Help me pick my NOVA list!

So I am currently scrambling to finalize my list for the NOVA Narrative Event.  When I registered, I completely missed the part about submitting my list ahead of time.  The draft primer can be found here, but the main highlights are:

2000 points (NOT 1999+1) with full use of Double FOC and Allies
Forgeworld is allowed, but no Superheavies/Gaurgantuan Creatures (could be interesting)
8 Points for completing two Missions each round
8 Points for KPs each round
10 Theme points for modeling/converting to match the narrative
"Infamy" points for completing random objectives (probably my main goal)
Painting Score (not much I can do about that in three weeks with the upcoming move)

Necron Deathstar... the missing piece! (Or not...)

Destroyer Lord... now a team player

I started working on my Necrons in late 5th Edition and never settled on a list that I really like.  A big part of that is I always felt they were missing something, specifically in the anti-tank category.  However, the new vehicle rules makes both Gauss and Tesla much more useful at killing tanks,  which means Surf Lords, Scarabs, and Lanceteks are no longer "required" to kill tanks.  Now almost any unit in the codex can do a decent job of killing tanks, which really increases the number of viable builds.

EDIT:  I incorrectly thought Destroyer Lords were Fearless... which completely breaks my analysis.

More Playtest Thoughts

Hail to our new 2+ Save Overlords!

It's been a crazy week, so I have not had a lot of time to blog.  However, I played my 2K Space Marines against a Dark Angels list on Thursday, and it was a very interesting game.  I am still learning a lot of the nuances of 6th and it really looks like details matter even more now than in 5th.  My opponent took the following list:

Belial with LCs
Librarian (Had the Divination Primaris Power and the Overwatch Power)
Deathwing with Banner, Apothecary, TH/SSs and CMLs
Deathwing with TH/SSs and CMLs
Deathwing with LCs and CML
Tactical Squad with PP, Flamer, and ML
Ravenwing Squad with PF, MGx2, and MM AB
Land Raider Crusader
Veteran Squad with lots of PWs and SS

Tactical versus TH/SS Terminators

From Google (not mine... yet)

In my Second Company blog post, Rau said:

"I kinda get the comparison you're making between Assault and Shooty terminators, but I don't think you worked out the 'true' difference very accurately.

1st off, against vehicles, Thunderhammers offer no advantage over Powerfists. No more autostuns. Vs infantry, you reduce them to I1, but aside from mega-deff characters, you hit them with a thunderhammer, they should be dead. So this rule comes into play maybe 25% of the time. Therefore, for comparative purposes, pretty much the sole difference between Assault and Shooty Termies is having either a Stormbolter, and thus a shooting attack, or a Storm Shied, and thus an invulnerable save.

Quite clearly, on a points vs usability scale, the Storm Shield wins every time, Those 3++ saves being invaluble. However, now power weapons are nerfed, the need for an invunerable save on Terminators has reduced considerably.

For me, the main difference between Assault and Shooty Termies is that Shooty Termies can operate on there own and still be 100% effective. Assault termies need a land raider minimum, and generally they need an IC in there too. If we exclude the IC requirement, just the Raider more than Doubles the cost of the unit. Ok, you're not JUST getting a transport with a raider, but to use your termies effectively, that raider has to throw caution to the wind and get up nice and close, which means melta time.

Those points spent on the raider would get you, well, another unit of Terminators! Plus HQ upgrades for both. Lets not forget 'normal' terminators are still putting out 3 S8 AP2 attacks each on the charge. With an assault cannon, they’re also putting in 12 shots before the assault to boot. If you’re doubling your numbers by loosing the Land Raider, well the numbers just get silly.

I think the changes to Power Weapons and vehicles put Shooty Termies out front in 6th, for me anyway."

My reply was going to be a bit long for a comment (and I was hurting for content), so I figured I would do a full post to reply.  He makes a lot of good points and admittedly, I was pretty torn between Tactical Terminators and TH/SS when I was writing up the list.  However, I decided to stick with my 5th Edition staple for the following reasons:

Updating the Honor Guard for 6th

I am already very happy with my Honor Guard list, so I really only see making minor tweaks to bring them into 6th Edition.  It was already a solid list with a lot of flexibility, so it made the transition pretty well in its current form.  Yes, all the units lost AP2 Force Weapons, but that isn't a deal breaker.  My current list is:

Draigo
Paladins (5) with DH x2, Halberd x2, Pyscannon x2, and Banner
GKSS (5) with Pyscannon and Pysback with SL
GKSS (5) with Pyscannon and Pysback with SL
GKSS (5) with Pyscannon and Pysback with SL
GKSS (5) with Pyscannon and Pysback with SL
Venerable Pysfleman
Pysfleman Dread
Stormraven with TLMM and TLPC and SL
Dread Calgar with Teleporter

The main units that had some changes include:

Second Company in 6th Edition....

Papa Smurf is BACK!

When I started 40K about two three years ago, I chose Ultramarines Second Company as my first army, so it is only fitting that I start with them for 6th Edition.  While my Battleforce Marines are a good starting point, I think I am going to start from scratch to see how I can best take advantage of the new 6th edition rules.  For the first iteration, I am focusing solely on "pure" Space Marines without allies until I get a better handle on how things are going to shake out.  At first I was making this a 1999 list, but decided to put on my big-boy pants and just go to 2K.  I doubt the second FOC is going to really make any armies really OP.  A few older books might get a boost, but I figure a well-built list will be able to handle any shenanigans.  (Warning... this is a long post, so feel free to skip ahead)

HQ(s):

When I build a Space Marine Army, I generally start with the HQ because of the FOC and Chapter Tactics shenanigans.  In my opinion, there are four main HQs that fit my playstyle and are worth considering for the list:

List Building Process/Plan for 6th Edition



These guys are probably making a repeat appearance soon...

Warning:  This is my own personal plan for 6th Edition and may or may not have anything useful for everyone else.

Now that 6th Edition is out, it is time for me to start tweaking my lists.  As I have mentioned before, I am a very middle of the road player.  I really don't focus on or excel at any one aspect of the game.  I spend more time playing than painting and have been making an effort to field fully-painted armies for all of my games.  Because I try to take a balanced approach to 40K, this really affects how I build my lists and design my armies.

I lean more towards the playing/competitive side of 40K, but really don't get the chance to really pursue that too much due to my location.  I haven't been to GTs yet and I really don't even get to go to that many local Tournaments.  That may change after I move this fall, but I doubt it will change how I do approach the game.  Right now, I have no desire to build rock-hard or spammy lists.  I am not bashing anyone who does, because I think that min-maxing is a very valid skill and builds effective lists.  However, those are overkill in the small, local metas I play in, so I have been able to get by with more offbeat lists.  I personally like big, splashy models like LRs/Stormravens and melee beatsticks.  I also like building lists that get their redundancy by mixing slightly different units with overlapping abilitys.  I also get bored painting the same thing again and again.  Different strokes for different folks.  With that in mind, this is how I plan on approaching 6th Edition:

Some things I missed the 1st time around...

I have had a little more time to digest the rules and picked up on a few things I had missed:

1.  Flying Monsterous Creatures are not as bad as I thought.  When I played my first game, my opponent and I overlooked the "Grounding Rule."  That makes a significant difference in their survivability, because ANY hits (not wounds!) causes the FMC to take a 3+ test or be grounded.  Tossing a few low-strength shots at a FMC can knock it out of the air long enough for the real firepower/assault to take it out.

2.  I am still trying to figure out the Stormraven... I think its awesome, then find a new rule that makes me think it's crap, and back and forth.  I initially thought it was a death trap, then realized I could use it as a Fast Skimmer which would avoid the S10 AP1 hits when it crashed.  However, it must start in reserve and cannot disembark anyone if it moves more than 6", so the earliest anyone is getting out of it (barring the special deepstrike) is Turn 3.  Land Raiders have similar issues but at least don't have to start off the board.  I think the LR actually benefits from the new rules because the occupants slingshot ahead, hopefully leaving the LR outside of melta range.

First Game of 6th Edition... 1st Impressions

The new "I-win" Button

I played my first game of 6th Edition this afternoon and I have to say I am really looking forward to the changes.  I took the following army which works out to approximately 1999 points:

Primary Detachment (Space Marines)
Libby with Null Zone/Avenger
Tactical Squad with Flamer/ML and Rhino
Tactical Squad with Flamer/Lascannon and Rhino
3 MM Attack Bikes
2 MM/HF Landspeeders
Stormtalon with Typhoon ML
Autocannon/Lascannon Predator

Allied Detachment (Honorguard Counts As Grey Knights)
Draigo
5 Pallies with Brotherhood Banner and Pyscannon x2
5 GKSS with Pyscannon and Pysback
Pysfleman

Paladins survived!!!!

Just when you thought the Nerfbat got them...

I sat down and had some personal time with the 6th Edition rulebook tonight, and I think it is going to be a good edition.  I am not going to spend a lot of time breaking down the new 6th Edition Rulebook, as there are many other sites that will do a much better job of it, and I need to work through a lot of the nuances such as the new Psyker Powers.  All I have to say is that I am very excited about the update and think it makes a lot of armies a lot more viable.  Some big winners are:

Wanting to Make Pallies Work

So far the GK codex has been a tough nut for me to crack, especially without my trusty Army Builder files.  (The French translation just doesn't cut it.)  I have two main problems that are giving me fits.  The first is how to properly utilize the Inquisition units without turning into a wannabe-IG army.  The other is how to fit in some of what I would consider the cooler models into a non-fail list.  Sometimes I think GW goes out of their way to make the better looking models perform only so-so on the tabletop.  When a new codex comes out, everyone buys the new shiny models because they look so nice, then when the players realize those models have cruddy rules, they have to shell out for the more effective units.  Just compare the effectiveness of units such as the Blood Angels' Stormraven, Libby Dreadnought, Death Company, etc to MSU/Razorback Spam.  Likewise, Coteaz and Crowe spam seem to be relatively point and click, while Paladins, Termies, Stormravens, and (to a lesser extent) Dreadknights seem to be harder to work into a coherent list.  The catalyst for my rant is none other than the Paladin unit.  As much as I want them to be awesome, they have some serious issues in a competitive lists.

1500 GK Starter List Design

While I'm used to normally playing at the 1850 level, games around here seem to be much smaller.  I am going to start the GK army at 1500 and work my way up as time and money permit.  I figure anything below 1500 will be tough for any sort of GK army that doesn't lean hard on inquisition forces.  I'm not against Inquisition in general, but I want to use the GK models I already have which are mostly PAGKs and GKTs.

Having said that, I plan on starting with a pretty vanilla list.  Nothing fancy like Draigo, Mordrak, Coteaz, or shunting for 1st turn assaults.  I think those options are better left for after I have a better feel for the codex and am operating at higher points values.  For now, I want to start with the "must haves" from the GK codex and then support them with mostly GK forces.  Anyone who has been following the internet chatter can probably guess what they are:

1.  Pysfleman Dreads
2.  Vindicare Assassin
3.  Purifiers

Personal List Design Principles

When I first started my SM army, I went with "battleforce" approach, using a variety of units.  Overall, I think that worked out fairly well, as it gave me a good idea of the strengths and weaknesses of the codex and its units before I focused in on one particular build.  That and it gave me a lot of options when it came to building lists for different points levels, events, and whims.  So I am going to stick to that strategy while building the GKs.

Having said that, when it comes to designing lists, I believe in:

1.  Redundancy-If my lists needs to do something, then I'm not leaving it one unit
2.  Duality-I greatly prefer units that can handle tanks or infantry as needed
3.  Saturation-I want to force my opponent to make hard choices about targeting
4.  Dispersion-I don't like too many eggs in one basket
5.  Synergy-I love force multipliers IF they also fullfil the previous criteria

What I do NOT believe in is SPAM.  Once again, this is the product of my Space Marine upbringing where multiple units can serve similar but slightly different roles.  For example, MM Landspeeders vs attack bikes and Riflemen Dreads vs Combi/Dakka Preds.  Personally, I have found that by using both in the same list provides more overall flexiblity to the list while not sacrificing the main purpose of the units.  Further, by mixing the list up slightly, it tends to lead towards a more visually pleasing army (ala White Dwarf picture spreads) and better soft scores.  I'm not denying the effectiveness of spam and do not feel any sort of "moral" superiority for not spamming.  I just feel that in many cases that making minor changes from "optimal" units can actually be beneficial in soft scores and flexibility.  That and I just get bored painting the same thing...