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.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

Paint them all blue with Red or Gold Stripes on the Legs and give the Officers Stetsons. They can be the CAV vs the Orks Indians.

Fun fact about Dragoons, not related to US CAV, but in the 70s Portugal created a Dragoon Unit to work closely with their Air CAV to fight Rebels in Africa. It was highly effective.

And during the initial invasion of Afghanistan, the Northern tribes mounted a cavalry charge against a Taliban position. It was successful as all hell.

But that doesn't mean anything in the context of this thread, does it?

Well just pardon me all to hell. Who'd of thought having fun with something in a thread was bad wrong?

Remove the hobbits, one step closer to fixing the book.

Rough Riders can stay.

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

Paint them all blue with Red or Gold Stripes on the Legs and give the Officers Stetsons. They can be the CAV vs the Orks Indians.

Fun fact about Dragoons, not related to US CAV, but in the 70s Portugal created a Dragoon Unit to work closely with their Air CAV to fight Rebels in Africa. It was highly effective.

And during the initial invasion of Afghanistan, the Northern tribes mounted a cavalry charge against a Taliban position. It was successful as all hell.

But that doesn't mean anything in the context of this thread, does it?

Well just pardon me all to hell. Who'd of thought having fun with something in a thread was bad wrong?

YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER VICTOR! YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN!

Remove the hobbits, one step closer to fixing the book.

Rough Riders can stay.

Or they can leave as well.

Halflings and Rough Riders are, again, holdovers. They have no business being around anymore.
Halflings were only there because in Fantasy the Empire had their Halflings serving as cooks and marksmen.

There is a lot of room for new and interesting replacements for Rough Riders. Trained warbeasts, for example, would make more sense than Rough Riders themselves.

Kanluwen wrote:This is about "fixing the IG codex".

Rough Riders are a symptom of what ails the book; a holdover to the days of yesteryear and the constant placation of fans who want to keep fielding models older than some of the players of this game.

Personally, again, I want Rough Riders removed not because "Stop having fun different than how I have fun!" but rather because I see no need for them outside of the Death Korps of Krieg.

No, this is about you wanting something removed because it doesn't fit in your army or the way you'd like to play. In what way does "fixing" a codex involve removing the bad units? Should Codex Chaos Space Marines remove Warp Talons because they are bad? Or Defilers? Should Codex Dark Eldar remove Wyches because they are bad? The same can be said with any codex. The answer is no, obviously, you don't get rid of bad units. You change them in hopes that they will become better.

And I understand completely that you want them removed because they don't fit your idea of the way the army works. But yes, that pretty much exactly translates to "Stop having fun different than how I have fun!".

VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:

 VictorVonTzeentch wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:

 Red Marine wrote:
NO ROUGHRIDERS!!!

Sam I am I will not play cowboys in space,
I will not fight them at your place,
I will not battle them in any space,
Sam I am get'em outta my face,
and pack'em back in your case

Cavalry as a strong fighting force died in the early 16th century. Aristocratic attempts to keep it viable through the 19th century usually ended in humiliating trajedy. Mounted combat was deliverd a merciless death blow in WW1. See Gallipoli. Rifled weapons utterly & completely removed cavalry from the modern battlefield. There best use today(2015) and 100 years ago was as a rural scouting force. If you want them on the table top I'd agree to see them as tiny scouting partys that help with Scout or Infiltrate.

Roughriders take the sci-fi element right outta the game for me. I dont care if thier cyber horcies, velocoraptor cav or potato dragoons. The wackier steeds just make it look more like fantasy battle. No more cowboys & aliens.

Also Astra Millitarium is awful. IG forever.

All I got out of this was: "Stop having fun in a different way than I do".

Plus him saying that really makes me wish there was an option for Dragoons, so I could have Dragoons, Heavy Dragoons, Light Dragoons, Command Dragoons and then some straight up Cavalry for support.

Not only do I hope Rough Riders get better, I've actually been wishing for an option to make entire platoons with command squads and advisors mounted on horses. That'd be incredible... To me at least

That said, 40k is full of stuff that makes zero tactical sense. Most of the time, people just say something along the lines of "you can't bring logic into this game" or something. Yet when it comes to using cavalry it becomes appropriate to analyze them in that exact same way.

Paint them all blue with Red or Gold Stripes on the Legs and give the Officers Stetsons. They can be the CAV vs the Orks Indians.

Fun fact about Dragoons, not related to US CAV, but in the 70s Portugal created a Dragoon Unit to work closely with their Air CAV to fight Rebels in Africa. It was highly effective.

Funnily enough, I actually am an officer in a US Army Scout Cavalry unit, and have been debating making a unit like that to combat my brothers newly acquired Ork army.

Kanluwen wrote:
YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER VICTOR! YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN!

One of these days I'll learn

Or they can leave as well.

Halflings and Rough Riders are, again, holdovers. They have no business being around anymore.
Halflings were only there because in Fantasy the Empire had their Halflings serving as cooks and marksmen.

There is a lot of room for new and interesting replacements for Rough Riders. Trained warbeasts, for example, would make more sense than Rough Riders themselves.

Sure they could come up with something better, but between them and the Halflings if we had to lose only one, I would choose the hobbits

Ignatius wrote:

Funnily enough, I actually am an officer in a US Army Scout Cavalry unit, and have been debating making a unit like that to combat my brothers newly acquired Ork army.

Do it, it could look great.

 Ignatius wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:This is about "fixing the IG codex".

Rough Riders are a symptom of what ails the book; a holdover to the days of yesteryear and the constant placation of fans who want to keep fielding models older than some of the players of this game.

Personally, again, I want Rough Riders removed not because "Stop having fun different than how I have fun!" but rather because I see no need for them outside of the Death Korps of Krieg.

No, this is about you wanting something removed because it doesn't fit in your army or the way you'd like to play. In what way does "fixing" a codex involve removing the bad units? Should Codex Chaos Space Marines remove Warp Talons because they are bad? Or Defilers? Should Codex Dark Eldar remove Wyches because they are bad? The same can be said with any codex. The answer is no, obviously, you don't get rid of bad units. You change them in hopes that they will become better.

There is a difference between "removing something because it doesn't fit the aesthetic of the army" and "I don't like how it plays/it sucks on the tabletop".

If we get plastic Vostroyans as a flagship regiment, with plastic Vostroyan Rough Riders on cybernetically enhanced horses? Sweet! It fits the aesthetic again! If we get Rough Riders renamed to "Attilan Rough Riders" with appropriate models and background to say that the Rough Riders are similar to the Scions and Stormtroopers, wherein they get shipped to warzones as part of a larger force--again, sweet! It works!

But as it stands now? They look wildly out of place and there is no way outside of heavy conversions, trawling feeBay, or Forge World to get appropriate models. So get 'em out of here and design a new unit to take their place.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:

Kanluwen wrote:This is about "fixing the IG codex".

Rough Riders are a symptom of what ails the book; a holdover to the days of yesteryear and the constant placation of fans who want to keep fielding models older than some of the players of this game.

Personally, again, I want Rough Riders removed not because "Stop having fun different than how I have fun!" but rather because I see no need for them outside of the Death Korps of Krieg.

No, this is about you wanting something removed because it doesn't fit in your army or the way you'd like to play. In what way does "fixing" a codex involve removing the bad units? Should Codex Chaos Space Marines remove Warp Talons because they are bad? Or Defilers? Should Codex Dark Eldar remove Wyches because they are bad? The same can be said with any codex. The answer is no, obviously, you don't get rid of bad units. You change them in hopes that they will become better.

There is a difference between "removing something because it doesn't fit the aesthetic of the army" and "I don't like how it plays/it sucks on the tabletop".

If we get plastic Vostroyans as a flagship regiment, with plastic Vostroyan Rough Riders on cybernetically enhanced horses? Sweet! It fits the aesthetic again! If we get Rough Riders renamed to "Attilan Rough Riders" with appropriate models and background to say that the Rough Riders are similar to the Scions and Stormtroopers, wherein they get shipped to warzones as part of a larger force--again, sweet! It works!

But as it stands now? They look wildly out of place and there is no way outside of heavy conversions, trawling feeBay, or Forge World to get appropriate models. So get 'em out of here and design a new unit to take their place.

Hmm. I think I see where you're coming from now. If you're talking about the current models being sold now as not looking right, then that I'll agree with you on.

However, I still don't agree about removing a unit for, well, any reason really. What about all of us who did make a concerted and dedicated effort in converting Rough Riders to look like the rest of their army? I get the Attilans look out of place, but mine look just like the rest of my Mordians. An army of dress uniform wearing, formation marchers, etc. looks perfectly natural next to a cavalry unit.

I think the answer to the Rough Riders not fitting the look of the Guard is actually to make a plastic Attillan infantry box. I think mongol-inspired Guard regiments could be pretty awesome.

It sucks that you lose something you've worked hard on, but in my opinion, it really would be best for the army as a whole for them to start dropping some of the older stuff in favor of moving forwards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Furyou Miko wrote:
I think the answer to the Rough Riders not fitting the look of the Guard is actually to make a plastic Attillan infantry box. I think mongol-inspired Guard regiments could be pretty awesome.

Or just remove the background about Rough Riders being from "various planets" and make Attila similar to the way Stormtroopers/Scions operate:

A single way oversized "regiment" that deploys elements to warzones piecemeal.

 Kanluwen wrote:
It sucks that you lose something you've worked hard on, but in my opinion, it really would be best for the army as a whole for them to start dropping some of the older stuff in favor of moving forwards.

Moving forwards to what end?

Sounds easy for you to say, but as I said I worked hard on them and enjoy their presence. Therefore, I will rage against the dying of the light*

*oops I mean Rough Riders

 Ignatius wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It sucks that you lose something you've worked hard on, but in my opinion, it really would be best for the army as a whole for them to start dropping some of the older stuff in favor of moving forwards.

Moving forwards to what end?

I can't say. I don't know where to go, but I really do feel like their insistence on keeping the older regiments that are still metal only around has been a hindrance rather than a help.

Sounds easy for you to say, but as I said I worked hard on them and enjoy their presence. Therefore, I will rage against the dying of the light*
*oops I mean Rough Riders

You might think it's easy for me to say, but I have three pounds of metal Kasrkin models that represent my army from the Doctrine Codex timeframe; where I ran a Kasrkin army(with heavy weapons teams to boot).

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Ignatius wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It sucks that you lose something you've worked hard on, but in my opinion, it really would be best for the army as a whole for them to start dropping some of the older stuff in favor of moving forwards.

Moving forwards to what end?

I can't say. I don't know where to go, but I really do feel like their insistence on keeping the older regiments that are still metal only around has been a hindrance rather than a help.

Sounds easy for you to say, but as I said I worked hard on them and enjoy their presence. Therefore, I will rage against the dying of the light*
*oops I mean Rough Riders

You might think it's easy for me to say, but I have three pounds of metal Kasrkin models that represent my army from the Doctrine Codex timeframe; where I ran a Kasrkin army(with heavy weapons teams to boot).

Maybe they should just do the old regiments in plastic then

But I too have about 40 metal Kasrkin which used to be used for the "Grenadiers" doctrine from the... 3rd edition? 4th? I don't even remember anymore. That said, I loved those models.

 Xenomancers wrote:
I really don't see any problem with current gard. Make their heavy weapons cheaper is about the only thing I think they really need. Maybe like others suggested - a bike unit that had some toughness and mobility could be a great addition to the AM.

Half the units in the codex never see a table, and haven't since well, ever . The vast majority of the units are overcosted and stuck in a 5E or sometimes 3E paradigm.

I would like to see more Tank Commander commands. Or maybe ability to command other tank/squadron as well.

Commands like: Reroll to hit, Ignore cover or Diamond Formation for 5+ invuln... I know we have smoke launchers, but its one use stuff.

Maybe new unit entry with "Armoured Fist" with some bonus for mechanised combat... Maybe Pinning after disembarking or something like that.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I vote we make Leman Russ Superheavy Vehicles.

If a Wraithknight can be a "Gargantuan Monstrous Creature", then by God a Leman Russ can be a Superheavy!

Not sure if you meant this tongue-in-cheek, but this isn't a bad idea. It elminates the Ordnance problem, and it would also allow the LR to fire at multiple targets that better suit it's assortment of weapons. There's nothing OP about BS3 split-fire, and it would give our tanks more versatility.

As for Rough Riders, I have to think the next codex will either drop them or give them new plastics and updated rules. Like Kan, I think the aesthetic (and concept) don't fit the army in 2015, but more options for people to create unique lists isn't a bad thing, either.

 the_Armyman wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
I vote we make Leman Russ Superheavy Vehicles.

If a Wraithknight can be a "Gargantuan Monstrous Creature", then by God a Leman Russ can be a Superheavy!

Not sure if you meant this tongue-in-cheek, but this isn't a bad idea. It elminates the Ordnance problem, and it would also allow the LR to fire at multiple targets that better suit it's assortment of weapons. There's nothing OP about BS3 split-fire, and it would give our tanks more versatility.

It absolutely was tongue-in-cheek, but it was more because of how big of an issue the lack of split-fire and firing their Ordnance is right now with Leman Russ.

As for Rough Riders, I have to think the next codex will either drop them or give them new plastics and updated rules. Like Kan, I think the aesthetic (and concept) don't fit the army in 2015, but more options for people to create unique lists isn't a bad thing, either.

It's not a bad thing at all, and I really do hate to be the "WRONGBADFUN!" guy that I've been here but it really does feel to me like a lot of the "older stuff" that gets kept as holdovers damages the books that exist--not just the IG.

I'll say it again since I've been ignored, but the only reason the Attillans don't fit the "aesthetic" of the Guard in 2015 is because said aesthetic has been reduced to Cadians and Catachans in plastic, with Elysians and Death Korps in resin... and it is very rare to see anyone with any of the metal Mordians, Valhallans, Tallarns, Steel Legionnaires or Vostroyans mixed into their army.

The Attillans fit in just fine when you play the army as its meant to be played, as an ad-hoc formation made up of units from several regiments, rather than just going with two - your infantry regiment and your armoured regiment with maybe some navy support.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
I'll say it again since I've been ignored, but the only reason the Attillans don't fit the "aesthetic" of the Guard in 2015 is because said aesthetic has been reduced to Cadians and Catachans in plastic, with Elysians and Death Korps in resin... and it is very rare to see anyone with any of the metal Mordians, Valhallans, Tallarns, Steel Legionnaires or Vostroyans mixed into their army.

The Attillans fit in just fine when you play the army as its meant to be played, as an ad-hoc formation made up of units from several regiments, rather than just going with two - your infantry regiment and your armoured regiment with maybe some navy support.

And it is this I agree with. Perhaps it is because I still use the actual metal Mordian models that I've had for ages I don't understand Kan's aesthetic argument.

 Kanluwen wrote:

As for Rough Riders, I have to think the next codex will either drop them or give them new plastics and updated rules. Like Kan, I think the aesthetic (and concept) don't fit the army in 2015, but more options for people to create unique lists isn't a bad thing, either.

It's not a bad thing at all, and I really do hate to be the "WRONGBADFUN!" guy that I've been here but it really does feel to me like a lot of the "older stuff" that gets kept as holdovers damages the books that exist--not just the IG.

No, I get it. RRs and ratlings are holdovers from the days of Praetorians fighting zulu Orks and Eldar riding dinosaurs. Retro can be cool--see Imperial Knights and some of the new AdMech offerings--but if GW's not going to update the models and rules to reflect a different hobby environment, then they should put them to bed until they can revisit them at some point later on down the road.

 Furyou Miko wrote:
I'll say it again since I've been ignored, but the only reason the Attillans don't fit the "aesthetic" of the Guard in 2015 is because said aesthetic has been reduced to Cadians and Catachans in plastic, with Elysians and Death Korps in resin... and it is very rare to see anyone with any of the metal Mordians, Valhallans, Tallarns, Steel Legionnaires or Vostroyans mixed into their army.

Right, because those models are prohibitively expensive for anyone trying to make anything other than MechVet lists.

Not to mention they do not have all the special/heavy weapon options available--requiring extensive conversion work in some cases.

The Attillans fit in just fine when you play the army as its meant to be played, as an ad-hoc formation made up of units from several regiments, rather than just going with two - your infantry regiment and your armoured regiment with maybe some navy support.

Mixed companies/regiments are actually a rarity, not the standard...so I'd posit that the people playing "just Cadians" or "just Catachans" are playing their armies just fine.

Imho, the basic stuff:

Formations that replicate some of the old doctrines and special character abilities.

Some point adjustments, naturally, and boosting some of the crappy units that others have mentioned.

Return of cut artillery.

The big stuff:

Orders, orders, everywhere. More orders, more effectively, at greater range, to all types of units. Make orders the key to playing IG.

A new type of squadron for Leman Russes. The only restriction is that they have to maintain unit coherency. In all other respects (shooting, being shot at/attacked in hth, damage) they count as separate units.

 Kanluwen wrote:

Right, because those models are prohibitively expensive for anyone trying to make anything other than MechVet lists.

Not to mention they do not have all the special/heavy weapon options available--requiring extensive conversion work in some cases.

True on the special/heavy weapon front, but not really true on the 'prohibitively expensive' front.

Mixed companies/regiments are actually a rarity, not the standard...so I'd posit that the people playing "just Cadians" or "just Catachans" are playing their armies just fine.

Every Imperial Guard army that has both infantry and tanks, or infantry and artillery, or tanks and artillery, or ogryns, or ratlings, or stormtroopers... is inherently a mixed company, because in the Imperial Guard, tanks are part of their own regiments, etc. So even if someone is playing "just Cadians", they're already fielding normally two, often three, sometimes even four or five different regiments in their company.

Actually on the subject of tanks I have an idea for the Vanquisher

1) Restore it to 155 points
2) Let it fire standard Leman Russ HE ammunition as it did back in 3rd edition, as well as AP shells
3) Give the AP round a +4 or +5 on the damage tables
4) Apply the general mobility fixes to all Leman Russ tanks (IE, re-introducing LB)

Jobs a goodun

As for all this QQ about regiments and formations I do feel obliged to throw this out there:
My IG army is built up from a combination of WW2 British and German units. Currently anyway. I plan eventually to have enough for each side (and with the amazing value of Warlords Games stuff I am not far off) to be fielded as a separate army. So, my army comes from the same general regiment. In the British my Infantry are from the 1st Lancashire Rifles, the Storm Troops are Royal Navy Commandos, the tanks are from the 3rd RTR and the artillery.... I have not got any yet
My Germans are likewise composed.
It works and if people want to do it with their space armies then there is no reason why they shouldnt.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I vote we make Leman Russ Superheavy Vehicles.

If a Wraithknight can be a "Gargantuan Monstrous Creature", then by God a Leman Russ can be a Superheavy!

LR's too? I mean they are about twice the size.

How about just give them 4 HP and let them always fire their maingun at full BS kinda like POMS.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spy_Smasher wrote:
Imho, the basic stuff:

Formations that replicate some of the old doctrines and special character abilities.

Some point adjustments, naturally, and boosting some of the crappy units that others have mentioned.

Return of cut artillery.

The big stuff:

Orders, orders, everywhere. More orders, more effectively, at greater range, to all types of units. Make orders the key to playing IG.

A new type of squadron for Leman Russes. The only restriction is that they have to maintain unit coherency. In all other respects (shooting, being shot at/attacked in hth, damage) they count as separate units.

Orders are already uncounterable. They need some drawbacks.

The main issues I see for gard players their best stuff is blast oriented so Invisibility wrecks them and they have no method to counter it without allies. They also are very weak against FMC because of this too. The main tournament armies focus on invis death stars and FMC...sooo gard have just be left in the dust here. They also need some QOL changes to a few units. For example - exempt LR from restrictions of firing ordinance maybe let stubbers fire at fliers at full BS. Something like that.

 Furyou Miko wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

Right, because those models are prohibitively expensive for anyone trying to make anything other than MechVet lists.

Not to mention they do not have all the special/heavy weapon options available--requiring extensive conversion work in some cases.

True on the special/heavy weapon front, but not really true on the 'prohibitively expensive' front.

Prohibitively expensive is in the eye of the beholder I guess, but there's a reason I would never do a Vostroyan army. $35 per 10 models, mandating a Heavy Bolter and Flamer in the squad.

Mixed companies/regiments are actually a rarity, not the standard...so I'd posit that the people playing "just Cadians" or "just Catachans" are playing their armies just fine.

Every Imperial Guard army that has both infantry and tanks, or infantry and artillery, or tanks and artillery, or ogryns, or ratlings, or stormtroopers... is inherently a mixed company, because in the Imperial Guard, tanks are part of their own regiments, etc. So even if someone is playing "just Cadians", they're already fielding normally two, often three, sometimes even four or five different regiments in their company.

You can't get sucked into the warp for casting orders. and they can't be singled out an denied by your opponent. That's all I'm saying.

I agree hydra flaks are weak. Then again almost all dedicated ground to air is bad in this game so it's not a gard exception. I think the basic rules about how we shoot flyers need to change. Deathstrike launcher is MEH. Needs to have a more powerful blast - then again it is cheap and some LOS blocking terrain can mean it's going off automatically. Essentially it's a gimic - I don't like gimics - just remove it or change it's rules to be a 1 time use str 10 ap1 large blast with unlimited range.

 Xenomancers wrote:
You can't get sucked into the warp for casting orders. and they can't be singled out an denied by your opponent. That's all I'm saying.

I agree hydra flaks are weak. Then again almost all dedicated ground to air is bad in this game so it's not a gard exception. I think the basic rules about how we shoot flyers need to change. Deathstrike launcher is MEH. Needs to have a more powerful blast - then again it is cheap and some LOS blocking terrain can mean it's going off automatically. Essentially it's a gimic - I don't like gimics - just remove it or change it's rules to be a 1 time use str 10 ap1 large blast with unlimited range.

Why would talking on the phone cause your face to melt?

One point I'd like to make is that Leman Russ tanks really shouldn't be Super Heavy vehicles. Mainly because they're not... you know... super heavy.

But then, perhaps I'm biased because I think Super Heavies and Gargantuan Creatures need to sod off and die.

 Xenomancers wrote:
You can't get sucked into the warp for casting orders. and they can't be singled out an denied by your opponent. That's all I'm saying.

Sure they can--by killing the officers. It's not like a Platoon Command Squad can utilize the really heavy hitting Orders, so taking out a Company Command Squad effectively neuters the army.
And taking out Platoon Command Squads does neuter the army, once the CCS is gone as Sergeants in squads cannot issue Orders.

Couple that with the fact that Orders mandate Officers(and their attendant squads) stay within 12-18 inches of the squads(read: SQUADS--not Platoons) that they affect, it becomes very realistic that you can kill Orders without needing the ability to "Deny the Vox Channels".

I agree hydra flaks are weak. Then again almost all dedicated ground to air is bad in this game so it's not a gard exception. I think the basic rules about how we shoot flyers need to change.

Simply put, AA vehicles suffer from overspecialization. Skyfire is something that some units pay heavily for, while others don't--and the ones which don't pay heavily for it usually have a way to offset the fact that they'll be Snap Shooting against ground targets.

Deathstrike launcher is MEH. Needs to have a more powerful blast - then again it is cheap and some LOS blocking terrain can mean it's going off automatically. Essentially it's a gimmick - I don't like gimmicks - just remove it or change it's rules to be a 1 time use str 10 ap1 large blast with unlimited range.

The Deathstrike Launcher as a "large blast" would be a huge nerf. It uses the Apocalypse Blast template(the "pizza plate") now.

The simple problem with it is that it is rather unreliable for the timeframe when you actually need it(early on in the game, before the enemy gets to scatter). Couple that with the fact that it is a One Use Only weapon, which has an accompanying table you have to roll on to attempt to fire the missile(but you can only do it past turn one!) and it becomes silly to even see it on the field since some armies can be into Assault with a Guard gunline by the start of turn 2 making the Deathstrike effectively useless since you can't drop templates into Assaults.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
One point I'd like to make is that Leman Russ tanks really shouldn't be Super Heavy vehicles. Mainly because they're not... you know... super heavy.

But then, perhaps I'm biased because I think Super Heavies and Gargantuan Creatures need to sod off and die.

It was a tongue-in-cheek statement, simply because Superheavies have no snap-fire penalties on the rest of their weaponry for firing Ordnance.

Another thing that we need is a hefty price reduction on Pask. 70 points for a slight buff on the main turret its terrible....

70 points? Yes, I did say that. Not 40, 70.
Why?
Because if you actually look at the RAW Pask's entry specifically states "Upgrade one Tank Commander to Knight Commander Pask.........40" So, in order to get Pask you first need to have a Tank Commander to upgrade to Pask. Tank commanders cost 30 points. So you buy your Tank Commander for 30 points and then upgrade him for another 40 points. 30+40=70.
So, for 70 points IG players gain a minor buff to the turret. Whereas SM players pay 40 points for a BS5 2 wound character whom can bail once the tank is hit and gives said chosen mount a hell of a lot of buffs.

On the subject of IG tanks we need out Leman Russ tanks upgraded too 4HP. Right now they just do not feel heavy enough, and whilst we are on the subject we desperately need to see the ability to fire the main gun separately from the rest of the weapons on the tank.

The Hydra needs to be able to shoot ground targets and ignore Jink saves

The Basilisk needs to have less of a minimal range

The Manticore needs some love

The Deathstrike needs to be taken out and made an Apocalypse unit with the D

Chimeras - Drop the fething price already!

Hellhounds and co - Seriously, who wants to pay that much for a short ranged tank? The few times I have used them they have been destroyed before they can do anything significant to the enemy (and by significant I mean two of them dealing with 1 ten man squad)

The Deathstrike isn't going anywhere. It's in plastic.

Figure out a different fix.

Personally, I'm in favor of allowing for the Deathstrike to be fired into an on-going Assault with 0 scatter.