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.

Has anyone here used castraferrum dreadnoughts in the new edition? Their low initiative has me sad, but other than that, they don't strike me as too bad. I was thinking of using my helbrute as a corrupted dreadnought in my Word Bearers army, with a power fist or chain fist, multi-melta, and heavy flamer or combi-bolter. The meltagun is cool but might be too expensive.

Played against them a few times. They're a solid budget dreadnaught choice. 1v1 Against a contemptor they'll normally lose due to the initiative but they're less points so that's not a massive issue. Vs everything else they're still great

Good against Terminators, not so good against Contemptors and Primarchs. Flamestorm cannon is fun.

Aside from the absolutely naff Initiative, boxnaughts will still have a place as a cheaper, slightly friendlier alternative to the contemptor.
Nice to see an almost full range of weapons variants available. Shame there's not siege hammer though. The ferromantic deflector is also a welcome addition.

I'm hesitant until they update the quite frankly nonsense weapon options.

Surely they can't have intended that the Castra Ferrum should pay +20 for a multi-melta when the Contemptor pay +5 for a gravis melta cannon, not to mention that lots of the other options don't match up either.

Keel wrote:
I'm hesitant until they update the quite frankly nonsense weapon options.

Surely they can't have intended that the Castra Ferrum should pay +20 for a multi-melta when the Contemptor pay +5 for a gravis melta cannon, not to mention that lots of the other options don't match up either.

Weapon upgrade costs are linked to the former weapon which has been replaced. When the previous weapon was quite powerful then the replacement weapon´s upgrade cost will be low.

 Strg Alt wrote:

Keel wrote:
I'm hesitant until they update the quite frankly nonsense weapon options.

Surely they can't have intended that the Castra Ferrum should pay +20 for a multi-melta when the Contemptor pay +5 for a gravis melta cannon, not to mention that lots of the other options don't match up either.

Weapon upgrade costs are linked to the former weapon which has been replaced. When the previous weapon was quite powerful then the replacement weapon´s upgrade cost will be low.

Both start with a gravis bolt cannon. Some weapon upgrade costs are identical with the Contemptor, eg. gravis lascannons but many are bonkers off for no good reason.

Keel wrote:

 Strg Alt wrote:

Keel wrote:
I'm hesitant until they update the quite frankly nonsense weapon options.

Surely they can't have intended that the Castra Ferrum should pay +20 for a multi-melta when the Contemptor pay +5 for a gravis melta cannon, not to mention that lots of the other options don't match up either.

Weapon upgrade costs are linked to the former weapon which has been replaced. When the previous weapon was quite powerful then the replacement weapon´s upgrade cost will be low.

Both start with a gravis bolt cannon. Some weapon upgrade costs are identical with the Contemptor, eg. gravis lascannons but many are bonkers off for no good reason.

In that case the unit entry was badly written like almost anything else in that pdf.

Iron Warriors can take a Graviton Crusher upgrade for dreadnoughts, which replaces the fist. I just claim the seismic hammer is that. So far no complaints. I run 2 box-naughts, one with chain-fist and one with the Graviton thing, both have auto-cannnons, and they're middle of the road choices, cheap and annoying to deal with, and a good force multiplier for infantry.

I want to get some Casta Ferrum for my army 17th Legion The Word Bearers, Removed from the main lists but the legacy lists have them PDF from WHC Im thinking of running them as CC dreads with Stormbolters or flamers whilst my Contemptors/Leviathans do the heavy lifting Ferrums supporting Destroyer and Assault Squads..Held in reserve to hammer down in drop pods and do the Gods work.

 ArcaneHorror wrote:
Has anyone here used castraferrum dreadnoughts in the new edition? Their low initiative has me sad, but other than that, they don't strike me as too bad. I was thinking of using my helbrute as a corrupted dreadnought in my Word Bearers army, with a power fist or chain fist, multi-melta, and heavy flamer or combi-bolter. The meltagun is cool but might be too expensive.

Hellbrute could also be used as the WB exclusive corrupted dreadnought.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Keel wrote:
I'm hesitant until they update the quite frankly nonsense weapon options.

Surely they can't have intended that the Castra Ferrum should pay +20 for a multi-melta when the Contemptor pay +5 for a gravis melta cannon, not to mention that lots of the other options don't match up either.

This way GW makes sure that players buy Contemptors instead of relying on boxnaughts which they have bought years ago.

I don't own any boxnaughts so this is maybe the impetus to grab a couple

Technically, to be period accurate, you should hunt down the OOP MkIV Dreadnoughts, but only the strictest "historical" Heresy players should say anything about newer patterns.

 Platuan4th wrote:
Technically, to be period accurate, you should hunt down the OOP MkIV Dreadnoughts, but only the strictest "historical" Heresy players should say anything about newer patterns.

Source, please?

Keel wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:
Technically, to be period accurate, you should hunt down the OOP MkIV Dreadnoughts, but only the strictest "historical" Heresy players should say anything about newer patterns.

Source, please?

It's in one of the FW IA books - the MKV with the fully enclosed sarcophagus was a late-Heresy development.

beast_gts wrote:

Keel wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:
Technically, to be period accurate, you should hunt down the OOP MkIV Dreadnoughts, but only the strictest "historical" Heresy players should say anything about newer patterns.

Source, please?

It's in one of the FW IA books - the MKV with the fully enclosed sarcophagus was a late-Heresy development.

Imperial Armour Volume II - Space Marines and the Forces of the Inquisition

But as I said, most people aren't going to care except the most stringent "historians", but they're also butt hurt about MkVI being the most commonly seen armor mark now.

 Platuan4th wrote:

beast_gts wrote:

Keel wrote:

 Platuan4th wrote:
Technically, to be period accurate, you should hunt down the OOP MkIV Dreadnoughts, but only the strictest "historical" Heresy players should say anything about newer patterns.

Source, please?

It's in one of the FW IA books - the MKV with the fully enclosed sarcophagus was a late-Heresy development.

Imperial Armour Volume II - Space Marines and the Forces of the Inquisition

But as I said, most people aren't going to care except the most stringent "historians", but they're also butt hurt about MkVI being the most commonly seen armor mark now.

I might be blind, but I don't see it.

I've only got the updated one in front of me right now ("Imperial Armour: Volume 2 - Second Edition: War Machines of the Adeptus Astartes"), but that states:

The MkIV is one such variant, although many believe it cursed by some deeply-rooted flaw that leaves it prone to misfortune. MkIVs saw service during the Horus Heresy but many became horribly corrupted and now fight alongside the Traitor Legions. Those that still serve the Imperium are invariably well protected with purity seals and hexagrammic wards.

IIRC the original version was longer, saying that the fully enclosed sarcophagus was developed to better protect the pilot from corruption.