[HH1.0] Dark Angels Tactics

[Monkeychunks]

You're correct, which is why that passage was changed via errata. In the past, Raven Guard Jump Infantry satisfied both parts of that rule and received both benefits. It now says 'Infantry (except Jump Infantry and Terminators)'.

 

This is in the core rulebook. It's why you can have Jump Monstrous Creatures which are distinct from Flying Monstrous Creatures, for example.

[Guest Metaliptica]

Hum ... Am I missing something or is the Lion's rule absolute focus also apply to overwatch ?

[Gorgoff]

Hum ... Am I missing something or is the Lion's rule absolute focus also apply to overwatch ?

It's for cc only.

[Dagoth Ur]

Hey everyone. I don't know if this sort of post is appropriate here or if anyone is even interest but here it goes. Me and a lot of my friends are very disappointed by the 30k DA rules that we have, thus I have decided to homebrew a lot of the stuff and playtest it with my friends. I've made a thread in the homemade rules section of the forum and if you're interested or have an opinion of your own, then please go check it out.

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/368588-an-attempt-to-fix-horus-heresy-dark-angels/

Edited January 18, 2021 by The Observer

[Varyn]

I didn’t get past +2S AP2 weapons on sergeants....

 

I personally think that a lot of the complaining about the DA rules is unjustified. I sympathise with poor wording on rules and a lack of clarification, but a lot of the complaining seems to be “I want better rules for my legion”.

 

If you look at most of the legions there are plenty of units which are over costed, rites of war which don’t quite justify their limitations and rules which don’t quite work as intended. Most players try to find a balance between building an army from the units and fluff they like and those which will help get the job done on the table. If all your legion specific rules, wargear, units and rites of war are amazing where is the fun in building an army?

 

I am not a DA player, but it seems to me that there is a lot of customisation and flexibility in the rules to build a wide variety of lists across a number of themes, some of which are more powerful than others, which seems in line with the other legions.

[Guest Metaliptica]

While I do agree that the +2 str AP2 weapon is too much, I don't agree on the fact that DA just want "better rules". I play DA myself so I guess my opinions is biased, but I also play WE and SoH and let me tell you : DA rules just don't really stack up to these legions (not even going to compare the first to the BA here).

Not everything in the DA legion arsenal is garbage obviously, namely stasis grenades, companions (and Cenobium armed with hammers I guess), but why do A DA player needs to get punished for trying to build a fluffy list ? Want to play Firewing or Deathwing ? Enjoy your free loose. Dreadwing ? sure just don't take jump pack destroyers, quad mortars with phosphex and give up the best buff from Sedras.

DA have mediocre LA rule, worse RoW, ok units and decent characters. While I agree that every legions get the short end of the stick in some areas (for example : Ultras or IW don't have a great LA rule either, but get access to amazing units) what did the DA get ? Options I guess: at least we can choose what kind of bullet we want to shoot ourself with. 

 

ALso I still haven't forgiven FW for :cussing up the Lion's rules like they did but that's an other story...

Edited January 18, 2021 by Metaliptica

[Dagoth Ur]

I didn’t get past +2S AP2 weapons on sergeants....

 

I personally think that a lot of the complaining about the DA rules is unjustified. I sympathise with poor wording on rules and a lack of clarification, but a lot of the complaining seems to be “I want better rules for my legion”.

 

If you look at most of the legions there are plenty of units which are over costed, rites of war which don’t quite justify their limitations and rules which don’t quite work as intended. Most players try to find a balance between building an army from the units and fluff they like and those which will help get the job done on the table. If all your legion specific rules, wargear, units and rites of war are amazing where is the fun in building an army?

 

I am not a DA player, but it seems to me that there is a lot of customisation and flexibility in the rules to build a wide variety of lists across a number of themes, some of which are more powerful than others, which seems in line with the other legions.

I made the other thread for feedback so that this one wouldn't get cluttered up as this isnt the space nor subforum for that sort of discussion.

 

Could've - I dunno - left a couple of words in there, but I guess expressly communicating that I am worried about power levels and would like some feedback does not communicate that all that well?

 

That said, I am looking for advice from DA players mainly as smarter people than I have talked to lengths about our LA and some of our Rites of War as well as the Scion rules. I do see the issue with the hidebreakers thanks to Metaliptica's pointers *in the thread* and will be taking that into consideration - particularly considering that the thread does outline that the weapons are the least thought about part of the whole thing so there was trouble to be expected. This is part of the *outline* (see the red marked Thoughts section) and also specifically one of the reasons it is there - so that things can be pointed out.

 

Could I invite you to have a look at the rest of the stuff and - if you find anything you'd consider needing of change - perhaps leave some *constructive* criticism in the *relevant* thread? As is I can't exactly do much with what you are telling me here.

Edited January 18, 2021 by The Observer

[Cadmus Tyro]

While I do agree that the +2 str AP2 weapon is too much, I don't agree on the fact that DA just want "better rules". I play DA myself so I guess my opinions is biased, but I also play WE and SoH and let me tell you : DA rules just don't really stack up to these legions (not even going to compare the first to the BA here).

Not everything in the DA legion arsenal is garbage obviously, namely stasis grenades, companions (and Cenobium armed with hammers I guess), but why do A DA player needs to get punished for trying to build a fluffy list ? Want to play Firewing or Deathwing ? Enjoy your free loose. Dreadwing ? sure just don't take jump pack destroyers, quad mortars with phosphex and give up the best buff from Sedras.

DA have mediocre LA rule, worse RoW, ok units and decent characters. While I agree that every legions get the short end of the stick in some areas (for example : Ultras or IW don't have a great LA rule either, but get access to amazing units) what did the DA get ? Options I guess: at least we can choose what kind of bullet we want to shoot ourself with. 

 

ALso I still haven't forgiven FW for :cussing up the Lion's rules like they did but that's an other story...

I think you missed Varyns point entirely, and the tone and content of your response does more to prove the point of his second paragraph. I’m not sure what I’m missing with the Lions rules, but he seems pretty competitive to me.

 

Whilst I believe the DA had multiple facets in their approach to war, I don’t believe that they would out perform a legion specialised in a particular area of expertise. Why should they out perform WE and BA in their CC ability? Those legions sole dedication has been to that particular way of war. The same applies to WS and their rapid assault tactics, IH and their armoured assault tactics etc etc. The strength of the 1st legion is their ability to counter any threat.

 

 

 

I didn’t get past +2S AP2 weapons on sergeants....

I personally think that a lot of the complaining about the DA rules is unjustified. I sympathise with poor wording on rules and a lack of clarification, but a lot of the complaining seems to be “I want better rules for my legion”.

If you look at most of the legions there are plenty of units which are over costed, rites of war which don’t quite justify their limitations and rules which don’t quite work as intended. Most players try to find a balance between building an army from the units and fluff they like and those which will help get the job done on the table. If all your legion specific rules, wargear, units and rites of war are amazing where is the fun in building an army?

I am not a DA player, but it seems to me that there is a lot of customisation and flexibility in the rules to build a wide variety of lists across a number of themes, some of which are more powerful than others, which seems in line with the other legions.

I made the other thread for feedback so that this one wouldn't get cluttered up as this isnt the space nor subforum for that sort of discussion.

Could've - I dunno - left a couple of words in there, but I guess expressly communicating that I am worried about power levels and would like some feedback does not communicate that all that well?

That said, I am looking for advice from DA players mainly as smarter people than I have talked to lengths about our LA and some of our Rites of War as well as the Scion rules. I do see the issue with the hidebreakers thanks to Metaliptica's pointers *in the thread* and will be taking that into consideration - particularly considering that the thread does outline that the weapons are the least thought about part of the whole thing so there was trouble to be expected. This is part of the *outline* (see the red marked Thoughts section) and also specifically one of the reasons it is there - so that things can be pointed out.

Could I invite you to have a look at the rest of the stuff and - if you find anything you'd consider needing of change - perhaps leave some *constructive* criticism in the *relevant* thread? As is I can't exactly do much with what you are telling me here.

I think that response is quite condescending, also, by only looking for DA opinion you are going to receive biased feedback. I think Varyns post is already constructive, he’s just addressing the underlying issue that motivates you to adapt the current rules rather than the content of them.

 

I understand the frustration of poor rule writing and less efficient choices that drive you to a particular build. But the HH for me has always been more about fluff than competition.

 

I agree about keeping this thread clear of further discussion around home made rules, therefore I’ve posted more in depth on your thread.

 

Cadmus

[Guest Metaliptica]

 

While I do agree that the +2 str AP2 weapon is too much, I don't agree on the fact that DA just want "better rules". I play DA myself so I guess my opinions is biased, but I also play WE and SoH and let me tell you : DA rules just don't really stack up to these legions (not even going to compare the first to the BA here).

Not everything in the DA legion arsenal is garbage obviously, namely stasis grenades, companions (and Cenobium armed with hammers I guess), but why do A DA player needs to get punished for trying to build a fluffy list ? Want to play Firewing or Deathwing ? Enjoy your free loose. Dreadwing ? sure just don't take jump pack destroyers, quad mortars with phosphex and give up the best buff from Sedras.

DA have mediocre LA rule, worse RoW, ok units and decent characters. While I agree that every legions get the short end of the stick in some areas (for example : Ultras or IW don't have a great LA rule either, but get access to amazing units) what did the DA get ? Options I guess: at least we can choose what kind of bullet we want to shoot ourself with. 

 

ALso I still haven't forgiven FW for :cussing up the Lion's rules like they did but that's an other story...

I think you missed Varyns point entirely, and the tone and content of your response does more to prove the point of his second paragraph. I’m not sure what I’m missing with the Lions rules, but he seems pretty competitive to me.

 

Whilst I believe the DA had multiple facets in their approach to war, I don’t believe that they would out perform a legion specialised in a particular area of expertise. Why should they out perform WE and BA in their CC ability? Those legions sole dedication has been to that particular way of war. The same applies to WS and their rapid assault tactics, IH and their armoured assault tactics etc etc. The strength of the 1st legion is their ability to counter any threat.

 

My goal in my response was never to act or sound agressive and I hope Varyn didn't take it as a personnal attack/ agressive behavior.

I too agree that DA shouldn't outperform WE and BA in CC as they have other strenghts that these 2 legions don't have (the same way they shouldn't outshoot IW etc ...) but the price for this polyvalence is currently objectively too high. I don't think anyone here is trying to make DA the next Custodes by making the LA rule over the top. But I'd say that I think that the rules should encourage you to make fluffy decision when building your list which is unfortunatly not the case with the current DA rules. This is not even talking about balancing the point costs : why is scion of the ravenwing most useless on bikes for example ?

 

Now about the Lion. (please note that these thoughts are based around my experience playing in my gaming group therefore I don't claim the following statements to be absolutely true or without flaws)

First up is his "choice" of weapons : this is not like sanguinius' options where the weapon you pick dictates the role and intent of use. Here : you simply have a correct and wrong choice (with his basic 5 attacks, the Lion will not statistically kill a single 2W 4++ centurion in a chalenge when equiped with the Lion's blade ...)

Then there is his gun which suffers from being Salvo. You could say that it becomes usable in overwatch but when your most powerfull rule is the automatic 8" charge shooting with this gun means you are giving up your best rule and shooting in overwatch means that you did something wrong.

His defencive stats are below average but he was never described as being notably more durabble than any of his brothers so that's in line with the character and I'm not going to argue on the subject.

Offesively speaking : let's compare him to Russ as both have similar points costs and both are meant to be played as Beatstick Primarchs (Russ is a slightly better army buffer while the Lion does a better job at improving the squad he's attached to). Russ will outperform the Lion in almost every situations while also having better defensive stats.

Despite what has been said about the Lion ignoring debuff, an absolute focus is too situational to actually matter and the situations where the rule actually starts to have an effect are the situations you want to avoid in the first place.

However you use the Lion, you are always conceiding something. Want to charge ? don't shoot. Want to shoot ? don't charge. Want Companions ? sure but it has to be in the same LoW slot and is therefore affected by the 25% points limit.

Why take the Lion ? he's not a monster hunter (especially in a legion with access to terranic greatswords) not a particullary efficient duelist, doesn't really add a lot of value to your army. He does buff the squad he's in, but a chaplain with stasis will do the same job better and a slightly above average fighter. at 460 points, he either needs a solid buff, or decent point decrease.

Lorewise : the Lion on the tabbletop and in the books feel like 2 different entities. Crunchwise, I'd hardly call his rules balanced. Yet youcall them competitive ? I don't claim to be a powergamer or to be the most strategic and efficient player so may I ask you to developp your oppionion ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I didn’t get past +2S AP2 weapons on sergeants....

I personally think that a lot of the complaining about the DA rules is unjustified. I sympathise with poor wording on rules and a lack of clarification, but a lot of the complaining seems to be “I want better rules for my legion”.

If you look at most of the legions there are plenty of units which are over costed, rites of war which don’t quite justify their limitations and rules which don’t quite work as intended. Most players try to find a balance between building an army from the units and fluff they like and those which will help get the job done on the table. If all your legion specific rules, wargear, units and rites of war are amazing where is the fun in building an army?

I am not a DA player, but it seems to me that there is a lot of customisation and flexibility in the rules to build a wide variety of lists across a number of themes, some of which are more powerful than others, which seems in line with the other legions.

I made the other thread for feedback so that this one wouldn't get cluttered up as this isnt the space nor subforum for that sort of discussion.

Could've - I dunno - left a couple of words in there, but I guess expressly communicating that I am worried about power levels and would like some feedback does not communicate that all that well?

That said, I am looking for advice from DA players mainly as smarter people than I have talked to lengths about our LA and some of our Rites of War as well as the Scion rules. I do see the issue with the hidebreakers thanks to Metaliptica's pointers *in the thread* and will be taking that into consideration - particularly considering that the thread does outline that the weapons are the least thought about part of the whole thing so there was trouble to be expected. This is part of the *outline* (see the red marked Thoughts section) and also specifically one of the reasons it is there - so that things can be pointed out.

Could I invite you to have a look at the rest of the stuff and - if you find anything you'd consider needing of change - perhaps leave some *constructive* criticism in the *relevant* thread? As is I can't exactly do much with what you are telling me here.

I think that response is quite condescending, also, by only looking for DA opinion you are going to receive biased feedback. I think Varyns post is already constructive, he’s just addressing the underlying issue that motivates you to adapt the current rules rather than the content of them.

 

I understand the frustration of poor rule writing and less efficient choices that drive you to a particular build. But the HH for me has always been more about fluff than competition.

 

I agree about keeping this thread clear of further discussion around home made rules, therefore I’ve posted more in depth on your thread.

 

Cadmus

 

 

Funny you say that ... 

Seriously tho what was condescending about the observer's response ? He asked for feedback and expressed his concern about the balance of his homegrown rules. Yes there are some issues with his homegrown rules (vets in every RoW and AP2 weapons mainly), but all of his choices were justified by the lore and as you rightly mentionned earlyer: HH is more about fluff than competition ).

 

HH is indeed about fluff instead of crunch but I still think that it shouldn't be used as an excuse for bad rules writting and lack of balance (Magnus and Russ' rules were fluffy upon release, yet it didn't stop players to rightfully ask for a nerf). This is especially when it took more than a few years to finally have rules for the legion. 

Edited January 19, 2021 by Metaliptica

[Cadmus Tyro]

@Metaliptica - I have no desire to enter into further discourse about the strengths of the Lion, and to be honest I have lost interest in sharing my opinions about your legion rules given that overly defensive response, again. It’s clear you have lost objectivity and there is a lack of desire to be open to the opinions of others.

 

Good luck with developing your legion rules, and good luck finding someone who will agree to play you using them.

 

Cadmus

[Dagoth Ur]

@Metaliptica - I have no desire to enter into further discourse about the strengths of the Lion, and to be honest I have lost interest in sharing my opinions about your legion rules given that overly defensive response, again. It’s clear you have lost objectivity and there is a lack of desire to be open to the opinions of others.

 

Good luck with developing your legion rules, and good luck finding someone who will agree to play you using them.

 

Cadmus

I think you may have confused Metaliptica with me, mate. He didn't write the rules - I did - and it would have been a bit difficult for me to be defensive considering I woke up about two hours ago and went immediately to work

 

That said, thanks for the write up in the other thread - to all three of you - I'll be responding later when I get off work.

 

Also, concerning the condescending part - thanks for taking my side Metaliptica but I have to hand it to Cadmus. In retrospect, I was being condescending to Varyn without realising it because I felt that the tone and content of his answer was very unproductive. I'd like to apologize for that blunder.

Edited January 19, 2021 by The Observer

[Cadmus Tyro]

@The Observer - I’m not confused, the previous post was directed to Metaliptica, the reference to “your legion rules” was in reference to the original DA rules. Although perhaps the wording of the post could have been a little better!

 

I honestly did want to encourage you and offer you constructive feedback, but part of that process is to discuss the thought process that drives the need for change. Because if it originates from the perspective of subjective dissatisfaction in the FW writing team because of a mismatch in your perception of the strength of their legion rules and concordance with the background material, it’s going to lead to unbalanced writing. If you work from the perspective of maintaining balance and “fixing” some of the inconsistencies with the rules, IMHO you are more likely to write a set of rules that is more palatable for your opponent.

 

I hope that doesn’t come across in a condescending way, because it’s not my intention to be.

 

Cadmus

[Gorgoff]

(for example : Ultras or IW don't have a great LA rule either,

That bit alone shows that your not very good at assessing the value of rules.

IW have one of the best LA rules in the game. I don't know how many times I've won a game because my opponent blew his leadership test and you say that being able to ignore casualties in the shooting phase is a weak rule? Do you know how many leadership tests you have to take during a 6 turn game?

 

Another nail in your coffin is almost everything you've said about the Lion.

 

"Then there is his gun which suffers from being Salvo. You could say that it becomes usable in overwatch but when your most powerfull rule is the automatic 8" charge shooting with this gun means you are giving up your best rule and shooting in overwatch means that you did something wrong."

Yes but no. It's situational, sure, but since you don't want to shoot with a beatstick I don't know where the problem is.

His rule allows a good player to have a certain charge. This is huge. Since you can measure every distance at any time you should get the charges you want and you think that is weak?

 

"His defencive stats are below average"

Statistically better then most of the other primarchs.

 

"Russ will outperform the Lion in almost every situations"

Not in shooting, against opponents who debuff him, against monstrous creatures in Cc and not against vehicles in cc.

 

"absolute focus is too situational to actually matter"

It just makes him one of the top tier duellist primarch.

 

"You could say that it becomes usable in overwatch but when your most powerfull rule is the automatic 8" charge "

The :cussing thing shoots 18" stationary and bloody 9" from movement.

Hmmm, when will THAT come in handy, when I can always charge 8"? Dude, seriously.

 

"he's not a monster hunter"

He is.

 

"not a particullary efficient duelist"

Top tier primarch in that category.

 

"but a chaplain with stasis will do the same job better"

You do know, that not fearless opponents have to make a leadership test with at least -2 against 3d6 while at the same time EVERY DA takes test against 3d6 picking the lowest? How on earth is a chaplain better in this regard?

 

I do think that some of the DA rules are not very good, but all in all they are really good IF played by someone who now how to use it.

And there special units are not "ok" but awesome.

[ShadowCore67]

My biggest gripes with their rules have always been their rites. Unbroken Vow, Storm of War, and Serpent's Bane.

 

Unbroken Vow's objective restriction is just too extreme and makes the rite basically unplayable.

 

Storm of War's list building restriction essentially forces you to take 6 tactical/assault squads, just so you can only take 4 other units.

 

Serpent's Bane is the least bad of the three but the auto lose condition is still pretty rough. Your opponent could focus on protecting one of the targeted units and win.

 

The variation in power of the Scion upgrades also is an issue. Firewing is by far the only one worth 25 points. The others are much weaker and should be costed as such or slightly buffed, and Ravenwing (the biker one) doesn't even benefit bikes and jetbikes.

 

In terms of just stuff that needs clarification: How does Ironwing interact with extra armor? Is Ravenwing really supposed to allow for reroll of thrust moves even though there's no LA units with jetpacks? Is the Firewing Cadre supposed to have assault grenades?

 

I've noticed this tactics thread as been pretty dead in terms of tactics and I think it's because despite all of the options, there's not much to discuss. IMO most gamey or more competitive lists will boil down to taking a generic RoW with firewing and stasis on any CC units.

Edited January 19, 2021 by ShadowCore67

[Cadmus Tyro]

I strongly disagree that the firewing RoW is below par, it’s actually the RoW that my alpha legion wished they had access to.

 

Seekers are an incredibly versatile unit, and you can take them as troops. Granted, you are paying an additional 25pts to give them the compulsory scion rule. But the way I would look at this, is you’re paying 25pts for the ability to infiltrate your seekers. Infiltrating seeker squads in rhinos are brutal, I use them on a regular basis and they are quite capable of eliminating even a decent squad of custodes.

 

I think the firewing cabal unit is fairly decent. I mean, they’re essentially three basic centurions running together and are costed the same as three basic centurions with bolt pistols and cc weapons. So essentially you are getting: x3 power weapons (at +1 strength with the option to rend for a degree of risk), jump packs (which also have the potential to negate overwatch and give you a 5+ cover save), needle pistols, shroud bombs, hatred characters and the scout rule. I mean, that’s pretty ridiculous, that’s a minimum of 105 points of extra kit for free, and that doesn’t even take into account the additional kit a centurion cannot access or their special rules. Oh, and guess what, they can score in their RoW and already have the scion rule so you avoid that tax as well with them. Need I mention access to stasis rounds? Although, I agree they should have frag grenades, and I suspect this will get FAQ’d at some point.

 

The other rule that makes this RoW powerful is the +1 AP rule. Add that to tank hunting veterans loaded with Melta and you’re rolling str10 AP1 shots, tanks are going to die, you just need a delivery system, and, as your FA slots are free of seekers, you have options.

 

And this is why there is such a drawback to using the RoW, auto losing. Now bear in mind your opponent still has to score objectives, because if they play too defensively, and you do succeed in wiping their elite units, they aren’t going to be winning the game. Think about the psychology of the game for a moment, if your opponent holds back his elite high output units due to fear, you already have them on the back foot.

 

Infiltrate on three troops units and scout on your cabal units gives you the tools to get up close to complete your objective, when combined with other units.

 

Cadmus

[ShadowCore67]

Good arguments, can't necessarily dispute any of them. I do agree the bonuses are strong, I just think completely auto losing is a bit extreme. I could see something like 3VP instead.

 

Personal opinion I guess.

[Cadmus Tyro]

Yes, it does seem extreme, but I suppose I feel it balances the benefits available. It also forces you to play the scenario/RoW as intended, which I think is a good thing. In most of the HH games I play, they end up being pretty close in VP, “martial hubris” has contributed to lot of drawn or lost games as a result. I think 3VP if you don’t complete the objective is quite close to auto losing, unless it’s a high VP game you are unlikely to claw that back. But that’s just my experience I suppose.

 

Cadmus

[WGXH]

 

Hum ... Am I missing something or is the Lion's rule absolute focus also apply to overwatch ?

It's for cc only.

 

 

 

Is it?

 

Hear me out here. The verbatim for the rule is 

"in any Assault phase, Lion El'Jonson is never required to roll more than a 4+ to hit any enemy model, regardless of the enemy's Weapon Skill, any special rules or modifiers in play"

 

Emphasis on modifiers and assault phase in this instance. Snap shots is a modifier, and Overwatch is a sub-phase of the assault phase.

 

RAI is probably absolutely not, but given his cost compared to his brethren, I feel it is almost thematic. Aside from Horus, he is one that his brothers fear to step towards. 4 S7 ap2 shots, hitting on 4's on a reroll, blinding while they are at I1.

 

That's definitely threatening. And it does tie into the Lion's lore of using any tool necessary to complete his duty.

[Nomadic Thunder]

If I played with primarch I’d absolutely love for this to be a thing.

But I feel it’s a bit tooooo gamey and rules-lawyer like to pull on anyone but “THAT guy”.

 

Edit: having said that. Lion is the coolest, calmest predator around and to have the grace under pressure to let loose a full salvo and an enemy hurtling toward him does very much fit his character.

I’d say discuss with your opponent in a convincing manner before you declare a bs3 overwatch with essentially two BLINDINGLY good (tehe) plasma guns.

Edited January 23, 2021 by Nomadic Thunder

[WGXH]

I agree, it's almost certainly not intended as such.

 

With that said, for the cost we pay and what we get, it's worth attaining each advantage that you can.

 

It's only going to make a difference against the primarchs who are significantly greater than Lion without this chicanery- Sanguinius and Russ predominantly. Horus' armour allows him to mostly ignore this penalty, and by and large he already holds an advantage against many other of his brethren.

Edited January 23, 2021 by WGXH

[Guest Metaliptica]

 

(for example : Ultras or IW don't have a great LA rule either,

That bit alone shows that your not very good at assessing the value of rules.

IW have one of the best LA rules in the game. I don't know how many times I've won a game because my opponent blew his leadership test and you say that being able to ignore casualties in the shooting phase is a weak rule? Do you know how many leadership tests you have to take during a 6 turn game?

Another nail in your coffin is almost everything you've said about the Lion.

 

"Then there is his gun which suffers from being Salvo. You could say that it becomes usable in overwatch but when your most powerfull rule is the automatic 8" charge shooting with this gun means you are giving up your best rule and shooting in overwatch means that you did something wrong."

Yes but no. It's situational, sure, but since you don't want to shoot with a beatstick I don't know where the problem is.

His rule allows a good player to have a certain charge. This is huge. Since you can measure every distance at any time you should get the charges you want and you think that is weak?

 

"His defencive stats are below average"

Statistically better then most of the other primarchs.

 

"Russ will outperform the Lion in almost every situations"

Not in shooting, against opponents who debuff him, against monstrous creatures in Cc and not against vehicles in cc.

 

"absolute focus is too situational to actually matter"

It just makes him one of the top tier duellist primarch.

 

"You could say that it becomes usable in overwatch but when your most powerfull rule is the automatic 8" charge "

The :cussing thing shoots 18" stationary and bloody 9" from movement.

Hmmm, when will THAT come in handy, when I can always charge 8"? Dude, seriously.

 

"he's not a monster hunter"

He is.

 

"not a particullary efficient duelist"

Top tier primarch in that category.

 

"but a chaplain with stasis will do the same job better"

You do know, that not fearless opponents have to make a leadership test with at least -2 against 3d6 while at the same time EVERY DA takes test against 3d6 picking the lowest? How on earth is a chaplain better in this regard?

 

I do think that some of the DA rules are not very good, but all in all they are really good IF played by someone who now how to use it.

And there special units are not "ok" but awesome.

 

Yeah I surely don't value the LA : IW rule as much as I should. between the meta around here being mostly CC based and me being a not so old heresy player, I plead guilty.

 

About the Lion : you made your point. While I am not agreeing what everything you said (one of them being the absolute focus rule making him a top tier combatant) I guess I still have to fully apreciate the value and power of some of the rules. I'll take some more time to play with them and see if that changes.

But right now, I still think that clocking at 460 points, he feels very costly for what he brings to the table, not to mention the balance problem between his two weapons, or the fact that he doesn't feel like a strategist at all on the tabbletop.

Something feels wrong about his profile. He probably doesn't need too much changing to actually make him work, but I strongly believe he does need some tweaks to his ruleset.

[Gorgoff]

 

 

Hum ... Am I missing something or is the Lion's rule absolute focus also apply to overwatch ?

It's for cc only.

 

 

 

Is it?

 

Hear me out here. The verbatim for the rule is 

"in any Assault phase, Lion El'Jonson is never required to roll more than a 4+ to hit any enemy model, regardless of the enemy's Weapon Skill, any special rules or modifiers in play"

 

 

 

 

Highlighted the important bit.

Snapfire is not a modifier and overwatch has nothing to do with the enemies WS.

So no, RAW it is about cc only.

 

 

 

 

(for example : Ultras or IW don't have a great LA rule either,

Snip

 

Yeah I surely don't value the LA : IW rule as much as I should. between the meta around here being mostly CC based and me being a not so old heresy player, I plead guilty.

 

About the Lion : you made your point. While I am not agreeing what everything you said (one of them being the absolute focus rule making him a top tier combatant) I guess I still have to fully apreciate the value and power of some of the rules. I'll take some more time to play with them and see if that changes.

But right now, I still think that clocking at 460 points, he feels very costly for what he brings to the table, not to mention the balance problem between his two weapons, or the fact that he doesn't feel like a strategist at all on the tabbletop.

Something feels wrong about his profile. He probably doesn't need too much changing to actually make him work, but I strongly believe he does need some tweaks to his ruleset.

 

Oh it definitely feels wrong.

I grew up with him being one if not the greatest tactican in the Emperium and not a beatstick.

In my taste he got the wrong rules, but powerful they are and well worth 460 points.

But do I like them?

No.

I think they are somewhat two dimensional because they force you to play him in a certain way with a certain list and in my humble oppinion he should be quiet the opposite. Flexible, unpredictable by your opponents and a huge force multiplier.

 

 

While I am not agreeing what everything you said (one of them being the absolute focus rule making him a top tier combatant) 

I wasn't clear on that one.

What I meant was that this plays a huge part of making him top tier duellist because he doesn't care about debuffs which some primarchs (and others) distribute. 

[WGXH]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hum ... Am I missing something or is the Lion's rule absolute focus also apply to overwatch ?

It's for cc only.

Is it?

 

Hear me out here. The verbatim for the rule is

"in any Assault phase, Lion El'Jonson is never required to roll more than a 4+ to hit any enemy model, regardless of the enemy's Weapon Skill, any special rules or modifiers in play"

 

 

Highlighted the important bit.

Snapfire is not a modifier and overwatch has nothing to do with the enemies WS.

So no, RAW it is about cc only.

 

I could just as equally highlight the section stating modifiers. Snapfire is indeed a modifier, modifying your BS to 1.

 

Given how the rule itself mentions Weapon Skill, I would agree the intention is not for this to apply- however

I'm curious to see what logic could be used to refute this within the rules, barring an errata I am unaware of. Not looking to create an argument- just looking to understand perspectives.

[Monkeychunks]

Surely this is covered by the rule that says no modifiers ever affect Snapshots unless they specifically call out that they affect them? You would expect the rule to say 'including Snapshots' if that were the case.

[Guest Metaliptica]

 

 

 

While I am not agreeing what everything you said (one of them being the absolute focus rule making him a top tier combatant) 

I wasn't clear on that one.

What I meant was that this plays a huge part of making him top tier duellist because he doesn't care about debuffs which some primarchs (and others) distribute. 

 

Then there is probably something I missed as the rule doesn't really come into play that often and most of the negative to hit or WS modifers do affect him. The Lion's Choler is IMHO the rule that makes him a decent beatstick

 

Now IF the rule was made so that he will always hit on 3+ ...