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.

w1zard wrote:

I would agree with you if you were actually claiming your troopers to be ACTUAL catachans, however many guard players have their own custom regiments that have their own ways of fighting that might be more similar to catachans, even if they use cadian models. For example, my regiment uses the <VALHALLAN> keyword because the valhallan combat doctrines fit their backstory and war methodologies very well. However, I do not ever claim they are valhallans, they are just using valhallan rules, and I would be very miffed if my opponent tried to make the argument that in order to utilize the valhallan keyword, I needed an entire army of the old metal valhallan figurines that look horrible, cost an arm and a leg, and are extremely difficult to obtain.

Hey buddy, let's not besmirch the fine Valhallan models some us use proudly. The basic squad is only 6 bucks different from the Cadian box now too. But I agree with the sentiment. If my custom regiment wants to use Valhallan models but using the Cadian doctrine, that's my business. It only becomes problematic if you bring a mix of regiments and use Cadian rules for Valhallans, Valhallan rules for Cadians and the Catachans are actually Vostroyans. I get a little miffed when people bring everything in the same paint scheme, but the tanks are actually Cadians, the artillery is Catachans and the conscripts are Valhallans. Pick a lane man...although I do understand that if you're playing competitively that's what you need to do.

Any thoughts on the best artillery? I like running heavily armored lists and have plenty of russes and chimeras, but my artillery is lacking (currently only have a single manticore). Is there a generally accepted go-to artillery piece (want to avoid FW rules if possible)? Primarily playing against, orks, tyranids, MEQ, CSM

Well if your avoiding FW and already have 1 manticore...your choices are basilisk and Wyvern (death strike is only for fluff)... basilisks are much better especially if you catachsn or cadia.

 Billagio wrote:
Any thoughts on the best artillery? I like running heavily armored lists and have plenty of russes and chimeras, but my artillery is lacking (currently only have a single manticore). Is there a generally accepted go-to artillery piece (want to avoid FW rules if possible)? Primarily playing against, orks, tyranids, MEQ, CSM

Basilisk is pretty much always most efficient choise unless you face T9+ or T5 stuff

Thanks! Time to look around for some cheap ones.

 Billagio wrote:
Thanks! Time to look around for some cheap ones.

If you play catachan use Harker and 2-3 basilisks to pretty much wreck anyone’s day.

bogalubov wrote:

Hey buddy, let's not besmirch the fine Valhallan models some us use proudly. The basic squad is only 6 bucks different from the Cadian box now too. But I agree with the sentiment. If my custom regiment wants to use Valhallan models but using the Cadian doctrine, that's my business. It only becomes problematic if you bring a mix of regiments and use Cadian rules for Valhallans, Valhallan rules for Cadians and the Catachans are actually Vostroyans. I get a little miffed when people bring everything in the same paint scheme, but the tanks are actually Cadians, the artillery is Catachans and the conscripts are Valhallans. Pick a lane man...although I do understand that if you're playing competitively that's what you need to do.

A squad of valhallans costs 50$, whereas a squad of cadians costs 35$ where I live. Maybe I exaggerated a bit when I said an arm and a leg but it is a marked increase.

Although I completely agree with you about people who paint everything the same and then try to claim multiple regiments for different detachments. These are the same type of people who then usually get "confused" about which models are from what regiment and try to give their army multiple different regimental traits. If they painted all their stuff different colors I wouldn't mind as much because it would be pretty fluffy then (different regiments fight alongside each other all of the time), and easy to tell which is which.

gungo wrote:
Well if your avoiding FW and already have 1 manticore...your choices are basilisk and Wyvern (death strike is only for fluff)... basilisks are much better especially if you catachsn or cadia.

What would you suggest when going forgeworld?

Colossus, Medusa..?

tneva82 wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Any thoughts on the best artillery? I like running heavily armored lists and have plenty of russes and chimeras, but my artillery is lacking (currently only have a single manticore). Is there a generally accepted go-to artillery piece (want to avoid FW rules if possible)? Primarily playing against, orks, tyranids, MEQ, CSM

Basilisk is pretty much always most efficient choise unless you face T9+ or T5 stuff

Well, The Manticore wounds toughness 5 on a 2+ unlike the Basilisk - seems more efficient not to mention the number of shots that get pumped out t1-t4 being much higher. I'd probably max out manticores points allowing.

 Naix wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Any thoughts on the best artillery? I like running heavily armored lists and have plenty of russes and chimeras, but my artillery is lacking (currently only have a single manticore). Is there a generally accepted go-to artillery piece (want to avoid FW rules if possible)? Primarily playing against, orks, tyranids, MEQ, CSM

Basilisk is pretty much always most efficient choise unless you face T9+ or T5 stuff

Well, The Manticore wounds toughness 5 on a 2+ unlike the Basilisk - seems more efficient not to mention the number of shots that get pumped out t1-t4 being much higher. I'd probably max out manticores points allowing.

I specifically said T5 for that.

It shoots more yes but for points difference in shots is miniscular at which point basilisks AP wins over. Remember units don't just have stats but also point costs. Do you want 2 manticore for 14 shots or 3 basilisk for 13.5 shots with better AP and more targets for enemy to destroy?

tneva82 wrote:

 Naix wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Billagio wrote:
Any thoughts on the best artillery? I like running heavily armored lists and have plenty of russes and chimeras, but my artillery is lacking (currently only have a single manticore). Is there a generally accepted go-to artillery piece (want to avoid FW rules if possible)? Primarily playing against, orks, tyranids, MEQ, CSM

Basilisk is pretty much always most efficient choise unless you face T9+ or T5 stuff

Well, The Manticore wounds toughness 5 on a 2+ unlike the Basilisk - seems more efficient not to mention the number of shots that get pumped out t1-t4 being much higher. I'd probably max out manticores points allowing.

I specifically said T5 for that.

It shoots more yes but for points difference in shots is miniscular at which point basilisks AP wins over. Remember units don't just have stats but also point costs. Do you want 2 manticore for 14 shots or 3 basilisk for 13.5 shots with better AP and more targets for enemy to destroy?

Sorry that was unclear - I meant to say whilst T9 is certainly niche, T5 is common and not a niche situation. There are also other factors in play - 2 Manticores are easier to hide out of LOS, have a higher toughness and don't have a long barrel poking around and an obnoxiously large gun shield that enemy units can draw LOS to. Also, is the math for 14 and 13.5 shots correct? If we are considering both the cadian doctrine and catachan doctrine I'd expect the hit difference to be more in the Manticore's favour than 0.5. Fair point re AP.

Yes T9 is niche but better AP will have more chance of being useful in targets to shoot than S10. I find manticore bounce off from vehicles annoyingly lot. And not many T5 low save stuff running around here. Plenty of T7 3+ or something with 2+ save though.

You're focusing too much on average shots. You need to look at the full range of possibilities and also the potential max damage the unit can put out. A Manticore on a hot run of dice will do significantly more damage than a Basilisk with s similar set of rolls.

Yes, 7 is the average value, but there's only a 16% chance of actually getting a 7. Meanwhile there's something like a 40% chance at getting above a 7. Any result of 5 or lower can be helpef with a CP reroll.

The Manticore also synergizes better with VfC Stratagem by virtue of hitting harder as a single unit than a Basilisk.

You concentrate on luck. I could say imagine damage 50 grots can do with hot run of dice! 50 over manticores 12*3=36 max damage! I'm interested what I'm likely to do. Not what I can do once in a blue moon.

And yes there's chance of rolling over 7. Equally good chance of rolling under it though. For every roll of 12 you will roll 2. Basilisk at least is less swingy so apart from often more damage average also less hurt by bad luck.,

In terms of the Manticore vs Basilisk debate, I will say that one thing hasn't really been mentioned: - Alpha striking / packing in a single very strong round of shooting to eliminate the biggest threats.

Personally, I believe that when using overlapping fields of fire and relic of lost cadia, an artillery park would benefit more from the sheer potential volume of shots from Manticore when coupled with a command re-roll.

 rhinoceraids wrote:
Good point about the Shadowsword and Vostroyan. Might try that.

Hellhounds and track guards are great. Had one move up. Flame. Then charge in to die to overwatch and blew up all my opponenets characters.

It was a big deal lol.

You take the overwatch before the charge move, unless it was like a 3 inch charge

w1zard wrote:

bogalubov wrote:

Hey buddy, let's not besmirch the fine Valhallan models some us use proudly. The basic squad is only 6 bucks different from the Cadian box now too. But I agree with the sentiment. If my custom regiment wants to use Valhallan models but using the Cadian doctrine, that's my business. It only becomes problematic if you bring a mix of regiments and use Cadian rules for Valhallans, Valhallan rules for Cadians and the Catachans are actually Vostroyans. I get a little miffed when people bring everything in the same paint scheme, but the tanks are actually Cadians, the artillery is Catachans and the conscripts are Valhallans. Pick a lane man...although I do understand that if you're playing competitively that's what you need to do.

A squad of valhallans costs 50$, whereas a squad of cadians costs 35$ where I live. Maybe I exaggerated a bit when I said an arm and a leg but it is a marked increase.

Although I completely agree with you about people who paint everything the same and then try to claim multiple regiments for different detachments. These are the same type of people who then usually get "confused" about which models are from what regiment and try to give their army multiple different regimental traits. If they painted all their stuff different colors I wouldn't mind as much because it would be pretty fluffy then (different regiments fight alongside each other all of the time), and easy to tell which is which.

Valhallan squads are $35 on the GW website:
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Valhallan-Squad

 necrontyrOG wrote:
Valhallan squads are $35 on the GW website:
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Valhallan-Squad

Weird, last time I checked they were 50$, must be a sale or something.

 Naix wrote:
In terms of the Manticore vs Basilisk debate, I will say that one thing hasn't really been mentioned: - Alpha striking / packing in a single very strong round of shooting to eliminate the biggest threats.

Personally, I believe that when using overlapping fields of fire and relic of lost cadia, an artillery park would benefit more from the sheer potential volume of shots from Manticore when coupled with a command re-roll.

Interesting, because I look at the 3 basilisk vs 2 manticore comparison a little differently. Basilisks can be lumped into the same unit, making buffs like "Vengeance for Cadia" or psyker powers impact the whole unit instead of just 1 of 2 manticores.

 Commissar_Rex wrote:

 Naix wrote:
In terms of the Manticore vs Basilisk debate, I will say that one thing hasn't really been mentioned: - Alpha striking / packing in a single very strong round of shooting to eliminate the biggest threats.

Personally, I believe that when using overlapping fields of fire and relic of lost cadia, an artillery park would benefit more from the sheer potential volume of shots from Manticore when coupled with a command re-roll.

Interesting, because I look at the 3 basilisk vs 2 manticore comparison a little differently. Basilisks can be lumped into the same unit, making buffs like "Vengeance for Cadia" or psyker powers impact the whole unit instead of just 1 of 2 manticores.

They are deployed as one unit, but act as separate units once the battle starts, it says this in their datasheets - unless you're talking about the Forgeworld ones, I don't have the rules for them. Buffs that affect a single unit, will not affect multiple basilisks in a squadron.

What are peoples thoughts on crusaders with a 2++ for tieing up tougher to kill units midboard and in general just being a nuisance

I have played against it a couple of times. It is a nuisance but it does not kill much even with help like the priest buff (S3 hurts badly), is vulnerable to denial and provides a good target for mortal wound generation as opposed to saturating with bad targets.

I can certainly see lots of fun/theme/situational uses but they are a tough sell to me for something more competitive.

IVIOOSE wrote:
What are peoples thoughts on crusaders with a 2++ for tieing up tougher to kill units midboard and in general just being a nuisance

I use a full squad of 10 along with a priest and an acolyte. It's 215 points which is a huge point sink. I have had a lot of fun playing the unit and it does distract my opponents, but you have to pay a lot of attention to how you deploy, move, and charge this unit as well as remember Acts of Faith and the Psychic Barrier. I like it but I think most guard players will struggle to get value out of this combination. You also have to be very aware of your opponent's capability to generate mortal wounds.

About that Manticore vs Basilisk argument: I've done a spreadsheet to calculate damage output and cost per wound for a LRBT, Manticore and Basilisk using Catachan doctrine (or Cadian order in case of LRBT) to re-roll amount of shots made. I assume that you will re-roll any result of 1 or 2 and keep 3+. We re-roll only one dice for Manticore of course. It gives us an average of 7,7 shots from Manticore and 5 shots from Basilisk.
Against T4, 3+ save we pay 33.6 points for a wound in case of Manticore and 31.2 for Basilisk.
Against T5, 3+ -- 33.6 and 38.9 respectively.
T4, 2+ -- 44.8 vs 38.9 (+1 AP for Basilisk comes into play).
T5, 2+ -- 44.8 vs 48.6 (but being able to wound T5 at 2+ is still cool).
T7, 3+ -- 42.0 vs 38.9.

bogalubov wrote:

w1zard wrote:

I would agree with you if you were actually claiming your troopers to be ACTUAL catachans, however many guard players have their own custom regiments that have their own ways of fighting that might be more similar to catachans, even if they use cadian models. For example, my regiment uses the <VALHALLAN> keyword because the valhallan combat doctrines fit their backstory and war methodologies very well. However, I do not ever claim they are valhallans, they are just using valhallan rules, and I would be very miffed if my opponent tried to make the argument that in order to utilize the valhallan keyword, I needed an entire army of the old metal valhallan figurines that look horrible, cost an arm and a leg, and are extremely difficult to obtain.

Hey buddy, let's not besmirch the fine Valhallan models some us use proudly. The basic squad is only 6 bucks different from the Cadian box now too. But I agree with the sentiment. If my custom regiment wants to use Valhallan models but using the Cadian doctrine, that's my business. It only becomes problematic if you bring a mix of regiments and use Cadian rules for Valhallans, Valhallan rules for Cadians and the Catachans are actually Vostroyans. I get a little miffed when people bring everything in the same paint scheme, but the tanks are actually Cadians, the artillery is Catachans and the conscripts are Valhallans. Pick a lane man...although I do understand that if you're playing competitively that's what you need to do.

I should have been more clear that this is more what bugs me. If you paint and model your army with a certain idea in mind or get bored from your regiment from playing it week in and week out thats one thing. What drives me nuts are when folks take advantage of that sentiment and field a hodge podge of whatever is strongest that month and never made or will make any effort in trying make the experience better for their opponent. The person I was responding to was talking about buying into guard as a CP farm/screen, maybe he has plans whatever but it sounded like it was for competitive reasons, to which I was suggesting he simply use the Cadian doctrine since it is better for those reasons and is far less confusing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

w1zard wrote:

 necrontyrOG wrote:
Valhallan squads are $35 on the GW website:
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Valhallan-Squad

Weird, last time I checked they were 50$, must be a sale or something.

No it definitely isn't. What changed was back before they gave you 20 cadians per box, they then halved the contents. It's been this way for a while. The Cadians are also garbage sculpts compare to the old metal lines, personally I'd buy up as many of those old regiments as I could if I were a new player but that's just me. Sure they are metal, but they also need zero assembly and are WAY easier to paint.

So I've been running Solar Macharius as my infantry (Mordian army) warlord now, and I'm struggling to find the right rules to fit him, even just equipment. Original rules were:

Equipment: Master-crafted bolt pistol, master-crafted power weapon, carapace armor (4+ save), trademark item (re-roll failed LD), Helm of Macharius (3+ Invul.)

Models within 12" use his LD

+D3 attacks on the charge

Random WS & Attacks

Automatically goes first

Here's what I've been trying:

1) Company Commander

Bolt Pistol, Power Sword, Laurel's of Command, Grand Strategist

Equipment seems meh, but feels like the Master Strategist he is

2) Company Commander

Bolt Pistol, Power Sword, Deathmask of Ollanius, Grand Strategist

Better equipment feel, but not a good enough commander

3) Lord Commissar 

Bolt Pistol, Blade of Conquest, Master of Command 

This one feels like the best equipped (Carapace, Force Field, Actual Macharian Powersword,) LD bubble, and re-roll Morale being a commissar, but doesn't feel like the leader of men he should be, though he can issue orders to basically any model.



Any suggestions or things I may have missed? I know he'll never be what he used to be, but I'd like to be as close to the fluff as possible.

 Red Corsair wrote:

No it definitely isn't. What changed was back before they gave you 20 cadians per box, they then halved the contents. It's been this way for a while. The Cadians are also garbage sculpts compare to the old metal lines, personally I'd buy up as many of those old regiments as I could if I were a new player but that's just me. Sure they are metal, but they also need zero assembly and are WAY easier to paint.

The great thing about metal models is that they retain their value as well. If someone is selling metal models, I'm willing to pay full price if they "assembled" (perhaps even increasing price as they become rare). For plastic models, if it's not on sprue, I'm probably not interested.

The Lord Commissar would be the most appropriate of the options presented.

Alpharius Walks wrote:
The Lord Commissar would be the most appropriate of the options presented.

Yeah I agree with this one. He can fight like Macharius and still play the giving orders game as well as giving an aura of using his leadership. He ticks all the marks to some level. You could also just give the company commander the master crafted power sword as well and he would check the fighting box a bit better as well as being able to issue up to three orders as opposed to one. If he somehow survives a full enemy turn of combat he could order himself to fight in the shooting phase which would be funny.

But yeah overall I say go with the Commissar idea. He has all the bases covered and a commissar issuing orders is pretty cool.

w1zard wrote:

 necrontyrOG wrote:
Valhallan squads are $35 on the GW website:
https://www.games-workshop.com/en-US/Valhallan-Squad

Weird, last time I checked they were 50$, must be a sale or something.

I bet you were looking at Australian pricing That happens to me all the time. Then I switch back to USA and my blood pressure comes down...

The one thing I would add to the Manticore vs Bassie argument is this: Bassies shoot every single freaking turn....period...