winterman

Only issue i see is the severe lack of ap2. That could prove a strong flaw

Tankbustas have melta bombs, so AP1 where it counts (MCs and vehicles).  

I love Trukk spam! I tried so hard to get it to work and it just wouldn't. This is sooo much better! How many points is that list? Also, I was under the impression you could waaaugh every turn except the first. Am I mistaken?

The decurion command benefit allows for turn 1.  

Yeah its pretty dire.  Looks like whoever cooked up the cadian decurion got their mitts on the ork one also.  Hope whoever that is isn't involved in any tyranid decurion introduction.

I think it's going to come down to what that core formation brings to the table.

It doesn't really bring anything.  Its lighter weight versions of the orkurion command benefits -- I think essentially no different than the ork codex detachment iirc.

I'm ambivalent to it.  I think it's going to disadvantage armies like Dark eldar and others a bit too much probably.  

 

I suppose the only way to test the theory is just to play it that way but...  it would be interesting.

Only if it's the sole method to win a mission.  All the events I mentioned use it as one factor in several, there's still end game objective grabs and secondaries. 

Its at least better than book maelstrom which scores in each players turn. Its also a set objective, maelstrom is annoying when you keep getting things that are improbable for you to score and your opponent gets claim objective behind his gunline and kill a unit.

Adepticon 2016 is doing 'during game' progressive objectives like that for the championship. NoVa last year had a mission option that scored that way as well. Will have to wait and see what ITC does this year. They hinted at tweaks to their maelstrom, this included.

I feel like you need a biker smash chapter master and some sort of foot combat unit so you have the opportunity to say 'slingshot engaged' in every game.

Wonder if the Forgeworld character in Mymera is any indication what these guys will be about - fleet, rending high T.  Either way, I can't see how these guys will do anything that TWC won't already do better.  Bet they will just be slightly cheaper but not beasts.  It's really the issue GW runs into a lot now -- they tend to make stuff that the artists want to create, without any idea how it will fit into the army.  Its like the toxicrene, haruspex etc all over again

Greetings,

Exarch/Bob Kelley and I have set the date for the latest event in our series -- Storm of Silence 4 will be April 23-24.  This will be the 9th GT style event Bob and I have hosted at the Gamer's Haven and we continue to improve every time.  

If you are into ITC or just GT styles events, we have consistently had 45-50+ attendees -- so if you want those points or a chance to play new people this is the event for you.

The Storm is our 'modern style' GT event focused more on win loss and ITC stylings -- with our own spin of course. 

A quick summary is below.  More details to follow as we have them

Event page:

https://www.facebook.com/events/547218522101746/

Hope to see you there!

In game mechanics, it matters more if he doesn't use them.

 

If the opponent lands (deep strike, jump infantry) a unit onto those battlements, they can claim the building for one of their models. Given most of VSG's abilities are friend or foe, it mainly affects when the roll to regenerate the shields is attempted, as this depends on the controlling player. Control of the building also determines who gains VP for destroying the building, when it is destroyed. Buildings are also scoring units (might be wrong on this last one).

"If a unit moves onto the battlements of an unclaimed, undestroyed building, they immediately claim that building and it becomes part of that unit’s side until the building is either destroyed or an enemy unit claims it."

So you can only claim unclaimed buildings when entering battlements.  Otherwise have to enter the building, which isn't an option for a VSG.  

However you are correct claimed buildings are scoring.

@west Very cool quick VSG.  Working on a tyranid one myself.  Maybe I'll post it here if its not gak.

Another one was identified:

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Downloads/Product/PDF/Warhammer-40k/7th-faq/Shield_of_Baal_v1.0_Dec15.pdf <--Updated sheild of baal.  One formation no one ever uses was changed

There's only a few actual new ones that people tracked down via editing BL links.

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Downloads/Product/PDF/Warhammer-40k/7th-faq/Stronghold_Assault_v1.1_Dec15.pdf <-- Stronghold Assault (added building type and AR to void shield generator and Vengeance Weapons Battery)

http://www.blacklibrary.com/Downloads/Product/PDF/Warhammer-40k/7th-faq/Dark_Angels_v1.0_Dec15.pdf  <-- Dark Angels, already noted above but mentioned for completeness

So in ITC does the Big Mek Stompa use the lifta droppa rule as written in the apoc book or the revised lifta droppa rules in the PDF?

Extra order and 3 dice.

Extra order wouldn't apply to a tank commander IIRC, Company Commander is a specific model in the CCS.  Could be mistaken though.

The 3 dice thing probably works on the tank commander, depends on the definition of officer in the IG book.  Definitely works in the arty CCS.

Yeah, not sure that is worth trying to get the points for the additional tank commander.

Actually, we have a growing community in Ohio. :) It is all part of the Ordo world domination plans.

 

There are three stages:

1. Conquer the NW

2. Conquer Ohio

3. Conquer the rest of the World

 

:)

Had no idea.  Thanks master of all things bacon!

Greetings all.

 

Was referred to these forums after meeting members of the new Ohio Group at Phoenix Nest Games today. Figured was best to introduce myself

 

I'm Corey or TheArmoredRock. I'm a long time resident of SE Ohio near Ohio University. I'm a veteran wargamer for over 25 years. While my primary focus is and has been WFB, I am now transitioning to "The 9th Age" (Fan supported and developed version of WFB 9th edition), KoW and Malifaux. I am also just getting into 40K with those dirty Tau!

 

I am also a co-host of the Model Citizens (formerly Boltgun's Battle Brothers) podcast based out of Columbus, Ohio with Allen Blount, former GW employee. We can be found on the Ohiohammer Network at www.ohiohammer.squarespace.com

 

Its great to find a some local guys again. This has been a wargaming deadzone for a long time and most of my gaming was in the Columbus Area.

First, love Allen but only know him from his occasional stints on 40k Basement Podcast (miss that podcast something fierce).

Second, you may already know but this is a Portland, OR and Vancouver, WA centric forum (unless someone moved out that way I guess).  I am not local either though so certainly not a req to live in the place where the dream of the 90s is still alive

Either way welcome and I will have to check out your podcast.

Issadon I'm not familiar with. I don't have the forgrworld books. 

No need to have the books.  Badab war is so far out of print they just post up PDFs.  All you need is in the two links below (first has his rules, second one has his Raptor chapter tactics -- those and the SM book is all you need):

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/fw_site/fw_pdfs/Warhammer_40000/Forge_World_Space_Marine_Badab_Characters_V2.pdf

http://www.forgeworld.co.uk/resources/fw_site/fw_pdfs/Warhammer_40000/Forge_World_Space_Marine_Chapter_Tactics_V2.pdf

His claim to fame is he comes with the strategic warlord trait Master of Ambush -- so gets to give 3 units infiltrate.  He has a ton of other tricks, but for Cohort that is the main deal.

All joking aside, this is such a hard thing for me. I'm a people pleaser by nature and don't like confrontation. I have a 3 color painting requirement to get cash prizes - so prizes awarded because of best general, paint, sports, overall, and raffle. But you can still participate. Each time though, I typically get a guy that says "are you sure?" and it is hard to say no.

 

I personally like it because this is more than just a competitive game and having painted armies on the field is mo bettah.

Totally relate here.  Booting someone from an event, especially someone who drove hours and hours and is staying overnight in a hotel and such, it just is not something anyone wants to do.  

And TOs honestly rarely make the hard call and boot someone.  I don't think I have ever seen it happen, even against blatant offenders at large GW events and the like. And lately most big events have dropped the requirement all together, favoring the no awards policy.  Which I dunno, that is something of a deterrent but doesn't address the reason there's a requirement in the first place.

The requirements are there for a reason.  Not everyone travels to just play 5 games and win.  It is the total experience.  To some degree it really is a sportsmanship thing, it is respect for the other guy across from you who came to the event to play against 5+ painted armies.  We can all get games against unpainted stuff any day of the week.  GT events are suppose to be special.

That said, I also totally relate to the stragglers.  I am a procrastinator, a slow painter, and have gamer ADD.  The current release schedule and often times lack of model availability make it tough to have an army ready for competitive play.  So I don't say the things above from some high horse -- totally get why folks might try and skirt the rules.

To the question though, honestly even though we (eg Storm and Harvester) require painting and have rules against proxies and such we have been fairly lax of late and have allowed several players to get by without really meeting the requirements or truly getting our approval for a questionable counts as.  We made the calls to allow them, for various reasons, right or wrong, but going forward I don't know.  We much prefer to require painting but with people continuing to skirt the rules it may not make a lot of sense.  I am frankly tired of being forced to play a game of chicken every event and wish people would just have some integrity -- but then again if we don't enforce the rules then who lacks the integrity?

Sucks, wish people would just paint their stuff.

OK let's build around the cohort. What would be the most competitive thing we could do to support a cohort deathstar? Every ally and unit is up for consideration, no limits.

 

I'm a big believer that novelty of lists counts for something. If your opponent hasn't seen something that's a plus. And I don't think anyone is running the cohort currently.

Personally?  I'd want Lais Issadon for infiltration or an Inquisitor with the book for scout.  You want that cohort mid table ASAP.  After that depends on whether you want full deathstar mode (so getting hit and run via Cypher or White Scars, psychers) or whether you want less star and more support.

Yeah its the alpha potential and range and LOS is an issue for Kataphrons -- consider the things they tend to counter (wraithknights, riptides, cent stars) are mobile and/or long ranged enough to kite them for a while.  And they are fragile enough to be dealt with before they are a major threat.  Plus once you add pods you open up using the Culexus in a pod as well.

I am of the same mind as you though - I am working on a Convocation that doesn't use pods.  And trying to make it still competitive.

One idea was using Inquisition and their old school chimeras (eg 5 fire points).  Can't start out in the chimera but once inside provides a bit of protection and some extra mobility in a pinch.  Drop pod is better, but still a nice option.  I also like the idea of modelling a Magos Biologos as a Xeno Inquisitor and getting rad grenades and servo skulls in an army that scouts and has a unit that also reduces T by 1 seems decent enough.  But getting Coteaz is probably the more competitive option.

Also thinking running two knights might be fun. Hard to get two shooty ones in at 1850 though.  But the buffs knights get in convocation, getting more seems like it is competitive to me, even if its two choppy knights

Based on the bundle on GW's site (PCS, 2xInfantry Squad, 2xHWS, Sentinels, says it has everything needed for the Formation), I'm wondering if the requirement for the Emperor's Shield Platoon is supposed to be "5 Squads with the Infantry type" rather than specifically "5 Infantry Squads".

Yeah, it also says at least 5 but you can't have more than 5 Infantry Squads in a platoon IIRC.

Too bad GW hasn't released even an errata in a long time.

Yeah taking the infantry as the core selection in the Cadian Battlegroup seems like a meh option.  Losing obsec on a horde army, gotta be some huge buffs or synergy to do that (like there is for say green tide) but it just isn't there in this thing, imo.  Move and shoot order is kinda neat, massed extra flashlight shots (that reroll 1s) is kinda neat.  An extra order and extended range (which is necessary when you have this many units) is kinda neat.  The buff to passing orders is pretty solid also. But worth breaking your back over with 175+ infantry models?  Just don't see it myself.

Taking a tank based Cadian Battle Group though, pretty neat but doesn't benefit much from the command benefits (the extra dice on the test is the only thing).  Still seems like a possibly competitive build. 

Doesn't seem to allow Pask though.

Not in that detachment, but he is allowed in the battle group command detachment of the composite detachment.  In fact that is the only compulsory of the Cadian Battle Group, so you could just take pask and his unit as a detachment and add him to any army you wanted.

Allied detachment doesn't have a fortification slot.  Not sure if Inquis one does, it may but I don't think it does.  May need to bite the bullet and take a vet squad and make the IG a CAD.

I don't personally care for the general rating thing.  Easy to game, completely objective and doesn't really have any bearing on the purpose of the list rating (imo).  You can be a crap general but a super friend invistar or 5 knight army is still gonna make for a meh game for many OFCC attendees.  And you can be a crap general, bringing a dickish list and still be an absolute TFG to play against.  

If captains are abusing the pairing system, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.  I'd consider maybe going with a more structured pairings system, maybe similar to ETC or ATC.