[40K] Fast vs. Heavy

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

I'm finally done completing the mandatory 1 HQ/2 Troops choices for both my
SM and SoB armies. Now I am looking to add to one or the other in regards to
Fast attack or Heavy support. I'm a bit torn, as I already have a Tornado
and Annihilator for my SM, but nothing for my SoB. I was thinking either a
Devastator squad or additional Tornado for the SMs, and either Seraphim or
the Devastator equivalent for the SoB (Retributor squad, I think) for the
SoB. Suggestions? Comments?
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"relkins" <relkins@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:ctlmpa$gs1$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
> I'm finally done completing the mandatory 1 HQ/2 Troops choices for both
my
> SM and SoB armies. Now I am looking to add to one or the other in regards
to
> Fast attack or Heavy support. I'm a bit torn, as I already have a Tornado
> and Annihilator for my SM, but nothing for my SoB. I was thinking either a
> Devastator squad or additional Tornado for the SMs, and either Seraphim or
> the Devastator equivalent for the SoB (Retributor squad, I think) for the
> SoB. Suggestions? Comments?
>
>

In all honesty, (don't take this as a flame or anything, because I am guilty
of doing multiple armies at once too), pick one army and finish it first.
Learn it and play with it until you are comfortable with the units and
strategy and then work on amry #2.

Ok, onto suggestions for the armies:

Seraphim are NASTY if used correctly. Twin linked pistols, faith points,
inferno pistols AND the ability to hit and run is quite nice.

I love land speeders. I have a squad of 3 (or 3 individual depending on
what other fast I take), and their ability to burn across the field and get
in range to take out most armor by turn 2 is wonderful - provided it
survives...

I haven't used dev squads much, or retributorsat all, but IIRC retributors
are very limited in their choice of heavy weapons. my dev squad I used was
able to take out a land raider (with a krak missile no less).

basically, it comes down to how YOU want to play your army.

Have you considered a dreadnought for your marines? the new assault cannon
rules are NASTY.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Thanks for the input, folks. Yeah, Im going to take your suggestions, and
stick with the Marines for right now. I was thinking about getting a
Terminator squad, but I want to wait until this Summer when the new minis
come out ("Practically the same minis, but now in plastic with an exciting
20% price increase!"). So, looks like Im sold on a Devastator squad. Now,
for maximum punch and power, what weapon/s combo would you suggest? Id like
a nice balance of long distance and medium range power.
Also any advice or ideas on SM Command squad construction/composition(Who
should get what weapons/gear, etc.) would be helpful!

drgrbek
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Melketh" <abcdef@ghijk.com> wrote in message
news:WpmdnYaZ7Ig0_GPcRVn-vA@comcast.com...
>
> "relkins" <relkins@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
> news:ctlmpa$gs1$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
> I was thinking either a
> > Devastator squad or additional Tornado for the SMs, and either Seraphim
or
> > the Devastator equivalent for the SoB (Retributor squad, I think) for
the
> > SoB. Suggestions? Comments?
> >
> >
>
> In all honesty, (don't take this as a flame or anything, because I am
guilty
> of doing multiple armies at once too), pick one army and finish it first.
> Learn it and play with it until you are comfortable with the units and
> strategy and then work on amry #2.

I can't agree more with this. I'd recommend finishing the Marines, since
they'll be cheaper, easier to model, and are currently a very strong army.


> Ok, onto suggestions for the armies:
>
> Seraphim are NASTY if used correctly. Twin linked pistols, faith points,
> inferno pistols AND the ability to hit and run is quite nice.

One thing to keep in mind: they now cost as much as Assault Marines. While
they're certainly trickier and more flexible than Assault Squads, they don't
have the same "brick to the teeth" aspect.

> I love land speeders. I have a squad of 3 (or 3 individual depending on
> what other fast I take), and their ability to burn across the field and
get
> in range to take out most armor by turn 2 is wonderful - provided it
> survives...

Land speeders are very fragile, and often seemingly die accomplishing
nothing. Of course, they only need stop a tank once in two or three games
to make up their points. Heavy Bolter Speeders are really only good for
claiming objectives, but do a great job at it.


> I haven't used dev squads much, or retributorsat all, but IIRC retributors
> are very limited in their choice of heavy weapons. my dev squad I used
was
> able to take out a land raider (with a krak missile no less).
>
> basically, it comes down to how YOU want to play your army.
>
> Have you considered a dreadnought for your marines? the new assault
cannon
> rules are NASTY.

Dreadnoughts are still a bit fragile, what with the AV12, but pack a ton of
punch with the ass cannon and at 105 points, are what we in the retail
business call "inexpensive." Devastators are brilliant, especially with
Tank Hunters. IMO, they make the Predators nearly obsolete.

Karyth Teel
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"relkins" <relkins@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:ctmekl$9ek$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
>
> Thanks for the input, folks. Yeah, Im going to take your suggestions, and
> stick with the Marines for right now. I was thinking about getting a
> Terminator squad, but I want to wait until this Summer when the new minis
> come out ("Practically the same minis, but now in plastic with an exciting
> 20% price increase!"). So, looks like Im sold on a Devastator squad. Now,
> for maximum punch and power, what weapon/s combo would you suggest? Id
like
> a nice balance of long distance and medium range power.
> Also any advice or ideas on SM Command squad construction/composition(Who
> should get what weapons/gear, etc.) would be helpful!
>
> drgrbek
>
>

I would forget about the heavy bolter, unless you are planning on supporting
infantry instead of tank hunting. But as you stated you want max punch and
power, but still depends on how close you plan to get to th enemy. If
within 12", multi-meltas. if you plan on staying back, lascannons, missile
launchers. I find that plasma cannons are decent, but they can kill
themselves (which I have seen happen more often than not).

Terminators are also nice, and having another assault cannon in the army is
quite useful. However, they are expensive points wise. I don't field mine
that often, and NEVER in a game of less than 1500 points.

as for the comand squad...can't really help you there as I rarely kit one
out, BUT I do know that you can now toss a Librarian into the squad and it
does NOT count against your HQ choices.
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Karyth Teel" <spo2@case.edu> wrote in message
news:ctmalr$g3e$1@eeyore.INS.cwru.edu...
>

>
> Dreadnoughts are still a bit fragile, what with the AV12, but pack a ton
> of
> punch with the ass cannon and at 105 points, are what we in the retail
> business call "inexpensive."

Ass cannon...

Ass cannon...

God, I love this group...

--
Sir Scott "Hugs all around..." McDaniel
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Melketh" <abcdef@ghijk.com> wrote in message
news:W-mdnafo_eKwe2PcRVn-sA@comcast.com...
> as for the comand squad...can't really help you there as I rarely kit one
> out, BUT I do know that you can now toss a Librarian into the squad and it
> does NOT count against your HQ choices.

Better than that - you can slap a commander, a chaplain, and a lib into one
command squad and it still counts as single HQ choice. The wording of the
rule is that only one character of a given type to a command squad, so you
can't take multiple chaplains or multiple libs, but you can take one of
each. So long as the Commander is the character leading the command squad,
you can add 1 lib and 1 chaplain. Pricey, but could be fun in close assault
😛

Dan
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Spack" <news@worldofspack.co.uk> wrote in message
news:369aqlF4t5glkU1@individual.net...

> Better than that - you can slap a commander, a chaplain, and a lib into
one
> command squad and it still counts as single HQ choice. The wording of
the
> rule is that only one character of a given type to a command squad, so you
> can't take multiple chaplains or multiple libs, but you can take one of
> each. So long as the Commander is the character leading the command squad,
> you can add 1 lib and 1 chaplain. Pricey, but could be fun in close
assault


Oh my, oh my, oh my. So, if I understand you correctly, I could have
theCommand sqd as it comes in the box, my SM Commander AND a Lib. and Chap.,
so long as my SMC is leading it? If you are correct (Which I dont doubt),
then Im going to be having LOTS of fun with my Command sqd!!!

BTW, in which book and on what page is that rule that addresses this? Just
for my own edification.

Thanks

drgrbek
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"relkins" <relkins@u.washington.edu> wrote in message
news:cto9j6$m5v$1@gnus01.u.washington.edu...
>
> "Spack" <news@worldofspack.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:369aqlF4t5glkU1@individual.net...
>
>> Better than that - you can slap a commander, a chaplain, and a lib into
> one
>> command squad and it still counts as single HQ choice. The wording of
> the
>> rule is that only one character of a given type to a command squad, so
>> you
>> can't take multiple chaplains or multiple libs, but you can take one of
>> each. So long as the Commander is the character leading the command
>> squad,
>> you can add 1 lib and 1 chaplain. Pricey, but could be fun in close
> assault
>
>
> Oh my, oh my, oh my. So, if I understand you correctly, I could have
> theCommand sqd as it comes in the box, my SM Commander AND a Lib. and
> Chap.,
> so long as my SMC is leading it? If you are correct (Which I dont doubt),
> then Im going to be having LOTS of fun with my Command sqd!!!
>
> BTW, in which book and on what page is that rule that addresses this? Just
> for my own edification.

Codex: Space Marines, page 21. Look at note 3 under the Space Marine
Characters heading. The rule is one of those vague ones that GW seems to
enjoy putting in - does it mean only one additional character, or does it
mean only one of each type of character (implying that 2 additional
characters can be added). I think this will end up being an FAQ item in the
first PDF for the Codex - personally, I hope it's just one additional
character full stop (as the example in the paragraph suggests). It's only
for reducing the number of HQ slots used anyway - there's nothing stopping
an independent 3rd character taken as another HQ slot from joining the squad
during deployment (in the rulebook under Independent characters it does
state multiple characters can join the squad).

Dan
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

Spack wrote:
> Codex: Space Marines, page 21. Look at note 3 under the Space Marine
> Characters heading. The rule is one of those vague ones that GW seems to
> enjoy putting in - does it mean only one additional character, or does it
> mean only one of each type of character (implying that 2 additional
> characters can be added).

It's clear that it's one of each type (1 Librarian and/or 1 Chaplain).
It's also clear that they lose some of their IC powers, as they become
tied to the squad.

> It's only
> for reducing the number of HQ slots used anyway

True, but with the standard 2 HQ slots, you can take 2 Characters with 2
Librarians *and* 2 Chaplains. That's a lot more Characters than you
could take before.

--
--- John Hwang "JohnHwang...@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
news:36b5slF4tnv9nU1@individual.net...
> Spack wrote:
>> Codex: Space Marines, page 21. Look at note 3 under the Space Marine
>> Characters heading. The rule is one of those vague ones that GW seems to
>> enjoy putting in - does it mean only one additional character, or does it
>> mean only one of each type of character (implying that 2 additional
>> characters can be added).
>
> It's clear that it's one of each type (1 Librarian and/or 1 Chaplain).

But is it? Does the clarification on only allowing one of each type merely
cover stopping taking a Chaplain with a command squad and adding another
Chaplain? It's one of those lines that's open to interpretation - even I've
managed to interpret it both ways, and I'm normally quite narrow minded when
it comes to looking at the rules. It's the phrase "The attached character,
the squad, and the character leading it" that's the problem - it implies
only 1 additional character by the lack of a (s) on the word character.

> It's also clear that they lose some of their IC powers, as they become
> tied to the squad.

Indeed. However, once you've lost the marines/specialists from the command
squad from attrition the characters no longer form a unit and are free to
wander off if they wish. Although by that stage they're likely engaged in
combat and unable to skip around screaming "I'm free!"

>> It's only for reducing the number of HQ slots used anyway
>
> True, but with the standard 2 HQ slots, you can take 2 Characters with 2
> Librarians *and* 2 Chaplains. That's a lot more Characters than you could
> take before.

And also way more points tied up in a single unit. I guess it depends on the
amount of points and the focus of the army - it'd be a stupid unit to take
in a shooty 500pts army for instance 😛

Dan
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

>> Dreadnoughts are still a bit fragile, what with the AV12, but pack a ton
>> of
>> punch with the ass cannon and at 105 points, are what we in the retail
>> business call "inexpensive."
>
> Ass cannon...
>
> Ass cannon...
>
> God, I love this group...

Yes, lovely plumage. :)
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

elfbard entered the world pub known as rec.games.miniatures.warhammer and
said...

> >> Dreadnoughts are still a bit fragile, what with the AV12, but pack a ton
> >> of
> >> punch with the ass cannon and at 105 points, are what we in the retail
> >> business call "inexpensive."
> >
> > Ass cannon...
> >
> > Ass cannon...
> >
> > God, I love this group...
>
> Yes, lovely plumage. :)
>

TRue there is nothing quite like watching as your dreadnought rapes your
opponent with his ass-cannon...

--
Jim M
posted on this day, the 4,173rd of September 1993

"Look alive. Here comes a buzzard." -- Walt Kelly (Pogo)
"I was married by a judge. I should have asked for a jury." -- Groucho Marx

http://jimac.tripod.com
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On 2/2/05 3:39 AM, in article 36bhu0F4sts5cU1@individual.net, "Spack"
<news@worldofspack.co.uk> wrote:

> I'm normally quite narrow minded

Out of context winner of the month!


janet
--
We should not have a tin cup out for something as important as the arts in
this country, the richest in the world. Creative artists are always
begging, but always being used when it's time to show us at our best.
Leontyne price
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

On 2/2/05 7:22 AM, in article
MPG.1c6a821c7f69d66398a4ab@news.west.earthlink.net, "Ancient Gamer"
<hnjcomics@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>
> TRue there is nothing quite like watching as your dreadnought rapes your
> opponent with his ass-cannon...

As a non-40k player I just want to know if this cannon in mounted on the
back of the dreadnought or if you folks are having problems spelling
assault?


janet
--
"We the people of the United States." Which "We, the people"?
Lucy Stone
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

In article <36bhu0F4sts5cU1@individual.net>, "Spack" <news@worldofspack.co.uk>
writes:

>"John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
>news:36b5slF4tnv9nU1@individual.net...
>> Spack wrote:
>>> Codex: Space Marines, page 21. Look at note 3 under the Space Marine
>>> Characters heading. The rule is one of those vague ones that GW seems to
>>> enjoy putting in - does it mean only one additional character, or does it
>>> mean only one of each type of character (implying that 2 additional
>>> characters can be added).
>>
>> It's clear that it's one of each type (1 Librarian and/or 1 Chaplain).
>
>But is it? Does the clarification on only allowing one of each type merely
>cover stopping taking a Chaplain with a command squad and adding another
>Chaplain? It's one of those lines that's open to interpretation - even I've
>managed to interpret it both ways, and I'm normally quite narrow minded when
>it comes to looking at the rules. It's the phrase "The attached character,
>the squad, and the character leading it" that's the problem - it implies
>only 1 additional character by the lack of a (s) on the word character.
>

This is GW trying to complicate a simple rule - if you look on page 29 in the
Command Squad entry it clearly states "A Command Squad which, including
attached characters..." Page 21 itself states "Librarians and Chaplains may be
attached to *another character's Command Squad*" (singular, my emphasis), very
clearly stating that both characters can be added to one Command Squad led by a
Commander (since both wouldn't be able to join one led by either a Librarian or
a Chaplain). It further states that "Only one character of a given type" may be
added to the squad - if it meant that only one character could be added it
would have said so.

Philip Bowles
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

P Bowles wrote:
> Page 21 itself states "Librarians and Chaplains may be
> attached to *another character's Command Squad*" (singular, my emphasis), very
> clearly stating that both characters can be added to one Command Squad led by a
> Commander (since both wouldn't be able to join one led by either a Librarian or
> a Chaplain).

Why not?

The Command Squad says it can be taken by Commander, Chaplain, or
Librarian, not Commanders only.

P.21 says you may only attach 1 additional Librarian and/or 1 additional
Chaplain.

Where are you getting the additional, unstated restriction from?

It seems clear me that you can have:

IC Librarian
Librarian's Command Squad
Librarian's Command Squad non-IC attached Librarian
Librarian's Command Squad non-IC attached Chaplain


--
--- John Hwang "JohnHwang...@cs.com.no.com"
\-|-/
| A.K.D. F.E.M.C.
| Horned Blood Cross Terror LED Speed Jagd Destiny
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"P Bowles" <pbowles@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20050202143100.05425.00000133@mb-m01.aol.com...
> In article <36bhu0F4sts5cU1@individual.net>, "Spack"
> <news@worldofspack.co.uk>
> writes:
>
>>"John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
>>news:36b5slF4tnv9nU1@individual.net...
>>> Spack wrote:
>>>> Codex: Space Marines, page 21. Look at note 3 under the Space Marine
>>>> Characters heading. The rule is one of those vague ones that GW seems
>>>> to
>>>> enjoy putting in - does it mean only one additional character, or does
>>>> it
>>>> mean only one of each type of character (implying that 2 additional
>>>> characters can be added).
>>>
>>> It's clear that it's one of each type (1 Librarian and/or 1 Chaplain).
>>
>>But is it? Does the clarification on only allowing one of each type merely
>>cover stopping taking a Chaplain with a command squad and adding another
>>Chaplain? It's one of those lines that's open to interpretation - even
>>I've
>>managed to interpret it both ways, and I'm normally quite narrow minded
>>when
>>it comes to looking at the rules. It's the phrase "The attached character,
>>the squad, and the character leading it" that's the problem - it implies
>>only 1 additional character by the lack of a (s) on the word character.
>>

Reading thought it all again a few times, I can finally see the light

> This is GW trying to complicate a simple rule - if you look on page 29 in
> the
> Command Squad entry it clearly states "A Command Squad which, including
> attached characters..."

This is the key I was looking for - "attached characters". A Command Squad
is led by a character (who is a leader, not classed as attached), and then
other characters are attached. Shame it's dug down in the Transport section
of the Command Squad entry.

> Page 21 itself states "Librarians and Chaplains may be
> attached to *another character's Command Squad*" (singular, my emphasis),
> very
> clearly stating that both characters can be added to one Command Squad led
> by a
> Commander (since both wouldn't be able to join one led by either a
> Librarian or
> a Chaplain).

Depends on how you read it. It does clearly state that both can be attached
at the same time. It's all about the semantics, and in this case could go
either way.

> It further states that "Only one character of a given type" may be
> added to the squad - if it meant that only one character could be added it
> would have said so.

That's the phrase that I pointed out in the last post as excluding the
ability of attaching a Chaplain to a Command Squad being led by a Chaplain
(and the same for Libs), again not clearly stating that one of each type may
be attached at the same time.


In the end, I'm glad you pointed out the phrase in the Transport option
text. I might just take a 3 character Command Squad in my next game just for
the comedy value of seeing my opponent's face when they wade into HTH. :)

Dan
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
news:36dhrkF4trqpfU1@individual.net...
>P Bowles wrote:
>> Page 21 itself states "Librarians and Chaplains may be
>> attached to *another character's Command Squad*" (singular, my emphasis),
>> very
>> clearly stating that both characters can be added to one Command Squad
>> led by a
>> Commander (since both wouldn't be able to join one led by either a
>> Librarian or
>> a Chaplain).
>
> Why not?
>
> The Command Squad says it can be taken by Commander, Chaplain, or
> Librarian, not Commanders only.
>
> P.21 says you may only attach 1 additional Librarian and/or 1 additional
> Chaplain.
>
> Where are you getting the additional, unstated restriction from?
>
> It seems clear me that you can have:
>
> IC Librarian
> Librarian's Command Squad
> Librarian's Command Squad non-IC attached Librarian
> Librarian's Command Squad non-IC attached Chaplain

Ah, I see what you're getting at - I was going with Spack's comment that you
could only have one character of each type in a squad, but looking again
that only applies to attached characters, not the character leading the
unit. If there's any ambiguity in these rules, that's where it lies rather
than wth the maximum number of characters.

Philip Bowles
 
Archived from groups: rec.games.miniatures.warhammer (More info?)

"Philip Bowles" <pbowles@aol.com> wrote in message
news:36e4d2F4v4o6oU1@individual.net...
>
> "John Hwang" <JohnHwangCSI@cs.com.no.com> wrote in message
> news:36dhrkF4trqpfU1@individual.net...
>>P Bowles wrote:
>>> Page 21 itself states "Librarians and Chaplains may be
>>> attached to *another character's Command Squad*" (singular, my
>>> emphasis), very
>>> clearly stating that both characters can be added to one Command Squad
>>> led by a
>>> Commander (since both wouldn't be able to join one led by either a
>>> Librarian or
>>> a Chaplain).
>>
>> Why not?
>>
>> The Command Squad says it can be taken by Commander, Chaplain, or
>> Librarian, not Commanders only.
>>
>> P.21 says you may only attach 1 additional Librarian and/or 1 additional
>> Chaplain.
>>
>> Where are you getting the additional, unstated restriction from?
>>
>> It seems clear me that you can have:
>>
>> IC Librarian
>> Librarian's Command Squad
>> Librarian's Command Squad non-IC attached Librarian
>> Librarian's Command Squad non-IC attached Chaplain
>
> Ah, I see what you're getting at - I was going with Spack's comment that
> you could only have one character of each type in a squad, but looking
> again that only applies to attached characters, not the character leading
> the unit. If there's any ambiguity in these rules, that's where it lies
> rather than wth the maximum number of characters.

I think the problem is that GW might be using the terms Leading and Attached
interchangeably in some parts, and that's the confusing part. I guess with
the exact wording Hwang is right - you could have 2 Libs in a Command Squad
if one was Leading it.

Dan