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.

To preface, we don't want to just buy more models and shelf the ones we have.
I'm also not too keen on the Phobos armor in mass. It's ok for a model or 2 (my boys use Reiver models with power swords as thier Intercessor Sgts).
So I want to find a way to make all my sons' Intercessors into Incursors.

My son had a pretty rough 1st 9th game and we are trying to make tweaks to make his army better.
Since I use Eldar with the "always cover" trait, I was thinking Incursors would be a good choice. Ignoring my cover would be the same as having AP1, so he wouldn't lose any damage output there, plus they ignore hit mods, which Eldar have plenty.
Concealed positions would also help him get onto objectives faster and put more forward units in theat range.

So how can I make his existing 10 Intercessors into Incursors? Just add little box arrays on their packs and scopes on thier rifles? Making the Haywire mine markers would be simple enough.
Constructive suggestions are appreciated

-

Random suggestion:
Would grabbing a box be out of the question?

I ask because Incursors actually work well in MSU, I've found. Since you can only take one Haywire Mine per squad anyways, getting 2 squads out of a single box is a lot better than not.

You'd then have extra helmets, weapons, etc for if your boys decide they want the Vanguard Start Collecting later.

 Kanluwen wrote:
Random suggestion:
Would grabbing a box be out of the question?

I ask because Incursors actually work well in MSU, I've found. Since you can only take one Haywire Mine per squad anyways, getting 2 squads out of a single box is a lot better than not.

You'd then have extra helmets, weapons, etc for if your boys decide they want the Vanguard Start Collecting later.

unfortunately yeah getting a box is a no-go. I just bought them some Assault Intercessors to fully upgrade their Troops to Primaris.
But I agree 2x5 Incursors would be best.
For their Battalions, I was thinking 2x5 Incursors and 1x5 Assault Intercessors could be an ideal setup. We play smaller games anyway

I think since their Intercessor Sgts are in Phobos armour (Reivers) I may just put some targeting gear on them unless I can scrounge up enough for the whole squads.
That plus converting several mine markers should be enough of a visual queue for us to know they are Incursors for this edition.

-

It's as you said, I would add antennae and such to the helmets and the backpacks, beyond that, you could add more of the pouches that SM carry in areas to make them look more vanguardy, and then I'd recommend adding a grenade or 2 to the chest of the intercessors like the phobos guys have.

Maybe a different paint scheme on the helmet to tell them apart too, but thats my 2 cents, hope I could help

Cool thanx. I also think it's important to note that we'd be using Incursors or Intercessors in any game but never both so we can avoid confusion.
My bits box is at my house right now and I'm working from home at our apartment (we're in process of moving) so it'll be a while before I can thoroughly go through my bits.

Between my 2 boys we have 4x5 Intercessors, each with a Reiver Sgt with power sword.
I'm confident I have enough bitz-n-bobs to upgrade all 4 Sgts to have targeting arrays and such.
I'm not as confident that I'll be able to upgrade the other 16 Joe's, but we'll find out eventually. Since there is no stat line difference between them, we'd probably be fine just keeping those as-is if I can't find enough bits to add

-

I used left-over Stalker bolt rifle parts to make boxy things to put on my Reivers backpacks. Cut of the scope and the magazine and you have the basic shape. I then used the magazine of oldmarine bolters as stand as they fit exactly in the gap. Then I glued a small round and a rectangle plastic bits on there for the lenses.

I only had enough matching bits for the 4 Sgts

I mean......... you could just change your eldar chapter tactics.

Just use Imperial Fists Chapter Tactics. Now you have no problems

BrianDavion wrote:
I mean......... you could just change your eldar chapter tactics.

The main issue is board control. Almost every Eldar unit I own is fast...that's kinda why I play them in the first place.
But by changing his Intercessors into Incursors, he gets to put more units up close to support his other units instead of just feeding them to me piecemeal.
I do want to get him a pair of Invictor warsuits eventually. Those things scare the heck out of me in smaller games.

-

 Galef wrote:
So how can I make his existing 10 Intercessors into Incursors? Just add little box arrays on their packs and scopes on thier rifles?

Simplest and cheapest way to make them look the part is using oldmarine arms/bolters, helmets, and backpacks (adding scopes to bolters and targeting arrays to backpacks to make them look 100% accurate, or just use Deathwatch or Devastator backpacks). I think this would satisfy even the strictest WYSIWYG because then only the armour mark would differentiate them from the real Incursors.

Not trying to derail the topic but just reading the title made it click (again) that the names GW decided to go with for all the Primaris units are very non descriptive fluff words. At least with the old stuff like "Tactical" " Assault" "Terminators" etc where commonly heard of generic words but all of this stuff sounds like made up gibberish.

 Vankraken wrote:
very non descriptive fluff words

Inceptor - "one who starts" (battle). Perfectly descriptive.
Incursor - "assaulter/attacker" ironically being functionally identical to your Assault squad example.
Reiver - "someone who raids behind enemy lines". Ditto.
Hellblaster - if blasting enemies with hot fire isn't descriptive, I don't know what is.
Infiltrator - seriously?
Intercessor - "someone between" (enemies and supporting units), IE frontline unit.
Eliminator, Suppressor, Eradicator - you were saying?

If anything, faux-Latin focus fits the setting much better than tacticool names like Tactical or Devastator squad, I'd say.

 Irbis wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
very non descriptive fluff words

Inceptor - "one who starts" (battle). Perfectly descriptive.
Incursor - "assaulter/attacker" ironically being functionally identical to your Assault squad example.
Reiver - "someone who raids behind enemy lines". Ditto.
Hellblaster - if blasting enemies with hot fire isn't descriptive, I don't know what is.
Infiltrator - seriously?
Intercessor - "someone between" (enemies and supporting units), IE frontline unit.
Eliminator, Suppressor, Eradicator - you were saying?

If anything, faux-Latin focus fits the setting much better than tacticool names like Tactical or Devastator squad, I'd say.

Haha, what? You're saying Devastator is 'tacticool' while Eliminator isn't somehow? And you're going to beef with "Assault" when that's the function?

Okay

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Irbis wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
very non descriptive fluff words

Inceptor - "one who starts" (battle). Perfectly descriptive.
Incursor - "assaulter/attacker" ironically being functionally identical to your Assault squad example.
Reiver - "someone who raids behind enemy lines". Ditto.
Hellblaster - if blasting enemies with hot fire isn't descriptive, I don't know what is.
Infiltrator - seriously?
Intercessor - "someone between" (enemies and supporting units), IE frontline unit.
Eliminator, Suppressor, Eradicator - you were saying?

If anything, faux-Latin focus fits the setting much better than tacticool names like Tactical or Devastator squad, I'd say.

Haha, what? You're saying Devastator is 'tacticool' while Eliminator isn't somehow? And you're going to beef with "Assault" when that's the function?

Okay

This is a great highlight of the problem with Primaris names; the similarity, not the dog latin vs tacticool.

Old marine: Devistator, scout, stern-guard, terminator, tactical, vanguard. even if the first letter is the same each name is distinct.

Primaris: Inceptor, Incursor, Intercessor, Eliminator, Eradicator. Heck of a mess of in_ starting sound combined with a c/s sound and the E_ ones are conceptually are close (is there a major difference between eliminating and eradicating something?) even though familiar. The Infiltrator, Suppressor, Reiver, Hellblaster names are distinct but on the other hand they don't catch flack.

I'll admit that Intercessor, Incursor, Infiltrator, Inceptor, etc is annoying to keep track of.
What's more annoying to me is that there are just too many units.
Do we really need Incursors, Infiltrators and Reivers as separate units when they could have realistically been 1 single Phobos troop with weapon swaps?

-

 Irbis wrote:

 Vankraken wrote:
very non descriptive fluff words

Inceptor - "one who starts" (battle). Perfectly descriptive.
Incursor - "assaulter/attacker" ironically being functionally identical to your Assault squad example.
Reiver - "someone who raids behind enemy lines". Ditto.
Hellblaster - if blasting enemies with hot fire isn't descriptive, I don't know what is.
Infiltrator - seriously?
Intercessor - "someone between" (enemies and supporting units), IE frontline unit.
Eliminator, Suppressor, Eradicator - you were saying?

If anything, faux-Latin focus fits the setting much better than tacticool names like Tactical or Devastator squad, I'd say.

Half are very uncommon words rarely used in English parlance. The other have are overly broad terms that don't accurately define anything. What's the difference between Eliminating or Eradicating? Does the suppressor actually do suppression fire like a machine gunner would do or is this suppression the same as eliminating or Eradicating something? Hellblaster I guess but why are plasma guns more hellish than melta guns?

Inceptor begins... ok so the jump pack guys with guns begins the fight? Is that accurate to marine doctrine?
Incursor comes up with someone who does a hostile entrance into territory aka raids. How is that different than a reiver except the reiver plunders (do marines loot now?).
Intercessor is someone who intervenes on behalf of somebody else (especially by prayer). How does that translate into what a tactical marine does and why is that any more descriptive of their role than any of the other overly broad descriptors?

Again there are so many new units with overly vague words (with a bunch starting with the same 3 letters) with too much overlap between each other. The old school marines have a very simple Tactical, Assault, Devastator, Scout, and Terminators which is generic sure but assault is generally used for close quarters infantry (such as Strumtruppen being storm/assault trooper or Sturmgeschütz meaning assault gun). Devastator has all heavy weapons so they are the heavy firepower unit so that makes sense in context. Scouts are scouts so that's perfectly fine. And tactical is generic but they are the jack of all trades unit so they are tactically flexible. Terminators is non descriptive but in the context of pop culture (which Warhammer is founded on) they mimic the Terminator from the movie being the steady unstoppable killing machine that can just eat tons of firepower without dying. Again not super descriptive but it's fitting without stepping on the toes of what other units do.

Infiltrator does do what it says on the tin so they got one right I guess.

Also how the zog is Devastator any more "tacticool" than Eliminator?

I also agree about the confusing naming of Primaris units.

As to the original question, any possible chance you can purchase the Start Collecting Vanguard box and sell off the Suppressors, Eliminators, and Phobos Lt. on eBay? You would likely recoup most of your money, especially given the demand for Eliminators which sell for $40+ alone.

Another suggestion if you want to use existing models: purchase/kitbash just the backpacks with antennas and magnetize the backpacks and the original intercessor backpacks. I did this with several imperial guard troops and their vox caster backpacks. It's not that difficult and works well when you want to easily switch between wargear options.

 Galef wrote:
I'll admit that Intercessor, Incursor, Infiltrator, Inceptor, etc is annoying to keep track of.
What's more annoying to me is that there are just too many units.
Do we really need Incursors, Infiltrators and Reivers as separate units when they could have realistically been 1 single Phobos troop with weapon swaps?
-

Totally agree. It extends to the humongous array of bolt-weapons too. I far, far prefer the paradigm where you had Bolt Pistol, Bolter, Storm Bolter, Heavy Bolter. Each was very common, distinct, and memorable. Very easy to remember and navigate on the tabletop. The Hurricane Bolter was there too, but it was a rare thing on particular vehicles and therefore wasn't very confusing.

Simpler times, simpler times. . .

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
I'll admit that Intercessor, Incursor, Infiltrator, Inceptor, etc is annoying to keep track of.
What's more annoying to me is that there are just too many units.
Do we really need Incursors, Infiltrators and Reivers as separate units when they could have realistically been 1 single Phobos troop with weapon swaps?
-

Totally agree. It extends to the humongous array of bolt-weapons too. I far, far prefer the paradigm where you had Bolt Pistol, Bolter, Storm Bolter, Heavy Bolter. Each was very common, distinct, and memorable. Very easy to remember and navigate on the tabletop. The Hurricane Bolter was there too, but it was a rare thing on particular vehicles and therefore wasn't very confusing.

Simpler times, simpler times. . .

I've been getting back into older 40k editions recently and oh how I miss the simplicity in weapon types and options. You could fit the stats for most all weapon used by all factions on one page back in 3rd ed. Now each faction seems to have multiple pages of weapons' stats with needless trivial variations of weapons to sell "newer, better" models.

 Gnarlly wrote:

 Insectum7 wrote:

 Galef wrote:
I'll admit that Intercessor, Incursor, Infiltrator, Inceptor, etc is annoying to keep track of.
What's more annoying to me is that there are just too many units.
Do we really need Incursors, Infiltrators and Reivers as separate units when they could have realistically been 1 single Phobos troop with weapon swaps?
-

Totally agree. It extends to the humongous array of bolt-weapons too. I far, far prefer the paradigm where you had Bolt Pistol, Bolter, Storm Bolter, Heavy Bolter. Each was very common, distinct, and memorable. Very easy to remember and navigate on the tabletop. The Hurricane Bolter was there too, but it was a rare thing on particular vehicles and therefore wasn't very confusing.

Simpler times, simpler times. . .

I've been getting back into older 40k editions recently and oh how I miss the simplicity in weapon types and options. You could fit the stats for most all weapon used by all factions on one page back in 3rd ed. Now each faction seems to have multiple pages of weapons' stats with needless trivial variations of weapons to sell "newer, better" models.

Bolt Pistol, Bolgun, Heavy Bolter
Las Pistol, Lasgun, Las Cannon
Plasma Pistol, Plasma Gun, Plasma Cannon
Hand Flamer, Flamer, Heavy Flamer
Melta Pistol, Meltagun, Multimelta

Ahhhh. . . doesn't that feel nice? So pleasant. And that's like, 90% of the weapons you'll see on models featured in older Imperial armies.

Galef wrote:I'll admit that Intercessor, Incursor, Infiltrator, Inceptor, etc is annoying to keep track of.
What's more annoying to me is that there are just too many units.
Do we really need Incursors, Infiltrators and Reivers as separate units when they could have realistically been 1 single Phobos troop with weapon swaps?
-

That, I'll agree with. Just like how we don't have a "Predator Destructor" or "Predator Annihilator" datasheet, we could have gotten away with just something like "Phobos Squad", and have the lot all separated by wargear.

Vankraken wrote:What's the difference between Eliminating or Eradicating?

In my eyes, Elimination feels more precise, and Eradication feels like total wiping clean.

Does the suppressor actually do suppression fire like a machine gunner would do or is this suppression the same as eliminating or Eradicating something?

I don't associate elimination or eradication with suppression.

Hellblaster I guess but why are plasma guns more hellish than melta guns?

We can say the same for the inferno pistol - is it a flamer or melta?

Incursor comes up with someone who does a hostile entrance into territory aka raids. How is that different than a reiver except the reiver plunders (do marines loot now?).

Are Tactical Marines the only Marines who fight "tactically"? Are Assault Squads the only unit that goes into melee?

Again there are so many new units with overly vague words (with a bunch starting with the same 3 letters) with too much overlap between each other. The old school marines have a very simple Tactical, Assault, Devastator, Scout, and Terminators which is generic sure but assault is generally used for close quarters infantry (such as Strumtruppen being storm/assault trooper or Sturmgeschütz meaning assault gun).

And Centurions?

I think the Primaris stuff is fine, barring a handful of oddities (Incursors would just be merged with Infiltrators, Inceptors could have a new name, and Intercessors might be nicer with a more solid sounding name).

Devastator has all heavy weapons so they are the heavy firepower unit so that makes sense in context.

But surely you could also "devastate" in melee combat?

That's the kind of nit-picking you made about Eliminators/Eradicators.

Again - as with nearly all Primaris stuff - give it time, and people will catch on. Aside from the three I've mentioned, I don't see all that much of an issue.

I don't suppose you could use a push-pin as the camera/antenna for the Incursors? Not sure if it would look better point down or point up. Maybe couple it with a tack for a sort-of radar dish look?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Incursor comes up with someone who does a hostile entrance into territory aka raids. How is that different than a reiver except the reiver plunders (do marines loot now?).

Are Tactical Marines the only Marines who fight "tactically"? Are Assault Squads the only unit that goes into melee?

Tactical and Assault both are very clear definitions of role within the context of Tac, Assault Devastators.

Again there are so many new units with overly vague words (with a bunch starting with the same 3 letters) with too much overlap between each other. The old school marines have a very simple Tactical, Assault, Devastator, Scout, and Terminators which is generic sure but assault is generally used for close quarters infantry (such as Strumtruppen being storm/assault trooper or Sturmgeschütz meaning assault gun).

And Centurions?

Centurions aren't really "old school", but the unit is named after it's equipment in the same way that Terminator or Bike Squads are.

Scout
Tactical
Assault
Devastator
Veteran
Terminator
Command

Imo organization pre Sternguard/Vanguard/Centurion is where it's at.