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.

Hello dakka. I have a quick question about recon squads. I am planning on running the Recon Company ROW (in the new HH book) for two reasons. First, because it's fluffy for my RG army. Second, I will be able to give most of my army 3+ cover (and some of them 2+ thanks to camoeline) on the first turn due to being able to infiltrate via RG special rules.

So my question is: what is the most effective way to kit out recon squads? I really have no idea looking at the options. I was planning on running min 5 man squads with snipers, but is there a better way?

My rough list is going to be 3 recon squads (as the compulsory troops), 3 big squads of tac marines with apothecaries, some contemptors for anti-tank, a couple of heavy support squads also for tank busting, and a dark fury squad. For the HQs I was thinking a Praetor with the dark fury squad and a moritat off doing his own thing. The recon squads will probably camp home objectives and no-man's objectives, while the tac squads will infiltrate as close as possible to push the enemy in his deployment zone.

So are minimum 5 man sniper squads the best plan? Or should I bump them up to 10 man? Or do something completely different? Let me know what I'm doing wrong!

Nuncio vox for your recon squads so that they can spot for artillery

well, depending on how you want to run them:

1) spotters for barrage weapons: Snipers + cloaks + vox

2) 'safe points' for deep strike: any gun + cloaks + vox

3) something to assault and tie up rapiers and the like: shotgun + vox

really, just remember the vox, and do whatever you want with them

You're kind of in a tough spot here. Recon marines were already point for point the worst unit in the Legion book, and with the changes to grenades they are even worse.

In Recon Company, they are essentially the alternative to tactical marines (i.e. another troop tax), except you have to buy three units and 5 of them cost almost as much as 10 tactical marines. You do get a combination of scout and infiltrate on them, so you can take one unit in a rhino with nuncio vox to basically drive up to 12" from the enemy for pin-point deep strikes from your dreadnoughts or whatever. Then keep the other two in reserve to outflank after objectives. You'll need to sink more into troops, probably, because killing 15 power armoured dudes is not hard.

Thanks for the responses so far.

One note I probably should have mentioned, I am planning on making this army based on the RG that were being hunted following Istvaan V. Therefore there will not be any tanks (well, maybe one. A spartan is tempting...) and no artillery. I know that this hinders how effective my army can be, but I play 30k to be fluffy and fun. So I can accept the hindrance

Its unfortunate that they are so point inefficient. I don't like the idea of dumping 400+ points in 15 PA marines that don't really do much. But I really love the turn one buff from the ROW.

Can min recon squads hold objectives at all? They will have a 3+ AS, plus a very likely 4+ CS. Would it be worth investing in one of the squads to bump them up to 10? It would make the chance of pinning a unit more likely, but it would also increase the "troop tax" significantly.

You should really think of part of their cost as a reliability tax. They can do only so much but make other things better. So you have to balance them with the rest of your army to ensure you get the most out of them and the most out of the rest of your army. If you're thinking of them in a vacuum your missing out on the synergistic advantages central to this unit.

If doing recon company I would bring the one mandatory recon squad as snipers with a vox on an objective like you are already planning. If I was bringing more I would go for meltabombs(as they are not grenades) and position them to try and take out heavy armor. Save them for infiltration deployment and go accordingly. Even with bombs they are one of the cheapest troop units in 30k. Kind of a hail mary thing, they likely will get blasted off the board but your opponent will have to allocate shooting to them over your more valuable units.

Recon Company needs three squads of Recon Marines, they are compulsory. The text on this is clear, Calth just introduced a flood of new players from 40K eager to adopt the same abusive list building mentality. The OP has the right idea building for fluff and fun, let's not poison his motivation with gamey arguments.

Meltabombs ARE grenades. They are in the grenades main section and with grenades in the summary. Trying to argue otherwise is real rules-lawyerly (see above about poison).

Sniper rifles don't pin in 7th/AoD, or they would be a decent choice.

Col. Dash wrote:
If doing recon company I would bring the one mandatory recon squad as snipers with a vox on an objective like you are already planning. If I was bringing more I would go for meltabombs(as they are not grenades) and position them to try and take out heavy armor. Save them for infiltration deployment and go accordingly. Even with bombs they are one of the cheapest troop units in 30k. Kind of a hail mary thing, they likely will get blasted off the board but your opponent will have to allocate shooting to them over your more valuable units.

what's the point of playing the 'recon company' if you're going to go minimal on the 'recon' part of it? Sadly melta bombs ARE effected by the grenade limitations (though they are yet to be official chances as it was a rough draft, so it's not the end yet). Secondly, if you're taking minimal troops you're in for a bad time when your only scoring units are shot off the board since you only brought 2-3 of them :(

HandofMars wrote:
Recon Company needs three squads of Recon Marines, they are compulsory. The text on this is clear, Calth just introduced a flood of new players from 40K eager to adopt the same abusive list building mentality. The OP has the right idea building for fluff and fun, let's not poison his motivation with gamey arguments.

No, you're completely wrong about this. "Compulsory troop choices" refers to the FOC slot, and simply means that recon squads may be taken to fill those slots (normally they can't be taken). You are required to take three troops choices without the "can not be a compulsory troops choice" rule, at least one of which must be a recon squad. It's kind of unclear why you'd accept the limitations of the RoW if you aren't going to use the benefits, but it is legal to do so.

Peregrine is correct. I don't understand how anyone read it differently. It doesn't say recon squads replace the compulsory choices, just that they are one for this RoW and you have to take three troops, one which has to be a recon squad. I would have to read the RoW again, last time I read it was with Alpha Legion in mind as far as bonuses go and everyone had infiltrate..

Col. Dash wrote:
Peregrine is correct. I don't understand how anyone read it differently. It doesn't say recon squads replace the compulsory choices, just that they are one for this RoW and you have to take three troops, one which has to be a recon squad. I would have to read the RoW again, last time I read it was with Alpha Legion in mind as far as bonuses go and everyone had infiltrate..

Interesting... I read it as I had to have 3 recon squads as my compulsory troop choices. But if I only need one recon and can take tac squads for the other two, that helps me out a lot.

As for the infiltrate, all of my squads (except the dark fury squad) have infiltrate because I'm playing RG. So they all would get the bonus cover save for the first turn. Combined with being able to give my apothecaries cameleoline, I can give my squads 4+ cover minimum for the first turn due to stealth and shrouded. Throw them in any kind of cover and that becomes a 2+. Not too shabby.

You read it correctly, the recon company has recon marines as its compulsory troops, and compulsory means mandatory.

In the standard Legion list, there is no such thing as a compulsory troop unit, it is the slots on the FOC that are compulsory (in that they are slots that are mandatory for you to fill). This explained quite clearly on page 9 that tells you how to use a Forge Organization Chart.

Tactical, assault, and breacher marines are not compulsory troops, they are just troops. They can be used to fill compulsory troop slots on the FOC, but they are not themselves compulsory, or they would HAVE to be used. Because, again, compulsory means mandatory. Recon and Support Marines are troops with the "Support" rule, that specifically says, "they may not be used to fill compulsory troop choices on the FOC". Note the choice of words, it's not saying these units aren't "compulsory troops", just that they can't be used to fill the compulsory slots on the FOC.

Note, for example, Sky Hunter Phallanx... "Jetbikes may be taken as Troops choices in a Primary Detachment using this Rite of War". So they become regular troops like tacticals or breachers, and you can use them to fill the compulsory slots if you want. Note it didn't say they are compulsory troops, which would mean you HAVE to take them. Same language exists in a whole bunch of other Rites.

Case and point being:

Terror Assault: Compulsory Terror Squads
Stone Gauntlet: Compulsory Breachers
Pride: Compulsory Vets or Terminators
Day of Revelations: Compulsory Jump Pack Equipped Squads (AKA Assault Squads)

Unlike, say:

Coils of the Hydra, Hammer of Olympia, Berserker Assault: 3 Compulsory Troops which can be any combination of: Tac, Breacher, Assault and/or any other types unlocked by Characters like: Terminators with Erasmus Golg or Horus.

If it meant for all three to be recon squads, it would have pluralized recon squads in the part about having three compulsory troops. Breachers, assault marines, and tacticals are all able to fill compulsory troop slots. the ROW specifically goes out of the way to say Recon squads are also part of that category but does not say they negate that the others no longer fill it.

Terror assault specifically says it must have three terror squads, there'sno ambiguity. PoL says that vets and termies can be taken as compulsory troops choices, no ambiguity again.

This one specifically says you must take three compulsory troop choices one of which must be a recon squad which is now a non-support troop choice. Again it did not negate that the other three normal choices cannot be taken for the other two slots.

No it doesn't, you are making words up. There is no such category. There are simply troops. You can fill compulsory slots with any troops, unless a specific rule prevents you from doing so.

Recon Marines become compulsory. The word compulsory means mandatory. English, do you speak it?

RAW, fluff, and balance are all against you on this one.

I speak it fine. There are three compulsory troop slots required for this. Recon squads are added to the list, its pretty frikkin clear, they DO NOT replace the existing list of troops that can fill those compulsory slots. One of the compulsory slots has to be filled with a Recon Squad. Squad, not squadS. It is clear English. What part do you not understand about it?

Please point me to where this magical imaginary list exists that identifies something as a compulsory troop or a "regular" troop, whatever that is.

The main original book which has been the basis of how we build lists since 30k came out. If its not an assault, tactical or breacher squad, it is a support squad thus cannot fill compulsory troop slots. Recon Co. places recon squads into that category without removing the others. If it did there would be a restriction listed that said the three above do not count towards the mandatory troops needed, all the other ROWs that have troop type requirements do this. Further why would it bother mentioning that you must have three compulsory troops which one of has to be a recon squad if it was the only option in the first place?

There is no such category, you are making things up.

The FOC has slots that are compulsory, in that they are mandated to be filled, which has been the case since the FOC was invented.

Please tell me where there is a category of "compulsory" HQs? There isn't, there are simply HQ choices, and some of them have a special rule that specifically states you can't use them to fill compulsory slots.

Troops are the same way. They are just troops. When Erasmus Golg lets you take Terminators as troops, you can use them to fill compulsory slots, the rules don't say Terminators become compulsory troops, because that would mean you HAVE to take them. If they wanted to make Recon squads simply another option for compulsory slots, they would have said "Recon squads lose the Support rule". Exactly like they do in the Ultramarines Rite of War and then tell you you may take them as compulsory Troops choices.

Again, you are inventing categories literally out of thin air.

As for why FW wrote in a redundancy, who knows? These are the same people that gave implacable advance to a bunch of units, and then published a book a month later than reprinted those units and took away that rule. These are the people that still are releasing Rites of War that prevent Slow and Purposeful units, even though there are no more Slow and Purposeful units in the Legion book at all.


Don't get me wrong, as someone who plays Alpha Legion as his primary, and is eyeballing building a small company of the III under Fulgrim, this would be my new default Rite if I'm not running something else. 2+ or 3+ army-wide cover? Why not.

Whooooo boy, okay, without getting into the thread derail argument of what exactly a compulsory troop is, I'm going to tell you how recon marines have worked well for me.

First of all, using a min size squad is a terrible idea. It doesn't take a mathematical genius to realize at minimum squad size you're paying 25 points per dude, at max squad size your'e paying 20 points per dude. That ain't great, but it's better.

Second, chameleoline. I say why bother. At a ten man squad this costs you 50 points. A vigilator costs 85pts, gives the entire squad stealth, doesn't mess with their infiltrating or scouting, and is pretty awesome for a variety of reasons. His sabotage ability can easily merc one of your opponent's artillery tanks or contemptors before the game even starts, his gun ain't bad (rapid fire blast that always wounds on 4+ ) , and he can take a melta bomb, which means you can still go melee tank hunting without having to blow 50 points for a squad worth of a melta bombs you can only use one at a time (assuming that new FAQ ruling sticks). So, 100 points for melta bombs + chameleoline, or 90 pts for a vigilator who lets your squad do all that AND SO MUCH MORE.

Third, sniper rifles. I know you pay a premium for a troop unit that can hold a point and shoot at something more than 24" away, but oh my god these things were priced for when sniper rifles could still pin units and hurt vehicles. DON'T BOTHER.

Considering how effective units like the scorpius and 10 man missile launcher squads are, I feel like it's pretty common to fight against armies that have a pretty fragile gun line. Recon marines are great for hunting these.

The build I like to use is 355pts for a vigilator with scout armor, power axe, inferno pistol and melta bombs leading a 10 man scout armored recon squad with melee weapons, lead by a sergeant with an inferno pistol and power axe.

The inferno pistol is HUGE for me, as a blood angel player, since infiltrate 18"-12" away from some tank, scout 6", move 6", now you're within 0-6" of some tank that you're firing two S8 AP1 shots at, one if which is at BS5, both of which might have melta. Bye bye tank turn 1 (probably), and then you're right up in your opponent's grill.

I know this doesn't help you since you can't take inferno pistols, but the last game I played I used this squad, had them take down a scorpius, 10 man missile launcher squad, and a siege breaker consul, without firing a shot, and they only lost 3 marines in the process AND I was rolling like terrible in melee. That was still awesome. They totally made their points back, and if there was a point to cap in my opponent's deployment zone, it would have been mine, so even without the inferno pistols, this load-out is still very effective, and 30 points cheaper.

If you ran two of these, and then a third without a vigilator, I could see your opponents being caught super off guard.


Also, another recon squad that I 100% want to build, is a 10 man power armored squad armed with shotguns (I just think it'll look really really cool) and a serg with an inferno pistol, power fist, and nuncio vox, in a rhino with an assault cannon.

It only costs as much as a 20 man tactical squad, but it'll be way more mobile, situationally more useful, and again, just plain cool.

I know you can't do that with raven guard, but even without the inferno pistol, and with maybe a havoc launcher or heavy flamer on the rhino, I still think it would be good.

Hand of Mars: you're wrong. There are compulsory slots, yes. There is also a list of units and Hq units that cannot fill those compulsory slots. As such a line is made of compulsory filling units, and non compulsory filling units. For example: Navigators, librarians, and SA tank commanders are all "noncompulsory" hqs. The recon company has been debated since it's come out on this matter.

No, you're wrong.

See how easy it is to argue when you don't have to provide supporting evidence?

There is no such thing as a compulsory HQ, except when a Rite of War specifically says you must use a particular HQ. Otherwise, you have just a compulsory HQ slot that you can fit with any HQ model that doesn't have a specific rule that prevents it. In the cases you mention, all those characters have "Support Officer: this character cannot be used to fill compulsory HQ slots".

There are plenty of examples of units changing their FOC classification and being able to fill compulsory Troop choices. This language involves them "lose their Support rule", and/or "can be taken as compulsory Troops choices" and/or "can be taken as additional Troops choices". The language is very specific. When something is just flat out said to be compulsory, it is compulsory, it is mandatory, that is the meaning of the very word.

There is debate since it came out because people like to seize on any inconsistency or vagueness (see the whole mess about drop pods and immobile), and assume their interpretation is the only correct one. I may be guilty of that as well, but at least I am pointing to actual examples and specific wording in the text, whereas you keep grasping at assumed lines and categories that are never outlined, described, defined, or delineated anywhere in the text.

HandofMars wrote:

There is debate since it came out because people like to seize on any inconsistency or vagueness (see the whole mess about drop pods and immobile), and assume their interpretation is the only correct one. I may be guilty of that as well, but at least I am pointing to actual examples and specific wording in the text, whereas you keep grasping at assumed lines and categories that are never outlined, described, defined, or delineated anywhere in the text.

don't start throwing insults at someone who's only commented about this topic once. Maybe read who you're replying too before you start being rude. Seriously though, lay off the personal insults: they only make it look like you have no idea how to debate a point like an adult.

I never claimed there was 'compulsory' units in my post, but 'compulsory filling'. Stop taking the word as a literal 'must take' and look at it more as a key. in order to take a support squad, you need to fill your compulsory slots with compulsory filling troops (tacticals, breachers, etc.); same applies to HQs. As such, a new category is made: a category refereed to as 'compulsory'. Tactical squads are 'compulsory' support squads are not. A praetor is 'compulsory' and navigator is not. no one is making categories out of thin air, there is an unofficial category that has been made because of the exclusionary nature of having compulsory slots. so there is no category inventing, it's a category that has been made by both the army list AND forge world when they say a unit can or cannot be compulsory.

Funny thing is: we agree on the point topic: recon marines should fill your compulsory slots with this ROW.

Well, looks like my post got a bit off topic in the past 24 hours...

If we could please stop the debate on 3 vs 1 mandatory recon squads my thread, that would be great. I'm sure that there is a YMDC thread on the topic somewhere on dakka.

I will simply ask my local group on how they interpret the rules and play it that way. If I only need one, great. I'll run a max squad with snipers to camp backfield objectives. If I need three, I'll probably run some combat squads like Walnuts described. Though I'll keep the 3+ AS since I already get infiltrate and move through cover.

HandofMars wrote:
There is no such category, you are making things up.



As for why FW wrote in a redundancy, who knows? These are the same people that gave implacable advance to a bunch of units, and then published a book a month later than reprinted those units and took away that rule. These are the people that still are releasing Rites of War that prevent Slow and Purposeful units, even though there are no more Slow and Purposeful units in the Legion book at all.


Don't get me wrong, as someone who plays Alpha Legion as his primary, and is eyeballing building a small company of the III under Fulgrim, this would be my new default Rite if I'm not running something else. 2+ or 3+ army-wide cover? Why not.

What about Cataphractii? Slow and purposeful - some rules may seem redundant but are put in place to prevent rule-breaking or gaps with future releases.

 Brennonjw wrote:

HandofMars wrote:

There is debate since it came out because people like to seize on any inconsistency or vagueness (see the whole mess about drop pods and immobile), and assume their interpretation is the only correct one. I may be guilty of that as well, but at least I am pointing to actual examples and specific wording in the text, whereas you keep grasping at assumed lines and categories that are never outlined, described, defined, or delineated anywhere in the text.

don't start throwing insults at someone who's only commented about this topic once. Maybe read who you're replying too before you start being rude. Seriously though, lay off the personal insults: they only make it look like you have no idea how to debate a point like an adult.

I never claimed there was 'compulsory' units in my post, but 'compulsory filling'. Stop taking the word as a literal 'must take' and look at it more as a key. in order to take a support squad, you need to fill your compulsory slots with compulsory filling troops (tacticals, breachers, etc.); same applies to HQs. As such, a new category is made: a category refereed to as 'compulsory'. Tactical squads are 'compulsory' support squads are not. A praetor is 'compulsory' and navigator is not. no one is making categories out of thin air, there is an unofficial category that has been made because of the exclusionary nature of having compulsory slots. so there is no category inventing, it's a category that has been made by both the army list AND forge world when they say a unit can or cannot be compulsory.

Funny thing is: we agree on the point topic: recon marines should fill your compulsory slots with this ROW.

I apologize if you felt my words were insulting, that was not my intent. Note that people do latch on to inconsistencies, but it's not always for advantage or whatever you thought I meant. The fact remains, though, my argument has been supported by direct quotations vs. the opposition's purely assumption-based argument. Tactical squads are not compulsory, they are just troops. They can be used to fill compulsory slots, which is a completely different thing. If tactical squads were compulsory, they would be compulsory. A few units having a special rule that specifically bars them from being used to fill compulsory slots doesn't create some magical new category. So I guess if you bring Horus, you can't take terminators in the compulsory slots because he just turns them into troops, and not "compulsory troops"? The Sky Hunter Phalanx lets you take Jetbikes as Troops choices, but I guess it doesn't say Jetbikes become compulsory troop choices, so you still need to buy two units of tactical marines and then a pair of flyers to transport them. In fact, nowhere in the tactical troop entry does it state that they are compulsory, so if we accept your idea of a category, I guess we technically cannot even build a legal list without a rite of war that specifies a compulsory troop option.

It is not insulting to point out an argument is baseless, even in today's hyper-sensitive society. Again, I apologize if it caused you duress to point out logical fallacy. :(

In respect for the OP's request, that's the last I'm going to say on the topic, as I already gave my practical recommendations for the list in a previous post.

 teban wrote:

HandofMars wrote:
There is no such category, you are making things up.

As for why FW wrote in a redundancy, who knows? These are the same people that gave implacable advance to a bunch of units, and then published a book a month later than reprinted those units and took away that rule. These are the people that still are releasing Rites of War that prevent Slow and Purposeful units, even though there are no more Slow and Purposeful units in the Legion book at all.

Don't get me wrong, as someone who plays Alpha Legion as his primary, and is eyeballing building a small company of the III under Fulgrim, this would be my new default Rite if I'm not running something else. 2+ or 3+ army-wide cover? Why not.

What about Cataphractii? Slow and purposeful - some rules may seem redundant but are put in place to prevent rule-breaking or gaps with future releases.

Per the latest FAQ, cataphractii armour no longer grants slow & purposeful, because people were taking Cat-armoured characters and using them to move around heavy support squads and the like. Now they have a new rule that is basically Slow & Purposeful, without actually being S&P and thus not being transferable. That leaves you in a quandary... do you go with what is clearly intended (one of the very few instances where we actually know what they meant) and bar Cataphracts from those Rites, or do you go by the written rules, which have removed the offending rule from them and suddenly they can be taken anywhere.

In our playgroup, we've ruled to go along with the original intent and bar Cataphracts from these rites. For Recon Marines, as much as it would benefit my infiltrating Alpha Legion gunline to stack another +1 to their cover saves, we determined that a "Recon Company" should probably have more than 5 recon dudes in it. RAW directly contradicts the former, and at least to us confirms the latter. If your group is cool with you just bringing one squad, great, more power to you.