|
Maneck posted:Deathwing. It likely won't be much of an issue in any list with a land raider in it, but it is something to think about when writing a list. Safety Factor fucked around with this message at 18:47 on Apr 16, 2018 |
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 05:14 |
|
|
I will say I really wish they didn't force you to use power level when calculating how much of your army can be in reserves. There really shouldn't be any cross over between the two points systems like this but it's also a huge pain for stuff like Sanguinary Guard where the base unit is 4 models but the max is 10 and most people take 8 or so. Death Company will be really weird with this as well since they're so incredibly expensive for PL. Pendent fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Apr 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:45
|
|
|
Beer4TheBeerGod posted: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 think adding a unit without the Saviors from Beyond/Null Maidens/Execution Force rule invalidates the "Vanguard Detachment even if that Detachment contains no HQ units", so if you have: Vanguard Detachment: Elite 1: LotD Elite 2: LotD Elite 3: LotD With an Imperium Warlord you're fine (3+ Elites, no HQ required because of the rule), but if you add Bullgryns to the Vanguard as Elite 4 you once again have to have an HQ in that Vanguard because Bullgryns don't have a rule allowing them to be in an HQ-less Vanguard sharing only the Imperium keyword. I'm also reading this to mean that you can mix LotD/SoS/Assassins in the same HQ-less Vanguard since each of them is being added to "a Vanguard Detachment" despite not sharing a keyword besides Imperium but I'm not sure about that? I think "Command Benefit" here means the CP you get from a normal Vanguard Detachment but not from the special HQ-less one? Schadenboner fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Apr 16, 2018 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:48
|
|
|
TheBigAristotle posted: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. I'm not sure about the Chapter Tactics end of things, but LotD have the keyword Adeptus Astartes, so at the very least you will not lose battle-forged if you put them in a detachment with space marines. They're a bit overcosted but pretty decent, getting to ignore cover is pretty great (but if you go Imperial Fists that benefit is a lot less impressive) but they get a huge tax to bring along a heavy or special weapon (25pts on top of the weapons' points). It's a bit weird that flamers are a little bit counterproductive for the Hellfire Lesser Daemon Marines, since they already get a way to deal with cover.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:49
|
|
|
Daemons already have PL baked into summoning. I'm not particularly a fan of crossing the streams, but it works for a few things. What's dumb is calculating army-wide points and then converting that to PL just to establish 50%.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
Mods, please rename thread title to "Warhammer 40,000: New FAQ Re-Introduces Templates", tia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:50
|
|
|
Changing DS requirements to half your armies' PL rather than half your armies' units is going to be interesting, since it makes things slightly more difficult for armies with cheap troops to dump all their muscle off-table. I hope Battlescribe gets updated to do this automagically, because otherwise this seems like it will be a bit of a pain. On the flip side, by using PL this means that someone wanting to hit that cap of 50% PL is incentivized to lean towards units with extreme customizability. So that's interesting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:55
|
|
|
Good FAQ overall, pity cp regen didn't get nerfed. Still, no more unit spam at least.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:55
|
|
|
Foul Ole Ron posted:Good FAQ overall, pity cp regen didn't get nerfed. It did! You now need the relic bearer on the field to use it, which means 1.cant keep the bearer in reserves and 2. if the enemy slays the bearer they no longer benefit from it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I'm not sure about the Chapter Tactics end of things, but LotD have the keyword Adeptus Astartes, so at the very least you will not lose battle-forged if you put them in a detachment with space marines. Naturally, I play IF. My next chapter is likely gonna be Salamanders so maybe it's not a great move, especially since they're so wildly overpriced, in dollars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
Oof, Eldar HQ nerfs are pretty harsh. Spiritseer and farseer are both understandable, but the warlock going to 55 pts is loving brutal (especially when Neurothropes were untouched). Time to headswap my bike farseer to be a bike warlock I think, because for only ten points more than a footslogging one why the hell not. Dark reapers nerf is fair enough, though I think they’re juust over the line where you probably don’t pick them now - I would have put them to 32. Failing to nerf Alaitoc is completely baffling. Consolation is that a “fair” Eldar army was extremely potent before the nerfs, and largely got clowned on by “unfair” armies, and a lot of those are gone now. I am mildly amused that I think Lawrence Bakers extremely strong Ulthwe list from LVO is almost (possibly even completely, I think he had Eldrad as a farseer and a sky runner warlock) untouched. I do sadly think you now pretty much have to pick Ulthwe or Alaitoc to compete in tournaments now now - the loss of slot filling warlocks is too much of a tax on the sub-optimal factions. Also I guess I have to paint some Dark Eldar? I’m slightly puzzled by the wording on the battle brothers rule, because who was running mixed brood Tyranids in the same detachment? BRB re-writing all of my army lists apparently.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 18:59
|
|
|
ijyt posted:Just don't play with FAQs lol, they're not official or enforceable anyway. If it's not printed in the rulebook then it's not a rule you need to play by, it's basically a houserule. Why even play with the official rule book then lol. Its not enforceable anyway.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:00
|
|
|
Now I'm getting into a rules argument about Upon Wings of Fire.quote:Upon Wings of Fire: quote:Tactical Reserves: To me it seems pretty clear cut that you cant use Upon Wings of Fire to get around the deployment restriction on the first turn, since they're being removed from the battlefield and then arrive at the end of your movement phase. I don't know if I'm missing something or if the person I'm arguing with really wants it to work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:00
|
|
|
Now that the FAQs are out, some battle report time! I played 3 games this weekend with the same list - a Battalion of Mars, a Battalion of Stygies and an eversor assassin. My list was this: quote:MARS – Battalion (+3) Game One: AdMech v. Space Wolves (no pictures, sorry!) My opponent took a pretty standard Space Wolves army. 2 units of Long Fangs, one with Lascannons and one with Heavy Bolters. 3 squads of 10 grey hunters, a land raider crusader, grimnar on foot, 5 lightning claw terminators, 5 varanguard, 1 CC dreadnought. We deployed hammer and anvil, with me creating a static gunline of the Mars stuff and infiltrating the 3 Vanguard squads with 2 techpriests along his right flank. He got the first turn. My Vanguard ended up whittling away his grey hunters and hounding the backfield objectives. As lovely as Vanguard are, they're great when set midway up the field (if you get turn 2) to fire on an enemy asap with those 18" Radium Carbines. My Kastelans ended up deleting his Varanguard as soon as they came in, along with his Lascannon Long Fangs. The Land Raider had some wounds shaved off, but survived to make it to my lines, which spat out the lightning claw terminators and Grimnar. His dreadnought also happened to make it into combat with my Kastelans. The Eversor ended up charging the Terminators and killing a few before being killed. I ran Cawl down into the combat with the dreadnought (which had a storm shield), proceeded to do fuckall for two turns before I finally just retreated out of combat and ignored the dreadnought completely. Ended up winning this one pretty decisively. Game Two: AdMech v. Mephrit Necrons Hoo boy, this game. My friend took a bunch of warriors, a monolith, immortals, deathmarks, the new cryptek, the Nightbringer, 3 wraiths and some Tomb Blades. We deployed Vanguard strike, with me taking the bottom side of the table. My friend got first turn, and I deployed my Vanguard too close which saw 2 squads wiped at the top of turn 1. From that point I was doing a fighting retreat back to the bottom left corner where I turtled and just tried to kill his guys as they came at my. Kastelans were stars in this one, as they killed the monolith in a single turn thanks to Wrath of Mars. But, he used the 2 new Emergency beamer stratagems to bring in a 10 man squads of warriors and a 10 man squad of immortals right in front of me. Wraiths proceeded to wreck my lines, as close combat units are likely to do against AdMech. Pics:        He won 7-3. Game Three: AdMech v. Primaris Space Wolves Fuuuuuuck this game. I ended up getting tabled. My friend took 2 repulsors, 2 armigers, 8 wulfen, a wolf lord on a doggo, a jump pack wolf lord and some intercessors. Cawl ended up getting killed at the top of turn 2 after killing an armiger at the bottom of turn 1. I pushed him a little too far and he was out further than my Rangers, which meant the repulsor was able to kill him in a single round of shooting. My vanguard survived for a long time and I killed 1 repulsor and got the second down to 1 wound. Both armigers were killed. In the end, it was really his Wulfen which tabled me, because i'm *never* able to kill them. Pics (taken by my friend. Check him out on Instagram, @lonewolf40k)         Takeaway: Sicarian Infiltrators: are loving laughably bad, and I'm not going to take them anymore in 8th edition (unless they radically change). They're hot garbage. The only way they're good is if you combine their shooting with Wrath of Mars, but with Dunecrawlers filling the role of anti-tank and my Kastelans clear out infantry. I just don't see the point. Breachers: are okay, I guess? They're less points than the destroyers, which is good, but they did gently caress all in all 3 of my games. One breacher was able to withstand a couple rounds of combat and shootings against the Primaris Wolves, but they just don't pour out enough fire for my taste. I think Destroyers are better, but they are way more expensive. Cawl: needs a better loving invulnerable save. It's ridiculous that NO unit in the AdMech (aside from Fulgurites) gets better than a 5+ invulnerable save, especially when other armies in the imperium get them like they're candy. Yes, he can heal himself D3 wounds per turn, but his survivability is WAY too low. He's basically there to heal tanks and grant a 9" reroll bubble (but only in the shooting phase! Unlike Wolf Lords, which let you reroll ALL hit rolls of 1, including in overwatch). Skitarii: I feel like giving AdMech a 6+ invulnerable save in 8th instead of the FNP roll they had from 7th was a mistake. They die so, SO fast. Even while in cover and with Stygies. Going forward, Shield-Captains on Jetbike are going to be the cornerstone of my lists until AdMech get better saves. I don't care if people dislike it - i'm tired of playing against units that can withstand massive volumes of fire and can shrug it off because a ton of the unit has 3++ saves, and the Custodes shore up major weaknesses in the AdMech line. I'm definitely going to take 3 Neutron Laser Dunecrawlers per list. I've now tried lists with 1, 2 and 3 Dunecrawlers. 3 control the field and dictate the battle, otherwise i'm playing the retreat game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It did! You now need the relic bearer on the field to use it, which means 1.cant keep the bearer in reserves and 2. if the enemy slays the bearer they no longer benefit from it. Ah my play group had being doing this anyway. My problem is cp regen stacking, like two cp regen sources.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:01
|
|
|
Pendent posted:Now I'm getting into a rules argument about Upon Wings of Fire. I believe his argument is that the faq rule pertains to units that you deploy to the field after deployment, while Wings of Fire pertains to units already deployed on the field. It might not be in the spirit of the rule but it follows the letter. Similar to how Monolith could teleport units outside standard deployment first-turn, because it's teleporting units that exist on the field.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:05
|
|
|
The 3 datasheet limit effectively stops pure Death Company lists.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:06
|
|
|
All you dudes bemoaning not being able to take single assassins anymore, there's a Detachment of a single elite slot you can take at -1 CP. It's less of a cost now that your Battalions give you two more CP!
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:07
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:It did! You now need the relic bearer on the field to use it, which means 1.cant keep the bearer in reserves and 2. if the enemy slays the bearer they no longer benefit from it. This was true of everything except Kurov's already, Kurov's just wasn't written well. Everything else is untouched. Pendent posted:Now I'm getting into a rules argument about Upon Wings of Fire. You can use Upon Wings of Fire on stuff which is already on the table. So if you had Captain Slam deployed at game start and chilling in your backfield, you could slingshot him up with UWOF just fine. Tactical Reserves affects things which were kept off-table and arrive during turn 1. It's a good trade-off, since it forces you to either choose to hide (in which case you have to wait until turn 2) or to risk deploying and potentially being shot before you get a chance to use UWOF and redeploy. Also just to 100% clear-up asssassins/Sisters of Silence/whatever: You can take those things in a Vanguard detachment, on their own with no HQ. You get no CP for doing this. You cannot mix them with other stuff, because they only share the IMPERIUM keyword, which Battle Brothers disallows. You cannot mix them with each other, because again they only share IMPERIUM. Basically you have to take minimum 3 assassins in their own hived-off detachment, or 3 SoS squads, or whatever else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:07
|
|
|
Zuul the Cat posted:Game Three: AdMech v. Primaris Space Wolves Are those Repulsors sprouting fur? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:08
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:I believe his argument is that the faq rule pertains to units that you deploy to the field after deployment, while Wings of Fire pertains to units already deployed on the field. It might not be in the spirit of the rule but it follows the letter. Similar to how Monolith could teleport units outside standard deployment first-turn, because it's teleporting units that exist on the field. The key part of the FAQ is that the unit has to "arrive" on turn 1. Removing it from the table and redeploying it at the end of the phase sure sounds like arriving to me, especially when you're able to use Upon Wings of Fire along with stuff like Descent of Angels which requires that the unit have been "set up on the battlefield this turn." Corrode posted:You can use Upon Wings of Fire on stuff which is already on the table. So if you had Captain Slam deployed at game start and chilling in your backfield, you could slingshot him up with UWOF just fine. Tactical Reserves affects things which were kept off-table and arrive during turn 1. See, as much as I'd like to I don't think I buy that. The FAQ says ANY unit that arrives turn 1, without making provision that it have been deployed off the table initially.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:09
|
|
|
Pendent posted:The key part of the FAQ is that the unit has to "arrive" on turn 1. Removing it from the table and redeploying it at the end of the phase sure sounds like arriving to me, especially when you're able to use Upon Wings of Fire along with stuff like Descent of Angels which requires that the unit have been "set up on the battlefield this turn." It's literally the opposite, the unit didn't arrive during turn 1 because it was already on the table. You don't say someone "arrived" at a party if they just stepped into the kitchen and came back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:10
|
|
|
Aww man, I just realized this fucks up my ability to use my penitent engine too - I was shuffling that off to my inquisitorial detachment so I didn't lose my stratagems.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:11
|
|
|
Corrode posted:You can use Upon Wings of Fire on stuff which is already on the table. So if you had Captain Slam deployed at game start and chilling in your backfield, you could slingshot him up with UWOF just fine. Tactical Reserves affects things which were kept off-table and arrive during turn 1. Yeah, it's totally usable first turn, but I'd welcome anyone to do it because it's only going to be useful/non-suicide in select instances. Even if you don't end up getting shot by going second you're putting a unit unsupported into the lines of the enemy army. Most players are still going to deploy with a "wrap" to interfere with assaults, so instead of multiple units dropping in and charging they're now facing one.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:12
|
|
|
Pendent posted:The key part of the FAQ is that the unit has to "arrive" on turn 1. Removing it from the table and redeploying it at the end of the phase sure sounds like arriving to me, especially when you're able to use Upon Wings of Fire along with stuff like Descent of Angels which requires that the unit have been "set up on the battlefield this turn." Yeah I guess it depends on if you read it as "if the unit hasn't arrived on the table yet this applies" or "all redeployment using your reserves is affected by this rule". I feel it's obviously intended to be the latter, but I can see the argument for the former. Corrode posted:This was true of everything except Kurov's already, Kurov's just wasn't written well. Everything else is untouched. True, though most other CP regen stuff is pretty fair IMO, I believe when most people think "bullshit regen" they tend to be thinking of the omnipresent might of Kurov
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:14
|
|
|
Well, I'm still not convinced personally but given that literally everyone is telling me I'm wrong I guess I'll just go with it. The only real use I see is to use it to drop Inceptors or Company Vets with Stormbolters in a position to clear some space in your opponents screen for your turn 2 charge. Neurolimal posted:Yeah I guess it depends on if you read it as "if the unit hasn't arrived on the table yet this applies" or "all redeployment using your reserves is affected by this rule". I feel it's obviously intended to be the latter, but I can see the argument for the former.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:15
|
|
|
Oh hey, would you look at that. Forgeworld hosed up their rules again. Not only did they not fix the Plague Hulk to have the correct keywords to make it useable outside of the now dead chaos soup list,(despite repeatedly assuring me that they would in the FAQ) but they also still have yet to give the Ork Mega Dread rules. Boy do I feel hosed. I sure hope my Atrapos doesnt lose its rules over poor rules writers at FW.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:19
|
|
|
goodness posted:Why even play with the official rule book then lol. Its not enforceable anyway. Wow you're dumb lol.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:26
|
|
|
ijyt posted:Wow you're dumb lol. Yikes, calling your own words dumb.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:30
|
|
|
Schadenboner posted:It's still in the Imperial Armour and it's probably not a super difficult conversion but it's an Elite not an HQ (because what the Guard needed was another Elites choice?). :dawkins: Huh. I actually agree. Furthermore if you take into account the following:  You can really see that FW actually had a stroke of genius in their design. Wish GW would basically lift this page 1:1.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
For those enjoying the salt: quote:It's a beta rule.. a very bad beta rule. quote:Yup. Melta has it right. Another nail in the BA coffin. And we had such high hopes this edition.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:33
|
|
|
Dakka is already trying to "fix" the FAQ and of course all the suggestions are staggeringly stupid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:37
|
|
|
Corrode posted:Dakka is [...] staggeringly stupid.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
I'm a bit salty about the new deepstrike rule. I'm fine with ensuring there's a better power balance between what starts on the board and what doesn't but not being able to apply forward pressure T1 will absolutely gently caress non-shooty nids. Like if there was a corresponding armour buff or whatever that'd be grand, but holy poo poo having to slog up the board everything is going to get shot to death.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
Pendent posted: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. quote:If GK are not exception for new Alpha-Strike rules, I'll literally ragequit. quote:These updates are a few FAQ answers. quote:Nevermind. I am not going to turn this into a pissing contest over who is worse. I am not happy with GK playability. End of story. Along with a few other "I quit" posts. I love these forums thank you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:38
|
|
|
Pendent posted:For those enjoying the salt: Please more i'm almost finished
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:42
|
|
|
The Sex Cannon posted:Please more
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:43
|
|
|
Were any FW books updated? I'm not seeing where any were. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:43
|
|
|
Safety Factor posted:I'm expecting y'all to dig up a bunch of these sorts of posts for the next Badcast. That's a good idea!
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 05:14 |
|
|
Schadenboner posted:Are those Repulsors sprouting fur? It's snow and wolf pelts. He has shields in the center of the pelts.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2018 19:45
|
|