Ishagu Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Huh? It's just the same model as a regular contemptor?? Where are the rules for this thing? You guys seem to be in the know... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolemai Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Book 6... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor Perils Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Since Book VI is now out on the FW website, I don't think it's allowed to post the rules again ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishagu Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 · Hidden by Flint13, February 13, 2016 - No reason given Hidden by Flint13, February 13, 2016 - No reason given Ugh... Link to comment
Ishagu Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Well, Regardless the new cost makes Contemptors very appealing :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hellrender Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 I think the previous page has a summary of the rules. Looking at the fluff behind the cortus, i understand that. Logical that extensive war, battle and limitin resources will lead to shoddy repairs and material. But none of that is reflected on their ''Cortus Contemptor Dreadnought'' model. Which is what i don't get. Why bother specifying the differences, and than not releasing a new bad ass model with it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinsanity Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 · Hidden by Flint13, February 13, 2016 - No reason given Hidden by Flint13, February 13, 2016 - No reason given Whether FW intends to release a model down the road or not, I don't see how their saying "you know, while you wait for a new model you can use a Contemptor to represent a Cortus. It's not called a Contemptor Cortus without reason..." is such a cop out. Besides, be thankful they released rules for it already, they could as well have just waited for a model to be ready and then released 'em as pdf instead (as they usually do, btw). Looking at the reaction, maybe they should have... Link to comment
Ishagu Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Ok, I've seen the rules. I'm very happy, and it makes me want to run Contemptors again. Going to paint up the one I got in the BaC boxset, will be great in a Pod :-D Frankly, I don't even want new models as it saves me a lot of money! Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hesh Kadesh Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Ok, I've seen the rules. I'm very happy, and it makes me want to run Contemptors again. Going to paint up the one I got in the BaC boxset, will be great in a Pod :-D Frankly, I don't even want new models as it saves me a lot of money! Lol My point exactly. There is nothing about this decision that benefits FW if they are wanting to take back profits from the BaC Dread by making it more interesting to run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atia Posted February 12, 2016 Author Share Posted February 12, 2016 Are some of the images Atia posted not showing for anyone else either? I just get what I assume to be the image file name as a link displayed instead. yep, known (and dumb) issue with using pics from facebook conversations (since i posted them here a few seconds before i load them up on our blog) - you can see all the pics here too: http://battlebunnies.blogspot.co.at/search/label/Weekender%202016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terminus Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 I got liked the pages, so thank you for that. Yes, 175 points for a double grav chain/fist contemptor is a steal, especially when it gets 6 attacks on the charge! As far as those wondering about their devious plan, these will drive all sorts of sales for Contemptors, and then they will release models for Cortus and we'll have to buy those as well. You know how this works. :P All the Sons of Horus and Emperor's Children stuff, and of course Raven Guard always getting the best everything, is quite exciting and the only reason I haven't opened a vein and squeezed everything into FW's shopping cart is because they mentioned that Epic is coming back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kol Saresk Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Eh, I doubt we'll actually see a model. It's basically a Mk V/Pariah version of the Contemptor. You know, the actual product, just made inferior by the fact it's scavenged together versus being made in a forge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
depthcharge12 Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Cortus Contemptors for DAs ironwing would be awesome. Fear and tank hunters - which the latter extends to cc too :devil: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hesh Kadesh Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 I got liked the pages, so thank you for that. Yes, 175 points for a double grav chain/fist contemptor is a steal, especially when it gets 6 attacks on the charge! As far as those wondering about their devious plan, these will drive all sorts of sales for Contemptors, and then they will release models for Cortus and we'll have to buy those as well. You know how this works. :P All the Sons of Horus and Emperor's Children stuff, and of course Raven Guard always getting the best everything, is quite exciting and the only reason I haven't opened a vein and squeezed everything into FW's shopping cart is because they mentioned that Epic is coming back. Just take DCCW for 7 attacks on the charge. Whoo bad wording! ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terminus Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 It would be 6, no? Base 3 attacks, plus one for extra fist, plus two for rage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ncarnadine Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 It would be 6, no? Base 3 attacks, plus one for extra fist, plus two for rage. If you don't go with the Chainfist, and instead go with an extra DCCW, you get a full extra attack on top of the attack for two melee weapons. There's a little asterisk for the 2nd DCCW option and if you follow it, it reads "This grants the Dreadnought an additional close combat attack while equipped." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caillum Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 With the latest FAQ, chainfists on dreadnoughts lose "Specialist Weapon", so that can extend to the Cortus too, I think. Either way, I think Terminus has the right of it: 3 (base) + 1 (2 weapons) + 2 (Rage) = 6 on the charge. Personally, I'd probably go for +1 Initiative a lot of the time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ncarnadine Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 With the latest FAQ, chainfists on dreadnoughts lose "Specialist Weapon", so that can extend to the Cortus too, I think. Either way, I think Terminus has the right of it: 3 (base) + 1 (2 weapons) + 2 (Rage) = 6 on the charge. Personally, I'd probably go for +1 Initiative a lot of the time! Nononono, I get that. You get the bonus attack for two melee weapons with the chainfist and DCCW. What I'm saying is, in the entry for the Cortus, taking two DCCWs get you an extra attack. 3 base + 1 for two melee weapons + 2 for rage + 1 for that silly rule = 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caillum Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 O_0 That's a bit stupid. How does the rule read? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slips Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Unless...y'know...its intentional to push a CC Build on them :p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ncarnadine Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 Unless...y'know...its intentional to push a CC Build on them Or it's a planned change in the main red book to oldschool Contemptors as well? Which would be nice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishagu Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 This is baffling me. Sounds like we need to contact FW... They could just be making it easier for people by reminding them an extra cc weapon confers an additional attack, as opposed to an extra, extra attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1ncarnadine Posted February 12, 2016 Share Posted February 12, 2016 This is baffling me. Sounds like we need to contact FW... They could just be making it easier for people by reminding them an extra cc weapon confers an additional attack, as opposed to an extra, extra attack. this is also possible. or it's possible the Cortus was written pre-chainfist FAQ. Still, contacting FW probably won't result in a response that anyone accepts. Been that way for over a year now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m_r_parker Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 I'm glad I'm not the only one confused by this, because I felt stupid when I read it and assumed there must be a fundamental thing I was missing. For those who haven't seen the rules - the Contemptor Cortus starting equipment is a DCCW and a Twin Linked Heavy Bolter, and you are presented with options that you can take to either weapon (all cost the same points regardless of whether you replace the DCCW or the TLHB). Within that list there is an option specifically for the Heavy Bolter arm to replace with a DCCW for free (it reads "(Heavy Bolter only) extra Dreadnought Power Fist*" or something like that) with an asterisk saying this gives your Contemptor an extra attack (not that it gets an attack from 2x DCCW). Scenario: I want a Contemptor Cortus with a DCCW and a Kheres Assault Cannon. Logically I would upgrade the TLHB as its a single change to the configuration. With this rule technically I could replace the TLHB with a DCCW and gain an extra attack (for free), and then replace the original DCCW for the Assault Cannon (for the same price as going TLHB > Assault Cannon). Same price, same configuration, but the second has +1A. I figured there must be a rule I was overlooking in the main rule book for DCCW where removal from a model reduces the number of attacks by one - but then surely the inverse is true (adding a DCCW adds an attack to the statline), and having the option specifically give you an extra attack is a mistake and a typo. Thus still confusing. Can anyone point out the really dumb mistake I was making, or is there generally an issue with the rules. Slips - I know with the book available for pre order there's a veto on posting pics from the book, but I can take a quick snap of just the weapon options if this helps clarify things. Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kol Saresk Posted February 13, 2016 Share Posted February 13, 2016 Didn't there used to be a rule that if you had no DCCWs on your Dreadnought, then it was at -1A? Did they get rid of that? Surely the +1 must come from having two like it always has and they're just assuming that if you trade the TLHB for a DCCW, it's because you're already planning on keeping the other? Granted, clarification could have been used just to prevent this sort of discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.