New rumors - updated 12-Oct

[Lord_Ikka]

The downside is Rough Riders are about as durable as a SM squad- without AoC to give them a buff and with only a 4+ armor save. A couple of heavy bolters can whittle them down without any trouble. Unless your positioning is really good, you're going to lose quite a few to standard anti-infantry weapons. 

[jarms48]

5 minutes ago, Lord_Ikka said:

The downside is Rough Riders are about as durable as a SM squad- without AoC to give them a buff and with only a 4+ armor save. A couple of heavy bolters can whittle them down without any trouble. Unless your positioning is really good, you're going to lose quite a few to standard anti-infantry weapons. 

 

Doesn't matter if they can first turn charge. You can give them a pregame move with the right trait. Up to 14 inch with another trait. They're 20 points a model. 200 points can kill almost kill a knight.

Edited November 8, 2022 by jarms48

[Lord_Ikka]

18 minutes ago, jarms48 said:

 

Doesn't matter if they can first turn charge. You can give them a pregame move with the right trait. Up to 14 inch with another trait. They're 20 points a model. 200 points can kill almost kill a knight.

Not saying that they can't kill off something, just that they seem to have two uses-

1. Suicide run at a nasty enemy unit that isn't screened well with a 1st turn charge. Not a bad choice, depending on the enemy unit, but may be difficult to pull off as people start to get wise to it and either pull back at deployments or screen better. 

2. Counter-charge from the backfield, hiding as much as possible the first couple of turns and then smashing into enemy melee fighters. Possibly the better use for a smaller, 5-man squad as they can hide and still hit fairly hard (might not be enough to kill off a Knight, but could finish off a wounded one).

[Emperor Ming]

RR should be easy to deal with, hit them some d2 weapons and move block them

Edited November 8, 2022 by Emperor Ming

[sairence]

My aim would probably be to charge, tri-point a survivor so they can't fall back without cp use, then fall back and charge again with their strat. It's a spicey unit for sure. And give the sergeant the goad lance, for more chances of extra attacks and MWs.

 

It's good that they're not too durable, means they can be shot and killed if you're not careful and will actually require a bit of finesse to use well.

[duz_]

1 hour ago, Lord_Ikka said:

Not saying that they can't kill off something, just that they seem to have two uses-

1. Suicide run at a nasty enemy unit that isn't screened well with a 1st turn charge. Not a bad choice, depending on the enemy unit, but may be difficult to pull off as people start to get wise to it and either pull back at deployments or screen better. 

2. Counter-charge from the backfield, hiding as much as possible the first couple of turns and then smashing into enemy melee fighters. Possibly the better use for a smaller, 5-man squad as they can hide and still hit fairly hard (might not be enough to kill off a Knight, but could finish off a wounded one).

 

This has always been my experience with RR though. Now they can do it even better and if they survive one round of combat their spears still work! Bonus 

[OldWherewolf]

Just looking at the changes to the troops and sentinels (from the release this morning), things look interesting:

 

Assuming the points cost from the leaked codex, Troops are slightly down in effectiveness as a baseline.  However, with the new Take Aim vs. the old Take Aim! (just re-rolling 1s to hit) they become slightly better.  Durability is the same, so with the higher points cost, it becomes a wash. 

 

The FOBs are... meh.  With T4 and 70ppm, they have good durability vs. anti-infantry weapons, but output is at 12% for the Malleus & Bombast into Intercessors, 25% for the Heavy Las into an Onager. 

 

What's interesting is the Scout Sentinel.  Moving from T5 to T6, it looks like it has a lot less durability, but there's a big shift from anti-infantry weapons to anti-tank weapons.  Basically the T5 & T6 weapons got a -1 to Wound, which would force more medium-strength shots into them, or putting the bigger guns into them.  This shift is important as the 7W apiece means ~30 more BS3 S4 AP0/1 shots into them, or more bigger guns, which means there's less big guns going into LRBTs.  But it goes a little beyond that.  The 6W -> 7W means Eradicators don't have a 50% chance of popping one at close range, that chance is now 33%.  Also D2 & D3 weapons now require an additional hit 4th hit to take one down, (33-50% boost). 

 

Then you use Ablative Plating to reduce incoming damage by 1....

 

Now the possibilities open up.  2 units of Scout Sentinels move-blocking the mid-board.  They're vehicles, so they can fall back, they're far more durable, and they can count as 3 models on an objective.  That frees us up to take less infantry, and directs fire away from infantry, LRBTs in the back get a durability boost from the anti-tank firepower being put into Sentinels now.

 

Then you can have the new Rough Riders as a counter-charge unit. 

 

However, the downside is that we have to lean into the fact that we are going to give up 15 points in Bring It Down.  But once we lean into that:

• Use the improved Manticores & Basilisks to take out anti-tank units early game, and/or clear space for scions to drop in for RND. 
• Use durable pre-game moving Sentinels & Ogryns/Bullgryns (T6 5W -1D!!!!) to screen & hold the mid-board early in the game (still need to do the math on the Ogryn/Bullgryn changes)
• Infantry, plus a chimera or two for late-game objective holding, especially after the enemy anti-tank firepower has been neutralized
• LRBTs in the back provding fire support to the mid-board, and can still shoot turret weapons if tagged (we won't need as much infantry to screen them)

This codex is looking up.  However, it looks like the gaps are still in the amount of orders we get, unless we take commissars, adding to the Assassinate VPs.  But the new Lord Solar and 2 commissars might not be too bad...

 

[TheWarmaster]

Does anybody know if the Sergeants of the new Infantry Squads can finally be equipped with a Lasgun in the new codex?

Has that been leaked at all? 

 

It's all I care about from this entire upcoming release.. haha! 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I don’t understand why so many are obsessed with sgts having lasguns.

 

they’re weak and provide no real benefits to the squad.

[Cpt_Reaper]

Because an extra lasgun is better than just a laspistol. I don't even give my sergeants a free chainsword because if my infantry are in close combat they're dead.

[mertbl]

Looks like sgts get an autogun option. 

[jarms48]

4 hours ago, mertbl said:

Looks like sgts get an autogun option. 

 

Only the Cadian specific one.

[Captain Caine 24th]

As to rough Riders a pre-game move can be huge to set up a first turn charge, board control, screen or objective grab, but it can also (depending on the final wording) be critical to get them out of harms way if the opponent gets to go first. Use that move to get into cover or out of LOS. Blood angel's death company had a similar mechanism via stratagem. I suppose it depends on the timing in the rule. Also, pair this with that Master Tactician warlord trait for a redeploy. The guard army could be extremely mobile, and really force an opponent to play disproportionately conservatively. Meanwhile, other units in tandem might further reinforce this strategy - something the like the new deathstrike might make an opponent pay dearly for holding units together in the backfield to avoid the rough riders' rush. 

 

Done wrong: rough riders launch out piecemeal and unsupported, picked off in the open, and are wasted without trading enemy units or gaining points. ...Done right, rush out, get them behind on points, and force them to come into the open, funneled into your kill box. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I’m not a fan of the lethality of the edition, but the desthstrike is a freaking ballistic missile so this godspear thing I’m ok with 

[Emperor Ming]

Its still crud thou, its an action to fire and the enemy get a turn to move away from the point that you nominate

 

For 150pts I would still rather have a russ

[Diagramdude]

Be careful moveblocking the midboard w two sentinels, that becomes super easy for the enemy to trilock both of them and then you can’t shoot anything at whatever they decided to pile into the melee. 

[sairence]

15 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

Its still crud thou, its an action to fire and the enemy get a turn to move away from the point that you nominate

 

For 150pts I would still rather have a russ

 

Nothing stopping you from blocking it directly on their home objective or a contested middle objective. If they want to keep holding that they need to eat the MWs. And if not, it can often be a crucial swing in your favour. This is an awesome tool, I'm sure it'll end up shaping many games without ever firing its shot.

 

And there's always thay beautiful moment when you draw your enemy into a big melee and order "Fire on my position" :D

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

32 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

Its still crud thou, its an action to fire and the enemy get a turn to move away from the point that you nominate

 

For 150pts I would still rather have a russ

I don’t see anything there about it taking two turns to fire or anything like that.

 

even if it does allow a turn for opponents to move away, it’s still a great tool against other guard and any other army that likes to use indirect fire weapons. Force the enemy artillery out of cover and into the open, and even then they might still be within that 3” radius.

Edited November 9, 2022 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[MrKoolPants]

These rules are looking absolutely nutty. I think the new units and rules are going to fundamentally change the makeup and play style of Astra Militarum armies. We’re seeing huge nerfs to existing choices, huge buffs to previously unused ones, and  very good new units. I can’t wait. 
 

Maxing out on rough riders, scout sentinels, and deathstrikes with godspears is going to be a WILD table control meta. 

[Emperor Ming]

For the deathstrike, you do an action and place a marker

 

Next turn, assuming you do the same action (with the deathstrike ofc) then you can reposition the marker or fire

 

leaks have been correct so far

[OldWherewolf]

12 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

For the deathstrike, you do an action and place a marker

 

Next turn, assuming you do the same action (with the deathstrike ofc) then you can reposition the marker or fire

 

You can use that to move an opponent off an objective, especially if they are strung out to screen the corners from Deep Striking units.  If they move, they cleared a drop zone for us and we move the marker.  If they don't move, they eat the MWs and that clears the drop zone.

 

Do we have the exact wording on the DS action?  Considering how many MWs Nid's put out, forcing a DS to place a marker where the opponent can move away after we have to perform an action would just be stupid (but GW has done worse...)

[Emperor Ming]

21 minutes ago, OldWherewolf said:

If they don't move, they eat the MWs and that clears the drop zone.

Well, that's my big gripe, they might not eat mortal wounds at all, you still have to roll a dice per unit in the blast zone, on a 1 they suffer no damage, from the giant missile of death that's just hit them

 

and I can defiantly see its uses, but its not for me, by the time you have faffed around with markers and actions, then you may not even do any damage, the points invested elsewhere would have been doing damage/capturing objectives etc

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

51 minutes ago, Emperor Ming said:

Well, that's my big gripe, they might not eat mortal wounds at all, you still have to roll a dice per unit in the blast zone, on a 1 they suffer no damage, from the giant missile of death that's just hit them

 

and I can defiantly see its uses, but its not for me, by the time you have faffed around with markers and actions, then you may not even do any damage, the points invested elsewhere would have been doing damage/capturing objectives etc

It’s no different than a to hit role.

missiles malfunction. Rocket boosters fail, fire control/gps can fail, a fuse/warhead can be a dud.

a 1 can represent all any or all of those things. A vehicle that automatically does  10+ MW would be absolutely broken.

[Lord_Ikka]

3 hours ago, Emperor Ming said:

and I can defiantly see its uses, but its not for me, by the time you have faffed around with markers and actions, then you may not even do any damage, the points invested elsewhere would have been doing damage/capturing objectives etc

Denying the enemy VP- in this case possibly a minimum 4VP if they move off of an objective they need to hold for primary points, can be just as useful as scoring one yourself. Plenty of armies have objective campers that are around the 150 points mark (especially if they are buff pieces set on the deployment objectives), so you're not really losing out on it in that regard.

 

Just the threat of the mortal wounds can be enough- though we need to know the size of the marker that we place. If the marker is less than 40mm, then due to how objectives work there is the possibility that placing a DS marker on the 40mm objective marker would still allow models to move off of the objective yet remain within the 3" needed to hold the objective and not within the DS 3". 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

19 minutes ago, Lord_Ikka said:

Denying the enemy VP- in this case possibly a minimum 4VP if they move off of an objective they need to hold for primary points, can be just as useful as scoring one yourself. Plenty of armies have objective campers that are around the 150 points mark (especially if they are buff pieces set on the deployment objectives), so you're not really losing out on it in that regard.

 

Just the threat of the mortal wounds can be enough- though we need to know the size of the marker that we place. If the marker is less than 40mm, then due to how objectives work there is the possibility that placing a DS marker on the 40mm objective marker would still allow models to move off of the objective yet remain within the 3" needed to hold the objective and not within the DS 3". 

I don’t think it matters the market’s size because I’m pretty sure it’s from the center. 4mm, 40, 400, the center placement will be the same.