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.

Captyn_Bob wrote:

Claas wrote:
So what is the correct way to use cultist from Lost and Damned in an AL insurgency force? Is it two separate rolls of 2 potential units or a rule that does nothing? The faq just says they don't interact in any stackable way.

No idea. I would play it as two rolls but maximum of one cultist unit. That way you are following the rules as written but aren't getting "stacked" benefits.

That's actually how I have played it due to only having 60 cultists.

Claas wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:

Claas wrote:
So what is the correct way to use cultist from Lost and Damned in an AL insurgency force? Is it two separate rolls of 2 potential units or a rule that does nothing? The faq just says they don't interact in any stackable way.

No idea. I would play it as two rolls but maximum of one cultist unit. That way you are following the rules as written but aren't getting "stacked" benefits.

That's actually how I have played it due to only having 60 cultists.

Isn't the second roll stacking, since it improves the odds the unit will return to the board? I would never bring up the issue myself, but I know many people who would.

 techsoldaten wrote:

Claas wrote:

Captyn_Bob wrote:

Claas wrote:
So what is the correct way to use cultist from Lost and Damned in an AL insurgency force? Is it two separate rolls of 2 potential units or a rule that does nothing? The faq just says they don't interact in any stackable way.

No idea. I would play it as two rolls but maximum of one cultist unit. That way you are following the rules as written but aren't getting "stacked" benefits.

That's actually how I have played it due to only having 60 cultists.

Isn't the second roll stacking, since it improves the odds the unit will return to the board? I would never bring up the issue myself, but I know many people who would.

Yes. If you do more than exactly what one rule says, you have stacked them in some way, and you can not stack them in *any* way, so you get to use one rule, exactly as written.

Edit: I also HATE that they used the word "stack" like it's something defined in the rules anywhere. Now people are going to argue or just genuinely be confused about what the FAQ means. It means the rules don't interact, you don't get to use a part that appears in both, you don't get 2 dice but 1 unit, you don't get 2 dice and 2 units, and you don't get 1 dice but 2 units. You get 1 dice to maybe get 1 unit.

Nurglitch wrote:
There's the option of a Black Legion Raptor Talon deep-striking on turn 1, and planting a Dimensional Key in some unfortunate.

Yea, but it kind of defeats it's own purpose since you now need to keep all your units in reserve until turn two like everybody else. It's still a better deepstrike than normal but the formation bonus is kind of lost.
It's a little awkward lol. You'd want to use a different detachment since only a single unit benefits from T1 deepstrike, but then you can't activate the key anymore.
Might be better to stick with a cabal and fish for the right psychic powers and then use a Black Crusade detachment or CAD to activate the key.
Or go full BL and just say "screw it" and risk it without the key.

 Roknar wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:
There's the option of a Black Legion Raptor Talon deep-striking on turn 1, and planting a Dimensional Key in some unfortunate.

Yea, but it kind of defeats it's own purpose since you now need to keep all your units in reserve until turn two like everybody else. It's still a better deepstrike than normal but the formation bonus is kind of lost.
It's a little awkward lol. You'd want to use a different detachment since only a single unit benefits from T1 deepstrike, but then you can't activate the key anymore.
Might be better to stick with a cabal and fish for the right psychic powers and then use a Black Crusade detachment or CAD to activate the key.
Or go full BL and just say "screw it" and risk it without the key.

You deepstrike 2/3 of your army than 2/3 of those 2/3 mishaps and 1/2 of those 2/3 of those 2/3 goes back into ongoing reserves. So, the key is kinda useful 1/3 of the time when the key bearer doesn't mishap. If he somehow manages to survive the turn being just a regular 3-wound raptor guy with a couple more raptors around.

the cultist one indeed is odd

first because give to the AL a rule more or less clsoe to the one they already have is *****

But no stack? ok, what that means?

also, why not stack if they are different rules with different names?

 koooaei wrote:

 Roknar wrote:

Nurglitch wrote:
There's the option of a Black Legion Raptor Talon deep-striking on turn 1, and planting a Dimensional Key in some unfortunate.

Yea, but it kind of defeats it's own purpose since you now need to keep all your units in reserve until turn two like everybody else. It's still a better deepstrike than normal but the formation bonus is kind of lost.
It's a little awkward lol. You'd want to use a different detachment since only a single unit benefits from T1 deepstrike, but then you can't activate the key anymore.
Might be better to stick with a cabal and fish for the right psychic powers and then use a Black Crusade detachment or CAD to activate the key.
Or go full BL and just say "screw it" and risk it without the key.

You deepstrike 2/3 of your army than 2/3 of those 2/3 mishaps and 1/2 of those 2/3 of those 2/3 goes back into ongoing reserves. So, the key is kinda useful 1/3 of the time when the key bearer doesn't mishap. If he somehow manages to survive the turn being just a regular 3-wound raptor guy with a couple more raptors around.

It's further awkward in that a comms relay really helps. In combination with the key, you would not scatter and thanks to re-rolls most of those 2/3 (or 100% if you really push it) would actually arrive turn 2, but of course, you can't have that with the speartip so you need a CAD ( or iron warriors I guess). So yea, the speartip makes the key work, but then you don't get anything else out of the spear tip and you really want a comms relay, aka CAD, aka not a speartip.

It works, but from a design perspective it's hardly ideal. The thing that lets you deepstrike somewhat decently is the thing you don't want when you want to deepstrike decently. It's like ordering a fancy drink then eating the cherry and pouring the rest away.
You get your cherry but it's such a waste.

Franarok wrote:
the cultist one indeed is odd

first because give to the AL a rule more or less clsoe to the one they already have is *****

But no stack? ok, what that means?

Exactly. They didn't actually define "stack" within their game terms, so we have to go with the colloquial meaning (like so much else they write). So it would mean you can't benefit from both rules in any way, shape, or form.

As I said above:

It means the rules don't interact, you don't get to use a part that appears in both, you don't get 2 dice but 1 unit, you don't get 2 dice and 2 units, and you don't get 1 dice but 2 units. You get 1 dice to maybe get 1 unit.

also, why not stack if they are different rules with different names?

Because Games Workshop is Games Workshop.

Yeaahhh but as human beings with free will, we can ignore nonsense interpretations that do nothing, and come up with our own sensible ones.

Yeah this is still irritating me. Keep bugging them on Facebook.

Captyn_Bob wrote:
Yeaahhh but as human beings with free will, we can ignore nonsense interpretations that do nothing, and come up with our own sensible ones.

Yeah this is still irritating me. Keep bugging them on Facebook.

I agree, but technically, it's not the interpretation that does nothing at this point, it's the rule that does nothing

Plus, not everyone can rely on house-ruling things :/

Ran a Night Lord 1850 list at a GT this past weekend. Went 1 and 4... Not good. Major takeaways:

Night Lord Talons that are gonna deep strike must have comms relays. I played 3 games where stuff didn't get on the table until turn 4... Like 40%+ of my stuff. Every game felt like I was fighting with one hand behind my back.

I had a fire raptor, but I think Helldrakes might be the way forward. I really like the negative leadership hit there, and vector strike and a template are a little too tasty to pass up on.

Stormbolt armor on a Tzeentch DP stole Slay the Warlord from my opponents every game. It's nasty. I only really got use out of him as a sorcerer, but still did solid damage and dodged a lot of bullets.

I dropped my dreadclaw in favor of two rhinos. I regret this. Less speed, no guaranteed T1 deep strike, rhinos just didn't synergize with my list.

Finally I'm on the fence about MSU for raptors... It makes them much easier to deepstrike, but when reserves got wonky, a squad of 6 wasn't cutting it. Thinking I might go with bigger squads, at least to encircle the Lord.

The interpretation is also lacking. Stacking implies some for m of addition. That's not happening here. The death of one unit triggers two completely separate rules that work in isolation from each other. There is no stacking, technically speaking. Two +1 boni to a save stack to give a 2+ bonus. It's only stacking here if you consider it a +1 bonus to creating a new unit, but that's really not how the rules work. They really shouldn't have worded it like that... or any other way, it's total BS.

 Kajaki War Pig wrote:
Finally I'm on the fence about MSU for raptors... It makes them much easier to deepstrike, but when reserves got wonky, a squad of 6 wasn't cutting it. Thinking I might go with bigger squads, at least to encircle the Lord.

MSU doesn't really work all that well unless you're Death Guard. I mentioned this to someone else but I think deep striking your raptors is a bad idea with Night Lords. Your cover saves get pretty stupid turn one. Sure you're going to lose a unit or two if the enemy ignores cover, but I figure it's a small price to pay to actually, you know, have your units on the table.

You should still Deep Strike some though. I'm thinking you'd want 1 5 dude squad for every Raptor squad already on the board.

Doesn't apply to Death Guard who are awesome in every way.

Yeah, it was really hard for me to wrap my head around the murder talon benefits of 2 or more units, but not deepstriking to use that disordered charge. I was so excited to use it, over the course of five games I was still in denial.... The charge from deep strike is so hard to pull of it's not worth it.

Can't you throw in an allied detachment with a sorcerer, 10 cultists and an aegis with comm? They won't get the talon benefits but they're still Night Lords.

That only helps them arrive though, not deepstrike where they need to be.

Tested the deathguard chosen last night worked out really well. Odd combo 2plasma 1melta 1auto cannon and one flamer in a rhino. Did really act as a Swiss army unit as I'd hoped. Auto cannon with relentless was awesome. First time I fired it I took two hull points off a knight which I admit was lucky.

The mix of weapons durability mobility and even three base attacks really paid off. Gonna run two of these units as standard at 1850.

Also a dp with level 1 and pandemic staff also felt very Swiss army and durable. Poison 2+ flamer was pretty sweet combined with nurgles rot and 5 s8 attacks rerolling 1s against most stuff with no daemon weapon 1 chance was good just seemed like a much better all-rounder than a mace prince

That's honestly sounding God awful. I've been doing 4 Melta Guns and a Flamer plus a Combi-Melta.
I'm expecting Cults to become a thing and it isn't like I need to target more than 5 Melta Guns at something to kill it most of the time.

Speaking of weird squad loadouts, how do people tool out their assorted Marine squads? There are a few oddities I'm working with for my Word Bearers:

Bikes: I run two units of: 3 Bikes with the Mark of Slaanesh, 2 Meltaguns, and a Champion with a Power Lance. They hunt tanks or isolated squads; Veterans + Favored Scions + Mark of Slaanesh means they will do damage while being fairly expendable.

Basic Marines: Normally, I'm used to "All Bolters, one Melta, and Champ with Combi-Meltagun". However, when I was tweaking my main army, I ended up with 4 points leftover! I normally like having "symmetrical" loadouts between most of my army, and so I changed my Marines to have the following loadout: 2 Marines with Bolt Pistol and Close Combat Weapon, 1 Marine with Boltgun, 1 Marine with a Meltagun and extra Close Combat Weapon, and a Champion with a Combi-Melta. Though it's messy and mixed-up, the result is the unit can either fire two Bolters, two Meltaguns, or "finish off" weaker units in Assault. Depending on if I want to shoot or charge, either the Bolter Marine or one of the Pistol Marines gets to chuck the squad grenade.

Terminators: Normally I've been a fan of running nothing but Power Axes, but I'm now pondering whether there's merit to mix-and-matching melee weapons on the Termicide (giving the Champion something else, that is). It's nit-picky, but the extra AP is probably not "as" important compared to being able to strike at initiative or to have the raw strength of a Maul. Am I just being crazy? (For Death Guard, Axes all the way though)

Havocs: I don't have any builds with Havocs yet, but one thing I've been really pondering is whether there are cases where it's worth taking the squad as "two missile launchers, two autocannons?" The unit costs 125 points instead of 115, but both weapons have the same range band, both weapons have similar strength values, the only difference being you're trading the extra shots for the lower AP/better strength. Part of me thinks that 10 points to threaten Bikers to want to Jink is worth the net loss of efficiency, but maybe I'm being crazy.

Franarok wrote:
the cultist one indeed is odd

first because give to the AL a rule more or less clsoe to the one they already have is *****

But no stack? ok, what that means?

also, why not stack if they are different rules with different names?

It means you can't bring two cultist units back from one being wiped out. But you do get two chances to try and bring the single unit back. Stacking refers to receiving the same benefit (I. E. A returning unit) more than once.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
Speaking of weird squad loadouts, how do people tool out their assorted Marine squads? There are a few oddities I'm working with for my Word Bearers:

Bikes: I run two units of: 3 Bikes with the Mark of Slaanesh, 2 Meltaguns, and a Champion with a Power Lance. They hunt tanks or isolated squads; Veterans + Favored Scions + Mark of Slaanesh means they will do damage while being fairly expendable.

Basic Marines: Normally, I'm used to "All Bolters, one Melta, and Champ with Combi-Meltagun". However, when I was tweaking my main army, I ended up with 4 points leftover! I normally like having "symmetrical" loadouts between most of my army, and so I changed my Marines to have the following loadout: 2 Marines with Bolt Pistol and Close Combat Weapon, 1 Marine with Boltgun, 1 Marine with a Meltagun and extra Close Combat Weapon, and a Champion with a Combi-Melta. Though it's messy and mixed-up, the result is the unit can either fire two Bolters, two Meltaguns, or "finish off" weaker units in Assault. Depending on if I want to shoot or charge, either the Bolter Marine or one of the Pistol Marines gets to chuck the squad grenade.

Terminators: Normally I've been a fan of running nothing but Power Axes, but I'm now pondering whether there's merit to mix-and-matching melee weapons on the Termicide (giving the Champion something else, that is). It's nit-picky, but the extra AP is probably not "as" important compared to being able to strike at initiative or to have the raw strength of a Maul. Am I just being crazy? (For Death Guard, Axes all the way though)

Havocs: I don't have any builds with Havocs yet, but one thing I've been really pondering is whether there are cases where it's worth taking the squad as "two missile launchers, two autocannons?" The unit costs 125 points instead of 115, but both weapons have the same range band, both weapons have similar strength values, the only difference being you're trading the extra shots for the lower AP/better strength. Part of me thinks that 10 points to threaten Bikers to want to Jink is worth the net loss of efficiency, but maybe I'm being crazy.

Autocannons are still king. We have Heldrakes or Blight Drones if we really want to kill Bikers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Regarding Power Weapons on Terminators, Maule and Axes all the way. Power Fist per four I have, but otherwise keep them specialized. Before we got this major boost, I've used Termicide with MoK and then either Mauls or Axes with decent effect. Now it just works even better.

Didn't look like this has been covered but Should I attach Abaddon to a unit in the Raptor Talon, Mr. Abaddon gets to assault out of Deep strike, yes?

He wouldn't get the Talon benefits as far as I know.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
That's honestly sounding God awful. I've been doing 4 Melta Guns and a Flamer plus a Combi-Melta.
I'm expecting Cults to become a thing and it isn't like I need to target more than 5 Melta Guns at something to kill it most of the time.

I know it sounds like a complete mishmash squad, it surprised me how allrounded and useful it was though!

 Bach wrote:
Didn't look like this has been covered but Should I attach Abaddon to a unit in the Raptor Talon, Mr. Abaddon gets to assault out of Deep strike, yes?

He'd only get it if the Raptor Talon Lord could be exchanged for Abbadon

Played at a ITC tournament today hosted by Golden Sprue GT winner Nick Nanavati.

My G2 was against Nick, and boy was it a crazy slugger fest, Magnus vs. Magnus. Nick ran the same list he did at the GT, which was posted earlier.

My list: CAD:
Sorcerer: MoT,
10xCultist: MoT
10xCultist: MoT
Magnus (warlord)

Void Shield Generator:3x Shields

Omniscent Oracles
Fateweaver
Lord of Change: ML3, Impossible Robe, staff of change

Allied DET
HoT-ML3, Grim, disc
5xScreamers
10xBlue Horrors

ITC Mission: Purge the Alien
I won the roll off and made Nick go first.
Turn 1 he couldn't do much because he deploy his princes farther back and mainly because of my void shield. He flew his princes forward and summoned plague drones and horrors. My turn 1 I was able to take out one of his DP thanks to a lucky rolled of 6 for the Prismatic gaze giving me first strike.

Next few turns, he kept summoning a few more stuff and pulling farther ahead in maelstrom. Turn 2 his Magnus casted force and took out my Lord of Tz in assault when I rolled a 2 and then roll a 1 on Fatey's re-roll. He also deep struck the masque near Fatey and shut down his movement forcing Fatey to go into glide mode on my turn. T3 he took out Fatey by vector striking 2 DPs and a bunch of high rolls on shriek. He did however peril one of his DP and failed grounding check which allowed me to assault and kill it with my Magnus.

I pretty much gave up on maelstrom and focused mainly on taking out his summoned units and the brimstone horrors. I was a ahead in KPs thanks to Screamer star and Magnus. Nick somehow caught up on KPs when we went to turn 6 because I finally failed Grim on the screamers(we tied on Turn 5). I was on the verge of losing, so I made a last ditch effort and threw the rest of my 4 remaining warp dices on flicker fire (level3) and took out his Chariot of Tz allowing me to win primary.

Final score 6-6 Tie. I rolled like crap this game(like always) and he made a lot of good saves. Man it was crazy

 Tonberry7 wrote:

Franarok wrote:
the cultist one indeed is odd

first because give to the AL a rule more or less clsoe to the one they already have is *****

But no stack? ok, what that means?

also, why not stack if they are different rules with different names?

It means you can't bring two cultist units back from one being wiped out. But you do get two chances to try and bring the single unit back. Stacking refers to receiving the same benefit (I. E. A returning unit) more than once.

Two dice rolls is benefitting from part of both rules.

You are stacking them in some way if you roll two dice.

The faq says they do not stack in *any* way

It's not a house ruling something to interpret a vague FAQ in a way that makes a new rule, not completely meaningless.

Strictest RAW, they are two separate rules with different names, so do not stack in any way, just like another other two completely different rules. In the spirit of things, I would ignore strictest RAW and interpret the FAQ answer in a sensible, and not pointless way.

The thing is, we know this didn't make it past a rules author, we've seen the email that this came from, it was a knee jerk response, that somehow got released. Maybe a real traitor legions FAQ will come out sometime.

Captyn_Bob wrote:


Strictest RAW, they are two separate rules with different names, so do not stack in any way, just like another other two completely different rules. In the spirit of things, I would ignore strictest RAW and interpret the FAQ answer in a sensible, and not pointless way.

Which means ignore it entirely.

That's the thing. Yeah it clearly didn't make it through any kind of testing or editing or thought process at all, but if the two rules having different names alone means they don't stack but are both used, then there's no reason for the FAQ answer to exist in the way it does. The wording it has, I mean. The "strictest RAW" is that they do not "interact in any stackable way" because that is explicitly stated. If your stance then becomes "Well that's a vague wording, they don't interact anyway, so I get to use both regardless" then you're ignoring the actual written word and assuming (interpreting) that they answered the question in that way because the rules would both be usable and non-interactive with each other at the same time. If that were true, the answer would have actually just been "use both rules." Since that's not what they said, we don't get to use any part of both, meaning we get to use only one. Anything else is yes, a house rule.

Take it to ymdc if you disagree.

For actual tactics: Has anyone playing IW been doing the fortification auxiliary to a Grand Company and what are you taking? I have the vengeance weapons batteries but I haven't used the actual Grand Company yet.