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.

EightFoldPath wrote:
My last 4-1 GT list will struggle with killing a Baneblade (and RDBTs and LRBTs). It was finely tuned in terms of being good into CK/IK because (a) they lacked screens and (b) it was good at killing T7 war dog bodies that would be screening. I'm currently debating my next GT list and I am thinking of just ignoring the LRBTs (and so also the Baneblades) and just trying to clear everything else from T3~7 in the first turn or two. I'd actually be taking out some S5 and skewing more into other areas.

Sounds like 4-1 had more to do with matchup luck than list quality. Planning to just take an auto-loss if you run into LRBT spam (or equivalents from other factions) isn't a viable competitive list. Any list that is earning those 4-1 and 5-0 records by list strength, not getting lucky and playing easy matchups, is going to have no problems handling a Baneblade because they're already planning to remove 2-3 LRBTs, 1-2 large knights, etc.

I'm flicking through the factions and thinking of the lists I saw and there are quite a few that would have had a rough time against a Baneblade. A lot of the higher placing CSM lists will need a re-design, as D2 CSM melee looks awful into LRBTs/RDBTs/SHs.

Sure, maybe that's the meta before guard are legal. But the meta will change and if guard are relevant in the meta people will be planning to be able to deal with the LRBTs. And if they can deal with the LRBTs they can also deal with a weaker version of LRBTs.

I think in your rush to be the edgiest edgelord who ever did edge, you might have missed the AoW tier list where Baneblades sat at the bottom of the middle tier, behind all the really strong choices, barely ahead of all the flawed choices that aren't worth taking.

Sorry, but remind me again who appointed AoW god of tier lists and decided that AoW's opinion is a substitute for CKO's opinion? I asked them, not AoW.

(And for the record, I saw their tier list video and I think they severely underestimated the terrain issues in favor of gawking at the raw stat lines. Same thing with the ADL, they ranked it way too high and completely ignored the fact that on most tables you won't be able to deploy it in a useful spot.)

The original question also wasn't asking "should I buy a SH" it was asking "I already own them, which one looks the best". More reading comprehension required, less edging.

More reading comprehension, less edging about ALL UNITS ARE VALID. This is the original question:

What are people's thoughts on the new Superheavies? Nice to see they've gotten a well-deserved boost, and I currently have a Baneblade, Shadowsword, Octoblade and Stormhammer that I'm hoping to finally use for once.

"Sorry, they suck and you're going to be disappointed if you use them" is a valid answer to that question whether you like it or not.

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:

More reading comprehension, less edging about ALL UNITS ARE VALID. This is the original question:

What are people's thoughts on the new Superheavies? Nice to see they've gotten a well-deserved boost, and I currently have a Baneblade, Shadowsword, Octoblade and Stormhammer that I'm hoping to finally use for once.

"Sorry, they suck and you're going to be disappointed if you use them" is a valid answer to that question whether you like it or not.

Thats your opinion and you've been very adamant about it these last 2 pages of this thread. You think BBs are F-tier due to terrain, that is fine.

Now feel free to take a step back, breathe some air and let others state their opinions, without feeling the need to instantly tell them they are wrong. This thread is literally going in circles.

To put Baneblades in summary:
- Tournament play: Not worth it.
- Friendly games: Okay.

Guys can we give the Baneblade argument a rest already? I think we get all sides at this point and no one is going to change their mind. We have a whole new codex to talk about and so far its been 2 pages of arguing about what exactly usable means. We could be discussing so many different things right now

You know, stuff like situations where 2 custom regiment traits could be superior to Born Soldiers, armored vs infantry approach, whether a brigade or a battalion is the better way to go. Anything else at this point will be more productive

Is born soldiers basically always best? I really want to take the +1 to hit with artillery in range of voxes trait but my gut say it's probably hot garbage.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Guys can we give the Baneblade argument a rest already? I think we get all sides at this point and no one is going to change their mind. We have a whole new codex to talk about and so far its been 2 pages of arguing about what exactly usable means. We could be discussing so many different things right now

You know, stuff like situations where 2 custom regiment traits could be superior to Born Soldiers, armored vs infantry approach, whether a brigade or a battalion is the better way to go. Anything else at this point will be more productive

Leman Russ spam on the drawing board looks good. Armored superiority (regimental doctrine) and shock and awe (mechanised order) should be a problem for my opponent. I plan on bringing 2 tank commanders and an officer with Steel Commissar and around 8-10 Leman Russ battle tanks total.

So today I tried out the Field Ordnance Battery, all three weapons. I honestly expected the Malleus to suck, but I liked that weapon the most - I had Ursula babysit the battery with Take Aim and +1S, and it did a crapton of damage. The Bombast was all kinds of 'meh' but that was expected too. The HLC gave "We have Vanquisher at home" feels, but my opponent was really scared of that battery and it really did more than the actual shooting performance (they took out one of those Primaris hover pickups and maybe 2 Aggressors before getting wiped in the 4th turn). I'm almost pleased with the unit but the 2-models restriction is giving me cancer.

In addition, something I noticed while checking out the new Cadian sprues: the Field Ordnance Battery have sergeant and vox options right on the sprue but no such thing on their dataslate. Take that NMNR! Now you can't have rules even if you do have models!

Yeah I noticed that issue in the new heavy weapon squad pics as well. Not to mention tanks somehow have voxes half as powerful as man portable backpack units If FOBs couldve been taken in squads of 4-6 theyd be a lot more tempting even though theyd be impossible to hide. I get why GW did it though, infantry orders would be pretty nuts on a battery of 4-6 guns just due to the sheer order their splash effect would give. You could order one battery and hit most of your deployment. As is they look cool, are easy to convert or proxy with FW guns, and feel very thematic for IG. A solid example of a "new" unit that feels like its always been in the codex, wish I could say that for other codexes.

Im curious to see how the FW artillery units such as the basilisk/medusa carriage, heavy mortar, and quad mortar turn out. To my understanding all they need is the platoon keyword and theyre set. If so, you could make a really thematic artillery park dug in behind aegis lines that might make artillery usable, at least towed ones. Take Aim basically just lets you ignore the indirect penalties and between all the different ordnance types you could probably run a brigade with a ton of infantry squads and have a decent foot list. Heck you may even be able to make serious use of Expert Bombadiers with sentinels and all the infantry on foot.

Speaking of FW, Im hoping we see a bunch of keyword updates to bring units in line. For example hopefully Hades drills will be updated to take Platoon infantry units, tanks like the Malcadors will get squadron, and maybe we'll see something like the Vulture getting the upgraded punisher cannon statline, though that last one Im not holding my breath on. At the bare minimum, the new tank strats and orders would go a long way to fixing some of the issues many FW tanks have. Theyll all still pale compared to a simple Leman Russ, but certain specialized tanks like the Malcador Infernus could find a niche or at least be fun for casual games. Not to mention certain tank aces could pair well with certain Macharius and Malcador variants.

Right now Im looking at running an armored company thats two tank commanders, 6 russes of various marks, 3 chimeras with infantry, an infantry officer, and a squad of kasrkin with the key. It seems solid to start with and learn the codex, just not sure which regiment traits I want to do just yet. Born Soldiers is good but Armored Superiority would help a lot with holding objectives. Ive also found myself tempted by Grim Demeanor, so that I can backscratch tanks caught in melee with the Acceptable Losses strat but I feel like that gives up a lot of utility for a strategem. Ill probably run Born Soldiers first and see what I feel its missing, then pick two more specialized traits from there.

Jarms48 wrote:
To put Baneblades in summary:
- Tournament play: Not worth it.
- Friendly games: Okay.

To put Baneblades in accurate summary:
-Tournament play: not worth it.
-Friendly games: not worth it.
-Games with both players deliberately bringing weak lists to enable the use of F-tier units: perfect.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ph34r wrote:
Is born soldiers basically always best? I really want to take the +1 to hit with artillery in range of voxes trait but my gut say it's probably hot garbage.

Born Soldiers is the easiest to understand and apply. Because it's a straight dice math buff for everything in the codex (except rough riders, I suppose) you can take it with any random list of units and be sure you're getting value.

Armored Superiority is the strongest. You win games by scoring VP, not by killing stuff, and having a bunch of obsec tanks that count as 5 models for objective control is a great way to score VP. And it has excellent synergy with LRBTs being one of the strongest units in the codex.

Expert Bombardiers is weak because unless we get a major surprise in the next dataslate the units it buffs are weak and not something you want to spam. You'll probably want one indirect fire unit, maybe two at most, to have a way to clean up that last surviving model in a unit you can't otherwise reach but it's not worth spending a doctrine slot to buff a single 50-150 point unit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 AtoMaki wrote:
So today I tried out the Field Ordnance Battery, all three weapons. I honestly expected the Malleus to suck, but I liked that weapon the most - I had Ursula babysit the battery with Take Aim and +1S, and it did a crapton of damage. The Bombast was all kinds of 'meh' but that was expected too. The HLC gave "We have Vanquisher at home" feels, but my opponent was really scared of that battery and it really did more than the actual shooting performance (they took out one of those Primaris hover pickups and maybe 2 Aggressors before getting wiped in the 4th turn). I'm almost pleased with the unit but the 2-models restriction is giving me cancer.

How did you deal with the issue that the direct-fire options are expensive glass cannons that are pretty trivially easy to remove? The weapon stat lines are not bad but you're paying way too much for a single-shot weapon.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:
Speaking of FW, Im hoping we see a bunch of keyword updates to bring units in line.

Good luck with that. Precedent so far is doing absolutely nothing beyond changing basic faction keywords and rules that literally don't work anymore. All of the FW Tau units are still stuck with crippled weapon profiles and basic stat lines that make them complete trash. We'll definitely see <REGIMENT> replaced with REGIMENTAL because that's the basic faction keyword, I doubt we'll see any of them get PLATOON or SQUADRON based on FW units never getting CORE when CORE is the important buff keyword. GW seems very reluctant to let FW units interact with codex buffs and PLATOON/SQUADRON aren't strictly necessary for the units to be functional. And sadly we're now at the point where a 300+ point Malcador or Macharius is worse than a 150 point LRBT, so even getting basic keywords isn't going to bring most of that stuff up to being a viable option.

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
How did you deal with the issue that the direct-fire options are expensive glass cannons that are pretty trivially easy to remove?

The HLCs got wiped a'right so I'm not vouching for them, but the Malleus battery actually managed to deal with both units my opponent committed to kill it (one Warsuit thingie and one of those Nuspeeders). The Warsuit in particular got wrecked hard. And before you ask no, he didn't have anything better to level against the battery because the rest of his army was busy dying from my Karskin and Rough Riders .

 AtoMaki wrote:

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
How did you deal with the issue that the direct-fire options are expensive glass cannons that are pretty trivially easy to remove?

The HLCs got wiped a'right so I'm not vouching for them, but the Malleus battery actually managed to deal with both units my opponent committed to kill it (one Warsuit thingie and one of those Nuspeeders). The Warsuit in particular got wrecked hard. And before you ask no, he didn't have anything better to level against the battery because the rest of his army was busy dying from my Karskin and Rough Riders .

How did you prevent it from dying before it could return fire? A fast flying unit shouldn't ever be in line of sight for the FOBs to shoot it until after it has already killed the FOBs. Hide the speeder behind terrain, pop out next to the FOBs and immediately kill them.

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:

To put Baneblades in accurate summary:
-Tournament play: not worth it.
-Friendly games: not worth it.
-Games with both players deliberately bringing weak lists to enable the use of F-tier units: perfect.

I don't think you're convincing anyone concerning what's worth it/not worth it in thier friendly games.

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:

 AtoMaki wrote:

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:
How did you deal with the issue that the direct-fire options are expensive glass cannons that are pretty trivially easy to remove?

The HLCs got wiped a'right so I'm not vouching for them, but the Malleus battery actually managed to deal with both units my opponent committed to kill it (one Warsuit thingie and one of those Nuspeeders). The Warsuit in particular got wrecked hard. And before you ask no, he didn't have anything better to level against the battery because the rest of his army was busy dying from my Karskin and Rough Riders .

How did you prevent it from dying before it could return fire?

By having a lot more units that were a lot more obviously dangerous.

Well for those of you looking for a fun combo, Brutal Strength plus Like the Wind is probably about as good as youre gonna get for assault IG. Definitely makes for some scarier Rough Riders. +2" movement, +1 to assault rolls, and an additional S on the charge.

Not gonna sweep LVO by storm but Im excited to try it with my Catachans

 CKO wrote:

Leman Russ spam on the drawing board looks good. Armored superiority (regimental doctrine) and shock and awe (mechanised order) should be a problem for my opponent. I plan on bringing 2 tank commanders and an officer with Steel Commissar and around 8-10 Leman Russ battle tanks total.

I'm prepared (or perhaps hoping) to be wrong on this, but my reading of Steel Commissar is that it isn't able to order vehicles. If you're planning on taking some infantry in the list then it'll work for ordering those. I need to go look to see if the commissar orders granted by Steel Commissar get the same range as the mech orders or not. As a side note, Steel Commissar also (unfortunately) doesn't appear to make the tank count as a commissar model, so I can't stick a null coat on it.

As for myself, I'm looking forward to testing out Recon Operators with Laurels of Command to push stuff forward even if I don't have first turn and then order them to go to ground during my opponent's shooting phase. If I go first, I can get a head start on things and then use Laurels of Command to attempt to make up for any Tactically Regrettable Decisions I will almost certainly make.

 CKO wrote:

Gue'vesa Emissary wrote:

 UlrikDecado wrote:
Funny, eight years here ane still DakkaDakka suffers from WAAC syndrome player "either it is unit from meta list or its bad unit". )))

Funny, eight years here ane still DakkaDakka suffers from CAAC syndrome player "if you talk honestly about unit evaluation or enjoy competitive play you're having fun the wrong way and you need to stop." )))

No, Baneblade chassis isnt bad and wont lose you a game as someone would argue.

Really? It won't cost you games to put a quarter of your points into a unit that can't leave your deployment zone and can be shot to death from anywhere on the table while it can't see anything to return fire? Maybe you can argue that a Baneblade is only D-tier instead of F-tier or that using F-tier units is "fun", but if you can't see how taking one can and will cost you games you're making a serious mistake in evaluating the unit.

(Or you're playing on tables with nowhere near enough terrain and creating a meta that excessively rewards alpha strike lists, but that's not something most people can rely on.)

Have you ever thought that maybe I am the problem and I am not getting the most out of these units? If several other people are saying something do you dismiss what is called groupthink with your superior intellect?

We would have people defending 12 point Cultist models via "learn to play" and "use tactics".

Laurels of Command has some big potential but only one use a game really kills it for me. We have a ton of great relics that offer utility, defense, or killing power. A single out of phase order that people will likely see coming just doesnt beat out the key, gatekeeper, ollanius deathmask, Kurovs aquila, the tactical reliquary of Tiberius, or the regimental standard and vox relics.

That said, popping "remain vigilant" in the opponents movement phase to screw over their deepstrike could potentially be clutch in the right scenario, that or the double obsec one during your morale phase to preempt the opponents scoring in their command phase

DeadliestIdiot wrote:

I'm prepared (or perhaps hoping) to be wrong on this, but my reading of Steel Commissar is that it isn't able to order vehicles.

You are both right, and wrong. Sentinels and scout sentinels are vehicles, they have SQUADRON and PLATOON keywords, and can receive all orders. Whereas vehicles like LRBTs dont have PLATOON, and can only receive mechanised orders.

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

That said, popping "remain vigilant" in the opponents movement phase to screw over their deepstrike could potentially be clutch in the right scenario, that or the double obsec one during your morale phase to preempt the opponents scoring in their command phase

The "Look at me, I'm Objective Secured now!" order has won me all three games so far with the new codex and is the sole reason I'm considering Commissars. It is really good. Tho I don't know if it is good with Laurels specifically, I would rather have Leontus or a Commissar for it.

 p5freak wrote:

You are both right, and wrong. Sentinels and scout sentinels are vehicles, they have SQUADRON and PLATOON keywords, and can receive all orders. Whereas vehicles like LRBTs dont have PLATOON, and can only receive mechanised orders.

Oh, good catch! Even more reason to bring sentinels for extra flexibility

Sentinels and ordnance batteries are also useful because of their huge base sizes. An order to them can splash a massive area compared to ordering a standard infantry squad. They dont get voxes, but its a good trick to keep them near a commissar, castellan or creed to get over the order range issues.

 AtoMaki wrote:

 MrMoustaffa wrote:

That said, popping "remain vigilant" in the opponents movement phase to screw over their deepstrike could potentially be clutch in the right scenario, that or the double obsec one during your morale phase to preempt the opponents scoring in their command phase

The "Look at me, I'm Objective Secured now!" order has won me all three games so far with the new codex and is the sole reason I'm considering Commissars. It is really good. Tho I don't know if it is good with Laurels specifically, I would rather have Leontus or a Commissar for it.

Yeah anything that gives ability to get either obsec or more bodies to objective before end of command phase is _gold_.

And that's something that's hard to quantity with math's which is why those are the ones that tend to slip under radar. I remember when daemon codex previews started appearing and people claimed the khorne stratagem to move units for 2CP start of combat phase is useless I have found that to be best stratagem from book that I use...Ability to throw in obsec bodies to objective at start of combat phase is soooo good.

 AtoMaki wrote:
So today I tried out the Field Ordnance Battery, all three weapons. I honestly expected the Malleus to suck, but I liked that weapon the most - I had Ursula babysit the battery with Take Aim and +1S, and it did a crapton of damage. The Bombast was all kinds of 'meh' but that was expected too. The HLC gave "We have Vanquisher at home" feels, but my opponent was really scared of that battery and it really did more than the actual shooting performance (they took out one of those Primaris hover pickups and maybe 2 Aggressors before getting wiped in the 4th turn). I'm almost pleased with the unit but the 2-models restriction is giving me cancer.

In addition, something I noticed while checking out the new Cadian sprues: the Field Ordnance Battery have sergeant and vox options right on the sprue but no such thing on their dataslate. Take that NMNR! Now you can't have rules even if you do have models!

Im surprised that mortar did better than Bombast. What was target and were they both supported by orders? (to be clear, Im not disputing, just really interested in your experience with ordnance. I guessed that Bombast should overachieve Malleus against SM. And have you still used dataslate for our glorious indirect fire?

 UlrikDecado wrote:

 AtoMaki wrote:
So today I tried out the Field Ordnance Battery, all three weapons. I honestly expected the Malleus to suck, but I liked that weapon the most - I had Ursula babysit the battery with Take Aim and +1S, and it did a crapton of damage. The Bombast was all kinds of 'meh' but that was expected too. The HLC gave "We have Vanquisher at home" feels, but my opponent was really scared of that battery and it really did more than the actual shooting performance (they took out one of those Primaris hover pickups and maybe 2 Aggressors before getting wiped in the 4th turn). I'm almost pleased with the unit but the 2-models restriction is giving me cancer.

Im surprised that mortar did better than Bombast. What was target and were they both supported by orders? (to be clear, Im not disputing, just really interested in your experience with ordnance. I guessed that Bombast should overachieve Malleus against SM. And have you still used dataslate for our glorious indirect fire?

They were shooting the Primaris infantry camping on the objectives. I can't really tell apart Primaris infantry, but they were some kind of snipers I think? They were 10-strong and had Stalker boltguns, I dunno if that's a variant or not. The Bombasts clipped off some models, usually 2-3 with Take Aim (splashed from the Malleus), and the one time they had +1S it made zero difference. Meanwhile, on the other side of the battlefield, the Karskin were one-tapping entire squads for 30 points less. Say, the Bombast wasn't terrible... just not great either. The 6 base attacks for the Malleus really made a difference by comparison.

Thanks!
Yeah, I fear Kasrkin are so effective, they will be nerfed into oblivion :( Before I made my Mechanised Infantry army, I guess. Because GW hates units I love.

I do think that Ordnance is subpar to mechanised equivalents, but
1) it is easier to babysit them with officers
2) I simply like the visual style of row (ok, four) arty pieces booming from behind Infantry positions )

 UlrikDecado wrote:

1) it is easier to babysit them with officers

I actually found it more inconvenient to commit an officer to the batteries instead of sending them with the real heavy-hitters. Because of the no-same-order-per-turn restriction, you want multiple "small" officers to follow around the big boys, because only 1 officer with 3 orders/turn is not that good as they can't spam the good order(s).

Forget the query just seen a whole thread on the different infantry squads

I dont like the ordnance, they are glass cannons, expensive, hard to hide. A LRBT or 3 sentinels are almost the same points. Those are also hard to hide, but a lot tougher.

 p5freak wrote:
I dont like the ordnance, they are glass cannons, expensive, hard to hide. A LRBT or 3 sentinels are almost the same points. Those are also hard to hide, but a lot tougher.

Even the humble Hydra puts 2 Bombasts to shame since it's mobile, cheaper, tougher and hits better by default due to Turret.
(Yeah Bombasts can fire outside LoS but if they do they won't really kill anything with their -1BS -1 AP.)

I really want to like the Field Ordnance Batteries, but they're really bad with their current rules. Expensive, easily killed and have a massive footprint.

I mean they could keep the exception to OLOS shooting and artillery would still be not great..
i don’t see that happening though…

What I do hopes happens is they keep AoC on the baneblade and maybe dorn chassis. They could use it especially the baneblade chassis.