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.

Hello!

Two years back I bought a Calladius Grav tank from Forge World, like the model, and the rules were not exactly bad either.

A while back I took it to the game, and for over 200p, I found it very underwhelming with the current FAQ'd profile, where it lost one S and d3D got replaced with flat D2
It's basic gun (Accelerator cannon) little more than glorified autocannon now with the current status. True, it is fairly durable and mobile, and shoots 8 times on 2+, but still...

What are your thoughts? Is the price or the nerf justified?

It was totally broken before the nerf. Every Custodes player that could afford it bought three of them and used them.

1. 3+/5++ Invulnerable save
2. 14" move with flying
3. 2+ BS
4. Ignores the moving and shooting heavy weapons penalty
5. Units that charge it are -2" to the charge

It's main gun (Twin Illiastus Accelerator Autocannon emphasis mine as its a glorified autocannon because, well, it is) is 60" range, S7, -3 AP (again, the same as other heavy weapons), and the "only" downside is 2 wounds. The tank has a weapon that is S7, -3 AP, shots 8 times, and can do a possible 16 wounds of damage. On a 200 point flying tank. Imperial Knights are 400-500 points and still don't have that kind of fire power. Never mind the other 6 shots at 36" S6 AP-1 W1.

How exactly, is it "underwhelming"?

Edited because I was using the old Twin Illiastus Accelerator Autocannon stats. Don't be fooled like I was! The correct sheets are at the GW Community site: Updated Custodes Profile PDF

I will now proceed to print it out and "throw" it at my local Custodes opponent who has been using the old datasheets.

It's still pretty great post nerf, especially when you bring three of them.

Add in a Vexilla and the -1 to hit is pretty major too for non marine armies.

Not underwhelming in the slightest.

The original profile (still available on the FW website) still lists the S8 d3D weapon profile you listed, but in some errata (can't find where atm) (also in battlescribe), it is S7 -3AP 2D damage.

And that is what I think is underwhelming for 200+ points.
I played against the Death Guard and it did nearly nothing to their drones and rhinos.

 Hawky wrote:

And that is what I think is underwhelming for 200+ points.
I played against the Death Guard and it did nearly nothing to their drones and rhinos.

Because you fired a weapon made specifically to kill heavy infantry at vehicles. Want an anti-armor Caladius? Start packing the Blaze Cannon.

 Hawky wrote:
I played against the Death Guard and it did nearly nothing to their drones and rhinos.

This is actually quite puzzling to me. Against DG, most targets are T5 or higher, making the difference between S8 and S7 meaningless. You wound on 3s in most cases for either strength.
DG also have Resilience saves, so they will shrug off 1/3 of the damage dealt.

So it sounds more like you played against the ONE army that Calladius is 'meh' against. But as others are stating (and I agree) the Calladius is one of those FW units that actually are pretty amazing overall. As a Eldar player, I'd kill for that kind of firepower on a 200pt skimmer (and Eldar don't really lack for firepower, so that gives you an idea of just how good it is)

-

 Hawky wrote:
The original profile (still available on the FW website) still lists the S8 d3D weapon profile you listed, but in some errata (can't find where atm) (also in battlescribe), it is S7 -3AP 2D damage.

It's on the WarCom Download page - link. (The Main Studio is doing all 40k FW rules now so check there first)

 Hawky wrote:
The original profile (still available on the FW website) still lists the S8 d3D weapon profile you listed, but in some errata (can't find where atm) (also in battlescribe), it is S7 -3AP 2D damage. .

Never trust battlescribe, especially when it conflicts with original GW documents. Where is this other errata? I've looked in the Codex: Adeptus Custodes Errata, the September 2019 Update, the CA 2018 errata, Chapter Approved 2018, and I've looked at the Forge World Download section. I can't believe I really have to check so many possible areas for errata, With so many possible locations, I could have totally missed it somewhere. So where is this other errata so I can throw it into my local opponent's face every time I play against his three Calladius tanks?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

beast_gts wrote:

 Hawky wrote:
The original profile (still available on the FW website) still lists the S8 d3D weapon profile you listed, but in some errata (can't find where atm) (also in battlescribe), it is S7 -3AP 2D damage.

It's on the WarCom Download page - link. (The Main Studio is doing all 40k FW rules now so check there first)

The page you download from Forge World is different from the link you provided beast_gts. Did Forge World mess up and not include this "corrected profile"? The URL directs to Forge World, but you can't access that link from the Forge World website.

 Galef wrote:

 Hawky wrote:
I played against the Death Guard and it did nearly nothing to their drones and rhinos.

This is actually quite puzzling to me. Against DG, most targets are T5 or higher, making the difference between S8 and S7 meaningless. You wound on 3s in most cases for either strength.
DG also have Resilience saves, so they will shrug off 1/3 of the damage dealt.

So it sounds more like you played against the ONE army that Calladius is 'meh' against. But as others are stating (and I agree) the Calladius is one of those FW units that actually are pretty amazing overall. As a Eldar player, I'd kill for that kind of firepower on a 200pt skimmer (and Eldar don't really lack for firepower, so that gives you an idea of just how good it is)

-

What's puzzling here, when the comment is on Drones and Rhinos where it isn't meaningless at all? Both are T7 vehicles, where the drop from S8 -> S7 is a significant cut in power. Said gun is not great antitank, not getting great results against tanks is the expected outcome (moreso on Drones, that have DR on top).

 Tamwulf wrote:
The page you download from Forge World is different from the link you provided beast_gts. Did Forge World mess up and not include this "corrected profile"? The URL directs to Forge World, but you can't access that link from the Forge World website.

The forgeworld site links to the wrong pdf.

This one is (to my knowledge) up to date -
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/PDF/fw_warscrolls/40K_Adeptus_Custodes_FW_Datasheets_Ares.pdf

You can tell if you are using the newer version by looking at the Sagittarum entry - if they are troops it's the new rules, if they have heavy they are the old rules.
And as noted the Iliastus cannons being strength 7.

I love all the people that claim the numbers of Battlescribe are not trustworthy, but won't actually do the legwork to disprove the claim the numbers provide.

The anti-infantry cannon is a 8x 60" S7 -3AP D2 gun.

The Anti-tank one is 2x 48" S9 AP-4 D3+3, with re-rolls on wounds, OR 8x 36" S7 AP-2 D1. You pick the profile.

One is great at mulching Primaris and NuChaos boys, one is for mulching Knights and other T8 beasties.

A.T. wrote:

 Tamwulf wrote:
The page you download from Forge World is different from the link you provided beast_gts. Did Forge World mess up and not include this "corrected profile"? The URL directs to Forge World, but you can't access that link from the Forge World website.

The forgeworld site links to the wrong pdf.

This one is (to my knowledge) up to date -
https://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/PDF/fw_warscrolls/40K_Adeptus_Custodes_FW_Datasheets_Ares.pdf

You can tell if you are using the newer version by looking at the Sagittarum entry - if they are troops it's the new rules, if they have heavy they are the old rules.
And as noted the Iliastus cannons being strength 7.

Having a quick look at WarCom, the most recent announcement I can see is 30/08/2019 - Death on Golden Wings and Middle-earth™ Heroes, which is the release of the Ares Gunship. The link in that article is the same one I posted earlier. The link off the Ares Gunship page has a different address, but appears to be the same (version numbers would help!).

OK, did some more digging.

From the GW Community Pages, upper right side of the front page, under "FAQ & Useful Things", it has a downloads section that looks exactly like the GW Downloads page, right down to the background and URL's, except the GW one is https://www.warhammer-community.com/faqs/#, and the Warhammer Community page is https://www.warhammer-community.com/downloads/. What a mess!

The Calladus Grav tank lost one point of S, and it's damage changed to a flat 2, which still makes it a very good weapon at -3 AP. It's damage is not as "swingy" with a 8-24, but flat 16 possible wounds. It changes target priority a bit now, meaning it's not the "one weapon wonder" is was before, but I would argue in a lot of ways, it's better with the flat damage output. You'll need 5's to wound the really tough stuff, just like all the other armies in the game. Intuitively, the math will still work out in your favor shooting the gun at T8 targets or better with 8 shots instead of one LasCannon shot, or even two LasCannon shots.

I've edited my above response to include this "new data", new data for me anyways.

 Sherrypie wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 Hawky wrote:
I played against the Death Guard and it did nearly nothing to their drones and rhinos.

This is actually quite puzzling to me. Against DG, most targets are T5 or higher, making the difference between S8 and S7 meaningless. You wound on 3s in most cases for either strength.
DG also have Resilience saves, so they will shrug off 1/3 of the damage dealt.

So it sounds more like you played against the ONE army that Calladius is 'meh' against. But as others are stating (and I agree) the Calladius is one of those FW units that actually are pretty amazing overall. As a Eldar player, I'd kill for that kind of firepower on a 200pt skimmer (and Eldar don't really lack for firepower, so that gives you an idea of just how good it is)

-

What's puzzling here, when the comment is on Drones and Rhinos where it isn't meaningless at all? Both are T7 vehicles, where the drop from S8 -> S7 is a significant cut in power. Said gun is not great antitank, not getting great results against tanks is the expected outcome (moreso on Drones, that have DR on top).

I was puzzled that the OP was disappointed when they were targeting the wrong things

-

GW need to wean themselves off the D-random damage full stop.

They attempted to streamline 8th but it is heading the way of the clusterfeth with errata, FAQs, CA, etc.

At this rate 6/7th will look positively smooth in comparison.

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
GW need to wean themselves off the D-random damage full stop.

They attempted to streamline 8th but it is heading the way of the clusterfeth with errata, FAQs, CA, etc.

At this rate 6/7th will look positively smooth in comparison.

The "nerf" to the Calladius was much needed. Like I said above though, a flat 2D instead of d3D is much better in a lot of ways, Who hasn't shot a LasCannon, hit, and then rolled a 1 for damage? You pay a stupid amount of points for that LasCannon, and then you have to roll a d6 for damage? Seriously?!?! One LasCannon shot will on average, do 3 damage. The Calladius, with it's gun, shoots 8 times as much as that LasCannon, and all it has to do is wound twice to beat the average LasCannon, three times to meet the maximum, and four times to exceed the maximum damage potential of a LasCannon. You can do the math, but:

Six shooting phases in a game, means only 6 LasCannon shots, or 48 Autocannon shots. Maximum wounds: LC 36, AC 96. During an average game, you'll probably only hit with 3-4 of those LC shots, and one will probably be saved, meaning 6-9 wounds on average unless you spend CP's for rerolls. The Autocannon? 40 shots hit, let's say 20 wound (4+), meaning around 14 will penetrate the save... that's 28 wounds over the course of a game. Lots of assumptions there, of course different armies with a LasCannon will perform better or worse, there is the shot degrading profile of most vehicles, to hit modifiers, etc. etc. It's hard to quantify all the variables for a LasCannon vs. Twin Illiastus Accelerator Autocannon, but I'd still say it's a fantastic weapon on a great tank, and it will do a lot of work for that player. Even vs. the MEQ of a Predator tank with TLLC, the Calladius just beats it hands down in all scenarios. Even looking at a TLLC, that's still only a maximum of 72 wounds, but on average, 36 wounds, or 12-21 average wounds after saves and such in a game. Pre-nerf, the Twin Illiastus Accelerator Autocannon was BONKERS Great. Now, it's just "merely" great outperforming LasCannons.

Volume of fire and fixed damage wins games, not single shot, swingy d6 damage.

So Lascannons were, or used to be, great anti-tank weapons when we had Armor values instead of saves. Your 25 shots of S5 back then wouldn't do much against the front armor save of a baneblade.

Now with "saves" everything has the "potential" with a D6 system to do something akin to damage.

What we need to do is go back to armor values. So a Lascannon, or something like it, is the only things you should be shooting at tanks. It's ridiculous how the NuScouts have the Anti-Tank weapons now. It boggles my mind how there still isn't a good Devastator equivalent with S8/9 weapons. Don't say Hellblasters, those are not anti-tank, they are anti-elite.

The calidius's autocannon, might outdamage lazcannons by a good bit, but its also a lot more expensive.

90pts for the gun. That's 4 1/2 lascannons worth in points. That's a potential 27 dmg at 48" range compared to the 16 dmg at 60" range and 2 less strength.

Being that its an autocannon it is obviously better at taking out smaller targets than a lazcannon and it is fired from a durable platform with better accuracy.

That being said, I think it should only be 80 pts instead of 90, but that's probably just because I play with custodes.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
I love all the people that claim the numbers of Battlescribe are not trustworthy, but won't actually do the legwork to disprove the claim the numbers provide.

The anti-infantry cannon is a 8x 60" S7 -3AP D2 gun.

The Anti-tank one is 2x 48" S9 AP-4 D3+3, with re-rolls on wounds, OR 8x 36" S7 AP-2 D1. You pick the profile.

One is great at mulching Primaris and NuChaos boys, one is for mulching Knights and other T8 beasties.

Battlescribe is incredibly accurate for points. It's not the best for figuring out if a list is legal or if a unit can take an upgrade or not.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Eihnlazer wrote:
The calidius's autocannon, might outdamage lazcannons by a good bit, but its also a lot more expensive.

90pts for the gun. That's 4 1/2 lascannons worth in points. That's a potential 27 dmg at 48" range compared to the 16 dmg at 60" range and 2 less strength.

Being that its an autocannon it is obviously better at taking out smaller targets than a lazcannon and it is fired from a durable platform with better accuracy.

That being said, I think it should only be 80 pts instead of 90, but that's probably just because I play with custodes.

Compare this tank to a predator with 4 LC then. Be amazed how terrible the predator is in comparison for the points.

Next time, if you want to take out vehicles, use the ANTI-TANK weapon.

Shocking, I know.

90pts for the gun. That's 4 1/2 lascannons worth in points. That's a potential 27 dmg at 48" range compared to the 16 dmg at 60" range and 2 less strength.

On a unit that has the FLY keyword, a 2+ BS, a -2 against charges, a 5++ and a 14" movement. You also have to pay for that.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So Lascannons were, or used to be, great anti-tank weapons when we had Armor values instead of saves. Your 25 shots of S5 back then wouldn't do much against the front armor save of a baneblade.

Now with "saves" everything has the "potential" with a D6 system to do something akin to damage.

What we need to do is go back to armor values. So a Lascannon, or something like it, is the only things you should be shooting at tanks. It's ridiculous how the NuScouts have the Anti-Tank weapons now. It boggles my mind how there still isn't a good Devastator equivalent with S8/9 weapons. Don't say Hellblasters, those are not anti-tank, they are anti-elite.

Oh, I am right there with you. Going off topic: My main army right now is Primaris Ultramarines, and I use two squads of Eliminators (one Sniper Bolt Rifle, the other LasFusils), and a Repulsor Executioner for my Primary Anti-tank, and I have two units of Supressors for light Anti-tank, backed up with Grenade Launchers in my Intersessors. I would love to see a Primaris Devastator squad. I used to play the Hellblaster Castle (Hellblasters, Captain, Lieutenant, Ancient and Apothecary). I hated the static, just stand still and shoot a lot nature of it, and the amount of points for it was abhorrent. It was OK and really the only way to play the new Primaris Space Marines until the new codex dropped. Seriously, if I could field a Primaris Devastator squad, with say LasFusils, Heavy Plasma Incinerators, Heavy Bolters, or Missile Launchers as options... but we can't (yet), and it probably won't happen for a while. I am very happy that we have Eliminators, the Executioner, and Supressors now. I hardly ever use the Hellblasters anymore. I'd probably take a Redemptor Dread if it had a LasCannon option. Instead, my Redemptors have been replaced with Invictors. It's not that Space Marines lack LasCannons, it's that Primaris Space Marines lack LasCannons.

 FezzikDaBullgryn wrote:
So Lascannons were, or used to be, great anti-tank weapons when we had Armor values instead of saves. Your 25 shots of S5 back then wouldn't do much against the front armor save of a baneblade.

Now with "saves" everything has the "potential" with a D6 system to do something akin to damage.

What we need to do is go back to armor values. So a Lascannon, or something like it, is the only things you should be shooting at tanks. It's ridiculous how the NuScouts have the Anti-Tank weapons now. It boggles my mind how there still isn't a good Devastator equivalent with S8/9 weapons. Don't say Hellblasters, those are not anti-tank, they are anti-elite.

The funny thing is that I can't really remember a time when Lascannons were ever really considered to be good anti-tank to be honest. Back in 5th ed, they weren't priced competitively compared to meltaguns who had AP1 which at the time made blowing up vehicles much likelier to happen, and being heavy at that time meant it was only good on certain vehicles, which could really only effectively be spammed with undercosted Vendettas back then as part of the Leafblower list. I also remember missile launchers being seen a lot more because of their cheaper cost and that the flexibility between krak and frag missiles, at least for devastator squads. Skip forward to 6th-7th ed, and AP2 actually did something on the damage table but it was held back again, this time with how HP worked and that it was more efficient to strip them through glancing rather than killing them in one shot, meaning autocannon equivalents and stuff like Grav-cannons were the to go to rather than lascannons, which were again both too expensive and in a design paradigm where they didn't do their job effectively. Now Lascannons have both the relevant strength and AP in 8th, but the variable damage makes them poop, make it so lascannons treat rolls of 1, 2, and 3 as damage 3 like the Neutron Laser and you have something that could reliably deal 12 consistently high damage rather than fluffing your damage rolls and getting 4 1's for 4 lascannons.

 Tamwulf wrote:

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
GW need to wean themselves off the D-random damage full stop.

They attempted to streamline 8th but it is heading the way of the clusterfeth with errata, FAQs, CA, etc.

At this rate 6/7th will look positively smooth in comparison.

The "nerf" to the Calladius was much needed. Like I said above though, a flat 2D instead of d3D is much better in a lot of ways, Who hasn't shot a LasCannon, hit, and then rolled a 1 for damage? You pay a stupid amount of points for that LasCannon, and then you have to roll a d6 for damage? Seriously?!?! One LasCannon shot will on average, do 3 damage. The Calladius, with it's gun, shoots 8 times as much as that LasCannon, and all it has to do is wound twice to beat the average LasCannon, three times to meet the maximum, and four times to exceed the maximum damage potential of a LasCannon. You can do the math, but:

Six shooting phases in a game, means only 6 LasCannon shots, or 48 Autocannon shots. Maximum wounds: LC 36, AC 96. During an average game, you'll probably only hit with 3-4 of those LC shots, and one will probably be saved, meaning 6-9 wounds on average unless you spend CP's for rerolls. The Autocannon? 40 shots hit, let's say 20 wound (4+), meaning around 14 will penetrate the save... that's 28 wounds over the course of a game. Lots of assumptions there, of course different armies with a LasCannon will perform better or worse, there is the shot degrading profile of most vehicles, to hit modifiers, etc. etc. It's hard to quantify all the variables for a LasCannon vs. Twin Illiastus Accelerator Autocannon, but I'd still say it's a fantastic weapon on a great tank, and it will do a lot of work for that player. Even vs. the MEQ of a Predator tank with TLLC, the Calladius just beats it hands down in all scenarios. Even looking at a TLLC, that's still only a maximum of 72 wounds, but on average, 36 wounds, or 12-21 average wounds after saves and such in a game. Pre-nerf, the Twin Illiastus Accelerator Autocannon was BONKERS Great. Now, it's just "merely" great outperforming LasCannons.

Volume of fire and fixed damage wins games, not single shot, swingy d6 damage.

Chill out...I was making a general statement about the rules. Not one model.

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:

 Tamwulf wrote:

 NoiseMarine with Tinnitus wrote:
GW need to wean themselves off the D-random damage full stop.

They attempted to streamline 8th but it is heading the way of the clusterfeth with errata, FAQs, CA, etc.

At this rate 6/7th will look positively smooth in comparison.

The "nerf" to the Calladius was much needed. Like I said above though, a flat 2D instead of d3D is much better in a lot of ways, Who hasn't shot a LasCannon, hit, and then rolled a 1 for damage? You pay a stupid amount of points for that LasCannon, and then you have to roll a d6 for damage? Seriously?!?! One LasCannon shot will on average, do 3 damage. The Calladius, with it's gun, shoots 8 times as much as that LasCannon, and all it has to do is wound twice to beat the average LasCannon, three times to meet the maximum, and four times to exceed the maximum damage potential of a LasCannon. You can do the math, but:

Six shooting phases in a game, means only 6 LasCannon shots, or 48 Autocannon shots. Maximum wounds: LC 36, AC 96. During an average game, you'll probably only hit with 3-4 of those LC shots, and one will probably be saved, meaning 6-9 wounds on average unless you spend CP's for rerolls. The Autocannon? 40 shots hit, let's say 20 wound (4+), meaning around 14 will penetrate the save... that's 28 wounds over the course of a game. Lots of assumptions there, of course different armies with a LasCannon will perform better or worse, there is the shot degrading profile of most vehicles, to hit modifiers, etc. etc. It's hard to quantify all the variables for a LasCannon vs. Twin Illiastus Accelerator Autocannon, but I'd still say it's a fantastic weapon on a great tank, and it will do a lot of work for that player. Even vs. the MEQ of a Predator tank with TLLC, the Calladius just beats it hands down in all scenarios. Even looking at a TLLC, that's still only a maximum of 72 wounds, but on average, 36 wounds, or 12-21 average wounds after saves and such in a game. Pre-nerf, the Twin Illiastus Accelerator Autocannon was BONKERS Great. Now, it's just "merely" great outperforming LasCannons.

Volume of fire and fixed damage wins games, not single shot, swingy d6 damage.

Chill out...I was making a general statement about the rules. Not one model.

I agree with you. The game is far too random. If I could have one thing, it would be to move the game to a d20 system, and give automatic hits/damage to certain weapons. A blast from a Sunfury plasma Incinerator should literally remove any unit it hits, non-titan. Guard squad - gone. Lehman russ - Gone. Necron squad - gone. Squad of golden dickbikes - gone.

Same basic principal on Lascannons. You shouldn't have to roll damage if you get hit with a gun that costs more, hits less, and generally is worse in every category except S and AP.

I think the Caladius is still one of the best custodes units going from S8 to S7 is a big nerf sure but is was a bit OP before and going from d3 dmg to 2 dmg is a buff. And it also droped 10p in CA19.
I went to small tournament this weekend and brought 3 Caladius tanks an they were very good in all games.

So the Calli will always be a main stay of any competitive Custard force, just due to the survivability, the fly rule, the PotMS, and the Dakka they bring, for the cost. For almost the same as a squad of bikes, You get some pretty awesome shooting, and a great backfield obj camper. Pair a trio up with a flag and Trajann, and you have your very own Golden Deathstar.

The drop from str 8 to 7 was understandable.

You shouldn't have one gun be the best at everything.

It was actually a good nerf, because it make the blaze cannon actually worth looking at. Yes it means Custodes don't have any cost effective long range anti-armor, but at least their durable (or they would be if everything didn't ignore their 2+ save).


Im actually quite happy with the caladius where it is right now, however I am disappointed with my aquillon terminators.

They simply don't have any reliable way to make it into melee (which means they almost never get their points back).

Custodes desperately need some kind of universal buff in their psychic awakening release to help with getting into melee.


My personal suggestion was allowing them to reroll 1's when they charge or giving them some sort of situational boost like +2 to charge for a unit that killed a model from the unit they are charging.

Sterling191 wrote:

 Hawky wrote:

And that is what I think is underwhelming for 200+ points.
I played against the Death Guard and it did nearly nothing to their drones and rhinos.

Because you fired a weapon made specifically to kill heavy infantry at vehicles. Want an anti-armor Caladius? Start packing the Blaze Cannon.

I mean, it used to be a crossover anti-light-vehicle gun in 30k, or do you normally give "+1 on the vehicle damage table" and "ignores jink saves" to anti-infantry weapons?