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.

 Insularum wrote:

A question on sentinels and plasma cannons - new cannon inflicts a mortal to the bearer on a 1 to hit instead of killing the bearer outright. How does this work on wound allocation as you could potentially have a unit of 3 all taking 1 mortal - do they all take 1 wound or is the bearer now classified as the unit not the model? Seems like it could screw up normal wound allocation restrictions.

Pretty sure you're suppose to roll every weapon separately. Fast rolling is good when you don't have multiples of the same weapon that can hurt different models.

Sentinel 1: Roll shots.
Sentinel 2: Roll shots.
Sentinel 3: Roll shots.

Sentinel 1: Roll hits. 1 overheats. Takes 1 wound.
Sentinel 2: Roll hits.
Sentinel 3: Roll hits. 2 overheats. Takes 2 wounds.

The reason you do this is overheat is an ability tagged to the individual weapon, not the unit.

I dont think you can allocate wounds like that, I believe it goes into a pool and is dished out one model at a time.

Swastakowey wrote:
I was tempted by the Death Strike but reading the 40mm base size for objectives kind of makes what little use that DeathStrike could have been vanish. I think the intent might have been that it cancels objectives but I guess they forgot to consider the base size?

The deathstrike main use is against sisters that hide 3 units of repentias behind a wall and send out one at a time fully buffed by the slave-driver and Vhal (or any other army that plays a similar game)
Even if the marker doesn't cover the whole objective you can just put it so it touches the side of the objective that you can't see/is in ruins forcing your opponent to stay in the open in order to control it.
Against veichle heavy armies you can make the movement phase for some of their models an headscratcher by placing the marker in the corridors between terrain at the "edge" or their move distance (unless you're playing on Planet Bowling Ball and there's no terrain to impede them whatsoever but let's assume you aren't playing a beer&pretzels game)§

The boy does have some usage but for 160 points killing just 4 marines with it half of your games is probably a bit too much of a gamble. It's more of a psycological deterrent that a solid piece.

Swastakowey wrote:
I dont think you can allocate wounds like that, I believe it goes into a pool and is dished out one model at a time.

3. ALLOCATE ATTACK
If an attack successfully wounds the target unit, the player commanding the target unit allocates that attack to one model in the target unit (this can be to any model in the unit and does not have to be allocated to a model that is within range of, or visible to, the attacking model). If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model.

This isn’t applicable as the wounds are not coming from a targeted attack.

Zompa wrote:

Swastakowey wrote:
I was tempted by the Death Strike but reading the 40mm base size for objectives kind of makes what little use that DeathStrike could have been vanish. I think the intent might have been that it cancels objectives but I guess they forgot to consider the base size?

The deathstrike main use is against sisters that hide 3 units of repentias behind a wall and send out one at a time fully buffed by the slave-driver and Vhal (or any other army that plays a similar game)
Even if the marker doesn't cover the whole objective you can just put it so it touches the side of the objective that you can't see/is in ruins forcing your opponent to stay in the open in order to control it.
Against veichle heavy armies you can make the movement phase for some of their models an headscratcher by placing the marker in the corridors between terrain at the "edge" or their move distance (unless you're playing on Planet Bowling Ball and there's no terrain to impede them whatsoever but let's assume you aren't playing a beer&pretzels game)§

The boy does have some usage but for 160 points killing just 4 marines with it half of your games is probably a bit too much of a gamble. It's more of a psycological deterrent that a solid piece.

The plasma barrage is scary enough on an objective with its 6+d3 range and it’s d3+1 (2-3) or 2d3 (4-5) or d3+3 (6) to clear an objective…. But the big junk on this model is if you roll a 1 absolutely makes this model a complete waste and do nothing for 150pts that’s nonsense when there is several ways already to mitigate this. With destroying the deathstrike, moving away from the effective deathstrike radius to simply potentially sacrificing another unit and wasting the deathstrike… it’s almost useful but that does nothing on 1 needs to go.

Personally I rather see the Godspear size go to 2+d3 inches to be scary enough to clear an objective or risk getting hit… the vortex is fine since it’s 50% chance of staying each turn but that 1 doing nothing has to go.

Jarms48 wrote:

Swastakowey wrote:
I dont think you can allocate wounds like that, I believe it goes into a pool and is dished out one model at a time.

3. ALLOCATE ATTACK
If an attack successfully wounds the target unit, the player commanding the target unit allocates that attack to one model in the target unit (this can be to any model in the unit and does not have to be allocated to a model that is within range of, or visible to, the attacking model). If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model.

This isn’t applicable as the wounds are not coming from a targeted attack.

Yeah this is what confuses me - I dish out wounds to the bearer of the overheated gun, then when you attack me I allocate failed saves to models, prioritising damaged models first. If 2+ models have taken damage already am I allowed/expected to spread incoming attacks between them?

 Insularum wrote:
Yeah this is what confuses me - I dish out wounds to the bearer of the overheated gun, then when you attack me I allocate failed saves to models, prioritising damaged models first. If 2+ models have taken damage already am I allowed/expected to spread incoming attacks between them?

No, you still choose a model. The only thing that changes is that when the first model dies you must choose the next wounded model.

Jarms48 wrote:

 Insularum wrote:
Yeah this is what confuses me - I dish out wounds to the bearer of the overheated gun, then when you attack me I allocate failed saves to models, prioritising damaged models first. If 2+ models have taken damage already am I allowed/expected to spread incoming attacks between them?

No, you still choose a model. The only thing that changes is that when the first model dies you must choose the next wounded model.

I'm probably not being very clear so apologies for that.

On old plasma guns, the wording is on a 1 the bearer dies - it has to be the guy with the plasma gun not just some random model in a unit even if there is one already wounded. On the new guns the sentinel carries it is still worded as the bearer but now just a mortal wound rather than remove from play. Presumably bearer still means "model with gun" so even if another model is already damaged the mortal goes to the model with the gun - this can lead to rare situations where there are multiple wounded models in a unit.

Is there a rule I've overlooked in play here? As the controlling player allocates damage and they must select already wounded models, what is to stop a player from allocating wounds to 1 damaged sentinel until it drops down to 1 wound remaining, then moving on to the next damaged sentinel (and potentially then the next in a full size unit)? In an extreme case where a full unit of 3 with plasma all overheat once, you could allocate up to 15 wounds evenly across the unit before removing any models from play.

Right, so the new Sentinels are a multi-model unit. As in 3-5 I think. That being the case, you can't possibly have multiple wounded models in a single unit. The unit takes the MW, not the Model. Like LRBT tanbk squads.

 Insularum wrote:

Is there a rule I've overlooked in play here? As the controlling player allocates damage and they must select already wounded models, what is to stop a player from allocating wounds to 1 damaged sentinel until it drops down to 1 wound remaining, then moving on to the next damaged sentinel (and potentially then the next in a full size unit)? In an extreme case where a full unit of 3 with plasma all overheat once, you could allocate up to 15 wounds evenly across the unit before removing any models from play.

I just explained why.

3. ALLOCATE ATTACK
If an attack successfully wounds the target unit, the player commanding the target unit allocates that attack to one model in the target unit (this can be to any model in the unit and does not have to be allocated to a model that is within range of, or visible to, the attacking model). If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model.

There is no issue here. You must choose a model to take wounds first. If you have 2 wounded models you still have to choose one of them. When one of them die, you must choose the other wounded model, only after this can you choose models with no wounds.

Remember, as I said in another post, you're not suppose to fast roll. Fast rolling is something we do to speed the game up, but the rulebook outlines you're suppose to do one at a time.

So if you take 10 wounds and have 3 models. You select 1 model and keep rolling individually until that 1 model is dead and then you select another model.

Jarms48 wrote:

 Insularum wrote:

Is there a rule I've overlooked in play here? As the controlling player allocates damage and they must select already wounded models, what is to stop a player from allocating wounds to 1 damaged sentinel until it drops down to 1 wound remaining, then moving on to the next damaged sentinel (and potentially then the next in a full size unit)? In an extreme case where a full unit of 3 with plasma all overheat once, you could allocate up to 15 wounds evenly across the unit before removing any models from play.

I just explained why.

3. ALLOCATE ATTACK
If an attack successfully wounds the target unit, the player commanding the target unit allocates that attack to one model in the target unit (this can be to any model in the unit and does not have to be allocated to a model that is within range of, or visible to, the attacking model). If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model.

There is no issue here. You must choose a model to take wounds first. If you have 2 wounded models you still have to choose one of them. When one of them die, you must choose the other wounded model, only after this can you choose models with no wounds.

Remember, as I said in another post, you're not suppose to fast roll. Fast rolling is something we do to speed the game up, but the rulebook outlines you're suppose to do one at a time.

So if you take 10 wounds and have 3 models. You select 1 model and keep rolling individually until that 1 model is dead and then you select another model.

That makes sense - it was the "this phase" bit I overlooked - there still might be some room for people being gamey about this over 2 phases but looks like you cannot actively split incoming attacks in one phase.

Thanks for the help!

Jarms48 wrote:

 Insularum wrote:

Is there a rule I've overlooked in play here? As the controlling player allocates damage and they must select already wounded models, what is to stop a player from allocating wounds to 1 damaged sentinel until it drops down to 1 wound remaining, then moving on to the next damaged sentinel (and potentially then the next in a full size unit)? In an extreme case where a full unit of 3 with plasma all overheat once, you could allocate up to 15 wounds evenly across the unit before removing any models from play.

I just explained why.

3. ALLOCATE ATTACK
If an attack successfully wounds the target unit, the player commanding the target unit allocates that attack to one model in the target unit (this can be to any model in the unit and does not have to be allocated to a model that is within range of, or visible to, the attacking model). If a model in the target unit has already lost any wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase, the attack must be allocated to that model.

There is no issue here. You must choose a model to take wounds first. If you have 2 wounded models you still have to choose one of them. When one of them die, you must choose the other wounded model, only after this can you choose models with no wounds.

Remember, as I said in another post, you're not suppose to fast roll. Fast rolling is something we do to speed the game up, but the rulebook outlines you're suppose to do one at a time.

So if you take 10 wounds and have 3 models. You select 1 model and keep rolling individually until that 1 model is dead and then you select another model.

Of course the mw coming from overheating isn't attack targeting sentinel unit so rules related to attacks isn't relevant.

GW can't write rules well. What else is new?-)

tneva82 wrote:
GW can't write rules well. What else is new?-)

Was just clarifying how it works.

* * * * *

After doing a deeper dive into the codex, I've updated my winners and losers list.

Winners:
- Cadian Shock Troops: Just the best value troop unit we have now.
- Kasrkin: These guys are just amazing.
- Rough Riders: Not amazingly durable but their damage is fantastic.
- Sentinels: Forward deploy Scout Sentinels can win you the game. Amazingly cheap for the durability they bring. Take aim or double model count orders on plasma cannon Armoured Sentinels is pretty nice. If they come from Creed you get S9 AP-4 plasma cannons.
- Leman Russ Tanks: Mainly the Executioner and Vanquisher. Battle tank is nice, but overshadowed by the Executioner. Demolisher is nice with double model count for blast order.
- Hydra: Turret weapon, so 8 AP-2 autocannon shots hitting on 3+. This thing is just a better Castigator for far cheaper. Shreds aircraft with +2 to hit and double shots against them, so still hitting on 3+ despite aircraft having -1 to hit.

I expected many of these to be nerfed. Likely the only safe ones from nerfs in this list is Shock Troops and Hydras.

Potential Winners:
- DKOK Death Riders: Even if it’s just keyword changes. New melee order lets them hit on 3+ which is massive, can get far better traits than the old DKOK one, and Commissar orders. Not as damaging as Rough Riders of course but far more durable. As I said though, highly depends on the keyword changes.

Losers:
- Catachans: Just sad, overcosted and incredibly restrictive options. By far the worst rule of the named regiment unique units.
- DKOK Guardsmen: Mini-transhuman on a T3 model is incredibly situational, most anti-infantry weapons shooting at you will be S4 and S5. Can’t take a vox if you have a plasma gun. I don’t think they’re terrible, but probably 5 points overcosted which really starts to add up for Guard.
- Pure Scions: I stress pure here, as Scions will still have a place as objective grabbers for regular Guard, but getting no regiment traits when taking them pure is rough. Especially when their datasheets in a pure army are so limited. All their "buffs" are essentially rolled into Kasrkins, the only things they really have over them is built in deepstrike and synergy with the scion WLT's. You also can't receive orders after deep strike.
- Regimental Preacher: Just far more limiting than the 8th edition one and worse than the current Sister one.
- Ratlings: Still just not a great unit. Now that the Scout Sentinel has forward deploy there's no use for them.
- FOB: Just too expensive for what you get. The lascannons are good and currently the only option really worth taking, but for a few points more you can just take a Russ with similar firepower and far better durability. The anti-infantry missiles should have been indirect.
- HWS: Got more expensive, no durability increases so no reason to take anything other than mortars still and one squad still takes up a whole HS slot.
- Taurox Prime: Could have really benefitted from turret weapon. It's the only heavy firepower Scions get. Taurox battle cannon is still terrible, Taurox gatling cannon got nerfed, Taurox missile launcher suffers from being purely a missile launcher. No 5++ really hurts them.

Potential Losers:
- Everything with indirect fire. Really depends if Guard lose the nLoS exemption.
- Tech-priest: If guard keep AoC then there's really no point to bring one. 5++ means nothing if you have 2+ and AoC.

Everything else is okay.

So looking at the codex it seems the relic banner says you “can” remove “any” or all.. hit modifiers. And is in addition to regimental banner reroll 1 to wound. It’s extremely good and it along w a ogryn body guard that you can revive w a medic is strong hq unit. I’m assuming ogryns bodyguards without -1 dam like every other ogryn/bullgryn is deliberate.
Codex looks good imho (mainly cadians with born soldiers) but I’m happy. Now to see what happens to Fw units.

gungo wrote:
So looking at the codex it seems the relic banner says you “can” remove “any” or all.. hit modifiers. And is in addition to regimental banner reroll 1 to wound. It’s extremely good and it along w a ogryn body guard that you can revive w a medic is strong hq unit. I’m assuming ogryns bodyguards without -1 dam like every other ogryn/bullgryn is deliberate.
Codex looks good imho (mainly cadians with born soldiers) but I’m happy. Now to see what happens to Fw units.

Quoting from n&r

 Polonius wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

Dirk Reinecke wrote:
So, looking at the codex, the Ogryn Bodyguard and Nork don't have the -1 damage that the regular Ogryn and Bullgryn have. That is a pity.

Do you think that's intentional(ly inconsistent) or something they forgot about?

it's at the top of page 89. Under "Abilities" it states that all bodyguard models gain three rules, including Wall of Muscle (damage reduction).

Ok that’s good for bodyguards but there is some strong combos in that dex.

So, do we already know how exactly this platoon thingy works out in the new codex? Which units can I pack in there?

Unless I'm missing something the platoon thing is only a key word.

Also earlier people had been talking about the banner relic and how it interacts with modifiers and the wording of the rules let's you ignore any or all modifiers so you can keep the positive ones

I'm having my first battle tomorrow, and while making my army I noticed that the Leman Russ turret weapons don't have point costs... so are they all free?

 AtoMaki wrote:
I'm having my first battle tomorrow, and while making my army I noticed that the Leman Russ turret weapons don't have point costs... so are they all free?

Correct, all turrets have the same cost and are built into the base price of the unit.

 Pyroalchi wrote:
So, do we already know how exactly this platoon thingy works out in the new codex? Which units can I pack in there?

Platoon is a rule that allows orders to bounce for infantry, vehicles need the squadron rule to allow orders to bounce. RIP to squads larger than 10!

Ok so going to sum up some little things Ive noticed reading the codex that dont seem to be mentioned much but have some big implications.

For orders, as many officers as you want can issue the same order, so for example if you had a castellan and 3 platoon command squads, all could issue Take Aim!. However, no officer can give the same order more than once. So the lord solar or creed, who can give 3 orders a turn, cannot issue the same order more than once in a turn. So for example, Creed couldnt give three seperate orders of Take Aim! Creed would issue Take Aim to one unit, and the other two would need a different order like first rank fire or take cover.

Second, the ogryn bodyguards can attach to any nonnamed officer. Not just platoon squads. If you have a Castellan running around, an ogryn bodyguard is a good idea. 6 extra wounds at T5 with -1 damage and a 2+ armor save will keep your warlord alive a lot longer and you can give the bodyguard a ripper gun/shield combo so he can shoot and not have to go into melee. Yes bodyguards cost as much as the character but they make them far more survivable, especially versus targeted pysker abilities and sniper weapons. An additional fun thing for them and any ripper gun armed ogryn, they can fire them in melee like a pistol. Also, if Im reading this right Commissars may be able to take one as well, but not so sure about that one. Gotta reread keywords

Thirdly, tank officers order to 12". Not really surprising but sometime important to remember, theyre not limited to 6" like most officers


Automatically Appended Next Post:
On an unrelated note, I think several regiment abilities are strong, they just need to be leaned into. As far as I can tell, theres no way to mix "regiments" in the army, so for example you cant have a batallion with Born Soldiers and a batallion with Monster Hunters. Going off this I think youll see a lot of incentive to run born soldiers for a mixed army, but specialized armor or infantry regiments will be better served by other regiment abilities.

Also, Monster Hunters on an all infantry army could be pretty nuts. Not sure its strictly competitive but you could see some crazy moments where ranks of infantry FRFSRF into a horde of T6 and T7 big models and are wounding them on 5's. I would suspect this is why GW made it a trait that takes up both slots. If we still had conscripts it could be really crazy but as it sits I think its just a fun way to mess with an ork speedfreak list or a nidzilla style list.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
So for example, Creed couldnt give three seperate orders of Take Aim! Creed would issue Take Aim to one unit, and the other two would need a different order like first rank fire or take cover.

Fortunately there's a solution there. You can issue multiple orders to a single unit, you just replace the previous one each time. Issue placeholder orders to two units to activate the Creed buff, then issue take aim to a third unit and AoE it back onto the other two. End result: three units with take aim and +1 strength.

Also, Monster Hunters on an all infantry army could be pretty nuts. Not sure its strictly competitive but you could see some crazy moments where ranks of infantry FRFSRF into a horde of T6 and T7 big models and are wounding them on 5's. I would suspect this is why GW made it a trait that takes up both slots. If we still had conscripts it could be really crazy but as it sits I think its just a fun way to mess with an ork speedfreak list or a nidzilla style list.

Sadly not, it's just a case of GW failing at math again.

Born Soldiers: 6 shots, 3 hits with one 6, one auto-wound and 0.33 normal wounds for a total of 1.33 per six shots.

Monster Hunters: 6 shots, 3 hits, 1 wound.

Born Soldiers wins here and also gives you other benefits.

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
So for example, Creed couldnt give three seperate orders of Take Aim! Creed would issue Take Aim to one unit, and the other two would need a different order like first rank fire or take cover.

Fortunately there's a solution there. You can issue multiple orders to a single unit, you just replace the previous one each time. Issue placeholder orders to two units to activate the Creed buff, then issue take aim to a third unit and AoE it back onto the other two. End result: three units with take aim and +1 strength.

I think yohre technically right but I see that getting FAQ'd if it turns out to be a thing you can do. Overriding Creeds order would override her +1 S I would think, youre quite literally overriding her order

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
So for example, Creed couldnt give three seperate orders of Take Aim! Creed would issue Take Aim to one unit, and the other two would need a different order like first rank fire or take cover.

Fortunately there's a solution there. You can issue multiple orders to a single unit, you just replace the previous one each time. Issue placeholder orders to two units to activate the Creed buff, then issue take aim to a third unit and AoE it back onto the other two. End result: three units with take aim and +1 strength.

I think yohre technically right but I see that getting FAQ'd if it turns out to be a thing you can do. Overriding Creeds order would override her +1 S I would think, youre quite literally overriding her order

RAW it clearly works. The +1 strength is activated by issuing the order, once the triggering event happens it is active for the duration. If it was "the unit gets +1 strength as long as the order is active" or similar overriding it would cancel the bonus but that's not the way it's structured.

Got a chance to play the new codex over the weekend. It was with borrowed models, so not a well optimized list and no rough riders or sentinels, but some first impressions:

* Armored Superiority was a game winner. An empty Chimera locked in melee with one wound left continuing to hold an objective against enemy models is incredibly powerful, and LRBTs becoming strong scoring units lets you shift more points into the big guns and less into cannon fodder. Born Soldiers is the easiest doctrine to understand and apply to any random army but IMO Armored Superiority is my default pick.

* Mechanized Infantry seems ok-ish. I didn't need to disembark for the extra movement distance to claim objectives, so staying in the Chimera until it dies and then disembarking onto the objective behind it was a better plan. But I can see how in other games this wouldn't be the case and you'd get a lot of value here. IMO the real question is whether you commit a full doctrine slot to it or take it as the bonus doctrine on a Kasrkin squad, and that probably comes down to if you're willing to commit a mechanized HQ to give them orders and need to allow multiple units to disembark simultaneously.

* LRBTs are god-tier. The relic battle cannon is an auto-take, even without the buffed strength and AP just having D3+6 shots instead of D6+3 is huge. My vanquishers easily earned their pay and simply delete stuff as long as they have a decent target. Executioners were pretty good. I did fall short on range by a few inches on turn 1 and waste some shots where a battle cannon or vanquisher would have been in range, but AP -4 really helps get damage through in an AoC world. Mortal wounds were no problem since tank orders are easy to get. And with the turret rule screening is much less important, even if you get locked in combat you're still putting BS 4+ shots into a different unit.

* Artillery underwhelmed. We played under the assumption that the exemption from the indirect fire penalty won't be staying and my Basilisk only ended up shooting at stuff I could have drawn LOS to with an advancing LRBT. I had to move it into LOS to get effective shots, and at that point why not take a superior LRBT? Indirect fire may be a useful tool to have in small quantities but if we lose that exemption don't invest in it.

* FW units suck. Underwhelming base stats, no synergy with the rest of the codex, and no real reason to take them. Sad to see the big centerpiece models go but until we get another IA book keep them on the display shelf and take more LRBTs.

The tactic I'm looking forward to testing is running the recon expert regiment trait and the Laurels of Command relic on an officer, then use the pregame infantry move to set up screening units and order them to take cover during my opponents turn if I get turn 2. Another thought is to give the officer the warlord trait that gives one of the other command abilities to give them commissar orders. Then I can alternatively use LoC to mess with any turn 1 deep strike, although at that point it's probably costing me more than its work heh. I don't have the codex yet (bought it off ebay and am waiting for it to arrive), so I might be misunderstanding how things work since I'm just going off what the reviews said at the moment.

I can also say that in the game I played using the leaks, the rogal dorn w/ the oppressor cannon slaps (even if I did royally screw up and lose horribly...I think I significantly underestimated the amount of damage I could have done with my 3 remaining rough riders, so I didn't use them effectively). Is it worth the points cost? I think that depends on the size of the match. At 1250pts, it seemed to be just barely worth worth the cost. I expect at 2k points, it'll be well worth the cost.

Has there been any explanation for why Infantry squads are limited to 10 now? I really don’t understand it, was hoping a rules person had discussed it somewhere.

Is someone trying to find a use for the scions? Kinda seem really bad now that karskins are a thing. I was considering maybe take a basic unit, but for that cost even the ratlings seem more appealing

caladancid wrote:
Has there been any explanation for why Infantry squads are limited to 10 now? I really don’t understand it, was hoping a rules person had discussed it somewhere.

GW is moving away from horde armies to elite armies.