Ad Mech VS Necrons Box in March

[Charlo]

 

There seems to be absolutely zero reasons for ever taking an Armiger, unless you want it for fluffy/aesthetic reasons.

The melta lance is far inferior to a neutron laser and comes on a platform that is roughly as survivable as an Onager but far more expensive. Yes, the Armiger can punch a bit, but honestly that's not worth it. And certainly nowhere near what AdMech needs.

 

A sadly useless new addition. If it had Knight rules, then maybe. If codex:Knights gives all super-heavies new rules, maybe. But as it stands, as an AdMech player, I say either it gets a heavy pts discount, or much better weapons, or it just stays on the shelf (shop).

 

Pass for now, even if the model is quite nice.

 

In general you are right, but on the other side the Amiger brings 3 usefull aspects to our army:

 

- Speed

- CC capability

- Durability

 

Maybe the lil Knight will find a place in some heavier lists, drawing away fire from some Kastellans or Onagers. Especially with the Rotate Ion Shield Stratagem he might be an excellent Distraction Carnifex.

 

Bit of a word vomit, but if you'll allow me:

 

I think these 3 points cannot be under estimated.

 

Two Armigers, while taking up 500ish points, adds some solid workhorse to our repertoire. Between two Melta Weapons and the Chain Cleavers they have the big stuff covered, especially anything that is big and not a vehicle (meaning Arc doesn't get it's bonus) and lets the Neurtron Laser be not our only source of chunking out bigger targets.

 

Yes, they will get bogged down by hordes, which are sadly a very Meta choice but they will be deadly to anything else. We also have things like Jazzhands, Infiltrators and even our basic Skitarii to handle the hordes too.

 

The lack of synergy beyond Knight of the Cog is frustrating, but getting some Canticles at a key moment is still pretty nice.

 

I think a lot of people like to talk in total Absolutes when it comes to looking at units online and I don't blame them - you bring a unit for a job and if there is something that can do that one job better why not take the "better" unit? Problem is the game isn't just a series of 1v1 bouts where your anti-tank get to shoot the tanks and your high shot weapons get to mulch hordes.

 

A lot of you are comparing to the Onager with a Neutron Laser but as above, the Onager could just as easily be counter deployed, is more vulnerable to CC and can have its line of sight blocked by terrain or other units. The Armiger presents an alternative that covers the Onagers weaknesses, it has just enough bulk, speed and range to get where it needs to deliver that potential 36 Damage amid the chaos of a battlefield.

 

I think truly the biggest flaw will be the degrading profile probably causing it to end up on 5+ to hit on few attacks.

Edited March 19, 2018 by Charlo

[Lysere]

In terms of speed the Armiger has the dragoons beat handidly but are designed for tougher targets making the two a great combo. A high speed onager is a perfectly fine option if you build around it.

 

Definitely hoping we get a knight codex soon since they need some love.

[MajorNese]

 

Two Armigers, while taking up 500ish points, adds some solid workhorse to our repertoire. Between two Melta Weapons and the Chain Cleavers they have the big stuff covered, especially anything that is big and not a vehicle (meaning Arc doesn't get it's bonus) and lets the Neurtron Laser be not our only source of chunking out bigger targets.

 

Yes, they will get bogged down by hordes, which are sadly a very Meta choice but they will be deadly to anything else. We also have things like Jazzhands, Infiltrators and even our basic Skitarii to handle the hordes too.

The problem is, they are too fragile for their points. You could play 2 armigers for 500ish points, or 8 dragoons. Those have twice the wounds, 3+ armour for one round (shroudpsalm) and -1 to hit to offset the lower toughness, making each wound almost as resilient as on the armiger. They deal with heavy stuff in CC (S8 wounds reliably, 2D instead of 3D on the armiger), and they don't have a problem with hordes. By spending a CP, each dragoon gets 5,5 hits, as much as two armigers combined, while having a lot more dragoons around.

 

Onagers might have a problem in CC, but if you can field one onager and two dragoons for each armiger, one could offset this. Anything wanting to punch the onager first has to walk across the field (or deep strike), where it meets the two dragoons first. Armigers may make nice big distraction carnifexes, but IMO they don't fill a niche effectively.

 

Hint: Arc became worthless this edition. Multiple damage might be nice, but not wounding and not getting through armour in the first place means plasma/laser are just better at it.

Edited March 19, 2018 by MajorNese

[Charlo]

 

 

Two Armigers, while taking up 500ish points, adds some solid workhorse to our repertoire. Between two Melta Weapons and the Chain Cleavers they have the big stuff covered, especially anything that is big and not a vehicle (meaning Arc doesn't get it's bonus) and lets the Neurtron Laser be not our only source of chunking out bigger targets.

 

Yes, they will get bogged down by hordes, which are sadly a very Meta choice but they will be deadly to anything else. We also have things like Jazzhands, Infiltrators and even our basic Skitarii to handle the hordes too.

The problem is, they are too fragile for their points. You could play 2 armigers for 500ish points, or 8 dragoons. Those have twice the wounds, 3+ armour for one round (shroudpsalm) and -1 to hit to offset the lower toughness, making each wound almost as resilient as on the armiger. They deal with heavy stuff in CC (S8 wounds reliably, 2D instead of 3D on the armiger), and they don't have a problem with hordes. By spending a CP, each dragoon gets 5,5 hits, more than two armigers combined, while having a lot more dragoons around.

 

Onagers might have a problem in CC, but if you can field one onager and two dragoons for each armiger, one could offset this. Anything wanting to punch the onager first has to walk across the field (or deep strike), where it meets the two dragoons first. Armigers may make nice big distraction carnifexes, but IMO they don't fill a niche effectively.

 

Hint: Arc became worthless this edition. Multiple damage might be nice, but not wounding and not getting through armour in the first place means plasma/laser are just better at it.

 

All excellent points and I think with them being a Knight unit first and an Ad Mech unit second hurts its costing and the like. Will probably see a heavy point reduction in the Knight codex methinks. My personal issue with the "2 Dragoons + 1 Onager" is a bit more out there, as that costs a lot of money real world!

 

Maybe when the Knight 'dex comes out things like stratagems and households will really push these guys to the next level granting more internal synergy between 2-3 Armigers as opposed to the small amount of external synergy between Ad Mech & Knights currently.

 

In terms of Arc, I must disagree though. For peanuts you get a solid rifle that hurts most infantry keenly and vehicles even more - I've had my Arc blow chunks out of oncoming vehicles rather handily in my games, albeit there hasn't been many!

[Lord_Ikka]

240 points isn't too bad- but only when you compare 2 Warglaives vs 1 full-sized Knight. The best Knight for comparision is the Errant, as it the closest weapon loadout that reflects what the Armiger Warglaives have. If you compare 2 Warglaives with 1 Knight Errant you get the following:

 

* Wounds- Equal at 24 for both

 

* Movement- Warglaives faster by 2 inches, then 1 inch at each of the lower tiers

 

* WS/BS/Saves- Equal at all tiers

 

* S/T- Errant is at 8 for both, so better by 2 in S and 1 in T

 

Weapons- Here is where it gets a little interesting.

 

* Thermal cannon vs 2 thermal spears- 1d6 vs 2d3 shots (fairly equal). Damage is cannon 1d6, thermal spears 2d6 (so it could be significantly deadlier to fight 2 Warglaive attacking the same target). Cannon has 6 inches more range, but spear allows for shooting (at a -1 to Hit) after advancing, so range is debatable.

 

* Reaper chainsword vs 2 chaincleavers- There are only 2 differences between the two, the chainsword has a better damage profile (6 vs 3) but the chaincleavers have double the attacks. Pretty much a wash.

 

* As for the carapace weapons/chest weapons, you have the Errant getting one heavy stubber/melta for the Warglaives' two. The Errant's carapace weapons add a considerable amount of firepower, and only the Stormspear will actually push the points of the Errant above 2 Warglaives, by around 8 points.

 

Points-wise, you have the Errant (bare-bones without any carapace weapons) at 430/443 with either the heavy stubber or melta. The Warglaives are at 454/480 for the same weapon loadouts. So you are paying a premium of 24/37 points for two Warglaives vs 1 Knight Errant.

 

Overall, the Warglaives are slightly faster than the Errant, have remarkably similar weaponry (their melee damage vs targets that you wouldn't feet on is almost exactly the same), and have to possibility of splitting an opponent's fire between two targets vs one for a Knight Errant. The downside however, is that the Knight Errant is tougher (T8 is actually a major step up from T7 in terms of weapons wounding it), can deal more effectively with infantry swarms by either using feet melee attacks or just walking away, and is cheaper by a significant amount. I do think the Warglaive is slightly overpriced, but only by about 15-20 points. It has a place in the AdMech stable, especially as a fast tank-hunter/distraction unit, but is not a must-have unit. I think the best option (aside from a points reduction or the introduction of new variants) would be to run 2 Warglaives and 1 Knight, or 3 Warglaives, as a Super-Heavy Detachment to get the 3CP- you'll get some decent anti-tank/monster firepower/melee. I don't expect to see double Warglaives in lists smaller than 2K, but you might have a single Warglaive in 1500 point games.

 

Comparing the Warglaive to an Onager is a bad comparison- the Onager is super points-efficient.

[Subtle Discord]

I guess it's a good thing Armigers are (most likely) a Knight release that is being paired with AdMech for the sake of the box set because they're the only models that make sense. I've never built a Knight list so I'm not sure how well they'll synergize with them, but I don't think they're the best fit for Mechanicus and they never were intended to be. As with larger Knights, they align with AdMech but they aren't a completely perfect fit because of the lack of certain keywords, so I don't think analyzing them in the context of an AdMech list because of what they're currently boxed with is the best course.

 

Can they be included in you Mechanicus army? Yes, but they are a Knight release and should be considered first in that context, in my opinion.

[Feral_80]

Hmm the only alleged advantages I read for the Armiger seem very situational. They are obviously badly overpriced for what they do, and they fill no niche - these, on the other hand, are quite objective statements. Sad, but that seems it. Let us hope the codex gives them some sense.

 

By the way, their theoretical role of hunters also seems very weak. Unless they can outflank, deepstrike, or fly, units armed like the Armiger will rarely be in the right spot despite their movement. Yes, they'll fire their unimpressive cannon at a big target. Then, since they have sprinted forward alone, they'll get swamped by 10 termagants for the rest of the game. Woho. Do not expect such a unit to ever be able to use its CC attack against a proper target unless you keep it back, or your opponent wants to...at best, they can work as a counter-charge unit against some opponents.

 

They might be barely correctly priced if they could stomp and disengage like a proper knight. It is unclear what is the sense in making them super-heavies without these rules... I guess their designation is meant to allow mono-knights armies, but that is no good reason to make them just inferior dreadnoughts.

Edited March 19, 2018 by Feral_80

[MajorNese]

240 points isn't too bad- but only when you compare 2 Warglaives vs 1 full-sized Knight.

I guess that is the whole point - it isn't designed to be a frontline unit for AdMech, it's designed to combat squad a knight.

 

AdMech and IK are polar opposites when it comes to concentration of force. AdMech can field a lot of medium-weight units, spread out a lot, but has low mobility and only one solid brick with the kastelans. Everything else, if it attracts too much attention, just gets wiped out. Therefore, redundancy is key, and presenting more threats to keep some of them alive. If one or two units do a Leeroy Jenkins and rush ahead (like the armigers, with only onager stats), they will get focused and die. With few to no other units to back them up, they're wasted points. That's why dragoons are used instead - they are just okay-ish all around (in low numbers), but a very cost-effective threat. Deal with them first is wasted firepower and leaves the onagers in peace to do their thing. Deal with the onagers first, the dragoons will wreck things and tie up more expensive stuff in CC. With an armiger, the opponent can just kill one unit (of onager-grade resilience) and take care of both.

 

A knight list is the polar opposite - only big, tough units with high mobility, but too concentrated to be flexible. Having more, cheaper knights to expand the threat bubble, lock up dangerous units in CC, counter-charge anything threatening the big knight might be worth it. Or finish up those units the big knight softened up - no one wants to use a big knight on the last 2W of a model. I don't play knights, but this seems logical, given the comparison to a big knight instead of AdMech units.

 

 

 

My personal issue with the "2 Dragoons + 1 Onager" is a bit more out there, as that costs a lot of money real world!

Amen to that. Onagers became cheaper with the Start Collecting box, but dragoons have always been one of the worst models when comparing cash to points. I've been playing skitarii since they came out, and up until last week only had two of those.

[Lysere]

Hmm the only alleged advantages I read for the Armiger seem very situational. They are obviously badly overpriced for what they do, and they fill no niche - these, on the other hand, are quite objective statements. Sad, but that seems it. Let us hope the codex gives them some sense.

 

By the way, their theoretical role of hunters also seems very weak. Unless they can outflank, deepstrike, or fly, units armed like the Armiger will rarely be in the right spot despite their movement. Yes, they'll fire their unimpressive cannon at a big target. Then, since they have sprinted forward alone, they'll get swamped by 10 termagants for the rest of the game. Woho. Do not expect such a unit to ever be able to use its CC attack against a proper target unless you keep it back, or your opponent wants to...at best, they can work as a counter-charge unit against some opponents.

 

They might be barely correctly priced if they could stomp and disengage like a proper knight. It is unclear what is the sense in making them super-heavies without these rules... I guess their designation is meant to allow mono-knights armies, but that is no good reason to make them just inferior dreadnoughts.

 

Well they do have one niche which is letting you take a super heavy detachment with knights without needing three full sized knights. This gives you access to the relic and warlord traits for a proper knight and still take a decent chunk of allies. I do agree that the points are a touch high but we also have no idea as to how the household rules will end up at this point. I'm hoping knights will be after the Dark Eldar.

[Magos Takatus]

 

 

 

 

All excellent points and I think with them being a Knight unit first and an Ad Mech unit second hurts its costing and the like. Will probably see a heavy point reduction in the Knight codex methinks. My personal issue with the "2 Dragoons + 1 Onager" is a bit more out there, as that costs a lot of money real world!

 

There is also the consideration that dragging a horde of Onagers and Dragoons somewhere to play a game would be a lot harder than a model that is less of a point sink. Not a huge advantage but I'm still not sure how many duplicate Onagers and Dragoons I can fit into cases and realistically carry on a bus if I felt up to finding a game at the local GW store. I quite like the Armiger models and I'm wondering how much space they would save in theory. :)

[Withershadow]

You would need more vertical space since they are taller, especially if you use the legs as is. If you put it on its side, it would probably take the real-estate of 2 vertical dragoons, but save you a bit of vertical space.

 

How many Dragoons and Onagers do you have, lol? I think 3 Onagers are plenty. Only have 3 dragoons but can see why some would want way more than that.

[Subtle Discord]

Roughly 2-to-1, from what I can see. You can get roughly 2 Onagers for the points of 1 Armiger, and they both share the same footprint. The tradeoff is in height, with the Armiger being taller, and the footprint of the Onager can be shrunk by leaving off the base, which isn't an option for the Armiger.

[Battybattybats]

Looks like more evidence of a future additional Armiger sprue, presumably with an additional weapons load out and imperial style armour. http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2018/03/40k-the-curious-case-of-the-missing-armiger-bits.html

 

The Armiger instructions show two new faceplates not actually on any sprues.

[Magos Takatus]

You would need more vertical space since they are taller, especially if you use the legs as is. If you put it on its side, it would probably take the real-estate of 2 vertical dragoons, but save you a bit of vertical space.

 

How many Dragoons and Onagers do you have, lol? I think 3 Onagers are plenty. Only have 3 dragoons but can see why some would want way more than that.

Currently I only have one Dunecrawler and one Dragoon but I have three Breachers, Three Destroyers and two Kataphrons already taking up space in the toolbox that I use to store my Mechanicus army. I can imagine it must be tricky to find a home for a large unit of walkers unless as you suggest you don't fix them to the bases. I have been eyeing up another Start Collecting box for a while since one Onager isn't enough. :)

[synthaside]

Magnetizing the bases to the feet I'll demonstrate with my  Dragoons ...  so they dont take up so much space that way you can lie them all down in boxes 

https://photos.app.goo.gl/9SA2VQR9RwuE4kKk1

I do the same for my onagers ... Feet to tops of chassis  robots  too .. makes transport much easier.
 

Edited March 19, 2018 by synthaside

[Prot]

That’s interesting.

 

I still think of how much more easily I could take the points if only it had true super heavy rules.

 

The reality is for me that I will have them ready to go, and I will play them cause I’m a sucker for stuff like this. The only question mark is how often I use them if I get Rick Rolled too often. Out of all my armies I definitely have the most issues with Admech right now. It’s not that I have to win, but making things worse isn’t exactly going to make me enjoy the Admech more in competitive environments.

[Subtle Discord]

You know, it seems like a more realistic scenario that they might get FAQ'ed to get all the Super Heavy rules, and I think you're right that it would help make them more compelling even without a points drop. Despiting making great changes and being more responsive, with how GW is operating these days it's hard to say how they're going to react to the feedback; some things seem to get quick attention while other issues just hang.

[Charlo]

You know, it seems like a more realistic scenario that they might get FAQ'ed to get all the Super Heavy rules, and I think you're right that it would help make them more compelling even without a points drop. Despiting making great changes and being more responsive, with how GW is operating these days it's hard to say how they're going to react to the feedback; some things seem to get quick attention while other issues just hang.

 

It will take a lot to do a major rules change and add rules.

 

Whereas points changes are easy to do in Chapter Approved etc

[Tyriks]

 

You know, it seems like a more realistic scenario that they might get FAQ'ed to get all the Super Heavy rules, and I think you're right that it would help make them more compelling even without a points drop. Despiting making great changes and being more responsive, with how GW is operating these days it's hard to say how they're going to react to the feedback; some things seem to get quick attention while other issues just hang.

 

 

It will take a lot to do a major rules change and add rules.

 

Whereas points changes are easy to do in Chapter Approved etc

I believe they said the spring updates would be rules changes more than points adjustments.

[Clingy]

Admech to get true FNP back in the next update. You heard it here first :P

[synthaside]

Got a source for that clingy ? it would make me rather happy indeed .

[Omnissiahs Fury]

If this is true, I'll buy you a pint. I will then proceed to push my models across the table with renewed vigor!

[Clingy]

Oh, I thought the joke was obvious. I needed my /s (sarcasm alert)

 

Sorry to disappoint folks. Didn’t mean to get anyone’s hopes up.

 

I have no sauce - it’s almost certainly not happening. :(

I will take that pint though If by some random coincidence it comes true lol

[synthaside]

Pint plus a breakfast sandwich of your preference sir ... 

Hurts even worse when playing against  Death Gaurd  , watching his bloody demon tanks get FNP and saves :-(

[Vel'Cona]

We always want what we can't have, eh?  The truth of the matter is that the Armigers suffer from three distinct problems:

 

-Overpriced (so we'll have to wait for CA 2018 for GW to correct this)

-Lacking in options (suspect either FW or a later GW release when the solo box set arrives)

-Easily bogged down.  Not sure there's anything that can be done about this with the current ruleset.  Without a stomp or the ability to leave combat freely (a la full IK) the Armigers are basically devoted high-priority killers, which given their speed is reasonable but versus some opponents this ability will go to waste.

 

Essentially, they're a cool model with an interesting niche somewhere between a Dreadnought and a full IK, but as with most early releases the lack of options and limited playtesting mean that GW characteristically miscalculated the Armiger on most levels.  Still, I like the model enough that I'll paint both of mine up anyway and put them on the table, since I don't care much for pure competition in either case :D