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.

 Kirasu wrote:


What game are you actually arguing against or are you just making up some fictional non-GW game? 40k atm is basically the only example of this. Malifaux primarily has in-faction armies due to how most auras or other buffs work. Warmachine has some mercs but again most bonuses are given to in-faction stuff. WFB (RIP) had basically no useful allies. The fact is MOST games want people to collect and use single factions.

Because all of them implement some sort of reward for not using allies - which is exactly what I said, right?
It has been some time since I dabbled with Warmachine (I don't know the first thing about Malifaux, sorry), but the last time I did certain mercenaries were pretty much must-takes for many armies - apparently this has changed. If there was no downside to bringing mercenaries or upside to not bringing them, why not bring the best ones in every army? That's no difference to all imperium armies bringing conscripts or all chaos armies bringing brimstones. If nothing is lost by bringing the cheapest screen available to your army, why not bring it?

A good counter-example would be MtG. Every color has certain weaknesses and strengths by design, and adding more colors to a deck eliminates weaknesses and adds strengths. In an environment where color-fixing is readily available, there is no downside to picking multiple colors, so the meta game shifts to "good stuff" decks and everybody in tournaments starts playing a different set of the same ~40 cards. The more you need to invest into having all colors of mana, the less colors a found in tournament decks. The harder cherry-picking colors is the more likely you will see one or two-colored decks.

This could only be elegant if you assume the entire gaming universe consists of 1 game... 40k. Custodes will probably be a very niche army as I don't believe GW understands how awful the game is for elite armies. Point for point they simply aren't competitive since GW refuses to increase # of shots / attacks for more expensive models.

So, what's your argument here?
Note that I'm not arguing whether unknown rules with unknown point values should result in 3++ or 4++. I'm arguing that it's ok to require you to field at least a custodes HQ and two other units if you want +1 to invul saves for your super-durable, objective securing jet bikes.

I think it's elegant because it allows little Timmy to field his Inquisitor, Cypher, Celestine, Roboute, Cawl, some ETB Agressors, his Talon of the Emperor box and a LRBT as one army to fight his friend Jonny's eldar pirates made up of harlequins, wyches and banshees, lead by Eldrad and Lillith.
It's also elegant because competitive gamers can't just drop a warptime sorcerer into their Death Guard army to have their Blightlords assault in turn 1 without giving up their legion trait. It's basically a combo tax.

The system is not well balanced at all, but the idea behind it is pretty good.

 Jidmah wrote:


A good counter-example would be MtG. Every color has certain weaknesses and strengths by design,.

Unless you favour Green, in which case all your best tricks got doled out to every other colour a decade or so ago, with nothing in return

(Bitter, moi?)

I second the notion that GW has no clue how systematically crap all elite armies and units are. 8th is a horde game through and through. GW already gak the bed with Marines, and that gives little hope for any future elite armies like Necrons.

 Kirasu wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Looks like its a detachment bonus for having a detachment of nothing but custodes.
Its probably so that if you have a mixed detachment with just a single unit of custodes, they won't have 4+ invuls.

Why make rules that incentivise not using certain aspect of the rules?

-OR-

Why make rules that punish you for using certain aspect of the rules?

What I'm trying to say that if the game is already so broken this early into its lifespan that they have to bribe people with powerful rules to stop them from abusing the shonky allies rules, then we're in trouble.

How is GW actually realizing problems and taking countermeasures "trouble"?

I think it's an elegant solution. In any game that has some sort of list building, cherry picking is always superior to playing a mono faction/army/color build unless the game implements some rules that provide benefits for those that do.

It's questionable whether GW is properly balancing those benefits against the advantages of cherry picking, but the path is the right one.

What game are you actually arguing against or are you just making up some fictional non-GW game? 40k atm is basically the only example of this. Malifaux primarily has in-faction armies due to how most auras or other buffs work. Warmachine has some mercs but again most bonuses are given to in-faction stuff. WFB (RIP) had basically no useful allies. The fact is MOST games want people to collect and use single factions.

This could only be elegant if you assume the entire gaming universe consists of 1 game... 40k. Custodes will probably be a very niche army as I don't believe GW understands how awful the game is for elite armies. Point for point they simply aren't competitive since GW refuses to increase # of shots / attacks for more expensive models.

Er not really in the case of Malifaux - it has multi faction leaders who eneable you to build gangs of different factions, a whole faction of Mercenaries etc etc

Unless I'm missing something, if the Allarus terminators only have a 5++ save as base, what benefit is their alleged cataphracti armour providing over basic terminator armour or indeed custodian guard armour? A custodian guard has a 2+ save and (with no storm shield but emperors chosen) a 4++. If the above is true, an Allarus terminator has a 2+ save and a 4++ via their armour or emperors chosen. So what benefit is the armour providing?!

Necronmaniac05 wrote:
Unless I'm missing something, if the Allarus terminators only have a 5++ save as base, what benefit is their alleged cataphracti armour providing over basic terminator armour or indeed custodian guard armour? A custodian guard has a 2+ save and (with no storm shield but emperors chosen) a 4++. If the above is true, an Allarus terminator has a 2+ save and a 4++ via their armour or emperors chosen. So what benefit is the armour providing?!

Teleportation onto the battlefield mainly.

Deep strike, single man squad, axes, vexillas...

Who knows, maybe even more. We haven't /seen/ them yet.

Rather funny how 30k termies are more survivable. But here's how these to 30k rules wouldn't be that bad for fw. Plastic termies for worse inv plus whatever they provide, fw ones would have role thanks to different guns and better inv save

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
3 attacks hitting on a 2+ is equivalent to 6 attacks hitting on a 3+ in terms of reliability.

Upside is the 2+ is less affected by -1 to hit etc.

Downside is the 6 attacks still have the potential to become 6 unsaved wounds (before damage multipliers, natch) But there's still a lot to be said for the sheer reliability of everyone hitting on a 2+.

I'll be wanting to see how the synergy all works out, and indeed the ranges on buff bubbles. When you're a small, elite army, you don't want to have to keep everyone bunched up to stand a chance, as you're forced to cede a large chunk of the board to your enemy.

I'm also hoping that Custodes will have ways to tinker with enemy Ld values. Given their own resilience, being able to wallop Hordes with Battleshock is a useful trick - rapidly cuts down the number of models one actually has to formally job if you can really maximise the effect of the Brown Trousers phase, no?

But there also needs to be acceptance that there should be some armies they can't just simply kerb stomp. I mean, they'll do an absolute number on other small, elite armies - so they shouldn't be completely 'no-brain' effective against all Hordes.

There's some questionable arithmetic here.

6 attacks hitting on a 3+ averages 4 hits. 3 attacks hitting on a 2+ averages 2.5 hits.

With -1 to hit, 6 attacks gives you 3 hits and 3 attacks gives you 2.

I think that Custodes might work well in practice because their guys are decent at shooting enemy infantry and good at chopping up just about everything. A 260 point squad with spears is legitimately dangerous and tough. High toughness, multiple wounds and a 2+ save means that weight of fire attacks will really struggle to take them down, and even really heavy fire from lascannons etc. will struggle. It's hard to see a weapon that can efficiently kill them.

Mandragola wrote:
There's some questionable arithmetic here.

6 attacks hitting on a 3+ averages 4 hits. 3 attacks hitting on a 2+ averages 2.5 hits.

With -1 to hit, 6 attacks gives you 3 hits and 3 attacks gives you 2.

I think that Custodes might work well in practice because their guys are decent at shooting enemy infantry and good at chopping up just about everything. A 260 point squad with spears is legitimately dangerous and tough. High toughness, multiple wounds and a 2+ save means that weight of fire attacks will really struggle to take them down, and even really heavy fire from lascannons etc. will struggle. It's hard to see a weapon that can efficiently kill them.

And 6 attacks have higher potential and of course more dice you roll the less extreme swings you are likely to suffer. Thus even if average somehow was same 6 attacks>3 attacks.

Not that it really changes core. If they have enough attacks to make mincemeat of hordes then imagine effect they are going to have non-hordes? Even worse as even if they are good against horde they are even better vs non-horde.

I think predator autocannons could do a pretty good job in killing them. Also smite is still very good against them or any other mortal wounds.

Mandragola wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
3 attacks hitting on a 2+ is equivalent to 6 attacks hitting on a 3+ in terms of reliability.

Upside is the 2+ is less affected by -1 to hit etc.

Downside is the 6 attacks still have the potential to become 6 unsaved wounds (before damage multipliers, natch) But there's still a lot to be said for the sheer reliability of everyone hitting on a 2+.

I'll be wanting to see how the synergy all works out, and indeed the ranges on buff bubbles. When you're a small, elite army, you don't want to have to keep everyone bunched up to stand a chance, as you're forced to cede a large chunk of the board to your enemy.

I'm also hoping that Custodes will have ways to tinker with enemy Ld values. Given their own resilience, being able to wallop Hordes with Battleshock is a useful trick - rapidly cuts down the number of models one actually has to formally job if you can really maximise the effect of the Brown Trousers phase, no?

But there also needs to be acceptance that there should be some armies they can't just simply kerb stomp. I mean, they'll do an absolute number on other small, elite armies - so they shouldn't be completely 'no-brain' effective against all Hordes.

There's some questionable arithmetic here.

6 attacks hitting on a 3+ averages 4 hits. 3 attacks hitting on a 2+ averages 2.5 hits.

With -1 to hit, 6 attacks gives you 3 hits and 3 attacks gives you 2.

I think that Custodes might work well in practice because their guys are decent at shooting enemy infantry and good at chopping up just about everything. A 260 point squad with spears is legitimately dangerous and tough. High toughness, multiple wounds and a 2+ save means that weight of fire attacks will really struggle to take them down, and even really heavy fire from lascannons etc. will struggle. It's hard to see a weapon that can efficiently kill them.

I'm not talking about averages - just sheer reliability. And that's without factoring in that they re-roll 1's.

 Astmeister wrote:
I think predator autocannons could do a pretty good job in killing them. Also smite is still very good against them or any other mortal wounds.

You're gonna need 2 Smites per model, average for the weakest Custodes. Wiping a 3-man squad would take 6. With the nerf to Malefic Lords and the beta rules making it so that Smite gets +1 difficulty per cast most armies just don't have the psychic access to kill a lot of Custodes.

That said, fear the 2k army of Wave Serpents!

7. On account they get that 6+ save against Psychic Phase mortal wounds

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/01/17/adeptus-custodes-preview-part-3-war-machinesgw-homepage-post-2/

Part 3 - https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/01/17/adeptus-custodes-preview-part-3-war-machinesgw-homepage-post-2/

On the tabletop, Vertus Praetors are the fastest moving elements of the Adeptus Custodes army, boasting a 14″ move, Fly, and a straight boost of 6″ when they Advance without having to roll.

Where the Vertus Praetors really shine is in their weaponry, helping provide some much-needed anti-armour ability to the Adeptus Custodes army. While you’re free to build yours with hurricane bolters, we’re fans of the new salvo launcher, a missile weapon that can adjust its firing profile based on target. The flakkburst missile allows you to shoot Flyers out of the sky (or soften them up for a particularly bold lance charge), while the melta missile deals hefty damage to any vehicles

Should anyone survive your ranged onslaught, interceptor lances are also brutally effective weapons:

By combining these guys with a nearby Shield-Captain on Dawneagle Jetbike (buildable using the same kit!) you’ll be able to grab objectives and hunt down choice enemy units with ease.

Am I the only one that’s concerned about the 6+++ against Psychic mortal wounds being a bandaid on a bullet wound? Mortal wounds are going to wreck Custodes, and with a very small model count and hence very small number of those saves you’re going to be attempting, it isn’t going to do much beyond the occasional “oh hey, I stopped one of the eight MW Magnus just dumped on my 500pt unit”. I would have thought s 5+++ would have been a bit closer to the mark.

Audustum wrote:

 Astmeister wrote:
I think predator autocannons could do a pretty good job in killing them. Also smite is still very good against them or any other mortal wounds.

You're gonna need 2 Smites per model, average for the weakest Custodes. Wiping a 3-man squad would take 6. With the nerf to Malefic Lords and the beta rules making it so that Smite gets +1 difficulty per cast most armies just don't have the psychic access to kill a lot of Custodes.

That said, fear the 2k army of Wave Serpents!

You are right. However, the new smite monster is Magnus, the new psychic MW monster might be a LoC (Smite +2, Bolt of Change, Infernal Gate) and there are other possibilities for MW in general. Tyranids for example can have Biovores, Mawlocks or even charging Carnifexes. Okay the latter might suck against Custodes...

 Astmeister wrote:

Audustum wrote:

 Astmeister wrote:
I think predator autocannons could do a pretty good job in killing them. Also smite is still very good against them or any other mortal wounds.

You're gonna need 2 Smites per model, average for the weakest Custodes. Wiping a 3-man squad would take 6. With the nerf to Malefic Lords and the beta rules making it so that Smite gets +1 difficulty per cast most armies just don't have the psychic access to kill a lot of Custodes.

That said, fear the 2k army of Wave Serpents!

You are right. However, the new smite monster is Magnus, the new psychic MW monster might be a LoC (Smite +2, Bolt of Change, Infernal Gate) and there are other possibilities for MW in general. Tyranids for example can have Biovores, Mawlocks or even charging Carnifexes. Okay the latter might suck against Custodes...

Dark Talons, especially if they try units of 10

kombatwombat wrote:
Am I the only one that’s concerned about the 6+++ against Psychic mortal wounds being a bandaid on a bullet wound? Mortal wounds are going to wreck Custodes, and with a very small model count and hence very small number of those saves you’re going to be attempting, it isn’t going to do much beyond the occasional “oh hey, I stopped one of the eight MW Magnus just dumped on my 500pt unit”. I would have thought s 5+++ would have been a bit closer to the mark.

Eh, Magnus and other outliers aside, I don't think you'll need to particularly worry about this. I mean, a standard smite will maybe kill one custodian with good luck, and it just got way harder to smite spam.

The real threat is good old fashioned massed walls of firepower.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

zamerion wrote:
https://www.warhammer-community.com/2018/01/17/adeptus-custodes-preview-part-3-war-machinesgw-homepage-post-2/

Not really wowed by either shooting weapon given the per model cost honestly, relative to the forge world bikers gun options.

Still, you mainly want these for their speedy, high toughness guardian spear equivalents, the gun is just a neat little bonus. Shame hurricane Bolters got their recent nerf to being a little overcosted. (10 points for three stormbolters?)

I find it interesting that the melta missiles apparently reroll to wound against vehicles. Maybe all melta weapons will be changing accordingly? Everyone agrees that meltas are too bad at the moment...

The Custodes army that's going to be on Warhammer TV this Thursday is reportedly 19 models. If that's pretty standard for a Custodes army, Magnus or Mortarion will eat them alive, especially if you bring along an allied Chaos sorcerer for Death Hex support. With those few models on the table, every lost model is going to hurt really badly.

As someone that uses this exact stratagem with my Dark Angels, I only can say that it is surprisingly usefull. And very cheap. I don't know how many times I have used it with a isolated Venerable Dreadnought just for him and be worth it. Or one that is alongside other Dreadnoughts or some infantry.

I can see a unit of jetbikes with a shield captain killing vehicles. The missiles are better than a lascannon at killing any vehicle in the game (other than range).

One unit could cripple a predator.

Why is everybody comparing 40k Custodes with 30k Custodes? For what I know (And I don't play HH) aren't 30k Custodes like... one of the most OP things in that game? Like, totally busted, like Magnus, etc...

I don't want that in 40k. I prefer a mid of the road custodes than a ultra-competitive Custodes army, that translates in a OP army agaisn't everything that isn't the most OP lists out there.

Custodes should be powerful, but with a weakness of their strategy falling apart if they start losing numbers.

In 30k it's too easy to build an army to match their strengths (Which doesn't mean they don't have duds, such as Saggitarum guard). We're worried that the horde meta plus them being a little light on anti-vehicle without FW toys will lead to them having the opposite problem in 40k: Units that excel at their given task but lead to an overall force easy to disrupt, dismantle and even table.

Kinda awkward that the missile profiles are all Heavy weapons unless they get a rule to mitigate hit penalties for moving and firing with Heavy weapons but with a BS 2+ I can't complain too much. Jetbikes look dope.

I would be higher on the Land Raider strategem especially with how prevalent -1 to hit modifiers are now but I can barely see myself taking one, let alone two of them considering how ridiculously overpriced Land Raiders are points wise.

I think theres just a bit of overemphasis of how many Magnus' are rolling around out there. Not everyone you're going to fight is going to have Magnus

 Galas wrote:
Why is everybody comparing 40k Custodes with 30k Custodes? For what I know (And I don't play HH) aren't 30k Custodes like... one of the most OP things in that game? Like, totally busted, like Magnus, etc...

I don't want that in 40k. I prefer a mid of the road custodes than a ultra-competitive Custodes army, that translates in a OP army agaisn't everything that isn't the most OP lists out there.

Everyone's always going on about 8th ed being a horde edition in which elite armies have a hard time to begin with. I don't think anybody wants Custodes to be better than everyone else, just better than other elite armies - thus allowing them to compete.

I mean, just look at the Terminators. We don't have a points cost for them yet, but for 20 years the points cost of Terminators has consistently been "too much". There's no reason to expect that the Custodes Terminators will fare any better. Similarly, if GW hasn't figured out how to get elite armies on equal ground to horde armies thus far, what are the odds of them doing it now, all of a sudden, with Custodes?

It's just people hoping for any small advantage they can get, not to have the bestest army out there, but to at least approach a level playing field.

That's the impression I'm getting anyway.

I can understand that. But I think the solution is to make Custodes a balanced army, and then nerf the outliers out there. If every new army needs to be more powerfull to compete, then we enter in power creep territory.

And as much as people complain about Horde Armies being totally OP... this is something new of 8th edition. is not like Hordes where the hotness in 5th, 6th and 7th.

And I Know, I know... the only meta that matters is the ultra-competitive big GT internet meta. But in my regional meta (Not local because I play in all of Galicia) even having guys that spam Dark Reapers, Magnus+Brimstones, etc... they are in a minority.