|
R0ckfish posted:Well if you were going to include a battalion of guard before the changes you are gaining an extra 2 cp now I saw an Adepticon list running a Catachan detachment like this. HQ: 1x Company Commander w/ power sword, 1x Straken Elite: 1x Ministorum Priest Troops: 6x naked infantry and I honestly am wondering if there's any reason not to soup this in to random lists with these rules. 5cp is a lot for less than 400 points.
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
TheBigAristotle posted:So that 0-3 non-troops in a battalion detachment, is that a rule now? I'm looking at my list and I have 4 troops and 5 elites. Not saying it's a good list, but it's fun. And I'm also not saying I'll follow this rule, but I'm just not sure what suggestion means in this whole FAQ context. It limits you to three of a specific datasheet for any non-troop, non-dedicated transport. So unless you're spamming the same stuff a bunch you probably won't notice the difference- three is pretty reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:12
|
|
|
TheBigAristotle posted:So that 0-3 non-troops in a battalion detachment, is that a rule now? I'm looking at my list and I have 4 troops and 5 elites. Not saying it's a good list, but it's fun. And I'm also not saying I'll follow this rule, but I'm just not sure what suggestion means in this whole FAQ context. It's a guideline for tournament play organisers, it's not a rule. They were very specific about that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:14
|
|
|
Pendent posted:It isn't commonly done since you lose access to things like Chapter Tactics with a mixed detachment. Yeah, the only armies that will really be hurt by this are index armies or armies with really lame faction bonuses. It's going to be a bit of a pain for Sisters if you want three detachments without one being outrider/aux/supreme/flyer though, since combined with the 3 unit limit means that you can only get three canoness, one Celestine, and one Uriah Jacobs. Will have to see if the exceptions include any HQ's
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
Basically everything about this FAQ is good. Great changes. I may be influenced by having gained CP on basically all my armies, stuff I hate being nerfed (gently caress off, flyrants!) and only minor changes (goodbye sweet assassins, our time was too short).
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:16
|
|
|
Corrode posted:Basically everything about this FAQ is good. Great changes. Assassins get an exemption to the rule.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
Decent FAQ all around, thought it would be longer given the amount of time it took to put it out. Wish they did more to incentivize single faction armies though and I'm not a fan of the first turn deep striking rules since it kind of screws BA and GK armies and it doesn't really solve the problem of getting shot off the board first turn at all that they were supposedly trying to address. Was kinda hoping to see some Custodes points rebalances (Allarus are a bit too expensive) but I guess I'll have to wait for CA 2018 for a shot at that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:17
|
|
|
Giant Isopod posted:They don't share a keyword other than "Imperium" ? The assassin exception appears to only allow you to take a vanguard with no HQ to get around the restriction? If I'm reading your interpretation right, you're saying that the Inquisitor can't be in the Detachment because it doesn't share a non-IMPERIUM keyword with the Assassins? quote:BATTLE BROTHERS All of the units in each Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common. In addition, this keyword cannot be Chaos, Imperium, Aeldari, Ynnari or Tyranids, unless the Detachment in question is a Fortification Network. This has no effect on your Army Faction. quote:‘Execution Force: So long as your Warlord is from the Imperium, you can include this unit in a Vanguard Detachment even if that Detachment contains no HQ units. However, if you do so, that Detachment’s Command Benefits are changed to ‘None’.’ I interpret this to mean that the presence of Assassins, Legion of the Damned, or Sisters of Silence does not impact the other units in the Detachment. Otherwise you couldn't create ANY mixed detachments unless they consisted exclusively of those units. You start with the Detachment of Inquisitors or Space Marines or whatever, and then you add the additional units that you wouldn't otherwise be able to add under the Battle Brothers rule.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
In the faq, the 0-3 for any unit (except troop/transport) is just for organized events, not matched play - It does however limit any dataset to 3 per army. Personally I think it kinda sucks. I think they should just have removed the supreme command detachment and/or applied 'max 3' rule to HQs, since they obviously were the problem, rather than limit the freedom of weird list creation. I guess it's a triangular balance issue between cookie-cutter, soup and spam. e:clarification
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Yeah, the only armies that will really be hurt by this are index armies or armies with really lame faction bonuses. It's going to be a bit of a pain for Sisters if you want three detachments without one being outrider/aux/supreme/flyer though, since combined with the 3 unit limit means that you can only get three canoness, one Celestine, and one Uriah Jacobs. Will have to see if the exceptions include any HQ's Deathwing. Not that anyone was going to bring a Deathwing army to a tournament in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:18
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:If I'm reading your interpretation right, you're saying that the Inquisitor can't be in the Detachment because it doesn't share a non-IMPERIUM keyword with the Assassins? You're wrong. You can take a Vanguard with no HQ choice, but you can't mix Assassins or Sisters into other things if the only keyword they share is IMPERIUM.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:19
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:I interpret this to mean that the presence of Assassins, Legion of the Damned, or Sisters of Silence does not impact the other units in the Detachment. Otherwise you couldn't create ANY mixed detachments unless they consisted exclusively of those units. You start with the Detachment of Inquisitors or Space Marines or whatever, and then you add the additional units that you wouldn't otherwise be able to add under the Battle Brothers rule. That would be dandy, but I don't think that's what it says.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
Mr. Funktastic posted:Decent FAQ all around, thought it would be longer given the amount of time it took to put it out. Wish they did more to incentivize single faction armies though and I'm not a fan of the first turn deep striking rules since it kind of screws BA and GK armies and it doesn't really solve the problem of getting shot off the board first turn at all that they were supposedly trying to address. Was kinda hoping to see some Custodes points rebalances (Allarus are a bit too expensive) but I guess I'll have to wait for CA 2018 for a shot at that. Nah, Blood Angels will be fine. It was already a good idea in a lot of situations to wait until turn 2 to drop in anyways, and the power level limitations just mean you have to take some semblance of a balanced army. There's still armies with good shooting but a lot of the stuff that was just wiping people off the table turn 1 relied on deepstriking.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:20
|
|
|
Corrode posted:You're wrong. You can take a Vanguard with no HQ choice, but you can't mix Assassins or Sisters into other things if the only keyword they share is IMPERIUM. So you're reading the rules to mean that the "Execution Force" rule means that the Assassins can be included in a Vanguard with other things, but those other things can't be included in a Vanguard with Assassins because of the Battle Brothers rule?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:23
|
|
|
I'm not going to pretend that I'm not relieved that the FAQ is as good as we hoped, puts a kibosh on people insistent that they were going to just ignore problems. CP gain relics requiring the bearer be on the battlefield is a HUGE positive change, because it means that the other player has some sort of counterplay to take care of it that isn't just "dont use stratagems".
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
Pendent posted:It limits you to three of a specific datasheet for any non-troop, non-dedicated transport. So unless you're spamming the same stuff a bunch you probably won't notice the difference- three is pretty reasonable. Oh good. Yeah I try to stick with "one of everything" except troops, it's more fun that way.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
I'm likin' this FAQ. The new deep strike rules and 0-3 limits will deffo help balance the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:24
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:So you're reading the rules to mean that the "Execution Force" rule means that the Assassins can be included in a Vanguard with other things, but those other things can't be included in a Vanguard with Assassins because of the Battle Brothers rule? The way I'm reading it is you can include a vanguard of 3x assassins with no HQ. That's how you add assassins to an army at all now. There is no "exception" to the battle brothers rule to let them mix into detachments at all, just create a lesser vanguard that doesn't cost you cp like a support detachment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:25
|
|
|
Also, someone who's allowed to or not at work: Please screencap people getting super salty about the changes. I need schadenfreude to continue living.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
Beta rules might as well be official because no one's going to play without them, at least around here. Edit: And the way people are talking about them as if they're written in stone leads me to believe I'm not in the only area where this is true!
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
Seems like the "characters cant block shots against other characters" rule might make troops/fast attack units more valuable to have around, since it cuts down on what you can use to screen stuff (unless they have bodyguard). A good change that makes bodyguard more useful, and an on-table presence more valuable vs. deep striking.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:26
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:So you're reading the rules to mean that the "Execution Force" rule means that the Assassins can be included in a Vanguard with other things, but those other things can't be included in a Vanguard with Assassins because of the Battle Brothers rule? No. Nothing about Execution Force suggests an exemption from Battle Brothers. Read the text: "‘Execution Force: So long as your Warlord is from the Imperium, you can include this unit in a Vanguard Detachment even if that Detachment contains no HQ units. However, if you do so, that Detachment’s Command Benefits are changed to ‘None’.’" The exemption is to the requirement for a Vanguard to include an HQ.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:27
|
|
|
Pendent posted:Nah, Blood Angels will be fine. It was already a good idea in a lot of situations to wait until turn 2 to drop in anyways, and the power level limitations just mean you have to take some semblance of a balanced army. There's still armies with good shooting but a lot of the stuff that was just wiping people off the table turn 1 relied on deepstriking.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
NovemberMike posted:Yeah, scary BA stuff tends to be relatively expensive and not that spammable. I don't think they'll actually care that much. What it means for me personally is that the dual Battalion build with Intercessors I'm working toward will take me from an average of 7CP with my old Vanguard + Battalion to a staggering 13 CP. I'm incredibly stoked The Sex Cannon posted:Also, someone who's allowed to or not at work: quote:These changes are painful for our current competitive builds. Really painful. I doubt that Blood Angels will remain competitive after this. quote:They royally screwed us. They should have just made the Reserves somemthing like only half of your Total Reserves can DS as normal on T1. Then the rest T2 or as you choosr after T1. Pendent fucked around with this message at 18:31 on Apr 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
Giant Isopod posted:That would be dandy, but I don't think that's what it says. You are correct. As written, the beta rule requires either spamming assassins or foregoing them altogether. I get what Beer4TheBeerGod is saying. And especially since GW were trying to cut down on spam, and they identified assassins as a problem, they must have meant something else. But as written, it's 3 assassins or none. GW also needs to rethink how this applies to Cypher and the Fallen. With the beta rules, there is literally only way to take Cyper (or Fallen): Cyper plus 3 units of Fallen in a Vanguard. Fluff wise I guess that would make sense? Still seems bizarre for units whose data sheets are part of the Chaos Space Marine Codex.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:29
|
|
|
So I have an inquisition army that is a guard battalion and some random poo poo. Can I still have a detachment with inquisitors, sisters of silence and assassin's, or is that totally gone.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:Seems like the "characters cant block shots against other characters" rule might make troops/fast attack units more valuable to have around, since it cuts down on what you can use to screen stuff (unless they have bodyguard). A good change that makes bodyguard more useful, and an on-table presence more valuable vs. deep striking. This was probably like this in the beta version and I just missed it: a character with less than 10 wounds can't block a character with less than 10 wounds, but a character with more wounds than that can block a character with less than 10 wounds. My Flyrant (12W) can block a Malanthrope (9W). I had kind of internalized it as "characters can't screen characters" but I was probably playing it wrong.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
Huh. My army is not ruined after all: ironically they did not change supreme command detachments. That's now the best way to add Inquisitors. Shame there's no inquisitorial lord of war.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:30
|
|
|
Yes More Where is this from?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
The Sex Cannon posted:Yes The Blood Angels subforum on Bolter and Chainsword. It's generally one of the better places over there to post but apparently people are a little worked up this morning. This is my only playable army at the moment and I think this all sounds great. http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/346280-spring-faq-is-out-and-its-bad-news/
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:32
|
|
|
That's a great faq although might have to rethink my Yvahra tactics with the new beta rules about deep strike. Might be tricky to deep strike the drones I use to protect it when it makes its first turn move
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:34
|
|
|
Giant Isopod posted:The way I'm reading it is you can include a vanguard of 3x assassins with no HQ. That's how you add assassins to an army at all now. There is no "exception" to the battle brothers rule to let them mix into detachments at all, just create a lesser vanguard that doesn't cost you cp like a support detachment. I agree that the rules only apply to Vanguard detachments. And it seems like you can make a Vanguard detachment consisting of Sisters of Silence, LotD, and Assassins. So the question for me becomes whether or not the presence of those Assassins prevents other units from existing in those Detachments per the Battle Brothers rule. I disagree that the rule requires the units to be alone. If that was the case then there wouldn't be any need for the "Command Benefit" wording since (as I understand it) none of those units have a Command Benefit. Similarly the wording of "even if that Detachment contains no HQ units" suggests that it's possible for the Detachment to have HQ units, which again none of the particular forces have. I read the rule to be that you start with a Vanguard force that's in compliance with the Battle Brothers rule, and then you can include Assassins/SoS/LotD.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
Diggin' how the cool and fluffy Raiding Party list that gave Drukhari 1 more CP than a Battalion now gives 1 CP less Doesn't effect my desire to run them in a Raiding Party but now it's a handicap instead of a cool perk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
Can I have a battalion detachment of Hive Fleet Kraken and a battalion detachment of Hive Fleet Kronos and still be battleforged?quote:The beta version of Battle Brothers is a brand new matched play rule we’d like to test. When we originally wrote this edition of Warhammer 40,000 we wanted to make sure that your army could include appropriate allies. For example, in an Imperium army, Imperial Guardsmen and Space Marines should be able to fight side-by-side, and in a Chaos army Chaos Space Marines should be able to burn the galaxy alongside their daemonic minions. The rules for what units could be included in each Detachment were therefore very relaxed, but this has since led to some very ‘mixed’ Detachments that include units from far more Factions than we originally envisioned. We feel that these esoteric mixed Detachments are far better suited to narrative or open play, and so we have decided to trial this rule for matched play games. This means that you can still include appropriate allies, but now they might need to be included in a different Detachment. There are a few units in certain Index books that would be difficult to include in a matched play army following these restrictions, so we have written errata to enable players to more easily include these units in their army. These changes appear in the appropriate FAQ and Errata documents, but are shown below for convenience. But the actual rule: quote:All of the units in each Detachment in your Battle-forged army must have at least one Faction keyword in common. In addition, this keyword cannot be Chaos, Imperium, Aeldari, Ynnari or Tyranids, unless the Detachment in question is a Fortification Network. This has no effect on your Army Faction.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted:... If that was the case then there wouldn't be any need for the "Command Benefit" wording since (as I understand it) none of those units have a Command Benefit. ... This means the +1 CP from vanguard, which you don't get if you remove the HQ
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:38
|
|
|
Giant Isopod posted:This means the +1 CP from vanguard, which you don't get if you remove the HQ Ah, I see now. In a vacuum, reading things right now, it does seem like the consequence of the rule is that the only way to include Assassins/SoS/LoTD is to have them in their own special 0CP Vanguard Detachment. That seems silly.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
Anyone have thoughts on Damned Legionnaires? Their fluff is very cool to me, and since I plan to field at least one more Space Marine army, it would be a nice option. My question would be if they're worth their points at all. 3+ invuln seems very nice. I don't quite understand the FAQ, so am I still losing chapter tactics if I don't take them in a separate detachment?
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:41
|
|
|
LifeLynx posted:Can I have a battalion detachment of Hive Fleet Kraken and a battalion detachment of Hive Fleet Kronos and still be battleforged? Yup. Read the rule. It's within a single detachment, and doesn't apply to 'army faction'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 22:30 |
|
|
LifeLynx posted:Can I have a battalion detachment of Hive Fleet Kraken and a battalion detachment of Hive Fleet Kronos and still be battleforged? It's a bit weirdly worded, but I'm fairly certain the faq rule means that each unit per-detachment, rather than each unit in all detachments. Which is to say you can have multiple subfactions of a faction, they just need to be in separate detachments. This was already the case prior for armies with 8thed codexes, it just means you cant pool stuff like Sisters and Assassins and Inquisition together in one detachment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:45
|
|