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.

Darkshroud in front, he is shrouded.

 tydrace wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 tydrace wrote:
Looking at the leaked rules, I'm a bit sad there's no Scout formation. So I can't take Deathwing and just add Scouts to make this work, I take it? Unless I use the Marine formation.

Look again - Your scout formation is even better since you don't have to bring 3 units. It's called the 10th Company Support formation and contains 1-5 Scout units. And you can bring that as often as you want.

I did, but we have no scout formation. We can take scouts as 10th Company Support in a Lion's Blade, but then you need a Demi-Company. I'm looking for a way to use scouts along with just a Deathwing Redemption Force or Deathwing Strike Force. (Best option I'm seeing so far is allying in some Raven Guard scouts, sure you need three squads but they do get Shrouded on Turn 1, which can mean survival).

All formations are also detachments. You can use any detachment on it's own - therefore you can use the 10th Company Support formation on it's own, too.
"3x 10th Company Support" or "15 Scout units" is a battleforged army.

*edit* this helped me understand the differences a great deal:

Then why do Core, Auxillary etc. exist at all?
After all, Aux are restricted until you take at least 1 core...

 Thairne wrote:
Then why do Core, Auxillary etc. exist at all?
After all, Aux are restricted until you take at least 1 core...

Now you're talking about the Lion's Blade Strike Force detachment which has special restrictions and rules. If you want to bring a LBSF, you have to adhere to those rules - if you don't want to bring a LBSF, you can do whatever you want with your formations.
*edit* The LBSF is simply a faction specific detachment when you look at the chart I provided.

*edit2* So, just to give some examples:

1 Ravenwing Strike Force
1 Lions Blade Strike Force consisting of a Demi-Company and a 10th Company Support Formation
-> Battleforged

2 Ravenwing Strike Forces
-> Battleforged

1 Ravenwing Strike Force
1 Deathwing Strike Force
1 Lion's Blade Strike Force consisting of a Demi-Company and a 10th Company Support formation
-> Battleforged

2 Lions Blade Strike Forces consisting of 2 Demi-Companies EACH and 20 10th Company Support Formations EACH
-> Battleforged

50 10th Company Support Formations
-> Battleforged

49 10th Company Support Formations and a CAD of 1 Captain, 2 Tac Marine Squads
-> Battleforged

A single 10th Company Support formation
-> Battleforged!

Just remember that - unless stated otherwise in the detachments - they do NOT share their bonuses. That's why Gladius / Decurion / Lion's Blade are so important - a unit that is part of a Demi-Company which in turn is part of a Gladius Strike force gets BOTH the advantages from the Demi AND the Gladius.
If you just use a Demi-Company on it's own, you don't get the Gladius bonuses.
A 10th Company Support formation can NEVER gain the bonuses from a Demi-Company, since there's no rule that would allow the 10th to be part of the Demi-Company.

Yep, you're right. Actually reading the page talking about the LBSF clears that up.
Which means I have to include these things in the formations in BS, lesson learned!

nekooni wrote:

 tydrace wrote:

nekooni wrote:

 tydrace wrote:
Looking at the leaked rules, I'm a bit sad there's no Scout formation. So I can't take Deathwing and just add Scouts to make this work, I take it? Unless I use the Marine formation.

Look again - Your scout formation is even better since you don't have to bring 3 units. It's called the 10th Company Support formation and contains 1-5 Scout units. And you can bring that as often as you want.

I did, but we have no scout formation. We can take scouts as 10th Company Support in a Lion's Blade, but then you need a Demi-Company. I'm looking for a way to use scouts along with just a Deathwing Redemption Force or Deathwing Strike Force. (Best option I'm seeing so far is allying in some Raven Guard scouts, sure you need three squads but they do get Shrouded on Turn 1, which can mean survival).

All formations are also detachments. You can use any detachment on it's own - therefore you can use the 10th Company Support formation on it's own, too.
"3x 10th Company Support" or "15 Scout units" is a battleforged army.

*edit* this helped me understand the differences a great deal:

Spoiler:

That flowchart of yours is a bit outdated, and you're a bit confused about formations still, I'm afraid.

The Decurion-style detachments (which someone ought to find a better name for, btw) are a special kind of detachment that consists of Core, Command and Auxiliary choices. Some of these choices are formations, with their own formation dataslates, and can be used independently in any Battle Forged army, but others are simply units as in any other detachment. The Dark Angels Scouts (10th Company Support) are the latter. The Space Marine Scouts (10th Company Task Force) are the former.

It's possible to take a Ravenwing Detachment, a flyer formation, and some Dark Angels Scouts, but then your army would be Unbound.

Rule of the thumb; all Formations have their own dataslate with the formation symbol in the top corners of the page.

Just to confirm- there's no more DA stuff in WDW #74. That's it. There's a battle report but the rest is WD rubbing one out over the 20+ years of WHFB lol.

Someone defined those detachments as CCAD (Core, Command, Aux Detachment), which would be a good definition.

^Though having CCAD and CAD both being terms and meaning different things could be potentially very confusing.
Not to stop anyone, just something to think about.

 Thud wrote:

That flowchart of yours is a bit outdated, and you're a bit confused about formations still, I'm afraid.

The Decurion-style detachments (which someone ought to find a better name for, btw) are a special kind of detachment that consists of Core, Command and Auxiliary choices. Some of these choices are formations, with their own formation dataslates, and can be used independently in any Battle Forged army, but others are simply units as in any other detachment. The Dark Angels Scouts (10th Company Support) are the latter. The Space Marine Scouts (10th Company Task Force) are the former.

It's possible to take a Ravenwing Detachment, a flyer formation, and some Dark Angels Scouts, but then your army would be Unbound.

Rule of the thumb; all Formations have their own dataslate with the formation symbol in the top corners of the page.

For some reason I couldn't find an actual scan of the 10th Company in C: DA, but here is the Ravenwing Attack and Support Squadrons which I suppose work the same.

It says "Formation", it's restrictions do not prevent you from using the formation as a solo detachment. Granted, the page for the 10th Company COULD be different, but that would surprise me.
*edit*
Going through my Necron codex, I now see where you're coming from - The Decurion has both "named Formations of multiple units" AND single instances of a simple unit - and the later aren't formations. So the question now is rather whether or not the 10th Company Support is a named formation or JUST refering to "1-5 units".

Further looking at the LBFS construction page i just noticed that the 10th is the ONLY choice that doesn't have a page number referenced.

I guess that means you're absolutely right since the 10th Company Support simply is NOT a formation and therefore also is NOT a detachment.

So new question:

If I took the ravenwing strike force and I took a Skyhammer formation... Is that battle forged? Cause that would be insanely powerful

Am I reading that right, the Ravenwing Support Squadron has flippin' "Strafing Run" and "Interceptor"?

 Commissar Merces wrote:
So new question:

If I took the ravenwing strike force and I took a Skyhammer formation... Is that battle forged? Cause that would be insanely powerful

Of course you can. Both are formations.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Am I reading that right, the Ravenwing Support Squadron has flippin' "Strafing Run" and "Interceptor"?

Yup. Quite literally- DAKKADAKKADAKKA lol.

nekooni wrote:

Further looking at the LBFS construction page i just noticed that the 10th is the ONLY choice that doesn't have a page number referenced.

Spoiler:

I guess that means you're absolutely right since the 10th Company Support simply is NOT a formation and therefore also is NOT a detachment.

This is a new situation. The 10th Company Support formation exists only within that Lion's Blade chart. (Another example of this codex being sloppy.) So I guess it can only be taken within a Lion's Blade?

axisofentropy wrote:

nekooni wrote:

Further looking at the LBFS construction page i just noticed that the 10th is the ONLY choice that doesn't have a page number referenced.

Spoiler:

I guess that means you're absolutely right since the 10th Company Support simply is NOT a formation and therefore also is NOT a detachment.

This is a new situation. The 10th Company Support formation exists only within that Lion's Blade chart. (Another example of this codex being sloppy.) So I guess it can only be taken within a Lion's Blade?

That's how I interpreted it.

 Commissar Merces wrote:

axisofentropy wrote:

nekooni wrote:

Further looking at the LBFS construction page i just noticed that the 10th is the ONLY choice that doesn't have a page number referenced.

Spoiler:

I guess that means you're absolutely right since the 10th Company Support simply is NOT a formation and therefore also is NOT a detachment.

This is a new situation. The 10th Company Support formation exists only within that Lion's Blade chart. (Another example of this codex being sloppy.) So I guess it can only be taken within a Lion's Blade?

That's how I interpreted it.

It has no dataslate and no advantages aside from being able to take scouts with you - it's just a "choice" for the LBFS detachment and not a formation at all. The Decurion does the same thing, just more clearly - it names the choice "Flayed Ones", and lists it as being "1 unit of Flayed Ones", but "Flayed Ones" still is not a formation at all.

The Inner Circle is the same. No rules for that, just allows you to bring one more IC and stay battle-forged.

You can take the scout formation in any army, even without the Lion's Blade. The rules flat out say you can. It just doesn't have any special rules attached to it the way the other formations do.

If you wanted scouts though, you could take a CAD along with the formations you want.

CrashGordon94 wrote:
^Though having CCAD and CAD both being terms and meaning different things could be potentially very confused.
Not to stop anyone, just something to think about.

I still like Multiple Formation Detachment. MFD is pretty unique as far as namings are concerned.

I dislike when people still try to call them "Decurion-style formations" which becomes less and less poignant as more come out.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
You can take the scout formation in any army, even without the Lion's Blade. The rules flat out say you can. It just doesn't have any special rules attached to it the way the other formations do.

No, you cannot. It's not a Dataslate Formation, it's just an option.

 Commissar Merces wrote:
After further digesting this book, it isn't going to roll over Eldar or Tau, but it will put the hurt on most other armies. Necrons and Ravenwing are the new armies from hell in terms of how much fire they can soak up.

To be honest, I don't really think the Lions Blade formation is that good, and especially not compared to it's C:SM counter part. If you are looking for a competitive build, it's ravenwing with an allied sky hammer formation. If they ever get to FAQing the ravenwing special rule for other HQ units, then a straight ravenwing build will actually work nicely. Needs to have access to psykers for some psychic defense and invisibility to compete with the big boys.

Overall, I am mildly pleased. I think a lot of opportunities were missed, but overall the codex improved.

Ravenwing improved. Everything else, meh. Ravenwing + Bike Conclave is tier 1 and will roll anything Tau or Eldar can field. Lion's Blade isn't as good as gladius, but free obsec transports are still free obsec transports.

GW still fails at rule writing. If they can produce a near flawless Space Marine Codex, why is Dark Angels such a mess?

CrashGordon94 wrote:

riburn3 wrote:Am I the only one that doesn't really care about the loss of ObjSec for RW/DW? I feel the new special rules in all the formations/detatchments are a good trade off and this army now has far more flexibility than it ever had. Granted, I've never run pure DW or RW force to begin with and like their synergy together, but I still don't really think it's a big deal.

It's not really an issue of Objective Secured. It's more that people built their armies around just shifting things to Troops and leaving everything else the same, and the DW/RW formations aren't the same thing.
Just for an example, you could've had Belial in charge, 4+ DW Termies as Troops, a bunch of Company Veteran Squads as Elites, Assault Marines as Fast Attack and Predators or something in Heavy Support.
An army like that is boned, you can't just shove all that into the Deathwing Formation and you can't build it as an ordinary CAD. See the problem?

jakejackjake wrote:They took away the option to take whatever you want that is unbound? The only downside is his terminators don't have objective secured but terminators suck anyway which means if you were playing a mostly terminator army you were losing. So you can take them and continue to lose if that's what you want.

No, the seemingly universally-despised and mostly used for cheating option of Unbound remains.
They took away the option of just playing a CAD with Termies/Bikers in Troops for no reason and now people are potentially screwed out of their armies unless they buy a bunch of stuff they don't want, throw a load of things away or take a non-option that their opponent would reject and puts their formerly-legit (and no longer legit for no reason) army on the level of a list with nothing but Baneblades.
All of which could've been avoided by keeping the FOC-switch options AND the new Formations, and what would be wrong with that?

How is it cheating?


It's not. Especially if you use it to make an army that sucks. Like Deathwing has for years.

Also if you reject playing an army because it is unbound your a little baby. I've never played unbound myself because it hasn't been necessary, but it's allowed and anyone who calls it cheating is a cry baby who gets upset when someone outplays them.

Don't get mad at GW for trying to make you stop playing bad units and then complaining that they are bad

"OH NO I HAVE TO MAKE A NEW LIST WITH NON TERMINATORS" You're playing 40k. No one has "built" an army. They are all"building" armies. They just got confused and thought at some point it would be "complete", but it never will

Deathwing redemption force. Then bring other formatins. If you want ever edition to play like the last then why update them at all? People are just whining because they didn't get the changes EXACTLY how they wanted them. Even though this codex is in the top three now if the leaks hold 100

it's the same in the Eldar dex too. You cannot just bring 5 wraithknights to a battle and be Battle Forged (they have their own entry in the Craftworld Warhost detachment). These units are only unlocked if you take the base formation. The data slate formations at the end of the unit entries are the only formations that can be brought separately. The Eldar ones that cannot be used by themselves includes Outcasts (which would be identical to this scout debate), Engines of Vaul, and Wraith Constructs (where wraithknights are an entry) If you want to run the scouts, you either have to take the Lion's Blade and add them as an auxiliary or take a CAD with a character (put him in term armour) and take 2-6 units of Scouts.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:
You can take the scout formation in any army, even without the Lion's Blade. The rules flat out say you can. It just doesn't have any special rules attached to it the way the other formations do.

Unless it has a Formation datasheet, its not a Formation and just a unit.

Anyone remember where we saw the Tactical Objectives?

 Commissar Merces wrote:
After further digesting this book, it isn't going to roll over Eldar or Tau, but it will put the hurt on most other armies. Necrons and Ravenwing are the new armies from hell in terms of how much fire they can soak up.

To be honest, I don't really think the Lions Blade formation is that good, and especially not compared to it's C:SM counter part. If you are looking for a competitive build, it's ravenwing with an allied sky hammer formation. If they ever get to FAQing the ravenwing special rule for other HQ units, then a straight ravenwing build will actually work nicely. Needs to have access to psykers for some psychic defense and invisibility to compete with the big boys.

Overall, I am mildly pleased. I think a lot of opportunities were missed, but overall the codex improved.

This army will be better than Tau, but yes they will do better than most. The only two that are totally equal or REALLY close I believe to be Eldar and Vanilla. I can't believe Dark Angels are just about to become baby spankers and people are upset

Also as far as the terminators go. No one will care if you play a deathwing army unbound. They might just get bored winning against you so easily but if it's what you want they'll let you

Well I was in the train going home expecting to discuss the Scout thingy further but it seems we've already reached a conclusion to that.

 Ghaz wrote:

Unless it has a Formation datasheet, its not a Formation and just a unit.

Either way, next thing I thought about.

Ravenwing Land Speeder only army. Could be fun, aye? Highly doable with Sammael, Land Speeder, Land Speeder Vengeance and Darkshrouds.

Do the Land Speeders in a Ravenwing Support Force gain the Shrouded from the Darkshroud as well? That would be great.

 tydrace wrote:

Do the Land Speeders in a Ravenwing Support Force gain the Shrouded from the Darkshroud as well? That would be great.

Yes, and Stealth too.

Only one model in a unit needs either rule to provide the whole unit with it.

 Asmodai Asmodean wrote:

 Commissar Merces wrote:
After further digesting this book, it isn't going to roll over Eldar or Tau, but it will put the hurt on most other armies. Necrons and Ravenwing are the new armies from hell in terms of how much fire they can soak up.

To be honest, I don't really think the Lions Blade formation is that good, and especially not compared to it's C:SM counter part. If you are looking for a competitive build, it's ravenwing with an allied sky hammer formation. If they ever get to FAQing the ravenwing special rule for other HQ units, then a straight ravenwing build will actually work nicely. Needs to have access to psykers for some psychic defense and invisibility to compete with the big boys.

Overall, I am mildly pleased. I think a lot of opportunities were missed, but overall the codex improved.

Ravenwing improved. Everything else, meh. Ravenwing + Bike Conclave is tier 1 and will roll anything Tau or Eldar can field. Lion's Blade isn't as good as gladius, but free obsec transports are still free obsec transports.

GW still fails at rule writing. If they can produce a near flawless Space Marine Codex, why is Dark Angels such a mess?

Bike conclave? Can you explain what this is? Do you mean the librarian formation? Is that still legal?

Reason why tau will trump RW is so many things ignore cover and the amount of interceptor is nasty if you wanna pair with deathwing. Not to mention their own formation that gives them preferred enemy space marines.