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.

On the alpha legion/raven guard infiltrate, am I right in thinking the model can move up to 9" regardless of its move characteristic? then assuming I go first can move my normal 6"?

There is no such thing as stacking cover saves anywhere in the game anyway. There is no reason to expect it to be different for this stratagem, even if it wasn't explicitly stated in the stratagem text.

Demon primarchs not being able to assault over a handful of chaf in a picket line is hilarious levels of absurdity. I look forward to witnessing that one go down initially /s


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 orangebrushminiatures wrote:
On the alpha legion/raven guard infiltrate, am I right in thinking the model can move up to 9" regardless of its move characteristic? then assuming I go first can move my normal 6"?

That's how it reads to me. I'm guessing they didn't want to fully ruin assault centurions

PiñaColada wrote:
I do find it comical that they inadvertently (or on purpose) buffed Order of Companions again even after raising it to 3CP.

" If a rule allows me to re-roll Damage rolls of 1, and the
Damage characteristic for a weapon is D3, do I re-roll the D6
rolls of 1 and 2 (which are halved to get the D3 result) or only
the original D6 rolls of 1?
A: In this case, you re-roll the D3 result (so you re-roll
rolls of 1 or 2 made on the D6)."

Page 4 of the BRB errata. Everyone I know always played that as natural 1's before but now it significantly helps buffing siegebreakers

Huh i have never heard anybody playing otherwise. You are rolling dice with 3 results.

Interesting differ in views. But then again there's huge amount of rule combinations people play with without even deliberate house rules

PiñaColada wrote:
I do find it comical that they inadvertently (or on purpose) buffed Order of Companions again even after raising it to 3CP.

" If a rule allows me to re-roll Damage rolls of 1, and the
Damage characteristic for a weapon is D3, do I re-roll the D6
rolls of 1 and 2 (which are halved to get the D3 result) or only
the original D6 rolls of 1?
A: In this case, you re-roll the D3 result (so you re-roll
rolls of 1 or 2 made on the D6)."

Page 4 of the BRB errata. Everyone I know always played that as natural 1's before but now it significantly helps buffing siegebreakers

It's always been the dice result of a one, independent of what's on the dice. Note that you cannot possibly roll a 1 on 2D3 (minimum result is a 2) or 3D3 (minimum result is a 3).

Never mind it was squirreled away at the bottom.

interesting they change the tac reserves from 'power' to points


Automatically Appended Next Post:
for the lols alpha legion and ravenguard starts changed... does this mean you can use it multiple times on the same unit?

we know you can use it multiple times they faq'd that in a previous release but could i say (or should i say what stops me):

use the strat on some cultists move them 9" forward
use the strat again on the same unit and move them 9" again (just make sure 9" away from enemy)




Also with regaining CP
I deploy a char that can regen CP say ultamarine captain
I then deploy using CP ravenguard.
there is no battleround... so how can i regenerate or is there now no limit... um...

 Latro_ wrote:
interesting they change the tac reserves from 'power' to points


Automatically Appended Next Post:
for the lols alpha legion and ravenguard starts changed... does this mean you can use it multiple times on the same unit?

we know you can use it multiple times they faq'd that in a previous release but could i say (or should i say what stops me):

use the strat on some cultists move them 9" forward
spent the strat again on the same unit and move them 9" again

I think you spend the points on the different units during deployment, and then when the first round begins move them, so the deployment phase would be over by the time you move them

actually yea i guess the trick is in the wording of 'when you deploy' you cant do it multiple times because you only deploy once

Am I the only one who sees an issue with the new fortify defenses stratagem?

Ins't it disproportionately far more powerful for armies such as DG in comparison to other armies, say Orks/GSC for instance.

A 2+ save for your ENTIRE army is far more significant than a 5+ or 4+, but of course it costs both armies the same to accomplish.

Poor balance GW....poor poor balance

No FAQ for Index Imperium 2, which is weird because many of those in it haven't received a codex (SoB, Inqu, SoS for instance)

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
No FAQ for Index Imperium 2, which is weird because many of those in it haven't received a codex (SoB, Inqu, SoS for instance)

SoB will have their beta-codex in this CA. The same reason why orks, genestealer cultists, and point changes wheren't here.

Tournament soup builds have gotten a few corners shaved off (no more multiple-CP-regen-rolls and a few more expensive stratagems), but there's still nothing preventing you from taking ten extra CP from random Guardsmen in the first place, which means all the Imperial armies are going to continue being designed around the idea that you've got 3-400pts of random Guardsmen floating around plugging any holes in your list.

Woo. Such a fantastic set of changes setting us up for a whole new raft of army builds rather than the endless cookie-cutter sea of guardsmen-Dominus Knight-Marine characters soup lists.

Quite honestly the GW rules team just needs to be gutted and rehired from the ground up. It just doesn't seem like they have a grasp on their own rules and the implications of them across a multitude of armies.

EldarExarch wrote:
Am I the only one who sees an issue with the new fortify defenses stratagem?

Ins't it disproportionately far more powerful for armies such as DG in comparison to other armies, say Orks/GSC for instance.

A 2+ save for your ENTIRE army is far more significant than a 5+ or 4+, but of course it costs both armies the same to accomplish.

Poor balance GW....poor poor balance

You may just be the only human alive right now thinking that strat makes marines too good ( of any iteration). I honestly think it buffs guardsmen too much. The issue with first turn is having expensive things like tanks bight it, not chaf. Id have rather the stratagem gave out a 5++ because it would do nothing for cheap chaf but help marines and tanks from the alpha. As it is now, a castellan will still solo every important AT you have turn 1.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
No FAQ for Index Imperium 2, which is weird because many of those in it haven't received a codex (SoB, Inqu, SoS for instance)

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_index_imperium_2_en-2.pdf

Agents of Vect available only for Black Heart. Hahaha! Some common sense.

The single biggest thing missing from this FAQ that I am super unimpressed by is that they didn't address farming the logical way, by tying your detachments CP's to the actual faction making it up or by limiting stratagems to the warlords faction keyword.

Instead they stopped imperial soup from gaining as many CP's back, but they never ran out anyway lol. They can easily start the game with 20 cp's. More then enough to table someone in the first two turns by burning all the guardsmens CP's on the knight with them. Want to adda knight to your army? Then you should leave the household Strats at home unless he's the warlord.

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
No FAQ for Index Imperium 2, which is weird because many of those in it haven't received a codex (SoB, Inqu, SoS for instance)

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_index_imperium_2_en-2.pdf

That's five months old, from the last FAQ cycle.

Index: Imperium 2
Updated 16/04/2018

EldarExarch wrote:
Am I the only one who sees an issue with the new fortify defenses stratagem?

Ins't it disproportionately far more powerful for armies such as DG in comparison to other armies, say Orks/GSC for instance.

A 2+ save for your ENTIRE army is far more significant than a 5+ or 4+, but of course it costs both armies the same to accomplish.

Poor balance GW....poor poor balance

This was a day 1 issue with the 8th edition cover system where going from a MEQ to TEQ was far more impactful than going from a T Shirt save to flak armor.

 Dynas wrote:
The fly change is a BIG one i think.

Also, I like the going 2nd Stratagem giving your entire army cover saves. Question though, would that stack with other cover save bonus for things like:

A.) already in actual cover
B.) Hive Fleet bonus like Jormagunder
C.) Unit abilities and other equipment that grant cover saves

You can't double-stack cover saves.

I like the strategem - paying 2 CP hurts, but the fact that my opponent might deploy assuming I'll spend the CP might make it worthwhile for the meta reasons alone.

The changes to CP regen and new strategem costs is hard to determine without playing a few games. It seems pretty crippling but I'll wait and see what it does to the meta.

At least they can't Agent of Vect my Teleportarium strike any more...

 Red Corsair wrote:
The single biggest thing missing from this FAQ that I am super unimpressed by is that they didn't address farming the logical way, by tying your detachments CP's to the actual faction making it up or by limiting stratagems to the warlords faction keyword.

Instead they stopped imperial soup from gaining as many CP's back, but they never ran out anyway lol. They can easily start the game with 20 cp's. More then enough to table someone in the first two turns by burning all the guardsmens CP's on the knight with them. Want to adda knight to your army? Then you should leave the household Strats at home unless he's the warlord.

I see a huge difference here.

Now with 2 detachments of guards (one of which is a brigade) and one of knights you can fuel a single knight for 2 turns.

Previously with a single battalion of guards you could fuel a knight and the smashers. I consider that a big improvement.

 Nightlord1987 wrote:
Agents of Vect available only for Black Heart. Hahaha! Some common sense.

Interesting though it's first strategem that requires specific faction detachment up to chapter/regiment/whateve. Hopefully in future they mark such clearly

I like the DW and SM changes. It's literally gakking nothing

EldarExarch wrote:
Am I the only one who sees an issue with the new fortify defenses stratagem?

Ins't it disproportionately far more powerful for armies such as DG in comparison to other armies, say Orks/GSC for instance.

A 2+ save for your ENTIRE army is far more significant than a 5+ or 4+, but of course it costs both armies the same to accomplish.

Eh, the stratagem will affect 3x more units on average in the horde armies. Your saves might not be as good but you lose a lot less with each failed one and this helps to mitigate biggest horde weakness, massed small arms fire. Each AP - gun is going to wound half the number of orks it would before, while not making a big difference against MEQ killer weapons like melta or plasma you'd expect to be pointed at DG. Anything that could limit wound spam is welcome to encourage a bit of variety.

Then there is the fact it's a lot harder to fit 30 strong mob in cover than 5 strong DG MSU, and orks/tyranids want to be deployed aggressively in front. Being able to do so and blunt enemy alpha strike at the same time is going to be big for them, IMO.

 Irbis wrote:
I like the DW and SM changes. It's literally gakking nothing

EldarExarch wrote:
Am I the only one who sees an issue with the new fortify defenses stratagem?

Ins't it disproportionately far more powerful for armies such as DG in comparison to other armies, say Orks/GSC for instance.

A 2+ save for your ENTIRE army is far more significant than a 5+ or 4+, but of course it costs both armies the same to accomplish.

Eh, the stratagem will affect 3x more units on average in the horde armies. Your saves might not be as good but you lose a lot less with each failed one and this helps to mitigate biggest horde weakness, massed small arms fire. Each AP - gun is going to wound half the number of orks it would before, while not making a big difference against MEQ killer weapons like melta or plasma you'd expect to be pointed at DG. Anything that could limit wound spam is welcome to encourage a bit of variety.

Then there is the fact it's a lot harder to fit 30 strong mob in cover than 5 strong DG MSU, and orks/tyranids want to be deployed aggressively in front. Being able to do so and blunt enemy alpha strike at the same time is going to be big for them, IMO.

Agree. Can't wait to try it out with my Nids. Not to mention the buff to Nidzilla units that don't have to be 50% obscured and in cover to get the save. Now I can put my big boys right out front with the other guys.

 Ghaz wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
No FAQ for Index Imperium 2, which is weird because many of those in it haven't received a codex (SoB, Inqu, SoS for instance)

https://whc-cdn.games-workshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/warhammer_40000_index_imperium_2_en-2.pdf

That's five months old, from the last FAQ cycle.

Index: Imperium 2
Updated 16/04/2018

Sure, but it's there. He said there was no FAQ, they may not have needed to FAQ anything afterall the index has been out for over a year through multiple iterations including CA.

If they think those armies need nothing...

 Vankraken wrote:

EldarExarch wrote:
Am I the only one who sees an issue with the new fortify defenses stratagem?

Ins't it disproportionately far more powerful for armies such as DG in comparison to other armies, say Orks/GSC for instance.

A 2+ save for your ENTIRE army is far more significant than a 5+ or 4+, but of course it costs both armies the same to accomplish.

Poor balance GW....poor poor balance

This was a day 1 issue with the 8th edition cover system where going from a MEQ to TEQ was far more impactful than going from a T Shirt save to flak armor.

If you have a 6+ save and it becomes a 5+ you have increased your save by 100%, a marine increases his save by 25%.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

tneva82 wrote:
If they think those armies need nothing...

Well again fair enough. I meant they need no further clarification based on whats there. Which isn't much, they need a codex.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Spoletta wrote:

 Red Corsair wrote:
The single biggest thing missing from this FAQ that I am super unimpressed by is that they didn't address farming the logical way, by tying your detachments CP's to the actual faction making it up or by limiting stratagems to the warlords faction keyword.

Instead they stopped imperial soup from gaining as many CP's back, but they never ran out anyway lol. They can easily start the game with 20 cp's. More then enough to table someone in the first two turns by burning all the guardsmens CP's on the knight with them. Want to adda knight to your army? Then you should leave the household Strats at home unless he's the warlord.

I see a huge difference here.

Now with 2 detachments of guards (one of which is a brigade) and one of knights you can fuel a single knight for 2 turns.

Previously with a single battalion of guards you could fuel a knight and the smashers. I consider that a big improvement.

Our definitions of big are different is all.

 Red Corsair wrote:

If you have a 6+ save and it becomes a 5+ you have increased your save by 100%, a marine increases his save by 25%.

But marines halve their casualties while orks only reduce casualties 20%

 Irbis wrote:
I like the DW and SM changes. It's literally gakking nothing

EldarExarch wrote:
Am I the only one who sees an issue with the new fortify defenses stratagem?

Ins't it disproportionately far more powerful for armies such as DG in comparison to other armies, say Orks/GSC for instance.

A 2+ save for your ENTIRE army is far more significant than a 5+ or 4+, but of course it costs both armies the same to accomplish.

Eh, the stratagem will affect 3x more units on average in the horde armies. Your saves might not be as good but you lose a lot less with each failed one and this helps to mitigate biggest horde weakness, massed small arms fire. Each AP - gun is going to wound half the number of orks it would before, while not making a big difference against MEQ killer weapons like melta or plasma you'd expect to be pointed at DG. Anything that could limit wound spam is welcome to encourage a bit of variety.

Then there is the fact it's a lot harder to fit 30 strong mob in cover than 5 strong DG MSU, and orks/tyranids want to be deployed aggressively in front. Being able to do so and blunt enemy alpha strike at the same time is going to be big for them, IMO.

That's not exactly how math works. an increase in armor save from 3+ to 2+ causes ap- guns to cause half the casualties, an increase in armor save from 6+ to 5+ does not.

Bolter vs an ork

2*.6666*.5*.83333 (6+ armor save): .555 unsaved wounds.
2*.6666*.5*.6666 (5+ armor save): .444 unsaved wounds.

It's about 20% less damage.

tneva82 wrote:
If they think those armies need nothing...

It's possible they will be receiving hefty points reductions in CA. They won't, but it's possible. I won't hold my breath.

The problem with SM and CSM continues to be overcosted basic units and significant power differences between Tactics. Add in the fact that, instead of fixing Soup armies, they just nerfed the gak out of the most useful aspects of SM and CSM armies.

The one of first places to start with fixing SM and CSM is to have their tactics affect ALL units, not just Infantry and Bikers. Practically every other army in the game gets that. No reason for SM not to have that. Especially when several of our models have actual SM pilots for them.