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.

Adeptus custodes faction focus;

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/06/26/apocalypse-faction-focus-talons-of-the-emperorgw-homepage-post-4/

They really have a great armour save, i'm definately looking forward to add these into my imperium army.

Shaelinith wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 Tiberius501 wrote:
I know it’s veey early days, and all we have are data sheets, but what’s the consensus so far? Apocalypse looking good or bad?

It's definitely an improvement on previous editions. The core rules overhaul of alternate activation, delayed damage, and generally trimming away lots of minutiae from regular 40k make it a realistic prospect to arrange games without requiring full days or weekends. My local club is already talking about playing a campaign with it rather than the traditional once-per-year big game.

If GW continue to support Apoc with FAQ / errata / unit datasheet updates to fix some of the oddities I think it definitely looks promising.

I'm a little afraid that it is not as fluid as they tell.
Attack are still done with 3 successive rolls, with a lot of rerolls alerady available for every step, and feel no pain is still here too. You throw less dice but that's it. And to compensate there more multi wound units to keep track of and much more token on the board.
Movement is where you gain a lot with movement trays, but i fear that movement trays will not be the best way to deploy, especially for chaff units.
You don't have a psychic phase, but an order phase which will definitely takes time too.
I don't think it will necessary be a problem for "small" Apo, but the huge battle ?
I definitively want to test it and i am quite pleased by some aspects of it, but i'm sad they did'nt decided to fuse attack and wound roll on the same characteristic and have way less rerolls and more modifier which are faster. With D12 think it would have been sufficient.

Attacks are done with 2 rolls, hit and wound. And they're done with much less dice than before; my full unit of Genestealers now rolls 8 attacks instead of 80. Tyranids at least don't seem to get many re-rolls, not sure how others will play out yet. Still, I'd rather be re-rolling from 8 original dice than from 80.
Saves & FNP are done in the damage phase using the combined blast markers inflicted during the turn. In theory this should be quicker, especially when a lot of units will never get a saving throw at all thanks to 7+ saves on a D6.
Psychic powers have effectively become like 40k stratagems (like command assets). However as you have a limited number of cards then in theory less time should be spent on command assets than 40k stratagems / psychic powers.

Honestly I think the biggest new drain on time will be the thinking time, deciding which detachments to activate and when. When an opponent can make an immediate counter, thinking carefully about activation order will be something players need to learn.

tneva82 wrote:

 Guardsmanwaffle wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Guardsmanwaffle wrote:
There's seemingly no rhyme or reason to these stats. They feel so random and don't reflect their counterparts in regular 40K. I'm still trying to figure out what the point of the Twin Lascannon is when the Vanquisher Battle Cannon is just a flat upgrade compared to it.

And same isn't true in 40k? In 40k battle cannon is flat out better upgrade over vanquisher cannon.

GW doesn't do balanced games. Whopedoo. Big surprise...not.

The Vanquisher to be fair is cheaper and at least does something different from the regular battle cannon even though 90% of the time the battle cannon is better. Its not the balance that’s getting me though, it’s the inconsistency. The Executioner plasma cannon is the exact same as a regular plasma cannon. Why does a conqueror battle cannon have such a different profile compared to a regular battle cannon when it’s essentially the same weapon? Why does a twin auto cannon have the same number of attacks as a single shot anti tank weapon. All that for just the weapon options for a single unit. I don’t even wanna know what the comparison is like when you start comparing different units.

Vanquisher does different...what? Better AT? Nope. Battle cannon is better vs it too. There's basically no target you WANT vanquisher cannon when you have battle cannon available. It's like having lower SAT in apoc. Sure it's DIFFERENT but it's still inferior. Just like vanquisher cannon in 40k. It just plain sucks for points vs both infantry AND AT.

Huh? The apoc battle cannon is 1 attack, 6+/6+
The apoc vanquisher is 2 attacks, 10+/4+. Its a massively better anti tank weapon.

The standard battle cannon is suddenly the last thing you want on a Russ in Apoc, except maybe an Executioner cannon. 1 shot generalist is significantly worse than double shot specialist, especially since some of those 'specialist' weapons aren't bad against the other target type.

 Spreelock wrote:
Adeptus custodes faction focus;

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2019/06/26/apocalypse-faction-focus-talons-of-the-emperorgw-homepage-post-4/

They really have a great armour save, i'm definately looking forward to add these into my imperium army.

"as well as the Sisters of Silence who make up the other HALF"

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

one kit, no Troops - are they even in the current Custodes codex? Or are they still a single entry jammed into index imperium 2 with the rest of the Minor Imperial Faction Whoopsiedoodles?

Meanwhile everyone with a raging marineboner and everyone who's even heard of 40k competitive play in the past 6 months has picked up a Golden Bananaboyz army for the sheer novelty of being able to buy a 2000pt army for half the usual cost and paint it out of a single coat of sprayprimer.

the_scotsman wrote:
Or are they still a single entry jammed into index imperium 2 with the rest of the Minor Imperial Faction Whoopsiedoodles?

Pretty sure it's three entries, because as we all know the most efficient way to represent a weapon swap is with a whole new datasheet.

 Geifer wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:
Or are they still a single entry jammed into index imperium 2 with the rest of the Minor Imperial Faction Whoopsiedoodles?

Pretty sure it's three entries, because as we all know the most efficient way to represent a weapon swap is with a whole new datasheet.

Hey, I mean in the preview they show off what...I'm going to say almost certainly...is going to be their only ability card twice. And then they go

LOOK AT THIS AWESOME WEAPON THEY HAVE, IT'S GOT A STATLINE

PUT THEM IN A RHINO PCHOOO MIND BLOWN

That's how good the command asset is. You couldn't begin to comprehend its awesomeness if they only posted it once.

On that note, I've been critical of how 8th ed moved some inherent unit abilities to stratagems, depriving units of abilities that by all rights they should be able to always use. Seeing that Sisters of Silence are only psychic nulls when their commander tells them to is a new low. Just out of interest I'd like to hear the responsible designer(s) explain the thinking behind that.

 xttz wrote:

Attacks are done with 2 rolls, hit and wound. And they're done with much less dice than before; my full unit of Genestealers now rolls 8 attacks instead of 80. Tyranids at least don't seem to get many re-rolls, not sure how others will play out yet. Still, I'd rather be re-rolling from 8 original dice than from 80.
Saves & FNP are done in the damage phase using the combined blast markers inflicted during the turn. In theory this should be quicker, especially when a lot of units will never get a saving throw at all thanks to 7+ saves on a D6.
Psychic powers have effectively become like 40k stratagems (like command assets). However as you have a limited number of cards then in theory less time should be spent on command assets than 40k stratagems / psychic powers.

Honestly I think the biggest new drain on time will be the thinking time, deciding which detachments to activate and when. When an opponent can make an immediate counter, thinking carefully about activation order will be something players need to learn.

The fact that the save roll is delayed at the end of the turn doesn't change the face that it is a roll
But fair enough, some units won't have any save.

Do we know why going from 10 boys to 20 adds 4 PL but going 20 boys to 30 adds 5? Only reason I can see is that +1 A on the profile.

mhalko1 wrote:
Do we know why going from 10 boys to 20 adds 4 PL but going 20 boys to 30 adds 5? Only reason I can see is that +1 A on the profile.

Well yeah, 30 have more attacks than 20+10

mhalko1 wrote:
Do we know why going from 10 boys to 20 adds 4 PL but going 20 boys to 30 adds 5? Only reason I can see is that +1 A on the profile.

The Orks' bonus attack at 20+ unit size is baked into the base profile of the 30 boyz mob.

And light infantry inherently gains more by being higher wounds, lower unit count. Basically any unit who would rather be forcing their opponent to stack up big blasts on them to strip away all their wounds than allowing the enemy to spread their firepower into small blasts (that will still likely land) is going to be paying more to up their unit size.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Geifer wrote:
That's how good the command asset is. You couldn't begin to comprehend its awesomeness if they only posted it once.

On that note, I've been critical of how 8th ed moved some inherent unit abilities to stratagems, depriving units of abilities that by all rights they should be able to always use. Seeing that Sisters of Silence are only psychic nulls when their commander tells them to is a new low. Just out of interest I'd like to hear the responsible designer(s) explain the thinking behind that.

TBF sisters of silence also have a psychic abomination ability on their profile, which prevents units within 6" from casting powers outright and makes them immune.

The stratagem just lets them do it to literally any psyker anywhere on the table.

 lord_blackfang wrote:

mhalko1 wrote:
Do we know why going from 10 boys to 20 adds 4 PL but going 20 boys to 30 adds 5? Only reason I can see is that +1 A on the profile.

Well yeah, 30 have more attacks than 20+10

Generally speaking, the system really seems to be charging based on attack volume first and foremost.

The biggest concern I think I have so far is with the new turn system, how are factions/units typically seen as "glass cannons" supposed to function?

.5" unit coherency helps somewhat, but I can't help but feel the fact that it is literally impossible to remove a unit before the next turn takes the "gunline behind an elcheapo screen" problem that 8th has to a whole new level.

I can't see anything in the rules yet that would make a deathball of longrange guns surrounded by a sea of ultra-cheap bodies assailable by an assault based force. If i'm playing something like a horde of daemons, where guns and even units with Fly are very very few and far between, the opposing army is going to be taking casualties like stripping the layers from an onion, while they will be able to pick out basically any of my units to attack. No matter what, that unit of Conscripts is going to survive until the end of the turn. Doesn't matter if your unit of 12 Harlequins dumps 24 dice of attacks on them and gives them 16 blast markers, you'll need to wait a turn to hit one layer of guardsmen. Then another turn to hit another layer of guardsmen. Then another to finally hit a tank.

Maybe the answer is just "there is no good way to solve this problem', and it certainly would still exist using current 40k rules for apoc. I just hope there's something I'm missing that makes that situation slightly better, as "the armies are so big that nothing can maneuver and everything just meatslaps on everything else until the game is bogged down into a joyless slog of action resolution" is my experience with every apoc game I've ever played.

In apoc they want to avoid one side picking up all their models before they use them that 40k does

the_scotsman wrote:
The biggest concern I think I have so far is with the new turn system, how are factions/units typically seen as "glass cannons" supposed to function?

.5" unit coherency helps somewhat, but I can't help but feel the fact that it is literally impossible to remove a unit before the next turn takes the "gunline behind an elcheapo screen" problem that 8th has to a whole new level.

I can't see anything in the rules yet that would make a deathball of longrange guns surrounded by a sea of ultra-cheap bodies assailable by an assault based force. If i'm playing something like a horde of daemons, where guns and even units with Fly are very very few and far between, the opposing army is going to be taking casualties like stripping the layers from an onion, while they will be able to pick out basically any of my units to attack. No matter what, that unit of Conscripts is going to survive until the end of the turn. Doesn't matter if your unit of 12 Harlequins dumps 24 dice of attacks on them and gives them 16 blast markers, you'll need to wait a turn to hit one layer of guardsmen. Then another turn to hit another layer of guardsmen. Then another to finally hit a tank.

Maybe the answer is just "there is no good way to solve this problem', and it certainly would still exist using current 40k rules for apoc. I just hope there's something I'm missing that makes that situation slightly better, as "the armies are so big that nothing can maneuver and everything just meatslaps on everything else until the game is bogged down into a joyless slog of action resolution" is my experience with every apoc game I've ever played.

Screens are much easier to clear in apoc. A single bolt shot can take out an entire infantry squad with a decent chance. In apoc if you screen, you do it with elite pieces, not with chaff. Chaff clears board space too fast.

A single intercessor squad out of rapid fire has 1/3 chance to inflict a wound on an infantry squad, and a 10% chance to outright remove it. Not the mention that there are a lot of methods to inflict area damage.

Lol actually i think that AM goes from having the best screens in 40K to the worst screens in Apoc. They REALLY pay for having a cap of 10 models on the infantry squads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh wait... they have conscripts, those do work.

the_scotsman wrote:

mhalko1 wrote:
Do we know why going from 10 boys to 20 adds 4 PL but going 20 boys to 30 adds 5? Only reason I can see is that +1 A on the profile.

The Orks' bonus attack at 20+ unit size is baked into the base profile of the 30 boyz mob.

And light infantry inherently gains more by being higher wounds, lower unit count. Basically any unit who would rather be forcing their opponent to stack up big blasts on them to strip away all their wounds than allowing the enemy to spread their firepower into small blasts (that will still likely land) is going to be paying more to up their unit size.

Mob Rule is also represent by having Ld go up as the squad size increases. At Ld7 you need multiple blast markers to fail a morale check, so it's quite useful.

I've a hard time seeing for which game size this game is tuned/thought for.

Are we talking 10.000pts+ games or more 3-4000?

Some big guys stats are also REALLY strange. like comparing the Reaver to the Hierophant. Sameish point cost, the first one is at 24 Wounds with Void Shield and Apocalypse weapons, the second one is at 8 (eight) Wounds without any of that.

"Killing" a screen with one shot doesn't help much if it doesn't die until the end of the turn, after it has done it's job of keeping you from charging the units behind it.

Berthier wrote:
I've a hard time seeing for which game size this game is tuned/thought for.

Are we talking 10.000pts+ games or more 3-4000?

Some big guys stats are also REALLY strange. like comparing the Reaver to the Hierophant. Sameish point cost, the first one is at 24 Wounds with Void Shield and Apocalypse weapons, the second one is at 8 (eight) Wounds without any of that.

The saves are quite different from 40k that's why.

 Peregrine wrote:
"Killing" a screen with one shot doesn't help much if it doesn't die until the end of the turn, after it has done it's job of keeping you from charging the units behind it.

That is true in 40K, and only if you play alpha strike lists.
The fact that in apoc you cannot remove your enemy before it strikes back, already puts alpha strike lists at a disadvantage.
Turn 2 will probably be where the game is at, so if i can just shoot away your screen with little effort in turn 1...

Not to mention that screening many things is impossible, we have double move here, so anything fast and flying will just ignore your screens and charge turn 1.

Berthier wrote:
I've a hard time seeing for which game size this game is tuned/thought for.

Are we talking 10.000pts+ games or more 3-4000?

Some big guys stats are also REALLY strange. like comparing the Reaver to the Hierophant. Sameish point cost, the first one is at 24 Wounds with Void Shield and Apocalypse weapons, the second one is at 8 (eight) Wounds without any of that.

Don't discount the 3+ save, saw the math over on bolter and they are pretty similar in terms of staying power. Also reaver weapons up the cost a decent amount

Berthier wrote:
I've a hard time seeing for which game size this game is tuned/thought for.

Are we talking 10.000pts+ games or more 3-4000?

Yes

Berthier wrote:
Some big guys stats are also REALLY strange. like comparing the Reaver to the Hierophant. Sameish point cost, the first one is at 24 Wounds with Void Shield and Apocalypse weapons, the second one is at 8 (eight) Wounds without any of that.

Check this out:

 xttz wrote:
Some interesting math-hammer regarding the Titan / Hierophant stats a couple pages back. For reference:
Ork Stompa 8W, 6+ Sv, 49PL
Nid Hierophant 8W, 3+ Sv, 95PL
Reaver Titan 24W, 5+ Sv, 100-154PL

Assuming average rolling:
You need 10 large blast markers to kill a Stompa (8.3 wounds inflicted after 6+ save on a D6).
You need 35 large blast markers to kill a Heirophant (inflicting 7.6 wounds after 3+ save on a D6)
You need 37 large blast markers to kill a Reaver (36 after void shield rule, inflicting 23.8 wounds after 5+ save on a D6)

Spoletta wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
"Killing" a screen with one shot doesn't help much if it doesn't die until the end of the turn, after it has done it's job of keeping you from charging the units behind it.

That is true in 40K, and only if you play alpha strike lists.
The fact that in apoc you cannot remove your enemy before it strikes back, already puts alpha strike lists at a disadvantage.
Turn 2 will probably be where the game is at, so if i can just shoot away your screen with little effort in turn 1...

Not to mention that screening many things is impossible, we have double move here, so anything fast and flying will just ignore your screens and charge turn 1.

lets pretend I play some kind of zany weird faction that almost only has melee options, let's call them "Daemons" for a purely theoretical name.

how do I thin out chaff screens before committing, even if I am running an almost totally non-glass cannon alpha strike list?

also what's to stop people from blocking fly by just corner-castling? can't get thru a screen if there's nowhere to land.

I really don't think Apocalypse is a game designed for codex "pure" armies.

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
"Killing" a screen with one shot doesn't help much if it doesn't die until the end of the turn, after it has done it's job of keeping you from charging the units behind it.

That is true in 40K, and only if you play alpha strike lists.
The fact that in apoc you cannot remove your enemy before it strikes back, already puts alpha strike lists at a disadvantage.
Turn 2 will probably be where the game is at, so if i can just shoot away your screen with little effort in turn 1...

Not to mention that screening many things is impossible, we have double move here, so anything fast and flying will just ignore your screens and charge turn 1.

lets pretend I play some kind of zany weird faction that almost only has melee options, let's call them "Daemons" for a purely theoretical name.

how do I thin out chaff screens before committing, even if I am running an almost totally non-glass cannon alpha strike list?

also what's to stop people from blocking fly by just corner-castling? can't get thru a screen if there's nowhere to land.

If someone corner castles then he is usually forfeiting the mission, which makes for an easy game.

the_scotsman wrote:

Spoletta wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
"Killing" a screen with one shot doesn't help much if it doesn't die until the end of the turn, after it has done it's job of keeping you from charging the units behind it.

That is true in 40K, and only if you play alpha strike lists.
The fact that in apoc you cannot remove your enemy before it strikes back, already puts alpha strike lists at a disadvantage.
Turn 2 will probably be where the game is at, so if i can just shoot away your screen with little effort in turn 1...

Not to mention that screening many things is impossible, we have double move here, so anything fast and flying will just ignore your screens and charge turn 1.

lets pretend I play some kind of zany weird faction that almost only has melee options, let's call them "Daemons" for a purely theoretical name.

how do I thin out chaff screens before committing, even if I am running an almost totally non-glass cannon alpha strike list?

also what's to stop people from blocking fly by just corner-castling? can't get thru a screen if there's nowhere to land.

Just commit and accept you'll take some damage?

There is also a couple of abilities and units previewed so far that could really hurt castling armies- the Deathstrike missile and the Deathguard command card come to mind. If Daemons have access to some abilities like those, they may make castling up sufficiently costly to negate the advantage.

The Death Guard have some particularly nasty psychic powers of their own to unleash, such as Plague Wind, which causes havoc to densely packed enemy formations.

I would be surprised if Daemons didn't get some similar powers.

the_scotsman wrote:
lets pretend I play some kind of zany weird faction that almost only has melee options, let's call them "Daemons" for a purely theoretical name.

No. Let's call them "Legiones Daemonica" instead.

No, no Doobie. It would be:

Legiones™ Daemonica™.

stratigo wrote:

 solkan wrote:

stratigo wrote:
Know what pisses me off the most?

Vertus praetors come in 3/5/10 unit sizes. They sell them in boxes of 3. Literaly EVERY other bike unit in the game goes up by 3/6/9. fething what?

That’s probably a typo. Is there an indication of where to send complaints/errata/FAQ requests yet, or does it all just go to the community address?

It isn't a typo at all, All custodes stuff come in 3/5/10. But wardens and guard come in boxes of 5, so it makes sense, while Termies and vertus come in 3, making it awkward. I suspect the idea they came upon is that "Well everyone would have made a guy into a shield captain" which... while true, everyone made 3 guys into shield captains, and if you REALLY wanted to do it this way, 3/5/8 would be more rational. It offends my sense of proportionality. But also it offends my wallet


Automatically Appended Next Post:
now having just read the custodes faction focus, it does seem like there IS a typo for allarus termies, in that they should have 3+ saves. The characters do, but the regular ones don't.

Or wait for it...it is actually typo due to copy&paste like with obliterators in new codex which was just copy&paste from old codex. The fact it's on everything makes it MORE likely to be mistake than deliberate rather than less.

Anyway as individual models dont' really matter no big deal anyway especially with movement trays. Have 9 bikes, play them as 10, done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Voss wrote:

Huh? The apoc battle cannon is 1 attack, 6+/6+
The apoc vanquisher is 2 attacks, 10+/4+. Its a massively better anti tank weapon.

The standard battle cannon is suddenly the last thing you want on a Russ in Apoc, except maybe an Executioner cannon. 1 shot generalist is significantly worse than double shot specialist, especially since some of those 'specialist' weapons aren't bad against the other target type.

I'm talking about 40k. Person was saying "one weapon in apoc is just flat out inferior than another weapon in apoc". I pointed out same is also true in 40k where battle cannon is flat out upgrade in every way over vanquisher being superior even against armoured foes. So battle cannon is flat out upgrade over vanquisher cannon. Just like vanquisher is flat out upgrade over twin lascannon turret in apoc.

This is GW game. That's to be expected. That complain about apoc stats is rather silly when it's true in every GW game. It would be note worthy if it WASN'T the case. Not that it is.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW why is it that titan shields are NEVER appropriate in 40k as they are in fluff and how they have worked like decades? Remove one blast marker? Really? Reaver and warlord have identical shields? Really? Where's the idea of firing tons of weaker shots to overload the shields before hitting with few big punches to take down the titan?