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.

BrianDavion wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:
trying to figure out what CTs I'll likely use for my Blood Ravens

Thousand suns?

you could do iron hands "lucky" 6+ FNP

or sally since they probably have a massive collection of sally master crafted weapons.

just think every time I re-rolled I could state "it was a gift!" Sallies was tempting but it sounds like they use flamer bases stratigiums which wouldn't be that great for me with my army as stands (I'm not sure I HAVE any flamers
Iron Hands might work, the Blood Ravens seem to cheat death in every dawn of war game. ANY OTHER chapter would be dead having taken the kinda beatings they have.

From their old article it sounds like you can at least pick and choose from the "general" stratagems, so you might not even have to use the Salamander Stratagems when running a Salamander Chapter Tactic.

The Stratagems are especially exciting; the Space Marines codex has 26 new Stratagems for you to play with. These allow you to customise your army even more – as well as general Stratagems, there’s also one for each Chapter, as well as Stratagems focused around specific units.

yeah, over all seems plenty exciting. I might experiment with chapter tactics and see what one I like best, I ran ultramarines last edition, before finally getting around to beginning a blood ravens project I'd always wanted to do just as 8th was announced (which elft me sitting on a full demi battle company just waiting to be assmbled until the index hit) having the freedom to play with differant CTs without feeling like a colossal dick is gonna be kinda nice

 pretre wrote:

Median Trace wrote:
Iron Hands Venerable Dreadnoughts ignore any wound 33% of the time. That isn't bad. Glad I have a bunch of these.

My hunch is that the Iron Hands Stratagem will have something to do with healing wounds on units with the Chapter Tactic.

It's actually less than 33%
1/6 of wounds saved with the venerable roll.
1/6 of 5/6 wounds saved with the CT roll.

So 11/36 or 30.5%.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Also, if people find these CT bland, there is still the Strategems an Relics that will add more flavoring

I'm willing to bet BT get a stratagem that says 'pay 2CP after taking any unsaved wounds and you may immediately take a move action.' or something similar.

Brain-farted on my conditional probabilities. Still, 30% chance for any wound is good.

Median Trace wrote:
Brain-farted on my conditional probabilities. Still, 30% chance for any wound is good.

Indeed!
Too bad there isn't a character dreadnought for IH, then you could take the Warlord trait.

Dionysodorus wrote:
Templars' seems only okay. Re-rolling charges is primarily relevant if you're deep-striking with more than one unit (otherwise you can just use a CP). So it strongly pushes them towards that style of play but I don't know that that's a very strong style of play in the first place.

Siege Masters' is going to be a huge deal in some matchups and useless in others.

Salamanders' is incredible. If you're shooting a large number of shots, it is like you're getting an extra 1.67 shots in the volley, which is fine. If you're shooting one shot which hits and wounds on a 3+, it is a 77% increase in expected damage. This is a huge boost in damage output for ranged dreadnoughts but also for the special/heavy weapons in tactical squads.

Iron Hands' is fine. Can't complain about 6+ FNP. This is probably overall preferable to Raven Guard's thing against BS3+. It's also worth noting that FNP plays really nicely with multi-wound models like bikers and Terminators since they're far more likely to survive a plasma hit.

The Iron Hands tactic is garbage. If you ever played Iron Hands outside of smash you would know that. If it was 5+ it would be reliable and something you could build around. Plus it only workers on infantry, bikes, and dreads. It might be okay on dreads, but with the lack of a decent dread delivery system it still makes dreads less than useful. And not to mention expensive. I can't even to afford the points to field my vehicles like I used to.

 pretre wrote:

Median Trace wrote:
Brain-farted on my conditional probabilities. Still, 30% chance for any wound is good.

Indeed!
Too bad there isn't a character dreadnought for IH, then you could take the Warlord trait.

Chaplain dread

If it was 5+ they'd be stepping on Death Guard's toes. I think you're underestimating how hard it is to get additional rolls to save a wound in this edition, the IH tactic is great.

Arachnofiend wrote:
If it was 5+ they'd be stepping on Death Guard's toes. I think you're underestimating how hard it is to get additional rolls to save a wound in this edition, the IH tactic is great.

Nah it's pretty weak. I'm guessing there's going to be Strategems and stuff to make up for it, though.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Arachnofiend wrote:
If it was 5+ they'd be stepping on Death Guard's toes. I think you're underestimating how hard it is to get additional rolls to save a wound in this edition, the IH tactic is great.

Nah it's pretty weak. I'm guessing there's going to be Strategems and stuff to make up for it, though.

i bet its going to be self repair a vehicle or something.

 Desubot wrote:

 pretre wrote:

Median Trace wrote:
Brain-farted on my conditional probabilities. Still, 30% chance for any wound is good.

Indeed!
Too bad there isn't a character dreadnought for IH, then you could take the Warlord trait.

Chaplain dread

There you go. 6+ x3 or...

so 91/216 or 42%.

Bjorn is better at 5++ and then 6+ for warlord. 44%.

Median Trace wrote:
Iron Hands Venerable Dreadnoughts ignore any wound 33% of the time. That isn't bad. Glad I have a bunch of these.

My hunch is that the Iron Hands Stratagem will have something to do with healing wounds on units with the Chapter Tactic.

I'm sorry but a CT being usable on one. specific. unit. does. not. make for a good CT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 pretre wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 pretre wrote:

Median Trace wrote:
Brain-farted on my conditional probabilities. Still, 30% chance for any wound is good.

Indeed!
Too bad there isn't a character dreadnought for IH, then you could take the Warlord trait.

Chaplain dread

There you go. 6+ x3 or...

so 91/216 or 42%.

Bjorn is better at 5++ and then 6+ for warlord. 44%.

IH aren't even supposed to have chaplains...They are supposed to have Iron Fathers. And I really dislike rules that are only good on one specific unit or model. It is bad design. I don't much like ven dreads or their cost. Never liked smash, but I was forced to play him due to local meta. I don't see myself using vehicles this edition. They are too expensive and seem tougher but underwhelming so far in my games. Very unhappy this edition. The IH lost even more of what they used to have this edition.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Arachnofiend wrote:
If it was 5+ they'd be stepping on Death Guard's toes. I think you're underestimating how hard it is to get additional rolls to save a wound in this edition, the IH tactic is great.

Nah it's pretty weak. I'm guessing there's going to be Strategems and stuff to make up for it, though.

I wouldn't count on it. They most likely will give the IH garbage and tell us to be grateful that they gave us that.

This thread is actually making me look forward to Blood Angels. I expected BA to get what BTs got, but now I'm seriously curious what BA are gonna get.

 Purifier wrote:

 JJ wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Talamare wrote:
Black Templar vs White Scar in an Assault List...

White Scar - d6+2" + 2d6" effective charges
Black Templar - reroll 2d6"

I get that Black Templar will have slightly more option for a combined arms army, but White Scar will just be advantaged again when it comes to Assault Guns.

You have to use CP to get the advance and charge for WS.

And we don't know what the BT get until they have their chapter focus.

Yes we do, it was leaked. Reroll charges. This is the thread with it.

Edit: I suspect you might have meant what strategems now that I think about it.

As we were talking about CP, I was talking about their stratagem. Not the CT.

Very interesting reading, the new tactics! Having not played other editions of Warhammer 40k it is hard to compare to the past however looking at the new ones and coming from AOS here are my thoughts;
(obviously we do not have any further info so it so solely based on what we know)

Top Tier

Raven Guard: -1 is incredibly powerful, especially in the early stages of the game where there is allot of shooting taking place. You can safely sit back and win most exchanges with a few Rifle Dreadnaughts or heavy weapon squads. If this stacks with cover saves it will be crazy good! This also makes not getting the first turn not hurt so bad! You do have to worry about letting your opponent get into 12" early so blocking Deep Strikers might be important, however its not a downside it just means they attack as normal.

Second Tier

White Scars: Not only do they get up the board faster than most, they can also do one of the most annoying things in the game IMO. Fall back from combat, have other units shoot the unit and then dive back in to finish them off if needed as they will get to hit first..

Ultramarines: As I understand it shooting has always been king? Therefore, any opportunity to gain additional shooting must be good. When you factor in the amount of re-rolls Ultramarines can get the -1 to hit after falling back might not be as big a deal. It also means everyone can shoot at the unit that was formerly engaged in combat. The +1 Leadership is a nice token gesture to the ‘tactical’ marine army and will save a few models in the physic phase and occasionally from morale checks.

Salamanders: Once the disappointment settles down from the fact there was nothing specifically about flamers I think we will conclude this is decent. Any unit with a high weapon skill (3+) and a heavy weapon with few shots will love this rule. It will an interesting balancing act with some characters re-roll auras, however there will be a sweet spot.

Third Tier

Iron Hands: Ignoring damage on a 6 is kind of boring however it does add up over the course of the game. One downside as I understand it, Iron Hand players like to run Vehicles which in many cases might not get this benefit? If it turns out all vehicles get this rule then it would fit the fluff much better and become much more potent.

Situational

Black Templars: Getting a successful charge from Deep Strike even with re-rolls is no guarantee. If you get out deployed this tactical benefit may be totally useless. However, if you can get your units where you want them to be then it could provide exceptionally powerful. This is one where good players will make it look broken and the for the rest of us we will complain its underpowered. Unlike White Scars of Ultramarines this rewards out playing your opponent, versus a noob friendly 'get out of jail' option.

Imperial Fists: I confess I have no idea what happens to a unit inside a building when it is destroyed and do not have the rule book with me. However, unlike the Black Templars how good this tactic is is totally dependent on the terrain you are playing with. Is the board full of cover? Yes, then you will be getting +1 to hit or forcing your opponents out into the open whereby you can benefit from -1 cover. No, then you won’t receive the benefit very often. What I dislike about this is that you cannot really build around it, its an on the day boon that gets better with every piece of terrain you add. It could be tier 1 or totally useless. Another thing to consider is how this would interact with abilities that act “as if you where in cover”…if that was included maybe this would become slightly less situational?

Overall we will not know how good these tactical advantages are until we see the units and other tactical options each chapter gets! TBH what do I know being a new 40K player haha....

 Melissia wrote:
This thread is actually making me look forward to Blood Angels. I expected BA to get what BTs got, but now I'm seriously curious what BA are gonna get.

Assuming GW gives them chapter tactics at all. I think they will, but it's possiable GW won't give blood angels etc their own. conversly it's possiable that GW'll go beyond what we expect and give several sets of chapter tactics to represent not only the blood angels but specific sucessors. (which would be awesome)

 NorseSig wrote:
IH aren't even supposed to have chaplains...They are supposed to have Iron Fathers. And I really dislike rules that are only good on one specific unit or model. It is bad design. I don't much like ven dreads or their cost. Never liked smash, but I was forced to play him due to local meta. I don't see myself using vehicles this edition. They are too expensive and seem tougher but underwhelming so far in my games. Very unhappy this edition. The IH lost even more of what they used to have this edition.

You don't think vehicles are good this edition? I guess you haven't faced Razorback Spam yet. I don't know if you classify fliers as vehicles, but the Storm Raven is significantly under costed. I don't bring them to casual games anymore. Dreads aren't great but they aren't unplayable. I wish my Venerable Dreads were of the Rifleman bent.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Arachnofiend wrote:
If it was 5+ they'd be stepping on Death Guard's toes. I think you're underestimating how hard it is to get additional rolls to save a wound in this edition, the IH tactic is great.

Nah it's pretty weak. I'm guessing there's going to be Strategems and stuff to make up for it, though.

but... it isn't. Considering how people drooled over the RG tactic, this response confuses me. From the other thread:

SilverAlien wrote:
So let's do some math hammer comparing Raven Guard and Iron hands being shot by 30 bolters rounds and 30 las rounds (from a SM and guardsman respectively)

Spoiler:

Raven Guard outside 12 inches:

30*(1/2)*(1/2)*(1/3)= 2.5 wounds average

30*(1/3)*(1/3)*(1/3)= 1.1 wounds average


Raven Guard inside 12 inches (or being stabbed in cc, etc):

30*(2/3)*(1/2)*(1/3)= 3.3 wounds average

30*(1/2)*(1/3)*(1/3)= 1.7 wounds average

Iron Hands anywhere:

30*(2/3)*(1/2)*(1/3)*(5/6)= 2.8 wounds average

30*(1/2)*(1/3)*(1/3)*(5/6)= 1.4 wounds average

So I am still not sure I agree with the consensus RG tactics are that much better than iron hands. Particularly for units that expect to be in melee or rapid fire range, which is a fairly considerable portion of your infantry, who are the main recipients of CTs that we know of.

If it was a 5+ it'd be far an away the best tactic. As is it's more widely applicable than the RG tactic, but a not quite as effective. Still, it's more than people think.

SilverAlien wrote:


If it was a 5+ it'd be far an away the best tactic. As is it's more widely applicable than the RG tactic, but a not quite as effective. Still, it's more than people think.

Hows about those odd high damage weapons.

like say a lascannon or auto cannon.

personally i just dont like it because you are DEPENDING on 6s. and im not lucky

BrianDavion wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
This thread is actually making me look forward to Blood Angels. I expected BA to get what BTs got, but now I'm seriously curious what BA are gonna get.

Assuming GW gives them chapter tactics at all. I think they will, but it's possiable GW won't give blood angels etc their own. conversly it's possiable that GW'll go beyond what we expect and give several sets of chapter tactics to represent not only the blood angels but specific sucessors. (which would be awesome)

I would like to see Flesh Testers get their own Chapter Tactics.

I strongly suspect Chapter Tactics will be given to every Chapter. Otherwise we are back to people running Red Marines.

SilverAlien wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Arachnofiend wrote:
If it was 5+ they'd be stepping on Death Guard's toes. I think you're underestimating how hard it is to get additional rolls to save a wound in this edition, the IH tactic is great.

Nah it's pretty weak. I'm guessing there's going to be Strategems and stuff to make up for it, though.

but... it isn't. Considering how people drooled over the RG tactic, this response confuses me. From the other thread:

SilverAlien wrote:
So let's do some math hammer comparing Raven Guard and Iron hands being shot by 30 bolters rounds and 30 las rounds (from a SM and guardsman respectively)

Spoiler:

Raven Guard outside 12 inches:

30*(1/2)*(1/2)*(1/3)= 2.5 wounds average

30*(1/3)*(1/3)*(1/3)= 1.1 wounds average


Raven Guard inside 12 inches (or being stabbed in cc, etc):

30*(2/3)*(1/2)*(1/3)= 3.3 wounds average

30*(1/2)*(1/3)*(1/3)= 1.7 wounds average

Iron Hands anywhere:

30*(2/3)*(1/2)*(1/3)*(5/6)= 2.8 wounds average

30*(1/2)*(1/3)*(1/3)*(5/6)= 1.4 wounds average

So I am still not sure I agree with the consensus RG tactics are that much better than iron hands. Particularly for units that expect to be in melee or rapid fire range, which is a fairly considerable portion of your infantry, who are the main recipients of CTs that we know of.

If it was a 5+ it'd be far an away the best tactic. As is it's more widely applicable than the RG tactic, but a not quite as effective. Still, it's more than people think.

So now apply it to any multi-damage weapon.

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
This thread is actually making me look forward to Blood Angels. I expected BA to get what BTs got, but now I'm seriously curious what BA are gonna get.

Assuming GW gives them chapter tactics at all. I think they will, but it's possiable GW won't give blood angels etc their own. conversly it's possiable that GW'll go beyond what we expect and give several sets of chapter tactics to represent not only the blood angels but specific sucessors. (which would be awesome)

I would like to see Flesh Testers get their own Chapter Tactics.

I strongly suspect Chapter Tactics will be given to every Chapter. Otherwise we are back to people running Red Marines.

ohh I agree too, they'll get something. they did last edition after all (dark angels, space wolves and blood angels all had at least one extra USR, GW never called it chapter tactics but that's pretty obvious what it was)

I'd honestly not mind seeing CTs for sucessor chapters as I'd like to see dark angels, blood angels and even space wolves whom not have them, to feel ENCHOURAGED to play sucessor chapters

 Desubot wrote:
Hows about those odd high damage weapons.

like say a lascannon or auto cannon.

personally i just dont like it because you are DEPENDING on 6s. and im not lucky

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
So now apply it to any multi-damage weapon.

These buffs are mainly for infantry (including cavalry I assume), correct? Not tanks, who don't get it. How many multi damage weapons are being fire at primarily single wound infantry? Even on bikes and terminators, who will often be in rapid fire range or close combat, it still evens out alright. It's worse for most longer ranged primaris and riflemen dreadnoughts I fully admit.

I suppose it is odd that the units this tactic does less for comparatively are ones you'd expect to see in IH players sue. Dreadnoughts, devastators, centurions, etc all get a little less from it competitively. Still, that's an issue with weird flavor problems more than the actual tactic being that much weaker. I still maintain they are fairly on par.

SilverAlien wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
Hows about those odd high damage weapons.

like say a lascannon or auto cannon.

personally i just dont like it because you are DEPENDING on 6s. and im not lucky

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
So now apply it to any multi-damage weapon.

These buffs are mainly for infantry (including cavalry I assume), correct? Not tanks, who don't get it. How many multi damage weapons are being fire at primarily single wound infantry? Even on bikes and terminators, who will often be in rapid fire range or close combat, it still evens out alright. It's worse for most longer ranged primaris and riflemen dreadnoughts I fully admit.

I suppose it is odd that the units this tactic does less for comparatively are ones you'd expect to see in IH players sue. Dreadnoughts, devastators, centurions, etc all get a little less from it competitively. Still, that's an issue with weird flavor problems more than the actual tactic being that much weaker. I still maintain they are fairly on par.

It happens when something isn't better to shoot at. So you show that there's BARELY a difference in rapid fire range with Raven Guard (where they don't get their ability), and then you say "Well those weapons aren't going to be fired at them". Cut the crap.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
It happens when something isn't better to shoot at. So you show that there's BARELY a difference in rapid fire range with Raven Guard (where they don't get their ability), and then you say "Well those weapons aren't going to be fired at them". Cut the crap.

The difference between RF range and melee RG and IH is almost the exact same as the difference between IH and RG when RG is benefiting from their chapter tactic. Yes multiwound weapons will be fired at the sometimes, which will minimize the advantage. I was simply pointing out the majority of units who benefit from CT either won't normally be targeted by MW weapons, or will so often find themselves at close range that it still is arguably as useful as the RG tactic would be. I also haven't brought up the handful of autohit weapons, or psychic powers which don't have a hit roll, etc.

I'm just saying I don't think the gap is that wide.

Why would someone not take Salamanders at this point. Jesus Tapdancing Christ.

PoorGravitasHandling wrote:
Why would someone not take Salamanders at this point. Jesus Tapdancing Christ.

Agreed. Since none of these Chapters have unit restrictions there is zero downside to being Salamanders.

For those who aren't really happy with these, honestly what can be done? The base rules don't allow much subtlety, all they can really do is +1 here, ignore this rule there, etc...

 Melissia wrote:
This thread is actually making me look forward to Blood Angels. I expected BA to get what BTs got, but now I'm seriously curious what BA are gonna get.

At this point, I expect Blood Angels to get shafted due to the amount of people likely complaining about the Ultramarines and Raven Guard chapter tactics.

BrianDavion wrote:

 casvalremdeikun wrote:

BrianDavion wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
This thread is actually making me look forward to Blood Angels. I expected BA to get what BTs got, but now I'm seriously curious what BA are gonna get.

Assuming GW gives them chapter tactics at all. I think they will, but it's possiable GW won't give blood angels etc their own. conversly it's possiable that GW'll go beyond what we expect and give several sets of chapter tactics to represent not only the blood angels but specific sucessors. (which would be awesome)

I would like to see Flesh Testers get their own Chapter Tactics.

I strongly suspect Chapter Tactics will be given to every Chapter. Otherwise we are back to people running Red Marines.

ohh I agree too, they'll get something. they did last edition after all (dark angels, space wolves and blood angels all had at least one extra USR, GW never called it chapter tactics but that's pretty obvious what it was)

I'd honestly not mind seeing CTs for sucessor chapters as I'd like to see dark angels, blood angels and even space wolves whom not have them, to feel ENCHOURAGED to play sucessor chapters

The difference between Flesh Testers and other successor chapters is that they, like the Crimson Fists, are a Second Founding Chapter with a very iconic character. Perhaps they won't get their own tactics, but I fully expect them getting their own Relic, Strategems, and Warlord Traits.

I really hope Blood Angels get a variant of Furious Charge. Perhaps even something like Hammer of Wrath. I dunno. Space Wolves hopefully will get something like the ability to interrupt charges for free. Who knows about Dark Angels.

 NH Gunsmith wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
This thread is actually making me look forward to Blood Angels. I expected BA to get what BTs got, but now I'm seriously curious what BA are gonna get.

At this point, I expect Blood Angels to get shafted due to the amount of people likely complaining about the Ultramarines and Raven Guard chapter tactics.

Seeing as the books are most likely either printed or printing as we speak, I seriously doubt GW gives a crap about what people are saying about the current chapter tactics in relation to the upcoming ones. Not only that, but I seriously doubt they take all the knee jerking reactions to heart. At least I sure hope they don't.

Grand total number of dakka players who have tested out the chapter tactics, stratagems, relics, powers, and altered units from the new codex: 0 (zero). Anyone making decisions right now is a fool of a took.