing, even from the rumors I can tell that it is not the optimal build. There are other builds and a large variety of options available in this book that are better than the "free" transports.

Have we seen anything about dev cents? Changes in points or shift from twin linked to two weapons? Look forward to hearing about them since I would like to run my las cents again, but they are just not worth the points with one twin linked shot..

niv-mizzet wrote:

 Red Marine wrote:
@Mort

You & every other xenos player always miss the point about the idea of more elite marines. Just making marines better if you take giant buckets of them doesn't help. I dont want to play Imperial Guard in power armor with ork trukks. I want a smaller meaner army. Like the eldar have. Theres no fluff where 50 necrons cleanse a whole world. In 25 years of 40k ive never heard of 2 tyranids sweeping a fortification clean of the enemy. Not once. There is no other army who's table top performance is so diametrically different than their fluff.

Im tired of pulling out a huge SM army, then packing away a dozen models with a vehicle a turn. That's what every other army is supposed to do. The death of a single marine is supposed to be significant.There are a lot of SM players, but the purpose of my army shouldn't be tohave zero chance of winning so you feel good about your necrons & eldar.

A thousand times this.

This new book IS stronger, that much is irrefutable. But the units that people wanted to be stronger remained unchanged, and instead they're basically only better because "lol formations" bonuses and a broken gun.
At least they took a minor first shot at trying to fix terminators, even if it was the least effort intensive path possible (drop the points some!) rather than going for a more creative fix.

But why would GW want you to buy only a few models? The easier it is to remove them, the more you'll have to field (and purchase). COME ON

 Yodhrin wrote:
That rather depends on whether you view lists as gaming or metagaming - for me it is the latter. I play to win once we put models down on the tabletop, using these new horrors seems rather cheap to me, like an international sports team clawing in better players from other countries by changing the rules such that someone who's third cousin's aunt twice removed was of that country qualifies them for citizenship..

Except that it's not. This isn't the players changing the rules. It's the rules of the game changing.

Going back to when the decurion came out, my general opinion was: "crons are good, decurion makes them even better."

The gladius full company brings up a parallel. Basic marines suck, but free transports makes them better.

I'm just none too happy about a new dex going "hey, we didn't fix anything about the crappy units, but we made a formation that's kinda broken, so that should balance out right?"

Really at this rate we're all going to end up with guardsmen statlines for every race, and formations that change your statlines to what they should be. -_-

mercury14 wrote:So the old Space Marine codex was so very underpowered that GW needed to hand them 550 free points a match to make them on par with the rest of 40k?

If you took a 2 captains, 30 tactical marines, 10 devastators, and 10 assault marines -- an Adeptus Astartes Company -- yes. Using the 6e codex, a Space Marine Company of any chapter sucked balls. In 7e, it's a lot better, because taking that full company includes their vehicles.

In the 6e codex, if you took a specialized Space Marine battleforce and combined the best units from the codex with allies guaranteed to give you by far the most broken mechanic of the game (Invisibility), or spammed the very best unit in the codex (grav bikes), you had a pretty good chance against even the toughest enemies. Who, by the way, are taking the very best units in THEIR codex.

What formations and formation bonuses provide is a mechanism by which individual units of the very best models have to compete with groups of potentially inferior models. It's a superior way of list-building, because it discourages spamming the best unit, since the formation it self is generally not spammy.

Personally, I would much rather take or face the free razorbacks, the tacticals, assault, and devastators, plus another thousand points or so of upgrades, other stuff, and allies, than just the best units in the game. Likewise, I am happy that Eldar got lots of buffs on many units, because playing against wave serpents, you know, gets old. And in-before-someone-complains... Scatter bikes are WAY easier to deal with than Wave Serpent spam. Gimme the scatter bikes ANY day.

TheNewBlood wrote:Has anyone been looking at the whole picture? Space Marines have been made significantly more powerful in this new book. Maybe not to the level of Eldar, and to a lesser extent Necrons and Mechanicus, but that ties into having to balance those armies against everyone else. Anyone who was expecting that level of power was just wishlisting and destined for disappointment.

People are also ignoring the fact that Space Marines can Battle Brother other very good factions: Imperial Knights, Skitarii, and Grey Knights. It's all fine to say, "as a single faction..." However, Xenos players have very few battle brother choices, whether they like it or not! How would those Tau like to be Battle Brothers with a faction with big stompy titans, or a faction that has haywire on every freaking die roll? Be able to share psychic powers, transports, and so on? But, but, what if they had to ALLY to get that? Would they care?

Put on the other shoe -- how would you like the Tau or Orks or Tyranid to have that capability? Would you care that they had to ally in order to get it?

TheNewBlood wrote:Becoming more elite within the current game mechanics would not solve their problems. Hey would still die at the same rate. Instead we are now able to play a much more tactical game with our marines, maneuvering, maximizing our special rules in list building. Most of e options remained. Ravenguard got a boost IMO for the lists they want to run. Couldn't assault after scouting anyway it just put them closer to eat more fire power, especially if going second. I will take improved survival anyday.

Marines ARE tougher than Imperial Guard. They have a better statline, and ATSKNF is not a silly nothing of a special rule. The core "problem" -- if you want to call it that -- is that weapons have gotten better, and power armor isn't enough to protect you against weapons that far outstrip its protection.

Really, NOTHING is good enough to give you protection unless you get invulnerable saves, guaranteed cover, or invisibility. And none of those would b a good thing to give to a basic troop in the game. Even if you gave Space Marines 2+ armor, all you'd accomplish is more expensive marines that died to all the things with AP2 that they die to now. They only thing they'd win easily against is crappy MSU fire. Besides, just because a Space Marine is a super HUMAN doesn't mean it can walk up to a giant Eldar Titan, a C'Tan, or a Riptide and stab it in the foot, and go ha ha. And clearly, Space Marines in Power Armor are NOT the most powerful units that the Imperium, or even the Adeptus Astartes have. I mean, Terminators, Centurions, Sanguinary Guard, Dreadnoughts, Nemesis Dreadknights, Imperial Knights...

If you want to get silly analyzing the fluff, the whole idea is ridiculous anyhow. There is no way 1,000 space marines can be as effective as 1,000,000,000 Imperial Guard (that's billion) -- and the ratio is probably worse than that (1 SM to 1 million IG). I mean, heck, they'd all have to be Imperial Knights in titan sized suits to warrant that kind of ratio.

niv-mizzet wrote:
Going back to when the decurion came out, my general opinion was: "crons are good, decurion makes them even better."

The gladius full company brings up a parallel. Basic marines suck, but free transports makes them better.

I'm just none too happy about a new dex going "hey, we didn't fix anything about the crappy units, but we made a formation that's kinda broken, so that should balance out right?"

Really at this rate we're all going to end up with guardsmen statlines for every race, and formations that change your statlines to what they should be. -_-

I am halfway surprised that the free transports don't kick in with the Demi-Company. People would be buying Razorbacks and Drop Pods by the truckloads if it was.

niv-mizzet wrote:
I'm just none too happy about a new dex going "hey, we didn't fix anything about the crappy units, but we made a formation that's kinda broken, so that should balance out right?

Not quite fair. Tacticals and Devastators get Grav Cannons, Terminators are 5 points less, and Dreadnoughts have 4 base attacks. That's SOMETHING. Not really enough on the Terminators. But especially the Grav Cannons have potential!

And the demi and full company formations, don't forget the reroll bonus.

Plus, there are going to be squads, that will make vehicles better. We just don't know what they are.

niv-mizzet wrote:


Either fortunately or unfortunately, the ITC doesn't allow redundant detachments, so no doubling down on full companies there for 20 free razorbacks. 10 is still pretty stout though. It's a shame most of the auxiliaries kinda suck. The librarius could be interesting.

Unless, of course, you can take 2 of the base formations in one Detachment, like with the Necron's Reclamation Legion or whatever (1+ in a Decurion Detachment)

OMG the libby formation is BRUTAL. Im going to have to make a seercouncil facsimile

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
I am halfway surprised that the free transports don't kick in with the Demi-Company. People would be buying Razorbacks and Drop Pods by the truckloads if it was.

Cynical Talys says: What space marine player doesn't already have razorbacks and drop pods? If you just made a demi-company kick it in, you'd only need 5 vehicles between the two, and who doesn't have that already?

Practical Talys says: Oh, well, all my space marine buddies have at least 5 drop pods (more like 7 or 9...). And most have at least a few razorbacks. This will get people to top up the razorback count to 10, and maybe the pods to 9!!

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:


Either fortunately or unfortunately, the ITC doesn't allow redundant detachments, so no doubling down on full companies there for 20 free razorbacks. 10 is still pretty stout though. It's a shame most of the auxiliaries kinda suck. The librarius could be interesting.

Unless, of course, you can take 2 of the base formations in one Detachment, like with the Necron's Reclamation Legion or whatever (1+ in a Decurion Detachment)

...wait. You can do that in a single decurion? O.O I'm not near my buddy's necron book. If you can run multiple full companies and call it a single gladius detachment, then kinda-holy-carp. The one downside is fitting two full companies at 1850 while taking the (I'm assuming here) minimum 1 auxiliary.

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:


Either fortunately or unfortunately, the ITC doesn't allow redundant detachments, so no doubling down on full companies there for 20 free razorbacks. 10 is still pretty stout though. It's a shame most of the auxiliaries kinda suck. The librarius could be interesting.

Unless, of course, you can take 2 of the base formations in one Detachment, like with the Necron's Reclamation Legion or whatever (1+ in a Decurion Detachment)

If you wanted an entirely Astartes force, I think you could be pretty scary if you allied in podspam melta Flesh Tearers (assault marines) to take care of the "tough stuff" and had a razorback gunline of lascannons supported by the marines in front. The pods effectively only cost 15 points anyhow, and leave behind more AV12 that opponent has to delete to keep them busy while you position your lascannons and engage little stuff with your tacticals.

niv-mizzet wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:


Either fortunately or unfortunately, the ITC doesn't allow redundant detachments, so no doubling down on full companies there for 20 free razorbacks. 10 is still pretty stout though. It's a shame most of the auxiliaries kinda suck. The librarius could be interesting.

Unless, of course, you can take 2 of the base formations in one Detachment, like with the Necron's Reclamation Legion or whatever (1+ in a Decurion Detachment)

...wait. You can do that in a single decurion? O.O I'm not near my buddy's necron book. If you can run multiple full companies and call it a single gladius detachment, then kinda-holy-carp. The one downside is fitting two full companies at 1850 while taking the (I'm assuming here) minimum 1 auxiliary.

I dunno about just spamming razorbacks. I'd want my army to have some other stuff, too. An invisible deathstar, pods in the back with haywire or melta, thunderwolf cav, Imperial Knights, that kind of thing. Personally, I find varied forces much more effective than spammed battleforces, because it gives you options and flexibility; your opponent doesn't instantly know what you're going to do every turn before you make it. I mean, there's not much unpredictable you can do with 30 scatter laser jet bikes.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

niv-mizzet wrote:

...wait. You can do that in a single decurion? O.O I'm not near my buddy's necron book. If you can run multiple full companies and call it a single gladius detachment, then kinda-holy-carp. The one downside is fitting two full companies at 1850 while taking the (I'm assuming here) minimum 1 auxiliary.

I'm pretty sure it leaked somewhere that the demi-company was the only requirement to a Gladius detachment.

niv-mizzet wrote:

 Matt.Kingsley wrote:

niv-mizzet wrote:


Either fortunately or unfortunately, the ITC doesn't allow redundant detachments, so no doubling down on full companies there for 20 free razorbacks. 10 is still pretty stout though. It's a shame most of the auxiliaries kinda suck. The librarius could be interesting.

Unless, of course, you can take 2 of the base formations in one Detachment, like with the Necron's Reclamation Legion or whatever (1+ in a Decurion Detachment)

...wait. You can do that in a single decurion? O.O I'm not near my buddy's necron book. If you can run multiple full companies and call it a single gladius detachment, then kinda-holy-carp. The one downside is fitting two full companies at 1850 while taking the (I'm assuming here) minimum 1 auxiliary.

We're not entirely sure how the Gladius/Demi-Company/Full Company paradigm works. It would be... interesting if you could do a full Company as well as expanding the entire thing to a Gladius, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

 Red Marine wrote:
. In 25 years of 40k ive never heard of 2 tyranids sweeping a fortification clean of the enemy. Not once. There is no other army who's table top performance is so diametrically different than their fluff.

They're called Lictors. And today they're still a far cry from their 2nd edition 'assassin' incarnation.

In 25 years you've never read one of the dozen or so bits of fiction involving a Lictor? Really?