PDA

View Full Version : Hq units



adreal
25-11-2012, 23:43
Pretty much I'm wondering why we need them. In 5th edition I would have gladly gone without a hq model, and a lot of my funner games were when I would take a archon with blaster and venom blade (ie cheap and nasty) and just throw him around, blasting tanks. I know now in 6th we have the slay the warlord objective, but really, considering the scale of 40k, why would every battle have a archon, or chaos lord, or a farseer?? Sure have the option, but why is it mandatory?? And how many people would go to battle without a hq if it was an option??

Horus Lupercal
25-11-2012, 23:47
Because every army needs a commander??

agurus1
25-11-2012, 23:57
Because every army needs a commander??

then most armies should have a lower on the totem pole option. Like how space wolves have that Wolf Guard Battle Leader option.

Cthell
26-11-2012, 00:12
then most armies should have a lower on the totem pole option. Like how space wolves have that Wolf Guard Battle Leader option.

They actually tried that in 4th ed - chaos lieutenants, lower-rank tau commanders, lower rank SoB commanders, GK brother captains (those are all the ones I can think of off the top of my head).

I'm not entirely sure what killed the idea off...

Angry SisterOfBattle Nerd
26-11-2012, 00:32
And how many people would go to battle without a hq if it was an option??
I would for low-point battle. Using Celestine in them makes no sense, yet wasting 65 points in a stupid useless Canoness with no use or purpose is really a huge pain when every points counts. That can, and will, prevent you from taking units you want to pick because they, contrary to the Canoness, will be fun and enjoyable to play.

Fizzy
26-11-2012, 00:43
Because commanders does not always suck.

My Pre heresy death guard HQ's add special rules and extra punch to my armies.

Like my main HQ: Infiltrate with one squad no matter what, Can give them feel no pain and fearless and he is extra good at close combat.

The other HQ can either make anyone within 6" get an extra BS or make my heavy weapon guys be able to walk and shoot.


So a game of 40K without commanders would really feel dull. It adds a lot to the game. Play other characters? Play other armies? Try online builds.

alextroy
26-11-2012, 00:53
40K is a cinematic, story-based game. As such, it requires a heroic figure to lead the troops into battle. He may be an awesome butt-kicking Chaos Lord, or a lowly IG Senior Officer, but there is always a heroic leader on hand when the battle really matters, i.e. when a game is happening.

Gaargod
26-11-2012, 01:21
Amusingly, I literally just posted a related question in the Fantasy General section - specifically, I asked how much fighty lords should cost. The equivalent applies here - I'm pretty damn sure I'd be happier to take a fighty HQ option if it cost significantly less. And they're a lot better in 40k than fantasy...

TheDungen
26-11-2012, 05:56
well the 3.5 dex replaced sorcerer with lieutenants and made sorcerer an option instead for both lords and lieutenants. I kind of prefered it that way.

Notanoob
26-11-2012, 06:25
I agree with TheDungen. I always thought that was the best way to organize it, especially for Chaos.

jt.glass
26-11-2012, 10:43
then most armies should have a lower on the totem pole option. Like how space wolves have that Wolf Guard Battle Leader option.I dunno about getting rid entirely, but this I could get behind.


glass.

RunepriestRidcully
26-11-2012, 11:21
Because commanders does not always suck.

My Pre heresy death guard HQ's add special rules and extra punch to my armies.

Like my main HQ: Infiltrate with one squad no matter what, Can give them feel no pain and fearless and he is extra good at close combat.

The other HQ can either make anyone within 6" get an extra BS or make my heavy weapon guys be able to walk and shoot.


So a game of 40K without commanders would really feel dull. It adds a lot to the game. Play other characters? Play other armies? Try online builds.
That would be cool if non loyalist space marine/heresy era space marine players had access to HQ's that were fun, as it is, it's just another in a rather long list of advantages they get other everyone else...

budman
26-11-2012, 11:52
HQ's are wonderful Do I think there needs to be cheaper ones for some armies... Heck Yeah... the 1st ed marine Lt. for Example

DaemonprincePaul
26-11-2012, 12:02
I wish we had a option for a lower level hq in chaos other than lord and sorceror. Like his second in command type of thing. While I love my chaos lord I would love a cheaper fighty optio. Maybe not with all the gear the lord can take but a nice cheap hq for say 500 point games. As I find after ive gave my lord a invun and a weapon oif some use (say a power weapon) hes 105 points which means ive just put just over a fifth of my army into one model. Then its the game of trying to get as many marines on the board as i can

Griefbringer
26-11-2012, 12:55
then most armies should have a lower on the totem pole option.

IG players at least can get along with taking just a company command squad, which should feel like a natural choice if you are fielding a sufficient amount of guardsmen (100+) to qualify as a company.

(Armoured company players could of course complain about having their company commander - leading a force of 9 Leman Russ tanks plus various attached forces - being forced to trundle around in a lowly Chimera, instead of being able to command a Russ of his own. But that is another issue.)

Gaargod
26-11-2012, 13:30
(Armoured company players could of course complain about having their company commander - leading a force of 9 Leman Russ tanks plus various attached forces - being forced to trundle around in a lowly Chimera, instead of being able to command a Russ of his own. But that is another issue.)


[Mental image of a Russ with transport capability. Probably about 5. Be such a pain...]

Konovalev
26-11-2012, 15:46
(Armoured company players could of course complain about having their company commander - leading a force of 9 Leman Russ tanks plus various attached forces - being forced to trundle around in a lowly Chimera, instead of being able to command a Russ of his own. But that is another issue.)

At least being relegated to a chimera is realistic... Though taking a Russ and having it count as a chariot for the commander so he can hit things with his sword would be quite fun. Kind of like Yarrick and the Fortress of Arrogance

Bookwrak
26-11-2012, 15:54
They actually tried that in 4th ed - chaos lieutenants, lower-rank tau commanders, lower rank SoB commanders, GK brother captains (those are all the ones I can think of off the top of my head).

I'm not entirely sure what killed the idea off...
As I recall, because almost nobody used them. Go look at what advice was given in the list building forum for the time to see what opinions were whenever they popped up in somebody's proposed list.

Griefbringer
26-11-2012, 15:57
[Mental image of a Russ with transport capability. Probably about 5. Be such a pain...]

I actually once converted five plastic Catachans so as to be standing, sitting or lying down on the back of a Leman Russ, and there was still some room left. Though in the end I decided to convert those Catachans back to normal grunts on round bases instead.

Back in the 3rd edition days there was an armoured company army list in WD (I got the issue lately second-hand), and that Leman Russ command tank as a HQ - essentially a regular Russ, though preferably modelled with an impressive looking commander peaking from the turret hatch (possibly waving a big sword and yelling to the driver to drive closer so he can hit the enemy with his sword). And then there was also the commissar tank possibility - bit like the company HQ tank, but depicted as painted black (probably without an option to summarily execute any of the other tanks, though).

Angry SisterOfBattle Nerd
26-11-2012, 16:00
And then there was also the commissar tank possibility - bit like the company HQ tank, but depicted as painted black (probably without an option to summarily execute any of the other tanks, though).
They did execute the other tanks when the other tanks fled. It just didn't happen a lot ;).

Oots
26-11-2012, 17:09
Cthell mentioned 4tn ed codices - Big Mek basically fills the lesser-commander role. Nob Level stats and pretty cheap, if you don't bother with either of his two signature fancy toys.

(no idea if that's considered competitive tho, even in a low-point army).

Lath-rael
26-11-2012, 17:20
If you want low-point games, like 400 - 500, without characters, you can put a house rule to declare one of your unit champions (nob, sybarite, veteran sergant, aspiring champ, ect) to be your warlord in those games.

And an option to take a single necron lord as warlord or a single tyrannid warrior, since those armies doesn't have things like sergants. But such rules should be used in 500 point max, and should be or fluff purposes only, i think :P

Charistoph
26-11-2012, 19:51
It would be interesting to see in 7th Edition a new FOC setup that had 1 Warlord, 0-2 HQ, 2-6 Troops, etc., and have the HQ units be the 2W Fighters, Chaplains, Techs, etc. that can be used as "Battlelords" for the 500-600 point games, and for Command Squads/Royal Courts/etc for the Warlords.

TheDungen
26-11-2012, 22:21
why wouldnt the people who use a chaos sorcerer use the lieutenant with the sorcerer upgrade, psykers are useful (especially in this ed) and you can only take one chaos lord right (or well just affoard one)?

then remove the dark apostle and the warpsmith and make them possible upgrades for the lord and lieutenant along with sorcerer (and you may only take one of them) giving the word bearers a chance to take a lord level dark apostle and the iron warriors a chance to take a lord level warpsmith (or well giving everyone that chance just that i think they'd be more intrested)

not to mention just being able to get a warlord trait at roughly 45 points (providing the lieutenant is the only hq you take).

I honestly think that character custom ability is something that 40k should learn more from fantasy. they should give us some equillient of the magic item section. in the old days we had a massive wargear section to fill that gap but they removed that two editions ago.

RunepriestRidcully
26-11-2012, 22:34
Well, they gave it back to the loyalists, even with a new codex chaos players just wish we had the options on our HQ's the loyalists have.

MagicHat
26-11-2012, 23:24
I would not be opposed TheDungen's suggestions. Means you could make fluffy stuff like the Blood Ravens Chapter Master/Chief Librarian.
I wouldn't mind the return of the old "Basically a Sergeant", Commander, Force commander either.

Considering C: CSM, it does seem unlikely though. A barebone sorcerer is pretty competent at such low levels.


Well, they gave it back to the loyalists, even with a new codex chaos players just wish we had the options on our HQ's the loyalists have.

I am not sure what you're talking about here... If it is the Wolf Guard Battle leader, then the Chaos Lord is cheaper and better.

RunepriestRidcully
26-11-2012, 23:40
It's the artificer armour, master crafted, digital weapons, ATSKNF, storm sheilds, thunder hammers, Relic blades, auxiliary grenade launcher, the true force organisation changes (not getting what we had before as troops) the bikes and jump packs for Apostles/warpsmiths, conversion beamers, retinues such as honour guard or a command squad, the chapter tactics, wolf tooth necklaces, ect
Not as bad as the difference in contemptor options though, or predators, or biker options, or support tanks, or ...

MagicHat
27-11-2012, 12:13
It's the artificer armour, master crafted, digital weapons, ATSKNF, storm sheilds, thunder hammers, Relic blades, auxiliary grenade launcher,
I really dislike ATSKNF too. But...
CSM lords have 39 options.

SM captains have 26 options, 5 of which are unique to them. No mastercrafted by the way.

BA captains have 22 options, 2 of which are unique to them. No articifier armour, no digital weapons, no mastercrafted, no relic blade, no auxiliary grenade launcher.

SW lords have 38 options, 16 of which are unique to them. No mastercrafted, no digital weapons.

GK GM have 18 options, most of which are unique to them.

BA captain with stormshield/powerfist and bike: 180 points.
MoT lord with Sigil, Disc, Lightningclaw/Powerfist: 175 points. He is also a jetbike and have 2 more A + and option to use lightning claw.


the true force organisation changes (not getting what we had before as troops) the bikes and jump packs for Apostles/warpsmiths, conversion beamers, retinues such as honour guard or a command squad, the chapter tactics, wolf tooth necklaces, ect

I think that the lack of jump pack/bikes is because there are no models for them, which is a very worrying trend IMO where kitbashing is more limited. But please don't pretend like the apostle/warpsmith don't have options that chaplains/techmarines don't.


Not as bad as the difference in contemptor options though, or predators, or biker options, or support tanks, or ...

Yeah... SM bikes have an attack bike. CSM bikes have marks and dual CCW. As a loyalist, I am also enjoying the use of all those deamon engines.

Gonefishing
27-11-2012, 13:20
If I could field an army with no HQ's I would be more than happy to do so - but then I play Tau....

Our special characters are awful - We have:

Aunva (AKA The Space Pope) - Beyond useless, and actually more of a detriment to your army than a help - costs over 200 Pts.

Shadowsun - Essentially a a character set up for cities of death, again rather useless. Her drones stop her joining a unit, and she sucks offensively and defensively.

Farsight - not a bad character, but taking him gimps your whole army list as it limits your choices. Fun if you want to run a farsight and the seven samurai list, but while fun, this is a crap build for your army.

Our other characters:

Ethereal - No - just NO.

Commander - (+1 unit) - basically an upgraded crisis suit with some extra leadership and wounds, has no unique options (as all his wargear can be accessed by upgraded crisis suits) - not worth taking when you can spend his points on more useful stuff.

On top of that the Warlord Traits pretty much suck for Tau - you have to role on the strategy table every time, and even then the options are not great, challenges are pointless - you will lose to most races sargents, and the whole cinematic principles behind a commander do not apply to tau....there not that much cinematic about someone avoiding contact with the enemy and taking potshots.

So yes - full agreement, would be happy not to take a commander.

Konovalev
27-11-2012, 14:30
I wouldn't trade my Shas'O for anything. The rest of the Tau HQ options are garbage though I agree. Ethereal's only unique wargear option is a close combat weapon... really...

TheDungen
28-11-2012, 06:40
yeah but two things:

1. even the entries with the most options cant compare t the old list still wargear sections.

2. i'm not advocating the return of more wargear, i'm advocating that some of the different hq entries are made into options for another. at least for space marines and csm. have two three diffrent paygrades and add some points for the role you wish him to have.
It would be hard to do something similar for xenos though, an autarch is quite different from a farseer and a etheral quite different from a shas'o

the alternative would be having a pay for warlord trait system in the main rulebook like fantasy has its magic item section.

Shamana
28-11-2012, 13:22
I wish we had a option for a lower level hq in chaos other than lord and sorceror. Like his second in command type of thing. While I love my chaos lord I would love a cheaper fighty optio.

Actually, I'd say the CSM codex doesn't have a problem there, because both the sorcerer and the lord start very cheap, as HQs go. Just get them minimum upgrades and say they are the lieutenant of the band :) . Seriously, were you expecting a chaos lord that costs as much as a (single) terminator?