Librarium Online Forums banner
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Hey everyone,

I am considering adding this unit to my army. I play Cadians, but I have a whole bunch of Catachan kicking around from my 3rd ed. IG army. I was thinking of using them as conscripts, either repainted in a criminal-looking way or just as I'd had them before. I have a commissar with a powerfist that I haven't really been using (hasn't been earning his points back sadly) but this seems like an ideal way to use him and use him effectively. My army obviously is very weak in hand to hand, and having a big unit of 20 conscripts plus him in the back is a tempting option. I have a few questions though:

What are some strategies about positioning him now that he is an IC, and an IC that needs to be kept alive basically at all costs?
Is 20 men an acceptable amount of bodies? Should I move this to 30? I am worried about blocking line of sight for large amounts of my army should I get these guys in hand to hand. I am thinking especially of using them against a carnifex one of my opponents always uses. I doubt they'd bring him down, even with the PF armed commissar, but who knows.
Thirdly, I considered taking an Inquisitor Lord in his place, as he is 5 points cheaper and has an extra wound and attack. His equipment would be more expensive but its not that big of a problem I anticipate. Is this just as viable?

What are some of this community's experience with independant commissars and conscripts?

Oh, and the last reason I want to use it: its fluffy as hell!
 

·
Archmagos
Joined
·
904 Posts
Hey everyone,

I am considering adding this unit to my army. I play Cadians, but I have a whole bunch of Catachan kicking around from my 3rd ed. IG army. I was thinking of using them as conscripts, either repainted in a criminal-looking way or just as I'd had them before. I have a commissar with a powerfist that I haven't really been using (hasn't been earning his points back sadly) but this seems like an ideal way to use him and use him effectively. My army obviously is very weak in hand to hand, and having a big unit of 20 conscripts plus him in the back is a tempting option. I have a few questions though:

What are some strategies about positioning him now that he is an IC, and an IC that needs to be kept alive basically at all costs?
If you want him to stay alive longer, put him at the back of the unit.
Is 20 men an acceptable amount of bodies? Should I move this to 30? I am worried about blocking line of sight for large amounts of my army should I get these guys in hand to hand.
40-50 is generally considered the most effective number for Conscripts.
I suppose they could block line of sight, but it really shouldn't be too much of an issue unless you place them in a long line (which isn't a great idea anyways).
I am thinking especially of using them against a carnifex one of my opponents always uses. I doubt they'd bring him down, even with the PF armed commissar, but who knows.
I wouldn't expect them to kill a Carnifex. Conscripts are more of a tar pit unit that keep assault units at bay so that you can continue shooting at other targets longer.
Thirdly, I considered taking an Inquisitor Lord in his place, as he is 5 points cheaper and has an extra wound and attack. His equipment would be more expensive but its not that big of a problem I anticipate. Is this just as viable?
Not particularly.
1) Inquisitor Lords must have a retinue, and in order for him to revert back to being an independent character, everyone in the retinue must be killed off. So, trying to get him to join the Conscripts isn't a very reliable method. Its best to just stick with the Commisar because at least you're guaranteed to be able to attach him to the Conscripts.
2) Tooled up assaulty Lords + Retinue have the potential to get expensive fast, and despite the number of power weapons you can include, don't have very impressive capabilities.
What are some of this community's experience with independant commissars and conscripts?

Oh, and the last reason I want to use it: its fluffy as hell!
Hope this helps :)
Also, Gaunt can be useful sometimes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I mispoke (or mistyped!) when I mean to kill carnifexes - I meant just keep them busy munching on cheap conscripts. I also considered taking Usarkar E. Creed and putting him with them, and since he is useless as a leadership bubble, just attaching Kell to a JO with an HI so I'd have two 9LD rerollable bubbles. Granted, Creed doesn't have a power weapon or anything, but is the idea of having a giant mob of conscripts to even have your Independant Commissar even attacking?
 

·
Member
Joined
·
517 Posts
Conscripts are a PERFECT choice against a Fex. The Carnifexs skill is against armor and vehicles. If you swarm it with low point troops its skills are wasted. Sure it may be killing 16 points of troops a turn, but it's not taking shots at your tanks, which are worth nearly 10 times that amount.

A standard Inquisitor might be given a force weapon, which could kill a Carnifex in one shot, with luck. Its certainly worth a try. Don't underestimate those cheap bodies in large numbers. Also, if you're going to take doctrines, you might want to adorn some of your models with Nid parts and take the xenos hunter doctrine that allows you to hit on 3s in CC. Those Conscripts will be a LOT scarier then.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
86 Posts
Speaking of Conscripts.....I had this Idea i wanted to pass by you guys and see what you reckon....Instead of taking conscripts as a tie up unit, could sentinels do the same kind of job? They are potentially much cheaper and posses some firepower whils getting there too, plus the scouts rule is very neat......Also you don't have to worry bout taking officers for leadership...

Obviously they would be a bad choice against a carnifex but against other smaller infantry units with lower strengths, it can take a bit of luck/time to bring one down which ultimately is what one wants.

I'm not sure, has anyone ever tried such a thing?
 

·
Senior Member
Joined
·
2,399 Posts
Speaking of Conscripts.....I had this Idea i wanted to pass by you guys and see what you reckon....Instead of taking conscripts as a tie up unit, could sentinels do the same kind of job? They are potentially much cheaper and posses some firepower whils getting there too, plus the scouts rule is very neat......Also you don't have to worry bout taking officers for leadership...

Obviously they would be a bad choice against a carnifex but against other smaller infantry units with lower strengths, it can take a bit of luck/time to bring one down which ultimately is what one wants.

I'm not sure, has anyone ever tried such a thing?
Yep, Tau pathfinders and Eldar rangers are my favorite. (and shoot on the way in). I beleive there's a thread about somewhere..
My experience with them is that they can kick a unit about for a few turns, but normally end up dying - even a frag grenade has S4+D6 in melee, so most things can pounce on you.
I wouldn't tool them up - If you are immobile/stunned/shocked/disarmed etc you lose a attack (min 1)- Hardened fighters is not worth it at all as:
Your WS keeps people locked in melee, but your low AV means you keep on getting damage rolls (glancing normally)
Thirdly, I considered taking an Inquisitor Lord in his place, as he is 5 points cheaper and has an extra wound and attack. His equipment would be more expensive but its not that big of a problem I anticipate. Is this just as viable?

Not particularly.
1) Inquisitor Lords must have a retinue, and in order for him to revert back to being an independent character, everyone in the retinue must be killed off. So, trying to get him to join the Conscripts isn't a very reliable method. Its best to just stick with the Commisar because at least you're guaranteed to be able to attach him to the Conscripts.
2) Tooled up assaulty Lords + Retinue have the potential to get expensive fast, and despite the number of power weapons you can include, don't have very impressive capabilities.

Unless you mean the elite choice - without a retinue. In which case it'll work fine - and you can have:
1) A psychic hood - 50% less zoanthrope blasts on your tanks
2) Emperors Tarot (if DH) - +1 on your going first roll? Do you like going first?
What lets him down is the Str & Tgn -
Hammerhands a funny & cheap psychic power for him - you can have a 2xhanded weapon, and still count as 2x CCw's, str6 and on your initiative - It's just not a power weapon. Combine with a combi melta for best effect.
The more expensive twin lightning claws (low Str? re-roll)/ scourging (Assault psy pwr) looks and sounds cool as heck, but admittedly makes the points back.
Also, it's just one model you can really spend some love and attention on - I'd do it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
What are everyone's thoughts on using Ursarkar E. Creed to keep the Conscripts in line? I'd use Kell to augment one of my other officers, allowing my army to have two banners that offer oh-so-valuable rerolls. It is sort of fluffy too - he's going back to his roots and fighting with the whiteshields where he started. Or are there better uses for Creed?
 

·
Member
Joined
·
517 Posts
I think Gaunt would be far better than Creed for keeping them in line. Cheaper and better is a great combo in this case.
Sure Creed has his qualities, but to stand in a meatshield unit...nah.
Creed makes a unit difficult to break. Gaunt makes it impossible. Gaunt has a worse save but if you get him and his unit into CC they ALL get an extra attack. That would be great against multiple targets or something with a large base where your huge squad size can do some good.

Use one of the doctrine points you're saving by taking Gaunt on the Xenos-fighters doctrine and all your conscripts are hitting with their 3 attacks on 3s regardless of opponent weapon skill, for just 5 extra points.

By comparison, a regular Commie equipped with similar stuff would cost you... two doctrine points (conscripts, ind. commie), a conscript each time they fail a test for moral (summary execution), and 69 points. The unit would not be fearless, and would not get the extra +1 attack on a charge. In addition, the Commie would have a lower Strength, Weapon Skill, and Attacks characteristic.... Gaunt is completely worth his points.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
668 Posts
Creed makes a unit difficult to break. Gaunt makes it impossible. Gaunt has a worse save but if you get him and his unit into CC they ALL get an extra attack. That would be great against multiple targets or something with a large base where your huge squad size can do some good.
I don't know if this is totally correct, but I'd assume since Gaunt's special rules state that any Tanith units get an extra attack, you'd have to go with Tanith doctrines and such in order to garner that bonus attack. Gaunt would get the extra attack, and he'd still make the unit fearless, so he's still a better option than Creed. Well, unless you were going with a Cadian army which would be wacky as hell with Gaunt leading a bunch of whiteshields.

Use one of the doctrine points you're saving by taking Gaunt on the Xenos-fighters doctrine and all your conscripts are hitting with their 3 attacks on 3s regardless of opponent weapon skill, for just 5 extra points.
That's not allowed. Conscripts aren't "Guard Infantry" and as such wouldn't be able to benefit from that doctrine.

By comparison, a regular Commie equipped with similar stuff would cost you... two doctrine points (conscripts, ind. commie), a conscript each time they fail a test for moral (summary execution), and 69 points. The unit would not be fearless, and would not get the extra +1 attack on a charge. In addition, the Commie would have a lower Strength, Weapon Skill, and Attacks characteristic.... Gaunt is completely worth his points.
That kind of depends on your interpretation. A unit that loses a model due to summary execution is assumed to pass the leadership test it failed, so in essence, they are made fearless. Plus, there is some debate as to whether or not a Commisar would take command after a summary execution, thus preventing anymore executions after the first. This is still way up in the air as far as I'm concerned.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Well, and the motivation of using Creed is twofold - I'd use him to provide the LD10 to the conscripts, but also it'd allow me to use Jarran Kell with the Cadian 8th banner to be attached to a Junior Officer with an Honorifica - allow me to have two rerollable LD 9 bubbles in my army - a very attractive prospect. I agree that Gaunt is far better for the conscript purpose, but for 50pts I get a powerfist, powersword armed guardsman with high WS and attacks (for a guardsmen) and a banner allowing rerolls, making my HQ units a lot more defensible (or at least more defensible than 5 toughness 3 +5 save models, haha!)
 

·
Set Sail and Conquer!
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
That kind of depends on your interpretation. A unit that loses a model due to summary execution is assumed to pass the leadership test it failed, so in essence, they are made fearless. Plus, there is some debate as to whether or not a Commisar would take command after a summary execution, thus preventing anymore executions after the first. This is still way up in the air as far as I'm concerned.
I won't bite. I want to, but I wont. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Please do, haha. Maybe I should start a thread on the rules forum about this, as I can see how this would become very troublesome. With a liberal interpretation, he could just keep killing conscripts to maintain leadership - certainly in the character of the game and fluff, but very unfair as it'd make a rather tough to break unit.
 

·
Set Sail and Conquer!
Joined
·
1,633 Posts
Please do, haha. Maybe I should start a thread on the rules forum about this, as I can see how this would become very troublesome. With a liberal interpretation, he could just keep killing conscripts to maintain leadership - certainly in the character of the game and fluff, but very unfair as it'd make a rather tough to break unit.
Yeah, you can if you want - the main reason I said I wouldn't bite is that this is an issue that has been around for a while, and there are many threads, each many pages long devoted to it here on LO.

Simply put, some people believe one thing, some believe other things, and no-one seems to be easily swayed! :) So yeah, its probably the oldest long standing argument that I can think of, off hand, on the IG forum.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
517 Posts
Well, about those "Tanith models"... I'm sure they mean the actual Tanith models that were released a while back, but AFAIK you can't get them any more. The thing is, what's to prevent you from using Tanith models to represent conscripts? What's to prevent you from using Cadian models to represent Tanith ones?

Guant is the leader of the Tanith 1st and only. So since I'm using him as an HQ, doesn't that mean my army must be representing some fictional branch of the Tanith 1st and only?

I know, I'm stretching things, but it seems silly to say that nobody gets an extra attack because Gaunt has somehow moonlighting as a Commissar for another regiment, let alone someone's made up regiment from BFE.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
668 Posts
Well, about those "Tanith models"... I'm sure they mean the actual Tanith models that were released a while back, but AFAIK you can't get them any more. The thing is, what's to prevent you from using Tanith models to represent conscripts? What's to prevent you from using Cadian models to represent Tanith ones?
From a WYSIWYG perspective, the fact that none of them have camo cloaks, well, except Cadian Snipers, which would be a ridiculous cost if you bought 50 of them, let alone trying to convert them, and also that they use different doctrines. The Cadian regiments and the Tanith regiment are effectively seperate armies. I guess if you wanted to use rules about different detatchments, then that'd be fine.

Guant is the leader of the Tanith 1st and only. So since I'm using him as an HQ, doesn't that mean my army must be representing some fictional branch of the Tanith 1st and only?
A fictional branch of the Tanith army that uses the same equipment and doctrines as Cadians? Using a huge amount of conscripts from a planet that doesn't exist anymore? I guess if your okay with playing it that way then have fun. I would say that the thread's topic is about a Cadian army, so if you wanted to say that your HQ is Gaunt, you'd be incorrect. Your Command squad would be your HQ, and Gaunt would be like, a super-advisor.

I know, I'm stretching things, but it seems silly to say that nobody gets an extra attack because Gaunt has somehow moonlighting as a Commissar for another regiment, let alone someone's made up regiment from BFE.
I didn't say that nobody would get an extra attack. I said that anyone other than Gaunt and any Tanith models wouldn't get an extra attack.

It also seems silly to say that the commander of an entire regiment, especially one as important to his regiment as Gaunt, would fight "on loan" without anyone from his regiment present. Besides, is it silly to expect your opponent to follow the rules? It'd also be silly to say that conscripts would get the Xeno-Fighters doctrine, since none of them are trained well enough to fight on par with guardsmen, much less survive long enough to develop techniques to kill aliens very well. The guys that do that become guardsmen, and they don't stay conscripts for long.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
517 Posts
It also seems silly to say that the commander of an entire regiment, especially one as important to his regiment as Gaunt, would fight "on loan" without anyone from his regiment present. Besides, is it silly to expect your opponent to follow the rules? It'd also be silly to say that conscripts would get the Xeno-Fighters doctrine, since none of them are trained well enough to fight on par with guardsmen, much less survive long enough to develop techniques to kill aliens very well. The guys that do that become guardsmen, and they don't stay conscripts for long.
Well, even Gaunt has a higher command. And the Codex isn't specific about the rank of the "Senior Officer" you're taking. It could be Van Voytz (sp?) standing there on the field as the HQ and Gaunt (another HQ) who would be leading his own troops.

EDIT: His own troops that are equipped differently than normal for this mission. It has happened before!

I see what you mean about the conscripts. Too bad. A horde of 4 point troops hitting on 3s would be totally sweet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Well, giving the Conscripts xeno-fighters is a definite impossibility, as is counting them as Tanith guardsmen (which I believe would either require the doctrines or the models themselves). But using him as one of your HQ choices isn't a bad idea to have a very big, very fearless mob of conscript. I am thinking if my friend uses another 450pt unit of Assault Marines and Chaplain, all tooled out, I might throw Gaunt and 50 conscripts at them (themselves in total less than 300pts) to hold them off, and frustrate the hell out of him.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
668 Posts
Well, even Gaunt has a higher command. And the Codex isn't specific about the rank of the "Senior Officer" you're taking. It could be Van Voytz (sp?) standing there on the field as the HQ and Gaunt (another HQ) who would be leading his own troops.
If you're using a Tanith army and choosing to use doctrines, you must use Tanith doctrines. Since there are no other regiments besides the Tanith First and Only, I don't think the "It's a previously unknown part of the Tanith First that was somehow looked over!" argument works here. This is why I said if you are using the rules for separate detachments, I'd have no argument there.

EDIT: His own troops that are equipped differently than normal for this mission. It has happened before!
Yes it has happened before. If you're telling me that because they were equipped differently, they are reduced to the statline of a conscript, then I would say that you're stretching pretty dang far for this.

When they had to use Grav-Chutes in Guns of Tanith, inserting by grav-chute didn't all of the sudden turn into a Tanith specialty. I'm sure that with the myriad of experiences available to Guardsmen, there would be times when a army with well-established doctrines and such would face a situation where they wouldn't necessarily follow their standard way of doing things, but their character would remain the same. By the nature of their regiment, it would be a seriously strange situation for the First and Only to be able to accept conscripts into their doctrine.
 

·
Member
Joined
·
517 Posts
If you're using a Tanith army and choosing to use doctrines, you must use Tanith doctrines.
I'd have to disagree. When you're using the Tanith Regiment as the basis for your army, then you have to use their docs. When you're using Tanith models (like the rule states) then you're just using Tanith models, which are just guardsmen really.


By the nature of their regiment, it would be a seriously strange situation for the First and Only to be able to accept conscripts into their doctrine.
What? You mean like they did after the battle of Vervunhive? When half of the regiment was made of conscripts?
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top