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.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

You know what's really hard to fit into a pure Custodes list that isn't trying to be flavor of the month? A 700pt unit that literally everyone agrees is overpowered. I would rather take the Orion Drop Ship than a Castellan, and for a little north of half the points, and 4x the actual cost, I can get a roughly better model.

You have Telemons and Caladii at your disposal and you're kvetching about AT capacity?

Oi.

 Xenomancers wrote:
Doom was almost always used to increase ANTI vehical power of weapons. RR wounds on 1 infantry unit isn't that strong and probably not even worth it's points in that match up.

To kill vehicals you can still include spear head of eldar with aliotoc fireprisms (also very strong and hard to kill).

Or spamming crimson hunters should also be effective.

Fire Prisms, Hemlock and Crimson hunters have been my go-to for anti-tank. Prisms don't actually need Doom because of Linked Fire.
I use Doom primarily to get the most out of Shuriken weapons.

-

Sterling191 wrote:

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:

You know what's really hard to fit into a pure Custodes list that isn't trying to be flavor of the month? A 700pt unit that literally everyone agrees is overpowered. I would rather take the Orion Drop Ship than a Castellan, and for a little north of half the points, and 4x the actual cost, I can get a roughly better model.

You have Telemons and Caladii at your disposal and you're kvetching about AT capacity?

Oi.

Not gonna lie. Those are both awesome units that I am looking into ways to self build. I am thinking of strapping two Jetbikes together and mounting a Exterminator turret to it. I have no idea how to make a Telemon. But realistically, those still haven't been confirmed golden yet. Still Beta. Not even sure they will make it, as both are far undercosted for their abilities.

Turn 2 deepstriking 14 wound Death tanks for only 210pts? Or the Telemon for only 240pts? And toss in a Vexhilla and a Tryhard Valorous. Three murder bots hitting on 2s with strength 9/7 weapons, then charging, with reroll all misses, -1 to hit, that can heroically intervene, with Tryhard and his S10 attacks, all DSing 9" on turn 2? Yeah, that's not gonna make it past the rules committee. and if it does, I give up trying to understand what is broken v. not broken.

On the one hand, Wraith Form works properly again, and MWBD is confirmed not to fizzle when you use the Veil of Darkness. On the other hand, Monoliths and Night Scythes are confirmed lumps of suck. I'd consider that about even. More generally, Eldar and the Castellan get the boot but Imperial Soup has so many facets that I'm not sure if a Guard Brigade feeding into a Smash Captain or a pack of Custard Creams is going to be a meaningful downgrade against the armies that are struggling.

 Galef wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:
Doom was almost always used to increase ANTI vehical power of weapons. RR wounds on 1 infantry unit isn't that strong and probably not even worth it's points in that match up.

To kill vehicals you can still include spear head of eldar with aliotoc fireprisms (also very strong and hard to kill).

Or spamming crimson hunters should also be effective.

Fire Prisms, Hemlock and Crimson hunters have been my go-to for anti-tank. Prisms don't actually need Doom because of Linked Fire.
I use Doom primarily to get the most out of Shuriken weapons.

-

Yeah it's great for that too.

Linked fire is a sure way to destroy almost any unit. Hit with Jinx and just pick up models/tanks. I see almost no use for the 2 shot version though. 2d3 shots is best vs vehicles and 2d6 best for infantry.

If your talking Custodes I think a pair of Telmon's with double Arachnus is equivalent, and you still save 140 points.

I'm unworried about Castellans. I was doing well against them before, now they are easier to kill, and are an even bigger chunk off the table.

A good article about the FAQ changes: https://www.goonhammer.com/subdomains/forums/the-big-faq-3-and-you/

 Amishprn86 wrote:




I am pretty sure DE are still going to be top players in the meta, Venoms and Talos are still very good, we might see Venom spam and Talos spam more so for sure and less Ravagers/RWJF spam.

Just had an interesting chat about whether Reborn Drukhari might still be worth a look. More flexibility in list building (no real cabal/cult division) and different sets of stratagems/traits etc. I think our conclusion was it needs testing out on the table. It would play very MSU and be very "death by a thousand cuts" but that seems very thematic.

happy_inquisitor wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:




I am pretty sure DE are still going to be top players in the meta, Venoms and Talos are still very good, we might see Venom spam and Talos spam more so for sure and less Ravagers/RWJF spam.

Just had an interesting chat about whether Reborn Drukhari might still be worth a look. More flexibility in list building (no real cabal/cult division) and different sets of stratagems/traits etc. I think our conclusion was it needs testing out on the table. It would play very MSU and be very "death by a thousand cuts" but that seems very thematic.

I don't have any doubts that that combination would be a list. It'd probably be a good list too. But it's be a far cry from an optimal take on it.

At the end of the day, Ynnari just give some of the same bonuses with different conditions. And I don't think that's going to be worth giving up an extra attack and double activation for Wyches. Or Reroll 1's to hit, extra movement, and ignore cover for Kabals.

So many people butt hurt over a titan model losing a 1cp 3+ invul.

At the end of the day, Ynnari just give some of the same bonuses with different conditions. And I don't think that's going to be worth giving up an extra attack and double activation for Wyches. Or Reroll 1's to hit, extra movement, and ignore cover for Kabals.

Fundamentally, the new Ynnari rules wants a faction(s) to give up all of its codex benefits for a bunch of index benefits, plus (mandatory) access to a few models of "questionable" worth. The previous rules asked too little of the Aeldari, and now the current rules ask for too much. It's a fine balance, but to be fair it seems that GW intentionally chose the sledgehammer.

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:

At the end of the day, Ynnari just give some of the same bonuses with different conditions. And I don't think that's going to be worth giving up an extra attack and double activation for Wyches. Or Reroll 1's to hit, extra movement, and ignore cover for Kabals.

Fundamentally, the new Ynnari rules wants a faction(s) to give up all of its codex benefits for a bunch of index benefits, plus (mandatory) access to a few models of "questionable" worth. The previous rules asked too little of the Aeldari, and now the current rules ask for too much. It's a fine balance, but to be fair it seems that GW intentionally chose the sledgehammer.

I am having a hard time parsing what it is you're trying to say here. Help me out here?

The old Ynnari rules were the contents of an Index ADDED to an already top-tier faction.
The new Ynnari rules are the contents of an Index which REPLACES the codex(es) of a top-tier faction.
The gulf is massive, and I'm almost certain that it's intentional.

Lemondish wrote:

 Phaeron Gukk wrote:

At the end of the day, Ynnari just give some of the same bonuses with different conditions. And I don't think that's going to be worth giving up an extra attack and double activation for Wyches. Or Reroll 1's to hit, extra movement, and ignore cover for Kabals.

Fundamentally, the new Ynnari rules wants a faction(s) to give up all of its codex benefits for a bunch of index benefits, plus (mandatory) access to a few models of "questionable" worth. The previous rules asked too little of the Aeldari, and now the current rules ask for too much. It's a fine balance, but to be fair it seems that GW intentionally chose the sledgehammer.

I am having a hard time parsing what it is you're trying to say here. Help me out here?

Ynnari is its own army faction now, NOT like how Ultramarines and Salamandars are a subfaction of Marines, but how Blood Angels and Space wolves are, think of Ynnari as the Space Wolves of Aeldari now.

You get your own 1 faction <trait> you get your 12 stratagems, 6 relics, and 6 WL traits, with its own powers, if you take a Detachment of Ynnari you play with Ynnari rules, but you still get your datasheet rules, like Drugs, Power for Pain, Flip Belt, Rising Crescendo, as those on the datasheets for the units.

The question is, is Ynnari "powers, Relics, WL traits, SfD trait, and stratagems" worth it over CWE/DE/Harlequins ones. For some units that answer is a strong, YES for other units its a NO, and for some it doesnt matter.

 Ordana wrote:

Reemule wrote:
The castellan is an answer to a question that isn't on the table anymore.

Its headed to the shelves.

If someone brings a knight, or several knights, most forces have enough firepower through even basic play to deal with it. And at a much cheaper cost than a 700 point option.

What was the question according to you?
Because to me Knights, Monsters and Tanks will still be very much present and few things are as easily slotted into an army and do the same kind of damage as a Castellan.

The problem with the CAstellan now is that another Castellan can actually kill it in a single turn with some luck and a little bit of supporting fire. Which makes the Castellan vs Castellan matchup so swingy that a lot of players will just do something less 'eggs in one basket'-y.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kdash wrote:

Reemule wrote:
The castellan is an answer to a question that isn't on the table anymore.

Its headed to the shelves.

If someone brings a knight, or several knights, most forces have enough firepower through even basic play to deal with it. And at a much cheaper cost than a 700 point option.

I’d argue that most forces don’t have a reliable way of killing a 4++ Knight – much less for under 700 points.

I’m sure there are options out there, but relying on a charge from deep strike also doesn’t fit the “reliable” category.

The Castellan will still see play.

Killing a 4++ knight is a joke. Plenty of armies were capable of killing a 3++ knight, it just required a huge investment and hot damage rolls so it wasn't as practical as forcing rotate ion shields and nuking its support units.

The biggest issue for a Castellan to continue to be a meta pick would be if the Castellan continued to be a meta pick. Because you'll have a lot of games where player one wipes player two's castellan with their castellan and the game is basically over right there.

 Skawt wrote:
So many people butt hurt over a titan model losing a 1cp 3+ invul.

3CP but who cares about little facts ;-)

So, let me get this right the Caste won't be a meta pick because if the other player has one it'll nuke it before the other one goes.

Which would make it not reliable. So wouldn't it make sense then after a bit of time other players will stop taking it, then you'll be safe to take it again as you won't run into mirror matches as often as its a risky pick ?

I mean it was in fact a bit too cheap, at least the imperial version for what it did so now that you're paying a good amount and it's no longer an auto include, it's a never pick ?

This all might be why I never enjoy to chase the meta, unless a pick is a no brainer broke choice, it's awful trash and once it's made fair, it's garbage and should be sold off as utter rubbish. Just seems like such an odd way to play the game. Especially when it can still smash, it's just a smash you pay a proper amount for.

tneva82 wrote:

 Skawt wrote:
So many people butt hurt over a titan model losing a 1cp 3+ invul.

3CP but who cares about little facts ;-)

Not to mention little in the way of "butt hurt" in here - most people seem to be saying they think it was a good change.

AngryAngel80 wrote:
So, let me get this right the Caste won't be a meta pick because if the other player has one it'll nuke it before the other one goes.

Which would make it not reliable. So wouldn't it make sense then after a bit of time other players will stop taking it, then you'll be safe to take it again as you won't run into mirror matches as often as its a risky pick ?

I mean it was in fact a bit too cheap, at least the imperial version for what it did so now that you're paying a good amount and it's no longer an auto include, it's a never pick ?

This all might be why I never enjoy to chase the meta, unless a pick is a no brainer broke choice, it's awful trash and once it's made fair, it's garbage and should be sold off as utter rubbish. Just seems like such an odd way to play the game. Especially when it can still smash, it's just a smash you pay a proper amount for.

Your also forgetting Slamguinius is coming in hot back from his timeout.

Choas now have some MW spamming version aswell as finding some thunder hammers at the back of Failbadon's wardrobe.

And 40 points of chumps no longer provide 100% immunity to charging ever.

 Dysartes wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Skawt wrote:
So many people butt hurt over a titan model losing a 1cp 3+ invul.

3CP but who cares about little facts ;-)

Not to mention little in the way of "butt hurt" in here - most people seem to be saying they think it was a good change.

Yeah. Maybe bit overkill to up the castellan by 100 pts as well with it(maybe some point increase but 100 pts + this seems somewhat heavy handed). Pretty much kills it from pure knight armies. But butthurt is "bit" overexaggeration.

Now castellan gets into point where rather than it why not take porypho...whatever the thing is called. T9, more wounds, hits on 2+ and guns that makes castellan go green with envy. 2d3 shots vs d6 which is lot better and flat 6 damage? Oolalaa reliability goes up a lot. No need for raven stratagem either so you are saving 3CP per turn.

5++ only except as warlord(so need 2+ knights along) bit of a bummer though. Well unless you can use RIS on it(did it specify questor/dominus only?).

Ice_can wrote:

AngryAngel80 wrote:

And 40 points of chumps no longer provide 100% immunity to charging ever.

They do if there's no physical space for the charging model between the chumps and the target. You still need to place the charger somewhere!

 Stux wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

And 40 points of chumps no longer provide 100% immunity to charging ever.

They do if there's no physical space for the charging model between the chumps and the target. You still need to place the charger somewhere!

If you can't shoot a hole big enough for 1 model in 10 guardsmen you don't know how to play 40k. we aren't talking multilayered screens here, we're talking about needing a 1 model sized gap in a 10 man unit wrapping the base.

ERJAK wrote:


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kdash wrote:

Reemule wrote:
The castellan is an answer to a question that isn't on the table anymore.

Its headed to the shelves.

If someone brings a knight, or several knights, most forces have enough firepower through even basic play to deal with it. And at a much cheaper cost than a 700 point option.

I’d argue that most forces don’t have a reliable way of killing a 4++ Knight – much less for under 700 points.

I’m sure there are options out there, but relying on a charge from deep strike also doesn’t fit the “reliable” category.

The Castellan will still see play.

Killing a 4++ knight is a joke. Plenty of armies were capable of killing a 3++ knight, it just required a huge investment and hot damage rolls so it wasn't as practical as forcing rotate ion shields and nuking its support units.

The biggest issue for a Castellan to continue to be a meta pick would be if the Castellan continued to be a meta pick. Because you'll have a lot of games where player one wipes player two's castellan with their castellan and the game is basically over right there.

Yes, most armies have the ability to deal with a Knight in 1 turn, but, the point was that very few of them (if any) have the ability to do so for less than 700 points.

Knights aren’t going to disappear and so effective counters to them, and the other 1300 points of the army are still required. Take Craftworlds as an example. 3 Fire Prisms and 3 Starcannon CHE, along with Doom and Jinx sets you back 1,153 points (psykers on bikes for the range). Those points, at the cost of 2 psychic powers and likely 2CP, you do 19.915 wounds to the Knight. Slightly less if you also need to move 1 of the Prisms. You could then throw in a unit of 7 Scatter Laser bikes with guide to take off the remaining wounds, or 6 Dark Reapers for another 161-205 points. But then, you’d need a Wave Serpent for the Dark Reapers, or a 2nd unit of Scatter bikes just in case you don’t go first. Add in 3 units of Rangers for troops for the battalion and another Warlock as a cheap HQ for the Spearhead, then you’re looking at 85-87% of your army. Brought for the sole reason to kill a 24 wound 4++ Knight. AND you then have to have first turn, because if you don’t have first turn a chunk of your firepower is going to get blown off the table.

Smash Captains are likely going to make a bit of a comeback, likely alongside Shield Captains. But, Smash Captains can still be screened out and Shield Captains aren’t getting there first turn. The Castellan is still a huge threat to armies, even at +100 points.

The main counter for the Castellan is going to remain T’au and things like Plaguebearer spam, alongside mirrior matchups. And let’s face it, what are Soup lists going to need to drop in order to kill the Knight? Maybe 2 bullgryn and 20 other points, or just a Basilisk.

They’ll probably drop in number initially, before people realise they are still very very good units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Drager wrote:

 Stux wrote:

Ice_can wrote:

And 40 points of chumps no longer provide 100% immunity to charging ever.

They do if there's no physical space for the charging model between the chumps and the target. You still need to place the charger somewhere!

If you can't shoot a hole big enough for 1 model in 10 guardsmen you don't know how to play 40k. we aren't talking multilayered screens here, we're talking about needing a 1 model sized gap in a 10 man unit wrapping the base.

Personally, I’d just deploy the Guard squads 4” in front of the Knight so when the Smash Captain drops down he can’t even declare a charge vs the Knight due to being over 12” away.

tneva82 wrote:
Now castellan gets into point where rather than it why not take porypho...whatever the thing is called. T9, more wounds, hits on 2+ and guns that makes castellan go green with envy. 2d3 shots vs d6 which is lot better and flat 6 damage?

No particular reason for chaos players not to take the Knight Pomponius over the Castellan. The magnalas is similar to a volcano cannon while the regular plasma decimator is barely a rapid fire battlecannon.

At over 800 points you still get a bit of a discount with a cawls wraith knight though. Or two whole shadowswords...

tneva82 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Skawt wrote:
So many people butt hurt over a titan model losing a 1cp 3+ invul.

3CP but who cares about little facts ;-)

Not to mention little in the way of "butt hurt" in here - most people seem to be saying they think it was a good change.

Yeah. Maybe bit overkill to up the castellan by 100 pts as well with it(maybe some point increase but 100 pts + this seems somewhat heavy handed). Pretty much kills it from pure knight armies. But butthurt is "bit" overexaggeration.

Now castellan gets into point where rather than it why not take porypho...whatever the thing is called. T9, more wounds, hits on 2+ and guns that makes castellan go green with envy. 2d3 shots vs d6 which is lot better and flat 6 damage? Oolalaa reliability goes up a lot. No need for raven stratagem either so you are saving 3CP per turn.

5++ only except as warlord(so need 2+ knights along) bit of a bummer though. Well unless you can use RIS on it(did it specify questor/dominus only?).

But the (and correct me if I'm wrong) 2d3 average is 4 and d6 average is 3.5.

 kastelen wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Skawt wrote:
So many people butt hurt over a titan model losing a 1cp 3+ invul.

3CP but who cares about little facts ;-)

Not to mention little in the way of "butt hurt" in here - most people seem to be saying they think it was a good change.

Yeah. Maybe bit overkill to up the castellan by 100 pts as well with it(maybe some point increase but 100 pts + this seems somewhat heavy handed). Pretty much kills it from pure knight armies. But butthurt is "bit" overexaggeration.

Now castellan gets into point where rather than it why not take porypho...whatever the thing is called. T9, more wounds, hits on 2+ and guns that makes castellan go green with envy. 2d3 shots vs d6 which is lot better and flat 6 damage? Oolalaa reliability goes up a lot. No need for raven stratagem either so you are saving 3CP per turn.

5++ only except as warlord(so need 2+ knights along) bit of a bummer though. Well unless you can use RIS on it(did it specify questor/dominus only?).

But the (and correct me if I'm wrong) 2d3 average is 4 and d6 average is 3.5.

Yes, but it's also a lot more consistent. Very reliably getting 3 to 5 damage is a lot better than the linear distribution of a d6. Not to mention you can never only have 1 shot.

 kastelen wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Skawt wrote:
So many people butt hurt over a titan model losing a 1cp 3+ invul.

3CP but who cares about little facts ;-)

Not to mention little in the way of "butt hurt" in here - most people seem to be saying they think it was a good change.

Yeah. Maybe bit overkill to up the castellan by 100 pts as well with it(maybe some point increase but 100 pts + this seems somewhat heavy handed). Pretty much kills it from pure knight armies. But butthurt is "bit" overexaggeration.

Now castellan gets into point where rather than it why not take porypho...whatever the thing is called. T9, more wounds, hits on 2+ and guns that makes castellan go green with envy. 2d3 shots vs d6 which is lot better and flat 6 damage? Oolalaa reliability goes up a lot. No need for raven stratagem either so you are saving 3CP per turn.

5++ only except as warlord(so need 2+ knights along) bit of a bummer though. Well unless you can use RIS on it(did it specify questor/dominus only?).

But the (and correct me if I'm wrong) 2d3 average is 4 and d6 average is 3.5.

Yes. But minimums are 1 vs 2. And odds of 1 shot is 1/6 vs 1/9...

It's not the average # of shots but also reliability. Don't just look at the average but also look at the probabilities. If average is same but probability is better which one will you take?

Same reason btw why flat 2 is better than d3 in almost all the cases. Average is same, one gets average 100% times. The times you MUST have that 3 as option are far less than when rolling that 1 hurts. Sometimes rolling 3 doesn't even compensate for rolling 1(vs say 2 wound models...) where d3 average is in fact less than 2...

Same reason btw why flat 6 there beats 3d3 for damage. Average is same yes but flat 6 is more reliable. Albeit this is bit less important than the shots.

And of course this has 2 of those rather than the plasma weapon for other arm so you have 2 super good. Cawl's wrath compensates but that requires CP, takes up relic slot and then you also need the raven strategem for reliability=3CP per turn. This one has built in reliability so no need to feed 3 CP per turn.

Am I the only one who agrees that vehicles shouldn't get Bolter Discipline? Also, I think it's a little unfair to say that they lost it, when in fact, they never officially had it to begin with.

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Am I the only one who agrees that vehicles shouldn't get Bolter Discipline? Also, I think it's a little unfair to say that they lost it, when in fact, they never officially had it to begin with.

Semantics. They had it in a very real sense for many people, in that they were using the rule as it was. The fact it was beta doesn't change that.

I think they should have just said that Hurricane Bolters didn't get it, rather than all Bolters on vehicles. But it's fine.

 Stux wrote:

 Ginjitzu wrote:
Am I the only one who agrees that vehicles shouldn't get Bolter Discipline? Also, I think it's a little unfair to say that they lost it, when in fact, they never officially had it to begin with.

Semantics. They had it in a very real sense for many people, in that they were using the rule as it was. The fact it was beta doesn't change that.

I think they should have just said that Hurricane Bolters didn't get it, rather than all Bolters on vehicles. But it's fine.

Yeah, you definitely wouldn't just have sarcastic "oH sO cEnTuRiOnS wErE sO oP???" posts then.