Jump to content
=][= SITE MAINTENANCE WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 13TH =][= ×

IX Legion Information and Rumours

Jolemai

By Jolemai
in + BLOOD ANGELS +

 Share

Recommended Posts

Nova_Dew Battle-Brother

Nova_Dew

Posted
Posted

Random odd thought after looking at our transfer sheet icon guide, we kinda know what Hosts are but... what are Orders in reference to our organisation? Is it a change of plan on FW's side changing them to Hosts? Our name for Chapters since they use the Flesh Eaters and Blood Drinkers chapter symbols? but since we use the Chapter Master rank by the time of the council of Nikaea... if that part is still canon, Or something completely different?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charlo Venerable Brother

Charlo

Posted
Posted

Random odd thought after looking at our transfer sheet icon guide, we kinda know what Hosts are but... what are Orders in reference to our organisation? Is it a change of plan on FW's side changing them to Hosts? Our name for Chapters since they use the Flesh Eaters and Blood Drinkers chapter symbols? but since we use the Chapter Master rank by the time of the council of Nikaea... if that part is still canon, Or something completely different?

 

We'll find out in book 8 :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
Indefragable Venerable Brother

Indefragable

Posted
Posted (edited)

Interesting indeed. They sure look nice!

 

I think FW is going to be doing a special Termie unit for every Legion, no matter what (I mean, Lernaens for the one legion whose Elite would properly prefer infiltration over direct assault).

 

I also hypothesize that these Crimson Paladins are the “military” elite of the IX Legion used in more traditional operations while the Sanguinary Guard will be more of a “household” elite reserved for the Primarch’s own direction. Not to say the SG would only fight by Sanguinius’ side, but they report only to him/Azkaellon bypassing the chain of command while the Crimson Paladins are part of the “normal” hierarchy. #speculation

 

As for rules, I at first thought they might be Tartaros with storm shields which would be...wow. But Cataphractii w/ a 3++ is still not too shabby, though I wonder how that would interact with the IX Legion’s must Sweeping Advance no matter what rules.

 

My guess is that both the swords and spears are S: User since GW seems loathe to give BA any strength modifiers since they think Encarmine Fury/Red Thirst should never stack in any way <eye roll>. I bet the spear* is +1I, though.

 

*bet $1 it’s called a “blood spear” or such

Edited by Indefragable
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Majkhel Venerable Brother

Majkhel

Posted
Posted (edited)

Thy look kinda thin... Like they were taller than other Cataphractii models?
I also do no like the shape of the shields, althought the details are nice. Power glaive looks nice. I'm surprised to see the actual assault canon instead of the reaper autocanon.

Edited by Majkhel
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charlo Venerable Brother

Charlo

Posted
Posted

They look really cool, but come on GW,  no ranged weapon, Storm Shields (I assume) and Cataphractii armour? Couldn't you use Tartaros or at least Indomitus?

 

There is an assault cannon right there in the pic.

They are a bodyguard unit so Cataphractii makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quixus Venerable Brother

Quixus

Posted
Posted

There is an assault cannon right there in the pic.

True, but if most other marine data sheets are anything to go by heavy weapons on infantry are optional and not the basic equipment.

They are a bodyguard unit so Cataphractii makes sense.

Yes, but not in conjunction with a storm shield.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Arkangilos Venerable Brother

Arkangilos

Posted
Posted

 

There is an assault cannon right there in the pic.

True, but if most other marine data sheets are anything to go by heavy weapons on infantry are optional and not the basic equipment.

They are a bodyguard unit so Cataphractii makes sense.

Yes, but not in conjunction with a storm shield.

Why? It still gives it a better save. Plus they could be special shields.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quixus Venerable Brother

Quixus

Posted
Posted

Why? It still gives it a better save. Plus they could be special shields.

Because in Cataphractii armour they can't run or fire overwatch in addition to not being allowed to make sweeping advances. In Indomitus armour they could at least run and and fire overwatch. With Tartaros armour they would have no such restrictions. All armour types end up with 3++ with a shield. So with a storm shield the other types are straight up better than Cataphractii armour. It baffles me that marines apparently very often choose suboptimal wargear combinations.

 

You are right though that the shields could have different rules than storm shields.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Panzer Veteran

Panzer

Posted
Posted (edited)

It baffles me that marines apparently very often choose suboptimal wargear combinations.

 

To be fair you have to put a shield actively into harms way to use it which might not alway be possible and in that case better armor is simply ... better. It's basically the whole reason why anybody uses armour instead of just carrying around a shield. ^^

Edited by sfPanzer
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charlo Venerable Brother

Charlo

Posted
Posted

 

There is an assault cannon right there in the pic.

True, but if most other marine data sheets are anything to go by heavy weapons on infantry are optional and not the basic equipment.

They are a bodyguard unit so Cataphractii makes sense.

Yes, but not in conjunction with a storm shield.

 

They are optional equipment most likely, but your comment was no raged weapon...

 

And they might be Storm Shields. Currently in the Heresy, only Imperial Fists use Storm Shields that give a flat 3++ save and are akin to the 40k version. Salamanders have their own shield that is +1 to any invuln save. This could be another different kind yet :happy.:

 

What makes it suboptimal? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nova_Dew Battle-Brother

Nova_Dew

Posted
Posted

I can see them having deep strike as an upgrade or as standard, it fits the BA theme of shock assault, drop these in the middle of the enemy and have them hold the line until the assault squads catch up or the fortification is breached. the wargear shown fits that well, ass cannon to make staying at a distance a bad idea, then sword and board to make them not want to get into melee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Quixus Venerable Brother

Quixus

Posted
Posted

 

It baffles me that marines apparently very often choose suboptimal wargear combinations.

To be fair you have to put a shield actively into harms way to use it which might not alway be possible and in that case better armor is simply ... better. It's basically the whole reason why anybody uses armour instead of just carrying around a shield. ^^

 

I wasn't just thinking about the cataphractii + storm shield configuration but marines in general. Why can only one special TDA unit (Justaerin) have multi-meltas despite being perfect for boarding actions? Why no lascannons for TDA? Why can't devastators take heavy flamers? Why can't Assault marines carry bolt guns, especially in previous editions where you couldn't charge when the plasmagun fired?

 

I guess it is a problem of how the shield is modelled in the rules. If a shield negated X attacks or something similar simulating the active use,  the combination with Cataphractii armour had a lot more merit, but as it is right now, there is no difference in the usage of an iron halo and a storm shield (besides 4++ vs. 3++), although one would expect that the shield would require more activity of the user.

 

What makes it suboptimal?

See here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.

  I accept