finally a new game.

[Medjugorje]

After the changes we will see a completely different game.

 

 

1. Uphold is not an autotake anymore ( discussion in the other discussion)

- finally all 4 vows are even.

- against GK and TS "abhor the witch#" feels strong

- against moster lists "suffer" could be the right choice

- against mass armies (120 Chaos Space Marines + Bugswarms) AAC feels good

- Against Drukhari with lots of Incubi and lances "Uphold" is most likely still the best choice. (and when Tau will change their lists then maybe it will still a good choice).

 

2. A lot of units with 2+ save which never used before could be really strong ( especially with 4++ relic)

- Terminators with claws

- Emperors champion

-Terminators with Bolters

- Centurions

- maybe the Land Raider crusader which has a 4+ against - 3ap now. 

 

3. Sword brethren could be a thing now. 

[Medjugorje]

4. Because so many buffs ----> Eleminators are a must take in my opinion.

 

5. All other troop choices are better now - I would say better then Crusadersquads because of their stratagems.

Edited April 14, 2022 by Medjugorje

[Marshal Mittens]

I am excited by the changes as well.

[Medjugorje]

I think 3 Redemptors with Grimaldus are still strong

 

Bladeguard at least one squad with Icon of Heinman in addition that they now benefit of cover again.

 

Our Assaut Intercessors could be a thing now. One squad with Sword of juggement and one with Fist of Balthus so that they can fight twice.

[Palmu]

Speaking of the Icon of Heinmann, how does the new rule interact with that? Does it count AP3 weapons as AP2, and thus ignore them altogether?

[Medjugorje]

it doesnt stack as I read it.

Icon of heinman is not as good as before on normal units but still good on BGV and models with storm shields. 

[Palmu]

I checked all the relevant rules, and I think it actually does, because a similar rules combination already exists, and it has been confirmed to work - Crux Obsidian and Unyielding in the Face of the Foe. Crux reduces the damage of an allocated attack by 1, and if it then becomes a 1-damage attack, the model taking a save benefits from Unyielding. Both are effects that trigger at the 'allocate attacks' phase. 

 

Both rules are effects that specify "when an attack is allocated against a model with X" etc, and going by the rules of defensive modifiers and allocating attacks, "Each time you determine if such a rule is triggered, and so applies, always use the modified characteristics of that attack at the Allocate Attack step of the attack sequence." The example given in this rule (pg 363), gives us the following:

 

An unit has a rule that changes the AP of -1 attacks into 0 instead.

The unit is hit with an AP0 attack, that is under the effect of a rule that gives it -1 AP.

The attack is now AP-1, and the rule triggers. 

 

So drawing from that, and the interaction of Crux and Unyielding, the new Armour of Contempt changes the AP of a -3 weapon into a -2 at the Allocate Attacks phase, after which Icon of Heinmann triggers against the AP -2 attack and changes it to 0. 

 

Which is big if true, to say the least. Needing to hit a Bladeguard with a -4 AP attack to even pierce the +2 save seems pretty insane. 

Edited April 14, 2022 by Palmu

[Brother Kraskor]

I checked all the relevant rules, and I think it actually does, because a similar rules combination already exists, and it has been confirmed to work - Crux Obsidian and Unyielding in the Face of the Foe. Crux reduces the damage of an allocated attack by 1, and if it then becomes a 1-damage attack, the model taking a save benefits from Unyielding. Both are effects that trigger at the 'allocate attacks' phase. 

 

Both rules are effects that specify "when an attack is allocated against a model with X" etc, and going by the rules of defensive modifiers and allocating attacks, "Each time you determine if such a rule is triggered, and so applies, always use the modified characteristics of that attack at the Allocate Attack step of the attack sequence." The example given in this rule (pg 363), gives us the following:

 

An unit has a rule that changes the AP of -1 attacks into 0 instead.

The unit is hit with an AP0 attack, that is under the effect of a rule that gives it -1 AP.

The attack is now AP-1, and the rule triggers. 

 

So drawing from that, and the interaction of Crux and Unyielding, the new Armour of Contempt changes the AP of a -3 weapon into a -2 at the Allocate Attacks phase, after which Icon of Heinmann triggers against the AP -2 attack and changes it to 0. 

 

Which is big if true, to say the least. Needing to hit a Bladeguard with a -4 AP attack to even pierce the +2 save seems pretty insane. 

 

I thought this too but it either doesn't work or needs FAQ. Exceptions to Armour of Contempt include:

 

Models that are under the effects of any other rule that worsens or reduces the Armour Penetration characteristic of an attack.

 

Icon worsens AP by turning AP-1 or AP-2 into AP0. So it is incompatible with Contempt.

 

Where I think this might need FAQ is you get stuck in an infinite loop:

 

- AP-3 attack comes in, Icon doesn't trigger

- Attack reduced to AP-2 by Contempt

- Icon triggers, reducing to AP0 - however this means Contempt doesn't stack and therefore has no effect

- So we're back at AP-3 and the cycle continues

 

 

Separately, I think Accept is going to find a lot of play for me. Perma-Assault doctrine and +1A stacking with Honour Vehement and Fires of Devotion is too spicy to pass up, especially as you can obtain the benefit of Suffer Not via strat. 

Edited April 14, 2022 by Brother Kraskor

[Palmu]

Lol, leave it to me to go over the rulebook with a fine-toothed comb, but fail to fully read the new rule. That's a shame, but also probably for the better because god knows this game has enough broken stuff in it already.

[Sword Brethren Durion]

Are Centurion over priced ? Because having some assault one in a land raider could do some dmg. And they got a 2+

[Medjugorje]

 

I checked all the relevant rules, and I think it actually does, because a similar rules combination already exists, and it has been confirmed to work - Crux Obsidian and Unyielding in the Face of the Foe. Crux reduces the damage of an allocated attack by 1, and if it then becomes a 1-damage attack, the model taking a save benefits from Unyielding. Both are effects that trigger at the 'allocate attacks' phase. 

 

Both rules are effects that specify "when an attack is allocated against a model with X" etc, and going by the rules of defensive modifiers and allocating attacks, "Each time you determine if such a rule is triggered, and so applies, always use the modified characteristics of that attack at the Allocate Attack step of the attack sequence." The example given in this rule (pg 363), gives us the following:

 

An unit has a rule that changes the AP of -1 attacks into 0 instead.

The unit is hit with an AP0 attack, that is under the effect of a rule that gives it -1 AP.

The attack is now AP-1, and the rule triggers. 

 

So drawing from that, and the interaction of Crux and Unyielding, the new Armour of Contempt changes the AP of a -3 weapon into a -2 at the Allocate Attacks phase, after which Icon of Heinmann triggers against the AP -2 attack and changes it to 0. 

 

Which is big if true, to say the least. Needing to hit a Bladeguard with a -4 AP attack to even pierce the +2 save seems pretty insane. 

 

I thought this too but it either doesn't work or needs FAQ. Exceptions to Armour of Contempt include:

 

Models that are under the effects of any other rule that worsens or reduces the Armour Penetration characteristic of an attack.

 

Icon worsens AP by turning AP-1 or AP-2 into AP0. So it is incompatible with Contempt.

 

Where I think this might need FAQ is you get stuck in an infinite loop:

 

- AP-3 attack comes in, Icon doesn't trigger

- Attack reduced to AP-2 by Contempt

- Icon triggers, reducing to AP0 - however this means Contempt doesn't stack and therefore has no effect

- So we're back at AP-3 and the cycle continues

 

 

Separately, I think Accept is going to find a lot of play for me. Perma-Assault doctrine and +1A stacking with Honour Vehement and Fires of Devotion is too spicy to pass up, especially as you can obtain the benefit of Suffer Not via strat. 

 

THat strat is even better but more expensive because it works against vehicles too.

Same for Aurelian shroud and Transhuman.

Although I thought that ACC is  the worst Vow I begin to prefer it against most other factions.

[Sword Brethren Durion]

What do you guy's think would be the best now ? Run alot of terminator instead of Vanguard Vet ? Or keep the Vanguard.

 

Was thinking that a troop of maybe 7/8 relic terminator with combi bolter and lightning claw in a land raider could be really deadly.

And maybe with that another pack of classic terminator with some power fist to deep strike and smash important target.

[Marshal Mittens]

Relic termies with chaps and 5+++ or apothecary and 6+++ and healing and resurrection seems good. The termie chaps looks awesome.

[redmapa]

What do you guy's think would be the best now ? Run alot of terminator instead of Vanguard Vet ? Or keep the Vanguard.

 

Was thinking that a troop of maybe 7/8 relic terminator with combi bolter and lightning claw in a land raider could be really deadly.

And maybe with that another pack of classic terminator with some power fist to deep strike and smash important target.

 

I took a silly list to a friendly tournament a couple weeks back and it had 25 Terminators in it and 10 of them were Relic Terminators with a similar loadout, in my opinion and limited experience with them they are not that great unless you deep strike them. They are slow, they will reach combat but are prone to lose the board to faster units and in theory their bolters will keep them doing something in the game they are just bolters. Most of the time they had to hide in order to survive and charge so they arent doing that much better than if you had Vanguard Veterans, who will also have to hide for a bit but have the advantage of pushing forward faster.

 

If you are taking big blobs of Terminators that are not deep striking then you should also take fast units because otherwise you can l get bogged down and unable to score, I had no trouble surviving with the list I took and now the same list will just be even tankier but movement was the real downside so I would keep the Vanguard or at least something thats fast.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

What do you guy's think would be the best now ? Run alot of terminator instead of Vanguard Vet ? Or keep the Vanguard.

 

Was thinking that a troop of maybe 7/8 relic terminator with combi bolter and lightning claw in a land raider could be really deadly.

And maybe with that another pack of classic terminator with some power fist to deep strike and smash important target.

.

I think you need a mix of both… terminators are resilient but slow while VV are fast but not as survivable. Also BGV are great with SoJ. One nice thing about AAC is your thunderhammers are AP3 which is critical for them to function well.

[Medjugorje]

What do you guy's think would be the best now ? Run alot of terminator instead of Vanguard Vet ? Or keep the Vanguard.

 

Was thinking that a troop of maybe 7/8 relic terminator with combi bolter and lightning claw in a land raider could be really deadly.

And maybe with that another pack of classic terminator with some power fist to deep strike and smash important target.

 

I think it depends on your list and on the opponent.

 

Is there still a bunch of ap4 / str8 and ignore cover  --> uphold

against mass armies i would prefer AAC because of the additional attacks.

Against high toughness --> suffer

Against GK and TS --> abhor

 

I would say it is like it should be.

 

btw... I never get why people do SoJ into BGV. Its already a good weapon... Put this SoJ on a normal powersword to gain +2 dmg  instead.

Edited April 19, 2022 by Medjugorje

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

S5 not so great against high T units with -1 damage.

[Brother Kraskor]

I have been thinking AoC could be something of a Centurion renaissance.

 

DevCents way in the backfield with lascannon & missiles, in cover, are going to be mega hard to shift. They ignore cover so are a good AoC counter. Leave an Apothecary with them for 6+++ and revives, plus a guy with Crux, and I can see them happily lasting a long time.

 

Alternatively (or additionally!), Assault Cents, Hurricane Bolters & meltaguns, happily advancing and popping the BT strat so they can shoot their bolters and meltas as if they didn't advance.

Edited April 19, 2022 by Brother Kraskor

[Medjugorje]

S5 not so great against high T units with -1 damage.

then you have to shoot it down with eradicators. And BGV are more for holding objectives .. i mean they are more the choice for INPUT instead of output.

 

At least this ability is way more important then their output. especially because they are too slow.

Edited April 19, 2022 by Medjugorje

[SkimaskMohawk]

 

 

What do you guy's think would be the best now ? Run alot of terminator instead of Vanguard Vet ? Or keep the Vanguard.

 

Was thinking that a troop of maybe 7/8 relic terminator with combi bolter and lightning claw in a land raider could be really deadly.

And maybe with that another pack of classic terminator with some power fist to deep strike and smash important target.

I took a silly list to a friendly tournament a couple weeks back and it had 25 Terminators in it and 10 of them were Relic Terminators with a similar loadout, in my opinion and limited experience with them they are not that great unless you deep strike them. They are slow, they will reach combat but are prone to lose the board to faster units and in theory their bolters will keep them doing something in the game they are just bolters. Most of the time they had to hide in order to survive and charge so they arent doing that much better than if you had Vanguard Veterans, who will also have to hide for a bit but have the advantage of pushing forward faster.

 

If you are taking big blobs of Terminators that are not deep striking then you should also take fast units because otherwise you can l get bogged down and unable to score, I had no trouble surviving with the list I took and now the same list will just be even tankier but movement was the real downside so I would keep the Vanguard or at least something thats fast.

I mean you can get your terminators moving fast enough. Grimaldus makes them average 10" move, push gives you up to 6" of movement a turn. I don't think overinvesting in terminators is a great idea by any means, but I always thought a unit of thundernators was better in Templar than vanguard. VV are closer to BGV in terms of role than terminators imo

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I swear by my BGV… throw on Transhuman and they just don’t die.

[Marshal Mittens]

Do you run a chief apothecary with your BGVs?

[Medjugorje]

it would be a mistake not to do it^^

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

There’s only so many points to go around and I prefer the Judicar for choppy armies… he pretty much equates to some auto kills.

[Brother Kraskor]

I'd love to try him with Centurions. Seems like a way to maximise the return on the points investment. 

 

Edit: Realised this was ambiguous, I mean the Apothecary.

Edited April 20, 2022 by Brother Kraskor