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.

 Otto von Bludd wrote:
Edit: Regarding Vulture loadouts I think there is a case to be made for the Rocket pods. No you don't get 40 shots (you get 4d6, 1D6 per pod), but you get 72" range and -1AP. This means you never need to move so you'll be hitting whatever you want on turn 1 at BS3+. -1AP is really nice; it's never wasted and STR5 is also the sweet spot. I'm considering trying out 2 pods with Lascannons or 4 pods on my Vulture instead of the Gatlings because they seems rather underwhelming to me this edition.

The Hellfury missiles are 72" 2D6 S4 AP0, but the MRPs are D6 36" S5 AP-1, which hovering at that range makes me a little nervous about return fire. For MEQ munching the MRPs seem pretty decent, but what about tank hunting? Two Hellstrike missiles a turn or six equivalent one-shots on the first turn as an alpha strike?

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Given the Pask FAQ and inferring the intent of the rules as written, I'm inclined to believe officers cannot be ordered.

Possibly even more useful than ordering the likes of Yarrick or Pask to fight in the shooting phase is ordering an officer to MOVE MOVE MOVE! in order to keep up with the units that have already done so. I find myself running troops to grab OBJs and then the ordering officer is left in the dust.

This is what the FAQ says:
Q: Can a Tank Commander or Knight Commander Pask issue a Tank Order to themselves?
A: No.

It says nothing about Officers. Nothing. Whoever answered that FAQ, if they had the intent to infer that this applies to ALL units that issue orders, should have made that clear. Until such time, RAW is all we have to go on.

Voice of command is an aura ability where you can select an infantry unit with the same Regimental keyword (so NOT Yarrick) within that aura. The exact wording is this [my commentary in brackets]:
This unit may issue one order per turn to the soldiers under their command at the start of their Shooting phase. [Note: The officer is a "soldier under his own command". Any commander not in command of himself is not really in command of his men either. That being said, THERE ARE NO KEYWORDS IN THIS SENTENCE. Because of this, its effects in relation to who does what to whom is not binding in any way. The only clarification offered here is how many orders can be issued and when they are issued.]
Orders may only be issued to INFANTRY [Hey, look, a keyword that applies to AM officers!] units within 6" of this unit [which includes the unit itself, as per the aura FAQ] that have the same <REGIMENT> [another keyword that does indeed apply to the officer] keyword as this unit. To issue an order, pick a target unit and choose which order you wish to issue from the table below. A unit may only be affected by one order per turn. [I see NOTHING barring an officer from issuing and order to himself, or another officer in the RAW or the FAQ]

It's subservient wording.

A commander is in command, in an official military sense, of his troops.

In the force organization the troops would be below him.

In the same org he would not also be below himself. That makes no sense.

"What are your orders sir?" "Fix bayonets!"
"And what are your orders...to...yourself?"

There are no keywords. You can order yourself all you want. But I wouldn't be playing it like that.

Depends on what you count as an order.

For example, I can't imagine someone ordering themselves to fix bayonets.

However, I can easily see someone 'ordering' themselves in the manner of "Come on, you can do this!"

 rhinoceraids wrote:
It's subservient wording.

A commander is in command, in an official military sense, of his troops.

In the force organization the troops would be below him.

In the same org he would not also be below himself. That makes no sense.

"What are your orders sir?" "Fix bayonets!"
"And what are your orders...to...yourself?"

There are no keywords. You can order yourself all you want. But I wouldn't be playing it like that.

Think of it differently:

Either the officer can focus on doing what he is doing (giving him the benefits of an order) or he can focus on leadership (giving others the benefit of an order). Or, he could lose focus completely, and give no orders.

40k is abstract, and what is called an 'order' may be thought of in a variety of ways. After all, how would you play a regiment that took a vow of silence as penance?

For sure. You can forge whatever narrative you want. Maybe the officer pulls out a mirror and gives himself an order. Or perhaps he has multiple personalities.

Maybe its correct or incorrect. But either way it doesn't change the language used. If you asked any officer in any military about the soldiers under his command. He is likely not going to talk about himself. Poor argument in 40k? Yes. Yes it is.

 rhinoceraids wrote:
For sure. You can forge whatever narrative you want. Maybe the officer pulls out a mirror and gives himself an order. Or perhaps he has multiple personalities.

Maybe its correct or incorrect. But either way it doesn't change the language used. If you asked any officer in any military about the soldiers under his command. He is likely not going to talk about himself. Poor argument in 40k? Yes. Yes it is.

Where are you even going now? I don't understand what you're on about.

Also for the record referencing real life is funny. Next time I talk to an active-duty military person I am going to ask them if having a Priest nearby makes them hit people one extra time in each Fight phase.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 rhinoceraids wrote:
For sure. You can forge whatever narrative you want. Maybe the officer pulls out a mirror and gives himself an order. Or perhaps he has multiple personalities.

Maybe its correct or incorrect. But either way it doesn't change the language used. If you asked any officer in any military about the soldiers under his command. He is likely not going to talk about himself. Poor argument in 40k? Yes. Yes it is.

Where are you even going now? I don't understand what you're on about.

Also for the record referencing real life is funny. Next time I talk to an active-duty military person I am going to ask them if having a Priest nearby makes them hit people one extra time in each Fight phase.

Of course they do! That's what padre's are for!

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 rhinoceraids wrote:
For sure. You can forge whatever narrative you want. Maybe the officer pulls out a mirror and gives himself an order. Or perhaps he has multiple personalities.

Maybe its correct or incorrect. But either way it doesn't change the language used. If you asked any officer in any military about the soldiers under his command. He is likely not going to talk about himself. Poor argument in 40k? Yes. Yes it is.

Where are you even going now? I don't understand what you're on about.

Also for the record referencing real life is funny. Next time I talk to an active-duty military person I am going to ask them if having a Priest nearby makes them hit people one extra time in each Fight phase.

Exactly. People should stop making inferences from real life and start reading the RAW.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 vipoid wrote:
Depends on what you count as an order.

For example, I can't imagine someone ordering themselves to fix bayonets.

However, I can easily see someone 'ordering' themselves in the manner of "Come on, you can do this!"

What is and isn't an order doesn't depend on anything we think. It is defined in the codex and each one is in a fancy chart.

My mistake about the 72" range MRPS, I must have confused them with the other missiles. I think lascannons / MRPS is still a nice loadout though because we don't exactly have a plethora of BS3+ lascannons and the adition of the MRPS give you some capability vs infnatry (when combined with the HB) as well as the ability to chip off a few wounds if the lascannons don't finish the job on something big.

Valks aren't inherently bad.

I just hate paying for a lascannon which is going to hit on a 5.

Could bring an officer of the fleet to help allow for rerolling 1's?

Mortars can shoot from a sealed room on the first floor of a 10 story building and hit another unit in a sealed room in a similar building 48" away. Real life has absolutely no bearing on the rules.

RogueApiary wrote:
Mortars can shoot from a sealed room on the first floor of a 10 story building and hit another unit in a sealed room in a similar building 48" away. Real life has absolutely no bearing on the rules.

I keep seeing this. But real life, reality. Does have bearing on this game.

Some parts are grossly exaggerated or flat out wrong. but to say real life has no bearing on the game isn't genuinely true.

There are no shortage of aspects which seem reasonable for a table top game to emulate real life.

Flamers are pretty short range

Mortars, are pretty long range.

Troops move less than bikes, planes, etc. All reasonable.

Vehicles are generally harder to kill than troops.

Realistically battle's wouldn't take place on my kitchen table with inanimate objects. But within the generally accepted paradigm of the game it's very easy to argue that many aspects are a reasonable transition from reality to a tabletop game.

Does everything make sense? No of course not.

Real life and common sense have no place in 40k and I don't care who says otherwise. One common saying around my local group is don't play with common sense play the rules. I read everything as RAW with no exception just like when I play magic

 rhinoceraids wrote:

RogueApiary wrote:
Mortars can shoot from a sealed room on the first floor of a 10 story building and hit another unit in a sealed room in a similar building 48" away. Real life has absolutely no bearing on the rules.

I keep seeing this. But real life, reality. Does have bearing on this game.

Some parts are grossly exaggerated or flat out wrong. but to say real life has no bearing on the game isn't genuinely true.

There are no shortage of aspects which seem reasonable for a table top game to emulate real life.

Flamers are pretty short range

Mortars, are pretty long range.

Troops move less than bikes, planes, etc. All reasonable.

Vehicles are generally harder to kill than troops.

Realistically battle's wouldn't take place on my kitchen table with inanimate objects. But within the generally accepted paradigm of the game it's very easy to argue that many aspects are a reasonable transition from reality to a tabletop game.

Does everything make sense? No of course not.

My point is that because quite a few things make no sense, you cannot use real life to extrapolate RAI interpretations. Thus, the magical teleporting mortar rounds example. If the RAW says a guy can yell at himself to go faster, he can yell at himself to go faster. There's no need to come up with some funky narrative to justify it or argue against it.

Unless both players can agree on RAI beforehand, we must default to RAW and FAQ/ERRATA.

 rhinoceraids wrote:
Valks aren't inherently bad.

I just hate paying for a lascannon which is going to hit on a 5.

Could bring an officer of the fleet to help allow for rerolling 1's?

I only run them fully loaded anymore. My opponents just don't shoot at them, lol. Which is exactly what I want until I drop off their load of Bullgryn with a Priest and maybe Straken and the other one dumps off a bunch of vets with shotguns and as many flamers as they can carry!

I do actually like the lascannon on it though, I've managed to hit more with that stupid thing on 5+ than my regular guard squads. And the fact it can spit out 2D6 S5 AP-1 MRPs and then the 2x heavy bolters I add is at least fun to throw dice around. But once they drop their loads off, they just can hover and actually do something. I think I may have done more damage to enemy vehicles this edition with heavy bolters than damn near any other weapon system haha.

What are the thoughts on the Malcador tanks?

For 300 points, the Malcador Defender outputs a moderate amount of anti-infantry dakka; and has 18w to boot.

That said, if it moves, it goes down to BS5 (except on the main gun); and while it has +1 to hits on Overwatch - if it gets stuck in melee, it's virtually pointless as it has no Fall Back+Fire rules. I'll be honest, I just love the idea of the Defender - tons of dakka, coupled with a Demolisher cannon; plus a little tankyness and +1 overwatch. Perhaps not the most effective, but, sounds fun.

Edit: Scratch bits about Tarantula turrets - Battlescribe gave me the wrong price; =(.

fe40k wrote:
What are the thoughts on the Malcador tanks/Tarantula Turrets?

For 300 points, the Malcador Defender outputs a moderate amount of anti-infantry dakka; and has 18w to boot.

That said, if it moves, it goes down to BS5 (except on the main gun); and while it has +1 to hits on Overwatch - if it gets stuck in melee, it's virtually pointless as it has no Fall Back+Fire rules. I'll be honest, I just love the idea of the Defender - tons of dakka, coupled with a Demolisher cannon; plus a little tankyness and +1 overwatch. Perhaps not the most effective, but, sounds fun.

Tarantula turrets seem interesting; for 105 points you get 6 immobile lascannons that can only target the nearest non-infantry. Overall they're pretty cheap, and if you place them on the perimeter, can randomly deny deep strikes and portions of the board, as they can spread out 6" from eachother (18+9" board coverage).

I thought the turrets are50 each. 10 pts for the mount and 40 for twin lc. But I may be wrong. .

They are fun. Cool models. Decent anti tank units. Which can hide easily because they are so small. I just don't like immobile units myself. But it's easy enough to bash some together to try.

I've had success with the cyclops. Such a nifty little guy. Tough too.

 rhinoceraids wrote:

fe40k wrote:
What are the thoughts on the Malcador tanks/Tarantula Turrets?

For 300 points, the Malcador Defender outputs a moderate amount of anti-infantry dakka; and has 18w to boot.

That said, if it moves, it goes down to BS5 (except on the main gun); and while it has +1 to hits on Overwatch - if it gets stuck in melee, it's virtually pointless as it has no Fall Back+Fire rules. I'll be honest, I just love the idea of the Defender - tons of dakka, coupled with a Demolisher cannon; plus a little tankyness and +1 overwatch. Perhaps not the most effective, but, sounds fun.

Tarantula turrets seem interesting; for 105 points you get 6 immobile lascannons that can only target the nearest non-infantry. Overall they're pretty cheap, and if you place them on the perimeter, can randomly deny deep strikes and portions of the board, as they can spread out 6" from eachother (18+9" board coverage).

I thought the turrets are50 each. 10 pts for the mount and 40 for twin lc. But I may be wrong. .

They are fun. Cool models. Decent anti tank units. Which can hide easily because they are so small. I just don't like immobile units myself. But it's easy enough to bash some together to try.

I've had success with the cyclops. Such a nifty little guy. Tough too.

You're correct - they're 40 points per Twin Lascannon, plus 10pts base.

Battlescribe was wrong; damn, that makes them seriously less appealing. I was fine with the immobility and auto targeting rules when they were much 25pts for Twin Lascannon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So; a while back, I purchased a large army of Astra Militarum. However, there's no defining focus one way or another at the moment; it seems pretty bare bones overall - simply, I'm going to need to purchase more models in any case.

What models do you think I should be heading towards with my current collection?

: 1 Command Squad
: 2 "Squad Commands" (not sure what these are, will have to double check when shipment arrives)
: 1 Commissar Yarrick
: 2 Commissars
: 2 Primaris Psyker
: 13 Psykers
: 2 Regimental Advisors (missing the third)

: 122 Guardsman (90 regular, 32 Mordian metal; various special weapons (willing to convert for more))
: 10 Kasarkin Storm Troopers
: 15 Heavy Weapons Teams (6 Lascannon, 3 Missile Launcher, 3 Heavy Bolter, 3 Mortar)
: 8 Ratlings
: 5 Ogryn
: 1 Sly Marbo

: 1 Leman Russ Demolisher
: 1 Leman Russ Executioner
: 1 Valkyrie

The alternative to running them as Astra Militarum is to run them as Renegades and Heretics; but the consensus is that they are overall worse (on the infantry front anyways) to AM. But, if the Chaos Codex turns out to be cool, it could be worth considering them over playing more Imperials.

From what I can tell, the Leman Russ' in general aren't worth it - perhaps I could convert them into something else. I could run the Guardsman as Conscripts, since they're all the rage; but who knows how long that'll last (good thing they look pretty much identical anyways).

As far as the rest of the army goes; I'm thinking Hydras/Wyverns are next on the purchase list; maybe a couple Basilisks as well. I'll need more Heavy Weapons Teams - which ones seem to be the best? Mortars/Missile Launchers? Also, what about Flyers?

fe40k wrote:

As far as the rest of the army goes; I'm thinking Hydras/Wyverns are next on the purchase list; maybe a couple Basilisks as well. I'll need more Heavy Weapons Teams - which ones seem to be the best? Mortars/Missile Launchers? Also, what about Flyers?

Depends on the direction you want to head in. You have most of what you need to fill up a Brigade detachment except for three fast attacks. Sentinels fill those slots nicely and cheaply, but you could also look into Rough Riders or Hellhounds. From there it's up to you - more footsloggers, more artillery, or even a super-heavy are all valid paths to go down. Manticores/Basilisks are good complements to footsloggers.

HWT seem to be best as either Lascannon or Mortars. Mix and match between squads however you see fit. For flyers, the Valkyrie is a transport first and a gunship second. I'd probably only bring one if you have some big scary melee machine that you really want to get into the fray quickly - Ogryn + Priest fits the bill. If you want flying guns look to the Vulture w/ Punisher cannons or more ideally, go afield in the Imperium and pick up something with PotMS.

You have an amazing collection. Little bit of anything. Conscripts are good, always bring a full 50.

Wyverns are good. I do like weapons that don't need LoS.

Maybe a manticore?

You can find some parts to make a vulture for a flyer. I've been trying a vulture, with a thunderbolt, and a marauder destroyer (Thing rocks!).

Flyers are very good. But they can't hold ground. Maybe some scions to split up your opponent. Traditionally people drive towards guard and carnage continues. Great! Drop some scions or elysians (Maybe play some sentinels as elysian drop sentinels).

People love mortars. I've never used any heavy weapons team ever.

Random question, guys - is there any value in fielding Daemonhosts in an IG list?

 vipoid wrote:
Random question, guys - is there any value in fielding Daemonhosts in an IG list?

Not that I can think of. They don't even fill Elite slots very efficiently. Their only real use in the past was turning on "if a daemon is nearby" abilities, which were very few and far between. I'm not sure those abilities exist anymore, at least not ones that trigger off nearby friendly daemons. You also used to be able to bury them in Acolyte squads, where they were at least half-competent melee fighters.

These days I really don't see any value in them beyond fluff.

KestrelM1 wrote:

 vipoid wrote:
Random question, guys - is there any value in fielding Daemonhosts in an IG list?

Not that I can think of. They don't even fill Elite slots very efficiently. Their only real use in the past was turning on "if a daemon is nearby" abilities, which were very few and far between. I'm not sure those abilities exist anymore, at least not ones that trigger off nearby friendly daemons. You also used to be able to bury them in Acolyte squads, where they were at least half-competent melee fighters.

These days I really don't any value in them beyond fluff.

Yeah, I think you're right. It's a shame because I like the idea and it seems like I could have fun modelling them. However, them not being characters seems rather silly. As does their pitifully weak statline (WS4+ BS4+, really?). Also, would it really be too much to ask to be able to choose which mutation affects them that turn?

Oh well, I guess I'll have to optimistically hope that they get buffed in whatever Codex they end up in.

 vipoid wrote:
Random question, guys - is there any value in fielding Daemonhosts in an IG list?

Yes. If you are a heretic and wish to be purged!

fe40k wrote:
What are the thoughts on the Malcador tanks?

For 300 points, the Malcador Defender outputs a moderate amount of anti-infantry dakka; and has 18w to boot.

That said, if it moves, it goes down to BS5 (except on the main gun); and while it has +1 to hits on Overwatch - if it gets stuck in melee, it's virtually pointless as it has no Fall Back+Fire rules. I'll be honest, I just love the idea of the Defender - tons of dakka, coupled with a Demolisher cannon; plus a little tankyness and +1 overwatch. Perhaps not the most effective, but, sounds fun.

They are lackluster and basically nothing more than tougher Leman Russes, with 50% more wounds. This is basically where the benefits end. They are all much more expensive (the Defender is 296 points, the Heavy Tank 228, the Annihilator 288 and the Infernus is 320) and either don't have the firepower to justify the additional cost or cost much more than the closest comparable Leman Russ.

*The Heavy is just a Leman Russ with more wounds, and costs ~40% more. It also lacks Grinding Advance as the latest FAQ hasn't added it. The different weapon options are not even close to outweigh these downsides.
*The Defender is just a load of heavy bolters. You could just take two Leman Russes with heavy bolters and be comparable for a 60 points increase (or ~20%), gaining more wounds and useful firepower as well as additional flexibility. The +1 to hit on Overwatch is as nice bonus, but since you can't fire when you disengage, it'll only be of minor help.
*The Annihilator is okay, as a LR Annihilator costs 192 points with a hull lascannon whereas the Malcador one has a 2 lascannons and a Demolisher (or another lascannon, but this is likely a bad choice). If you take sponsons, you have a lot of firepower in one package and having an equivalent number of lascannons on Annihilators will be more expensive although somewhat tougher.
*The Infernus is a tougher, stronger and vastly more expensive Hellhound. I would probably just take 3 of the latter for more wounds, flexibility and almost no difference versus the intended targets.

These comparisons are also only against the Leman Russes (or Hellhound for the Infernus), and we have better choices than them for our heavy supports. In my opinion, the Malcadors rank firmly in the bottom tier and I don't really see a use for them other than as roadblocks.

So something I've been trying out lately and seems to be working is using the Company Command Squad slots to make baby heavy weapons teams (usually have 3-4 officers in my lists). 44 points for a 4 wound bs 3+ lascannon. With a Commissar nearby, they can't fail morale from losing the two bulletcatchers. So far the tendency has been for my opponents to either ignore them, not devote enough firepower to kill the gun in a single round of shooting, or severely overkilling them. I'm guessing this won't work at a competitive level though. Any thoughts/experiences with this setup?

RogueApiary wrote:
So something I've been trying out lately and seems to be working is using the Company Command Squad slots to make baby heavy weapons teams (usually have 3-4 officers in my lists). 44 points for a 4 wound bs 3+ lascannon. With a Commissar nearby, they can't fail morale from losing the two bulletcatchers. So far the tendency has been for my opponents to either ignore them, not devote enough firepower to kill the gun in a single round of shooting, or severely overkilling them. I'm guessing this won't work at a competitive level though. Any thoughts/experiences with this setup?

Only that I'll be giving this a go next time I play IG.

I'll let you know how it goes.

Just considering the purchase of a couple Tauros Venators (would probably convert from cheaper models) because I'm liking the look of the speed combined with dakka -- twinlinked multi-lasers are juicy.

I imagine having a couple of these could be a nasty headache for the enemy --- darting around at high speed, getting into their deployment and fiddling with arty/ long range units and having a 5++ to boot.