Khârn's Burtcherhord

[Kol Saresk]

Isn't Objective Secured a benefit of a Combined Arms detachment?

Well, since(if I've read everything posted here correctly), the formation is only Khârn, 4 Zerker squads and 4 CSM squads, anything else would either have to be a separate Unbound Detachment or either be part of a Primary or Allied Detachment with the 1HQ, 2Troops tax plus the cost of the unit(s).

 

To me, Unbound would be the easiest way to get extra units on the field without having to pay that tax.

[Carrack]

It seems to me that losing objective secured wouldn't be as bad in this formation as it would in other list. This list looks like its strength is killing enemy troops. Quickly too when you get into assault. Pesky, fast moving, objective secured transports also won't want to sit on an objective with bezerkers bearing down on it and lose their mobility. They also won't want to rush in close enough to steal an objective and get themselves within charge range.

 

Losing objective secured is a disadvantage, but I think this list looks good at eliminating the enemy's ability to make use of his ob sec and so it equals it out some.

[Kol Saresk]

Well, with this list you wouldn't lose Objective Secured though. Everything is a Troop slot except for Khârn. If anything, you have an overabundance of Objective Secured.

 

So if you wanted, you could comfortably defend your objectives with 4 squads of CSM and focus the rest of your army on securing the other objectives and putting pressure on your opponent.

[Lucio]

Well, with this list you wouldn't lose Objective Secured though. Everything is a Troop slot except for Khârn. If anything, you have an overabundance of Objective Secured.

 

So if you wanted, you could comfortably defend your objectives with 4 squads of CSM and focus the rest of your army on securing the other objectives and putting pressure on your opponent.

Except "Objective Secured" is a property a Troop squad gets when it's taken as part of a Combined Arms detchment. A formation is an alternative to the Combined Arms, and thus doesn't get the bonus.

[Sheesh Mode]

 

As far as I know, none of you did, or perhaps you just didn't report on it. Now I did a full batrep and gave my in game suggestions, but even though I was successful the interest level was like a '2 out of 10'.

 

I'm just not understanding why our formations are all so mediocre. I think only the DA might have it worse as they too got 2 Dataslates out of the Advent Calendar and they are a whole new class of fail. (I thought the librarius might be usable but I had a core mechanic wrong in it..)

 

I did not run that slate because my own army, while similar, is much more effective. The cultists are fearless, the chosen are led by a special character, and there are no terminators nor a raptor. Now I could take this list and make a duel deathstar out of it with two landraiders, two vindicators and Abbadon but that would be extremely difficult. I would be taking most of the squads in that formation and making them minimum sized. 

 

I am going to send the company an email asking about their interpretation of Chaos, how they think it should be run, and why they create these kinds of formations. Wish me luck guys.

[Kol Saresk]

 

Well, with this list you wouldn't lose Objective Secured though. Everything is a Troop slot except for Khârn. If anything, you have an overabundance of Objective Secured.

 

So if you wanted, you could comfortably defend your objectives with 4 squads of CSM and focus the rest of your army on securing the other objectives and putting pressure on your opponent.

Except "Objective Secured" is a property a Troop squad gets when it's taken as part of a Combined Arms detchment. A formation is an alternative to the Combined Arms, and thus doesn't get the bonus.

http://natfka.blogspot.com/2014/08/what-is-battleforged-army.html?m=1

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-tkglpLLURik/U-pnFpHBXtI/AAAAAAAAI_k/SjzpQ50mW9M/s1600/battleforged_BAO1.jpg(mods/admins, feel free to hotlink image if it should be)

 

Now, with Scribe saying:

Yes, unless its stated (and it isnt) this formation does not gain Objective Secured.

The conclusion I am drawing is that a formation that meets the 1HQ, 2 Troops minimum(which this formation does) will(unless specifically stated otherwise; which Scribe says it isn't) benefit from Objective Secured.

 

So do they or do not benefit from objective secured, and why or why not?

[UlsanGamer]

Formations are listed as their own detachment in the rulebook.

 

Combined arms detachments are maximum 6 troops. This has 8.

 

Therefore these troops could never be part of a combined arms detachment and are not objective secured unless they have the special rule in the formation.... They do not.

[*Furyou Miko]

They do not gain Objective Secured, because they are not a Combined Arms Detachment, they are a Formation.

 

A Combined Arms Detachment is basically the new form of the old Force Organisation Chart. 1-2 HQ, 2-6 Troops, 0-3 Elites, 0-3 Fast Attack, 0-3 Heavy Support.

 

Any other types of Detachment, such as this formation, need to specifically state that something in the detachment gains Objective Secured.

 

Hypothetically, they could fix the Inquisition Detachment with the line "All Elites choices taken as part of an Inquisitorial Detachment gain the Objective Secured rule.", because Objective Secured isn't attached to Troops, it's attached to Troops-taken-as-part-of-a-Combined-Arms-Detachment.

[Kol Saresk]

They do not gain Objective Secured, because they are not a Combined Arms Detachment, they are a Formation.

 

A Combined Arms Detachment is basically the new form of the old Force Organisation Chart. 1-2 HQ, 2-6 Troops, 0-3 Elites, 0-3 Fast Attack, 0-3 Heavy Support.

 

Any other types of Detachment, such as this formation, need to specifically state that something in the detachment gains Objective Secured.

 

Hypothetically, they could fix the Inquisition Detachment with the line "All Elites choices taken as part of an Inquisitorial Detachment gain the Objective Secured rule.", because Objective Secured isn't attached to Troops, it's attached to Troops-taken-as-part-of-a-Combined-Arms-Detachment.

Okay, so I read Scribe's post backwards. It isn't "Formations have Objective secured, unless otherwise stated", it is "Formations do not have Objective Secured, unless otherwise stated." Correct?

[Slips]

Yessir!

[Anon40k40k]

It's not that hard. All formations and detachments list the requirements and benefits. If it says ob sec, you have it. If it doesn't, you don't :)

[stev]

So acknowledging that the slate may not be the greatest, if one was going to attempt to use it, how best to equip everyone and what else would compliment it?

 

I imagine keeping the csm as min 5 man units.

 

I usually run my zerkers as 8 man with icon, veterans, one or two plasma and a champ with power sword and melta bombs.

 

It seems like 4x5 man zerker squads would allow more points for necessary transports but it seems quite small...would squads that size survive and be effective in combat?

[Anon40k40k]

Unless you're hurting for points, multiple smaller squads is almost always better. Especially with fearless squads. I'd run them all as 5 man squads in rhinos. Fists on the zerker champs, melta/combi melta on the csm. That's like 1400 points. You an fit a Warpsmith, 2 cultist squads and 4 Reaper Batteries on top of that in 1850. It's not going to win any tournaments, but should hold it's own in friendly games.

[Slayer le Boucher]

Those special rules would have worked better in a specific FoC like all the latest armies had till now.

 

"World Eaters detachement" with 1 HQ, 3 troops and 1 HS has mandatory, and the same restrictions( everyone MoK).

 

The probleme i have is that sometimes with formations, you are stuck with a definite selection of units, that you like them or not, while it would have been more interessting with more flexibility.

 

Because like others have said its a minimum of 1000+pts for a part of your army, that not even considered has Core, so you still have the mandatory hq and troops to take, and you are quickly in the 1800+pts.

 

now not every clubs play games over 2kpts even casually, your club, unfortunatly is highly fixated on tournament conditions, so there is no room for "casual" game, apart amongst the newest members, who most of the time struggle to get at least 1900pts...

 

So yeah, even though i was super hypped on this formation, i don't think i will ever use it.

[Sheesh Mode]

This is not a competitive formation and will not work despite our attempts to make it such. It is an assault formation, so throw bodies and landraiders on the field then call it a day. 

[Emperors Immortals]

I'm lost. I giggled with murderous glee at its release but can't find a useful load out for the life of me.

 

Adding LandRaiders and using min squad size makes it worse, trying to horde it go leaves it vulnerable.

 

Perhaps a Spartan and a FireRaptor might help, though I can't see it working.

 

Maybe CityFight with an all I fan try army? Nope, just can't make it work.

[King Jackal]

Land Raider with the 12" FNP bubble Legacy of Ruin is almost a must. Some spawn?

[Prot]

 

 

As far as I know, none of you did, or perhaps you just didn't report on it. Now I did a full batrep and gave my in game suggestions, but even though I was successful the interest level was like a '2 out of 10'.

 

I'm just not understanding why our formations are all so mediocre. I think only the DA might have it worse as they too got 2 Dataslates out of the Advent Calendar and they are a whole new class of fail. (I thought the librarius might be usable but I had a core mechanic wrong in it..)

 

I did not run that slate because my own army, while similar, is much more effective. The cultists are fearless, the chosen are led by a special character, and there are no terminators nor a raptor. Now I could take this list and make a duel deathstar out of it with two landraiders, two vindicators and Abbadon but that would be extremely difficult. I would be taking most of the squads in that formation and making them minimum sized. 

 

I am going to send the company an email asking about their interpretation of Chaos, how they think it should be run, and why they create these kinds of formations. Wish me luck guys.

 

 

 

Agreed. Just to be clear I did not say I was the only one to report on testing the formation to call anyone out. Simply put I think it says a lot when something brand new comes out like this and the community of Chaos players kind of collectively say, 'Nah, this isn't even worth trying for one, testing game.'

 

I mean that is ugly when you think about it. It's a cheap purchase for the Dataslate. We assume it's something a few designers got together on and SHOULD HAVE playtested. It comes with art, some pictures and its bundled up and uploaded for (in this case) the Advent Calendar.

 

Within minutes it is reduced to, what I call, Dooomrider status. IE: Dead weight. 

 

Draw your own conclusions. You say you could easily make something more effective without penalizing yourself (by using the formation). I agree. That is why I say I could write something better in a drunken stupor after watching my niece play with her Barbie dolls for 2 hours for inspiration. 

 

Now that being said, I really wished some other people would have tried the Helguard AND this formation because while I am a crusty vet, I admit others could perhaps do much more with the formation(s). But overall the community has spoken.

 

In truth I had fun with the Helguard, but it was so hard to squeeze function out of it in a 'mildly' competitive environment (I would never go within a country mile of a tournament with that formation). Everytime I revisit the formation I find myself making -better- lists without the formation penalty, so I completely agree with you in theory.... I just wish someone, anyone would try and report on these as well. 

[Scribe]

If I where inclined, I would run this with all min sized, but Khârn + 1 Berzerker squad.

 

Upgrades would be minimal, and it requires an additional HQ + 1 min Cultists to open up support units (Spartan, IA13 stuff) to make the list actually function.

 

At 1750 where I play, its untenable, and would get smashed by any number of casual lists I and my friends run.

 

Should have been a Detachment, 1-2 HQ, 1-8 Troops, 0-4 Elites, 0-2 Heavy, 0-2 FA, all MoK and all units with MoK gain Fleet + additional rules from the Formation.

 

Alas...its not.

 

I too would love to know golly gee GW wants out of Chaos, as right now...so help me Khorne, without Forge World its a dead end.

[Redtoof]

I play 1500 points, if I were to run this formation I'd do something like:

 

Khârn

4x 5 berserkers, meltabombs on champs

4x 5 marines with mok, meltagun, combimelta on the champ, rhino, dirge caster

Helbrute formation - mayhem pack, all multimeltas.

 

The zerkers can run behind the rhinos so they can charge stuff, hopefully the dreads drop in turn 2 so you can attempt to swamp the opponent with targets. Not saying it would work, but it might be quite fun!

[Slayer le Boucher]

I play 1500 points, if I were to run this formation I'd do something like:

 

Khârn

4x 5 berserkers, meltabombs on champs

4x 5 marines with mok, meltagun, combimelta on the champ, rhino, dirge caster

Helbrute formation - mayhem pack, all multimeltas.

 

The zerkers can run behind the rhinos so they can charge stuff, hopefully the dreads drop in turn 2 so you can attempt to swamp the opponent with targets. Not saying it would work, but it might be quite fun!

And your list wouldn't be valid, because you still need the mandatory HQ and 2 troops, since the Butcherhorde is a formation.

 

Thats why actually this thing can only be played at 2500pts and higher, or in Apoc games, if you you go minimal unit size with everything, its doesn't have enough impact to be of any help, if you take normal size units, then adding the options to make the bare minimum, it costs the same price as the Tau or Eldar formations, without all the S8 Ap1-2 guns...

 

The probleme is that orgininally a formation is there to support the Primary Detahcement of the army, by giving ways and rules that makes its a bit "outside the box".

 

here you must build your list so that your army supports the formation..., wich for me doesn't make a freakin sens...

 

Also the Altar of War mission with this dataslate, isn't bad, but its not great either really...

[McGibs]

You can have a battleforged army that is only formations. You don't need a combined arms detachment with HQ/troops anywhere in there.

"primary detachment" is literally just the detachment that your warlord is in.

[Fibonacci]

 

And your list wouldn't be valid, because you still need the mandatory HQ and 2 troops, since the Butcherhorde is a formation.

Say "hello" to 7th edition and "goodbye" to FOC.

 

Formations are detachments.  It is possible (and common) to have a battle forged army made from formations only.  You can build a battle forged army with no HQ.  You can even have a battle forged army with no characters at all.

[Cheex]

Yeah - there seems to be a lot of confusion about building an army in this thread.

 

A Battle-Forged army is composed of one or more Detachments. You can have any number of any type of Detachments in your army, as long as every model is in exactly one Detachment. Whichever Detachment your Warlord is chosen from is called your Primary Detachment, and this can be any Detachment in your army (except Detachments that specifically say otherwise, like the Allied Detachment).

 

Formations are a special type of Detachment that simply have a specific list of units that you must take, rather than a FOC like other Detachment types have. But they are still Detachments.

 

There is NO requirement to take any specific Detachment type in your army. A Combined Arms Detachment (which sports the FOC we all know and love) is only one specific type of Detachment, but there is no requirement to take one.

 

Since a Formation is a Detachment, you can very much simply take a Formation as your entire Battle-Forged army. It will be your Primary Detachment, since your Warlord will come from there.

 

If it's still confusing, I suggest forgetting everything you know about building armies from previous editions and re-read the entire section on Battle-Forged armies in the 7th edition rulebook.

[Kol Saresk]

One question. There are quite a bit of BA formations that have no HQ or IC, so would you draw your Warlord from the squad leaders?