Basic HH Tactics?

[Nehekhare]

Incorrect.  You use the Age of Darkness Force Org for 30k battles, not the Force Org from the main rulebook.  Just as you use the 30k rules for Lords of War, not the Lords of War rules out of the main rulebook.  The Age of Darkness Force Org does not permit multiple detachments as you describe, which is something that applies to 7th ed's Battle-forged armies/Combined Arms detachments.

 

incorrect. 7th edition supercedes outdated force organization. The AoD FOC is one of many detachments possible yet does not benefit from combined army benefits. It is perfectly legal to field multiple FOCs within one army since the quote that forbids it refers to an outdated rule that no longer exists.

[Moonstalker]

 

Incorrect.  You use the Age of Darkness Force Org for 30k battles, not the Force Org from the main rulebook.  Just as you use the 30k rules for Lords of War, not the Lords of War rules out of the main rulebook.  The Age of Darkness Force Org does not permit multiple detachments as you describe, which is something that applies to 7th ed's Battle-forged armies/Combined Arms detachments.

 

incorrect. 7th edition supercedes outdated force organization. The AoD FOC is one of many detachments possible yet does not benefit from combined army benefits. It is perfectly legal to field multiple FOCs within one army since the quote that forbids it refers to an outdated rule that no longer exists.

 

 

Codex always supercedes main rulebook.

[Nehekhare]

 

Codex always supercedes main rulebook.

 

not if it refers to rules that no longer exist.

 

7th ed. supercedes 6th ed.

[Moonstalker]

 

 

Codex always supercedes main rulebook.

 

not if it refers to rules that no longer exist.

 

7th ed. supercedes 6th ed.

 

 

I don't believe it refers to rules that no longer exist, except for this specific reference.

 

"For Horus Heresy games of 1,749 points or less, we advise that rather than the rules presented here, you use the standard Force Organisation chart found on page 109 of the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook instead"

 

There is also a reference to the allies chart in the main rulebook that is outdated, but it is provided for reference - Massacre has its own allies rules and chart included.  Of course, if you want the main rulebook to supercede that, we can just go ahead and not have allies at all because "Legiones Astartes" isn't anywhere on the 40k allies matrix.  However, if you want to get into making assumptions and rules-as-intended, they mean a battleforged FOC, or something close to it.

 

The most important quote here is on page 164 and does not reference any outdated rules - we still choose armies with Force Orgs.  Battleforged is a type of Force Org.  One that is not available (except by house rule/agreement) in 30k.

 

"Games using the Battles in the Age of Darkness rules expansion use one of a number of potential Force Organisation charts on pages 166-167"

 

Important note here: ONE.  Those are also reference to pages in Massacre, not the main rulebook

 

"The standard is the Age of Darkness Force Organisation chart, which...should be considered the standard form of play while using this rules expansion."

"When selecting your army for a Battles in the Age of Darkness game, you use your chosen army list in conjunction with one of the Force Organisation charts shown on pages 166-167 of this book."

 

There is another reference here to outdated page numbers (again, pages 108 and 109 in the BRB), but immediately after that.

 

"However, note that the Force Organisation charts presented here take precedence over that listed in the rulebook..."

 

I don't know how much clearer these books can make it to you.  You use one, single, AoD FOC when playing 30k.  You could argue that you can use a battleforged or unbound list for games under 1750 points, since for those it directs you to use the FOC out of the main rulebook.  But for playing in this expansion at 1750-3k, you use this expansion's FOC.

[Spinsanity]

I don't know how much clearer these books can make it to you.  You use one, single, AoD FOC when playing 30k.  You could argue that you can use a battleforged or unbound list for games under 1750 points, since for those it directs you to use the FOC out of the main rulebook.  But for playing in this expansion at 1750-3k, you use this expansion's FOC.

In the end, if you're trying to play a WAAC army, 30k is most likely not for you... This is meant to be (as stated in this tread previously) a narrative game; the whole point is/should be enjoying the lore, NOT picking the rules appart and finding loopholes...

[Nehekhare]

 

if you're trying to play a WAAC army, 30k is most likely not for you... This is meant to be (as stated in this tread previously) a narrative game;

dude...frankly, I find this offensive. I am discussing rules. whatever your problem with that is, please try not to jump to conclusions about my type of army or what "is meant" to played. Also, I fail to see how clear rules prevent a narrative instead of enabling it in the first place.

 

 

[discussion]

 

I think the fallacy here is to equate the Legion Crusade Army List and the Battles in the Age of Darkness Expansion.

 

The relevant rules can be found on p.9 LACAL, "Using Force Organization Charts":

 

when selecting your army for a Battles in the Age of Darkness game, you use your chosen army list in conjunction with one of the Force Organisation charts shown on page 10 of this book [i.e. 3HQ/4 Elite, Onslaught, Castellan or Leviathan] and the scenario you are playing. [...] Further advice on selecting your army and its composition can be found in the Warhammer 40,000 rulebook.

 

 

so, while it is already perfectly legal to use the Crusade Army list with standart army composition rules in normal (=not BitAoD) games of 40k, the reference in question to an outdated rule is found right there:

 

 

However, note that the Force Organisation charts presented here take precedence over that listed in the rulebook and, unlike the standart chart and battle missions found in the Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook, you may not take an additional primary detachment in games over 2,000 points unless specified by the particular mission (the expansion of the army being taken has already been taken into account in the Battles in the Age of Darkness charts).

 

This was a rule in 6th ed but no longer exists in 7th edition. As such, this part is to be ignored and we are back to what the main rulebook has to say (p.120): 

 

SELECTING DETACHMENTS

You can include any number and type of Detachments in a Battle-forged army provided you have sufficient units.

 

using the AoD FOCs (which do have their own command benefits and restrictions, just not "ideal commander and "objective secured", you only get those using the combined army FOC) in either a battle-forged or an unbound army (where everything counts as a single detachment anyway).

 

At the moment there is no rule, expansion or brb, that restricts the number of detachments in an army.

[Moonstalker]

I think the fallacy here is to equate the Legion Crusade Army List and the Battles in the Age of Darkness Expansion.

 

Perhaps not a fallacy, but arguing around each other.  I think it's clear that in games <1750 points, you're supposed to refer to the main rulebook.  You are right that there is a clear distinction - playing a Legion list in a 40k environment obviously subjects you to 40k rules.  The FAQ for Betrayal where this was addressed seemed to make that clear enough.  You play in 40k you play with 40k rules, but in the AoD, you use AoD rules, and you extend the same to your opponent (IE, Orks or Eldar getting access to AoD force orgs and AoD-style Lords of War).  However, I assumed that in the Horus Heresy forum, of all places, we were talking about 30k battles.

 

 

 

However, note that the Force Organisation charts presented here take precedence over that listed in the rulebook and, unlike the standard chart and battle missions found in the Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook, you may not take an additional primary detachment in games over 2,000 points unless specified by the particular mission (the expansion of the army being taken has already been taken into account in the Battles in the Age of Darkness charts).

 

There are two clauses here.

 

1. The Force Organisation charts presented here take precedence over that listed in the rulebook

2. You may not take an additional primary detachment in games over 2,000 points unless specified by the particular mission

 

The second clause refers to rules that no longer exist, that much is true.  However, I do not believe this makes the first clause of this rule irrelevant.  The AoD FOC is the standard for games of 30k, and the rulebook also seems insistent that you only get one of them to play around with.  The AoD FOC, as it includes its own primary detachment, allied detachment, LOW detachment, etc, is (I believe) the equivalent of a battleforged FOC.

 

Organisationally, I think it is like:

 

Unbound

-Whatever

 

Battleforged

-Combined Arms Detachment

-Allied Detachment

-Fortification Detachment

-Lord of War Detachment

 

Age of Darkness

-Age of Darkness Primary Detachment

-AoD Allied Detachment (distinct from 40k's in its lack of Objective Secured)

-Fortification Detachment

-AoD Lord of War Detachment (distinct from 40k's in its point restrictions and such)

 

Additionally:

 

 

 

There is no limit to the number of Detachments a Battle-forged army can include, and you can use any mixture of Detachments you have available, within the restrictions of the rules that follow.

 

Now, the rules for BitAoD direct you to use the AoD FOC for 30k battles between 1750 and 3000 points.  So, that is when the AoD FOC is available, and when it should be used.  Below 1750 points (or when playing 40k), the rules (or FAQ) direct you to use the 40k rulebook.  At which point you can use a battleforged list, which can include any of the types of detachments available to you.  However, the AoD FOC is not available to you, as it's specifically for 1750-3000.

 

Edit: I think we might also be getting a little off-topic here?  This is supposed to be a basic tactics thread, and while it's good to know what FoC you should be using, I'm not sure this is the right place for the discussion?  Maybe a new thread in the main HH forum?

[SillyDreadnought]

For the sake of this thread, which covers 'Basic' Tactica for the new player, I would suggest you take the FoC debate to PM's and operate under the assumption of the standard Age of Darkness FoC, and how the Rites of War ( both Legion and Generic ) change it.

[Nehekhare]

That we may do, yet it kind of was the point of this whole debate that the AoD FOC may just NOT be the only way to play the Legion army list, so

As I think this debate is too interesting/important to keep it to us two alone, I invite you to discuss in another thread: http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/292788-aod-foc-discussion/?p=3725361

[Rumour Control]

In my opinion, not that it counts for much, you wanna play heresy games? Use the massacre force org charts regardless of wether they are 6th ed or not. you wanna play standard 40k? Use the main rulebook.

[MiR]

For me you make problems where no exists.

30k have there own way to Organise there Troops and had even bevore 7th there own FOC. This FOC was very different from a normal 40k game.

Super Heavys, Rites of War, 1 additinal HQ and Elite slot, different Allyed matrix, etc.

Even with the new 7th ed. i dont know what there sould be different. As lond as no FAQ says we should take another rule instad from the 6th ed, it simply tays in effect.

Since when you are allowed to use Stormtalons as Blood Angel or Space Wolf? This units are only for the Codex:  Space Marines. even when BA and SW are SM there dont have the unit.

Its that simple.....no FAQ no new 7th ed FOC Rules for 30K, we still use 30k and 6th ed Rules.

[Nehekhare]

I'm afraid it's not that simple. army composition works quite differently in 7th and lots of the HH rules depend on rules and terms that no longer exist.

 

Heresy era games are 40k games. Same rules, same game. The change affects everybody.

[Brother Sanvael]

Moving the conversation on a bit, how do people run their Breacher squads.

 

I've got my sargeant in artificer armour with a power fist, but am torn on what, if any, specials I should be taking. As a 20 man squad, in my army I'm using them as foot slogging and to provide a bulwark to anchor my tactical blobs. Currently I'm not using any specials as the ranges are too short for where my Breachers usually are.

[Brofist]

Lascutters are a decent upgrade, since they are basically power fists, and graviton guns for hunting armor.

 

I never use breachers though. I love the models, but I run mine as tactical marines instead. For the points levels I'm playing they are just too expensive. If I was turning them into a deathstar I would probably throw an apothecary and navigator into the squad, and rock either IH or IF rules for all the cool bonuses. 20 T5 :cusss with FNP, 4-5 power fists, -1BS to enemy shooting, and rerolls against templates is a tough, albit expensive, nut

[Moonstalker]

I'm not a big fan of Lascatters because of the cumbersome rule.  Hitting at WS1 in melee is pretty much useless, and powerfists on A1 models almost equally so.  5+ to hit against pretty much anything, except for stationary or moving vehicles (autohits on the former, 4+ on the latter).  So you pay 40 points for four of them in your squad, and then you hit with 1.333 a turn, and then wounding with 1.110 of them.  40 points to kill one marine per turn while also reducing the number of bolter rounds you can put out.

 

For the record, at rapid fire range those 4 bolters kill .888 marines a turn, if those marines don't have FNP.

 

Grav guns I am also not a fan of.  The haywire can be useful, along with the difficult terrain patch, but it's a short-range heavy blast weapon on infantry.  You cannot snapfire it to shoot while moving.  So, we have the problems of a footslogging infantry blob with -1 to run rolls, and then compound that limited mobility by giving them weapons that cannot be fired while moving.

 

If you put anything on Breachers, I think it should be meltaguns.  it's not like bolter-holders need the extra anti-infantry of flamers or volkites.  Meltaguns are still S8 AP1 which can do work on vehicles, even if you won't get 2d6 because of armored ceramite (and it is not even a guarantee that the vehicles you're shooting will have armored ceramite - I almost never see Predators with it, Sicarans rarely, and Contemptors can't even take it).  It will also do a number on terminators and tacticals, piercing armor saves, double-toughing, and denying FNP.  Their short range is essentially equal to that of the grav gun because they can move and fire with them, essentially adding six inches to the range. 

[SillyDreadnought]

Grav guns are more of a Zone Mortalis thing for area denial ( thanks to those stay-in-play templates ), as are Lascutters for door removal. For open field work, the melta gun seems to be the only viable choice if you want them to -take- objectives, otherwise I'd say Volkites or Flamers for defensive work. A notable exception to this is the Medusan Immortals, since you can stuff them to the gills with Volkites, making them Breachers +1 whilst also lugging around a melta gun.

 

A breaching charge on the sergeant can be a good idea too.

[shaun03]

Jumping in building a legion army this summer. Just finished reading all 3 HH books, and really torn between what legion I want to build. DG stand out mainly cause there different play style than my two 40k armies. Alpha legion i wrote off at first than there starting to grow on me. Night lords are the evil spawn of BA and my sharks, so building them would'nt be much of tactical jump from my currently play style.

 

Seeing how legions off you a choice to build your army the exact way you want it, with all the options it can get out hand building your army turn in sq in to over price Swiss Army knives. Making jack of all trade sq's is something than that has little to know place in legion List. If all codex came with felxabilty that legion it would improve game over all.

 

With out starting the debate all over again about what can be brought and to use what chart I would like to start small and build a 1850 point list, I don't plan use two foc or take allies. Doesn't feel right to me. Starting with 1850 because that most normal 40k games in my area.

 

HQ;

Do the upgrade count as single HQ choice could I take chaplain x 2 and master of single for 1 HQ spot.

 

Troops;

Some row forces you take more compulsory troops, a little unclear on this works do I need to take more than 6 troop choices? Or do I need to take more of the sq in question ( night lords terror sq's) than support sq's.

 

Are legion list too op for 40k games. So of the stuff we fuse not counting low units are pretty tough, and row than be used can be more game breaking than giving out to other armies via rule book codex or datsheets.

 

Anyone come agasint opt who won't play legion list?

[Brofist]

HQ;

Do the upgrade count as single HQ choice could I take chaplain x 2 and master of single for 1 HQ spot.

I haven’t ready any restrictions on HQs. As far as I know you can take duplicates or multiple praetors/centurions/whatever.

 

Troops;

Some row forces you take more compulsory troops, a little unclear on this works do I need to take more than 6 troop choices? Or do I need to take more of the sq in question ( night lords terror sq's) than support sq's.

I’m not sure about your question, but extra compulsory troops don’t increase your troops cap or force you to take only troops. You just need to fulfill the requirements in order to unlock other options.

 

Are legion list too op for 40k games. So of the stuff we fuse not counting low units are pretty tough, and row than be used can be more game breaking than giving out to other armies via rule book codex or datsheets.

From my experience legion lists are hardly OP, especially in the world of less balanced 40k. Especially at lower point levels, you’ll probably find it the other way around. Our troops cost lots of points, so by the time you are getting the cost effective toys half your points are sunk into your core army. Likewise most ROWs are pretty medicare, unless they’re paired up with some specific legions. Legions are middle of the pack, maybe middle upper tier, depending on your legion and style of play.

 

My mates are happy to play 30K in 40K with me or at the FLGS. If I wasn’t playing beerhammer in a good place, I’m sure somebody wouldn’t want to play my army. That’s fine with me though, because I probably wouldn’t want to play them either.

[shaun03]

thanks for insight,  my questions on troops choice was bit unclear after reading the Night lords ROW i understood what they meant about the terror sqs. 

 

I was assuming most pople wouldn't have issue with playing agsint a 30k list at avg points 1000-2000 anything higher than its apoc so balance and op goes out the window. Undound armies can be more op than a legion list. Just didn't fall in to its forge world so the rules are to op and i stand no chance of winning there for i am not playing. 

 

I guess the next step is narrow down the legion than settel on row and get building at and painting.

[Nehekhare]

40k is op. It even sais so in the HH FAQ ;D

 

seriously, how can a list where you pay extra points just to encourage buying bigger squads compare to wraithknights and wyvern squadrons?

 

where do people get those ideas?

[shaun03]

When building tac squads is plusing up to 20 the normall thing? I writing a few list that I going to proxy with 40k armies before I pick legion. And wasn't sure if I skould take full 20 man sq.

 

For DG and there row it slows them down because they can take rhinos and moving 6 is going to hurt, but it fits there syle of out lasting the other guy.

 

I don't see the bulking up NG tact sq's tho, and terror sq's can only be 10 strong so I don't think i will be a list that use tact sq's much.

 

As for alpha legion I think 20man sq's might be usefully with infiltration.

[Phalanx Warder]

When building tac squads is plusing up to 20 the normall thing? I writing a few list that I going to proxy with 40k armies before I pick legion. And wasn't sure if I skould take full 20 man sq.

For DG and there row it slows them down because they can take rhinos and moving 6 is going to hurt, but it fits there syle of out lasting the other guy.

I don't see the bulking up NG tact sq's tho, and terror sq's can only be 10 strong so I don't think i will be a list that use tact sq's much.

As for alpha legion I think 20man sq's might be usefully with infiltration.

In 30k you pay a premium for buying a squad, that premium goes down the more you add to the squad. Tac squads for example the second 10 marines are 50pts cheeper that the 10 that come when buying the squad. I am running 15 man squads but that is only to allow for other toys in my list and the 1500pt limit we currently have.

[Moonstalker]

I don't go all the way to 20, I use 19 man squads with an attached apothecary.  But I'm a little weird like that - I like to move my troops around the field in 5 marine wide and 4 marine deep formations.  What Battle8rother said is correct, though.  You generally pay a lot less for additional troops than you do for the initial squad, so bigger squads give you more bang for your buck.  You also get more benefit out of things like attached apothecaries or the Cognis Signum buff by having a larger squad.

 

I don't really put a lot of faith in 10 man squads in Rhinos.  For one, no room for the usual apothecary, so your tac marines won't be as tough as your opponent's if they've gone the tactical blob route.  You won't have as many, because you're paying more per marine and buying Rhinos in addition.  And to top those two off, 6-8 strength firepower is pretty abundant in Legions, which leaves Rhinos as pretty easy pickings.  7th edition may bring more value to Rhinos as they would represent fast scoring units, but I think a lot of us are still a little iffy on how to adapt 30k to 7th ed.

[shaun03]

Thanks that clears up few things,

 

Starting to see that 30k needs a different approach to list building than 40k. Maybe after few proxy games I'll get better understanding of changes and what makes effective set ups. For troop choices,

 

Barring super heavy and low entries, how is the heavy support choices? The Pred sq looks tempting, but the s8 ap3 wirlwin is really standing out. I was never huge fan of tanks. But they apeaer to player a bigger roll in legion list ATM. Are heavy weapon support sq's worth taking? Or should give in and get some armor.

[Moonstalker]

There's a thread over here where we've been discussing heavy support choices.  Any of those you've listed can work out, except for serious tank hunting I would not turn to the Heavy Support squad.  Lascannons on them is just really super expensive, and their lack of ablative wounds in the squad hurts.