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.

Not much choices there. You need some AT and more than 1 unit. Options are basically destroyers, DDA, H.destroyers and doom scythes. No DDA's, destroyers need the stratagem so 1 unit. Either triple flyers or heavy destroyers or both.

I would be taking 3x3 heavy destroyers models withstanding. Need to buy those sooner or later. With CA19 point costs those are pretty good and more than viable replavement of flyer wing that loses lots of it's use with death of one which are super soft to begin with.

tneva82 wrote:
Not much choices there. You need some AT and more than 1 unit. Options are basically destroyers, DDA, H.destroyers and doom scythes. No DDA's, destroyers need the stratagem so 1 unit. Either triple flyers or heavy destroyers or both.

I would be taking 3x3 heavy destroyers models withstanding. Need to buy those sooner or later. With CA19 point costs those are pretty good and more than viable replavement of flyer wing that loses lots of it's use with death of one which are super soft to begin with.

Yeah basically this. We have other AT options, they just suck.

I'd go with 9 Heavy destroyers. Since their points drop, I think they've become a competitive choice. Doom Scythes are expensive and lacklustre. Doomsday Arks really are carrying our codex at the moment in my opinion, I can't imagine taking a serious list without three of them.

With that in mind, what do folks think about the following brigade?

3x Overlord with staff of light (80) 240
6x 10 Teslamortals (150) 900
1x Deceiver (180) 180
2x Gauss Triarch Stalker (115) 230
3x 3 scarabs (39) 117
3x3 Heavy Destroyers (111) 333

Split it into 4 groups,
2 groups have 1 overlord, 2 teslamortals, 1 of the Heavy destroyer squads and one of the triarch stalkers

3rd group has the last overlord with the veil of darkness, 2 teslamortals and the last heavy destroyer squad. Potentially deceiver parts of this group up into a good position, then veil of darkness the overlord and remaining infantry to join.

Final group is the deceiver with the scarabs.

Sounds like a nice casual list, i like it. With 60 teslamortals a cryptek could be useful. It would put pressure on your opponent to wipe out an entire unit of them, possibly overshooting, leaving other units unharmed, or with minor damage.

pothocboots wrote:
With that in mind, what do folks think about the following brigade?

3x Overlord with staff of light (80) 240
6x 10 Teslamortals (150) 900
1x Deceiver (180) 180
2x Gauss Triarch Stalker (115) 230
3x 3 scarabs (39) 117
3x3 Heavy Destroyers (111) 333

Split it into 4 groups,
2 groups have 1 overlord, 2 teslamortals, 1 of the Heavy destroyer squads and one of the triarch stalkers

3rd group has the last overlord with the veil of darkness, 2 teslamortals and the last heavy destroyer squad. Potentially deceiver parts of this group up into a good position, then veil of darkness the overlord and remaining infantry to join.

Final group is the deceiver with the scarabs.

Interesting list. The main thing that strikes me is that this looks like an ideal Mephrit list, since basically none of the other dynasties benefit you all that much, and this much Ap-1 tesla at half range will seriously dissuade anyone from coming near you. Also you can deceiver a couple of units up to get some early hurt down.

On the flip side, I can't see what this list is going to spend it's CP on beyond command rerolls, certainly don't see it burning through 15CP.

IanVanCheese wrote:

pothocboots wrote:
With that in mind, what do folks think about the following brigade?

3x Overlord with staff of light (80) 240
6x 10 Teslamortals (150) 900
1x Deceiver (180) 180
2x Gauss Triarch Stalker (115) 230
3x 3 scarabs (39) 117
3x3 Heavy Destroyers (111) 333

Split it into 4 groups,
2 groups have 1 overlord, 2 teslamortals, 1 of the Heavy destroyer squads and one of the triarch stalkers

3rd group has the last overlord with the veil of darkness, 2 teslamortals and the last heavy destroyer squad. Potentially deceiver parts of this group up into a good position, then veil of darkness the overlord and remaining infantry to join.

Final group is the deceiver with the scarabs.

Interesting list. The main thing that strikes me is that this looks like an ideal Mephrit list, since basically none of the other dynasties benefit you all that much, and this much Ap-1 tesla at half range will seriously dissuade anyone from coming near you. Also you can deceiver a couple of units up to get some early hurt down.

On the flip side, I can't see what this list is going to spend it's CP on beyond command rerolls, certainly don't see it burning through 15CP.

I'd suggest Sautehk, give your tesla the ability to proc on 4+

15CP is just a really nice buffer to have

I think I would actually consider running this, I just dont have the models for it believe it or not

Exploding on 4s is nice (and gives you something to burn the CP on), but I feel like you get diminishing returns after the first +1 to hit. Also feels like a waste to go Sautekh and not bring the stormlord (though points, I know). Also the list falls apart vs 2+ saves (or marines in cover). I think Mephrit sneaks it for me, but both work.

If you are going Sautekh, swap an overlord for a normal lord. You'll already have +1 to hit on priority targets, but reroll 1s to wound is great and you can get all 60 immortals benefiting from it in theory.

IanVanCheese wrote:

On the flip side, I can't see what this list is going to spend it's CP on beyond command rerolls, certainly don't see it burning through 15CP.

If you have 10 RP rolls you can burn 10CP for command rerolls. RP is at the start of your turn, its not during a phase, you arent limited by strategic discipline.

 p5freak wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

On the flip side, I can't see what this list is going to spend it's CP on beyond command rerolls, certainly don't see it burning through 15CP.

If you have 10 RP rolls you can burn 10CP for command rerolls. RP is at the start of your turn, its not during a phase, you arent limited by strategic discipline.

No

KurtAngle2 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

On the flip side, I can't see what this list is going to spend it's CP on beyond command rerolls, certainly don't see it burning through 15CP.

If you have 10 RP rolls you can burn 10CP for command rerolls. RP is at the start of your turn, its not during a phase, you arent limited by strategic discipline.

No

Yes.

KurtAngle2 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

On the flip side, I can't see what this list is going to spend it's CP on beyond command rerolls, certainly don't see it burning through 15CP.

If you have 10 RP rolls you can burn 10CP for command rerolls. RP is at the start of your turn, its not during a phase, you arent limited by strategic discipline.

No

He is correct though why on earth you would be wishing to rr 10 RP's is another thing. Unless it's some hyper rare case you are just wasting good CP for worthless gain. Even necrons can use 15 CP for better than that.

Phaeron's Will could get some use here right?
Could also fuel the random C'tan powers stragem.


What about Nepherekh for the dynasty, combine with Phaeron's Will for Psuedo 12" move?

tneva82 wrote:

KurtAngle2 wrote:

 p5freak wrote:

IanVanCheese wrote:

On the flip side, I can't see what this list is going to spend it's CP on beyond command rerolls, certainly don't see it burning through 15CP.

If you have 10 RP rolls you can burn 10CP for command rerolls. RP is at the start of your turn, its not during a phase, you arent limited by strategic discipline.

No

He is correct though why on earth you would be wishing to rr 10 RP's is another thing. Unless it's some hyper rare case you are just wasting good CP for worthless gain. Even necrons can use 15 CP for better than that.

I said you can, not that you should.

 Arachnofiend wrote:
It occurs to me that the "staff of light" portion might actually still be the Eldritch Lance or a new thing; it isn't exactly the same as either weapon.

I doubt he'll be cheap, more than an Overlord surely. The question is if he's worth it, people paid a lot of points for Guilliman after all.

His weapon looks similar to the old weapons on Pariahs. I'm hoping that we get some pariah models, not because I liked the old ones (bleh) but because our rules probably aren't getting fixed any time soon. Maybe some new models will help.

I'm not huge on fluff, but from what I remember, it seems like szeras was involved heavily with the Pariah project during the "old cron" days. Maybe we'll see that expanded a little more.

If anything, I'm hoping we get a decent build-a-dynasty list of abilities, but I'm not holding my breath.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
After Chapter approved came out, the Annihilation barge's cost dropped to 90 points (103 with Tesla Cannon, 110 with Gauss cannon).
It doesn't seem like it's ever received much play. Is it just because it competes with the DDark in the heavy slot?
I would think that maybe, just maybe, the 8 shots of str 7 tesla might make it worth a try. No AP hurts it, but they don't degrade, move well, and aren't super expensive.

I haven't had much luck getting games in this year, so I'm purely speculating. Just throwing it out there to see what everyone has to say.

I've had great luck running a pair of Mephrit Annibarges, hunting down medium targets and melting hordes

it is legit just because they compete with DDAs that most of the time they arent really worth it

However, with the shift from triple D-Scythe + Triple D-Ark into a horde of Heavy Destroyers, I can see me putting mine on the table again to replace what I am now lacking in the "upfield gun boat" portion of the DDA kit.

i know I'm a minority when it comes to floating about making use of the S8 profile and gunning down infantry with the flayers as a matter of course, so seeing as how I am now gonna be not having the arks, using barges to hunt infantry that my immortals dont want to get toop near seems like my next best thing.

 IHateNids wrote:
I've had great luck running a pair of Mephrit Annibarges, hunting down medium targets and melting hordes

it is legit just because they compete with DDAs that most of the time they arent really worth it

However, with the shift from triple D-Scythe + Triple D-Ark into a horde of Heavy Destroyers, I can see me putting mine on the table again to replace what I am now lacking in the "upfield gun boat" portion of the DDA kit.

i know I'm a minority when it comes to floating about making use of the S8 profile and gunning down infantry with the flayers as a matter of course, so seeing as how I am now gonna be not having the arks, using barges to hunt infantry that my immortals dont want to get toop near seems like my next best thing.

Yeah, I would think that with the Heavy D's coming into play there will be other options. I'm just curious about how the annibarge does against better saves. You're pumping out a good number of shots with the 8 Tesla rounds (plus whatever under slung gun you use) so I wonder if the volume of fire would be good enough to help deal with how many 2+ saves there are floating around.

punisher357 wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
I've had great luck running a pair of Mephrit Annibarges, hunting down medium targets and melting hordes

it is legit just because they compete with DDAs that most of the time they arent really worth it

However, with the shift from triple D-Scythe + Triple D-Ark into a horde of Heavy Destroyers, I can see me putting mine on the table again to replace what I am now lacking in the "upfield gun boat" portion of the DDA kit.

i know I'm a minority when it comes to floating about making use of the S8 profile and gunning down infantry with the flayers as a matter of course, so seeing as how I am now gonna be not having the arks, using barges to hunt infantry that my immortals dont want to get toop near seems like my next best thing.

Yeah, I would think that with the Heavy D's coming into play there will be other options. I'm just curious about how the annibarge does against better saves. You're pumping out a good number of shots with the 8 Tesla rounds (plus whatever under slung gun you use) so I wonder if the volume of fire would be good enough to help deal with how many 2+ saves there are floating around.

The way 8th was designed, having just-not-high-enough Strength with no AP and damage 1, has arguably been the least favourable weapons configuration.

The targets for which no-AP is good enough, S5 tesla does the job just aswell, and we're alerady covered in that department.

Covering for lack of DD's midfield gunboat properties might be a niche.

It's an awesome model, might work for casual games against non-power-armour armies. Sautekh + Gauss cannon could help it proc tesla on 5+ and move-and-fire without heavy weapons penalty on the gauss cannon.

torblind wrote:

punisher357 wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
I've had great luck running a pair of Mephrit Annibarges, hunting down medium targets and melting hordes

it is legit just because they compete with DDAs that most of the time they arent really worth it

However, with the shift from triple D-Scythe + Triple D-Ark into a horde of Heavy Destroyers, I can see me putting mine on the table again to replace what I am now lacking in the "upfield gun boat" portion of the DDA kit.

i know I'm a minority when it comes to floating about making use of the S8 profile and gunning down infantry with the flayers as a matter of course, so seeing as how I am now gonna be not having the arks, using barges to hunt infantry that my immortals dont want to get toop near seems like my next best thing.

Yeah, I would think that with the Heavy D's coming into play there will be other options. I'm just curious about how the annibarge does against better saves. You're pumping out a good number of shots with the 8 Tesla rounds (plus whatever under slung gun you use) so I wonder if the volume of fire would be good enough to help deal with how many 2+ saves there are floating around.

The way 8th was designed, having just-not-high-enough Strength with no AP and damage 1, has arguably been the least favourable weapons configuration.

The targets for which no-AP is good enough, S5 tesla does the job just aswell, and we're alerady covered in that department.

Covering for lack of DD's midfield gunboat properties might be a niche.

It's an awesome model, might work for casual games against non-power-armour armies. Sautekh + Gauss cannon could help it proc tesla on 5+ and move-and-fire without heavy weapons penalty on the gauss cannon.

If you look at the Indexes of 8th, there was a moderate amount of Toughness 7, low armor (I.e., 3+ and 4+) monsters/vehicles which in theory would be the usual target for the ABarge. You can see the design intention there.

Of course, those targets turned out not to be played in any prevalent fashion and Armor Saves throughout moved lower and lower.

This meant that the same profile that in 6th was too cheap at the same cost, is now still not particularly great despite technically getting better (double the shots instead of twinlinked).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In fairness, although the modern QS is better than 6th/7th, at the time, the QS Rule also made it unkillable versus certain army load outs.

Yeah, the fact they add to the QS wall is another thing they have going for them.

I reckon if people played "normal" (read - non-Leviathan and non-Custodians) Dreadnoughts, they might have better targets

I do think that Tesla Destructors aren't great. Base AP1 would fix a lot of their issue I think. AP optional & 2D would be sweet

 IHateNids wrote:
Yeah, the fact they add to the QS wall is another thing they have going for them.

I reckon if people played "normal" (read - non-Leviathan and non-Custodians) Dreadnoughts, they might have better targets

I do think that Tesla Destructors aren't great. Base AP1 would fix a lot of their issue I think. AP optional & 2D would be sweet

I'd maybe go the other route and just double their number of shots again. 16 Str 7 Ap 0 Tesla shots would make them into savage little mobile gunboats vs infantry, while the extra shots would also mean more gets through vs light armour.

IanVanCheese wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
Yeah, the fact they add to the QS wall is another thing they have going for them.

I reckon if people played "normal" (read - non-Leviathan and non-Custodians) Dreadnoughts, they might have better targets

I do think that Tesla Destructors aren't great. Base AP1 would fix a lot of their issue I think. AP optional & 2D would be sweet

I'd maybe go the other route and just double their number of shots again. 16 Str 7 Ap 0 Tesla shots would make them into savage little mobile gunboats vs infantry, while the extra shots would also mean more gets through vs light armour.

Unfortunately, as you correctly stated, their preferred targets are T6 and have a low armor save. Basically themselves. On everything else either the S7 is wasted as Immortals or Tomb Blades are equally good, or the Save prevents them from being efficient....

I could see Destructors getting an extra two shots per barrel tbf

would indirectly buff the flyers as well, which is never bad

I've always wondered why the Tesla Destructor couldn't have str 8, but that's something for another thread.

I'd like to try a list with Heavy destroyers to sub for DDarks and then use the Annibarges for volume of fire along with the Triarch stalker and the Particle Shredder. I'm not 100% sold on the Triarch stalker, but I play casual games only.

I think that (maybe) without the Heavy Gauss Cannon the stalker isn't as tempting a target, but I could be way off.

The issue with Stalkers is their reputation

in 5th & 6th they made the target they shot at count as Twin-Linked

Re-rolling Scatter with the old DDA made Stalkers hilarious levels of OP, irrespective of their loadout.

Thanks to that fact, Stalkers have become pretty much "Pair or Bust", because people know to target them first

They're very good for their cost, but like a lot of our codex, they arent good enough against what's across the table 9 times out of 10

 IHateNids wrote:
The issue with Stalkers is their reputation

in 5th & 6th they made the target they shot at count as Twin-Linked

Re-rolling Scatter with the old DDA made Stalkers hilarious levels of OP, irrespective of their loadout.

Thanks to that fact, Stalkers have become pretty much "Pair or Bust", because people know to target them first

They're very good for their cost, but like a lot of our codex, they arent good enough against what's across the table 9 times out of 10

I think most things are "pair or bust" if they're killy units or help increase damage. As soon as someone sees something you have do high or decent damage to their army, they tend to zero in on it. You'll need redundancy or someone will just focus fire and wipe them. However, if they're blasting my stalker(s), that's firepower not directed at my Heavy D's or annibarges. Also, I'm not proposing this in a tournament setting.

Just as an example, (not proposing this as a list) if I took 6-9 heavy destroyers, 3 annibarges, and 2 stalkers I think it would cause target priority confusion. The biggest failing I've seen in my opponents has been poor target priority and the harder I can make it for them to choose, the better. If you focus on any single unit, the others will be operating under less pressure. It's not a perfect strategy, it doesn't solve every problem/situation, but it's something to consider.

I also think that taking warriors with this setup will be beneficial. The larger unit size makes them harder to wipe. Either my opponent will have to focus more firepower to kill them or they'll divide it among the armor/warriors and I'll have a better chance of reanimation. Just spit-balling.

Since I don't do tournaments and play casually, I think this approach would work fairly well.

 IHateNids wrote:
I could see Destructors getting an extra two shots per barrel tbf

would indirectly buff the flyers as well, which is never bad

From a game designers perspective, it really wouldn't make sense, I'd argue, to fix a weapon by just making it more of what is not working for it in the first place.

Give it something useful, and then balance its point cost. Ie AP or more damage.

punisher357 wrote:

Just as an example, (not proposing this as a list) if I took 6-9 heavy destroyers, 3 annibarges, and 2 stalkers I think it would cause target priority confusion. The biggest failing I've seen in my opponents has been poor target priority and the harder I can make it for them to choose, the better. If you focus on any single unit, the others will be operating under less pressure. It's not a perfect strategy, it doesn't solve every problem/situation, but it's something to consider.

I dont see any target priority confusion there. Your heavy destroyers would be targeted by anything that has S6+ and two or three fixed damage, maybe even D3 or D6, because they dont have QS. Whereas annibarges and stalkers would be targeted by something that has S7+ and 1 or 2 fixed damage, or D3, because QS is pretty much useless there, against 1 or 2 damage.

punisher357 wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
The issue with Stalkers is their reputation

in 5th & 6th they made the target they shot at count as Twin-Linked

Re-rolling Scatter with the old DDA made Stalkers hilarious levels of OP, irrespective of their loadout.

Thanks to that fact, Stalkers have become pretty much "Pair or Bust", because people know to target them first

They're very good for their cost, but like a lot of our codex, they arent good enough against what's across the table 9 times out of 10

I think most things are "pair or bust" if they're killy units or help increase damage. As soon as someone sees something you have do high or decent damage to their army, they tend to zero in on it. You'll need redundancy or someone will just focus fire and wipe them. However, if they're blasting my stalker(s), that's firepower not directed at my Heavy D's or annibarges. Also, I'm not proposing this in a tournament setting.

Just as an example, (not proposing this as a list) if I took 6-9 heavy destroyers, 3 annibarges, and 2 stalkers I think it would cause target priority confusion. The biggest failing I've seen in my opponents has been poor target priority and the harder I can make it for them to choose, the better. If you focus on any single unit, the others will be operating under less pressure. It's not a perfect strategy, it doesn't solve every problem/situation, but it's something to consider.

I also think that taking warriors with this setup will be beneficial. The larger unit size makes them harder to wipe. Either my opponent will have to focus more firepower to kill them or they'll divide it among the armor/warriors and I'll have a better chance of reanimation. Just spit-balling.

Since I don't do tournaments and play casually, I think this approach would work fairly well.

Another interesting (and psychological) possible benefit in this setup could be the following; normally an enemy would focus down a big warrior blob to avoid them RP'ing. For this he has anti-infantry weapons en mass, and then in the end if he is just a couple of shots shy of whiping the unit, he will chip in with some heavier AT weapons to knock down the last few models (I see this almost every time I play).

If you field lots of juicy targets for AT, that's where people tend to start. I know I do. In my shooting phase I typically strive to make the bigger guns work first, ie DDAs, let them dig in to as much untouched pristine enemy meat as possible, and then perhaps reach for cheapere weapons if I need to finish things off.

With the above setup I suspect he'll grab all his las cannons and battle cannons to throw at the HDs and stalkers and flyers, perhaps that would save a few infantry units to live another day and RP one more turn.

EDIT: Now that being said, RP isn't what wins us games, so this isn't a strat I'd play into in a tournament

torblind wrote:

 IHateNids wrote:
I could see Destructors getting an extra two shots per barrel tbf

would indirectly buff the flyers as well, which is never bad

From a game designers perspective, it really wouldn't make sense, I'd argue, to fix a weapon by just making it more of what is not working for it in the first place.

Give it something useful, and then balance its point cost. Ie AP or more damage.

Oh, no, you misunderstand me.

This is not what I want to happen.

This is what I can see GW doing. Because RoF fixes everything......



I understand the points about target priority and such, I am merely stating that Stalkers are argueably the worst case of reputation we have at the minute, because the other big thing that was bonkers in older editions was Wraiths, but Wraiths are still as good as they were, if not better.