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.

 lessthanjeff wrote:

Sterling191 wrote:
Neither Inquisitors nor Assassins negate doctrines. Rules have been updated since their initial implementation to permit them to be taken without borking armies.

Am I misreading the text on page 33 then? The new codex specifies that you can exclude agents of the imperium and unaligned units for counting as a deathwatch detachment but then only specifies unaligned models for your army getting combat doctrines.

As far as I'm aware, taking an inquisitor still allows you to use doctrines. What it does not allow you to do is rotate the doctrines as you wish by being pure Deathwatch. So, if you have an AOI, you have to go dev->tac->tac/ass->ass->ass as other marine chapters do.

 bullyboy wrote:

As far as I'm aware, taking an inquisitor still allows you to use doctrines. What it does not allow you to do is rotate the doctrines as you wish by being pure Deathwatch. So, if you have an AOI, you have to go dev->tac->tac/ass->ass->ass as other marine chapters do.

Again, Inquisitors and Assassins (when taken correctly, IE: solo) are explicitly ignored for the purpose of breaking doctrines.

Hey guys, would you equip eliminators in a Killteam with bolt sniper or Lasfusils?

Sterling191 wrote:

 bullyboy wrote:

As far as I'm aware, taking an inquisitor still allows you to use doctrines. What it does not allow you to do is rotate the doctrines as you wish by being pure Deathwatch. So, if you have an AOI, you have to go dev->tac->tac/ass->ass->ass as other marine chapters do.

Again, Inquisitors and Assassins (when taken correctly, IE: solo) are explicitly ignored for the purpose of breaking doctrines.

nevermind, I had to go check my ravenguard supplement and the PA books to see how this works. Single AOI units (Inq or assassin) do indeed seem to ignore this.

Also good to know I can take a single ordo inq without screwing things up.

 bullyboy wrote:

nevermind, I had to go check my ravenguard supplement and the PA books to see how this works. Single AOI units (Inq or assassin) do indeed seem to ignore this.

Also good to know I can take a single ordo inq without screwing things up.

In fairness, Assassins when they were first updated in late 8th *did* break doctrines. GW learned their lesson and when Inquisitors were first updated pre-PA they were able to work around it. It wasnt until PA that Assassins got the same updated wording.

And while I personally prefer a Malleus Inquisitor, the Xenos one is exceptionally fluffy and not a detriment should you choose to include it.

 Hesselhof wrote:
Hey guys, would you equip eliminators in a Killteam with bolt sniper or Lasfusils?

Snipers all the way. Fusils are decent, but you have other anti-Gravis / Anti-vehicle options that dont overlap with character hunting that the Eliminators are premier at.

The easy comparison is just that a Las-Fusil Eliminator costs the same as an Eradicator.

 LunarSol wrote:
The easy comparison is just that a Las-Fusil Eliminator costs the same as an Eradicator.

I mean, sure, but eradicators are comical compared to literally everything in the game/codex. Compare eradicators to LITERALLY ANYTHING ELSE and you can "prove" that anything is a bad unit.

Ok, so how are people equipping (or thinking about equipping) Indomitor kill teams. It's the only one I'm not sure about.
Do you stick with 10 man unit with 3 eradicators, 1 inceptor (to allow fallback and shoot at 1 less CP), and 1 aggressor (for some melee)? Or are you thinking about combat squadding, and if so, how do you allocate each member?

Anti-horde:
5 heavy Intercessors, 4 aggressors, 1 Inceptor
5 heavy Intercessors, 5 bolter Inceptors

Anti-MEQ/TEQ/Vehicles:
5 heavy Intercessors, 5 Eradicators, or drop 1 for the Inceptor fallback

Anti-MEQ:
5 heavy Intercessors, 5 plasma inceptors

ObSec Jumpers:
5 heavy Intercessors, 5 inceptors combat squadded

Do any of the proteus heavy / unique weapons have any merit (compared to just taking plasma / combi) ?

Frags and Infernus being the main two in consideration I think, don't think there's any others.

Ive used a 10 man squad w/ 2 x Frags, 2 x Infernus and the rest with Shotguns a couple times. Combat squaded in the Teleportarium they’ve been my answer to my buddies 20 Necron Warrior bomb w/ Veil and Royal warden. I haven’t shot off more than 6-7 guys in the drop, using the Overkill strat to keep them down even. I’m not sure it’s enough damage honestly but look forward to trying them against tougher and weaker opponents. I feel this new meta of multi wound models backed up by FnP and Invuln psychic powers has me leaning toward Missile Launchers. I don’t need to be as close and while I’ve whiffed quite a lot with the D6 damage roll in the past, I think they’ll have a deeper psychological presence via board control.

Had a test game last weekend and my Frag Cannons were crucial in stripping the last few wounds of T7 vehicles when I needed it. I like the duality of their capabilities but wish the horde clearer was better.

That is good to know about the psychic awakening rules so I’m glad you shared that. I’ve not played in about a year now so I missed that PA release and was just going off the DW codex (which is still weird that they mention agents of the imperium in some places but not others).

Regarding the heavy weapons, I shelved my frag cannons. Losing the ability to go to str 9 makes them strictly worse than a plasma gun against tough targets and for anti horde you’d be better off with combi-flamers. For the cost of one frag cannon, you could take 3 special weapons and improve your output against both targets considerably.

I used to use a squad of frag cannons to help with antitank because we had so few options for that before. Now, we have lots of options and the frag cannons got nerfed for some reason.

They were ok at 10pts (per index), but 15pts puts them purely in fluff context now. I'll still take a few, but they need to go back to 10pts.

Niiru wrote:
Do any of the proteus heavy / unique weapons have any merit (compared to just taking plasma / combi) ?

Frags and Infernus being the main two in consideration I think, don't think there's any others.

I'm not a fan of the Infernus or the Frag cannon (largely due to cost considerations for what they can do), but basic HBs, the humble Missile Launcher and the CML are solid gold. Yes, it would be faaaaaaar better if we could deploy lascannons or multimeltas (seriously, give Deathwatch MMs and I'll never, ever, need to run an Eradicator), but their range and relative cost profiles make them solid choices for backfield objective fire teams.

 bullyboy wrote:
They were ok at 10pts (per index), but 15pts puts them purely in fluff context now. I'll still take a few, but they need to go back to 10pts.

I think all of the index points feel better than what we got in the Codex. I'd not be at all surprised to discover their actually more current.

I’ve not crunched the numbers on the infernus yet, but I believe it’s only 5 more points than the heavy bolter by itself. I was considering a squad with 4 heavy bolters anyways, so that one might not be too bad. I also wish we could get multi-meltas though...

I haven’t been impressed with cyclone missile output, but that’s also partly because of the combined expensive cost of the terminator it’s on.

I was thinking about trying the chapter champion for a shared 5++, but now I’m wondering if that’s worth it. First off, it will only help against a high ap weapon and probably only for 1 or 2 units near him. Putting those points into stormshields would add more durability to units against both small arms fire and high ap weapons without positioning requirements. He’s also another liability for scoring points. Has he done anything remarkable for you guys that more stormshields couldn’t have replaced?

I think its more about putting an Invul on Gravis.

 lessthanjeff wrote:

I haven’t been impressed with cyclone missile output, but that’s also partly because of the combined expensive cost of the terminator it’s on.

53 points is 8 points more expensive than an HMR Eradicator, has a bit less anti-tank/anti-elite ability but comes with considerably longer range, inbuilt anti-infantry (and absolutely terrifying anti horde capacity), actual melee capacity, a baked in invuln and 2+ save while also being able to pull off squad-wide movement shenanigans for another 5 points. It's an absolute steal.

 lessthanjeff wrote:
I’ve not crunched the numbers on the infernus yet, but I believe it’s only 5 more points than the heavy bolter by itself. I was considering a squad with 4 heavy bolters anyways, so that one might not be too bad.

It is 5 points more, and I've been trying to justify that extra 20 points, but not sure that I can, except I do have a couple of ideas.

The efficiency is that if you want an HB anyway or you want an HF anyway, then it's only 5 points more for the additional weapon. So it's a discount versus buying the two weapons.

Also it's efficient in that you pack more weapons onto the same number of guys, so if you're trying to squeeze more weapons into a transport or a teleportarium unit, it lets you double up on guns for those four guys. But that suggests that we're looking at more of an alpha-strike unit, twice the shots and you pay a premium to be able to cram all those shots in the first shooting phase after you arrive. Similar to combi weapons.

Usually we think about heavy bolters as a backfield weapon for a unit that will be standing still and not moving around. Using IHBs that way is mostly a waste of the 5-point flamer. You might think that they'd be handy against backfield assaulty bully units, and maybe they would, but how often does that happen?

But if you think about the IHB as a heavy flamer with a couple of extra shots, then that goes back to the idea that it's an up-close weapon, for deepstriking.

Usually the disadvantage of having the HB on an up-close unit is that you have to move around and incur the hit penalty. But if you fire both weapon profiles on an IHB, you're at -1 to hit anyway, and the penalty maxes out at -1, so you might as well move and shoot every turn.

So maybe the way to justify it is to think about the IHB as a heavier combi-weapon, more efficient than the combi-flamer or combi-plas because it's more like two special weapons combined, rather than a special and a bolter. The thing you get for your 5-point premium is that it has the profile roughly of a plas (the 2-damage HB, but lower str/AP and no overheat) *and* the profile of a flamer, (but the heavy version).

So in the role of coming in from the teleportarium, in a drop pod, or from a transport, you can lay down one big volley--including 8 shots at a target up to 36" away behind the screen while you flame the screen--then any survivors can run & gun and still be a threat out to 42".

Seems like it's worth testing.

After reading the data sheet just now does the 1 Heavy Hammer per 5 Model bullet mean that I can put them on my watch Sergeant and Black Shield?

Runt Nosher wrote:
After reading the data sheet just now does the 1 Heavy Hammer per 5 Model bullet mean that I can put them on my watch Sergeant and Black Shield?

Only if you're in a full 10-man unit, otherwise yes.

Sterling191 wrote:

53 points is 8 points more expensive than an HMR Eradicator, has a bit less anti-tank/anti-elite ability but comes with considerably longer range, inbuilt anti-infantry (and absolutely terrifying anti horde capacity), actual melee capacity, a baked in invuln and 2+ save while also being able to pull off squad-wide movement shenanigans for another 5 points. It's an absolute steal.

I assume you're running them as dual lightning claw? I didn't notice that as an option to make them cheaper, so I'm glad you pointed out the cost as it does make me a little more tempted.

The big appeal of the eradicator to me is the damage being 5-10 vs 1-6 though and for targeting big targets the extra ap is also important. Comparing to the vets in a squad they'd be replacing, that's also the cost of 2 with either plasma weapons or storm shields depending on if you want offense or defense. Offensively, 4 shots with higher ap and higher chance to hit since they aren't heavy weapons. Defensively, an extra wound and at a better invul save. The teleport homer is nice, but also requires the unit being off the table for another turn. I'll probably try it, but I'm on the pessimistic side.

Flavius Infernus wrote:

So in the role of coming in from the teleportarium, in a drop pod, or from a transport, you can lay down one big volley--including 8 shots at a target up to 36" away behind the screen while you flame the screen--then any survivors can run & gun and still be a threat out to 42".

Seems like it's worth testing.

Was that supposed to be "8 hits" assuming you aren't moving the unit? Guessing movement will be needed to get both weapons firing so 6 hits but also I think they'll both need to target the same unit since it's 1 weapon. I believe you can only split shots when they come from different weapons.

 lessthanjeff wrote:

Flavius Infernus wrote:

So in the role of coming in from the teleportarium, in a drop pod, or from a transport, you can lay down one big volley--including 8 shots at a target up to 36" away behind the screen while you flame the screen--then any survivors can run & gun and still be a threat out to 42".

Seems like it's worth testing.

Was that supposed to be "8 hits" assuming you aren't moving the unit? Guessing movement will be needed to get both weapons firing so 6 hits but also I think they'll both need to target the same unit since it's 1 weapon. I believe you can only split shots when they come from different weapons.

Nah, I just misremembered the number of shot that an HB gets (I was still thinking in terms of them being like plasma guns with Str 5 and much less AP). So should have said 12 shots.

I'm not sure about the rules requiring all profiles on a weapon to shoot at the same target. I read over the rules for that a couple of times, and it's definitely not explicit, but you could make arguments for either conclusion based on what's there. Probably should be a topic for YMDC.

It's no great loss if you do have to shoot both at the same target. The closer target is likely to need killing too.

 lessthanjeff wrote:


I assume you're running them as dual lightning claw? I didn't notice that as an option to make them cheaper, so I'm glad you pointed out the cost as it does make me a little more tempted.

LCs are a waste on Terminators as the model has to give up its bolter to take them. Basic power weapons and SBs are zero cost equipment, pick the one that suits your loadout (I personally hold to Axes, but there's roles for all three).

 lessthanjeff wrote:

The big appeal of the eradicator to me is the damage being 5-10 vs 1-6 though and for targeting big targets the extra ap is also important. Comparing to the vets in a squad they'd be replacing, that's also the cost of 2 with either plasma weapons or storm shields depending on if you want offense or defense. Offensively, 4 shots with higher ap and higher chance to hit since they aren't heavy weapons. Defensively, an extra wound and at a better invul save. The teleport homer is nice, but also requires the unit being off the table for another turn. I'll probably try it, but I'm on the pessimistic side.

Special Weapon vets and Terminators fulfill wildly different roles within a kill team, even with the loss of Unflinching. The former is about close in firepower, the latter is in giving the unit an expanded engagement envelope and being downright painful to shift (exponentially so with defensive and healing support). Working together, they allow the unit to do far more than either could separately.

 lessthanjeff wrote:

The big appeal of the eradicator to me is the damage being 5-10 vs 1-6 though and for targeting big targets the extra ap is also important.

Yes, CMLs dont do the anti-tank role as well as HMR Eradicators. Literally nothing in the game does that job better than HMR Eradicators. But the latter falls on its face hellaciously hard in melee, and when dealing with hordes. A Proteus team with a few Terminators and LC Vets is *not* something you casually tag into combat against.

Power weapons are 3 points each for terminators and vets in my codex. The lightning claw seems to be the only one that is free so that’s why I was assuming you had that loadout. Honestly, a pair of claws doesn’t sound bad to me to get 5 attacks in the first round at ap2 and rerolling wounds.

For durability in the unit, you could get 4 wounds at a 2+ 4++ for 50 points of vets but the terminator you’re describing seems to be 3 wounds at 2+ 5++ for 56 points (61 with the teleport homer). While there is an advantage to having the toughness focused on one model for rezzing purposes, wouldn’t you not want to put damage on the terminator till the unit was almost wiped because of the investment in the one model?

 lessthanjeff wrote:
Power weapons are 3 points each for terminators and vets in my codex.

fething hell GW broke it from the index to the codex. Non PF/TH weapons were all free in the latter (and are free for baseline codex terminators). That's another for the FAQ pile. I'll need to check the SW supplement, but I think we're now the only loyalist terminators that get double charged for these weapons.

Edit: Correct, we pay extra for what every other Marine army gets for free.

 lessthanjeff wrote:

For durability in the unit, you could get 4 wounds at a 2+ 4++ for 50 points of vets but the terminator you’re describing seems to be 3 wounds at 2+ 5++ for 56 points (61 with the teleport homer). While there is an advantage to having the toughness focused on one model for rezzing purposes, wouldn’t you not want to put damage on the terminator till the unit was almost wiped because of the investment in the one model?

Who says I only run a single terminator in a Proteus team?

I don't mean to imply that you only run one in the whole unit, but I'm asking if you have 2 20 or 25 point models in a unit and then 56 or 61 point models in the unit, which ones do you put wounds on first? The 1 terminator to 2 vet comparison will continue regardless of how many terminators you actually include in your army.

Basically, I like the tough model to be separate from the hard-hitting one. I usually want the wounds to go on the cheaper models first so I don't lose the expensive weapons, so what are the circumstances where you are putting the damage on the terminator first?

 lessthanjeff wrote:
I don't mean to imply that you only run one in the whole unit, but I'm asking if you have 2 20 or 25 point models in a unit and then 56 or 61 point models in the unit, which ones do you put wounds on first? The 1 terminator to 2 vet comparison will continue regardless of how many terminators you actually include in your army.

Basically, I like the tough model to be separate from the hard-hitting one. I usually want the wounds to go on the cheaper models first so I don't lose the expensive weapons, so what are the circumstances where you are putting the damage on the terminator first?

Again, you're assuming that every Terminator in a squad is going to have a CML. In non-Crusade games, they're not. Furthermore, all incoming attacks are not created equal. Terminators are exceptionally good at soaking small arms fire, while Vets are ideal for taking things like Lascannon or Melta fire. Where you start allocating wounds in a kill team is a very delicate dance (both due to mixed save characteristics and the 9th edition attack allocation rules), but can allow for significantly greater durability than the squad appears to have on paper.

Finally, points costs and weapon choices mean you're not going to have shields on every Vet. That makes the underlying 2+ 3W profile on the terminator vastly more valuable.

Right, if you want to give specifics of the exact units you're running, we can run a more detailed comparison across units. All I have to go on right now is you said a single terminator with a cyclone missile launcher was a steal for its durability and output. I'm just trying to show what an equivalent number of points buys in vets for their durability and output to compare the value of the choice. If you'd rather compare a terminator with a different loadout, just tell me. All I'm trying to do is compare the numbers so anyone reading can understand which one they want to pick and what the advantages will be of the choice.

Every 56 point terminator with a power weapon and cml could be replaced with 2 vets that both have stormshields and one that has a special weapon like a plasma gun for 55 points. Terminator is 3 wounds with a 2+ 5++ on one model with 2 str 8 shots. Vets would get 4 wounds with a 2+ 4++ across two models with 2 str 8 shots. That's about the closest I can make the numbers for a comparison.

Durability wise, I think vets win hand down. They're more resistant to elite shooting from the likes of eradicators (because it's two models so you can't lose all 4 wounds from a single hit), they have more wounds overall (so better against the small arms fire), and they have a better invul.

Output wise, harder to compare. Both get 2 strength 8 shots. Terms lose accuracy with movement but have better range. Plasma gun has better ap, but could blow up. In melee the vets will get a lot more attacks, but at less ap since I probably wouldn't recommend upgrading their weapons. The free chainswords seem solid enough.

I'm just trying to make as close of a comparison as I can for value comparison.

I'm not recommending every vet in a unit gets a stormshield, but I'm saying every terminator chosen could be 2 vets with stormshields or special weapons for less cost.