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.

And if they Take Aim, they reroll all misses.

 NenkotaMoon wrote:
And if they Take Aim, they reroll all misses.

That's even better! Any sort of morale boost? The old iron discipline returned?

How about their tanks? Or is it the same?

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 NenkotaMoon wrote:
And if they Take Aim, they reroll all misses.

That's even better! Any sort of morale boost? The old iron discipline returned?

Not that has been shown.

The Cadian Warlord trait is called "Superior Tactical Training" and allows for the Warlord to issue the Order they've issued to an additional Cadian unit of the same type within 6" on a D6 roll of 4+.
Their stratagem is called "Overlapping Fields of Fire" and the text is:

Use after a Cadian unit from your army has inflicted an unsaved wound on an enemy unit in the Shooting phase. You can then add 1 to hit rolls for any other Cadian units from your army that target the same enemy unit this phase.

Their special Regimental Order is a Tank Order called "Pound Them to Dust!":

Reroll the dice when determining the number of attacks the ordered model can make with turret weapons that use a randomly determined number.

I didn't see the Relics, sadly, as the review I saw skipped over the unique Regimental Relics.

Thier regimental order is to pretend to be a catachan for a turn?

"Quick! Open your emergency testosterone packs and open fire!"

 Future War Cultist wrote:

 Tyr13 wrote:
Reroll 1s to hit if they didnt move.

That's pretty good! Permanent take aim in effect.

It gets better/worse: If you use Take Aim when the doctrine is in effect it improves to reroll all misses.

Lots of new details out, including Militarum Tempestus traits. Their doctrine is similar to the imperial fists bolter drill, except it seems to work on all weapons.

Cadians are looking to be nasty too. Army wide rerolls and extra orders.

So I saw a video review today, and while it is likely explained in the codex, what happens when I use tempestus as my regiment? If I decide to take Russes do they gain STORM TROOPERS? Their doctrine lets them generate extra shots with any gun, at half range, on a 6+. While it obviously benefits our transports insanely well, I feel this could get ever so slightly out of hand if That Guy calls his conscript blob MILITARUM TEMPESTUS and gets their 30 flashlights to generate extra shots.

If it's anything like the Index rules, you're specifically disallowed from choosing Militarum Tempestus as a regiment; it's locked to Scions and so forth only.

Although storm trooper conscripts as a concept make me giggle.

StarHunter25 wrote:
So I saw a video review today, and while it is likely explained in the codex, what happens when I use tempestus as my regiment? If I decide to take Russes do they gain STORM TROOPERS? Their doctrine lets them generate extra shots with any gun, at half range, on a 6+. While it obviously benefits our transports insanely well, I feel this could get ever so slightly out of hand if That Guy calls his conscript blob MILITARUM TEMPESTUS and gets their 30 flashlights to generate extra shots.

That's not how it works. They explicitly say that you cannot replace the REGIMENT keyword from any unit with Militarum Tempestus as a keyword. This means you can only gain access to it via units that start with it, which are Tempestus Scion Command Squads, Tempestus Scion squads, and Taurox Primes.

My nephew's small Cadian force is going to love this book.

Heh, one of his two commanders is going to basically double in firepower; a command punisher with three heavy bolters.

Wait a sec. I hear scion plasma guns went up from 7 points to 13 points. That's a HUGE nerf. Why isn't anyone talking about this?

In fact, the two units complained about the most (conscripts and scions) got rightful nerfs. Is everyone just salty because the Leman Russ isn't trash anymore?

ThePorcupine wrote:
Wait a sec. I hear scion plasma guns went up from 7 points to 13 points. That's a HUGE nerf. Why isn't anyone talking about this?

In fact, the two units complained about the most (conscripts and scions) got rightful nerfs. Is everyone just salty because the Leman Russ isn't trash anymore?

The conscript nerf was basically dismissed by most people who wanted them nerfed as utterly irrelevant to their actual balance. They were overly durable, that was the main issue for anyone who was actually bothered by conscripts.

As for scions, there has been a lot of confusion and conflicting information regarding it. People aren't 100% sure what happened there, though honestly there have been so many buffs to tank and artillery firepower, which sticks around multiple turns as opposed to suicide scions, that most of us assume that'll probably be a wash with balance overall. I will say it's certainly fluffier for tanks and artillery to be the big damage dealers of a guard army, so that is a generally good improvement.

As for me personally, I never had a huge issue with plasma scions as they were another variation on something a lot of armies have, high firepower yet fragile units and units good at killing MEQ/TEQ which aren't exactly the top tier units atm. I was always more worried by the things guard had which lacked equivalents in most other armies, such as exceptionally durable chaff and strong artillery. Those have only been buffed by the codex.

How has exceptionally durable chaff been buffed by the codex? Conscripts were nerfed, not buffed.

ThePorcupine wrote:
How has exceptionally durable chaff been buffed by the codex? Conscripts were nerfed, not buffed.

They do now get regiment bonuses though, so that will technically be a "buff" I suppose.

I still think conscripts should have just lost their regiment tag. They're conscripts, so they shouldn't be an official part of the regiment yet in my opinion. Then they'd get no orders and no regiment tactics. They'd be good for bubble wrapping chaff, which is totally in character fluffwise.

ThePorcupine wrote:
How has exceptionally durable chaff been buffed by the codex? Conscripts were nerfed, not buffed.

The only nerfs were to orders and size, while the buffs included all of the potential regiments, including ones that benefit conscript durability. That is a net gain for their actual role.

SilverAlien wrote:
The only nerfs were to orders and size, while the buffs included all of the potential regiments, including ones that benefit conscript durability. That is a net gain for their actual role.

*massages temples* Okay.. So apparently reducing the size of the unit by 40% and the effectiveness of orders on them by 50% aren't "real nerfs" and there are apparently regiments that benefit conscript durability. I'm looking through all the leaked info right now. Please enlighten me which of these benefits conscript durability. I don't see a single one. The only one which you could MAYBE interpret as benefiting durability is mordian conscripts overwatching on 5's instead of 6's, which makes them slightly harder to charge. But I'm obviously missing something big. Show me the light.

ThePorcupine wrote:
*massages temples* Okay.. So apparently reducing the size of the unit by 40% and the effectiveness of orders on them by 50% aren't "real nerfs"

Well, at the very least, those changes didn't actually address what the problem with Conscripts are.

ThePorcupine wrote:
*massages temples* Okay.. So apparently reducing the size of the unit by 40% and the effectiveness of orders on them by 50% aren't "real nerfs" and there are apparently regiments that benefit conscript durability. I'm looking through all the leaked info right now. Please enlighten me which of these benefits conscript durability. I don't see a single one. The only one which you could MAYBE interpret as benefiting durability is mordian conscripts overwatching on 5's instead of 6's, which makes them slightly harder to charge. But I'm obviously missing something big. Show me the light.

No, reducing conscript squad size to the size most competitive lists ran them at, and removing orders when many people didn't bother to run commanders with them, are not real nerfs. Anyone with any sense knew that.

Personally, I think the Valhallan tactic works best for them. Finally manage to snipe that commissar? Oh well, they still won't be taking anything like the morale causalities they should. One of the only good counters for many armies now made significantly weaker.

The fact I had to point that out makes me wonder why you are the one rubbing your temples. I'm the one dealing with people who can't see the blindingly obvious unless you literally shove it in their face. Trust me, trying to explain why units are broken to people who can't figure out a back up for minimizing morale losses on conscripts is a good thing that increases their durability gets old.

This is why I think we should just get rid of conscripts. Too much baggage.

We got our combined squads back anyway, so it's not like we need the conscripts that much. And personally, I think that if you want a big unbreakable unit you should fork out the points for it. And I say that as a lifelong IG player.

Weird random thing: I've seen in some reviews that Crusaders are in the AM codex for some reason. Do they have the AM keyword now? Can they take a Regiment and get all the things that come with that?

I'm guessing the answer is "no", which makes their inclusion in the codex really weird, since they're really just a Ministorum unit that you're allying in.

But if the answer is "yes"... Catachan Crusaders might make for a hilarious oddball build. S4 power swords with a 3++, acts of faith, Straken, a priest, and orders. Deus Vult indeed.

I guess even if they can't, they'd still make a potentially interesting alternative to Ogryns (who also don't get a regiment keyword anyway). If they at least have the AM keyword they'd be easier to transport, and can get some decent mileage out of just AoF and a priest.

 ross-128 wrote:
Weird random thing: I've seen in some reviews that Crusaders are in the AM codex for some reason. Do they have the AM keyword now? Can they take a Regiment and get all the things that come with that?

I'm guessing the answer is "no", which makes their inclusion in the codex really weird, since they're really just a Ministorum unit that you're allying in.

But if the answer is "yes"... Catachan Crusaders might make for a hilarious oddball build. S4 power swords with a 3++, acts of faith, Straken, a priest, and orders. Deus Vult indeed.

I guess even if they can't, they'd still make a potentially interesting alternative to Ogryns (who also don't get a regiment keyword anyway). If they at least have the AM keyword they'd be easier to transport, and can get some decent mileage out of just AoF and a priest.

They can be taken in a <Regiment> list without that detachment losing the benefits of being Cadian, Vostroyan, etc, but they don't benefit from it either.

Hmm, so that does put them in roughly the same category as Ogryns then. Would be interesting to see a comparison between them.

Off the top of my head,
Ogryn advantages:
S5 ranged weapon
Good S and T on the model
High number of base attacks
Multi-wound (both good and bad, can take wounds without losing models but can also be punished by multi-wound weapons)
Mobile cover (if using slab shields)

Crusader advantages:
Easier to transport, especially with a priest in tow.
3++ save
Good AP on power swords
AoF basically replace Orders
Single-wound models (resistant to multi-wound weapons, but every wound costs a model)

 ross-128 wrote:
Hmm, so that does put them in roughly the same category as Ogryns then. Would be interesting to see a comparison between them.

Off the top of my head,
Ogryn advantages:
S5 ranged weapon
Good S and T on the model
High number of base attacks
Multi-wound (both good and bad, can take wounds without losing models but can also be punished by multi-wound weapons)
Mobile cover (if using slab shields)

Crusader advantages:
Easier to transport, especially with a priest in tow.
3++ save
Good AP on power swords
AoF basically replace Orders
Single-wound models (resistant to multi-wound weapons, but every wound costs a model)

It is pretty trivial to get an Ogryn bodyguard a 2++ save.

So with a psyker and a priest, they can get 3 attacks and have a 2++. They can also drop out of a valkyrie for a guaranteed charge at something.

jaxor1983 wrote:
So with a psyker and a priest, they can get 3 attacks and have a 2++. They can also drop out of a valkyrie for a guaranteed charge at something.

Sadly the psyker won't give them a 2++, as it is +1 Armour Save, not +1 to all saves.

Did they change it from the index? That one says 'to a unit's saving throws.'

jaxor1983 wrote:
Did they change it from the index? That one says 'to a unit's saving throws.'

In that case, it's still trivial to give Ogryns a 3++, but you still can't use it on crusaders because they're not Astra Militarum units (at least in the Index. I don't think they're in the Codex).

jaxor1983 wrote:
So with a psyker and a priest, they can get 3 attacks and have a 2++. They can also drop out of a valkyrie for a guaranteed charge at something.

Unless their rules have changed, they can't ride in a valkyrie. They can only ride in a Ministorium Rhino or Immolator.

If their rules have changed though, then that's a pretty big change, expecially for Inquisitors who actually lost access to crusaders because of this.

You guys are probably right. I was thinking that they actually added the AM keyword to crusaders. They are probably unchanged, and just ministorum still.

However, according to this article, they DO have the AM keyword.

http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2017/10/lady-guardsmen-4-great-things-codex.html