>>98278424
double fist double apoc

they call him Medius Homo

Wanna start hoarding HH. I have three options, please help me choose:

- Defenders of Terra: BA, WS, IF + one-offs + a bit of Auxilia and Custodes.

- Attackers of Terra: SoH, WB, WE, IW + one-offs, traitor guard, demons

Both would be a big collection of models from which id proxy different lists, roughed up and thematic of the siege of Terra. Mixed legions in every unit, different characters etc...

I already have a big CSM 40k collection, so I'm leaning more towards the defenders of Terra.

Some secondary options are:

- Alpha Legion (best legion)
- Solar Auxilia (love them)
- Loser Gang (mix of RG, IH, SM much like the above)

File: 3fac7b05369b3cb4c8b20171a(...).jpg (222 KB, 472x700)

222 KB JPG

Which Legion, or Legion-specific units, are the most strongly associated with MkIV power armour?

>>98278496
>Mixed legions in every unit
Are you planning to run them as shattered legions or something?

If you currently have 0 HH armies I don't get why you don't just start with 1 instead of 5 at once.

Want to add some tanks for my Ultramarines and torn on which to go for

>Kratos + 2 Legion Vindicators

OR
>Ally in Solar Auxilia Command Tank + 2 Leman Russ'

File: IMG_20260628_181545.jpg (2.45 MB, 4000x1932)

2.45 MB JPG

I enjoyed assembling these assault marines, hope I'll be able to resume painting them in the evening.

>>98278541
Hard to say. A lot of the traitors had plenty of Mk IV, because Horus was playing favourites before openly rebelling. But certain loyalist legions also had plenty of it, like UM who immediately set up their own supply chain as usual, the fucking logistics freaks

File: file.png (899 KB, 630x822)

899 KB PNG

>>98278541
I'm pretty sure it's thousand sons and by a wide margin

>>98278541
Mostly the traitor legions since Horus rigged the supply lines to mostly favor who would side with him, even if everyone got a sizeable collection at least; HH2's book claims it had a very short-lived window of being the most prevalent armour mark, as well as that MkIV was very popular within the Sons of Horus and Emperor's Children. The Night Lords, World Eaters and the Thousand Sons enjoyed getting stocks of it as well, the latter is associated with it a lot. Ultramarines are perhaps the most prominent loyalist users of MkIV and I can only assume that's followed by Dark Angels.

This also makes me think that I haven't seen nu-MkII painted in SoH colors yet.

File: Iron Warriors.jpg (156 KB, 1243x415)

156 KB JPG

Been working on some more infantry models for my army. What should I get next?
>Typhon
>Fellblade
>2-4 rhinos

>>98278722
What is that infantry on the left ?

>>98278744
Which one?
If squads it's...
20x tacticals
10x assault tacticals

>>98278756
the ones with swords. I assume those are the "assault tacticals" look very nice. I did not know that marines could have unit with chainswords without jump packs.

Man on one hand, I miss the +1 a for two weapons, but on the other hand I actually really like volley fire for certain units like destroyers and terminators. Maybe it's just a choice when you charge/get charged, you can either get +1 A if you have two ccw/pistols, or volleyfiee if you have an assault weapon?

>>98278758
Command squad. Don't need a banner dude anymore in 3.0.

>>98278758
Those are called despoilers. Very common unit in Horus Heresy

>>98278758
Those are called despoilers. And they are indeed pretty much tacticals that exchange their bolter for a chainsword, though 1 in 5 can upgrade to a power weapon.

It's baffling how often new people wander into this thread. I thought HH and posting on 4chin boards were becoming increasingly obscure.

>>98278771
I don't miss it. Led to so many gamey situations like
>if I give my Dawnbreakers melta bombs, which are classified as melee weapons, they gain +1 attack with their special spears which aren't two handed, but they wouldn't get this bonus otherwise because they lack pistols

>>98278771
>Man on one hand, I miss the +1 a for two weapons
I don't. Dual wielding in any setting is dumb.

File: mechanicum.png (1.27 MB, 1080x1427)

1.27 MB PNG

>>98278781
>I thought HH and posting on 4chin boards were becoming increasingly obscure.

There's definitely going to be places where a player may seldom, if not never interact with 30k. And sometimes those same people are pleasantly surprised by the model range, on one interaction I had a few 40k guys got upset that Primaris tanks weren't in the style of those like the Sicaran and Kratos. It's like pic related happening.

>>98278777
they're coming out of the Spartans, which is extremely based

>>98278706
I paint my MKII in Luna Wolves colours.

MKIV and MKVI (and MKV when arrives) are for SoH.

Not sure what to do for MKIII, tempted to give them the grey Visions of Heresy treatment.

>>98278786
Older editions grenade attacks were only one a piece and had to roll a 6. Fixed.

Why are they only updating custodes? Where are my white scar upgrade sprues?

>>98279540
because it's a 40k kit ;^)

File: IMG_7810.jpg (156 KB, 691x1024)

156 KB JPG

The Emperor has his sword at your neck and demands of you answer his question immediately or face execution!

>What is your favorite aspects and least favorite aspects of the Horus Heresy rule set editions of 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0.

>>98279605
I don't actually play this game.

>>98279671
Did I type this post

>>98279599
>>98279540
I don't think they ever made a plastic WS upgrade sprue for 40k, did they? just the bosspoles on the Ravenwing sprue, plus all those Deathwing shoulders, and now the Primaris one

>>98279605
1e
>simplicity of the ruleset and how narrative focused the wider community was
>but the missions were awful and the game itself was very swingy
2e
>reactions helped alleviate alpha strikes
>most armies became cookie cutter and competitive minded fags began to poison the well
3e
>probably most balanced edition
>missions are once again terrible, challenges became tedious and the ruleset divided the community

File: neat.jpg (117 KB, 728x553)

117 KB JPG

>>98279605
I don't know, I've never played, I just collect the pretty dollies

>>98279605
>flavor
>lack of balance
>flavor
>lack of balance
>balance
>lack of flavor

>>98278697
why?

>>98278659
what legion?

been wondering how you guys contend with this. How do you model artificer plate? How about specialist bolters? I wanted to put together some seekers but I didn’t want to just give them boring normal bolters and color the shells different or something. Also I have a few squads that have artificer armor, but they’re just standard legionaries, I wanted to do a little more with em.

>>98280188
For seekers use a bolter with a scope and even better if it has a bigger mag

>>98279605
>1.0
The black books, Zone Mortalis, and Strike Forces.
>2.0
Fixed the issues with 1.0 while having minimal easily fixed issues itself.
>3.0
Nothing, it's shit.

File: 1757821402180307.jpg (186 KB, 545x867)

186 KB JPG

>>98280328
>while having minimal easily fixed issues itself.

>>98280188
>How do you model artificer plate?
I dont really. Characters often have fancier armor than mooks, but its hardly some universal thing and theres no real "tells" besides "its more detailed and fancy" a lot of the time.

>>98279605
gonna rant about a change in 3.0, my opinions on the other editions are pretty lukewarm, but I feel the need to bitch about this.

>3.0
One thing I sort of like is vehicles are less mortal and dont instantly die turn one anymore but even that’s a problem in itself. The game’s designers dont recognize the problem is with anti tank units, not how vehicle damage works. In other games, antitank is expensive, range limited, and slow. Field guns need a turn to set up and they can only fire front arc, they’re slow, but they have long range. Infantry antitank requires dedicated units, they’ve got short range, they’re less powerful and they’re expensive, but they’re a more nimble threat. Tanks are expensive, conspicuous and have to be supported but they’ve got the best of all worlds, they’re mobile, dangerous, and effective.

In Horus Heresy, and this problem extends to warhammer as a whole, antitank units are cheap squads of 5 dudes with infinite range bazookas who can run around and demolish any vehicle in 1 turn, an unkillable mobile mech with an infinite range bazooka, that can permanently lock down a lane on a battlefield against a tank that really can’t hide itself. So tank combat is less about taking chances against one or two High V guns to put a shell into a problematic unit, it’s more if you appear to your enemy you die instantly to 10 lascannons. GW’s “solution” which they opt for time and time again, is to just make tanks HP bloats that can eat 10 lascannons and maybe get a turn off shooting before they go down. HH was almost there when they nerfed the lascannon, but they didn’t rip the problem’s throat out GW cowered back and made the tanks a brick of wounds to chew through, again.

File: Artificer Armour.jpg (979 KB, 1169x1356)

979 KB JPG

>>98280188
>How do you model artificer plate?
I use character models.
>How about specialist bolters?
Bolters with scopes and sternguard ammo belts.

File: IMG_20260629_192517093.jpg (93 KB, 1120x1303)

93 KB JPG

Found this while scrounging for some bits, does anyone know which kit it's from?

>>98280467
Except there still ARE guns that can just rip a tanks dick out and shove it down their throat (vindicator laser destroyers, melta blast guns). Theyre just not infantry grade (or - in the case of infantry with their lascutters and meltas) situational and short range.

These guns are also unwieldy and bad into other targets due to low volume of fire.

>>98280884
Ask in /wip/ too

File: 01-10.jpg (128 KB, 800x800)

128 KB JPG

>>98280884

>>98280897
Heresy’s tank v tank was never really a problem it was whoever gets a penetration first wins, which is pretty much how it is in any wargame and also irl

>>98280938
Hot damn, that was quick!
Thanks a bunch anon.

>>98278424
If only we could get rules for more titan legions. Legio Destructor is a must.

File: 1228.png (1.26 MB, 1375x651)

1.26 MB PNG

>>98280046
The modern Rubric Marine helmet is more or less exclusively MkIV. Older versions, and a good number of Sorcerers, have more variety, but the current box is, I'm pretty sure, strictly MkIV.

>>98281218
A fair point, and MkV for WE, mkVI for EC and mkIII for DG post heresy.

>>98281341
That is how they were designed back in the day, yes.

File: 20260629_215326.jpg (3.62 MB, 4000x3000)

3.62 MB JPG

Anyone whose painted Thousand Sons, what did you use as a base to get the metallic red effect? I used Plate Mail then used Baal Red.
Also is this salvageable or should I strip and restart?

File: 20251221_094701.jpg (104 KB, 591x675)

104 KB JPG

>>98281667
For candy red I did a fulgrite copper base washed agrax and then tamiya clear red over

>>98280467
What is your ideal set of tank rules? Or how would you fix this?

>>98280967
I mever understood why people have problems with penetrating hits. The tank got hit by some of the most powerful anti tank weapon humanity have. The only couple of things that I think are too much are sunder and players spamming lascannons.

>>98281869
The issue isnt "penetrating hits", its that the sort of weapon that was classed as "the most powerful AT weaponry humanity has" were super fucking common (like lascannons, or meltaguns/MM's).

3e has it right, there exist guns that will one hit fuck up anything short of a titan. Theyre just mounted on vehicles made to use them. And infantry weapons are there to chip away at tanks.

How do you run your command squads? Just thunder hammers + shields or is there more to it?

>>98281773
Adjusting from 2.0 rules:
Lascannon is -1 str at >24in for infantry lascannon and dreadnought lascannon, remove sunder. penetration drops off over distance for everything. Buff meltagun str +1. That’s where I’d start. 3.0 took a few steps in the right direction but with the removal of classic vehicle damage it just feels bland and unrewarding imp.

>>98280416
The only people who think otherwise are lying 1.0 pieplatespammers, 1.0 custards, 1.0 TSons, or fucking retards.

People were inventing entirely new game modes with restricted unit selection in a desperate attempt to make 1.0 playable in its dotage, for 2.0 it took three houserules; make dreads a little worse, make lascannonspam a little worse, switch the order of operations in Brutal - sorted. But dimwits and faggots bleated and moaned and pissed their diapies and begged Daddy GW to do it for them and we got the big sloppy turd that is 3.0 instead.

>>98281869
>I spent a lot of money and time on this fancy centrepiece model and the fact you can just delete it immediately even if that's unlikely is BULLSHIT WAAAAAHHH
That's it. That's the only reason.

>>98281869
>The only couple of things that I think are too much are sunder and players spamming lascannons
>the only thing that's too much is the entire premise of heresy's gameplay differences, (bligh turning space marines into aspect warriors and handing out weapons that would be better suited for apocalypse)
Gee I wonder why it's been a problem for so long

>>98282116
>for 2.0 it took three houserules; make dreads a little worse, make lascannonspam a little worse, switch the order of operations in Brutal - sorted
Nope. Not even close.

Short of total systemic redesign dreadnoughts (and other monsters) simply did not function in 2e, the rules favored them too much. As seen with every other monster that was problematic like thanatars or the big demons. Dreadnoughts were just the most common and accessible case. The whole "unit class" was rotten.

"lascannonspam" was itself a symptom of broken vehicle rules which encouraged spam of "good enough" weapons rather than a focus on the real heavy hitters. It, or some variant of it, was always going to emerge. Doubly so with the power of reactions allowing units to fire 3+ times in a turn cycle (fire once on your turn, free intercept, return fire).

>brutal
Would remain a fundamentally broken rule, just in the other direction. You go from "this makes attacks unstoppable" to "this does literally nothing in most cases" because ID is a bad system for heresy (and arguably in general).

>>98282155
And this is also conveniently ignoring that these giant problems (because they were, these issues MURDERED listbuilding in 2e) are just one small fraction of the total issues with the edition. And that even if they were all fixed (which small bandaids will not actually do) the edition would remain significantly fucked on many levels.

"2e was just a couple of house-rules away from perfect!" is unadulterated cope, spewed by people who have never thought about the edition and its problems beyond hearing that dreads, thunder hammers, and lascannons were OP (which they were).

>>98282155
>>98282164
Yeah I don't even reply to retards saying "2.0 only needed three houserules!" any more because they're too mentally disabled to understand anything.

>>98278697
Which of course has always felt fucking weird, as the pariahs of the goddamn legions, they would've been stuck with Mk. II and Mk. III plate. The Burning of Prospero happens before the Heresy proper, and while yes, Mk. IV was in production even as early as the end of the Great Crusade, the fucking Thousand Fuck Ups never should have been first in line to receive it and it boggles my mind that they'd have received more than a couple hundred sets, hardly enough to outfit the entire legion. I suppose it'd be enough for the core command and a portion of those garrisoned on Prospero right before the burning, but any of the fleets that were still offworld and either crusading or otherwise on expedition or lost between translations should all be stuck in the older marks.

The only reason, the ONLY reason I can conceive that they ended up with Mk. IV as a primary depiction was because Jes Goodwin and the team wanted each of the devout Chaos Legions in service of a single Chaos God to each be aligned with a specific set of pre-Mk. VII armor when designing their visual identities and retroactively choosing to use those marks in artwork. And of course, the XVth, hated as they were by everyone in the galaxy, somehow manage to convince their mechanicum allies to make them special snowflake Achean patterns JUST FOR THEM, TOO, FUCK.

Mk. II was considered "phased out" and Horus wanting to give the goodies to his half of the legions. Also, Mk. II before the redesign was a bitch and a half to produce as models.
Death Guard got Mk. III.
Thousand sons get Mk. IV.
World Eaters get Mk. V.
And of course Mk. VI goes to the Emperor's Children, because their prissy little egos wanted the newest, sleekest armor available to look like the unforgivable twinks they are. But at least they're honest about who they are, unlike the Thousand Swindlers.

I say all this as a Thousand Sons player. Fuck it, they're your dudes, just don't fucking use Mk VII, VIII, or X.

>>98282257
TS had their own forges on Prospero where they produced the Achean pattern power armour, based on the MkIV. Doubt they got large amounts of MkIV shipped to them, rather than producing large quantities of their own variants.

>>98282257
it would make sense that the tsons received a token amount of mkIV and then zhak-arhkad developing their own sub-pattern for mass manufacture

File: file.png (144 KB, 511x153)

144 KB PNG

>>98282445
forgot pic

>>98282257
Didnt Horus prop up the Tsons?

>>98282519
No, not until after the SW made sure which side the TS would be on. The Thousand Sons were potentially one of the largest threats to Horus' rebellion, with their esoteric know-how. That is why Horus modified the SW orders to arrest Magnus into eradicating the TS, because it would deal with two legions which would have posed a severe opposition for his cause in one go.

>>98282257
>Also, Mk. II before the redesign was a bitch and a half to produce as models

What do you mean by that?

>>98282534
Onion legs, plastic don't do undercuts like that

>>98282636
In English, please.

>>98282648
I think hes saying the layered shin guards are hard to do in plastic. Doesnt seem like they would be hard to do, but im not a sculptor (or at least, not a great one really, shit sculpting tools and green stuffs a CUNT to work with for me sadly....) so I might be wrong.

>>98282695
Are you talking about the dumb trumpet design FW pullet out of their ass (while also ignoring it on some of their MkII, such as the apothecary) while both old and period GW designs gave MkII and III abutted plates as described in the fluff?

Wanna get some thallax and run them with through a praevian in 2E. Seeing that they gain the legion rules, what would be a good/ cool legion to shove them into? I was thinking either iron warriors or white scars

>>98282746
Praevian only allows castellax or vorax to be taken.

>>98282746
For Thallax you want the forge lord.

>>98282787
>>98282771
Ah true, my slip up. I think I just go straight to praevian cause I used to run daemon engines with my world eaters

>>98282723
Faggot

File: smurt.png (327 KB, 373x336)

327 KB PNG

Anybody else notice that all the journal tactica have the exact same page count? It's a minor detail, but it really soothes my terminal autism.

>>98282257
The bit in the Black Books about Horus favouring giving MkIV to the traitor legions should be ignored. It was a mistake.
It never made any sense. It doesn't even fit the Black Books narrative.
Horus doesn't fall until decades after MKIV has been introduced.
The WB gal vorbak had been using it when they became possesed 40 years before the HH.
The legions had their own direct supply deals with Mechanicum forgeworlds.
Loyalists like the UM and BA didn't need Horus to get it.
Even disliked pariahs like the WE, NL or TS had tons of it before Davin.
Even if we take Ullanor and Horus becoming Warmaster as the starting point, there was no enough time to make a difference.

>>98283647
>gw writers don't even know the lore of their own setting
yeah

File: 12r3rg.jpg (66 KB, 422x591)

66 KB JPG

terror squads with all volkite charger are not recommended in game? i have a plan to make 30 terror squad marines for my first NL army.

>>98283681
Look at this goofy motherfucker. Spirit halloween ass helmet and some lightning painted on his armor and he thinks he’s Vlad Tepes.

>>98283681
They're fine. You just need to be aware of the fact terror squads are a semi-elite unit meant to bully weaker MEQ like tacticals and despoilers. Not actual melee elites that can go toe-to-toe with command squads and the like.

File: 1782645806619649m.jpg (141 KB, 1024x738)

141 KB JPG

I like Orks.
Would you rather see a Great Crusade expansion that includes Eldar and Orks, or The Scouring which includes MkVII power armour?

>>98283777
I choose option three: Great Crusade expansion with all the crazy and scary xenos races we only got some hints and vague descriptions of.
Who am I kidding, there's no world in which GW is competent enough to pull any of that off.

>>98283777
You can play with orks using militia rules
>>98283786
Agreed

>>98283786
That's what I meant, perhaps I should have phrased it as "includes, but not limited to Eldar and Orks"

>>98283777
>I like Orks.
Good for you. Now go and play 40k

>>98283777
Fuck Orks, I want HRUD. Hrud figures would be awesome. Anyone ever made 3d printed ones or anything?

>>98283777
I like Orks as well, anon.
We all know about Ullanor, but did the Eldar play any major part in the lead-up to the Heresy? I know Eldrad tried to warn Fulgrim about it and caused a bit of a tiff.

>>98283882
Not really. The Eldar thought humanity would eradicate itself through civil war, and were more than happy to stay hands off and let it happen. Only Eldrad saw and realised that a new Chaos god might be created in the process, and tried to influence things to stop that from happening.

>>98283777
I would prefer seeing neither.

>>98283681
Why not reccomended? Not meta enough? They are not good point wise? The math says they are not good? Oh god, what has this game become. Sad, really sad.

>>98283919
NTA but for some reason, the internet has decided that in 3.0 you are only allowed to play:
>A fully upgraded melta kratos
>A heavy conversion beamer predator
>Tactical squads in Rhino's with havoc launcher
>Command squad terminators in land raider or spartan, also with havoc launcher
>A praetor
>Centurions
Anything besides that is considered to be bad and literally unplayable, regardless of any factual evidence to the contrary. I don't get it either.

File: 1766342766649520.jpg (75 KB, 736x736)

75 KB JPG

>>98283953
>tfw permanently BRICKED my collection with a volkite predator
g-go on without me /hhg/... *BEEEEEEP*

File: icp.png (161 KB, 480x270)

161 KB PNG

>>98283960
Anon...

File: 1722698017492733.jpg (505 KB, 1080x1080)

505 KB JPG

>>98282116
dreadnoughts and monstrous units are properly given gravity and seriousness in 2.0
up their points costs if you want to moderate them but they should be absolutely fucked to try and throw a tactical squad against or whatever and hey they are, guess what war isn't balanced
lascannons can go without sunder if you want i guess, maybe a bit too much icing on the cake
brutal is literally one of the best rules in the game, as is instant death
reactions are exactly what they need to be in order to turn it all into a game of 'which finger would you like cut off in the course of landing your punch?'
2.0 is literally next-to-perfect
no arguments will be brooked but go ahead if anyone likes

File: 91384501871.png (85 KB, 609x600)

85 KB PNG

>>98283997

My FLGS has two maximus boxes left for preorder, considering pulling the trigger - is the box good value? Don't have any mkiv's yet.

>>98284038
depends if you like the contemptor and sicaran/have any want for them
the dreadnought has a full full kit so you can do double melee or so they've stated
sicarans are dank besides
it's a pretty kino box imo

>>98283777
no, I'd rather skip ahead a few thousand years

not 40k, not the problems of the early or late imperium

File: legion techmarine rhino.jpg (220 KB, 1280x960)

220 KB JPG

The rhino variant I was working on a while back prints.
https://gofile.io/d/V77Txj

>>98284077
rhino w/ servo arm lmao
ballin

File: 99550101461_MkIIITechmarine01.jpg (57 KB, 891x920)

57 KB JPG

>there's no plastic Techmarine kit for Horus Heresy
Grim. Dark, even.

>>98283681
they're meant to stack as many Checks onto the enemy unit as they can to take advantage of their Fear (1) bubble, so you kind of want soup - a flamer, a rotor cannon, enough shooting to force 25% casualties - without so much shooting that you're left with no chainswords/chainaxes/chainglaives to take advantage of your Hatred (Infantry); you might even want bolters with chain bayonets over chargers; remember, as long as there's at least one Status on the enemy unit, you're effectively WS5 S5

if you give terror squads all chargers then they're a charger TSS that costs twice as much; they'll still have Fear and Vanguard and all that, but your melee will be awful without all that extra damage from Shred and Breaching

>>98283686
yeah but now picture ten of them tumbling out of their clown car rhino running over and yelling "bleh!" at you

u now know tru terror

File: based off.jpg (82 KB, 653x408)

82 KB JPG

>>98284080
It's based off an oooold conversion someone did for their SW tank focused army which I knew I had to 30k-fy when I started making an epic scale tank company.

>>98284038
with LGS discount, you basically pay for 20 mkIV tacs, 10 mkIV assaults and a dread, while Sicaran is a "free" bonus
so if you want those kits, go for it

>>98283681
No, they arent.

Terror squad are very expensive and (subsequently) fragile for the cost, to work they REALLY need to leverage what benefits they have and punch hard into the proper targets. 2ppm volkite chargers just dont compare to 5ppm chainglaives. You also want special weapons for statuses (rotor cannon at least).

If you want "volkite squads" then either the TSS or (my prefered) tactical veterans are the better call. Tactical vets with 8 volkites, 1 flamer and 1 rotor cannon are a good bit cheaper than an equivalent terror squad and will both hit harder AND be twice as durable. And theyre line.

>>98283919
Yes, literally all of those dipshit.

>>98283953
Youre confusing "things that are good" and "things that are common".
Csquad terminator deathstars are not "good", theyre simply big and dumb and appeal to timmy sensibilities. Which makes them very common.

>>98284300
>I don't get it either

>>98284305
Anon I understand you were making fun of metaslaves who only take the "conventional wisdom" best units. But my point is that terminator command squad deathstars are not one of those units. The people who say "oh its not (list of units that are commonly understood to be "competetive" in 3e - seekers/tacs in rhinos/kratos/plasma dreads/cbeamer predator/rapiers(?)/etc)" are not going to mention a spartan with 10 terminators inside.

Youre conflating two different things, the timmies who only care about "what is strongest in a whitepaper facemash (terminator command squad with thunder hammers)" and the people whos thoughts on what to take are parroting the things they heard were good.

>>98284300
>Yes, literally all of those dipshit
You mathematician meta chaser are all that is wrong with this game.

>>98284375
no that would be people who mix armour marks and use 40k bits
/s

>>98284389
I'm putting Primaris Sanguinary Guard arms on my Blood Angels just for you, anon.

File: mirror.jpg (39 KB, 736x862)

39 KB JPG

>>98284434

>>98284375
mathematician meta chasers are so easy to win against, because things like skirmish sub-type, synergy between units, or making good use of LOS and positioning can't be easily solved in an equation.

>>98284375
Cute. But the unit is still unfit for that purpose.

You can moralise about it all you want, but Terror Squad are simply not good with that specific loadout and do not do the job you would take them for in that role well, especially compared to alternatives. There is a difference between "suboptimal" - which Terror Squad are in general, even with their best configuration - and "unusable", and dakka terrors are the latter. The failure with them not being good at that - and subsequently not being taken in that role - lies with GW and not with players who decided against a 100-pt handicap per unit.

>>98284522
I always thought about this game as a game that have the most important rule above everything else: THE RULE OF COOL.

That's why terror squad is an awesome unit, whatever weapons you give them. They are the shitty elite squads of a shitty legion that lots of people loves and joke around. They are the bastards that will try to hurt the already weakened unit and probably fail because they are a wonderful shit, not a point wise balanced unit that is perfect for whatever. Ffs once a stupid Rhino ramed my terror squad, the bastards failed morale and ran away. You now what I did with the survivors, I just moved them off the board, filthy bastards hahaha. This epic scene made so much laughs that I will temember it forever. And I think that exactly this kind of scenes are the soul of this game.

Seeing the flavour be torn appart piece by piece edition by edition because of some rules balancing makes me sad and I don't want this for my game. That's why I decided to keep playing 2.0 and will for sure play 1.0 sometime in the future.

Once I played with my NL against Dark Angels. The opponent fielded a sicaran and two predators. I had zero ranged anti tank weapons (my dread have autocannon and fist because it is beautiful) so I did what my legion is best at doing, I hid. And for three turns there was almost no shooting, he tried to chase me, but I was better at running and hiding. The last two turns I pushed to an objective, have a nice close combat and lose the game by one point. It was awesome. If I had balanced list with anti tank weapons that would be just one of many bland game, but this one was to remember. So yeah, rule of cool all the time.

>>98284685
>That's why terror squad is an awesome unit,
Because theyre bad? Miss me with this garbage.
>elite squads
Theyre troops.
>2e
They were bad in 2e too. Worse actually, because the legion trait did nothing for them and so they didnt even have the potential to be good in melee.
>I had zero ranged anti tank weapons
Then you are playing night lords wrong. Especialy in 2e. The legion trait is literally designed for ganking tanks with S+1 laser destroyers and predator squadrons. Thats basically all its good for.

>>98284685
>theyre good because theyre so terrible!
No, that just makes them terrible. Theyre a unit that fails to fulfill the fantasy and role they are supposed to be used for. NL rules in 2e were terribly written, with the sole saving grace being Terror Assault gunlines - which were fun and fluffy enough, but which left significant portions of everything else about the legion out to dry.

>>98284698
>>98284711
Meh, you know nothing John Snows

"cool" is not some external characteristic thrust onto a unit regardless of what it is and what it does. Its an emergent property of how the unit lives up to its fantasy.

>>98284766
You have tried to make your case for terror squad and you have failed. They are bad and badly written, a failure on nearly every level, especially in 2e.

The NL fantasy in 2e is dirty fighting, it is leveraging assymetrical warfare against opponents to compensate for solid legion elites and a pointless trait in melee. Its mass snipers taking out sgts and voxes while forcing pinning checks under night fighting, its rapiers firing out at expensive transports with a +1 to their penetration rolls because each rapier counts for six models. Its vehicle squadrons taking out far more expensive units. Telepathy librarians pinning stubborn deathstars with their psychic power.

Its using every underhanded and mean trick in the book to dismantle the opposing force in a way that never lets them fight back, because your core rules are trash and you shouldnt be giving them the fair fight they want. Terror squad do not fit into that in any way except as a reminder of what not to do, they are bad and lame in 2e.

File: IMG_4676.jpg (328 KB, 1085x1118)

328 KB JPG

>>98284434

/hhg/ is the only place I see someone defend dogshit units being dogshit and act like they have the moral highground in doing so. There's got to be a name for whatever mental illness that is.

>>98284816
It has a name, its called CAAC (Casual At All Costs).

People take the fact that WAAC is bad and that HH is a thankfully less retardedly competetive game than 40k and decide that they need to performatively act out against anyone putting thought into their list or noticing the "gameplay" part of the game they play. Its how you end up with "Im just saying that every unit in your army feels thoughtful and like it has a role tom play" as a negative comment about someone (which - paraphrasing due to imperfect memory - has happened to me).

These same people like to respond to every question about "what to take" or "which is better" with some variant of "whichever is coolest"/"rule of cool!" and insinuating that anyone making any decisions about their list ("I cant take heavy flamers on unit X because I dont have the points, so I wont") are WAAC/not playing in the spirit of the game.

The CAACfag conveniently just so happens to find many entirely meta things "totally cool" and happens to bring them, they never actually practice what they preach

>>98284834
I played competitive 40k for some time and ran away to HH not to be a waacfag that I was only to see waacfags taking over the place I ran to. Fuck

>>98284685
Based anon

>>98284685
>THE RULE OF COOL.
And terror squad are fucking lame as they are. Thats the issue.

There are plenty of units that are - even if not entirely practical - "cool", destroyers being a great example. Terror squad are simply bad.

>>98284846
Case in point: A performative retard crying about how anyone who thinks about the game elements of the tabletop game is waac.

>>98284816
/hhg/ is the only place I see someone argue that breaching 6+ is worthless but artificer tanking was overpowered

>>98284855
Yes, I recently bought original FW destroyers, will do 8 of them. They cost a lot, will probably die in the first turn, but I like their idea so I will have them. Same as Terror squads.

>>98284861
Nah, I see waac as minmaxing every element in the game, not caring about those elements. Math is imo a nice part of waac.

>>98284865
>They cost a lot,
No shit, you bought original FW destroyers.
>will probably die in the first turn
If youre bad at using them, sure.
>Same as terror squad.
No, not like terror squad. Certainly not "like terror squad" as you imply terror squad should be used (expensive do-nothing wastes of space that are there to serve as some sort of punching bag for other units because their point is to be bad).

Destroyers can WORK. They do what they do VERY well, theyre a glass cannon to end glass cannons. And they happen to cost about as much as the terror squad, that hits a fraction as hard as them. They're cool precisely because they live up to their fantasy, they FEEL like a war crime unit, suicidal but devastating. The phosphex bomb and rad grenades alone are enough for that, let alone the sheer volume of dice they can put out.

>>98284874
>Math is imo a nice part of waac.
Once again proving my point. "anyone who thinks about the game elements of the tabletop game - which is what "the maths" is - are waac".

>>98284909
Exactly. Isn't it? If checking math and minmaxing units loadouts and list building isn't waac than what it is?

>>98284834
This behavior is the result of someone being bad at the game and also being someone who gets mad about losing. They have constructed a position where when they lose it's not their fault and they were wronged because their opponent behaved immorally by not building an army list to an imaginary, uncommunicated standard and they are virtuous victims.

>>98284965
>If checking math and minmaxing units loadouts and list building isn't waac
Which it isnt, thats called "actually playing the game".
>what is it
It is literally in the acronym.

>>98284864
But - certainly depending on context - theyre right?

AA tanking halves the damage you take (or 1/6's it vs AP3). This is an enormous increase in durability for the pts cost on top of the obvious "spike potential".

A 1/6 chance to breach on the other hand is not very significant. Its fine* for weapons with very high attacks volume, but it does not make weapons with otherwise poor capabilities into armor into good weapons into armor. Power swords are not good inot 2+ armor.

So I just got these books from a dude offloading his collection on the cheap. If I'm not particularly interested in the overall plot and stuff which books are good reads?

File: received_1202441885331264.jpg (757 KB, 2048x1536)

757 KB JPG

>>98285050
don't know why the image didn't load

>>98285058
Sabbat Worlds was pretty decent. But its also not HH.

File: IMG_6473.jpg (1.43 MB, 1284x1161)

1.43 MB JPG

Volkite calivers or plasma on a DG support squad? I already have meltas and I’m waiting on some buts to make a poisoner squad for chem-flamers.

>>98284795
>because each rapier counts for six models
Why six models?

File: 1774654230038062.png (348 KB, 725x477)

348 KB PNG

>>98285150
Because rapier carriers are bulky. And bulky counts for the NL legion rule. So the carrier counts for 4 guys + 2 gunners for 6. Which means two rapiers count as outnumbering a vehicle. Which means you have S10 laser destroyers, which positively murders whatever tank is in front of you (especially since NL ignore shrouded saves)

>>98285169
Oh, nice.

>>98285230
Its one of the few interesting things you can do with that legion rule.

>>98285169
Ah yes, because nothing says "Sneaky backstabbing NL" like semi-static heavy gun carriages.

>>98285366
Yes, emblaced guns firing out from prepared positions under the cover of darkness as part of a prepared ambush is in keeping with the NL character. Both "in general" and as the rules characterize them.

A convoy is driving through a warzone, suddenly the vox cuts out, replaced with mangled screaming and ear-bleeding static, their sensors are jammed and heavy weapon teams and snipers begin firing from unknown positions out in the darkness, picking apart the enemy before they even know what's going on.

That is what NL are in 2e. The guys who win a melee combat by shooting everyone involved dead before they even get there.
If you want "theatrical melee cartoon villains", head on over to 3.0

>>98285058
horus rising
false gods
galaxy in flames
prospero burns
know no fear
master of mankind

>>98285383
emplaced*

File: 20260630_175520.jpg (2.98 MB, 4032x3024)

2.98 MB JPG

first attempt at a somewhat fancier custodes base

>>98278424
TQ: double quake cannons and whatever on the shoulders
they call him the rumbling

>>98284434
Chad. Based.
But based on what, I wonder.

File: 20260123_132934.jpg (2.49 MB, 4032x3024)

2.49 MB JPG

>>98284434
been there done that

waac is only a problem because rule writers at GW suck and come up with stupid shit like monster rules in 2.0 and retarded list building army rules like taking terminators or tanks as troop slots.

Tyrants are bad. When will they get good?
>Maybe you're just using them wrong
What are Tyrants actually good for?

>>98285493
>Tyrants are bad
Theyre not bad, but theyre difficult to use "well" because of what they are relative to the edition.

3.0 rewards specialists. Tyrants do a lot of everything and not enough of anything for the pts cost.

>what are they actually good fo
Dealing with light vehicles and non WS5+thunderhammer infantry.

>>98285493
Tyrants are good at separating the good players from the WAAC players

>>98285491
Someone who buys Termie troops can contest only so much ground, and their points are pooled on a few unwieldy units that need support to get anywhere.
They are nigh unstoppable, but can very well be outmaneuvered and delayed.

Unironically you'd win because your mobility is superior.

Does anyone know if there's a repo of the old Black/Red Books from 1st and 2nd editions? my local group has pretty much bounced off the newest edition and I'd like to get them to be able to share with the folks.

>>98285502
>light vehicles
Tyrants have difficulty in dealing with even Rhinos, which cost like 1/4 of their own cost. An outright disgrace.

>>98285491
waac is a mindset and will always be a problem, it doesent matter if you have very well balanced games or very poorly balanced games, there will always be those who seek to optimize everything to the fullest.

GW does not write particularly good rules (although 3e is an outlier in just how well balanced it is relative to their other stuff) but in the grand scheme of things their games are actually not THAT unbalanced for the most part.

>>98285514
>Tyrants have difficulty in dealing with even Rhinos
They dont, they literally have lascannons as far as vehicles are concerned. They wont kill vehicles overly well "while moving", but they will absolutely kill predaotrs, rhinos and sicarans with their missiles.

>>98284087
borrow someone’s CSM havoc sprue, guaranteed they didn’t use the servo arms for the missile launcher marines. That’s how I kitbashed my warsmith

>>98284864
artificer tanking is overpowered because you can just allocate the saves you want to the 2+ and put all the breaching on the 3+ marines. artificer tanking is why breaching 6+ was so dogshit in fact

File: IMG_6521.jpg (111 KB, 920x950)

111 KB JPG

What armor mark is this? VII? I have this dude (no arms or harness), but I can’t tell if he’s in post-heresy armor or just a bespoke suit because he’s a techmarine.

>>98285551
>What armor mark is this?
"techmarine"

It looks like what the HH ones and rapier crew have. Use if you want.

>>98285479
That's a hand, not an arm.

>>98285551
It’s artificer armor. Tech marines heavily modify and customize their own battleplate to the point where it’s basically a unique design that hardly resembles its original pattern.

>>98285555
>>98285559
Sweet. Thanks, anons.

>>98285507
On paper or in practice? cause on paper it works, in practice unstoppable bricks of terminators are everywhere and I crash into a wall. Solution is to bring assloads of lascannons but that makes me a “waacfag” so I’m stuck I guess.

>>98285491
>monster rules in 2.0
You mean the dreadnought/automata/armiger/whatever unit types? Because in 2.0 they decided to make turn MCs into a one per faction unit type that's functionally the exact same rules repeated multiple times.

>>98285551
To me it looks mk7 but he appears in one of the backgrounds of one of the black books so he's probably 30k appropriate.

>>98285577
They all share the same issues.

>>98285577
You mean 3.0? You could take dreadnought talons with 3 dreads per slot in 2.0

>>98285585
That's not what I wrote. You know how there were different unit types before? Things in 1.0 like infantry, jump infantry, beasts and monstrous creatures? Well the last one was split into something like 5 different unit types that all did the nearly same thing and had the same problems but were named differently.

>>98285600
Ah my bad, I thought you were talking about the war engine detachment from 3.0.

Yeah most people talk about those units collectively cause they have lots of common issues.

>>98285390
This, but also add first heretic and scars. Burn battle for the abyss.

what was wrong with brutal in 2.0? I never played enough to encounter the issues.

>>98285651
It was too strong.

it was the only way for weapons to deal "multiple damage" short of destroyer, and the way it interacted with saves and instant death made it essentially unstoppable into normal targets that die in one hit. It became the god rule for melee weapons, if you had it (through access to thunder hammers) you were good, if you didnt you were not. The primarchs that had it would basically always beat the primarchs who didnt.

>>98285509
They are in a lot of places, even pretty public ones i.e. pdfcoffee

>>98285658
>roll multiple saves
what the fug. I didn’t even notice that. would making it just 1 save roll fix it?

>>98285686
>would making it just 1 save roll fix it?
It would make the rule meaningless into most targets (because that "its hard to save against") thing is what made it useful for most people. But sure, that would be an improvement.

The issue is that the editions of warhammer HH2e was based on do not handle "granular damage" well, you either die instantly or take one damage from something. Trying to find ways for weapons to do "more than one damage, but not enough damage to be instant death" is difficult to do when you try and do it in a way that matters (because why not just kill things instantly?).

A dreadnought already hits for S9+, this means they already oneshot everything if an attack gets through. Brutal for them is only useful for the fact that it made their attacks essentially ignore saves (pass three or it doesent count). Ditto for thunder hammers, they already instant death marines and terminators.

>>98285705
Here is the real issue at the root of all this. HH was built on a system designed for a great many factions (and which still had its own issues with that). Where profiles were varied and all sorts of different weapons had different niches because different targets existed and were important. A gun might be good at killing terminators but bad at killing Tyranid Warriors (this is what plasma guns were back in the day).

The rules of this warhammer become less functional when you turn the game into eternal marine vs marine mirror matches by design. And as you try and change little things, other things break in significant ways, until you have to end up with major overhauls (like damage, or some other hypothetical system which would do the same thing damage did).

what is the plasma gun even good for? it feels shitty against everything

>>98285742
Generalist anti infantry damage. It's like a cheap mobile autocannon in my experience. I use my TSS as the second wave scoring for my depoilers who help soften up their charge target to take the objective, then move on to secure it and clean up the rest of the tactical squad or whatever that was scoring it then ran away in the next turn while despoilers continue on.

>>98285742
Its actually "mathematically good". its just not flashy.
Its safe, fairly reliable, anti-armor damage good for shooting at heavy infantry (marines and custodes and so on).

Need your opinion boys, should vehicle line of sight be reverted back to arcs of sight? I find it strange that just because you can draw line of sight from a hull means you can shoot a left sponson through a wall even though the weapon has no line of sight. Hull mounted is 45 degrees, some sponsons have a diamond shaped LOS from weapon, etc. it’s seems stupid that a sponson has LOS when a model is right in front but to the right of the hull but can still shoot its sponson at it. So basically LOS from the gun with limitations to arc. Is the move from this better or worse?

>>98285863
No, because that leads to "well this variant of the kit released in XYZ had its sponsons 1" further forwards so its an objectively better kit" and "well your print/recast/conversion is actually modelling for advantage"

Individual arcs of sight and model dependent rules ("measure LoS from the weapon") can work, they can allow for very fun granularity and immersive play. But they also shackle you to specific models because you have just turned the miniature into an element of the rules. Which is not something you want to do for a mass battle system using GW product.

>>98285912
I was afraid of that answer but you speak truth. The land raider is a good example, the old ones were limited to a 100-110 arc from the sponson but the new one can turn sponsons a flat 180. As much as I want to change it, I have to put my ego aside and think about what works best.

>>98285937
With those things its also a case of "oh, I positioned 3 degrees off during the movement phase, can I go back and change it" or just really tedious play patterns, especially when you play games with possible half a dozen vehicles per side. You have to accept some imprecision if you want a 3k game to get done in a reasonable time frame.

Abstracted vehicle lines of sight are fine, even if a bit inelegant or flawed in places (a bit of my track can see so I can see!).

>>98285966
I see what you’re saying, everything has to be measured perfectly and the angles have to be just right. This can be a time suck and I’m sure abstraction can tell the story or moment that’s occurring. My brain just screams “that gun can’t see the model through that wall!”, therefore no shoot. But you’re right, concessions and compromise.

>>98285541
it's the exact same chance

breaching 6+ means artificer tanking doesn't even work

>>98286013
>My brain just screams “that gun can’t see the model through that wall!”, therefore no shoot.
I totally get that, and in a smaller wargame that would be the ideal way to go.
But as with TLOS its just both more time-consuming and very reliant on "precision" in a way that encourages bad actors/bad play.

The best solution is probably to just "not do it" when you end up with a really silly situation ("oh the edge of the track on my fellblade has peeked aroun the corner, so I can shoot through this building". Good sportsmanship.

>>98286038
I dont think you understand what youre talking about.

Yes, breaching 6+ gives you a 1/6 chance to be AP2 and therefore ignore AA, but that attack would never hit the AA. You would simply take it on someone else, and use the AA for wounds that arent Ap2 (and are ideally ap3).

A 1/6 chance to breach also doesent "cancel out" a 2+ save statistically.

>>98286038
Yes but it doesn’t even pierce the artificer guy, it gets thrown onto another model, you still have to just hope he just fails one of the 2+ saves.

>>98286038
I am going to explain AA tanking to you.

It does not mean "all damage goes on the AA first", it means "the damage they choose goes on the AA first", whether thats a sgt or consul it doesent matter.
This creates a MASSIVE durability wall vs certain kinds of weapons which would otherwise safely murder an entire 3+ armor unit. THIS is the problem.

Situational AP2 does nothing to this because you just out that Ap2 on the unit itself, the AA doesent stop it, but nothing short of an invuln or FNP would, its AP2.

Having a lone sgt take 4+ rockets or taking a lot of power weapon hits which would otherwise deal significant damage to the unit changes how units interact in a negative way. Its especially bad with characters, because characters do not generally care about how many wounds they have when facing other characters (all AP2 Instant death anyways in those fights), so its essentially just a giant meatshield for your unit that doesent even have the threat of dying from the shots because you can stop any time.

>>98286042
Yes I agree. All in the name of players having a good time. Gentleman’s agreements and gentleman’s games are always at the top of play concerns!

>>98286042
My next question is are we better served to going back to only models within LOS and range can be removed as casualties?

>>98285661
Thanks anon, i was able to find almost all of em on the WBM too!

>>98286095
That's how we play 3e in my FLGS. let that "I can see one, so I can murder all" BS stay in 40k.

>>98286144
How much longer does it take to figure range and LOS for wound calculations? It’s been a while for me. Has it been positive for you guys?

>>98286013
>My brain just screams “that gun can’t see the model through that wall!”
if only some of my friends acted this way
they're constantly telling each other they can shoot an entire kratos through a wall because there's a tiny window that lets them draw LoS

>>98286170
We mostly just eye ball it, if the further model can see one, and the closest model can see the furthest, then they can all see. Those behind a wall or out of range/LoS can't die and any exceeding wounds are lost. That's how it was in 2.0. Also, precision doesn't let you bypass these rules.

>>98283313
Kid, the way you print books is take one big sheet of paper then fold it/cut so it becomes 8/16 pages depending on book size. So, sometimes people will desperately cut/dilute content to fit in that. Say, you have 65 pages but with these big sheets you can only do 64 or 72, then the publisher will try as hard as possible to cram/drop that 1 page somehow to not end up with 7 empty pages and nearly 10% more expensive material cost...

>>98286095
I thought thats how it was in 2e

>>98286095
What people always forget is that Blasts never were affected by range or LOS when it came to which models could be removed as casualties. In practice, people spammed pie plates, and killed entire unit through a hair thin crack in the wall because true line of sight makes it impossible to entirely hide bigger units and models.

>>98286095
people frequently get shot through walls

>>98286917
NTA but while thats true, "I see one guys shoulderpad so I can kill everyone" does feel pretty bad. Maybe something like "you can kill 3" from the guy you can see" or whatever?

>>98286193
And this is why the 3" LoS block is a good thing. So you dont spend forever trying to figure out if you can squeeze a peek through a bullethole somewhere.

It also helps hide units so you dont worry about the "I can see one guy so they all die" thing.

I have ordered the whirlwind. I just need this jackass to send my ebay bits and I can blaspheme unto Nuggant.

>>98284077
Super cool anon, have you tried printing is a bigger scale?

>>98286970
I’d say the guy that could be seen is the one that gets shot and give the guy 4+ cover save.

>>98286978
I think 6” through any area terrain is fine like in 4th edition 40k. So measure where the terrain starts and if the terrain ends like 3 inches deep then you have 3” beyond that. Assuming the terrain is the same size as the models or smaller. Like tank traps are height one and marines are height one for example. Pretty easy stuff.

>>98287384
Surprising amount of people that reported ordering the humble whirlwind. I get it though, always had a soft spot for that tank.

>>98286970
it's not a 1:1 simulation

particularly in the era of competing with free to play shooters the moment you start saying true los only, someone is going to start asking for wallbang guns and bam

sniper autocannon HSS/cognis signum recons meta