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.

So, spinning off from the "Are Monoliths worth it?" thread, where most folks seemed to think that they weren't, I was wondering: Are there any LoWs that are worth their current price in points plus the 3CP cost of the Super Heavy Auxiliary Detachment required to field them?

Obviously this leaves out any LoW that can be put in a Supreme Command Detachment, so no Gulliman or Mortarian.

It also begs the questions: How many points is 3CP worth? If you didn't need to spend 3CP to bring any of these units would they be underpriced?

Not looking to argue whether or not LoWs belong in 40k, or whether they should get faction traits, or anything like that. Just wondering if anyone considers any LoW worth its current price plus the opportunity cost of 3CP with its current rules.

Uh pretty much none of them.

I dunno, i'm growing increasingly fond of a trio of Killtanks for Orks.

The Shadow Sword can delete anything in the game in a single shooting phase, but it will likely die if it doesn't get to shoot on turn 1, or your opponent isn't an idiot. It'd be worth the points if your opponent is maining Knights, or some 500+ point units.

The thing is I don't think things like Shadowswords would really die fast these days. Eradicators are a threat, but they're not on you turn 1. I think the bigger problem is bringing such a massive gun with no real targets.

A Stormlord or a Hellhammer would probably live a while and pop Gravis/Primaris fairly well, but then it isn't helping you on objectives so it will shoot what scares it, but what scares it isn't necessarily scoring against you.

Knights are a problem, but then you get in their face while they try and take it out.

Pretty sure the answer is "no". A single Knight was only ever worth it as an allied detachment during the Castellan-soup era because of a specific combination of stuff that doesn't work anymore, the Baneblade chassis is squishier, easier to shut down, and has no more firepower than just taking three Russes, and no other superheavies have been in any way relevant since 7th.

(Before someone comes along to tell me that Heirodules are in a great place like they do every time I complain about under-supported FW stuff I checked, they're Heavy Support choices now.)

An Ork Kustom Stompa with Belly Gun and that Lifta Droppa kannon and the base shooting arm with some minor buffs can one round morty, if its Evil Sunz and gets the Visions buff along with more Dakka

It has amazing shooting output.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Pretty sure the answer is "no". A single Knight was only ever worth it as an allied detachment during the Castellan-soup era because of a specific combination of stuff that doesn't work anymore, the Baneblade chassis is squishier, easier to shut down, and has no more firepower than just taking three Russes, and no other superheavies have been in any way relevant since 7th.

(Before someone comes along to tell me that Heirodules are in a great place like they do every time I complain about under-supported FW stuff I checked, they're Heavy Support choices now.)

Baby Knights are dirt cheap since faq. If they get a 5 man counts as obsec and proper Knights get 10 in their book then I can see their mono lists getting traction.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Pretty sure the answer is "no". A single Knight was only ever worth it as an allied detachment during the Castellan-soup era because of a specific combination of stuff that doesn't work anymore, the Baneblade chassis is squishier, easier to shut down, and has no more firepower than just taking three Russes, and no other superheavies have been in any way relevant since 7th.

(Before someone comes along to tell me that Heirodules are in a great place like they do every time I complain about under-supported FW stuff I checked, they're Heavy Support choices now.)

Baby Knights are dirt cheap since faq. If they get a 5 man counts as obsec and proper Knights get 10 in their book then I can see their mono lists getting traction.

Mono knights don't cost additional CP to field. We're talking LoWs brought in a SHAD. You mentioned Hellhammers and Stormlords, those are 490 and 470 PPM respectively without sponsons, do you consider those units worth those prices plus the 3CP surcharge for the SHAD required to field them?

Sorry, not trying to single you out Daed, just looking for your thoughts.

What about the FW Astartes version of the Shadow Sword, that Astraeus thing with the two "particle mass driver gun things" that are like 72" S8 AP5, D4 damage with like 12 shots per turn? And it has Void shields. And FLY. That is easily worth the stupid cost.

The only model I'd consider at the cost of paying CP for right now would be the Tesseract Vault or Magnus if I am playing him souped with Tzeentch Daemons.

On the whole, they are very much not worth it. GW should really consider adding a LoW slot to Battalions.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Mono knights don't cost additional CP to field. We're talking LoWs brought in a SHAD. You mentioned Hellhammers and Stormlords, those are 490 and 470 PPM respectively without sponsons, do you consider those units worth those prices plus the 3CP surcharge for the SHAD required to field them?

Sorry, not trying to single you out Daed, just looking for your thoughts.

They might kill a bunch of stuff, but they would probably weigh a list down (no pun intended) instead of making it better.

If you could blunt enemy AT then by size alone they might hold objectives well. And if they can chip at morty they could be worthwhile, but that's AM.

CSM and superheavies? Harder sell.

All in my head sadly. I wouldn't avoid giving it a shot though.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Pretty sure the answer is "no". A single Knight was only ever worth it as an allied detachment during the Castellan-soup era because of a specific combination of stuff that doesn't work anymore, the Baneblade chassis is squishier, easier to shut down, and has no more firepower than just taking three Russes, and no other superheavies have been in any way relevant since 7th.

(Before someone comes along to tell me that Heirodules are in a great place like they do every time I complain about under-supported FW stuff I checked, they're Heavy Support choices now.)

Baby Knights are dirt cheap since faq. If they get a 5 man counts as obsec and proper Knights get 10 in their book then I can see their mono lists getting traction.

Eh. They're really badly hard-countered by any melee unit with multi-damage attacks, especially on the shrunken tables today, and they're exactly in the profile bracket that's badly screwed by D2 HBs/+2D melta. I'm not seeing it.

Daedalus81 wrote:They might kill a bunch of stuff, but they would probably weigh a list down (no pun intended) instead of making it better.

If you could blunt enemy AT then by size alone they might hold objectives well. And if they can chip at morty they could be worthwhile, but that's AM.

CSM and superheavies? Harder sell.

All in my head sadly. I wouldn't avoid giving it a shot though.

Would you say the 3CP price is what weighs the list down? Or that most LoWs only contribution is pure killing power? The CP cost is definitely a problem for CSM, we're very CP dependent.

Holding an objective with a super heavy tank by using its sheer size to block off the objective works. I've done it.

AnomanderRake wrote:

Spoiler:

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
Pretty sure the answer is "no". A single Knight was only ever worth it as an allied detachment during the Castellan-soup era because of a specific combination of stuff that doesn't work anymore, the Baneblade chassis is squishier, easier to shut down, and has no more firepower than just taking three Russes, and no other superheavies have been in any way relevant since 7th.

(Before someone comes along to tell me that Heirodules are in a great place like they do every time I complain about under-supported FW stuff I checked, they're Heavy Support choices now.)

Baby Knights are dirt cheap since faq. If they get a 5 man counts as obsec and proper Knights get 10 in their book then I can see their mono lists getting traction.

Eh. They're really badly hard-countered by any melee unit with multi-damage attacks, especially on the shrunken tables today, and they're exactly in the profile bracket that's badly screwed by D2 HBs/+2D melta. I'm not seeing it.

Are we talking about the baby Knights or the full sized? My Contemptor eats the small ones alive in melee, unbuffed. Add Diabolic Strength and Prescience from a Sorcerer and he does the same to the big ones. It's hilarious every time.

No, not unless you're playing in a game size where expending 3CP is kind of trivial to get a large force concentration on one model.

Pssst...

>.>

<.<

That's probably the point.

They're probably supposed to be super inefficient if bringing one eats up a large fraction of your CPs.

Because see, giant units naturally use CP super efficiently, that's the lesson of the Castellan meta. And not just giant horde units either, giant models, whose output is not significantly blunted by 1/2 or even 3/4 damage.

A single SuperHeavy? No. A trio so they can benefit from Chapter Tactics\Household traits\ etc, Certainly. Especially if one of them can be a warlord so as to cost 0CP? Even better.

The trouble with the SHAD detachment is the double whammy of not getting detachment abilities PLUS the 3 CP.

If you're paying 3 CP you should get detachment abilities if all your keywords match!

So as it stands right now, no, there isn't a single superheavy that I'd take in a SHAD that I consider worth the price. It would essentially have to be perfectly points efficient without buffs via CP or detachment bonuses on its own, and as we know superheavies are almost universally trash without some kind stratagem or buff or whatever being used on them.

the_scotsman wrote:

Because see, giant units naturally use CP super efficiently, that's the lesson of the Castellan meta. And not just giant horde units either, giant models, whose output is not significantly blunted by 1/2 or even 3/4 damage.

the castellan was OP because of Raven + cawls wrath + raven strats + rotate. No other Superheavy gets that same amout of support. Just let me use my Wraithknight in my wraithhost with no penalty :(

No one mentioned movement rules. Any LOW without FLY is pretty much immobile when it encounters a fuel pipe or a barricade.

 p5freak wrote:
No one mentioned movement rules. Any LOW without FLY is pretty much immobile when it encounters a fuel pipe or a barricade.

Another good point. I have a bit less of a problem with that, though, as that can be addressed by the players making sensible boards.

the_scotsman wrote:No, not unless you're playing in a game size where expending 3CP is kind of trivial to get a large force concentration on one model.

Pssst...

>.>

<.<

That's probably the point.

They're probably supposed to be super inefficient if bringing one eats up a large fraction of your CPs.

Because see, giant units naturally use CP super efficiently, that's the lesson of the Castellan meta. And not just giant horde units either, giant models, whose output is not significantly blunted by 1/2 or even 3/4 damage.

That makes sense until you consider:

>.>

<.<

Mono Knights. A pure Knights army suffers no CP penalty. If the 3CP surcharge for the SHAD is designed to push LoWs towards Onlaught level games, why don't pure Knights suffer a similar penalty? How is an entire army of LoWs, which is skew in its purest form, better than a combined arms approach of 1 LoW + a TAC list of more standard units?

carldooley wrote:A single SuperHeavy? No. A trio so they can benefit from Chapter Tactics\Household traits\ etc, Certainly. Especially if one of them can be a warlord so as to cost 0CP? Even better.

Again, only Knights can do that. Why is that fine for one faction but all others are effectively penalized for bringing a single LoW, even if it's from their own faction?

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Again, only Knights can do that. Why is that fine for one faction but all others are effectively penalized for bringing a single LoW, even if it's from their own faction?

GW litterally just needs to add a LoW slot to battalions. Forces monofaction, forces you to bring other stuff (HQ and troops) and lets you benefit from your subfaction rules. (As it stands, Iyanden can't even get a wraithknight with its craftworld bonus -.- )

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Holding an objective with a super heavy tank by using its sheer size to block off the objective works. I've done it.

Just for clarification: You used a flat objective marker in that game? Since the official objective markers are 3D models, you would not be able to sit on them directly, right?

Or am I missing something?

a_typical_hero wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Holding an objective with a super heavy tank by using its sheer size to block off the objective works. I've done it.

Just for clarification: You used a flat objective marker in that game? Since the official objective markers are 3D models, you would not be able to sit on them directly, right?

Or am I missing something?

no matter what you use as an objective marker, it doesnt physically exist for the game purposes, you're free to move straight over it.

also, the fellblade is huge, putting the corner of a thread within 3" and stuffing the rest of it between two terrain pieces isnt impossible at all.

The rules suggest using 40mm round markers, and there is a huge number of markers sold by GW.

I've seen as many flat objectives as I've seen flags, piles of ammo crates, the official GW stuff, wounded soldiers and anything that can be found in a bits box.

the_scotsman wrote:
...Because see, giant units naturally use CP super efficiently, that's the lesson of the Castellan meta. And not just giant horde units either, giant models, whose output is not significantly blunted by 1/2 or even 3/4 damage.

The Castellan meta didn't teach us that superheavies used CP super efficiently, it taught us that Castellans used CP super-efficiently, and GW also nerfed stuff the Castellan relied on (Rotate now costs 3CP for the Dominus chassis). Applying a CP cost to all superheavies, including the ones that come in factions with no useful stratagems or support abilities of any kind, is the kind of massive scattergun nerf GW loves that hits way more stuff than what it was actually targeted at (like the Rule of Three to catch out Flyrants, or burning the whole game and starting over to delete about five pointless USRs).

a_typical_hero wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Holding an objective with a super heavy tank by using its sheer size to block off the objective works. I've done it.

Just for clarification: You used a flat objective marker in that game? Since the official objective markers are 3D models, you would not be able to sit on them directly, right?

Or am I missing something?

Yes, it was a flat marker, but I didn't put the tank directly on top of it. It was within 1, and I positioned it lengthwise in front of the marker, and it was the 4th turn, so he didn't have anything left close enough and with enough movement to get around to the other side within scoring distance. A Fellblade is about 6 across by 9 long, so I basically parked a building in front of the objective, that could score the objective itself. Not a tactic you could rely upon in every game, but it worked that time.

VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Again, only Knights can do that. Why is that fine for one faction but all others are effectively penalized for bringing a single LoW, even if it's from their own faction?

GW litterally just needs to add a LoW slot to battalions. Forces monofaction, forces you to bring other stuff (HQ and troops) and lets you benefit from your subfaction rules. (As it stands, Iyanden can't even get a wraithknight with its craftworld bonus -.- )

But would most LoWs be balanced without the 3CP surcharge? If they are, then they are effectively overpriced. If not, then adding a LoW slot to Battalions without increasing their price would make them unbalanced.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
...But would most LoWs be balanced without the 3CP surcharge?...

Eh. Most LoWs are underarmed, too squishy, and have little to no support from the card-game elements (relics, stratagems, character bubbles). The 3CP surcharge is icing on the cake of nonviability, what you really need is for GW to acknowledge LoWs are part of the game and integrate them into the design of the rest of it.

I think that the reason why the Battalion doesn't in include a LoW is to avoid Mortarion, Guilliman and other similar LoW.

So, as usual, GW rules destroy themselves.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:

Would you say the 3CP price is what weighs the list down? Or that most LoWs only contribution is pure killing power? The CP cost is definitely a problem for CSM, we're very CP dependent.

You have to build around that drop in CP. If you're planning to VotLW and Cac something every turn it won't work out well. In experimenting with Necrons I usually wind up with 7CP to start and I don't have any LoW, but then I don't plan on using it all that much.

I might go in with the consideration that 1CP will be for a Doom Scythe on turn 1 to either reroll a hit or wound. Then I plan to never reroll for that model again, because odds are it will die ( it survives 1 out of three games ). I just need it to ace some Aggressors to keep the heat off my Warrior blobs. Skorpekh Destroyers get 2CP for -1 to wound until they're properly in melee.

Alternatively I could make a list that drops 3 to 4 CP on a single unit to make them go hammy, but if I did I'd have to lean back on pre-game stuff. CSM don't have a lot of units that have presence like Necron Warriors though.

You could probably get away with something like this:

Jump Lord, CS & Meltagun, Murderous, Talons (115)
Jump Lord, TH, Scourging ( I don't think auras are particularly important to turn off these days...maybe for DG ) (125)

CSM, Champ w/ CS & LC (4LC and 1 CS attack), Meltagun (85) x 5
Helbrute, HPC, CB (120) x 2
Greater Possessed (65)
Spawn (23) x 3
8 Talons (184)
5 Havocs, Combi & 4x ML (148)

That's 1361, which is enough to squeeze a Fellblade into.

Deploy the Fellblade first as far as you can get to one side of the table. Then you have 11 drops before the dreadnoughts to let them parse out their anti-tank, which should lean towards the Fellblade. You could drop the dreadnoughts immediately exactly opposite and force a choice or you can try and bait them to leaning towards the Fellblade. A smart player will likely go central ( or could get scared into reserves or a covered position for fear of going second ).

It still feels a bit limp. If CSM Dreadnoughts had -1D they would be solid in facing anything like Aggressors on the other end of the table. The DG dread changed Crazed to reroll 1s to wound permanently once the dreadnought it damage, which seems great. The Helbrute Plasma Cannon is D3 in the DG book (sub for MM for close range fighting).

( Some other notable eventual upgrades for CSM through DG -- Spawn are 2D3 attacks instead of D6 and Possessed are flat 4 attacks. )

CSM with 1 wound also feel soft ( especially when I think about my Warriors ), but these will at least have punch. Just keep them from being overly exposed. Missile Launcher Havocs will help clean up the things you're worried about more - hordes or anti-tank.

AnomanderRake wrote:[Eh. They're really badly hard-countered by any melee unit with multi-damage attacks, especially on the shrunken tables today, and they're exactly in the profile bracket that's badly screwed by D2 HBs/+2D melta. I'm not seeing it.

Thing is they have the legs for days to choose the time and place of engagement. Anything scary to them should be popped by big bois. They still need more to work, but they're pretty decent.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Cybtroll wrote:
I think that the reason why the Battalion doesn't in include a LoW is to avoid Mortarion, Guilliman and other similar LoW.

So, as usual, GW rules destroy themselves.

I'm glad that Primarch Bros isn't really a thing any more though I'm sure someone will find a way to force it when Magnus gets his redo.