So I played my first games of 5th edition yesterday.

[Silent Requiem]

Well, I finally got a chance to play again. It's a new club (for me), and the typical game is 1000 points, which drops me down to a list I am very familiar with, so it makes the transition a little easier.

 

I bought myself a rule book and read (skimmed, really) it while waiting for a game. My first was against the new Chaos Marines.

 

I was running 2 GHLR with extra armour and dozer blades, a BC with psycannon, and two 6 man PAGK squads with incinerators (1 per squad).

 

He was running something like:

 

Deepstriking HQ with combi melta and lightning claw

Defiler with battle-cannon and something else

Obliterator

5 man Possessed squad

8 man Khornate bezerkers with rhino with havoc launcher

small Tzeench squad with sorcerer

3 other small squads with your usual array of powerfists and melta guns

 

We rolled for mission, and got secure and control, with the standard long edge deployment.

 

The table was 6x4, and had a building in the north east corner behind some rocky/dangerous terrain. Two patches of forest about 12" north and south of the middle of the table. No other terrain played any role. He placed his marker in the northwest building, and I placed mine centrally behind the southern forest.

 

We had already agreed that I would play the south side, and him the north, so we rolled off for deployment and I won, letting him deploy (and go) first. He put his oblit directly on his marker, all his squads behind the northern forest and his defiler and possessed between the building and the forest. His HQ was in reserve. I deployed everything in reserve.

 

Turn 1: With nothing of mine on the board, he advances everything forward, except his oblit. While I wasn't super familiar with the rules, I was pretty sure that his oblit could not actually hold his objective, so I was happy to see it left behind for no purpose. I, of course, did nothing.

 

Turn 2: He advances everything except the oblit again. He clearly wants to take me apart as I come on squad by squad.

In my turn I get one GHLR plus a squad (that comes on inside the raider). Raider comes on directly across from the defiler and gets two penetrating hits, destroying it.

 

Turn 3: He continues to advance, and shakes my GHLR with the oblit. Khorne bezerkers get out of the rhino about 12" from my objective. If he keeps advancing I am going to have a really difficult time pushing him back.

 

I get my second GHLR and my HQ. Both come on just west of the southern forest, as I want cover between me and the oblit. They both fire at the rhino, trying to kill his mobility, but only manage to immobilize it. In the east, my GHLR fired at the oblit, but rolled double ones to wound, doing nothing. The PAGK disembarked and shot up the Possessed.

 

Turn 4: He continues to shoot at my GHLR in the east, but to no effect. The Possessed try to reach the PAGK, but fall well short. In the midfield, he mills around a bit, not sure what to do about my GHLR. Importantly, they do not advance on my objective.

 

I get my second PAGK, and march them on directly south of my objective. They shoot up the bezerkers a bit, and the BC and nearby GHLR shoot up various squads trying to force panic tests, which he always passes. In the east, the PAGK get back into the GHLR, and move 6", so the Raider can take another (ineffective) shot at the oblit.

 

Turn 5: He starts his squads moving towards the objective again, but will be well short until next turn. A shot by the Bezerkers at my PAGK with a (unmodeled) plasma pistol just overheats. The oblit shoots at my eastern Raider again, and does nothing of any importance. His HQ (which I knew nothing about) decides that now is the time to DS. He makes the DS roll (but has not been rolling up until now) and I shrug it off as a rules change. He tries to come in close to my eastern raider to have a go at it with the combi melta, but scatters away.

 

I fire at the Bezerkers in the south with my PAGK and BC, but can't force a panic test. The raider lines itself up to tankshock the squad off the objective if we go to turn six, and finishes off one of the smaller squads with a melta gun. My PAGK move firmly onto my objective.

 

I push forward 12" with my GHLR in the east (with PAGK inside) and pop smoke. If there is a turn six I will be able to assault his objective, though I may lose the GHLR to the dangerous terrain.

 

We roll for turn six, but the game ends, with me winning (1 objective to none). I took no casualties, and (apart from the defiler) failed to inflict any significant casualties on him.

 

Post game analysis:

 

Man, am I ever rusty! Apart from the defiler, I failed to concentrate my fire on anything critical. Partly I think I need to get used to the new missions, but mostly I just need to get my act together.

 

I also completely blew the second objective. There is absolutely no reason at all why I could not have finished the game with both of them, but I am so used to playing 6 turn games, that I didn't get that "I have to move NOW" feeling until too late. I was a full game turn short of the second objective, which was all but undefended.

 

Playing fantasy recently has also led me to over value panic tests. I don't know what I was on when I thought that trying to force Chaos to take panic tests was a good idea.

 

I also need to acknowledge that I was helped by my opponents mistake in forgetting that only troop choices scored. He had plenty of these and could easily have left one on his objective.

 

My more general thoughts on 5th (and a recap of my second game) will follow.

 

-Silent Requiem

[Bucky]

Nice report!

 

I also recently got back into 40K, and have yet to play a game of 5th. I usually run a mech SOB list, but have decided to give the Grey Knights a shot. Anyway, I have read your tactic post that is stickied and I enjoyed it very much. I hope to see many more of these battle reports as they help immensely.

 

 

-- JB

[MayorDaley]

His HQ (which I knew nothing about) decides that now is the time to DS. He makes the DS roll (but has not been rolling up until now) and I shrug it off as a rules change.

The guys that work at my local GW informed me that you HAVE to roll for DS'ing reserves at the beginning of turn 2, and every subsubsequent turn. Don't know if that helps; just my 2 cents.

[Silent Requiem]

My second game was a Dawn of War Capture and Control against Tau. I used the same list, and he ran:

 

3 man HQ unit with 4+ invulnerables, plasma, and missile pods

2 broadsides

piranha with fusion gun

2 firewarrior squads

stealth suits

hammerhead with rail gun

 

He placed his marker in one corner, and I in the other. He went first, and put his fire warriors and on the table, one squad at each side, with his HQ supporting the squad going for my objective. I held everything back, but was forced to take the first turn.

 

I won't go through the turns, but I basically came on and racked his warrior squads in turns 1 and 2, wiping out his scoring units completely. I then hit the hammerhead and the fusion piranha and was working on the broadsides when the game ended. I lost most of one squad, my BC, and had one raider immobilized. I did manage to take both objectives, but it was really close, as I again underestimated the time remaining (game ended on turn 5).

 

My general thoughts on 5th edition are as follows (albeit after only two games):

 

1) I thought that I would be at a huge disadvantage, rules wise, but people are generally really rubbish when it comes to 5th edition rules. I had numerous people (including GW employees) tell me things that were just blatantly wrong, and I had to look up the relevant rule to prove it to them on several occasions. And I don't mean obscure things, I mean stuff you'd use every game.

 

2) My GHLR are MUCH more survivable now. The are also much more popular. There were about 7 MEQ players at the club, and they were ALL fielding at least one Raider of some kind. I have never seen that before, but it will mean that a) I have to deal with Raiders more often, and b ) everyone else will come planning to deal with Raiders.

 

3) The LOS rules are less technical, which makes the game run more smoothly for new players, but also limit technical play. I'm not a huge fan, but at the end of the day it's not that big of an adjustment. The new abundance of cover saves, combined with shrouding/the new vehicle damage rules means that my army is pretty much as survivable as when I was playing LOS games.

 

4) People over emphasize scoring units. You don't need loads, you just need to keep them alive. Of course, I only played the one mission, so my views may change.

 

5) I think that whoever wrote the 5th edition rule book did a better job (from a drafting perspective) than 4th. The examples were clearer, and more exhaustive.

 

Well, those are my preliminary thoughts. I don't feel my play style or list will play much, though the new missions seem fun. hopefully I'll be able to get some more batreps up over the next month.

 

-Silent Requiem

[Doomaflatchi]

Great report, and well done on your battles! First, allow me to second what's been pointed out earlier by other people - units held in reserve (including Deep Strike) must be rolled for every turn. I assume from the tone of your first post that you realized this at some point, but too late to affect the outcome of the battle.

 

Secondly, I agree with you about the difficulty of forcing Leadership tests in 40k. In Fantasy, the average Ld score is 7 or 8, meaning that your opponent will probably fail half the panic tests forced on him. However, in 40k, 90% of all units in the game have Ld 9, 10, or are Fearless. At Ld 10, that only a 1 in 12 chance of failing. All in all, I think that the ability to make your opponent take Leadership tests is too weak - it doesn't happen enough to be counted on from an offensive standpoint, and because of that, from a defensive standpoint when it happens to one of your units you feel like you lost the battle because you were "unlucky". Leadership is the one aspect of the 40k rules that I am really dissatisfied with; I'm of the opinion that they should either make it more meaningful or take it out.

 

Well done, and I'm glad you enjoyed your first games of 5th Ed! :o

[Melissia]

The main reason leadership doesn't do much in 40K is because GW focuses far, far too much on Marines, who are supposed to have great morale.

[Grand Master Iapetus]

Mega ditto's on the wins. The objective games seem to be more suited to the GKs, I have personally struggled more with the KP missions.

 

1) I thought that I would be at a huge disadvantage, rules wise, but people are generally really rubbish when it comes to 5th edition rules. I had numerous people (including GW employees) tell me things that were just blatantly wrong, and I had to look up the relevant rule to prove it to them on several occasions. And I don't mean obscure things, I mean stuff you'd use every game.

 

Emperor's skivvies, there is a lot of that out there - too many to name, but one comes to mind. If you pop a transport in shooting, you can now assault the troops that are forced out. I asked 3 GW employees and their answer was "No way..." Now that our codex is so much more different in terms of Smoke, Force Weapons, Transports, etc - the "water" is even muddier.

 

2) My GHLR are MUCH more survivable now. The are also much more popular. There were about 7 MEQ players at the club, and they were ALL fielding at least one Raider of some kind. I have never seen that before, but it will mean that a) I have to deal with Raiders more often, and b ) everyone else will come planning to deal with Raiders.

 

And I used to feel guilty about taking 2 at 1500 points... :wub:

 

4) People over emphasize scoring units. You don't need loads, you just need to keep them alive. Of course, I only played the one mission, so my views may change.

 

I think you are right. I redid all my army lists going into 5e and got at least 4 troop units at each point level. Now I am moving to 2 bigger squads of troops and upping the count on other types of units (LRs, Termies).

 

Both you and Doomaflatchi bring up some great points about leadership. Seems the GW trend has been to make new armies much tougher to break if not fearless. More through the new codecies than 5e rules...Daemons, Orks, CSM, Standard Marines - all are either fearless or much closer to it by rules changes. Forcing break checks through tank shock or even winning combat is a much tougher proposition now.

[Aidoneus]

Congratulations on the wins. You say you're rusty, but apparently you still have a lot of your old talent. ;)

 

Couple rules-issues:

 

1) As has been said, you roll deep-strike every turn

 

2) You may combine units before the game starts, and then roll one reserves roll for the entire combined-unit. (page 94, preparing reserves) This allows you to attach an IC to a squad, put a squad in a transport, or both. Thus, in your first game, you should have been rolling 2 dice for your two "squads" of PAGK (one with BC) in a land raider each.

 

3) The roll for first deployment is the same as the roll for first turn (and the same as the roll for first to choose sides). (pp 92-93, missions) In the Tau game, if he deployed first, he has to go first, unless you specifically try to "seize the initiative" (page 92, seize the initiative)

 

4) To GM Iapetus: you can NOT assault a unit who disembarked from a transport with the same unit that destroyed that transport in the shooting phase. They count as two distinct and separate units (pg 87, dedicated trasnports; pg 92, multiple unit choices)

 

Rules aside, I agree with you that Land Raiders are much, much better now. The FAQ version of Machine Spirit is a godsend, and AV14 is just a LOT harder to crack. I've been having lots of success with Raiders, and not much with infantry, in 5th edition.

 

I too miss the Line of Sight game. It made the game seem much more technical, and took a lot of skill to perfect. I liked that, and it certainly worked well for me. But the new rules aren't bad generally. For some of the things GW did to balance the rules in 5th, I can live with the LoS rules.

 

I agree somewhat about Scoring Units being overemphasized, but you really need to play some Seize Ground missions to appreciate where they're coming from. When there are 5, not 2, objectives on the field, having that 3rd or 4th Troop unit can make all the difference in the world. Your list is going to feel this especially, since the PAGKs want to stay inside the Raiders (to stay alive), you not only lack extra scoring units, you also are hurting for contesting units. That's why I prefer 1500+ games, where I can squeeze in another PAGK+Raider "squad."

 

Keep up the good work! I definitely look forward to hearing of more of your exploits in the future!

[SamaNagol]

Thanks, glad to have you taking an active part again and I look forward to reading more. It is a shame you will be mainly playing at 1000pts though as it obviously makes a considerable difference to the effectiveness of running 2 LRs. As they are so survivable now, I doubt you will come across many lists that will be able to take down 2 of them, and then also be able to deal with the Storm Bolter goodness they deliver inside.

[Isiah]

4) To GM Iapetus: you can NOT assault a unit who disembarked from a transport with the same unit that destroyed that transport in the shooting phase. They count as two distinct and separate units (pg 87, dedicated trasnports; pg 92, multiple unit choices)

 

Yes you can. See under 'Dedicated Transports" p67. If a unit destroys a dedicated transport with it's gunfire it may then assault the disembarked passengers as long as their assault rules allow it, ie they didn't destroy the transport using their heavy weapons say.

 

SR: Great batreps and great to see your Land-Raidered GKPA ride again. And two LRs at 1000 points is interesting to say the least.

 

Cheers

I

[Aidoneus]

:(

 

Well I'll be a son of a... Sir, you are absolutely right; my apologies. They really hid that in there didn't they? It's not even under dedicated transports; it's right above it in the "explodes" section. :)

 

Anyway, I'll be sure to let my friends know. Thanks for the heads up!

[Deadshane]

Aidoneus, you're officially RUBBISH with rules! <_< ;) :lol:

[number6]

Congrats, SR! And not for winning -- though you deserve kudos for that when playing against opponents who, knowingly or not, were gaming the system in their favor -- but for actually getting in some games under the new system!

 

Rather than repeat what others have said, I'll just say that I agree with your assessment of the 5th edition rules as written. They are significantly clearer than before and I've had far far fewer "discussions" about rules since picking the new edition up. There are still some crazy backwater -- and I really wish GW would be willing to repeat rules rather than expect everyone to read through the book start-to-finish like a novel and have it all absorbed first pass (I've noticed that on an actual thorough read-through it's organized perfectly, it's only when you want to reference that you have trouble finding what you're sure you've seen before!) -- but still, a vast improvement over every other edition.

 

And I wouldn't focus too strongly on Trule Line of Sight. It's an obvious, and huge, change. But taken as a whole, I and my gaming group are in 100% agreement: this is the most fun version of the game to date. That's all that matters to me. I'm willing to suck up the small stuff that I find annoying when the big picture is that much more absorbing.

 

I would also encourage you to play larger games. Land Raiders are even more awesome now than before, but I wouldn't downplay the importance of Troops too much. As Aidoneous noted, Sieze Ground games often push a raider-centric GK army to its absolute limit. Yes, that's only 1/3 of missions, but that's part of what makes 5th edition so much fun! You must now balance the ability to actually win games against the ability to just kill or survive being killed. You can't focus too much on either side of that equation to be successful in an all-comer's, randomly-generated game environment. Otherwise you'll find yourself playing for Draws all too often.

 

I'll be interested to hear more as you find time to reveal it.

[Dominar_Mortis]

I'll be interested to hear more as you find time to reveal it.

seconded.

 

i have only recently uncovered the tome you scribed all that time ago and i have been sifting my way thru since, picking up the little nuggets of gold. in true blind following, i have just finished building my own GHLR and painting up the PAGK in readiness of my first "water GK" game in the coming weeks (damn RL)

 

i'll be watching intently from the shadows... :D

 

 

DM

[Gentlemanloser]

To be honest, I'm torn on Land Raiders now.

 

To me, the changes 5th has bought to them has swung too far in thier favour.

 

In 4th, they were too fragile, to easy to pop and I wouldn't touch them. In 5th, they are so durable, they've literally become manditory.

 

Personally, every match I've used my 2 LR in with my GK I've won. Every match I've swapped them out for Dreads I've lost.

 

I don't like LR's being that much of a cruch. ;)

[iamnothere]

The Land Raider isn't the invulnerable beast it's touted as on the forums. I've used 2 in quite a few games recently and have just moved up to 3.

 

Some games they've been incredibly durable, some games they've ALL died in the frist turn. What they are is an effective delivery system and mobile bunker for your squads.

 

My favourite use of the LR is to get the last 2 or 3 GK back into protection so they can't be attacked by hoards of other stuff.

 

I never thought of them as a crutch before, might have to play a few games without them to see what you mean.

[Gentlemanloser]

I hope you fair better than I!

 

But people are coming prepared for LR more now, and I find Dreads just don't stand up to the presure. Plus without PotMS and the utility of providing the only delivery for our PAGK, Dreads just aren't such a great trade. :(

 

If our FAGK could get Drop Pods (with Locator Beacons and DPA), we get 12" moving Troops, or Transports. And all the toys everyone else can have. Then maybe we wouldn't have to rely on LR so much.

 

But I feel we do have to utilise these, to make our army work.

 

Which I'm not a fan of. :(

 

Edit: The Great protection they provide our fragile and expensive troops is just another must have reason, and a great point!

[Reinholt]

From a meta perspective, the Land Raider is also strongly dependent on what your common foes are.

 

If you face a lot of lists without long range anti-tank, so that they can reliably serve as bunkers and troop delivery tools, then you are going to think they are powerful. If you face a lot of Eldar and Dark Eldar loaded to bear with lances, for instance, you're going to think they are overcosted tissue-papered wastes of points.

 

In my experience using them (I have three that I occasionally use to surprise people for my marines), you can win big or lose big with them. Against opponents unprepared for them either through lack of anti-tank weaponry or through lack of strategic know-how, you can rail people. Against foes who come prepared and know how to deal with them, you can lose them pretty quickly.

 

One thing I will say, though, is that they have a multiplicity benefit like most heavy armor. People usually don't bring enough firepower to take out three land raiders easily (though there are always exceptions); almost everyone can kill one. Taking multiples tends to make them much harder than just one, so I wouldn't mix and match dreadnoughts and Land Raiders until I already had 2+ Land Raiders rolling around, especially without the ability to drop pod the dreads.

[Gentlemanloser]

In 4th I would have agreed.

 

But it's the change to glances that is really noticable. Eldar for example, had a lot of ways (above thier ways to penetrate...) to glance vehicles. And each glance has a 1/6th chance of popping your LR.

 

Now, at best it's going to imbolise it. And it's the Mass glances in 4th that really killed the LR. I've faced Necrons now with my LRs and laugh at thier poor Gauss weapons, when I used to dread facing them as they seemed to just glance my LR to dust with impunity.

 

Of course, Fire Dragons in Wave Serpents are going to melt it to slag just as easily as before, but you have less to worry about from the Haywire Grenades, Vibro Cannons and D Cannons.

 

And the change to PotMS makes them deadlier than they used to be.

 

The largest Imperial Tank in the game got every aspect buffed. Survivability, Firepower, Transport Capacity.

[Grand Master Iapetus]

Gentlemanloser - you make some great points, definitely the changed glance tables and enhanced POTMS is a big driver for the LR surge. In 4th, I always felt like the crusader was the way to go, but now I want more GHLRs...go figure. I also think that some of the other vehicle rules changes have made other vehicles MUCH less effective. I see a lot fewer predators with the new codex out, and more raiders...as you pointed out. And you're also right when you say people come loaded for bear (3 LR) and end up shooting some poor coyote to pieces (Dreads) when the bear doesn't show up...

 

The other topic you raised:

If our FAGK could get Drop Pods (with Locator Beacons and DPA), we get 12" moving Troops, or Transports. And all the toys everyone else can have. Then maybe we wouldn't have to rely on LR so much.

 

But I feel we do have to utilise these, to make our army work.

 

Which I'm not a fan of. :(

 

I don't like that idea either - to marine-ish, not enough GK. But there is a much simpler solution that fits perfectly with the GK fluff. Give all Grey Knight units the "Heroic Intervention" rule from the SM codex. That would include PAGK troops as well as termies. This one change alone could probabably balance our entire codex with no other changes needed.

[number6]

I've become a converted fan of the land raiders myself, but I still play more than 1/2 my games the "traditional" way I used to: 2-3 dreadnoughts and a unit of allied Seraphim. Still works great, and my dreads still have a superb survival rate, most of the time making it all the way to game's end, just like in 4th edition. 4+ cover saves -- either from smoke or from intervening terrain -- are huge!

 

I mention this because I fear that people are going to start thinking that there is Exactly One Way to play a Grey Knights-centric DH army. It simply isn't the case. In fact, I would strongly encourage afficionados of raiders to give the multi-dreadnought army a try. It will give you a new tactical challenge to master. The army builds play similarly in some ways, entirely different in others. Refreshing for both you and your opponents. Besides, it's always good to keep your opponents guessing. If you both know it's All Land Raiders All the Time, well, you can of course expect to see lists tuned to counter that. Why allow that to happen?

[Marid]

I built two LRs because I loved the way they looked. In 4th people said they were too fragile, but I said, "Bah. They look awesome!" It seems that the arrival of 5th edition came at just the right time for me.

 

I'm still a novice at this game, but I run one LRC w/ PAGK and one LRGH w/ PAGK w/ pyscannons. The LRC moves forward aggressively with the LRGH hanging a just bit back but still moving forward. These each shield two Rhinos filled with IST. Since the LRC can fire three of its four weapons after moving 12" I move it into rapid fire range as soon as I can. With the weakened non-rending AC, I see no reason to be timid with it. Get it into rapid fire range ASAP. The LRGH targets armor with help from the LRC's multi-melta. Then it lends help against infantry with its HBs. They work very well as a pair because of PotMS. Each complements the other's roles.

 

When it's time to disembark, the LRC has a full squad of PAGK w/ Incinerator and a BC. While the LRGH, being a bit further back, has Psycannons in its squad. But I don't actually want to get either into CC. I'd much rather disembark in cover and blast away with SBs. Let my opponent cross the no-man's land with a menacing LRC spitting 15 re-rollable dice of murder.

 

Meanwhile, the ISTs have moved into position on two objectives. :(

 

Anyway, that's my meager strategy, but it's worked well so far. It's not the pro-typical "water" list, but I like to play aggressively. LRs, while they last, can give you control of the board and force your opponent to react to you. That can't be a bad thing. ;)

[Inquisitor Fox]

I'm glad to see I'm not the only one that hates Leadership in 40k. Learning and starting in Fantasy myself (For Bretonnia and the Lady of the Lake!) I see Leadership as an aspect of the game that COULD be really cool.. if they had things other than Ld 9 or 10 more often :( Synapse, Fearless, ATSKNF, Vox-Casters... the amount of Ld based hijinks in 40k is incredible! If only..

 

Ahem..

 

I do have to support Number6's comment though, about ways to play the army. To quote "Forbidden Kingdom":

 

"Learn the way, then find your own way."

 

Each person should be able to experiment with what works for them. No army, Any army, has only one way to play it. There are no "Thou shalt.." commandments that MUST always be followed and adhered to. If it works for you, go for it! If it doesn't, don't. I LOVE Silent Requim's strategies.. and battle reports. I love reading what works for others. That being said, I always take everything I read with a grain of salt, mesh it with my own experiences, then find what works for me and play my own game. It's more fun that way for me, then applying a formula without any art or personal involvement.

[Gentlemanloser]

I've got to weigh in the Leadership side of things.

 

5th has all but destroyed Leadership. There's no penalties In Shooting, just about everyone is Ld 9+, or has ways of using others Ld 9+, or is Fearless, etc.

 

But the kicker is No Retreat! and CC resolution.

 

No Penalties to high Ld scores in shooting, but an uncapped penalty in CC that can be all but impossible to overcome, and out of *everything* else in the game, unless you're Stubborn, you're either Falling Back, obliterated from a Sweaping Advance, or having to soak the same uncapped penalty in extra wounds.

 

Stubborn has become *the* Leadership modifer of the version, bar none.

 

Ther's no reason to fear shooting Moral (even pinning), but every reason to dread CC Moral.

 

Unless you're Stubborn.

 

Number6 also bought up a very interesting point;

 

Yes, that's only 1/3 of missions, but that's part of what makes 5th edition so much fun! You must now balance the ability to actually win games against the ability to just kill or survive being killed.

 

It's something I've had to consider. I used to attach IC Inquisitors to my PAGK squads. But now, I don't as if I roll Kill Points, they become a detriment, and a very tasty treat for my opponent. Same with DCA.

 

But. (And there's always a but!)

 

Some of my opponents have gone the other way, and with some armies, they have the tools to do this. A few of my opponents have disregarded the whole objective side of the game and field lists based on obliterating your opponent, with no regard to capturing objecyives.

 

And it works.

 

Especially with the Daemon army (coupled with just how dangerous CC has become in 5th, and the sheer CC prowess of the Daemon army).

[Reinholt]

Actually, in my view, the Inquisition have the best leadership shenanigans in this version of the game:

 

Iron Will

 

The ability to pass or fail any leadership test, at will, for any reason, is fantastic. Especially as you aren't fearless (you have the option but not requirement to fall back). More flexible than Stubborn. Though ATSKNF and Combat Tactics combined is pretty powerful as well.