We're Gonna Get a Book!

[Aothaine]

The guy in the french forum is getting everything right so I would bet the rumor about our +1 damage to vehicles and buildings is true

 

Is it +1 dmg army wide? So bolters do +1 dmg? Because that is pretty damn amazing if that is the case imho.

[casb1965]

The guy in the french forum is getting everything right so I would bet the rumor about our +1 damage to vehicles and buildings is true

 

+1 dmg to vehicles is pretty good but is negated if you play against Iron hands, who shoots at buildings though?

[Aothaine]

 

+1 dmg to vehicles is pretty good but is negated if you play against Iron hands, who shoots at buildings though?

 

Okay... First, how often are you going to be playing against Iron Hands. Second, Shooting at buildings can still be very valuable in the right circumstances. But I agree that it is more likely a better option to shoot at the miniatures inside the building. GW should make it so any missed shots while shooting at a unit in a building hit the building instead. I think that would really fix things in regards to shooting buildings. Also, I'm not to clearing on buildings that become ruins. Do the units in those buildings take casualties like when a transport blows up? If not, they should. Could also open up opportunities for Imperial Knights to charge through buildings instantly turning them into ruins.

[Argonte]

 

 

The guy in the french forum is getting everything right so I would bet the rumor about our +1 damage to vehicles and buildings is true

Is it +1 dmg army wide? So bolters do +1 dmg? Because that is pretty damn amazing if that is the case imho.

Apparently yes, but you have to stay in the first doctrine

[Hellebras]

 

The guy in the french forum is getting everything right so I would bet the rumor about our +1 damage to vehicles and buildings is true

 

Is it +1 dmg army wide? So bolters do +1 dmg? Because that is pretty damn amazing if that is the case imho.

 

From the wording given, it's only on Heavy weapons. So quite a bit more limited. I'm almost glad that I don't really have an incentive to stay in Devastator doctrine.

[casb1965]

 

 

 

+1 dmg to vehicles is pretty good but is negated if you play against Iron hands, who shoots at buildings though?

Okay... First, how often are you going to be playing against Iron Hands. Second, Shooting at buildings can still be very valuable in the right circumstances. But I agree that it is more likely a better option to shoot at the miniatures inside the building. GW should make it so any missed shots while shooting at a unit in a building hit the building instead. I think that would really fix things in regards to shooting buildings. Also, I'm not to clearing on buildings that become ruins. Do the units in those buildings take casualties like when a transport blows up? If not, they should. Could also open up opportunities for Imperial Knights to charge through buildings instantly turning them into ruins.

If you destroy a fortification it "explodes" and on a 1, 2 or 3 a figure dies. Only problem is most fortifications are t8 20w 3+ save so it takes an age to destroy.

[DesSaboteur]

Based on what we have seen form the other supplements I would be surprised if that was correct.

 

The wording is situational and specific and does not compare structurally in the same way the ultramarine and white scars combat doctrine is written. Those Buffs are army wide, and effect every member of the chapter and provide a benefit that can be used against anything while in their combat doctrine.

 

Now compare that to this "rumor" which not only will it only work with members holding heavy weapons but it can only be used against Vehicles and Buildings. 

[Hellebras]

Based on what we have seen form the other supplements I would be surprised if that was correct.

 

The wording is situational and specific and does not compare structurally in the same way the ultramarine and white scars combat doctrine is written. Those Buffs are army wide, and effect every member of the chapter and provide a benefit that can be used against anything while in their combat doctrine.

 

Now compare that to this "rumor" which not only will it only work with members holding heavy weapons but it can only be used against Vehicles and Buildings. 

From GW, something like that wouldn't surprise me at all. Apparently the person who put it out has been really reliable so far. Maybe they misworded it, but I'm not holding my breath. The part where it's limited to buildings and vehicles has some precedent now in the Doctrines chapter buffs, with the Raven Guard one only applying on characters.

[NatBrannigan]

Well it's a little disappointing if true, but I can work with this. Means some of the more Anti-Infantry heavy weapons can do decent Anti-vehicle work as well. Looking at Heavy Bolters being -2 AP and Damage 2. Couple that with exploding 6's and it's ok, just about...

 

Wouldn't mind a little more, maybe a second part to the ability though... please?

[Disruptor_fe404]

Based on what we have seen form the other supplements I would be surprised if that was correct.

 

The wording is situational and specific and does not compare structurally in the same way the ultramarine and white scars combat doctrine is written. Those Buffs are army wide, and effect every member of the chapter and provide a benefit that can be used against anything while in their combat doctrine.

 

Now compare that to this "rumor" which not only will it only work with members holding heavy weapons but it can only be used against Vehicles and Buildings. 

 

I would say that the rumoured IF super-Doctrine is exactly in line with the Raven Guard super-Doctrine revealed today.

[Fenriwolf]

I agree i'd love to have something better (just drop the building part already,it's too specific and it will never work as a consequence)

 

But it's not completly bad.Autocannons,heavy bolters (considering they benefit from all the other bolter bonuses + eventual siegebreaker rules on centurions) and even assault cannons get really good at hitting veichles with +1dmg/-1 AP and the usual complement of rerolls/buffs

 

Eh,might even be time to actually pay for those predator destructors/attack bikes/suppressors...

Edited September 11, 2019 by Fenriwolf

[DesSaboteur]

 

Based on what we have seen form the other supplements I would be surprised if that was correct.

 

The wording is situational and specific and does not compare structurally in the same way the ultramarine and white scars combat doctrine is written. Those Buffs are army wide, and effect every member of the chapter and provide a benefit that can be used against anything while in their combat doctrine.

 

Now compare that to this "rumor" which not only will it only work with members holding heavy weapons but it can only be used against Vehicles and Buildings. 

 

I would say that the rumoured IF super-Doctrine is exactly in line with the Raven Guard super-Doctrine revealed today.

 

 

When making this post I had not known what the super doctrine for the two new supplements was, and was hoping they would back up my theory, unfortunately it helps solidify the rumor. This IF doctrine is very disappointing in comparison to the first two supplements and doesn't even mesh well with our combat tactics. 

[Lemondish]

 

 

 

 

Based on what we have seen form the other supplements I would be surprised if that was correct.

 

The wording is situational and specific and does not compare structurally in the same way the ultramarine and white scars combat doctrine is written. Those Buffs are army wide, and effect every member of the chapter and provide a benefit that can be used against anything while in their combat doctrine.

 

Now compare that to this "rumor" which not only will it only work with members holding heavy weapons but it can only be used against Vehicles and Buildings.

I would say that the rumoured IF super-Doctrine is exactly in line with the Raven Guard super-Doctrine revealed today.

When making this post I had not known what the super doctrine for the two new supplements was, and was hoping they would back up my theory, unfortunately it helps solidify the rumor. This IF doctrine is very disappointing in comparison to the first two supplements and doesn't even mesh well with our combat tactics.

I agree. I'm very disappointed with this.

 

It's possible there's specific Stratagems, warlord traits, or relics that help offset the heavy limitations.

 

And it also means that I might actually be alright giving up the super doctrine bonus, for whatever that might be worth.

[NatBrannigan]

I guess that's a positive but it's really stretching to find the silver lining! I'll have lots of Intercessors and Infiltrators in a list so moving to the Tactical Doctrine will probably be very worthwhile, I just wish I would be doing so for a better reason :(

 

Did think this extra damage would make a Sicaran (which I've wanted forever) really decent Anti-tank but it's main weapons are Assault! Grrr

 

Autocannon Predator?

[jeremy1391]

From what Reece keeps saying about how Fists damage output is going to be crazy it leads me to believe there’s more than +1 D, or that we are gonna have some nasty strats.

[Aothaine]

I feel that speculating is a fun exercise to do. But we really shouldn't have any negative feelings about these speculations. We'll known in the next month or two what our rules are going to be and I'm positive that they are going to be just as awesome as everything else that has been released so far. Keep faith my brothers/sisters. GW is not going to do us wrong.

[Rizara]

yeah i for one am okay with the extra +1 dmg on heavies, if that is the case.  Its better than not having it, and it also means i know where much of my shots will be going first turn while in the devestator doctrine.  Even more so if we go first, you focus all that heavy weapon firepower at vehicles, imparing or destroying much of their mobility and firepower in the process.  After that its about mopping up the infantry.  This to me sort of sounds like the fist way of things.   Removing the threats of enemy firepower and tanks/transports then cleaning up whats left.   I for one can't wait to see who gets pirmaris-sized up in our book, since apparently everyone is getting a new primaris hero.  Personally I would like to see a new Imperial fist character because I never really cared for lysander both model/rules wise and in the fluff.    A primaris pedro or other crimson hero would be cool too, and it would be neat if they also did a primaris templar character.  I feel the reason our book is last is because it has possibly the greatest potention for new characters and models.  Would be awesome if we got a primarch, i would take that over a primaris hero any day.   But only time will tell.  I will say it would be nice if they hurry up and just release the stuff already instead of having it so spread out.  Mostly because I am already investing heavily into sisters come november so it means any Fist purchase might have to wait. 

[Lemondish]

yeah i for one am okay with the extra +1 dmg on heavies, if that is the case. Its better than not having it, and it also means i know where much of my shots will be going first turn while in the devestator doctrine. Even more so if we go first, you focus all that heavy weapon firepower at vehicles, imparing or destroying much of their mobility and firepower in the process. After that its about mopping up the infantry. This to me sort of sounds like the fist way of things. Removing the threats of enemy firepower and tanks/transports then cleaning up whats left. I for one can't wait to see who gets pirmaris-sized up in our book, since apparently everyone is getting a new primaris hero. Personally I would like to see a new Imperial fist character because I never really cared for lysander both model/rules wise and in the fluff. A primaris pedro or other crimson hero would be cool too, and it would be neat if they also did a primaris templar character. I feel the reason our book is last is because it has possibly the greatest potention for new characters and models. Would be awesome if we got a primarch, i would take that over a primaris hero any day. But only time will tell. I will say it would be nice if they hurry up and just release the stuff already instead of having it so spread out. Mostly because I am already investing heavily into sisters come november so it means any Fist purchase might have to wait.

I really just don't like the concept that its value isn't based on what you bring to the match but what your opponent does.

[Rizara]

well it is based on what you bring too, but yes, if you go up against an all infantry list you lose out on the extra damage.  Only time will tell if its true, and it could be only half of what we get. Who knows. 

[jeremy1391]

well it is based on what you bring too, but yes, if you go up against an all infantry list you lose out on the extra damage. Only time will tell if its true, and it could be only half of what we get. Who knows.

You gotta remember we are already one of the best anti infantry chapters with our exploding bolter shots

[Aothaine]

You gotta remember we are already one of the best anti infantry chapters with our exploding bolter shots

 

This is such an important fact to remember. Our exploding bolter shots are already super powerful. Hurricane Bolters are insane with the new Imperial Fist tactics. My soon to be main army based off of Imperial Fists is eagerly awaiting what else we might get on top of this. 

 

Edit: We also get that on top of the bolter drill. Pretty sure no other chapter can use bolters as well as we can.

Edited September 11, 2019 by Aothaine

[Lemondish]

well it is based on what you bring too, but yes, if you go up against an all infantry list you lose out on the extra damage.

It is, because you need to bring heavy weapons to make it work. But against Tau who mostly rely on battlesuits instead of vehicles, or Tyranids that rely on monsters, daemon hordes, GSC, Orks, Tzaangor bombs, etc.

 

And unlike IH or UM, once your targets are gone it isn't doing anything for you, which feels really boring. Things like Cents should benefit with those heavy Bolters, but I wouldn't think waves of stalker bolt rifle Intercessors really fit imperial fists. Oh well, maybe there's something else there to rescue the supplement from this boring trait.

Edited September 11, 2019 by Lemondish

[Happy-inquisitor]

 

well it is based on what you bring too, but yes, if you go up against an all infantry list you lose out on the extra damage.

It is, because you need to bring heavy weapons to make it work. But against Tau who mostly rely on battlesuits instead of vehicles, or Tyranids that rely on monsters, daemon hordes, GSC, Orks, Tzaangor bombs, etc.

 

And unlike IH or UM, once your targets are gone it isn't doing anything for you, which feels really boring. Things like Cents should benefit with those heavy Bolters, but I wouldn't think waves of stalker bolt rifle Intercessors really fit imperial fists. Oh well, maybe there's something else there to rescue the supplement from this boring trait.

 

 

 

Imperial Fists are already pretty tasty against infantry and similar units such as Tau drones. Exploding 6's on bolters are nice and if anyone thinks we will not get bolter-enhancing stuff in the codex supplement then I'd like some of what they are smoking ;)

 

The chapter tactic is near-useless against big tough targets, the majority of which are vehicles. Exploding bolter hits are not powerful or effective against those unless you are running Infiltrators so its highly specific. Ignoring cover is usually worthless against them because they can rarely claim cover. It is against those big tough targets that IF might be needing a little help.

 

It does leave IF with nothing super-special against monsters. Whether that is a fatal weakness only time will tell, I do feel it is far too early to speculate on that based on a single rumour. Only nidzilla is a list archetype that truly relies on the durability of monsters; demon princes hide behind chaff with their Character keyword and Tau battlesuits use drones for durability. Imperial Fists are likely to be amongst the best chapters at removing chaff/drones because bolters are a good weapon for that job.

[Aothaine]

 

Imperial Fists are already pretty tasty against infantry and similar units such as Tau drones. Exploding 6's on bolters are nice and if anyone thinks we will not get bolter-enhancing stuff in the codex supplement then I'd like some of what they are smoking

 

The chapter tactic is near-useless against big tough targets, the majority of which are vehicles. Exploding bolter hits are not powerful or effective against those unless you are running Infiltrators so its highly specific. Ignoring cover is usually worthless against them because they can rarely claim cover. It is against those big tough targets that IF might be needing a little help.

 

It does leave IF with nothing super-special against monsters. Whether that is a fatal weakness only time will tell, I do feel it is far too early to speculate on that based on a single rumour. Only nidzilla is a list archetype that truly relies on the durability of monsters; demon princes hide behind chaff with their Character keyword and Tau battlesuits use drones for durability. Imperial Fists are likely to be amongst the best chapters at removing chaff/drones because bolters are a good weapon for that job.

 

We also have the new troop unit coming that does a mortal wound on a nat 6. So you get a mortal wound and a regular hit as well.

Edited September 12, 2019 by Aothaine

[Slips]

 

 

Imperial Fists are already pretty tasty against infantry and similar units such as Tau drones. Exploding 6's on bolters are nice and if anyone thinks we will not get bolter-enhancing stuff in the codex supplement then I'd like some of what they are smoking

 

The chapter tactic is near-useless against big tough targets, the majority of which are vehicles. Exploding bolter hits are not powerful or effective against those unless you are running Infiltrators so its highly specific. Ignoring cover is usually worthless against them because they can rarely claim cover. It is against those big tough targets that IF might be needing a little help.

 

It does leave IF with nothing super-special against monsters. Whether that is a fatal weakness only time will tell, I do feel it is far too early to speculate on that based on a single rumour. Only nidzilla is a list archetype that truly relies on the durability of monsters; demon princes hide behind chaff with their Character keyword and Tau battlesuits use drones for durability. Imperial Fists are likely to be amongst the best chapters at removing chaff/drones because bolters are a good weapon for that job.

 

We also have the new troop unit coming that does a mortal wound on a nat 6. So you get a mortal wound and a regular hit as well.

 

Do you mean Infiltrators? 

 

In that case, no, they don't cause a mortal wound on a 6 only an automatic wound so it can still be saved against using armor/invulns unlike Mortal Wounds which require an FNP equivalent.

 

Still, Infiltrators, despite their cost, causing 2 Auto-Wounds on a natural 6 using IF CT and their Bolter Special Rule (thanks FAQ) is pretty much worth the price of admission while also giving us much more board control with their area denial and infiltrate. Couple that with the Vox Operator upgrade and theyre also getting re-rolls from across the table if you take Phobos Cpt. and Lts.

 

If the super doctrine affects things like I expect to, then that means a Leviathan Dread with a Grav Flux Bombard is firing off Heavy d3 S9 Ap-5(5+1) D6(5+1; vs vehicles/titanic) from the doctrines T1. Or, the Storm Array which will be Heavy 10 S7 Ap-3 D3. It doesnt affect the Melta Lance as much making it 2D3 S9 Ap-5(4+1) Dd6+1 re-rolling at half range.

 

Basically, you take a Levi, drop him in a pod and erase a few things you dont like.