Emperor's Furor Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Which of the loyalist legions do you think will be the most effective in close combat when it comes to the end of the heresy, I know fluff wise there are some significant leaders but as seen with the world eaters it doesn't always translate to the table top (I personally think their rules are to conservative). I ask because I'm having a hard time deciding on a legion, just when I think I have it I realise theres a problem, the latest being, do I really want to just have a shooty army when I already have a pretty shooty 40k army, I want something different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athrawes Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 I'd imagine the Wolves would be the Top contender. However, The Blood Angels are famous for the tenacity of their assaults. Either are probably amongst the greatest close combat Legions. Not simply Loyalist, but in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy1391 Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Imperial fists are pretty assaulty now. They have access to phalanx warders who are power axe wielding breacher marines, they have templar squads who are all wielding power weapons, imperial fist terminators have access to storm shields and prototype assault cannons. And then there is their right of war which gives buffs to shield wielding units (hammer of wrath when charging, or +1 toughness when holding still) so my vote goes to the fists.... But I may be a bit biased... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 I'll second the reconmendation for the VII Legion. They have a Sigismund. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deathspectersgt7 Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 I would think all the Legions have they're Assualt oriented units the story is still open interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yogi Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 No one can know this, but I'll guess and say Wolves as well. They have fans everywhere, there is no escaping them, I suspect they will be well represented with nice rules, at the same time not being one dimensional. If Russ' rules aren't completely smashface awesome, I would be very surprised. If Bligh made wolves mediocre it would please my chaos heart, but we know that won't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b1soul Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Blood Angels - I believe they have a rivalry with the World Eaters going on, some are already manifesting signs of the Red Thirst Space Wolves - bunch of Vikings Imperial Fists - they have Sigismund White Scars - should have plenty of good swordsmen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy1391 Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Let's not forget the awesome phalanx warders and templar brethren that the fists have! And we have super awesome termies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Surrender_Monkey Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 In order of close-combatness: 1. Blood Angels - Toss up between the Angels and Wolves, but I give Sanguinius' men the nod because I feel they're a little more specialized towards pure assault than the Wolves, who are more flexible (I'm thinking of Grey Hunters with bolters and Long Fangs). 2. Space Wolves 3. Raven Guard - Their assaults tend to be very short and very focused, but none the less deadly. 4. White Scars - Similar to the Raven Guard in many respects, but I place them lower because their strategy also relies on short ranged firepower from things like Land Speeders. 5. Imperial Fists - Traditionally thought of as a "bit of everything" legion with a focus on shooting, but once you throw the Templars and Sigismund into the mix they probably have more of an assault bias than the other "bit of everything" legions. 6. Ultramarines - The Ultras are the epitome of the flexible legion, and the lack of specialization means they're low on this list, but not as low as others. 7. Dark Angels - The Dark Angels always felt like a shooty legion to me, and a big part of their assaulty stuff - the Deathwing - is post heresy, but they do have the Ravenwing in the mix. 8. Salamanders - Salamanders are all about close range firepower, and don't seem to be noted as particularly good in close combat. The fact that they prefer to be so close to the enemy does at least lift them above the Iron Hands. 9. Iron Hands - Flesh is weak, so naturally the Iron Hands focus more on vehicle based combat than the other Legions, which leads to a shooting bias. They should not be considered incapable in close combat, as Dreadnoughts can be powerful, but someone has to be bottom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonaides Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 Well, only one legion had a rivalry with the World Eaters in close combat accomplishments... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Rohr Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 All the legions are close combat legions if you'd like them to be. You can have Salamander Assault companies, Raven Guard armored echelons, world eaters heavy support sections, Word Bearer assault terminators, and anything else under the sun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jarl Kjaran Coldheart Posted April 19, 2014 Share Posted April 19, 2014 I agree with M2C,but if forced to pick I'd go with Wolves or White Scars, with the RG. No knock to the IF, as they do have a Sigismund, but the IF never struck me as the CC monsters of the above Legions. WLK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostMalone Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Blood angels, there WE without the control issues Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Hands Fanatic Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Blood angels, there WE without the control issues Blood Angels, without control issues? How novel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheForgottenAngel Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 People forget that the Dark Angels of Caliban were very close combat oriented due to their weaponry. The mindset of them being a shooty army is a result of 40k rulesets. Under that logic the Imperial Fists would be a shooty army aswell during the heresy yet in 30k the opposite is true. Corswain is also a very notable swordsman. I wouldn't be surprised if the 30k Dark Angels highlight the 1st Legions skill in assaults. ;) 40k I feel fell short of representing the larger chapter, the book really is more about the deathwing and ravenwing. Remember that the Dark Angels were the first legion to be founded out of all the legions and could be completely autonomous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostMalone Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Hey we just thirst for that tasty haemoglobin but we still have more self control then those crackwhore sons of angron ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Hey we just thirst for that tasty haemoglobin but we still have more self control then those crackwhore sons of angron ;) I was going to ask some of the Imperial Army units that fought alongside the IX about the truth of this statement, but I can't seem to find any of them around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Rohr Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 The Dark Angels are specifically mentioned in book three as being expert close combat fighters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy1391 Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 I agree with M2C,but if forced to pick I'd go with Wolves or White Scars, with the RG. No knock to the IF, as they do have a Sigismund, but the IF never struck me as the CC monsters of the above Legions. WLK You forget that barring primarchs Sigusmund was THE close combat monster of the legions, and his Templars were also! So I get that as a legion as a whole they are balanced but Sigi definitely is the go to guy when you have to stab something! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Rohr Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Imperial Fists assault units as a whole weren't Swordsmen though as the rules show. Their assaults were massive shield walls that relied on unit cohesion over individual prowess. It surprises me that the Fists fought more like the Roman legions than the Ultras though. I really thought a unit of breachers with power weapons would've been a Ultras special unit. I'm glad it's not, and that is the Fists thing now though and it'll be awesome to model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Father Ferrum Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 Honestly, I'd put the Raven Guard at the bottom of that list instead of the Iron Hands. Even in 30K, the Ravens have been described as a recon-by-fire, quasi-special ops-type force. They prefer the quick kill, sure, but everyone except the Night Lords does too ("Guns are too quick. You can't savor all the little. . . emotions."). The Iron Hands have Terminators with FNP and special "last chancer"-style Breacher Squads (Gorgons and Immortals, respectively), both of which types of units are intended for assault operations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitnam Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 But Immortals to me seem more like a close-range shooty unit, not an assaulty unit. Meant to advance under a hail of bolt or volkite fire. In contrast, the Raven Guard have assault jump packers all with lightning claws Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Athrawes Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 I agree with M2C,but if forced to pick I'd go with Wolves or White Scars, with the RG. No knock to the IF, as they do have a Sigismund, but the IF never struck me as the CC monsters of the above Legions. WLK You forget that barring primarchs Sigusmund was THE close combat monster of the legions, and his Templars were also! So I get that as a legion as a whole they are balanced but Sigi definitely is the go to guy when you have to stab something! True, and I don't think anyone could dispute that Sigismund is a beast in close combat, but when the question is which loyalist legion was the most close combat oriented (and effective at it) I just don't see how the Fists could compare to the Wolves or the Angels. One superlative fighter (Sigismund) with a coterie of followers (Templars) don't make a Legion the go-to CC Legion. In comparison, the Blood Angels and Wolves are famous as a Legion for their assault oriented prowess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshal Rohr Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 But nobody was 'assault oriented' in any legion. Everyone had a pistol, gladius equivalent, and a rifle. It's only because everyone is talking at cross purposes that this is relevant. Half are talking background and half are talking game. For instance Imperial Fists and Space Wolves can both take wrath of angels and run identical armies of identical selections. Nothing is lost and both adhere to the background. If you are talking about which legions were renowned for assaults, all of them were. Imperial Fist Phalanx were just as scary as Iron Hand Shield Walls and Ultramarine Testudos. Imperial Fist Assault Squads were just as nasty as Emperors Children or Sons of Horus. You can't judge a 30K legion like a 40K chapter because chapters are weak shadows of how terrific legions were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeremy1391 Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 I agree with M2C,but if forced to pick I'd go with Wolves or White Scars, with the RG. No knock to the IF, as they do have a Sigismund, but the IF never struck me as the CC monsters of the above Legions. WLK You forget that barring primarchs Sigusmund was THE close combat monster of the legions, and his Templars were also! So I get that as a legion as a whole they are balanced but Sigi definitely is the go to guy when you have to stab something! True, and I don't think anyone could dispute that Sigismund is a beast in close combat, but when the question is which loyalist legion was the most close combat oriented (and effective at it) I just don't see how the Fists could compare to the Wolves or the Angels. One superlative fighter (Sigismund) with a coterie of followers (Templars) don't make a Legion the go-to CC Legion. In comparison, the Blood Angels and Wolves are famous as a Legion for their assault oriented prowess. I'll give you that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.