Warhammer 40k Forum and Wargaming Forums banner

461 - 480 of 486 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
The Condemnor Boltgun is never going to do anything to Elraad or Farseers since they have ghosthelms (they regenerate warp charge every player turn so have charges to burn in your shooting phase). So you can use them vs Grey Knights, Spirit Seers, warlocks, etc., but when you start removing things that you maybe could have used them against and if the target is in a vehicle or if you just plain miss with the weapon, then it becomes very situational and as others have said a meltagun, 10 points, etc. would have been better.

It does ignore cover saves just by hitting with it, but frankly to be useful it would need to be taken multiple times on different squads which means the price needs to be in the 2-5 points to really even be considered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
But it's a particularly shooty vehicle. You're getting your Av11 tank/5 T3 models within 6" how, exactly?

Midnight
He already answered that:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mokuren View Post
Long story short: it's a friggin' 12" weapon, if I'm close enough to use it against a vehicle, it's because he's either stupid or has nowhere to run, and at that point I don't care about his smoke launchers or the fact the entire game table is area terrain. If I'm close enough to be in melta range, I don't care even if he has 2+ cover.

or since Dominions have Scout and maybe first player turn, maybe they were just in range. 3 scouting dominions (maybe even outflanking) should be able to get in range of something. The 2+ cover thing was in reference to being probably able to assault anyway at that point.

All of this pertaining to the discussion over Twin-linking vs Ignores Cover, granting that you can't assault on the first player turn or coming in from outflank giving more benefit to Ignores Cover, but not everything is always in cover so you don't always get an Ignore Cover benefit but you can always benefit from Twin-linking (barring hitting and wounding with everything, but that is like saying you get no benefit from Ignores Cover when they fail their Cover save).

As far as ranges the rest of the game:
Ignores Cover - 6" tank move + 6" disembark + 6" 2D6 pen = 18" (24" 8+D6 pen) still covers a lot of board.
Twin-linking - Same as above but they get cover save and you can't assault or 6" move + 6" 2D6 pen shooting + ~7" charge = average 13" threat range (8 - 18" possible) for assaulting or 12" shooting 2D6 pen (18" 8+D6 pen) still covers some board, and with 3 units on the board doing it makes it more possible.

Most of the pro-argument for Twin-linking was that it benefited both weapons of choice. The 12" range of the meltagun as a limiting factor of the weapon we are talking about using also limits the benefits of Ignores Cover as compared to Twin-linking due to being able to assault after shooting. You could still assault after shooting with Ignores Cover the occupants of the vehicle (if there were any), so it is not the worst thing either, but generally just destroying the vehicle is about 75% of the goal. You are looking to destroy a dangerous vehicle or expose the squishy passengers.

I guess another major benefit of Ignores Cover is for those Jetbikes and Bikes Turbo-boosting.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Short and good:

The pro argument for Twin-Linking is it always works and always works well no matter what weapon you have on hand.
The pro argument for Ignores Cover is that it's just the tiniest bit better than Twin-Linking when your opponent has a Cover save AND you're using Meltaguns (against vehicles), despite it being worse in all other situations.

... yeah.

I seriously have no idea how this being anything other than a nerf to the unit even merited a discussion, let alone how it remains one. :dunno:
 

·
Rattlehead
Joined
·
6,741 Posts
since Dominions have Scout and maybe first player turn, maybe they were just in range. 3 scouting dominions (maybe even outflanking) should be able to get in range of something. The 2+ cover thing was in reference to being probably able to assault anyway at that point.
If somebody's deploying tanks close to you when he knows you have Scouting Meltas on the first turn, he's doing it wrong.

I guess another major benefit of Ignores Cover is for those Jetbikes and Bikes Turbo-boosting.
Which is HUGE - Eldar, Necrons and Tau, as armies, have universal Jink on their vehicles, and what are the most powerful armies in the meta at the moment?

The pro argument for Ignores Cover is that it's just the tiniest bit better than Twin-Linking when your opponent has a Cover save AND you're using Meltaguns (against vehicles), despite it being worse in all other situations.
Or against MCs, or elite infantry, or even MEQs (4 Melta shots ignoring cover kills 3 Marines, 4 Flamers rerolling wounds and covering three models each kills, well god damn, 3 Marines). So you're worse at killing Orks and Termagants, which die to the small arms you HAVE to take as Troops anyway, you stay the same against MEQs, and you get better at killing MCs and vehicles. That's a buff, and begs the question: what was so god damn amazing about twin-linked Flamers anyway?

Midnight
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
If somebody's deploying tanks close to you when he knows you have Scouting Meltas on the first turn, he's doing it wrong.
Midnight
I thought we were talking about Ignores Cover vs Twin-linking? I don't think either one has a benefit of range.

Now if you are saying people shouldn't take meltaguns, then that is a different discussion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
But that is totally separate from which is better Ignores Cover vs Twin-linking.

They won't always have cover, but you can always improve your shooting with Twin-linking.

Basically it all doesn't really matter. They are what they are. Take them with meltaguns or don't take them. I think we have went through the various plus and minus to each rule. I personally will probably just take meltagun Dominions and then flamer Seraphim.

I wonder when they are going to FAQ the Seraphim Superior taking eviscerators or not. I suspect the ipad version is older, so they probably won't get it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Which is HUGE - Eldar, Necrons and Tau, as armies, have universal Jink on their vehicles, and what are the most powerful armies in the meta at the moment?
Or against MCs, or elite infantry, or even MEQs <SNIP> what was so god damn amazing about twin-linked Flamers anyway?
Eldar and Tau? Not as tough as MEQ. Let's try and keep arguments internally consistent for at least consecutive paragraphs. Meanwhile, for a last time, as noted before

  • Twin-Linked flamers are cheap and excel at flushing troops on objectives out of cover. Additionally, 3 targets under a Template is a conservative estimate.
  • The Twin-Linked ALSO applied for Meltaguns and Bolters, and you weren't married to any single weapon choice if you wanted to take advantage of the AoF.
  • Despite what it sometimes feels like, MEQ and above isn't the only infantry around
  • Horde armies exist, and
  • I'm 80% sure you're just trolling at this point.

I'm done responding to you in this thread. :bye:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,705 Posts
The Condemnor Boltgun is never going to do anything to Elraad or Farseers since they have ghosthelms (they regenerate warp charge every player turn so have charges to burn in your shooting phase). So you can use them vs Grey Knights, Spirit Seers, warlocks, etc., but when you start removing things that you maybe could have used them against and if the target is in a vehicle or if you just plain miss with the weapon, then it becomes very situational and as others have said a meltagun, 10 points, etc. would have been better.

It does ignore cover saves just by hitting with it, but frankly to be useful it would need to be taken multiple times on different squads which means the price needs to be in the 2-5 points to really even be considered.
Don't forget - you cause perils of the warp by hitting with it. You then roll to wound as well because you've just hit someone with a S5 bolter round :wink: So you are potentially causing 2 wounds with the same shot.

Not saying that makes it a better weapon, just pointing out what seems to be overlooked. Unless of course they specifically say you *only* take PotW, and not the wounding hit as well, in which case that *really* sucks...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
Not saying that makes it a better weapon, just pointing out what seems to be overlooked. Unless of course they specifically say you *only* take PotW, and not the wounding hit as well, in which case that *really* sucks...
No, you still get the potential Wound (which is likely easily saved, S5 AP- ). Assuming you can get it through whatever unit he's hiding behind.
 

·
Rattlehead
Joined
·
6,741 Posts
Eldar and Tau? Not as tough as MEQ. Let's try and keep arguments internally consistent for at least consecutive paragraphs.
Erm... you know, you don't have to be tough to be good. Tau and Eldar have really good, tough tanks with Jink for you to ignore, whereas Marines have cheap tanks you're wasting Meltaguns against whereas they have expensive, tough infantry that you can kill as an additional target to vehicles. Ultimately I would take Meltaguns even if it was Twin-Linked, because a Meltagun can kill Tanks as a primary target but is also good at killing Marines, while Flamers can kill infantry as a primary target and, well, infantry as a secondary target.

There's no rule that you must fire Meltaguns at vehicles, whereas there is a rule that you must fire Flamers at infantry (well, okay, there isn't, but you can't damage them, so there is literally no point).

  • Twin-Linked flamers are cheap and excel at flushing troops on objectives out of cover. Additionally, 3 targets under a Template is a conservative estimate.


  • Again, you're assuming that conditions are in your favour. If anyone with brain cells sees a tank full of Flamers 13" away from them, they'll spread out if they can't kill you.

    [*]The Twin-Linked ALSO applied for Meltaguns and Bolters, and you weren't married to any single weapon choice if you wanted to take advantage of the AoF.
    Trueborn can take Shredders and Dark Lances, but they're bad choices, so they don't; they are essentially 'married' to Blasters as a weapon choice, but the unit is still really good. If you take Dominions with Flamers with the 5th edition Codex, and then they get worse and Meltaguns get better in the 6th edition Codex, the unit hasn't been downgraded, it's been sidegraded. It's got worse with one weapon, and better with another, so take the one that got better.

    Meltaguns gained a 50% damage buff (my maths is shaky, but Cover reduced your damage output by 33%; your damage output is now 66%, and 33% divided by 66% and multiplied by 100 is 50%). Flamers lost a 25% damage buff against T4, and a 16% chance against T3. 50% buff is better than a 25% or 16" buff. Therefore, the Act of Faith was buffed.

    [*]Despite what it sometimes feels like, MEQ and above isn't the only infantry around
    [*]Horde armies exist, and
    Boo hoo, your guns that kill tanks and Terminators and Monstrous Creatures and MEQs aren't very efficient when you point them at Hormagaunts.

    At this point you're just arguing that Thragtusk is bad because it dies to Doom Blade. Guess what; if you pointed Twin-Linked Flamers at Land Raiders, twin-linked Flamer units were less than worthless. Horde armies aren't the only army in the game, man.

    Midnight
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,003 Posts
Sisters don't get Inquisitor right? So how does the "By the Seal" chapter trait of the Red Hunters work with them? If an inquisitor is present both grey knight and sisters of battle forces are considered battle brothers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,166 Posts
My guess is that refers to the previous edition, Witch Hunters. They get priests, so I'd say since Red Hunters is a Forge World codex, then with permission of your opponent you could replace inquisitors with Priests. Or accept only ]I[ come with Grey Knights, and the Sisters lose out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,101 Posts
My guess is that refers to the previous edition, Witch Hunters. They get priests, so I'd say since Red Hunters is a Forge World codex, then with permission of your opponent you could replace inquisitors with Priests. Or accept only ]I[ come with Grey Knights, and the Sisters lose out.
Maybe it's foreshadowing. . . .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,166 Posts
Don't count on it, the Chaos Dwarfs have an "official" FW army book, and aren't allowed in GW locations and tournaments.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,520 Posts
It's just another case of GW playing a completely different game than the rest of us. Most likely it was written by someone who hasn't fought Sisters of Battle since pre-WDex writing the rules - back then the Inquisitor with (improved) Psychic Hood were decently popular as they could be brought in through the Allies rule in C:WH despite Allies not being a normal part of the game at the time.

Just laugh about it. It's made even more amusing by the fact that they DID notice the Allies Matrix says "Sisters of Battle" instead of "Witch Hunters". Maybe they'll figure it out when they re-do the FAQ again and have to change it to "Adepta Sororitas".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
211 Posts
Just laugh about it. It's made even more amusing by the fact that they DID notice the Allies Matrix says "Sisters of Battle" instead of "Witch Hunters". Maybe they'll figure it out when they re-do the FAQ again and have to change it to "Adepta Sororitas".
I was about to point that out too. And how Codex: Grey Knights is all in italic and specifies the full official army name while "Sisters of battle" isn't even in italic and there's no mention of it being a codex (which I agree with).

I think FW just has no clue about Sisters' current situation, which is not surprising considering the few kits and models they have available for them have had the exact same amount of update work as the official GW models.

That is, none.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
398 Posts
Meltaguns gained a 50% damage buff (my maths is shaky, but Cover reduced your damage output by 33%; your damage output is now 66%, and 33% divided by 66% and multiplied by 100 is 50%). Flamers lost a 25% damage buff against T4, and a 16% chance against T3. 50% buff is better than a 25% or 16" buff. Therefore, the Act of Faith was buffed.
You forgot 3-4 different things in your calculations that have already been discussed, so that entire statement is meaningless.

As I have already said we work with what it is currently, so whether you view it as buffed or nerfed is irrelevant, compare it to other options for taking in either this codex or an ally.
 

·
Fantasy Rumors
Joined
·
962 Posts
This is quite good read

http://natfka.blogspot.co.uk/2013/10/revealing-future-of-40k-inquisition.html

Enjoy

There is a burning question going on right now in the community, and that is in regards to what happened to Inquisitors alongside the Sister's of Battle. After all they were present in the Witch Hunters codex, but the Ordos Hereticus is currently is in the 5th edition Grey Knight codex.

Then we come to the second question in regards to last week's Forgeworld Space Marine chapter tactics. Most particular the Red Hunters Space Marine chapter being able to ally with Grey Knights or Sister's of Battle if there is an Inquisitor present. Something obviously is unknown or missing at this particular point, since Adepta Sororitas do not have Inquisitors.


Here is an answer.

Of course this brings to a lot of cool speculation on the future, and the possibility of an Inquisition codex. Something I would be dying for, almost quite literally. Yes, its time to start my First Space Marine army, to ally up with my current Grey Knights and Imperial Guard armies. GW, you just roped me into a new army.

Thank you to the reader that sent in this correspondence to the readers here on Faeit 212 (I do not have permission to use his name)

The Question to Forgeworld
I had a question concerning the newly released PDF for "SPACE MARINE CHAPTER TACTICS FOR SIXTH EDITION WARHAMMER 40,000".

For the section that addresses the Red Hunters on the that states the following:
"By this Seal: When using the Allies Matrix, all models in
the Red Hunters detachment count units from Codex: Grey
Knights and Sisters of Battle as Battle Brothers so long as an
Inquisitor is also present in the allied detachment."

Sisters of Battle (now known as Adeptus Sororitas as in the new codex release) no longer have an inquisitor in their codex and haven't since they were part of the Witch Hunters codex. Can you please clarify how a sisters of battle/adeptus sororitas is suppose to be able to take the Red Hunters as allies if they cannot take an inquisitor in their army list?


The Response via Forge World
Thank you for your email. The Chapter Tactics update is fully up to date with the current codex's and is in fact future proofed. All we can say is that it is correct and the Red Hunters Chapter Tactics will make sense at a later date.
 
461 - 480 of 486 Posts
Top