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.

 kronk wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
so.... allied detachments actually hurt now, interesting. that makes me a little sad I picked up allies of most armies to throw in some flavor, now they will cost command points if I bring em

You could take a small patrol detachment for your allies and not have negative CP.

Exactly, or an outrider/vanguard style detachment if you want 3 specific units from that slot.

Makes allies an interesting proposition now.

Barring something more specialized that vanguard detachment looks like it fits Deathwing pretty nicely.

The downside is that if you want more than 1 CP you're going to have to something else along, like a battalion.

 Blacksteel wrote:
Barring something more specialized that vanguard detachment looks like it fits Deathwing pretty nicely.

The downside is that if you want more than 1 CP you're going to have to something else along, like a battalion.

I suppose you could take multiple Vanguards. Assuming HQs remain mostly the same as they are now, you could have one with a captain and another with a libby and 6 DW squads with whatever support units you want.

tneva82 wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 ross-128 wrote:
I will say that it's interesting and a bit weird that "Flying Circus" is now an entirely valid approach with its own dedicated detachment.

Only if you want to auto-lose for having no models on the table.

Thats assuming flyers start off board. If they did would there be need for fly off board, you die rule?

They said you have to start with at least half your army on the board in matched play. Also, we know the generic rules for models with fly, but we don't know if flyers themselves will have extra things. Who knows really.

blaktoof wrote:
Iirc there are 14 generic detachments, the OP has 12.

Maybe there will be a couple detachments meant for narrative play and/or Apocalypse?

I wonder what the standard detachment limit is going to be for tournaments. I can't imagine they'd only allow one, because that would be pretty boring and disallow a lot of armies that are legal today. On the other hand, if they allow too many then command point farming might become a thing, with people taking cheap HQ units and splitting their armies up into as many detachments as possible.

The next big question is how much things cost points wise - like how expensive would it be to field a brigade of three Gravis Captains and six Primaris troops?

 MagicJuggler wrote:
GW gave us a sample mission and it included Slay the Warlord; it's now worth D3 points instead of 1, because if there's one thing scoring in 40k needs, it's more randomness.

I had two secondary armies planned, one which was going to be a simple conversion project/to build on my Word Bearers (the Crabthedral list), and the second was a War Rig army that used the Insurrection to avoid taking any HQs so I could have a Russ Warlord.

As written, both of the lists as written are 100% illegal, unless GW allows for a "zero HQ" clause or an "anyone can be the Warlord" clause.

Plus it's going to be a mess to go into a 40k game with 26 detachments of one unit and -26 Command Points. I guess I can be even more obnoxious about it and print each detachment on its own sheet.

Could you use more basic words?

What is Crabthedral and what is a "war rig army with insurrection?"

This is pretty interesting.

You can create a much more varied and interesting army now in 8th than you ever could in 7th. You just lose out on formation benefits.

 Luciferian wrote:
I wonder what the standard detachment limit is going to be for tournaments. I can't imagine they'd only allow one, because that would be pretty boring and disallow a lot of armies that are legal today. On the other hand, if they allow too many then command point farming might become a thing, with people taking cheap HQ units and splitting their armies up into as many detachments as possible.

The next big question is how much things cost points wise - like how expensive would it be to field a brigade of three Gravis Captains and six Primaris troops?

Given how liberal the faction rules are (allowing units from several different 'armies' within a single detachment) I'd be surprised if most tournaments don't cap it at 2 detachments.

 yakface wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
I wonder what the standard detachment limit is going to be for tournaments. I can't imagine they'd only allow one, because that would be pretty boring and disallow a lot of armies that are legal today. On the other hand, if they allow too many then command point farming might become a thing, with people taking cheap HQ units and splitting their armies up into as many detachments as possible.

The next big question is how much things cost points wise - like how expensive would it be to field a brigade of three Gravis Captains and six Primaris troops?

Given how liberal the faction rules are (allowing units from several different 'armies' within a single detachment) I'd be surprised if most tournaments don't cap it at 2 detachments.

I mean, maybe. The balancing factor will be how strong command points actually are.

Also, we don't know if (a) you can have negative command points, maybe going negative would make an illegal list or (b) if you have negative command points, are they added into your opponents total?

 Galas wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:
so.... allied detachments actually hurt now, interesting. that makes me a little sad I picked up allies of most armies to throw in some flavor, now they will cost command points if I bring em

Actually no. You can bring normal detachments with other faction and gain even CP. The one that cost you Command Points is if you want to cherry pick only one unit.

I suppose assuming one can take multiple detachments (thinking limitations in tournaments not free play or picku p games here). though I am also curios how my legion of the damned, custodes, or sisters of silence are going to be on the table without an HQ and without having zero command points though hopefully that means I get actual HQ choices for them. I am hoping the 30k stuff for custodies and sisters of silence make their way into 40k I love my custodies jet bikes

Seems I'll have to get the 2nd Imperium book and run a Vanguard IG list to run my current Scion army.

 G00fySmiley wrote:

I suppose assuming one can take multiple detachments (thinking limitations in tournaments not free play or picku p games here). though I am also curios how my legion of the damned, custodes, or sisters of silence are going to be on the table without an HQ and without having zero command points though hopefully that means I get actual HQ choices for them. I am hoping the 30k stuff for custodies and sisters of silence make their way into 40k I love my custodies jet bikes

Re-read the faction rules (posted earlier in this thread). If the Sisters of Silence and/or Legion of the Damned have the 'Imperium' faction, for example, you could simply slot them into a detachment with any other 'Imperium' units.

 kronk wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
GW gave us a sample mission and it included Slay the Warlord; it's now worth D3 points instead of 1, because if there's one thing scoring in 40k needs, it's more randomness.

I had two secondary armies planned, one which was going to be a simple conversion project/to build on my Word Bearers (the Crabthedral list), and the second was a War Rig army that used the Insurrection to avoid taking any HQs so I could have a Russ Warlord.

As written, both of the lists as written are 100% illegal, unless GW allows for a "zero HQ" clause or an "anyone can be the Warlord" clause.

Plus it's going to be a mess to go into a 40k game with 26 detachments of one unit and -26 Command Points. I guess I can be even more obnoxious about it and print each detachment on its own sheet.

Could you use more basic words?

What is Crabthedral and what is a "war rig army with insurrection?"

In Traitor's Hate, one formation is called the Warpack. It lets you turn one Walker in the formation into a Character (thus making it eligible to be Warlord). In the list I wrote and linked, the intent was to combine this with Word Bearers Tactics and traits for a Warlord Defiler (aka a Crab Cathedral, aka a Crabthedral).

The Genestealer Cult Decurion is called the Cult Insurrection. If you use a Neophyte Cavalcade as your core, you can avoid taking any HQ or Character choices. The intent was to build a pure mech GSC list as something that went against the grain of Subterranean Uprising/First Curse builds but could have a chance at winning games.

 yakface wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

I suppose assuming one can take multiple detachments (thinking limitations in tournaments not free play or picku p games here). though I am also curios how my legion of the damned, custodes, or sisters of silence are going to be on the table without an HQ and without having zero command points though hopefully that means I get actual HQ choices for them. I am hoping the 30k stuff for custodies and sisters of silence make their way into 40k I love my custodies jet bikes

Re-read the faction rules (posted earlier in this thread). If the Sisters of Silence and/or Legion of the Damned have the 'Imperium' faction, for example, you could simply slot them into a detachment with any other 'Imperium' units.

Of course that means invalidating armies which gw said they wont do. Albeit likely not big issue as whd has all sos and/or custodes army

Thanks for the clarifications.

We still have the faction books coming that might add more options and/or detachments.

 yakface wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
I wonder what the standard detachment limit is going to be for tournaments. I can't imagine they'd only allow one, because that would be pretty boring and disallow a lot of armies that are legal today. On the other hand, if they allow too many then command point farming might become a thing, with people taking cheap HQ units and splitting their armies up into as many detachments as possible.

The next big question is how much things cost points wise - like how expensive would it be to field a brigade of three Gravis Captains and six Primaris troops?

Given how liberal the faction rules are (allowing units from several different 'armies' within a single detachment) I'd be surprised if most tournaments don't cap it at 2 detachments.

That's kind of what I was thinking as well.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
In Traitor's Hate, one formation is called the Warpack. It lets you turn one Walker in the formation into a Character (thus making it eligible to be Warlord). In the list I wrote and linked, the intent was to combine this with Word Bearers Tactics and traits for a Warlord Defiler (aka a Crab Cathedral, aka a Crabthedral)..

Doesn't that formation require a warpsmith, which was and likely still is an HQ? Meaning it'd still be legal (spearhead/vanguard depending on which vehicles you took).

 yakface wrote:

 G00fySmiley wrote:

I suppose assuming one can take multiple detachments (thinking limitations in tournaments not free play or picku p games here). though I am also curios how my legion of the damned, custodes, or sisters of silence are going to be on the table without an HQ and without having zero command points though hopefully that means I get actual HQ choices for them. I am hoping the 30k stuff for custodies and sisters of silence make their way into 40k I love my custodies jet bikes

Re-read the faction rules (posted earlier in this thread). If the Sisters of Silence and/or Legion of the Damned have the 'Imperium' faction, for example, you could simply slot them into a detachment with any other 'Imperium' units.

sweet! though I do still hope for sisters of silence and custodies to get real HQ's... a table full of golden servants of the big E himself!

SilverAlien wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
In Traitor's Hate, one formation is called the Warpack. It lets you turn one Walker in the formation into a Character (thus making it eligible to be Warlord). In the list I wrote and linked, the intent was to combine this with Word Bearers Tactics and traits for a Warlord Defiler (aka a Crab Cathedral, aka a Crabthedral)..

Doesn't that formation require a warpsmith, which was and likely still is an HQ?

*Checks out*

Yes indeed. So all this bitching he's making is just pointless.

Bravo dude. Just Bravo! People make mountains out of molehills, you made a mountain out of a depression.

These are all so incredibly boring

No inspiration on any of them.

 Talamare wrote:
These are all so incredibly boring

No inspiration on any of them.

Thats why they are so balanced
But fear no more, guardsmen! because you'll find your super special and probably OP detachment in future Eldar, Space Marines and Tau Codex, coming this Winter to GW stores near you!

Lord Kragan wrote:

SilverAlien wrote:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
In Traitor's Hate, one formation is called the Warpack. It lets you turn one Walker in the formation into a Character (thus making it eligible to be Warlord). In the list I wrote and linked, the intent was to combine this with Word Bearers Tactics and traits for a Warlord Defiler (aka a Crab Cathedral, aka a Crabthedral)..

Doesn't that formation require a warpsmith, which was and likely still is an HQ?

*Checks out*

Yes indeed. So all this bitching he's making is just pointless.

Bravo dude. Just Bravo! People make mountains out of molehills, you made a mountain out of a depression.

...reading comprehension is apparently not your friend, considering the very next paragraph described the other army I had planned (which is in fact based on not having any characters). The issue with the other build is there looks to be no provision for making non-character models your Warlord.

 Talamare wrote:
These are all so incredibly boring

No inspiration on any of them.

You know that's the whole point, right? These are the generic detachments, the equivalent to the standard FOC in other editions. Each army will have their own special detachments, though we can only hope they won't be as game-breaking and stupid as 7th edition's formations.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MagicJuggler wrote:
The issue with the other build is there looks to be no provision for making non-character models your Warlord.

{citation needed}

Have we actually seen the rules for choosing warlords, or are you just assuming this?

 Peregrine wrote:
You know that's the whole point, right? These are the generic detachments, the equivalent to the standard FOC in other editions. Each army will have their own special detachments, though we can only hope they won't be as game-breaking and stupid as 7th edition's formations.

Actually in the preview where they said formations were going away, they kind of hinted that these universal detachments would be it...no special detachments for each army.

And I really hope so, personally. And I'm also really glad these are 'boring', because they should be.

40k has so, so many different units to choose from, that players have a great time being able to construct their army for how they want it to play on the table. Detachment rules IMHO shouldn't be some kind of puzzle or game where you are able to break the game and get freebies by finding a loophole in one of the dozens of detachments available.

What's presented here is more than what is needed.

Oh, by the Emperor...

I'm sure I can fish up an army without characters. How about 1 Shadowsword in a lord of war detach, A ADL, Firestorm Bunker, and Void Shield Battery in a Fortification detach, and a flight of Vendettas in an air support detach.

And again, for the "My Warlord is a Tank" army, how about:

Spearhead Detach:
HQ: Vanquisher Tank Commander [Warlord]
HQ: Vanquisher Tank Commander
Troop: Leman Russ Battle Tank
Troop: Leman Russ Battle Tank
Troop: Leman Russ Battle Tank
Support: Basilisk
Support: Basilisk
Support: Basilisk
Support: Manticore
Support: Manitcore

And of course, it you're heart is set of being Genestealer Cults, then decorate your tank commander with Tyranid bits, and have another detachment full of Genestealers!

 Talamare wrote:
These are all so incredibly boring

No inspiration on any of them.

Kind of like certain posts from certain users...

I could run a crazy cryptek named mister burns who defends his tomb world with his canoptek army;


Hell I could do a royal court with a giant unit of lychguard, ally that into my normal battalion for lulz.

Also currently the harlequin don't have an HQ choice, that might change in 8th ed, maybe the shadow seer becomes HQ, like almost every other psycher in the game. maybe it will be a counts as if all of your units have the harlequin keyword. People are sure quick to jump to the assumption that GW is out to bone them in particular.

 MagicJuggler wrote:
...reading comprehension is apparently not your friend, considering the very next paragraph described the other army I had planned (which is in fact based on not having any characters). The issue with the other build is there looks to be no provision for making non-character models your Warlord.

First off, I have no idea why you can't simply toss an iconward in if you don't want to use the piecemail formations.

Secondly, we know nothing about warlord in 8E. To my knowledge we haven't even confirmed warlords are still a thing, or what the position of warlord does. People tend to assume it'll either function like last edition or like AoS, but neither is a given.

Third, even if you can't nominate a defiler as warlord, that army is still legal. It is a mechanics change, every army will have a few of those happen. Look at the changes to summoning for example, that has a much bigger impact on demons than this change will have on your list.

 Marmatag wrote:
You can create a much more varied and interesting army now in 8th than you ever could in 7th. You just lose out on formation benefits.

And this is how it should be.

-