Lord Asvaldir Posted July 6, 2014 Share Posted July 6, 2014 That really just seems silly to me. It's a flying vehicle, of course it can just go in a dive and aim towards the ground if I want. In casual friendly games no one Sri least in my gaming group will care about they, however it certainly will be an issue in tournaments. Despite the change, I still think taking a Drake is a good choice. It still does the same old roll use to-burning anything out of cover short of +2 saves units, just a bit trickier to use now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Excessus Posted July 7, 2014 Share Posted July 7, 2014 Well, no more hiding behind 2+ save characters for the enemy then. Move the heldrake close enough so the 2+ save tanking char is out of LoS...allocate to the moist, delicious 3+ armour saves behind him! :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Furyou Miko Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 you do know that if it is ok to move a model around on its base , then we are opening the hell hole starting with defilers shoting from behind wall and then hiding out of LoS and meq models that are prone on opponent turns and stand up on your own. It's OK to waggle bits of the model that are designed to be waggled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboarder Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 you do know that if it is ok to move a model around on its base , then we are opening the hell hole starting with defilers shoting from behind wall and then hiding out of LoS and meq models that are prone on opponent turns and stand up on your own. It's OK to waggle bits of the model that are designed to be waggled. the rules even make that point, the heldrake has a ball joint head, that means it has an inherent wide range of potential positions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Except the faqed it as a fixed weapon, rather than a forward sponson (i.e. rather than what the model actually has). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboarder Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 Except the faqed it as a fixed weapon, rather than a forward sponson (i.e. rather than what the model actually has). the FAQ states that it is a turret weapon (FROM THE MOUTH), that has no bearing on how you model the height and or direction of the neck. you could have a heldrake that shoots crooked, it just always has to shoot crooked, furthermore the original point was that it is possible, within the rules, to model the head lower, and it is, because it is a ball joint there is a wide range of potential heights, and quite frankly no its not modelling for advantage. That being said, GW has pretty much destroyed the drake, its a huge pain in the ass to use, and because everyone is a whiney b*tch people will laugh about what has happened to it. In fact the communities reaction to what happened to the drake it a perfect example of why the majority of them disgust me (note this is not directed at anyone here, more at some of the more common "vocal" posters on other boards) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incinerator950 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 We where whining and we ended up being laughed at ourselves. DE complained from 4th into 5th about not getting rules and everyone ignored them. Nids are on the fence with us for having one of the worst dexes. Everyone is only there for themselves, or we would have raised hell about codex creep years ago whenever gw produced a flopping pile of crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prot Posted July 9, 2014 Author Share Posted July 9, 2014 Why do we have to go down this road in every conversation we have? Why? It seems that anytime we try to have a good conversation about Chaos, about the codex, or how to play it, we end up degenerating back to a conversation about how the codex sucks. I honestly do not think the codex is -that- bad in 7th. I've played a lot of Maelstrom games and this game type alone has given codexes like Chaos a huge boost. I'm not going to pretend Chaos got a shot in the arm that puts them on the level of... Necrons in 7th, but there are only so many 'Necrons' out there. I can't get on the hate wagon for this edition. This thread on the Heldrake for instance.... why make things so difficult on yourselves? I honestly don't understand this stringent behaviour of almost going out of your way to make the Heldrake sound like the biggest piece of flying dung in the game all the sudden. The head is on a long neck with a socket. It was very obviously meant to rotate in several positions.... To say it can't crane its neck to the ground (Just like EVERY shot you've ever seen from every movie featuring a 'dragon'), well I think that's just Chaos players trying to make it as hard on themselves as possible. If I was playing a guy who glued his Predator turret in place, and thus couldn't move it, I wouldn't say 'HA your Predator is locked forward because you glued it pointing that way, FOOL!' But it's like you guys want to make it as difficult as possible on yourselves. I completely understood why GW did not want it farting fire anymore, but playing it now seems very potent, it's just an adjustment. It's not the end of the codex, nor the unit. (I notice this with the Helcult formation as well. Why you wouldn't count cultists in that formation as super scoring is beyond me. But some of you don't.) I swear some of you guys aren't even playing the codex in 7th and won't even give it a shot, but that's a different matter entirely. It's just disappointing to see. I'll get off my shoebox now, and I apologize but the more I explore some -fresh- ideas from Chaos in 7th, the more I like it.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sception Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 The heldrake argument is reasonable, and yeah, there's an element of wailing and gnashing of teeth there. But the helcultists bit isn't even up for debate. Objective secured is the specific benefit for combined arms and allied detachments to reward people for running them instead of unrestricted unbound lists or formations with their own benefits - fearless cultists and cover saved dreadnoughts in this case. It is both very clear raw and very clear rai that units within formations not get the benefits afforded combined arms and allied detachments - apart of course from those particular formations where objective secured is the thing they get, as with the sky whatever nid formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prot Posted July 9, 2014 Author Share Posted July 9, 2014 Okay, since I missed it then, where is it very clear that Helcult Cultists do not get to be 'Troops'? I looked up formations which state that the units still carry the same force org slot, but do not count against your main force org. But I don't know where it says they don't count as troops for Objective Secured... what section would that be in? (as a side note, I will say if that were the case it makes the Formation nearly, if not utterly useless.) Where I am getting this is Page 121: Formations: Unless Stated otherwise, each individual unit maintains its normal Battlefield Role when taken as a formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teetengee Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 They are troops, but not all troops get os in battleforged armies. Only those troops found in allied and combined arms detachments get objective secured (also any other detachment that specifically says so). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sception Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 As stated, objective secured is not a special rule of battleforged armies, its a special rule of combined arms and allied detachments in particular. You can think of them as large, versatile formations, and OS troops (and reroll warlords, if the warlord is chosen from the formation) is the formation benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prot Posted July 9, 2014 Author Share Posted July 9, 2014 I see. From that angle there is nothing that gives Objective Secured to the Formation.... in that case, there goes the Helcult Formation. Instead I'll use the 3 Helbrute formation: Mayhem. I still see this as pretty potent, but it will take me a while to massage the weapon combo's and deep strike strategy. Probably start a new thread, or look for an existing one on that, but unfortunately I see no point in taking the Helcult as the way I wanted to use it allowed me to stop babysiting stay at home Cultists, but in this case anything can turbo up to them and contest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incinerator950 Posted July 9, 2014 Share Posted July 9, 2014 I've been meaning to bid on Thunder Hammers for mine, unless you guys got conversion tips for DV brutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prot Posted July 9, 2014 Author Share Posted July 9, 2014 I'm actually just considering an order for some Helbrutes. I can go with the 3some and I probably will give one a hammer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daboarder Posted July 10, 2014 Share Posted July 10, 2014 Dont over estimate the value of objective secured. its good but its not the be all and end all. For example, as a Tyranid player running a swarm list with a lot of gaunts and the SL as my warlord, I prefer to run the army around the endless swarm formation, sure my units dont have objective secured.....But they grow back out of trygon tunnels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.