Detachments, which is best?

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

I know we only have access to two atm but when more arrive we’ll touch on them later.

 

for now, which is generally best?

 

im leaning hard towards gladius, since I prefer a more balanced shooty/fighty mix.

not just that but the doctrines can combo some mean stuff. 
 

advance and shoot? Advance a landspeeder tornado over multiple units potentially dishing out a lot of mortal wounds,  then light them up with an assault cannon and an HB.

 

fall back and charge? RAS and chappy charge, potential for massive numbers of MWs, if the squad survives to the next turn, fall back, charge again for more MWs.

does the bonus from our detachment really outweigh the doctrines? I have a hard time seeing it if it does.

Edited June 25, 2023 by Inquisitor_Lensoven

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

Even the stratagems for gladius seem better than the ones available in sons of sanguinius 

[Paladin777]

While I'm not sure about which ones 'better,' the GSF is definitely more balanced.
 

One thing I will say is that I've noticed a whole lot of people commenting about how +1S on the charge is worse than +1W. While that's correct, I think that's kinda missing the point. The army-wide, game-long +1A on the charge is the real benefit. Aside from World Eaters, no other faction gets as much benefit on the charge. It breaks down to be a 25-33% damage boost for most of our units on the charge for the whole game. That doesn't include the +1S, which I think ends up being just a nice little bonus when it matters. 

Edited June 25, 2023 by Paladin777

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

29 minutes ago, Paladin777 said:

While I'm not sure about which ones 'better,' the GSF is definitely more balanced.
 

One thing I will say is that I've noticed a whole lot of people commenting about how +1S on the charge is worse than +1W. While that's correct, I think that's kinda missing the point. The army-wide, game-long +1A on the charge is the real benefit. Aside from World Eaters, no other faction gets as much benefit on the charge. It breaks down to be a 25-33% damage boost for most of our units on the charge for the whole game. That doesn't include the +1S, which I think ends up being just a nice little bonus when it matters. 

i wouldnt say its a boost for the whole game since its only when we charge. we get charged? no benefit. we dont get a charge off? no benefit. even in 9th i thought our chapter tactic was fairly underwhelming tbh, now it just feels even more underwhelming.

 

[Silas7]

1 hour ago, Paladin777 said:

While I'm not sure about which ones 'better,' the GSF is definitely more balanced.
 

One thing I will say is that I've noticed a whole lot of people commenting about how +1S on the charge is worse than +1W. While that's correct, I think that's kinda missing the point. The army-wide, game-long +1A on the charge is the real benefit. Aside from World Eaters, no other faction gets as much benefit on the charge. It breaks down to be a 25-33% damage boost for most of our units on the charge for the whole game. That doesn't include the +1S, which I think ends up being just a nice little bonus when it matters. 

 

I mean, I'm down for having my intercessors/ tacticals punch other marines on 3's to wound and Bladeguard going to S6 opens up more targets for them to engage, especially when looking at leader combos.

Edited June 25, 2023 by Silas7

[Karhedron]

I am think GSF at the moment. Unless you are running a really melee-heavy list, the bonuses are better IMHO. If you just have 1 or 2 key melee units, you can always add a Chappy for Litany of Hate to replicate the old Red Thirst of +1 to Wound. GSF provides more tools for getting in and out of combat. Jump Pack units can make great use of the Tactical Doctrine to fall back in any direction and then charge again. This allows units that charged the front line on T2 to withdraw and charge your opponent's backline support and Objective campers on T3. Of course you need something reasonably durable for that so maybe there is still a role for VanVets with Storm Shields.

[Blindhamster]

I don’t think I can ever describe the detachment bonus as good when templars have two detachment bonus options for melee that work in all rounds of melee.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

6 hours ago, Karhedron said:

I am think GSF at the moment. Unless you are running a really melee-heavy list, the bonuses are better IMHO. If you just have 1 or 2 key melee units, you can always add a Chappy for Litany of Hate to replicate the old Red Thirst of +1 to Wound. GSF provides more tools for getting in and out of combat. Jump Pack units can make great use of the Tactical Doctrine to fall back in any direction and then charge again. This allows units that charged the front line on T2 to withdraw and charge your opponent's backline support and Objective campers on T3. Of course you need something reasonably durable for that so maybe there is still a role for VanVets with Storm Shields.

I wonder if RAS w/ shield would provide enough durability.

[Paladin777]

I feel dumb, but what does the acronym RAS mean...

Edited June 25, 2023 by Paladin777

[Karhedron]

47 minutes ago, Paladin777 said:

I feel dumb, but what does the acronym RAS mean...

 

Regular Assault Squad.

 

There are far too many TLAs in this game. 

[Helias_Tancred]

The acronyms are creeping towards U.S. Army level lol. 

[Paladin777]

For what it's worth, I don't think a single shield on the regular assault squad is going to do all that much. Enough to be worth taking, but not enough to reliably make an impact. It's especially problematic that he's one of two models in the squad of 5 (three in a squad of 10) that can take a special melee weapon. You don't want to be losing that PF or TH right out of the gate in the event of an unlucky roll. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

6 hours ago, Paladin777 said:

For what it's worth, I don't think a single shield on the regular assault squad is going to do all that much. Enough to be worth taking, but not enough to reliably make an impact. It's especially problematic that he's one of two models in the squad of 5 (three in a squad of 10) that can take a special melee weapon. You don't want to be losing that PF or TH right out of the gate in the event of an unlucky roll. 

Add a chappy and you get two special melee weapons and 2 4++ 

 

if it would kill the chappy outright to fail allocate the attack to the sgt. If it would kill the sgt outright to fail but not the chappy, allocate the attack to the chappy.

[Arkhanist]

10 hours ago, Karhedron said:

 

Regular Assault Squad.

 

There are far too many TLAs in this game. 

 

And that's because ass squad gets hit by the swear filter.

edit: or maybe not!

Edited June 26, 2023 by Arkhanist

[Paladin777]

8 hours ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

Add a chappy and you get two special melee weapons and 2 4++ 

 

if it would kill the chappy outright to fail allocate the attack to the sgt. If it would kill the sgt outright to fail but not the chappy, allocate the attack to the chappy.

You can't allocate wounds to a leader unit attached to a squad. 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

2 hours ago, Paladin777 said:

You can't allocate wounds to a leader unit attached to a squad. 

That’s weird they share keywords but they can’t have allocate wounds to the leader…

[Arkhanist]

33 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

That’s weird they share keywords but they can’t have allocate wounds to the leader…

 

Yup. For a normal unit, if a unit member has already lost 1 or more wounds, then a successfully wounding attack goes on them; otherwise, the defender can choose any member of the unit to take the save as per previous 40k rules. But there's a specific exemption for Leaders. All attacks go against the unit's toughness, and per the section on leader rules "Each time an attack successfully wounds an Attached unit, that attack cannot be allocated to a Character model in that unit, even if that Character model has lost one or more wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase."

 

The exception to THAT is if someone using an attack with the [precision] ability; if the attacker can see the character, then they can choose that the attack is allocated to that character instead of the attached unit. Otherwise, you have to kill the entire bodyguard unit before any attacks can be allocated to Leader characters. This all applies in melee too of course.

 

So if you add a FLY keyworded leader to a non-FLY unit, they don't get to make fly moves (the rules specify MODELS with FLY), and the character has to stay in coherency; a weapon with [anti fly] can take advantage of that to score easier critical wounds against the unit because the UNIT does share the keyword; but none of those wounds can be allocated to the FLY character until they're all dead!

 

Kinda like an automatic 'look out sir...' where the bodyguard unit leap up in front of their flying boss to take the AA rounds I guess...

[Blindhamster]

Didn’t the errata change it so you use highest toughness?

[BluejayJunior]

3 hours ago, Arkhanist said:

 

Yup. For a normal unit, if a unit member has already lost 1 or more wounds, then a successfully wounding attack goes on them; otherwise, the defender can choose any member of the unit to take the save as per previous 40k rules. But there's a specific exemption for Leaders. All attacks go against the unit's toughness, and per the section on leader rules "Each time an attack successfully wounds an Attached unit, that attack cannot be allocated to a Character model in that unit, even if that Character model has lost one or more wounds or has already had attacks allocated to it this phase."

 

The exception to THAT is if someone using an attack with the [precision] ability; if the attacker can see the character, then they can choose that the attack is allocated to that character instead of the attached unit. Otherwise, you have to kill the entire bodyguard unit before any attacks can be allocated to Leader characters. This all applies in melee too of course.

It's kind of a weird interaction I hadn't noticed, but probably necessary so that people can't use Precision weapons to get a single wound on a character and then force all wounds onto the character rather than the bodyguard. Maybe odd that you can't voluntarily take wounds on a character. GW probably don't want characters tanking wounds for a unit. The narrative is the unit escorting a leader and protecting them, not the other way around, so you have to go through the unit first. 

[Arkhanist]

2 hours ago, Blindhamster said:

Didn’t the errata change it so you use highest toughness?

 

For mixed toughness units yes, but excluding characters.

 

Quote

 If an Attached unit contains models with different Toughness characteristics, for the purpose of determining that unit’s Toughness characteristic, use the highest Toughness characteristic amongst that unit’s Bodyguard models. If a non-Attached unit contains models with different Toughness characteristics, for the purpose of determining that unit’s Toughness characteristic, use the highest Toughness characteristic amongst all of that unit’s models. In either case, When resolving attacks against such a unit, determine that unit’s Toughness characteristic when it is selected as a target.

 

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

2 hours ago, Arkhanist said:

 

For mixed toughness units yes, but excluding characters.

 

 

What units are mixed toughness without characters?

[Xenith]

On 6/25/2023 at 7:08 PM, Paladin777 said:

I feel dumb, but what does the acronym RAS mean...

 

We need @Jolemai to jump in with his list of Blood Angels Acronyms and slang! 

[Arkhanist]

39 minutes ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

What units are mixed toughness without characters?

 

They're pretty rare, but they do still exist. There's an Imperial Guard command squad with an Ogryn in it, and a unit of gretchin with a runtherd. Though for the latter, they do have a unit rule that specifies they're T2 for ranged attacks while any gretchin are alive. All the older examples I could think of were previously (and still) fixed, like the Dark Eldar beastmaster and krieg heavy artillery, though there may be a few more examples still extant.

Edited June 26, 2023 by Arkhanist

[Silas7]

1 hour ago, Inquisitor_Lensoven said:

What units are mixed toughness without characters?

 

Most commonly located in the Deathwatch.

[Inquisitor_Lensoven]

4 hours ago, Arkhanist said:

 

They're pretty rare, but they do still exist. There's an Imperial Guard command squad with an Ogryn in it, and a unit of gretchin with a runtherd. Though for the latter, they do have a unit rule that specifies they're T2 for ranged attacks while any gretchin are alive. All the older examples I could think of were previously (and still) fixed, like the Dark Eldar beastmaster and krieg heavy artillery, though there may be a few more examples still extant.

Ogryns are add ons, they’re not part of the actual squad