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.

Just my two cents but Rangers hit on 3+, not 4+.

 Solis Luna Astrum wrote:

Suzuteo wrote:

Vindicare is definitely more durable, but getting shot at is fine. Anything that can hit Rangers 60" away will probably be shooting my Kastelans or Crawlers first anyway.

You cannot deploy your Rangers that far away from your opponent and still get re-rolls from your TPD unless you also deploy him far back. If you do that you then have to deploy your Kastelans close to the TPD or loose their re-rolls. That puts the robots out of range for at least one turn assuming your opponent moves toward your Kastelans. You can solve this by dedicating a second TPD to support your Rangers but then you loose the other abilities of that TPD. You've now added a 135 point tax to your unit of Rangers, that's 235 points to do what a Vindicare does by himself for 90 points.

You might have missed the previous sentence where I pointed out that Rangers probably should pair with the Kastelans anyway. Anything that can shoot the Rangers can probably also shoot the Kastelans, and I would much rather have them shoot the Rangers in that situation.

A lot of people run two detachments anyway. (Though you did just give me an interesting idea for something else...)

 Aaranis wrote:
Just my two cents but Rangers hit on 3+, not 4+.

Oops. I knew that, but for some reason thought it was 50% chance to hit. xD


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Crazy thought. Are we all aware that unit coherency rules changed in 8th edition?

See P176:

Models move and fight in units, made up of one or more models. A unit must be set up and finish any sort of move as a group, with every model within 2" horizontally, and 6" vertically, of at least one other model from their unit: this is called unit coherency. If anything causes a unit to become split up during a battle, it must re-establish its unit coherency the next time it moves.

Combine this with their FAQ:

Q: What happens if a unit that has become split up during battle cannot re-establish unit coherency the next time it moves? A: In this case the unit cannot move.

Q. Can you clarify what the difference is between ‘wholly within’ and ‘within’ for rules purposes? A. If a rule says it affects units/models that are ‘wholly within’ then it only applies if the entire unit/model is within. If it just says ‘within’, however, then it applies so long as any part of the unit/model is within.

RAW tells me I can leave 2 of my Arquebus models behind at an objective in one group as long as they stay within coherency to one another and the remaining models stay within coherency as a separate group. This separate group can hang out near a TPD and receive benefits that apply to the unit. If one of my Arquebuses dies, it can never move again (unless that second group comes close enough to regain coherency, in which case it is forced to move). If that group hanging out near the TPD dies, you lose the unit benefits.

And yes, I know this probably flies against the intent of the designers, but for anyone who has not played 7th edition starts in 8th edition, there is no way they can know of it as written.

Compare this to the old 7th edition "chain" rule:

… once a unit has finished moving, the models in it must form an imaginary chain where the distance between one model and the next is no more than 2″ horizontally and 6″ vertically. We call this ‘unit coherency’.

Man really ? The latest FAQ covered just that:

Q. Can I set up a unit, or finish any sort of move with a unit,
so that its models form several separate groups (where each
group consists of models from that unit that are within 2"
horizontally and 6" vertically of at least one other model from
their group)?
A. No. The unit must set up or finish any sort of move as
a single group.

So no you can't do that, and it was never intended. I get it you may have understood it wrong but this edition is full of people who lacks common sense to interpret the rules, although I can give it to you, not all GW's rules are logical at all

 Aaranis wrote:
Man really ? The latest FAQ covered just that:

Q. Can I set up a unit, or finish any sort of move with a unit,
so that its models form several separate groups (where each
group consists of models from that unit that are within 2"
horizontally and 6" vertically of at least one other model from
their group)?
A. No. The unit must set up or finish any sort of move as
a single group.

So no you can't do that, and it was never intended. I get it you may have understood it wrong but this edition is full of people who lacks common sense to interpret the rules, although I can give it to you, not all GW's rules are logical at all

Which FAQ was that? Ah well. It was an interesting thought. I do think that RAW would have allowed for it; I mean, how would we explain it to people who didn't play 7th?

People who didnt played 7th wouldnt have had that kind of idea in the first place^^

Iago40k wrote:
People who didnt played 7th wouldnt have had that kind of idea in the first place^^

Yeah... I mean, it's not like we were trying to Scout bunkers with escape hatches to catapult units into the enemy deployment zone or anything like that...

Suzuteo wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
Man really ? The latest FAQ covered just that:

Q. Can I set up a unit, or finish any sort of move with a unit,
so that its models form several separate groups (where each
group consists of models from that unit that are within 2"
horizontally and 6" vertically of at least one other model from
their group)?
A. No. The unit must set up or finish any sort of move as
a single group.

So no you can't do that, and it was never intended. I get it you may have understood it wrong but this edition is full of people who lacks common sense to interpret the rules, although I can give it to you, not all GW's rules are logical at all

Which FAQ was that? Ah well. It was an interesting thought. I do think that RAW would have allowed for it; I mean, how would we explain it to people who didn't play 7th?

This one, all recent: https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/731291.page

So what was the view on the Fisty Castallans? They might be a good shout, what with Aegis protecting them until they get close, and their surprisingly fast 8" speed!

Also, I thought about a squad of Infiltrators deploying as a bodyguard to a Culexus assasin may be effective - even with the new change to 2 attacks - thoughts?

 MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:
So what was the view on the Fisty Castallans? They might be a good shout, what with Aegis protecting them until they get close, and their surprisingly fast 8" speed!

Also, I thought about a squad of Infiltrators deploying as a bodyguard to a Culexus assasin may be effective - even with the new change to 2 attacks - thoughts?

A few pages back, I pointed out that they're pretty much Neutron Crawlers but less durable and with 48 times less range. The fact that Protocols change at the start of a battle round also means going second can be very fatal. >_>

Suzuteo wrote:

A few pages back, I pointed out that they're pretty much Neutron Crawlers but less durable and with 48 times less range. The fact that Protocols change at the start of a battle round also means going second can be very fatal. >_>

I'm not following you.. Robots are set up with Aegis protocol (2+/4+), with Cantel of Shroudpsalm being activated at the beginning of the battle round (1+/4+).. They sound really great for protecting you against a going second. An enormous amound of firepower will be needed to take them down, heavy weapons will be deflected back on a 5+, etc.

While they would be very effective as a firebase, I do feel like the fisto robotos plug a weakness in our army for screening against melee and putting pressure on their lines

Fisto robots do perform better than the neutron against medium-heavy infantry. Nobz, termies, paladins, primaris, etc.

Couple with flamers would make for an interesting screen, barring the 240or price tag :-)

 MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:

Suzuteo wrote:

A few pages back, I pointed out that they're pretty much Neutron Crawlers but less durable and with 48 times less range. The fact that Protocols change at the start of a battle round also means going second can be very fatal. >_>

I'm not following you.. Robots are set up with Aegis protocol (2+/4+), with Cantel of Shroudpsalm being activated at the beginning of the battle round (1+/4+).. They sound really great for protecting you against a going second. An enormous amound of firepower will be needed to take them down, heavy weapons will be deflected back on a 5+, etc.

While they would be very effective as a firebase, I do feel like the fisto robotos plug a weakness in our army for screening against melee and putting pressure on their lines

If you go second and turn on Conquerer, then your protocol switches at the start of the next battle round, and your opponent goes first while your robots are sitting ducks without the Aegis protocol on. Same applies for Protector, but at least you can be very far away...

Though if you intend to only keep the robots for screening, then yes, keeping Aegis on all the time and just not having a Datasmith in your army might be the way to go.

 gally912 wrote:
Fisto robots do perform better than the neutron against medium-heavy infantry. Nobz, termies, paladins, primaris, etc.

Couple with flamers would make for an interesting screen, barring the 240or price tag :-)

Phosphor Blasters do even better. That or Icarus Crawlers or a Crusader.

Suzuteo wrote:
If you go second and turn on Conquerer, then your protocol switches at the start of the next battle round, and your opponent goes first while your robots are sitting ducks without the Aegis protocol on. Same applies for Protector, but at least you can be very far away...

Though if you intend to only keep the robots for screening, then yes, keeping Aegis on all the time and just not having a Datasmith in your army might be the way to go.

That's not how it's gonna play, in practice you'll always have the Aegis Protocol on for a full turn. You start the Battle Round (so, player one 1st turn, player two 1st turn) with the Aegis Protocol, even if you don't have the 1st turn. So if you go second, your opponent must shoot at your Aegis Robots, then you have your turn, set the Conqueror protocols for the next Battle Round, and move the Robots in position for your turn two charge. You shoot all the while (at 5+, how come they're not relentless). Then opponent's second turn, he keep shooting at your Aegis Robots, then your turn comes and you finally are able to reduce all his dreams in a pulp in a single glorious charge.

EDIT: On another subject, given the news about the Codices, which modifications and new rules would you like for our own army ? Personally I'd love it if we could have an equivalent to the Scout move if we play our Detachment full AdMech, and of course as they announced they would add new models for some armies, I'm waiting our transport and pray it's a nice one (please 12 transport capacity or more ! ). Wondering if they're going to flesh out our existing rules, like the Canticles, or change the Neurostatic Aura of the Infiltrators so that it's actually useful and a staple of this unit again. Also, make Kataphrons cheaper, because no one wants to buy mine so I'll keep them I guess

On twitch, one of the designers hinted that AdMech will get a strategem to self-destruct the robots. Fun!

 axisofentropy wrote:
On twitch, one of the designers hinted that AdMech will get a strategem to self-destruct the robots. Fun!

Wow, a more reliable version of my kamikaze Dragoon you mean ? That'd give some use to the Dragoon, seeing how useless he is otherwise :(

So for folks testing Rangers - are you using the Omnispex? Seems like a nice way to help them hit a bit harder. I was tossing around a bot/crawler/knight list and had 107pt leftover... so, I figured that would be a perfect filler that might help snipe out stuff like Commissars.

Thoughts?

 Aaranis wrote:
That's not how it's gonna play, in practice you'll always have the Aegis Protocol on for a full turn. You start the Battle Round (so, player one 1st turn, player two 1st turn) with the Aegis Protocol, even if you don't have the 1st turn. So if you go second, your opponent must shoot at your Aegis Robots, then you have your turn, set the Conqueror protocols for the next Battle Round, and move the Robots in position for your turn two charge. You shoot all the while (at 5+, how come they're not relentless). Then opponent's second turn, he keep shooting at your Aegis Robots, then your turn comes and you finally are able to reduce all his dreams in a pulp in a single glorious charge.

EDIT: On another subject, given the news about the Codices, which modifications and new rules would you like for our own army ? Personally I'd love it if we could have an equivalent to the Scout move if we play our Detachment full AdMech, and of course as they announced they would add new models for some armies, I'm waiting our transport and pray it's a nice one (please 12 transport capacity or more ! ). Wondering if they're going to flesh out our existing rules, like the Canticles, or change the Neurostatic Aura of the Infiltrators so that it's actually useful and a staple of this unit again. Also, make Kataphrons cheaper, because no one wants to buy mine so I'll keep them I guess

The problem is still that your opponent gets one turn to shoot at your Kastelans without Aegis on. And turn two charge into ideal targets seems extremely optimistic, given your opponent will likely have assaulters or screening units to deal with. =\

SCOUT. Or better yet, if they don't give us transports, Dunestrider! I love AdMech as a mobile gun line.

 axisofentropy wrote:
On twitch, one of the designers hinted that AdMech will get a strategem to self-destruct the robots. Fun!

 Aaranis wrote:

 axisofentropy wrote:
On twitch, one of the designers hinted that AdMech will get a strategem to self-destruct the robots. Fun!

Wow, a more reliable version of my kamikaze Dragoon you mean ? That'd give some use to the Dragoon, seeing how useless he is otherwise :(

Wow. Dragoons are the cheapest Explodes unit, right? If so, they would instantly become one of our best units. Charge into a bunch of units, explode for reliable D3 Wounds!

 em_en_oh_pee wrote:
So for folks testing Rangers - are you using the Omnispex? Seems like a nice way to help them hit a bit harder. I was tossing around a bot/crawler/knight list and had 107pt leftover... so, I figured that would be a perfect filler that might help snipe out stuff like Commissars.

Thoughts?

Omnispex is nice, but not mandatory. Not all targets you will be sniping hide in cover.

Suzuteo wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
That's not how it's gonna play, in practice you'll always have the Aegis Protocol on for a full turn. You start the Battle Round (so, player one 1st turn, player two 1st turn) with the Aegis Protocol, even if you don't have the 1st turn. So if you go second, your opponent must shoot at your Aegis Robots, then you have your turn, set the Conqueror protocols for the next Battle Round, and move the Robots in position for your turn two charge. You shoot all the while (at 5+, how come they're not relentless). Then opponent's second turn, he keep shooting at your Aegis Robots, then your turn comes and you finally are able to reduce all his dreams in a pulp in a single glorious charge.

EDIT: On another subject, given the news about the Codices, which modifications and new rules would you like for our own army ? Personally I'd love it if we could have an equivalent to the Scout move if we play our Detachment full AdMech, and of course as they announced they would add new models for some armies, I'm waiting our transport and pray it's a nice one (please 12 transport capacity or more ! ). Wondering if they're going to flesh out our existing rules, like the Canticles, or change the Neurostatic Aura of the Infiltrators so that it's actually useful and a staple of this unit again. Also, make Kataphrons cheaper, because no one wants to buy mine so I'll keep them I guess

The problem is still that your opponent gets one turn to shoot at your Kastelans without Aegis on. And turn two charge into ideal targets seems extremely optimistic, given your opponent will likely have assaulters or screening units to deal with.

Why would your opponent get a turn to shoot at Kastelans without Aegis? Protocols are decided at the beginning of your movement phase, it sounds like you are mixing them up with Canticles? i.e. Conqueror protocol is set at the beginning of the second movement phase

 MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:

Suzuteo wrote:

 Aaranis wrote:
That's not how it's gonna play, in practice you'll always have the Aegis Protocol on for a full turn. You start the Battle Round (so, player one 1st turn, player two 1st turn) with the Aegis Protocol, even if you don't have the 1st turn. So if you go second, your opponent must shoot at your Aegis Robots, then you have your turn, set the Conqueror protocols for the next Battle Round, and move the Robots in position for your turn two charge. You shoot all the while (at 5+, how come they're not relentless). Then opponent's second turn, he keep shooting at your Aegis Robots, then your turn comes and you finally are able to reduce all his dreams in a pulp in a single glorious charge.

EDIT: On another subject, given the news about the Codices, which modifications and new rules would you like for our own army ? Personally I'd love it if we could have an equivalent to the Scout move if we play our Detachment full AdMech, and of course as they announced they would add new models for some armies, I'm waiting our transport and pray it's a nice one (please 12 transport capacity or more ! ). Wondering if they're going to flesh out our existing rules, like the Canticles, or change the Neurostatic Aura of the Infiltrators so that it's actually useful and a staple of this unit again. Also, make Kataphrons cheaper, because no one wants to buy mine so I'll keep them I guess

The problem is still that your opponent gets one turn to shoot at your Kastelans without Aegis on. And turn two charge into ideal targets seems extremely optimistic, given your opponent will likely have assaulters or screening units to deal with.

Why would your opponent get a turn to shoot at Kastelans without Aegis? Protocols are decided at the beginning of your movement phase, it sounds like you are mixing them up with Canticles? i.e. Conqueror protocol is set at the beginning of the second movement phase

Alright I mixed up some rules but my explanation still works, it says that when this unit is placed the Aegis Protocol is on, just like in 7th. So you still have two shooting phases from your opponent (IF he gets first turn) that goes in the Aegis Protocol. What I mixed up was with the Canticles, which are indeed decided upon each Battle Round. Sorry.

Does anyone know how Litany of the Electromancer works? WHen does the 1" get measured? At the start of the battle round? Once at any time during the battle round? WHose turn does it take place?

Aaranis wrote:
Alright I mixed up some rules but my explanation still works, it says that when this unit is placed the Aegis Protocol is on, just like in 7th. So you still have two shooting phases from your opponent (IF he gets first turn) that goes in the Aegis Protocol. What I mixed up was with the Canticles, which are indeed decided upon each Battle Round. Sorry.

MIKEtheMERCILESS wrote:
Why would your opponent get a turn to shoot at Kastelans without Aegis? Protocols are decided at the beginning of your movement phase, it sounds like you are mixing them up with Canticles? i.e. Conqueror protocol is set at the beginning of the second movement phase

I think there may be some misunderstandings here.

Keep in mind three facts:
1) When set up, your Kastelan uses Aegis Protocol.
2) You attempt to change protocols at the start of your Movement phase.
3) The protocol change takes effect at the start of the next battle round. (Before or after Canticles, your choice.)

Here are the rules as written:

Battle Protocols: When this unit is set up, the Aegis Protocol (see below) is in effect. You can attempt to change the unit’s battle protocol at the start of each of your Movement phases if there is a friendly <FORGE WORLD> Cybernetica Datasmith within 6". To do so, roll a D6; on a 2+ the attempt is successful and you can select any one of the three battle protocols to take effect from the start of the next battle round. Otherwise, the attempt fails and the unit’s current protocol remains in effect.

If you go second, you always go second in each battle round. That means there will be one turn where you are exposed to enemy fire without Aegis.

Wulfey wrote:Does anyone know how Litany of the Electromancer works? WHen does the 1" get measured? At the start of the battle round? Once at any time during the battle round? WHose turn does it take place?

At the start of your battle round (which is BEFORE your turn, even if you go first), you roll for Canticles. If you get Litany, then you look at every unit that is in a 100% AdMech detachment (units in detachments with any non-AdMech units are NOT affected by Canticles). Pick out every enemy unit within 1" of these units. Roll a single D6 for each of these enemy units. If you get 6, you roll D3 and deal that many mortal wounds to that unit.

Litany of the Electromancer
Roll a D6 for each enemy unit that is within 1" of any affected units; on a roll of 6, the unit being rolled for suffers D3 mortal wounds.

Okay guys, I think I will settle with this list. After a lot of games the sweet spot for Kastelans imho is 3 or 4, while 2 Neutronagers and 1 Icarus Onager are pretty perfect. You shouldnt go with more than 4 of each.
So, this is the list. The only problem: Id love to take 4 squads of vanguard. Good god they are good. But I have to cut some points one way or the other so the question is: Do I take power swords and stubbers on my infiltrators, or do I take Radium Jezzails on the Dragoons instead of the Lances. I learnt that the lances...they suck, kinda. No AP is just crap, 3 attacks usually dont do anything. Since I havent tried the Jezzails yet I think I could cut the lances. The Dragoons are for harrassing only anyways and boy to they do a great job with that. They usually dont do any damage for me but pulling units into CC is just crazy good. Plus they are hard to hit and pretty durable with shroud song...

anyways, list as follows:


comments?

Iago40k wrote:
Okay guys, I think I will settle with this list. After a lot of games the sweet spot for Kastelans imho is 3 or 4, while 2 Neutronagers and 1 Icarus Onager are pretty perfect. You shouldnt go with more than 4 of each.
So, this is the list. The only problem: Id love to take 4 squads of vanguard. Good god they are good. But I have to cut some points one way or the other so the question is: Do I take power swords and stubbers on my infiltrators, or do I take Radium Jezzails on the Dragoons instead of the Lances. I learnt that the lances...they suck, kinda. No AP is just crap, 3 attacks usually dont do anything. Since I havent tried the Jezzails yet I think I could cut the lances. The Dragoons are for harrassing only anyways and boy to they do a great job with that. They usually dont do any damage for me but pulling units into CC is just crazy good. Plus they are hard to hit and pretty durable with shroud song...

anyways, list as follows:

Spoiler:

Imperium: Spearhead Detachment - 1564

*************** 1 HQ ***************
Belisarius Cawl
- - - > 250

*************** 2 Standard ***************

5 Skitarii Rangers
- 2 x Transuranic arquebus
+ Ranger Alpha
- Galvanic rifle
- - - > 100

5 Skitarii Vanguard
+ Vanguard Alpha
- Radium carbine
- - - > 50


*************** 2 Elite ***************
5 Sicarian Infiltrators
- 5 x Stub carbine + Power sword
- - - > 120


Cybernetica Datasmith
- - - > 52


*************** 2 FA ***************

1 Sydonian Dragoons
- 1 x Taser Lance
- - - > 68

1 Sydonian Dragoons
- 1 x Taser Lance
- - - > 68


*************** 5 Heavy Support ***************

2 Kastelan Robots
- 2 x 2 Heavy Phosphor blasters
- 2 x Heavy Phosphor blaster
- - - > 220

2 Kastelan Robots
- 2 x 2 Heavy Phosphor blasters
- 2 x Heavy Phosphor blaster
- - - > 220

Onager Dunecrawlers
- Icarus array
- - - > 130

Onager Dunecrawlers
- Neutron laser + Cognis heavy stubber
- - - > 143

Onager Dunecrawlers
- Neutron laser + Cognis heavy stubber
- - - > 143

Imperium: Patrol Detachment - 285 Punkte

*************** 1 HQ ***************

Tech-Priest Dominus
- Volkite blaster
- Macrostubber
- - - > 135


*************** 3 Standard ***************

5 Skitarii Vanguard
+ Vanguard Alpha
- Radium carbine
- - - > 50

5 Skitarii Vanguard
+ Vanguard Alpha
- Radium carbine
- - - > 50

5 Skitarii Vanguard
+ Vanguard Alpha
- Radium carbine
- - - > 50

comments?

Maybe cut the Infiltrators for another Icarus Dunecrawler? I like having an even number of Crawlers because it lets me split them up while keeping the Force Field up. Furthermore, Icarus is the better TAC option, since AA coverage is pretty important in some matchups; two Icarus Crawlers shuts out a ton of lists, including Eldar, Tau, and Imperial flyers.

My newest list cut the second TPD for two more Dragoons:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/730618.page

I actually am not too sure of this change, since I liked keeping my TPD with the second group of Crawlers... but eh, we'll see.

Suzuteo wrote:



Maybe cut the Infiltrators for another Icarus Dunecrawler? I like having an even number of Crawlers because it lets me split them up while keeping the Force Field up. Furthermore, Icarus is the better TAC option, since AA coverage is pretty important in some matchups; two Icarus Crawlers shuts out a ton of lists, including Eldar, Tau, and Imperial flyers.

My newest list cut the second TPD for two more Dragoons:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/730618.page

I really think the Infiltrators are necessary. People need to adjust their deployment just because of them. I see you are using 4 Onagers instead of more Kastelan. I ust them too but I got the feeling 2 Kastelans is not enough after people stepped back from playing complete mechanised lists since they didnt win anything. We play Eternal War and Maelstrom put together which is hard for lets say AM conscript screen and 8 tanks.
What are your experiences so far on balancing out onagers and kastelans?

Hey I had a game today of 1000 pts, first time against some T'au. For once my Infiltrators were useful, they allowed me to drop in the back of his army to almost wipe out (one survivor) a whole team of Pathfinders with Markerlights that were contributing to giving hell to my boys, and all with a single Flechette Blaster volley. Then they got worn off a bit by XV-25 shooting, and died in CC against them (you read that right, my luck was bad this game). So I think they're still useful for now, but for a real specific role. Now that my opponent knows them he will certainly modify his deployments because of that though.

Oh and I won 11-5 so Tau are still attractive to me

How are folks running Fulgurites? 5-man? 10-man?

I am going to grab some today and figured a 10-man squad as a counter-assault unit would be pretty decent.

Iago40k wrote:

I really think the Infiltrators are necessary. People need to adjust their deployment just because of them. I see you are using 4 Onagers instead of more Kastelan. I ust them too but I got the feeling 2 Kastelans is not enough after people stepped back from playing complete mechanised lists since they didnt win anything. We play Eternal War and Maelstrom put together which is hard for lets say AM conscript screen and 8 tanks.
What are your experiences so far on balancing out onagers and kastelans?

I don't think Infiltrators are good any more. I mean, they went from 8.125 points per attack to 11.82; that's an 45.46% increase! I would much rather have an extra Icarus. 48" covers a lot of ground; the enemy is rarely 57" away.

One thing to note about my list is that one unit of 2x Kastelans went into a Crusader.

In terms of Kastelans vs. Crawlers, I agree with Wulfey to some extent a few pages back. Icarus and Neutron Crawlers are our bread and butter in a TAC list due to their durability, mobility, reach, and ability to shut out entire classes of enemy. I am enjoying a 1:1 Crawler ratio, with Kastelans supporting the Crawlers as a midfield anti-horde specialist and the Crusader being a mid-field generalist that does a bit of everything. (I find it funny that we consider 36" to be our midfield.) From my view, focusing too much on Kastelans might be a mistake. They definitely are absolutely OP against any high model count army, but they are also rather vulnerable to deep striking units; once that Protector protocol comes on, it becomes super hard to extricate them from CC, and if I am facing an army with that capability, I definitely will be keeping Dragoons and the Crusader close by to peel enemies off.

Whatever our mix though, I think we need a strong screening element. Now, I dislike Conscript blobs because it pretty much clogs your board up and causes you to fall behind in any points match, thus committing you to tabling your opponent, and I find Vanguard too expensive for the durability that they offer (especially when you need to stop people in CC), which is where Dragoons come in. Their damage is mediocre, but they have that mix of characteristics that I find essential for AdMech to play the points game: durability (Incense and Shroudpsalm is awesome), mobility, and not-awful in CC. Even if you charge them suicidally into a bunch of Berserkers, they buy your artillery another turn of shooting; you just fall back next turn and have your artillery open up. (If they explode before then, all the better!)

 Aaranis wrote:
Hey I had a game today of 1000 pts, first time against some T'au. For once my Infiltrators were useful, they allowed me to drop in the back of his army to almost wipe out (one survivor) a whole team of Pathfinders with Markerlights that were contributing to giving hell to my boys, and all with a single Flechette Blaster volley. Then they got worn off a bit by XV-25 shooting, and died in CC against them (you read that right, my luck was bad this game). So I think they're still useful for now, but for a real specific role. Now that my opponent knows them he will certainly modify his deployments because of that though.

Oh and I won 11-5 so Tau are still attractive to me

As I mentioned earlier, we pretty much shut out Tau and Eldar. Icarus Crawlers are sooo good against their Battlesuits and Jetbikes. They also are great against mid-toughness infantry. Might as well have a sign on them that says "no mobility allowed."

Suzuteo wrote:
As I mentioned earlier, we pretty much shut out Tau and Eldar. Icarus Crawlers are sooo good against their Battlesuits and Jetbikes. They also are great against mid-toughness infantry. Might as well have a sign on them that says "no mobility allowed."

Funny thing is that I didn't have the Icarus, it was the Neutron Laser. Still, once I had the LoS to the Broadside I got to OS it. My command squad with two Meltas and two Plasma guns failed to scratch him even with the Orders because of sheer bad luck, even though they survived until the end of the battle, first time it's happening

 Aaranis wrote:

Funny thing is that I didn't have the Icarus, it was the Neutron Laser. Still, once I had the LoS to the Broadside I got to OS it. My command squad with two Meltas and two Plasma guns failed to scratch him even with the Orders because of sheer bad luck, even though they survived until the end of the battle, first time it's happening

Wow. Well... popping Coldstars is a lot easier with Icarus Crawlers. (The shoot and charge, then next turn fall back and shoot combo is super annoying, so it's best you just kill them in one go.)

While I agree that having the threat of infiltrators looming over the enemy to cause more careful deployment and play while also providing the opportunity for exploiting overextension is important, I wonder if sicarians are really the best choice for that.

We can put another detachment on the board that simply shares the imperial keyword and that allows us to field other imperial deep strikers. We could use tempestus with plasma alongside their HQ, allowing them to reroll 1s when supercharging, thus being able to threaten vehicles or other important units. We can use notoriously hardy assault terminators with storm shields to tie up important targets.

I am still looking for the best option to use as deep strikers alongside AdMech but it seems sicarians aren't simply it and I fail to see a place for them in our army right now.