Horus Heresy Solar Auxilia Hermes Light Sentinel

[Aarik]

I think this discussion touches on a larger issue that I've been mulling over myself a bit.  TL;DR: the possibility of playing the game gives the hobby a larger purpose for me, even if it's largely just theoretical.  It's a lot easier to rationalize spending all this time and money when I can do more with the models than admire them on a shelf.  I want them to be able to help win me games, or at least not be dead weight.  And poorly balanced rules hurts that purpose, which in turn hurts hobby motivation.  That lack of hobby motivation then can impact GW's sales.

 

Longer ramblings:  I barely ever play the actual game.  The last time I played 40k was pre-Covid.  I've never actually played 30k.  But I have 2500 points of heresy Word Bearers, and a bunch of ideas for other heresy armies I'd love to work on.  Every once in a while, though, I'll have a bit of an existential hobby crisis and wonder what the heck am I doing?  I've got all these (in the grand scheme of things, relatively mediocre-ly painted) models just sitting on my shelves...what's the point?  I get a lot of enjoyment from painting and looking at my models on my shelves, but does that really justify all the time and money I put in?  Am I just spinning my wheels with just a bunch of essentially niche decorations to show for it?  What separates me from the dude just collecting funko pops or action figures or something?  (No offense to those who do, it's just not for me.)  And the answer I come to is that I can theoretically use them in a game.  A game that looks pretty darn sweet when you've got two painted armies on a table full of terrain.  They're not just shelf decorations, I can actually use them for something.  Even though I rarely actually play, the possibility of doing so is enough to stave off the existential dread and give my efforts purpose.  

 

But poor rules writing and balance really cuts the legs out from under that theoretical purpose  -- for Solar Auxilia as a microcosm, and a lot of other GW decision as a macrocosm.   When the models won't really be useful for something (i.e., helping me win, or at least not hurting me because I should have used something else that's much, much better) outside of sitting on my shelf, it's much harder to justify buying and painting them.  Say I spend hundreds of hours and hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars to finish a fully painted army and then finally manage to carve out enough time to fully learn the rules and play a game.  After all that effort and expense, I'm left in a situation where -- all other things being equal -- I'm (from the general community consensus, because I don't know enough to have my own informed opinion) left in a situation where I'm at a pretty big disadvantage just because GW couldn't be bothered to write decent enough rules.  I'm not a powergamer, WAAC player, or sore loser.  But I don't think its controversial to say that its much less fun to lose way more often than you win.  Or have to constantly fight an uphill battle to have a chance.  It's like if you're going to play pick up sports, but you know ahead of time that no matter what, your team will always be playing down a player.  Sure, it's possible that your team will pull one out and win, and you'll still get to run around, get some exercise, and have some fun.  But it's a lot less fun knowing you're always at a disadvantage, and it's going to be harder to muster up the care to train and play when that's the case.  Same thing here.  So when it comes time for me to decide where I'm going to dedicate my limited hobby time, I'm more likely to dedicate it elsewhere.

 

To keep my rambling on topic, this applies to these light sentinels.  They look like adorable little baby duck walkers, awesome!  But buying and painting up a bunch of them to find out that they really don't do much of anything on the tabletop?  Much less awesome.  That's the kind of thing that kills hobby motivation.  And I think that discouraging effect of poor balance isn't talked about enough, especially for new players.  Poor external balance leads to someone picking the army they think is coolest, painting it up, and then realizing that their rules just aren't up to snuff.  Then they post online, "hey, me and my buddy just picked up warhammer.  He chose army X, and I chose army Y, but he keeps kicking my teeth in."  And the response is just "yeah, you can try to do ABC, or swap in units DEF, but his army is just way better than yours."   And internal balance is the same.  Someone picks the units they think are cool, paints their army, then finds out that some or most of their units just aren't going to be very useful no matter what they do.  That's discouraging for the same reason.  People find out that their effort to build and paint was largely wasted if they want to have a somewhat effective force on the tabletop.  Even someone a bit more knowledgeable can run into problems with poor internal balance.  You can figure out, "okay, these are the few effective units in my army.  I don't want to lose all the time, so I'll focus on them."  But then you're vulnerable to having much or all of your collection invalidated in 1-3 years when GW tears everything down and starts from scratch for the next edition.    Or you just end up in a situation where you're just not drawn to the good units, so you can either paint up models you don't like, or just not play the army.  For example, I like AdMech, but really don't like the Kataphron models.  So I can either have to paint up and store a bunch of Kataphrons in order to have a halfway effective army (and run the risk of the next balance pass putting them out of favor), or just play something else.  Or as another example, in 9th edition, I converted and painted a bunch of vanguard vets...10th comes along and now they're much less useful.  And I got in like two games with them before that happened.  Those are just the breaks, but its discouraging to see a bunch of effort go somewhat to waste.  And wanting to avoid that situation keeps me from starting other projects. 

 

And the same concern exists even when units are overpowered too.  For example, I love Contemptor and Leviathan dreadnoughts.  I think they look super cool, there are a bunch of different variants between the plastic GW ones, FW, and third-parties, they're cheaper and quicker to paint for me than their points equivalents in infantry models, and they have a smaller footprint on my shelf than infantry or other vehicles.  I'd love to have a bunch in my army.  But they're too overpowered and the community has made the gentleman's agreement to limit them to one per 1000 points.  So if I want to paint up more than two or three, I'm left with the choice of spending time to paint something that even if/when I do play most likely won't see the table, or running a list that's a bit dickish.  Neither is a great option.

 

Finally, to try to tie this all up into a larger point, I think that GW's failure to put out more balanced rules at launch leads to problems like these, and then how GW deals with them leads to more problems.  We see the effects of both when you compare 30k to 40k.  In 40k, GW has tried to fix their poor initial efforts with more frequent balance passes.  I think overall, that's a good thing (but not nearly as good as doing a better job out of the gate).  The knock-on effect of that, though, is that the rules change more frequently, and it's harder to figure out what exactly the latest rules actually are.  That, in turn, raises the barrier of entry and takes more effort to keep up with.  And a number of people have ended up turning to 30k for a more stable ruleset.  But that more stable 30k ruleset has its own problems.  I.e., problems just don't get fixed.  Dreadnoughts and lascannon HSS are overpowered, the non-space marine armies are underpowered (maybe other than custodes?).  Whereas in 40k, someone who has a bad army or bad units has the glimmer of hope that they might get some sort of fix in the next patch.  But someone with a Solar Auxilia or Mechanicum army is most likely out of luck until whenever Horus Heresy 3.0 comes out.  Or, more realistically, 6-18 months after HH 3.0 comes out when GW finally gets around to releasing the rules.  So when I'm deciding if I want to get some SA or Mechanicum models, their ultimate end goal of eventually serving me well on the tabletop doesn't seem to be realizable.  And I go with something else instead.

 

If you made it this far, thanks for reading all that!  

[Orion]

14 minutes ago, Aarik said:

I think this discussion touches on a larger issue that I've been mulling over myself a bit.  TL;DR: the possibility of playing the game gives the hobby a larger purpose for me, even if it's largely just theoretical.  It's a lot easier to rationalize spending all this time and money when I can do more with the models than admire them on a shelf.  I want them to be able to help win me games, or at least not be dead weight.  And poorly balanced rules hurts that purpose, which in turn hurts hobby motivation.  That lack of hobby motivation then can impact GW's sales.

 

Longer ramblings:  I barely ever play the actual game.  The last time I played 40k was pre-Covid.  I've never actually played 30k.  But I have 2500 points of heresy Word Bearers, and a bunch of ideas for other heresy armies I'd love to work on.  Every once in a while, though, I'll have a bit of an existential hobby crisis and wonder what the heck am I doing?  I've got all these (in the grand scheme of things, relatively mediocre-ly painted) models just sitting on my shelves...what's the point?  I get a lot of enjoyment from painting and looking at my models on my shelves, but does that really justify all the time and money I put in?  Am I just spinning my wheels with just a bunch of essentially niche decorations to show for it?  What separates me from the dude just collecting funko pops or action figures or something?  (No offense to those who do, it's just not for me.)  And the answer I come to is that I can theoretically use them in a game.  A game that looks pretty darn sweet when you've got two painted armies on a table full of terrain.  They're not just shelf decorations, I can actually use them for something.  Even though I rarely actually play, the possibility of doing so is enough to stave off the existential dread and give my efforts purpose.  

 

But poor rules writing and balance really cuts the legs out from under that theoretical purpose  -- for Solar Auxilia as a microcosm, and a lot of other GW decision as a macrocosm.   When the models won't really be useful for something (i.e., helping me win, or at least not hurting me because I should have used something else that's much, much better) outside of sitting on my shelf, it's much harder to justify buying and painting them.  Say I spend hundreds of hours and hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars to finish a fully painted army and then finally manage to carve out enough time to fully learn the rules and play a game.  After all that effort and expense, I'm left in a situation where -- all other things being equal -- I'm (from the general community consensus, because I don't know enough to have my own informed opinion) left in a situation where I'm at a pretty big disadvantage just because GW couldn't be bothered to write decent enough rules.  I'm not a powergamer, WAAC player, or sore loser.  But I don't think its controversial to say that its much less fun to lose way more often than you win.  Or have to constantly fight an uphill battle to have a chance.  It's like if you're going to play pick up sports, but you know ahead of time that no matter what, your team will always be playing down a player.  Sure, it's possible that your team will pull one out and win, and you'll still get to run around, get some exercise, and have some fun.  But it's a lot less fun knowing you're always at a disadvantage, and it's going to be harder to muster up the care to train and play when that's the case.  Same thing here.  So when it comes time for me to decide where I'm going to dedicate my limited hobby time, I'm more likely to dedicate it elsewhere.

 

To keep my rambling on topic, this applies to these light sentinels.  They look like adorable little baby duck walkers, awesome!  But buying and painting up a bunch of them to find out that they really don't do much of anything on the tabletop?  Much less awesome.  That's the kind of thing that kills hobby motivation.  And I think that discouraging effect of poor balance isn't talked about enough, especially for new players.  Poor external balance leads to someone picking the army they think is coolest, painting it up, and then realizing that their rules just aren't up to snuff.  Then they post online, "hey, me and my buddy just picked up warhammer.  He chose army X, and I chose army Y, but he keeps kicking my teeth in."  And the response is just "yeah, you can try to do ABC, or swap in units DEF, but his army is just way better than yours."   And internal balance is the same.  Someone picks the units they think are cool, paints their army, then finds out that some or most of their units just aren't going to be very useful no matter what they do.  That's discouraging for the same reason.  People find out that their effort to build and paint was largely wasted if they want to have a somewhat effective force on the tabletop.  Even someone a bit more knowledgeable can run into problems with poor internal balance.  You can figure out, "okay, these are the few effective units in my army.  I don't want to lose all the time, so I'll focus on them."  But then you're vulnerable to having much or all of your collection invalidated in 1-3 years when GW tears everything down and starts from scratch for the next edition.    Or you just end up in a situation where you're just not drawn to the good units, so you can either paint up models you don't like, or just not play the army.  For example, I like AdMech, but really don't like the Kataphron models.  So I can either have to paint up and store a bunch of Kataphrons in order to have a halfway effective army (and run the risk of the next balance pass putting them out of favor), or just play something else.  Or as another example, in 9th edition, I converted and painted a bunch of vanguard vets...10th comes along and now they're much less useful.  And I got in like two games with them before that happened.  Those are just the breaks, but its discouraging to see a bunch of effort go somewhat to waste.  And wanting to avoid that situation keeps me from starting other projects. 

 

And the same concern exists even when units are overpowered too.  For example, I love Contemptor and Leviathan dreadnoughts.  I think they look super cool, there are a bunch of different variants between the plastic GW ones, FW, and third-parties, they're cheaper and quicker to paint for me than their points equivalents in infantry models, and they have a smaller footprint on my shelf than infantry or other vehicles.  I'd love to have a bunch in my army.  But they're too overpowered and the community has made the gentleman's agreement to limit them to one per 1000 points.  So if I want to paint up more than two or three, I'm left with the choice of spending time to paint something that even if/when I do play most likely won't see the table, or running a list that's a bit dickish.  Neither is a great option.

 

Finally, to try to tie this all up into a larger point, I think that GW's failure to put out more balanced rules at launch leads to problems like these, and then how GW deals with them leads to more problems.  We see the effects of both when you compare 30k to 40k.  In 40k, GW has tried to fix their poor initial efforts with more frequent balance passes.  I think overall, that's a good thing (but not nearly as good as doing a better job out of the gate).  The knock-on effect of that, though, is that the rules change more frequently, and it's harder to figure out what exactly the latest rules actually are.  That, in turn, raises the barrier of entry and takes more effort to keep up with.  And a number of people have ended up turning to 30k for a more stable ruleset.  But that more stable 30k ruleset has its own problems.  I.e., problems just don't get fixed.  Dreadnoughts and lascannon HSS are overpowered, the non-space marine armies are underpowered (maybe other than custodes?).  Whereas in 40k, someone who has a bad army or bad units has the glimmer of hope that they might get some sort of fix in the next patch.  But someone with a Solar Auxilia or Mechanicum army is most likely out of luck until whenever Horus Heresy 3.0 comes out.  Or, more realistically, 6-18 months after HH 3.0 comes out when GW finally gets around to releasing the rules.  So when I'm deciding if I want to get some SA or Mechanicum models, their ultimate end goal of eventually serving me well on the tabletop doesn't seem to be realizable.  And I go with something else instead.

 

If you made it this far, thanks for reading all that!  

 

I'd like the game to be more enticing, better internal balance etc, but I've come to the conclusion that it's out of my hands.

My solution has been to just let it go. 

 

As much as I like the idea of the game, I'd much rather to be free to purchase, model and paint whatever I want. 

My collections still end up being semi functional forces, but that's more of a latent "feng shui" from being in the hobby for a long time, rather than a practical decision.

 

Also on the note of Funko Pops and Action figures, I hear you, but I don't agree that warhammer (without gaming) is the same, at least not for me. The hobby process and subsequent end result is way more substantial than buying a thing, opening it (or not in some funko pop collections) then shoving it on your shelf.

It's the same reason I don't get the appeal of Joytoy stuff. Seems unsatisfying.

[Marshal Rohr]

Solar Aux V1 had a haywire round for their grenade launchers and Militia had an incendiary and poison round. I wouldn’t be surprised if these walkers get special rounds for the grenade launcher or keep frag and krak only and are cheap as dirt in points. 

[MegaVolt87]

The weapons don't seem heavy enough for these walkers. To me, these should be mobile 1 man versions of traditional 2 man weapons teams. If these can't outflank/ infiltrate I don't see them being useful unless they are really low pts. 

[Aarik]

33 minutes ago, Orion said:

 

I'd like the game to be more enticing, better internal balance etc, but I've come to the conclusion that it's out of my hands.

My solution has been to just let it go. 

 

As much as I like the idea of the game, I'd much rather to be free to purchase, model and paint whatever I want. 

My collections still end up being semi functional forces, but that's more of a latent "feng shui" from being in the hobby for a long time, rather than a practical decision.

 

Also on the note of Funko Pops and Action figures, I hear you, but I don't agree that warhammer (without gaming) is the same, at least not for me. The hobby process and subsequent end result is way more substantial than buying a thing, opening it (or not in some funko pop collections) then shoving it on your shelf.

It's the same reason I don't get the appeal of Joytoy stuff. Seems unsatisfying.

 

Yeah I've come to basically the same conclusion.  I have a primaris army that has the core of a decent army list in it, and if/when I want to get back into playing 40k I can add whatever meta hotness units I need.  And I'm building my heresy Word Bearers to have decent overlap with 40k CSM (terminators do double duty, Gal Vorbak are possessed, etc.) so I have them for 30k and 40k too.  And outside of that, I'm just dipping my toes into whatever projects I feel like painting with the idea that I can expand them into a gaming force later if I ever feel the urge.  

 

And I agree that the painting/modeling aspect of the hobby separates it from collecting funko pops and action figures.  I do get a lot of enjoyment from hobbying vs. gaming.  I guess the point was a little more specific to me because I'm much more of an army painter rather than any sort of competition or display painter.  There are so many different things I want to paint, and I don't have infinite time and patience, so my stuff is almost all just tabletop standard.  And I think that's part of where my hobby existential crisis comes from.  Wondering why I have hundreds of rather averagely painted war dollies collecting dust.  If I was entering competitions or getting a bunch of online validation for pictures of my models, that would be a different -- but no less valid -- purpose.  A better comparison might be to building model trains or a ship in a bottle or something.  Both give enjoyment from the hobby process, but after that, they just sit on a shelf.  

[OttoVonAwesome]

13 hours ago, Marshal Rohr said:

Solar Aux V1 had a haywire round for their grenade launchers and Militia had an incendiary and poison round. I wouldn’t be surprised if these walkers get special rounds for the grenade launcher or keep frag and krak only and are cheap as dirt in points. 

It's a Hermes grenade launcher and not just a regular grenade launcher so who knows. Either way I'm going all in on Solar Aux. The heavy flamer sentinels are gonna make a great harassment units. 6 wounds is two dead marines is 20-40 points off the table. I'm not someone who thinks everything needs Ap2 to be effective doesn't mean I'll cheap out on Axe Veletari, Executioners, Rapiers and demolisher cannons though. Solar Aux are fine I would have traded the Ap on my artillery for 4+ saves and str 6 lasguns on my guard back when I played the earlier editions any day.

Edited February 5 by Tyriks

[Petitioner's City]

7 hours ago, MegaVolt87 said:

The weapons don't seem heavy enough for these walkers. To me, these should be mobile 1 man versions of traditional 2 man weapons teams. If these can't outflank/ infiltrate I don't see them being useful unless they are really low pts. 

 

I sometimes feel this about the melts gun on a questoris imperial knight - it's bigger than many multi-meltas, but is a teeny meltagun from the rules' perspective - or the conversion beamers on an asterius, which are bigger than the vehicles carrying other examples (predators, for example). Scale, and rules fitting to that, remain a perennial issue - although the intro of gravis (lit, large) weapons this edition was good. 

[Xenith]

On 2/1/2024 at 1:33 PM, Petitioner's City said:

They look great, but I'm struggling to see what gap in the army they address - volkites, multilasers, flamers and similar light ap/low armour weapons are ten a penny in the army, so what do these really do? If there wasn't a carnodon, maybe?

 

Scouting units, yes, but it feels less effective than either a carnodon squadron or a Strike Russ.

 

This is an issue for me - the less advanced 40k ones are toting lascannons and missile launchers, etc, yet the heaviest one of these has a caliver - a marine portable weapon? They could have made it a culverin at least. 

[Marshal Rohr]

1 hour ago, Xenith said:

 

This is an issue for me - the less advanced 40k ones are toting lascannons and missile launchers, etc, yet the heaviest one of these has a caliver - a marine portable weapon? They could have made it a culverin at least. 

I imagine these won’t be vehicles but will be like Terminators or Ogryns. High toughness and a 3+ save. 

[Xenith]

But like, the point still stands that they are weapons platforms, but only carry man-portable weapons - grenade launcher aside. I think they could have been upgunned a bit. 

[Noserenda]

Ill laugh if they arent vehicles tbh (Not checked on sentinels this edition) because if ever vehicle armour facing was relevant its on these! 

Its worth pointing out that the Solar Auxilla are not fodder btw, they are designed as the top end of the Imperial army, and really do have a significant overlap with the lower end Astartes inductii. This was deliberate on FW's part in 1st edition where nearly all of their guard ranges were elite or special and thus more expensive in points to make collecting an army of them less gruelling for our wallets :D 

Not sure this is something the 2nd ed team carried on, its kinda hard to tell the difference between design decisions, malice and error sometimes in Liber Imperium especially! But i do feel they have been trying to shift the SA down a few metaphorical pegs and they really didnt seem keen to keep Militia on board at all as the actual bottom of the barrel :P 

[Marshal Rohr]

12 minutes ago, Xenith said:

But like, the point still stands that they are weapons platforms, but only carry man-portable weapons - grenade launcher aside. I think they could have been upgunned a bit. 

Might be a resin upgrade pack in their future. Influencers should have Beta-Garmon by now so leaks should be soon. 

[SkimaskMohawk]

10 hours ago, Marshal Rohr said:

I imagine these won’t be vehicles but will be like Terminators or Ogryns. High toughness and a 3+ save. 

 

9 hours ago, Noserenda said:

Ill laugh if they arent vehicles tbh (Not checked on sentinels this edition)

Milita sentinels aren't vehicles, and are t6, 3w 3+. Armourbane get to reroll fails, fleshbane rerolls successes, and they basically have relentless.

[OttoVonAwesome]

On 2/5/2024 at 7:53 AM, Noserenda said:

Ill laugh if they arent vehicles tbh (Not checked on sentinels this edition) because if ever vehicle armour facing was relevant its on these! 

Its worth pointing out that the Solar Auxilla are not fodder btw, they are designed as the top end of the Imperial army, and really do have a significant overlap with the lower end Astartes inductii. This was deliberate on FW's part in 1st edition where nearly all of their guard ranges were elite or special and thus more expensive in points to make collecting an army of them less gruelling for our wallets :D 

Not sure this is something the 2nd ed team carried on, its kinda hard to tell the difference between design decisions, malice and error sometimes in Liber Imperium especially! But i do feel they have been trying to shift the SA down a few metaphorical pegs and they really didnt seem keen to keep Militia on board at all as the actual bottom of the barrel :P 

I think them not wanting to do militia properly has more to do with GW's recent crazy aversion to mixing the miniatures ranges. Where's Skitarrii list guys? Are we waiting for bespoke new 30k skitarrii whats going on?

 

Solar Aux are still pretty elite especially compared to militia. Sure they took a hit when AP was dropped to reasonable levels but was anyone having fun having half thier army swept off the board by pie plates on turn 1 in 1.0? Companion squads are crazy good and I hope they get a proper kit in this wave cuase it seems like no one is using them in online Batreps at all and I think that's making the army look weaker than it is. It's the same as a marine player not taking any of his real elite infantry and just spamming troops. I think these little sentinels are gonna be fantastic not cuase they got big guns but for denying ground, triggering reactions and generally forcing the other guy to deal with them instead of your other units. Should look at them more like outriders than actual sentinels. Placing them forward or inbetween units to screen charges and soak up fire.

[Lord Marshal]

Pre-order next week.

[Deus_Ex_Machina]

My personal experiences with any army such as the Imperial Guard/Solar Auxilia was this:

 

If your large blast templates from your tanks/artillery don´t perform in a game then you have a big problem when facing any kind of power armour. You can stack the odds a bit in your favour with dedicated infantry units who wield special weapons to combat marines but these units won´t be plentiful and the opponent would want to get rid of them asap.

[Doghouse]

I know they won't be great but I want to make a recon pattern cohort to go with my recon marines company I am making. I think sometimes you have to just go with the rule of cool and not worry about how they are going to hold up against Astartes because it's part of the historical appeal to me. The idea of quirky mechanised cavalry units is awesome to me.

 

I fully expect Astartes to pull the legs off these guys like a thanks giving Turkey, just a shame I can't use an Aethon as a HQ choice.

[Matcap86]

Now with free rules!

 

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/04/23/harass-and-hound-your-foes-with-free-rules-for-the-hermes-sentinels/

 

Direct link to the pdf: Light Hermes Sentinel

Edited April 23 by Matcap86

[StrangerOrders]

Those are some unexpectedly cheap little ducklings.

 

Cheap too....

[Cleon]

Yes, they look decent from a points to output point of view - I think I'd be picking between the light one with the multi laser and the heavier one with Volkite, but I can't square the 'points of a space marine' statline with my anticipated view of the cash cost plus time taken to get a unit built and painted.

[Doghouse]

Has there been any indication of a price on these in pounds/dollars?

[tinpact]

I would guess $50/£30 - the price of the Necromunda vehicles, which look about the same size - or maybe a bit more 

[Matcap86]

36 minutes ago, Doghouse said:

Has there been any indication of a price on these in pounds/dollars?

 

55 euros for a squadron. Unknown how many minis are in a box. Same price as a SA Leman Russ so 40 pounds, 65 dollars.

[Cleon]

38 minutes ago, Matcap86 said:

 

55 euros for a squadron. Unknown how many minis are in a box. Same price as a SA Leman Russ so 40 pounds, 65 dollars.

Two in a box is hiding on the warcomm page rather than clearly announced, as a price yeah that about figures.

[Doghouse]

Thank you both very much. 

 

Two to a box so might get a bit pricey I guess for a full squadron..