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.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:

Very true, everybody else's shoulder pads are going to be a camo green. The will be the only infantry models with white and red on them.

An absolute might insist you model on the medi-pack to truly represent WYSIWYG, but I can't imagine anyone actually having a problem with it.

I'm really digging the new medic rules, for a moment I was excited to field Command Squad's of just medics supporting my mass infantry. Then I could lay into my opponent and charge them with breaching the Geneva Conventions whenever they targeted them.

Made quick list that is similar in style to my 7th ed lists and generally what I like to play. Turned out 2 company commanders, tank commander, command squad+2 platoon commanders, 9 squads of infantry(autocannons, flamers, lascannons, plasma guns), missile HWT, sentinel, melta+infenro hellhounds, manticore and 2 leman russ. Tad short of 1800 pts and brigade.

Think I would need to buy lot more infantry if I were to play 8th ed(rather than HH). I'm running short seeing infantry seems to be way for IG in 8th ed.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:
I was shocked when I totalled up the points costs for my army, in 7th it is around 2,250-2,300... now it isn't even 2,000 points. I have to find a way to add an additional 76 points if I want to get to 2k again... plasma pistols for everything haha. And I will be painting some of my Tallarn's shoulder pads white with a cross on them in each of my command squads just to spend points and take medics.

Kind of off topic, but I used two Inquisitors in my army, how is it going to work in 8th? The detachment says they have to be from the same faction, and I assume Imperial is a faction. What are going to be the penalties of taking Coteaz and a generic Inquisitor?

Yeah it's kind of funny. Everyone else is freaking about their armies costing more points and I'm sitting here thinking "how the heck am I going to use all these free points now?"

I really hope there's not a limit to detachments, otherwise I'm going to be taking a stupid amount of conscripts

In matched game there is max number of detachments depending on point size

tneva82 wrote:
In matched game there is max number of detachments depending on point size

Hmm, I was reading about detachment restrictions in the match play section of the rulebook & it seemed to suggest that its entirely up to the 2 players, or tournament organizers. Otherwise if you go by the detachment section, it suggests that you can take any number of detachments.



Guard will have an easy time fulfilling these requirements. Hopefully not too many restrictions will be placed on detachments in matched play, otherwise they are hindering one of our strengths. I can easily see guard players having 18+ command points in an 1800pt game.

Chris521 wrote:
It really depend on what other strategems there will be. So far, we can use 5 (assuming 5 turns) for rerolls and I doubt we will need to autopass leadership check every turn if we have enough commissars. Though extra command points could be used to save a few points on commissars.

You can't reuse strategems in the same phase, not turn. So you can use 6 rerolls a turn (Movement, psychic, shooting, charge, fight, morale). The one people might miss is you can reroll a charge and also in combat, as the old assault phase is now 2 phases.

 Commissar Benny wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
In matched game there is max number of detachments depending on point size

Hmm, I was reading about detachment restrictions in the match play section of the rulebook & it seemed to suggest that its entirely up to the 2 players, or tournament organizers. Otherwise if you go by the detachment section, it suggests that you can take any number of detachments.
Guard will have an easy time fulfilling these requirements. Hopefully not too many restrictions will be placed on detachments in matched play, otherwise they are hindering one of our strengths. I can easily see guard players having 18+ command points in an 1800pt game.

Ah right it's indeed suggesting.

Though 3 bridages that's valid according to the suggestion should be enough even for IG That'd minimum 9 HQ, 9 elite, 18 troops, 9 FA and 9 HS. More than that seems tough even for IG!

I'm thinking what led GW to remove veteran doctrines, specially that regimental doctrines and doctrines in general are very desired among IG players. Having some specialisation was always handy. Maybe to promote usage of Tempestus? Why removing forward sentries then? It sems to me that they are just trying to create homogenous fighting force out of the Guard.

 Hawky wrote:
I'm thinking what led GW to remove veteran doctrines, specially that regimental doctrines and doctrines in general are very desired among IG players. Having some specialisation was always handy. Maybe to promote usage of Tempestus? Why removing forward sentries then? It sems to me that they are just trying to create homogenous fighting force out of the Guard.

Tempestus kit plus 3rd Party models for veterans, my tinfoil hat suggests me.

I'm thinking about rules, not models.

 Hawky wrote:
I'm thinking about rules, not models.

Rules are there to sell models and there is a pricy scion box, but not a IG veteran box... from GW.
Think about all those 3rd party that sell carapace. Gone.

SO I haven't made it through this whole thread but Vendettas have gone then? I can see why they wouldn't want 6 LCs flying about but it's a bit surprising and I haven't seen much tears about it.

It's gone. Probably because GW doesn't sell vendeta model. FW meanwhile sells(well conversion kit) so it's 99% sure it comes on FW index end of june.

 RandyMcStab wrote:
SO I haven't made it through this whole thread but Vendettas have gone then? I can see why they wouldn't want 6 LCs flying about but it's a bit surprising and I haven't seen much tears about it.

They aren't in the index, that's for sure. It sort of makes sense, since GW said that all units that have models would get rules, and techinically you can't buy the vendetta. It's an upgrade from forge world. Maybe we will get it later or in a FW supplement.

I'm really dissapointed that you only get 1 missile though, and not two. It would be semi-good anti-tank flyer with two missiles and a lascannon. The dakka version with heavy bolters, missiles pods and the multilaser seems fantastic however!

Yes that's probably it. We can see what the FW books bring, it will cost about a million points anyway..

FunJohn wrote:
I'm really dissapointed that you only get 1 missile though, and not two.

At least they aren't one use anymore.

tneva82 wrote:
It's gone. Probably because GW doesn't sell vendeta model. FW meanwhile sells(well conversion kit) so it's 99% sure it comes on FW index end of june.

I am sure we will see them come back along with the Vulture. Forgeworld cannot be that stupid.

 Kaiyanwang wrote:
I am sure we will see them come back along with the Vulture. Forgeworld cannot be that stupid.

Let's hope that the vulture keeps its strafing run rule. Even with 40 shots, 5+ to hit would be annoying. That would be around 13 hits, compared to the 18 you used to get. You are going to have to pay for 2 punishers too.

I actually wonder if the "one missile" is a typo, because the book actually does say "helstrike missiles", plural, without specifying how many. And of course, the fact that you replace those missiles with two missile pods.

Though I guess the weapon statline does refer to the weapon as "hellstrike missiles" instead of "hellstrike missile", which does make it seem intentional. Of course, this is why as a rule of thumb I would avoid ever naming a weapon in plural tense: because you really want to be clear when there's only one of something, and "one hellstrike missiles" would sound funny. So I guess overall I'll have to go with "it's intentional, one missile" until/unless they release a FAQ stating otherwise.

So I guess if any of you decide to write your own wargame later, keep that in mind: always name things in singular tense even if they are in batteries, it makes writing the rest of the rules easier. For example, if it seems strange to call it "one hellstrike missile" when the physical model has, say, four missiles on it, call it something like "one hellstrike missile battery" or "one hellstrike missile rack". Your editors will thank you.

Just look at the manticore entry if you want to see some strange plurals on missile rules.

Been trying to come up with effective lists with Russes but I just cannot decide which of the turret options to go with, they all just seem so....terrible.

What turrets do you guys think are even worth taking?

 Trickstick wrote:

FunJohn wrote:
I'm really dissapointed that you only get 1 missile though, and not two.

At least they aren't one use anymore.

You actually get 5-7 missiles, equal to the number of turns the game is played.
I'll take that over. one shot weapons.

Hoyt wrote:
Been trying to come up with effective lists with Russes but I just cannot decide which of the turret options to go with, they all just seem so....terrible.

What turrets do you guys think are even worth taking?

This is how I would run LRBT.

LRBT Spam
This group of 5 LRBTs costs 1000 points on the nose.
Pask w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB
Tank Commander w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB
LR Demolisher w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB
LR Demolisher w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB
LR Demolisher w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB

Pask gives "Gunners Kill on Sight!" to 2 LRBT every turn. The other commander gives the order to the final LRBT.
Every round they, on average HIT with this..
19.375 PC shots : STR 7, -3 AP 1 Damage. 13.125 of those can be safely overcharged to target vehicles or other large creatures
7.75 HB hits : STR 5, -1 AP 1 damage
5.166 SB hits : STR 4, AP -, 1 damage. Double if targets are within 12".

That's an insane amount of damage. It's picking up entire enemy units each turn.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Right so after having some time to read over it

That was a great read. Thanks for taking the time to post.
I agree with a lot of what you said. Plasma is the bee's knees. Even plasma pistols at 5 points a pop are sweet.
With transports, units are locked in combat with them. This means you can 'tank shock' a squad of tactical marines with your Chimera and keep them locked up in combat.
If you want to go first, just throw all your stuff in transports. Plopping 4 chimeras and 4 russ's onto the table is pretty quick.
The mathhammer shows that LRBT are --really-- good when combined with tank commander orders. I ran some numbers with Pask and another commander giving 3 other russ's orders every turn. The amount of firepower they produce is crazy.
It will take a while to get used to MSU squads. For old guard players that will be different. This is a list I threw together for food guard. I think that has a lot of potential, and will look really cool on the table.

I was thinking with Russes to only take Tank Commanders, that way the to hits are better which is so much more vital now.

Hmm, considering the executioner is 2 points cheaper than a battle cannon, I guess it can pretty much entirely replace the battle cannon since they basically have the same stats now (and as long as you have a TC to wrangle them you can be generous with overcharging to deal with multi-wound targets).

Edit: And yeah a Russ should pretty much always be run as a TC now. None of its weapons ignore BS anymore, so having BS3+ and re-rolling 1s is pretty vital no matter the loadout. We get plenty of HQ slots now anyway, use the HS slots on HWTs and artillery.

 ross-128 wrote:
Hmm, considering the executioner is 2 points cheaper than a battle cannon, I guess it can pretty much entirely replace the battle cannon since they basically have the same stats now (and as long as you have a TC to wrangle them you can be generous with overcharging to deal with multi-wound targets).

Even without over charging, each russ is throwing out 7.5 plamsa shots per turn on average.
That's crazy. Once you have a tank commander and pask who are hitting on a 2+ and 3+, and giving 3 other LRBT the ability to reroll 1's.....

Hoyt wrote:
Been trying to come up with effective lists with Russes but I just cannot decide which of the turret options to go with, they all just seem so....terrible.

What turrets do you guys think are even worth taking?

This is how I would run LRBT.

LRBT Spam
This group of 5 LRBTs costs 1000 points on the nose.
Pask w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB
Tank Commander w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB
LR Demolisher w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB
LR Demolisher w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB
LR Demolisher w/ Executioner PC, 2 PC, HB, SB

Pask gives "Gunners Kill on Sight!" to 2 LRBT every turn. The other commander gives the order to the final LRBT.
Every round they, on average HIT with this..
19.375 PC shots : STR 7, -3 AP 1 Damage. 13.125 of those can be safely overcharged to target vehicles or other large creatures
7.75 HB hits : STR 5, -1 AP 1 damage
5.166 SB hits : STR 4, AP -, 1 damage. Double if targets are within 12".

That's an insane amount of damage. It's picking up entire enemy units each turn.

Thats pretty amazing firepower, didn't even notice that Pask can give 2 orders a turn, seems that the humble old Battlecannon is effectively useless now.

Those 5 russes also fit neatly into a Spearhead detachment as well.

5 LRs is also 60 toughness 8 3+ wounds, which seems pretty tough but I'll have to see how long they acually last with all the multi damage weapons on the tabletop now

I think the cause for the russ variants being so lame is potentially a design oversight. Think about it, if damage would carry over to other models, then they would be at least servicable. The rules were probably made first as a "baseline heavy tank" then as they continued writing they realized that carrying over damage needed to be scrapped and forgot about poor ole IG. Either way, I am not butthurt since I have 3000 pts of Infantry muahahaha

slargy wrote:
I have 3000 pts of Infantry muahahaha

Would you be able to test this list and let me know how it plays for you?

 labmouse42 wrote:

slargy wrote:
I have 3000 pts of Infantry muahahaha

Would you be able to test this list and let me know how it plays for you?

I can get pretty close to it. I am missing some lascannon teams and would have to throw some old mordian HBs onto bases. Unfortunately most of my special weapons of old are meltaguns. I could definitely get pretty close if you will accept some autocannons as substitutes. If I buy 4 packs of 60mm bases I can probably bits up all the heavy weapons. a quick critique on the list: Change the Special weap teams to command squads. +1 BS and I am fairly certain the same points gets you 4 PGs (just no ablative wounds)

slargy wrote:
I can get pretty close to it. I am missing some lascannon teams and would have to throw some old mordian HBs onto bases. Unfortunately most of my special weapons of old are meltaguns. I could definitely get pretty close if you will accept some autocannons as substitutes. If I buy 4 packs of 60mm bases I can probably bits up all the heavy weapons. a quick critique on the list: Change the Special weap teams to command squads. +1 BS and I am fairly certain the same points gets you 4 PGs (just no ablative wounds)

If you could try a few games and let me know how it works, I would greatly appreciate it.