Special Rules; Buildings; Defense Networks; Forge . Vortex Missile Aquilla Strongpoint: Fixes many of the problems of the. You can hide a whole army behind an Aquila Strongpoint. Due to their special rules you also can’t prevent the units inside from shooting by. Official rules for using the Plasma Oblit cannon with a Macro-Aquilla Strongpoint by james_mangas_1.

Author: Mikazilkree Nelar
Country: Libya
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Software
Published (Last): 21 August 2012
Pages: 188
PDF File Size: 18.45 Mb
ePub File Size: 2.58 Mb
ISBN: 581-7-95832-546-6
Downloads: 49104
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Dazuru

The 8th Edition of 40K has strongpolnt us 12 Imperial Fortifications. Knowing all of the above, some people will still be tempted to spend up to pts on a single fortification. Great for thematic gaming, but difficult to justify when points are tight. It comes in two versions; 2 trenches which can fit about 10 infantry models each, and 3 defence emplacements that can fit 1 heavy weapon team base each. Unlike the Aegis, any cover behind it from the point of view of the firer receive cover.

They do not have to be close strlngpoint it, so it could cover a lot of infantry. The Skyshield may be better in 8th Edition in at least one way: Templates have been removed from the strongopint, so packing it full of troops or tanks to gain its save is less likely to backfire.

Important to note they draw line of sight from any point on the model rather than just the obvious firepoints. Upgradeable with Icarus 25 or Quad 30the bunker keeps 10 models safe while 5 can shoot. How useful that is to you depends on how many low-armour models with high powered weapons your army has. The saving grace of the Firestorm Redoubt may be the fact that it can be downgraded to more affordable prices. This is a simple fortification that can be bought alone or in pairs.

In Punisher or Battle Cannon mode, it could basically be thought of as an immobile Leman Russ, so that may be the simplest way to judge it. Wow, points before the bolters. The Macro Cannon is truly impressive, firing two types of incredibly high powered ordnance, but what a price tag. However, the maximum of one infantry squad still applies, and makes the high capacity fairly irrelevant.

This fortification is a titan killer. Heavy D6 shots causing D6 Mortal Wounds per hit means this should be pointed at the biggest baddest thing in the enemy army, and it needs to kill it quickly to help justify its breathtaking cost.

There are times when this would be useful, obviously against high AP firepower, but in my opinion there are several things wrong with the VSG. Apart from the free Icarus, most of the rules are shared with the similar fortresses above. What you are really paying all those points for is the Missile Silo, which has two pretty impressive profiles.

Believe it or not, I have always been a big fan of fortifications. As I recall I won all but one game, so they were clearly not always just a massive points sink. Other opinions are welcome — I am genuinely interested in other views on these impressive models, especially from anyone who is hoping to make them work in Matched Play.

Where is this in the new rules? I thought you had to be wholly within a terrain piece to get a cover save now. Only specific terrain pieces like barricades, the Statue Man and other specific terrain pieces have los cover, and even then there are restrictions like being within 1″ rulez a barricade.


Thanks, I’ve edited it to include strongpoin cover rule from pg While we are on the topic — what do we think hills do? Now being obscured by a terain feature does nothing unless you are on it. Very poor rules writing. There are some additional rules for Stronghold Assault main rule book pagesbut these are just for this type of mission. They include Strongpoont, improve attacker heavy weapons vs fortifications by removing movement penalties, give a standard 15 wounds to bunkers and 30 to fortresses and let multiple units garrison inside each as the Emperor Intended!

40K: The Rise Of Fortifications – Bell of Lost Souls

Those rules don’t apply to the matched play versions of fortresses however, so what you see in the post above is taken from the main rules and army books. Weird that the “twin Icarus Lascannon” on the Fortress of Redemption does 2d6 shots. It’s got the same name excepting “Twin”, “Quad” as all the other Icarus Cannons, it’s not called “Heavy Icarus” or anything. Having a unique name also means they could make it a zero point option, only available on that particular building.

It is odd though, as the standard approach would have been to give it a price say, 40pts and reduce the cost of the FoR by 40pts in compensation. I think most of these would be worth taking if there was a rule that when manned, the BS improved, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. And unlike other units, they can’t benefit from most buffs. It would be difficult to price the weapons appropriately if the could hit on a 4, 3 or 2, let alone some of the other effects used on them in the past by firing models, from guide to Orders to tank hunters to ignore cover to whatever.

You’re adding weapon point cost, when it’s clearly already included since it’s noted as equipped. And you can’t do math. When it says you may take up to 4 heavy bolters, those you pay the points 8 each, which is 32, not So, the cost would be points. Before you throw stones, you night want to check that. You still have to pay for mandatory weapons. Feel free to confirm with GW, just don’t forget to come back and apologize when you find out you are wrong.

You should also check in with your mother. I’m sure she raised you better than this. Dietrich if you were right about how equipped weapons are costed, you’d still be really rude. I’m sorry, had a bad day. Doesn’t excuse my behavior, and I get it. You guys are doing a nice job on the previews and spoilers.

For the point cost, I assumed it had to include the weapon, because these seem way out of line. It’s unusual from what we are used to but makes sense in terms of their changing points in the future. And yeah, it’s fair to have assumed that after you’ve spent many points they’d throw in the weapons, floor mats and cupholders for free.

I love these things, and would so enjoy using them in matched play and still might because I’m not all that brightbut I suspect I’ll have to save them for narrative siege games. I remember playing games with a trio of bunkers down the middle of the table, unmanned at the beginning of the game and it was first-come-first-served on them. There are two things I just keep coming back to when trying to think of an army that might justifiably take one of these: The low ballistic skill, and absence of a rule letting you use an occupant’s instead, and the single infantry unit capacity, which for the big fortifications is so much less than in the past.


No, they actually refer to the “battlements” in the fort section, saying that “many players simply place the embarked models on top of the fortification so they remember that they are there. I used to use the firestorm redoubt and vengeance batteries with battle cannons semi competitively. The vengeance canons went in mech lists as you could deploy them outside your deployment zone and let rip with battlecannons to strategically deny areas or provide doc.

Now they are trash, sadly. I’ve run into vengeance batteries occasionally at tournaments, yeah. They’re tough-ish battle cannons.

The biggest problem I am seeing with fortifications ATM, is the keywords transport, fire points and embarked. Not only do they cost more in this edition than before, with less rules, crappier accuracy, and are technically vulnerable to lasguns now instead of being utterly immune, but you also have to buy their guns AND they nerf your ability to have characters direct your army!

General sitting in his bunker handing out orders over radio? Lieutenant in his Chimera pointing out which enemies to fire at? Far as I’m concerned, fortifications are essentially dead, and I don’t like that what were previously command vehicles don’t allow commander units to… well, command.

Wall of Martyrs – Aquila Strongpoint

Does this mean that only ‘Imperium’ key-worded rlues can use these? My renegades are really gonna hurt without their aegis’ to hide behind…. They have the “unaligned” faction keyword, not “imperial”. Your renegades are good to go.

Wall Of Martyrs: Aquila Strongpoint

Just remember that there’s currently no buffs or auras that affect “unaligned” faction units. I would like to point out that the Gun Emplacement for the Aegis Defence Line is optional, meaning that for 75 points you are essentially paying for a combined 28″ of cover that you can place wherever you fancy. In addition to granting cover to almost 30 infantry ruoes, the fact that the walls are Immovable and cannot be targeted means that you can actually use them to create choke-points or simply obstruct the movement of Combat reliant units.

I’m not sure how consolidation in Combat works with this type of terrain, but from what I can tell, I don’t believe units are able to simply move through the walls of they are connected to each other.

Vote Up 0 Vote Down. June 2, June 3, Vote Up 1 Vote Down.

Vote Aqujla 2 Vote Down. June 9, 9: What about barbed wire, barricades and so on? Are there no upgrade options anymore? June 3, 7: You can just grab the fortification detachment anyways, which has choices in it. June 3, 1: I’m holding out for a rule that allows emplaced weapons to use the BS of embarked models.

June 3, 4: June 3, 3: Now, I still won’t field the thing. But, it’s 72 points less than you think. Vote Up -3 Vote Down.

June 3, 6: