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.

GSC Bikers are also T4 2W. Not sure why we would stay at T3.

 Kanluwen wrote:

2W would have them too fragile for a unit that comes in multiples of 3. How many Wounds are Thunderwolves?

It's an awful generous assumption to make: that GW would take such things into consideration when designing a kit. Remember that they design the kit first, then assign rules to them. They don't think about whether the kit fulfills a needed role for the army, unless it happily aligns with the early concepts that they feel good about.

I mean you don't expect, by your logic, for the pteraxii who also may be in sold in sets of 3 to be more than 2w apiece?

Madjob wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

2W would have them too fragile for a unit that comes in multiples of 3. How many Wounds are Thunderwolves?

It's an awful generous assumption to make: that GW would take such things into consideration when designing a kit. Remember that they design the kit first, then assign rules to them. They don't think about whether the kit fulfills a needed role for the army, unless it happily aligns with the early concepts that they feel good about.

And the rules writers usually look at the kit when designing the rules...if you think that looks like a 2W model, you're kidding yourself.

I mean you don't expect, by your logic for the pteraxii who also may be in sold in sets of 3, to be more than 2w apiece?

No, because they're more likely in sets of 5 if one watches the video GW put up. Check out 0:24 there. There's one of the Pteraxii variant units there, set up with 4x Flechette Carbines and an Alpha or something akin to it with a Blaster and Taser Goad.

The flamethrower toting variant is something different...and not even in the video from what I can tell.

 Kanluwen wrote:

And the rules writers usually look at the kit when designing the rules...if you think that looks like a 2W model, you're kidding yourself.

Not especially? The trend is pretty well established, mounted units get +1 T and +1 W over their infantry equivalent, the only exceptions we've had are for mounts which are monstrously sized (which Thunderwolves certainly are). I can see them having other upgrades thanks to the nature of their mounts, maybe an upgraded save (normal or invuln), but a third wound seems inappropriate.

No, because they're more likely in sets of 5 if one watches the video GW put up. Check out 0:24 there. There's one of the Pteraxii variant units there, set up with 4x Flechette Carbines and an Alpha or something akin to it with a Blaster and Taser Goad.

While not definitive, I'll concede that's a distinct possibility. The dual build nature of the kit coupled with the community sites previous pattern of debuting models/kits with photos that reflect how they will be sold made me assume a box of 3 instead of digging deeper.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 deffrekka wrote:
My guess would be toughness 4, 2 wounds, 4+ 6++ save, BS 3, WS 4, movement 12", costing around 14-16pts when comparing them to similar bike models. They definitely won't be cheaper than Infiltrators, I know what GW is like with pointing new units......

2W would have them too fragile for a unit that comes in multiples of 3. How many Wounds are Thunderwolves?

How many wounds do Windriders, Shining Spears, Reavers, Warbikers, Space/Ravenwing Bikes, Atalan Jackals all have? 2. They all come in boxes of 3 dont they aswell?

Thunder wolves, Jugganauts, Nob Bikers and Sky Weavers are the only 3+ wound bikes/cavalry in the game.

These horses are more like a space marine bike instead of a thunder wolf. Toughness 4 with 2 wounds would be my bet. 3 wounds is a stretch and so is toughness 5.

i think people are expecting those numbers because the Ironstriders are T6 6W when they kinda feel like they shouldnt be that durable (model-aesthetics not points)
Ironstriders look T5 4W imo.

I'd be surprised if they were better than T4/2W.

Madjob wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

And the rules writers usually look at the kit when designing the rules...if you think that looks like a 2W model, you're kidding yourself.

Not especially? The trend is pretty well established, mounted units get +1 T and +1 W over their infantry equivalent, the only exceptions we've had are for mounts which are monstrously sized (which Thunderwolves certainly are). I can see them having other upgrades thanks to the nature of their mounts, maybe an upgraded save (normal or invuln), but a third wound seems inappropriate.

And what makes you think these aren't "monstrously sized"? Thunderwolf Cavalry are on 60mm round bases currently...these are seemingly on the 60x35mm ovals(comparing to the 40mm bases that the Pteraxii are on).

No, because they're more likely in sets of 5 if one watches the video GW put up. Check out 0:24 there. There's one of the Pteraxii variant units there, set up with 4x Flechette Carbines and an Alpha or something akin to it with a Blaster and Taser Goad.

While not definitive, I'll concede that's a distinct possibility. The dual build nature of the kit coupled with the community sites previous pattern of debuting models/kits with photos that reflect how they will be sold made me assume a box of 3 instead of digging deeper.

I'd imagine that they wanted to save something for another potential reveal/tease in March.
That said, it didn't even really require me to do too much digging. It's right there in the video, multiple times(0:24 is just the 'best' shot showcasing the Princeps who is the only one rocking the blaster+goad), showcasing them as a unit of 5 instead of 6.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 deffrekka wrote:

How many wounds do Windriders, Shining Spears, Reavers, Warbikers, Space/Ravenwing Bikes, Atalan Jackals all have? 2. They all come in boxes of 3 dont they aswell?
Thunder wolves, Jugganauts, Nob Bikers and Sky Weavers are the only 3+ wound bikes/cavalry in the game.

Jackals are boxes of 5, featuring 4 Bikers(one can be built as a leader or standard Jackal) and 1 Wolfquad(which is an optional unit upgrade).

The reason I asked about Thunderwolves is that I literally didn't know. I don't own the Space Wolves book, I don't know anyone who plays them to borrow it off of, and frankly I don't like referencing online stuff. If someone knew, they'd answer and we could work a discussion from there..

These horses are more like a space marine bike instead of a thunder wolf.

We don't really know what they're like. That's the whole reason everything is speculation right now. It's why I brought up DKoK Death Riders as an example, why I brought up Thunderwolves, etc.

Toughness 4 with 2 wounds would be my bet. 3 wounds is a stretch and so is toughness 5.

For the record, I did say that I figure T5 would be the high side and that T4 is more likely...and that led to the whole thing about how they'd have to be T3 cause Rough Riders are. I could MAYBE see the Vanguard-based version(Sulphurhounds) having a higher Toughness or Save value for some weirdly worded reasoning.

 Kanluwen wrote:

And what makes you think these aren't "monstrously sized"? Thunderwolf Cavalry are on 60mm round bases currently...these are seemingly on the 60x35mm ovals(comparing to the 40mm bases that the Pteraxii are on).

I've got a pretty reliable scale reference since the riders are skitarii infantry comparable to vanguard/rangers. So yeah they don't look to be of a size that would compare to something like a Thunderwolf.

Madjob wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

And what makes you think these aren't "monstrously sized"? Thunderwolf Cavalry are on 60mm round bases currently...these are seemingly on the 60x35mm ovals(comparing to the 40mm bases that the Pteraxii are on).

I've got a pretty reliable scale reference since the riders are skitarii infantry comparable to vanguard/rangers. So yeah they don't look to be of a size that would compare to something like a Thunderwolf.

To compare:
Thunderwolf Cavalry

vs Serberys Sulphurhounds


Both are on 60mm bases, with the Thunderwolves on the 60mm round while the Sulphurhounds have 60x35mm ovals.
In case you're unfamiliar with said base, it's the one used for the Transauranic Arquebus model:


Remember that the riders for the Thunderwolf Cavalry aren't Primaris-sized. They were done in line with the 'old' Space Marine range and are roughly the same size as a Skitarii.

I do wish they'd give us some kind of preview, ruleswise, like they're doing for the Lumineth.

T4 W2; with a 5++ or 6++ for bionics. Bank on it.

Wonder if the plane will have the invul or go the route of the dunerider

 Vineheart01 wrote:
Wonder if the plane will have the invul or go the route of the dunerider

I think the batwing jump troops will also likely get a bionics invul, but I highly doubt the dragonfly plane will get an invul.

The weapons on the sulfurhounds have some interesting shapes that you maybe didnt notice, look at the one on the left. Maybe im imagining things but it looks like some kind of assault cannon.

Besides, the ranger variant (AKA Serberys Raiders) dont have a flamethrower like the shulphurhounds do, I don't think im crazy when I believe they have some kind of special ability (look at those binoculars and antennas) or a decent melee attack, even thought it would be strange as the ones that alawys want to get near melee are the vanguards.

With the pteraxis I would say that they are some kind of shock troop, with the regular ones having special weapons like incendine combustor, meltas(?), and other different ones, and the princeps being stuck with default sicarian weapons

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Thairne wrote:
Probably outflanking, T3 2A 2W models.
They might tie up a backfield unit, but unless those are power weapons which no skitarii so far wielded I dont see them doing anything significant damage wise. They might chop-chop a backfield hiding character thi

Sicarian Infiltrators have Power Swords or Taser Goads as options.
It's amusing that people seem to forget Skitarii have melee units...people just don't like them.


There was a bit of talk(take with salt) that the Raiders(the non-flamethrower horse variants) are a harassment unit with deployable mines and/or a forward deployment blocker.

I honestly think there's a lot of merit to Infiltrators, who can shoot something and be just in range that the opponent WANTS to deal with them first, and on top of that I favor Graia so the Strat is easy to pop off. Their only real issue is why would anyone use the Swords when the Goad just works?

Leucaruth wrote:
The weapons on the sulfurhounds have some interesting shapes that you maybe didnt notice, look at the one on the left. Maybe im imagining things but it looks like some kind of assault cannon.

Besides, the ranger variant (AKA Serberys Raiders) dont have a flamethrower like the shulphurhounds do, I don't think im crazy when I believe they have some kind of special ability (look at those binoculars and antennas) or a decent melee attack, even thought it would be strange as the ones that alawys want to get near melee are the vanguards.

With the pteraxis I would say that they are some kind of shock troop, with the regular ones having special weapons like incendine combustor, meltas(?), and other different ones, and the princeps being stuck with default sicarian weapons

Pretty sure its just the rifle version of the phosphor blast pistol, there's better pictures of it elsewhere. I don't blame people for not recognizing it, the pistol is pretty bad, the only thing it's really better than is the rad pistol, and that's only because the rad pistol is actually pointless when the alpha can take a rad carbine and a melee weapon.

So I'm in a weird position lately as far as armies go. I like dark eldar. I really do. That said they never get new units except for resculpts and then usually lose units or heroes they had like trueborn and bloodbrides and about 4 heroes. Also I've been playing them a little too long probably and need a change.

Genestealer cult sounded fun but they tend to be infantry heavy and very fragile when I fought them.

Skitarii sound fun but I might just be effected by new army cool factor with the new units. For this reason I might wait a month or two and see how these new units pan out and if the awesome feel of the new army doesn't wear off too much.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
So I'm in a weird position lately as far as armies go. I like dark eldar. I really do. That said they never get new units except for resculpts and then usually lose units or heroes they had like trueborn and bloodbrides and about 4 heroes. Also I've been playing them a little too long probably and need a change.

Genestealer cult sounded fun but they tend to be infantry heavy and very fragile when I fought them.

Skitarii sound fun but I might just be effected by new army cool factor with the new units. For this reason I might wait a month or two and see how these new units pan out and if the awesome feel of the new army doesn't wear off too much.

That's the best solution for now. I've stopped a deeper dive into Kataphrons, as the cavalry, planes and jump troops just look so sweet. At the same time I realised I'm not that much of a powergamer as I thought, and competitive gamer for that case, as I want at least a box of these no matter how the rules are going to be. Besides PA book might change a relative power of certain units/combos, and since there are no leaks or previews...

i was just about to order 2 boxes of fulgurites, a killteam box (for a 2nd manip and 5 infitrators since the price is so good) and another box of infiltrators before those announcements showed up.

Now im holding off lol.

What do we think of the rustalkers now they have had a points reduction in CA ?

U02dah4 wrote:
What do we think of the rustalkers now they have had a points reduction in CA ?

I'm testing them and the few conclusions so far:
- Blades over Razors/Cordclaws, unless Ryza for RR1 to wound. But...
- They do very little damage to MEQs in either setup due to W2 and 3+, and no freaking AP. But they are fairly decent against Orks and GSC (and the usual T3 soft infantry). They might fall flat against Sisters, better wounding will not help vs 3+ save, but haven't had a chance to test them
- They work best for me as an early screening rush, pushed via Stygies. 17" of movement with Infantry keyword is not too shabby, it allows me to push DS and Dajumps away from the main line, for quite a decent price (5,5 pts per wound). It demands a little bit of terrain though, you don't want to be shot turn 1 (TFCs won't care anyway) as the usual T3 and 4+ save will be easily killed (even with W2 and -1)
- Thus, their niche IMO are Orks and GSC - push the DS/Jumps back, to buy yourself space and time to counter-act. But as Orks and GSC are not very meta picks now, you might be better without them

What would make a start to fix them? AP. Any point of AP, preferably a special rule of ignoring armor/invuln save (like Assassins do). Preferably, Razors could ignore the invulns while having a power sword AP, while Blades could ignore the armor - that would make for ANY reason to bring Razors/Cordclaw loadout

i dont think ruststalkers will ever be good unless their mortals trigger on a 4+ or they give them some native AP.

They wound a lot even at S4 but with 0 AP it means very little. And they cant advance/charge so despite being Mv8 theyre kinda sluggish for a pure melee unit

the problem with ruststalkers is that we have fulgurites that do the exact same job but better (drop mortals in combat) or we have the infiltrators + wrath of mars that can do the same thing with shooting.

There needs to be an actual reason to take rusts because in all games ive played with them, i wouldve wanted fulgurites instead.

Well they are not quite the same

Fulgurites might be better in combat but the difficulty with fulgurites is reliably making the charge so they can be tanky i know my tourneys have lighter terrain and so they are a struggle to hide

6" move + 9" stygies + manipulous 2 + charge avg 7 =24" only just gets you there if they are on the line
Conversely rust stalkers have 8"move gives you a little bit more leeway secondly 30 points cheaper for 10 with 2 wounds much tankier vs small arms

Sure you can add transports but it adds cost

Infiltrators are definitely more effective but 150 pts vs 110 is quite a points difference given no extra survivability so they should be.

Corpuscarii are preferable to fulgurites as atleast they shoot and they are almost as effective as tazer infiltrators in shooting/CC for 30 pts cheaper



Infiltrators + WoM are a seperate fase as they are a one off unit sure they are broken but you can only do it once per turn.

Ruststalkers had a role before in that they were our only unit with grenades(and those grenades were nasty). If they give them back, that alone opens up something new.


Interestingly enough, something I keep coming back to is a notation in the formation "Sicarian Killclade" about the interaction between the Infiltrator helms and the Transonic weaponry: the transonics apparently amplified the helms' output and created a weird, scarier interaction. Oh, and the whole "the helmets create an uplifting chorus" bit.

Think Ruststalkers would be interesting if they could boost up the Infiltrator Neurostatic Aura and if the Infiltrators came with Broad-Spectrum Data Tethers?

Rustalkers will never be good simply because of their innate mobility issues. Mobility is the name of the game, as it always has been. Any other time someone already brought up Priests, which get more benefit from external goodies.

If Ruststalkers had 4 attacks base they would be a good horde clearer, an actual role. And with more attacks the MW component becomes more effective as well.

Their mobility is fine, it's better than fulgurites and they're arguably our best unit.

U02dah4 wrote:


6" move + 9" stygies + manipulous 2 + charge avg 7 =24" only just gets you there if they are on the line

Sure you can add transports but it adds cost

Even just starting them on the ground, they can act as a decent distraction carnifex if your opponent knows what they do. Before we got transports, i used to stygies a big blob in my opponent's face, it protected the rest of our army.

With transports being as cheap as they are, i have no trouble fitting at least one in my lists and getting an extra 3" on my priests, effectively making them need only a 4" charge.

But i agree that the rustalkers have better innate mobility and are cheaper, but these are the only two positives i can find.

2 of the ranger riders can actually be seen with swords, the alpha and the guy with binoculars during the video. So the whole unit could be equipped with them, thoughts?

 0XFallen wrote:
2 of the ranger riders can actually be seen with swords, the alpha and the guy with binoculars during the video. So the whole unit could be equipped with them, thoughts?

Depends on the rest of the statline - even mounted Skitarii won't be worthwhile to bother with a WS4+ S3 and power sword costing additional 4pts.

True, I think alphas melee weapons should cost 0 or 1 point.
However, if the riders melee weapons are mandatory they should have come up with a viable solution to that problem.