Warhammer 40K Tabletop XXIX: Ro, Ro, Ro Your Boute

[Grim Portent]

I've seen it said occasionally that Black Templars work now that the Castellans detachment is a thing, but I don't really see how it makes the Black Templars main thing, that is to say hordes of footslogging melee marines, in any way viable.

ObSec from Coteaz and respawning Troops is good, but neither really boost melee Crusader Squads, nor is there anything in the detachment to make them better at board control.

Anyone able to elaborate on if the detachment actually lets BTs do their thing and I just can't see it, or if I'm right and it's just a 'minimum Crusader Squads with guns make cheap objective holders' thing?

[Renegade Paladin]

So, yeah. Looks like a Sigmarisation of 40K. I don't know why they would do such a thing (as I've stated previously). But the video linked on the same page involves square bases, so maybe it's all an elaborate troll?

The video is absolutely an elaborate troll. They are most definitely not going to move Deep Strike rules to mandate that you literally throw your drop pods at the table from a meter up, and the cardboard box with "Plastic Thunderhawk" scrawled on the side in marker just takes the cake.

[Cheesegear]

I've seen it said occasionally that Black Templars work now that the Castellans detachment is a thing, but I don't really see how it makes the Black Templars main thing, that is to say hordes of footslogging melee marines, in any way viable.

Who said anything about footslogging?
Black Templars bring Coteaz and 40+ Objective Secured Assault Marines with !Rage to the table with Blade/Shotgun Scouts in Land Speeder Storms.
Vanguard (and Celestine, of course) will also hit like a truck. And be Objective Secured.

inb4; World Eaters. Well, yes. Of course.

ObSec from Coteaz and respawning Troops is good, but neither really boost melee Crusader Squads

Nobody cares about Crusader Squads. But people care about Black Templars. Yes, there is a difference.

Anyone able to elaborate on if the detachment actually lets BTs do their thing and I just can't see it, or if I'm right and it's just a 'minimum Crusader Squads with guns make cheap objective holders' thing?

With Coteaz, anything is an Objective holder, and I don't know why you'd use Crusader Squads to do it, when you have Scouts in Land Speeder Storms.

"If you aren't using Tactical Squads in Drop Pods, you'd better be using Scouts in Storms." - How To Play Space Marines 101.
Crusader Squads are neither of those things, and it still holds true even for Castellans.

[Wraith]

Anyone able to elaborate on if the detachment actually lets BTs do their thing and I just can't see it, or if I'm right and it's just a 'minimum Crusader Squads with guns make cheap objective holders' thing?

The competitive thing that people do, is what Cheesegear said; ObSec Crusader Squads.

The fun thing that non-robots thought of, is respawning Lander Raider Crusaders as Dedicated Tranports.

[Blackhawk748]

I don't know what the 40K equivalent of the ETC for WFB might be, but they should get started on a 9th Age-esque 50K now.

Ya, im already drawing up some concepts.....

[Cheesegear]

The competitive thing that people do, is what Cheesegear said; ObSec Crusader Squads.

That's pretty much exactly what I didn't say. Crusader Squads are bad. Crusader Squads are Assault Squads without Jump Packs. Since everything in a Castellans is ObSec, why aren't you taking Assault Squads?

EDIT: It actually makes Blood Angels angry that their Assault Marines still aren't Things. The actual Assault Marine armies are Raven Guard (in Formations), and Black Templars (in Castellans).

[Grim Portent]

Wouldn't an Assault Marine army benefit more from Ravenguard or Fire Hawks (FW) chapter tactics?

Other than Rage nothing the BTs have meshes with Assault Marines, and both RG and FH make HoW better for jump troops, which is usually a better bonuses than +1A on the charge. Especially since Templars only get Rage some of the time, but RG get Shred on their HoW all the time.

[Renegade Paladin]

The competitive thing that people do, is what Cheesegear said; ObSec Crusader Squads.

The fun thing that non-robots thought of, is respawning Lander Raider Crusaders as Dedicated Tranports.

And remember, you heard it here first.

[Wraith]

That's pretty much exactly what I didn't say. Crusader Squads are bad.

....I know the difference between Crusader Squads and Assault Squads. No, really, I do. Honest. I'm just.... what's the word I'm searching for....

...Ah yes. That's the one. Stupid.

And remember, you heard it here first.

It was worth repeating. I do like me some Land Raiders.

[Ricky S]

EDIT: It actually makes Blood Angels angry that their Assault Marines still aren't Things. The actual Assault Marine armies are Raven Guard (in Formations), and Black Templars (in Castellans).

Yea I know a lot of BA players who are still annoyed. Personally I don't need assault squads when I'm running death company and sanguinary guard. They are better anyway. Unbound is more fun anyway :P

Back onto the new edition, if they drastically change it they risk having all the older players dropping it. I know everyone says that new players are the life blood but why wouldn't you want to keep the older players too?
If it does completely get sigmarised, then I have nothing to fall back onto but 30k.
I love the models and the lore so I'll always be involved but I might stop playing. Maybe I'm being melodramatic. I should probably just wait for the actual rules to get released.

[Forum Explorer]

Yea I know a lot of BA players who are still annoyed. Personally I don't need assault squads when I'm running death company and sanguinary guard. They are better anyway. Unbound is more fun anyway :P

Back onto the new edition, if they drastically change it they risk having all the older players dropping it. I know everyone says that new players are the life blood but why wouldn't you want to keep the older players too?
If it does completely get sigmarised, then I have nothing to fall back onto but 30k.
I love the models and the lore so I'll always be involved but I might stop playing. Maybe I'm being melodramatic. I should probably just wait for the actual rules to get released.

I'd reassure you if I hadn't lived through the shift from 5th to 6th. That was also a massive change, and entirely for the worse (IMO of course). But the way I see it, it'll be hard for them to top that one. Either they'll mess up so badly that the fans will create 90 K, or they'll actually improve things. I consider them making things worse, but not worse enough to drive people away to be the least likely result.

[Bobby Baratheon]

I kinda wish there was a more beer-and-pretzely version of 40k (yes, I know killteam exists) so I could get more friends playing.

[LeSwordfish]

I'd reassure you if I hadn't lived through the shift from 5th to 6th. That was also a massive change, and entirely for the worse (IMO of course). But the way I see it, it'll be hard for them to top that one. Either they'll mess up so badly that the fans will create 90 K, or they'll actually improve things. I consider them making things worse, but not worse enough to drive people away to be the least likely result.

5th to 6th was peanuts to this.

[Cheesegear]

Wouldn't an Assault Marine army benefit more from Ravenguard or Fire Hawks (FW) chapter tactics?

You aren't wrong, per se. But you are missing the point.

So, you play Space Marines. If you have even a remotely competitive bone in your body, you will run the Battle Demi-Company. You can have other things, but it's a universal given that any competitive list will feature a Battle Demi-Company. It's all Objective Secured, full of units you're going to take anyway, and it's a Core choice for the Gladius, so with a little extra effort, you get a set of Combat Doctrines for no reason. You can end up with free Transports, but most people who don't have wallets on fire, can settle for the free Combat Doctrines.

What do Black Templars get out of the Battle Demi-Company? Not much. The most important Formation in the entire book, and Black Templars can't even use it right. Neither can Raven Guard. But we're just about to talk about that...

Raven Guard are really bad at the Battle Demi-Company. You have to force yourself to not take Objective Secured Drop Pods (Ew.), or, if you run The Gladius, you don't even benefit from the free Transports, because you don't want Transports anyway, and a BDC caps out at 1 Assault Squad, or Bike Squad (Bikes are non-Vehicles, and get Shroud for 2+ Jink on Turn 1). So, that's tops, right?
Except then we have a funky Supplement called Angels of Death, which gave Raven Guard the Talon Strike Force, which means all the Drop Pods are coming down on Turn 1 (who needs Shroud when you have ~80% of your army coming in on Turn 1?), and, the (good) Formations that make the Talon, are all Jump Infantry. Raven Guard are for winners. Unfortunately, they're still not quite as good as White Scars or Ultramarines, so screw 'em.

Do you know who's not in Angels of Death? Do you know who still doesn't have a viable way to play? That's right. Black Templars.

Then comes Fall of Cadia, and makes the Castellans of the Imperium, and says that Black Templars also get to keep their Uniques.
Winnar.

Now, you could insert any Chapter you want into the Castellans and would basically be exactly the same - if not slightly better.

But what if your Marines are Black Templars? What if you want to use Chapter Tactics (Black Templars)? What do you do? How do you not fail if you want to play Black Templars?
Or, are you the kind of person who goes up to a Night Lords' player and tells them they could play a World Eaters Warband and stack Raptors (+/- Raptor Talon) instead?

Especially since Templars only get Rage some of the time, but RG get Shred on their HoW all the time.

If you're putting Raven Guard in Castellans, you're playing Raven Guard wrong. You could. But why would you?
There is no other way to play Black Templars, that's what makes it such a big deal. You can put your Black Templars on the table, and actually call them 'Black Templars' instead of some fruity homebrew Chapter or winking at your opponent to let you use another Chapter's rules for a game or two.

Yea I know a lot of BA players who are still annoyed. Personally I don't need assault squads when I'm running death company and sanguinary guard. They are better anyway. Unbound is more fun anyway :P

A new Blood Angels player runs nothing but Death Company, Sanguinary Guard and Terminators (Angel's Blade FTW). Maybe they'll Ally in a 'Red Demi-Company' from Space Marines - but that's not important.

An old Blood Angels player still has 5-6 Assault Squads-on-foot with Razorbacks and doesn't have a clue what to do with them.

If it does completely get sigmarised, then I have nothing to fall back onto but 30k.

> Implying that 30K wont get Sigmarised to follow with GW products - their parent company that they are beholden to.

I kinda wish there was a more beer-and-pretzely version of 40k (yes, I know killteam exists) so I could get more friends playing.

And there's nothing wrong with that. It's just that in order to cater to you, they have to alienate the established fan base.
So, the game you want, comes at the expense of the game that everyone else wants. Which is...How business works. GW is within their rights to choose their target demographic, and shift the game to suit. It seems idiotic (because it is). But if that's what they want to do, I am not actually in a position to stop them. I've made my lengthy forum posts in the past. I'm not going to do it again. Just...It's toy soldiers. I'm an adult. If I don't like it, I'll find something else to throw my money at.

[Bobby Baratheon]

And there's nothing wrong with that. It's just that in order to cater to you, they have to alienate the established fan base.
So, the game you want, comes at the expense of the game that everyone else wants. Which is...How business works. GW is within their rights to choose their target demographic, and shift the game to suit.

Hence "a version." As in, not replacing the main game. IMO, a simplified variant of the rules would be a means to an end to get more people into the big leagues and thus buying more of the expensive models.

[Cheesegear]

Hence "a version." As in, not replacing the main game.

That's where '3 ways to play!' comes in. Except going off The General's Handbook Open and Narrative Play are garbage (Path to Glory is a trainwreck) and Matched Play is the only even slightly fair way to play AoS.

So, yeah.

[Forum Explorer]

5th to 6th was peanuts to this.

Good. The bigger the change the bigger the chance it'll either improve things, or be a catastrophic failure.

Now, where should I keep an eye on for people making a 40K version of 9th age? Serious question, I would want to get in on that.

[Cheesegear]

Good. The bigger the change the bigger the chance it'll either improve things, or be a catastrophic failure.

I feel like GW has Sigmar 1.0, and learned from the catastrophic mistakes. I feel like out of that...Disaster...We got General's Handbook, which fixed some problems, but overall is an extremely positive addition to what makes Age of Sigmar work.
I feel like GW knows that 40K, in it's current form, is bat**** insane. 40K is too big. The number of combos that exist in relation to the number of other combos in the game were clearly not intended or properly thought out; 40K is currently a very large game, that means it's potential for broken-ness is also very large. Hence...Well, how it is.

GW knows - or perhaps, thinks it knows - what went wrong with Sigmar. They also know that something is wrong with 40K.

I don't believe we'll get such a drastic reshuffling because that would be dumb. But 40K is currently dumb. So it'd be silly not to believe that a change is coming. The question is simply how big of a change is coming, knowing that GW knows how much of a disaster Sigmar was on release.

[lord_khaine]

5th to 6th was peanuts to this.

It looks more like 2nd to 3rd than anything else at this point.

[LeSwordfish]

Good. The bigger the change the bigger the chance it'll either improve things, or be a catastrophic failure.

[Theodoric]

I feel like GW has Sigmar 1.0, and learned from the catastrophic mistakes. I feel like out of that...Disaster...We got General's Handbook, which fixed some problems, but overall is an extremely positive addition to what makes Age of Sigmar work.
I feel like GW knows that 40K, in it's current form, is bat**** insane. 40K is too big. The number of combos that exist in relation to the number of other combos in the game were clearly not intended or properly thought out; 40K is currently a very large game, that means it's potential for broken-ness is also very large. Hence...Well, how it is.

GW knows - or perhaps, thinks it knows - what went wrong with Sigmar. They also know that something is wrong with 40K.

I don't believe we'll get such a drastic reshuffling because that would be dumb. But 40K is currently dumb. So it'd be silly not to believe that a change is coming. The question is simply how big of a change is coming, knowing that GW knows how much of a disaster Sigmar was on release.

Well said.

[Ricky S]

A new Blood Angels player runs nothing but Death Company, Sanguinary Guard and Terminators (Angel's Blade FTW). Maybe they'll Ally in a 'Red Demi-Company' from Space Marines - but that's not important.

An old Blood Angels player still has 5-6 Assault Squads-on-foot with Razorbacks and doesn't have a clue what to do with them.

I was that player. I had 5 lasplas razorbacks with a 5 man assault squad with a melta in each. I repurposed the assault Marines into running tactical marines and sold off the razorbacks. I'm all about drop pods now.

[Blackhawk748]

Good. The bigger the change the bigger the chance it'll either improve things, or be a catastrophic failure.

Now, where should I keep an eye on for people making a 40K version of 9th age? Serious question, I would want to get in on that.

My guess would be its gonna start on Dakka, we just need to wait and se how much of a flaming train wreck 8th is gonna be. Who knows? Maybe they will learn something from their competitors?

Spoiler

Show

I made this one special for right now.

[Forum Explorer]

I feel like GW has Sigmar 1.0, and learned from the catastrophic mistakes. I feel like out of that...Disaster...We got General's Handbook, which fixed some problems, but overall is an extremely positive addition to what makes Age of Sigmar work.
I feel like GW knows that 40K, in it's current form, is bat**** insane. 40K is too big. The number of combos that exist in relation to the number of other combos in the game were clearly not intended or properly thought out; 40K is currently a very large game, that means it's potential for broken-ness is also very large. Hence...Well, how it is.

GW knows - or perhaps, thinks it knows - what went wrong with Sigmar. They also know that something is wrong with 40K.

I don't believe we'll get such a drastic reshuffling because that would be dumb. But 40K is currently dumb. So it'd be silly not to believe that a change is coming. The question is simply how big of a change is coming, knowing that GW knows how much of a disaster Sigmar was on release.

Exactly. 7th has some big problems, with allied combos, the psychic phase being retarded, and independent characters being special rule dispensers. A big change is needed. (Sadly, I don't think Eldar will be able to be fixed until they get an entirely new codex. Though nerfing Jinking, Gargantuan Creatures, and changing how vehicles work might go a long way to helping. Oh and the psychic phase).

If 7th edition is the burning house, then I'm in agreement with the dog. Either you put the fire out, or wreck the house entirely. Either is a win for the dog.

[Cheesegear]

Funhaving made me lose today.

Lysander was down to 2 Wounds left, staring down a Guilliman on full Wounds. My Centurions came in. "Should I do it!? ...No, that's dumb. But I really want to do it. But it's dumb...But I really want to do it." I decided to Split Fire my Sergeant off to take out a unit holding an Objective (It's not like it was a bad choice), and the other two Centurions brought Guilliman down to a Wound. Guilliman has one Wound left, and Lysander has two, and Guilliman is currently Concussed from the Grav. I got this. Here comes The Ballad of Lysander & The Trolley Pole of Might.

Lysander runs into Guilliman...And bounces off.

Two turns of combat later (i.e; Four rounds of combat), Lysander finally dies, and Guilliman is still on one Wound. I've held onto Kingslayer for like, three turns at this point stalling my deck because I can't draw any cards because it's Contact Lost and we're both ObSec'ing each other. I lose my Warlord, I fail Kingslayer for D3+1, and I've stalled on two or three Objectives that I could have had instead.

Score was 7-13, to the Ultramarines.

Playing against the Victrix Strike Force is one of the most competitive games I've played in a long time. All non-Vehicles are ObSec. So his whole Demi-Company is ObSec anyway. The 10th Company is also ObSec (Infiltrating/Scouting ObSec is also for winners), and Guilliman himself, is ObSec. Which means it put up a real fight against my Demi-Company & CAD. I think my 'casual' list is not up to the task of dealing with All-ObSec & Guilliman. Might have to step up my game.

[LeSwordfish]

I had a nice casual Scenario game today. We played the "Fall of the Kriegan Gate" scenario from Fall Of Cadia, ignoring some of the scenario restrictions in favor of turning it into Ultramarines vs Night Lords.

• 1500 points, mech-y marines with Sicarius vs Fast And Dangerous Night Lords.
• Sicarius should have been Creed, but the scenario gave him two of Sicarius' special abilities, so we opted to give him Eternal Warrior and an extra Tactical Doctrine instead.
• Playing longways, with a great big wall and gate across the middle of the board. All five objectives are in the imperial end, while the chaos end is nearly bare of cover, save some craters.
• Scenario rules: the game goes on for ten turns, and the winner is the one who holds more objectives at the end.
• The imperials get three free fortifications (two on the wall, one just behind) while any Chaos units return after being wiped out - though they have to come on from Chaos' short end. Chaos must take Urkanthos, a daemon prince, as warlord, and he gets to pick three boons. (+1 save, +1 T, re-roll saves.)
• I throw everything across the board, plus deep striking some raptors into his tanks. He has two full squads of Grav (combi-grav, grav-gun, grav-cannon) and my first priority is to winkle those out of their frhinos before they can kill Urkanthos. Luckily, double-melta and meltabombs do their job, and raptors can just hop straight over the wall.
• My first wave is mostly wiped out, but by turn five i've taken his biggest guns out with a heldrake, and Urkanthos feels safe to drop into hover mode and charge Sicarius.
• Two squads are reduced to just one guy, so i charge those into the breach to force him to kill them so they can res. It works pretty well: one of them - a sargeant with power maul - takes out a vindicator single-handedly.
• He throws his disembarked tactical marines into the gate as my second wave arrives, but both Urkanthos and the Heldrake are running around, and when a full squad of raptors hops the wall instead of charging the breach, he concedes.
• Victory to the Night Lords! The Kriegan Gate falls, as does one of the emperor's mightiest heroes.
• Man, this was fun. I miss scenario-based gameplay. I'm not sure it was balanced, though - board-wide LD10 and Stubborn is decent but ignorable for marines, but The Best Ever for the IG it was meant for. Perhaps we should have made all the imperials fearless, though none ever failed a test.
• (Also my opponent didn't use the fortifications at all well. His Grav died like chumps because it was in AV10 rhinos and then out in the open to get Baleflamer'd - rather than snug in Bastions.)

[Pilum]

My guess would be its gonna start on Dakka, we just need to wait and se how much of a flaming train wreck 8th is gonna be. Who knows? Maybe they will learn something from their competitors?

I would actually argue that they have, to a point. I've not really played any AoS, just looked at the rules at launch and some of the talk since (though a friend's recently mentioned wanting to give it a go), it certainly felt like it slotted in with some of the games like Saga, Dragon/Lion Rampant and various other historical and fantastical rules my club's been scratting about with. The move away from regimental blocks, fixed values for hitting and/or damaging in combat, quick and dirty morale rules... Extremely simplified, true, but the only concept missing that comes up in most of these is really the only thing the two GW Flagships have never had - uncertain unit activation beyond the occasional special instance (eg Stupidity).

Not that it really matters or means much, but I do think that the staff in Nottingham are often wider gamers than they're given credit for - certainly according to guys I know who've worked with and around them (no claims to fame here, just Mail Order Trolls and freelance painters!)

[Wraith]

Not that it really matters or means much, but I do think that the staff in Nottingham are often wider gamers than they're given credit for - certainly according to guys I know who've worked with and around them (no claims to fame here, just Mail Order Trolls and freelance painters!)

Interesting, as similar sources have told me the exact opposite.

Adrian Woods, for example, kept being given Codex: Orks to write because no-one else in the office did, or had ever, played Orks. And he wasn't very good at it, since he was primarily a Warhammer Fantasy player and that's why Orks were - at best - a mediocre book for a span of about 15 years.

Hearsay and rumour, happy to be corrected and all that, but not atypical of similar stories I'd heard.

[Cheesegear]

Adrian Woods, for example, kept being given Codex: Orks to write

2nd Ed. - Jervis Johnson
3rd Ed. - Andy Chambers
4th Ed. - Phil Kelly
7th Ed. - 'Design Team'

There's a six year gap between 4th and 7th. Who is Adrian Woods? Is he responsible for Orks not getting a book for six years?

Hearsay and rumour, happy to be corrected and all that, but not atypical of similar stories I'd heard.

Here's to hoping that 2016 taught GW a lesson.
Here's to hoping that their...Reception...Of LVO and Adepticon in 2017 taught them a lesson.
Here's to hoping that their interest in audience engagement is genuine.
Here's to hoping that they'll actually listen to their fans regarding 8th Ed.

What do people like about Age of Sigmar?
What do people not like about 40K/7?

[Pilum]

Well Wraith, could just be who people came into contact with and individual tastes, but it was only ever in the context of RPG sessions with workmates, or mentions of playing a big Napoleonic game as part of a campaign at the weekend, that sort of thing - you know, like you'd hear any gamer friend talk about when we met up. It was never "and so me and Andy Chambers refought Nijmegen Bridge".

Cheese, to give you answers:
AOS - can't comment on rules so from someone on the outside looking in: I like the idea that a single unit entry tells you everything you need to know to play that unit. If the Warscrolls are in the boxes then even better but that does seem to conflict with the idea of updates and tweaks. From Dakka entries it sounds like any rules abuses outside how the designers envisaged something should work (Summoning?) are being rectified quickly, which is nice. I also like that the new dwarf pirates show that there is a desire to change the Universe's design space to accommodate new imagery and ideas, rather than being restricted by decades of Tolkienesque tradition.

40k - the bloat doesn't help. Having to flip through various areas of a book to define a USR is a pain, especially when it's one of the "just like Rule Z but +1" or "this combines Rule X and Rule Y" types. I like the idea of formations giving a bonus, but I'd much prefer it to be thematic and arguably 'possible' from the rules. To use the Eldar as an example, taking a warhost to automatically max out your Run rolls; nice, fits the army image as fast and elusive and could in theory happen naturally (and with luck like that you buy a lottery ticket!). The Aspect Host giving a flat out +1 combat stat bonus (or even the guardians getting 'free' weapon platforms) - less so. Subtlety; but then I think better use of Pinning and such would be handy, though you KNOW someone out there would have a "you don't play" list up within 24hrs of the book landing.

The constant need to 'one-up' the last army or something being the biggest and bestest and most apocalyptic... gets wearying. Even with a gaming group who's generally happier to kick back and just do something cool for fun, the "and this thing just ... goes boom with no save or reaction possible?" conversation gets tedious. Actually, that comes back to another niggle; iirc Rick Priestley generally justified the armour save as keeping P2 interested in the game while P1 did his thing in the igo-ugo structure. Too many things bypass this idea (and I say this as a former IG player for whom the whole 'armour saves' section of rulebooks was Terra Incognita).

I could go on but I've rambled and probably self-contradicted enough!