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.
Hi,
I am painting an unit of Space marine Aggressors, and I am about to place the decals.
While looking at references, I am surpirsse that most people, including official art on the box of the unit, shows heavy support symbols on the shoulder pads, instead of elite icons.
Is that an error on games workshop or Aggressors are actually heavy support units? Or they were in the past and they have been changed to Elites, thus explaining the oficial art as just not being up to date with the rules?
Serve the Emperor today, for tomorrow you may be be dead.
Painting blog:
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/793314.page
Battlefield roles for Detachment purposes have nothing to do with in-universe ones.
In-universe, Aggressors are a Fire Support unit. Fire Support borrows the old Devastator icon.
For army building purposes, Aggressors are Elites.
Supporessors are a Fire Support unit that are chosen in a Fast Attack slot, and Hellblasters are Fire Support units that fill out the Heavy Support role.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/01/29 00:28:18
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
I believe that in official Chapter designations, they fill a Fire Support (read, Heavy Support) designation, but that doesn't mean that they follow the same for their tabletop role.
In fact, quite a few Primaris units have that going on:
Incursors, despite being Troops in game, are actually a Close Support unit (like Assault Marines).
Reivers, which are Elites in game, are also Close Support units.
Suppressors, a Fast Attack choice, are marked in fluff as Fire Support.
An older example is for Assault Centurions - they're technically supposed to be Close Support, like Assault Squads, but in game, take up an Elites slot.
The way I rectify this for my homebrew Chapter is that my guys have a slightly altered unit designation - so, for me, my Suppressors are completely a Close Support unit, Incursors serve as a Battleline unit, and Aggressors can be fielded in both a role as Fire Support, or making up large chunks of my 1st Company, a la Terminator Squads.
JohnnyHell wrote: Battlefield roles for Detachment purposes have nothing to do with in-universe ones.
In-universe, Aggressors are a Fire Support unit. Fire Support borrows the old Devastator icon.
For army building purposes, Aggressors are Elites.
Supporessors are a Fire Support unit that are chosen in a Fast Attack slot, and Hellblasters are Fire Support units that fill out the Heavy Support role.
They're plainly not a fire support unit when their weapons are short ranged and they have close assault gear. They're an assault unit, hence "aggressor".
JohnnyHell wrote: Battlefield roles for Detachment purposes have nothing to do with in-universe ones.
In-universe, Aggressors are a Fire Support unit. Fire Support borrows the old Devastator icon.
For army building purposes, Aggressors are Elites.
Supporessors are a Fire Support unit that are chosen in a Fast Attack slot, and Hellblasters are Fire Support units that fill out the Heavy Support role.
They're plainly not a fire support unit when their weapons are short ranged and they have close assault gear. They're an assault unit, hence "aggressor".
I didn’t write their fluff or decide their designation. That triangle that used to mean ‘Devastator’ is on all three units I used by way of illustration and now stands for ‘Fire Support’. Go read the Codex. GW decided they are Fire Support.
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
JohnnyHell wrote: Battlefield roles for Detachment purposes have nothing to do with in-universe ones.
In-universe, Aggressors are a Fire Support unit. Fire Support borrows the old Devastator icon.
For army building purposes, Aggressors are Elites.
Supporessors are a Fire Support unit that are chosen in a Fast Attack slot, and Hellblasters are Fire Support units that fill out the Heavy Support role.
They're plainly not a fire support unit when their weapons are short ranged and they have close assault gear. They're an assault unit, hence "aggressor".
Range doesn’t really mean anything though.
That’s like saying a devastator squad with multi Melta loadout isn’t fire support as it’s close range compared to the same but with lascannons.
Also, how would this characterisation work for some older marine stuff like siege tyrants?
Cyclone missile, TL bolter and a power fist.
They literally have a weapon for long, medium and close range.
And just to muddy the waters further there's also 'future-proofing' to consider. I've finished painting over half my Marine collection and I'm seriously considering going back and replacing all of the squad markings with just a company badge so that when GW inevitably rearranges what options are legal for units in the future I don't have to do a re-badging project to make their squad markings line up properly again.
Here's my thread, Aggressors are at bottom. You can see I gave mine same as i'd put on assault marines. I see them more of a Support role but not Heavy Support.
Insectum7 wrote: They're plainly not a fire support unit when their weapons are short ranged and they have close assault gear. They're an assault unit, hence "aggressor".
According to GW and the Codex markings, they're a Fire Support unit.
There's also plenty of cases of Fire Support/Heavy Support units being relatively short ranged - multimelta Devastators and grav-amp Centurions are only 24" range (only 6" more than Aggressors with boltstorm gauntlets) and Legion Heavy Support Squads could be all outfitted with heavy flamers, yet would still have occupied the same rough designation.
They're called a Fire Support unit because they just have lots of dakka, not because it needs to be long ranged.
Insectum7 wrote: They're plainly not a fire support unit when their weapons are short ranged and they have close assault gear. They're an assault unit, hence "aggressor".
According to GW and the Codex markings, they're a Fire Support unit.
There's also plenty of cases of Fire Support/Heavy Support units being relatively short ranged - multimelta Devastators and grav-amp Centurions are only 24" range (only 6" more than Aggressors with boltstorm gauntlets) and Legion Heavy Support Squads could be all outfitted with heavy flamers, yet would still have occupied the same rough designation.
They're called a Fire Support unit because they just have lots of dakka, not because it needs to be long ranged.
Well I'm just going to shock everybody and say the unthinkable. Maybe GW is wrong.
Fire Support while being right up in the enemy's face isn't so much "supporting" as in "directly engaging". If you're moving quickly to close the distance you're "assaulting".
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
the entire argument is irrelevant anyway as it's not "fire support" but "heavy support" in other words "heavy weapons etc"
and by that standard yes agressors certainly qualify. they're heavy gun platforms designed to deliver, on a per man basis, extreme amounts of firepower to support their comrades.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
BrianDavion wrote: the entire argument is irrelevant anyway as it's not "fire support" but "heavy support" in other words "heavy weapons etc"
and by that standard yes agressors certainly qualify. they're heavy gun platforms designed to deliver, on a per man basis, extreme amounts of firepower to support their comrades.
The discussion was around lore and GW’s (and other’s) schemes using the triangle not the skull/cross on their pauldrons. Your post would be true if you were correct on the designations, but you’re not...
The force org slot is called Heavy Support, when you’re picking armies. The icon is a stylised explosion.
The Aggressors’ designated in-universe role *is* Fire Support. The icon is a chevron or triangle. Otherwise I agree they fit the role name perfectly, but it is Fire Support. Obviously people are free to “your doods” it however they like and paint whatever markings they want on their army.
Stormonu wrote: For me, the joy is in putting some good-looking models on the board and playing out a fantasy battle - not arguing over the poorly-made rules of some 3rd party who neither has any power over my play nor will be visiting me (and my opponent) to ensure we are "playing by the rules"
BrianDavion wrote: the entire argument is irrelevant anyway as it's not "fire support" but "heavy support" in other words "heavy weapons etc"
and by that standard yes agressors certainly qualify. they're heavy gun platforms designed to deliver, on a per man basis, extreme amounts of firepower to support their comrades.
The discussion was around lore and GW’s (and other’s) schemes using the triangle not the skull/cross on their pauldrons. Your post would be true if you were correct on the designations, but you’re not...
The force org slot is called Heavy Support, when you’re picking armies. The icon is a stylised explosion.
The Aggressors’ designated in-universe role *is* Fire Support. The icon is a chevron or triangle. Otherwise I agree they fit the role name perfectly, but it is Fire Support. Obviously people are free to “your doods” it however they like and paint whatever markings they want on their army.
Ahh you;re right it is fire support. eaither way it makes sense. fire support can be long range but it can also be close range heavy weapons, I don't see an issue with agressors being fire support.
Opinions are not facts please don't confuse the two
BrianDavion wrote: the entire argument is irrelevant anyway as it's not "fire support" but "heavy support" in other words "heavy weapons etc"
and by that standard yes agressors certainly qualify. they're heavy gun platforms designed to deliver, on a per man basis, extreme amounts of firepower to support their comrades.
The discussion was around lore and GW’s (and other’s) schemes using the triangle not the skull/cross on their pauldrons. Your post would be true if you were correct on the designations, but you’re not...
The force org slot is called Heavy Support, when you’re picking armies. The icon is a stylised explosion.
The Aggressors’ designated in-universe role *is* Fire Support. The icon is a chevron or triangle. Otherwise I agree they fit the role name perfectly, but it is Fire Support. Obviously people are free to “your doods” it however they like and paint whatever markings they want on their army.
Ahh you;re right it is fire support. eaither way it makes sense. fire support can be long range but it can also be close range heavy weapons, I don't see an issue with agressors being fire support.
Makes less sense when the effective weapon range is only half of the effective range of the troops they're supposed to be supporting.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_support
I don't really care for what GW have to say. The creator of .GIF says it's a Jif. But we all ignore them and say no gif.
Same here for gW and fire support. The dudes have short range many shots and power fists. They can advance and still shoot, (without taking penalty). The dudes are assault.
JohnnyHell wrote: https://lmgtfy.com/?q=siege+tyrant
Doesn’t take long to Google something.
It doesn't. But I didn't care enough to do so.
Either way the designation works better for Terminators armed with Cyclones because Cyclones have a much farther engagement range (presumably 48" since HH is based off pre-8th Ed). As in, they can support forces from beyond the local firefight/contact.
5500
2500 
