# Web Exculsive Skyhammer Annihilation Force



## HokieHWT (Dec 8, 2013)

http://elite40k.blogspot.fr/2015/06...tm_campaign=Feed:+elite40k+(Elite+40,000)&m=1

Is this just a straight money grab or what?!?


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

HokieHWT said:


> Is this just a straight money grab or what?!?


Forever and always. I'm losing interest in keeping up with all these formations and special rules.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

I don't see how this is a money grab - the 'save no money for a bunch of units' is nothing new _or_ extortionate in itself...

The formation itself is fucking bonkers though. Pick 4 enemy units, force them to take Pinning on 3D6 and prevent them from firing Overwatch whether they pass or no? Yeah, Tau, you just got shut the fuck down.

Also, viable Assault Marines, natch.

EDIT: Holy fuck, those guys are 3rd Company! *GW Ultramarines that aren't blue and gold!*


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

http://elite40k.blogspot.fr/2015/06...tm_campaign=Feed:+elite40k+(Elite+40,000)&m=1


> * Composition*
> 
> The *Skyhammer Annihilation Force* comprises:
> 
> ...


Amazing rules, basically up to 4 squads (10/10 CS) all alpha strike with 2 pods,2DS and can shoot and charge with reroll to wound and hit. Chapter tactics apply. 
How can I acquire this rules without buying another half a company... I just freaking bought 2 assault squads and 2 devastator squads and 2 tactical squads in FLGS .... Thanks GW.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

It's the age of the internet, the rules are free and easily accessibly already.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

MidnightSun said:


> I don't see how this is a money grab


Formations are small collections of models that GW gives swanky rules to in order to boost sales of potentially less competitive units and create a more fluff-oriented aspect to the game as far as I'm concerned. I like them, they're fun, but it can be a lot to keep up with. Here we see friggin' awesome rules for two recently released and expensive kits, which for those that only own part or none of it might be inspiration enough to get the rest. Lets call it more of a sales pitch than a money grab to avoid negative connotations maybe.

I don't mean to complain about it, but it is what it is. You and I, we live in the age of information where a little sheet of paper is easy to find and replicate with little to no fucks given. For a lot of other people though, they need that GW official print like they need anything else in this hobby.


----------



## Einherjar667 (Aug 23, 2013)

Money grab? Hardly. Poorly executed promotion? yes. 

To me, a money grab is more like: only releasing the codex with X, Y or Z, and jacking the price up. So "Hey, want the codex, well you need to pay for this that and the other as well". The codex is something that's high in demand, so that would be more opportunistic. these special rules that come with a bundle aren't that high in demand, so they're very "take it or leave it".


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Basically, GW tries to get on board the Day 1 DLC train but forgot that the internet exists and unlike DLCs for computer games, it's comically easy for tabletop wargamers to simply find the rules online and apply them to things they already have.


----------



## venomlust (Feb 9, 2010)

Bah! Bah I say!


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Decent rules.


----------



## tu_shan82 (Mar 7, 2008)

just curious, is there anything on the datasheet that specifically mentions the units come from SM codex only or can BA and DA use it RAW. Obviously the sheets from the codex cant be used but if this only mentions units used and not specificaly which


----------



## tu_shan82 (Mar 7, 2008)

codex they come from, I cant honestly see an opponent stopping you and keeping a straight face. If not I suppose theres counts as but an opponent would be better off, if you use ba you dont get chapter tactics or red thirst.


----------



## Xabre (Dec 20, 2006)

All Formations have a rule one them that states what Faction or Race they come from. In this case, while I haven't seen the datasheet, I would assume that it's going to say 'All Models must come from Codex: Space Marines' or something like that. So while Blood Angels could ally with Battle Brother relations and paint the models red, they wouldn't count as a viable option.

Look at it the other way; Archangel Formation which is only Blood Angels, but I decide to take it as Imperial Fists for the Bolter Drill and just create an entire army of Sternguard.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Xabre said:


> Look at it the other way; Archangel Formation which is only Blood Angels, but I decide to take it as Imperial Fists for the Bolter Drill and just create an entire army of Sternguard.


Which you could arguably still do better out of a CAD instead (depending on points level of course), given that you have to take so many compulsory unit choices with that formation (6 of those 14 Elites choices are taken already and only one of them is Sternguard).


----------



## Xabre (Dec 20, 2006)

I thought Archangel was simply 1 HQ (which had to be a Captain or Chaplain) and something like 0-14 elites. But ONLY infantry or Furioso (max 6 Dreads).

So you could have, say, a captain and 2 sternguard, totally legal in an Archangel.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Nope. The detachment is, at its minimum:

Libby - TDA
Captain - TDA (can be Karlaen if you're into him)

1-10 Sternguard
1-10 Vanguard
1-10 Assault Terminators
1-10 Terminators
1-6 Furioso
1 Chaplain - TDA

This is an example of a fluff formation that has little to no battlefield relevance to me. You have to use their warlord traits, you get Descent of Angels, and you lose Red Thirst.


----------



## ckcrawford (Feb 4, 2009)

I like it. Its a pretty nice force with rules.


----------



## Xabre (Dec 20, 2006)

ntaw said:


> Nope. The detachment is, at its minimum:
> 
> Libby - TDA
> Captain - TDA (can be Karlaen if you're into him)
> ...


Are we talking about the same Detachment? This is the one where you can take 2-16 Elites, no more than 6 Furioso, no more than 10 of each Vet Squad. However, none of them are 1+.


----------



## HokieHWT (Dec 8, 2013)

The reason I said money grab is because without that GW stamp, I don't see you being allowed to use it in tournament play...maybe I'm wrong but I would think that in GW sponsored tournaments you have to have the digital or physical codex or datasheet. While I'm sure there are ways to pirate pdfs of the rules, maybe they is a way to make a distinction.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

hokiehwt said:


> gw sponsored tournaments


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

GW making sure Speess Maweenz get a little rule to help them in a phase they lose in against a couple of particular armies.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Normally I agree with you Orochi, but have you played in the last ~10 years or are you pulling that out your arse to get a raise out of people?


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Xabre said:


> Are we talking about the same Detachment?


We are, and I don't know why I let myself be convinced that it's one of each of those units. 

I still maintain that a CF sternguard army wouldn't be a good idea out of the archangel detachment though because you don't have Kantor (and ObSec), chapter tactics, or any of the other awesome stuff from the new SM codex...like WS/BS4 scouts as your 'troop tax' in a CAD and this new formation here that allows you to buff your devs even more than the IF tactics do and assault marines that, within this formation, put those in red to shame.


----------



## Achaylus72 (Apr 30, 2011)

Just another fucking GW rehash job.


----------



## Stormxlr (Sep 11, 2013)

Achaylus72 said:


> Just another fucking GW rehash job.


Are you refering to the rules that they are basically MUCH better version of Deathwing Assault.
Actually after this formation if they don't make DWA better I really don't see the point of fielding any DW terminators. This formation is just so good...


----------



## Orochi (Jan 28, 2009)

Vaz said:


> Normally I agree with you Orochi, but have you played in the last ~10 years or are you pulling that out your arse to get a raise out of people?


Normally it is the second option, but in this case it is actually the first. I have avoided playing for a long, long time.

Purely the hobby/creative side for me nowayears.


----------



## ntaw (Jul 20, 2012)

Stormxlr said:


> This formation is just so good...


I think this is my beef with it. GW gives fuck all about balance I know, but this makes other army builds (that, for all intents and purposes, should at least be able to pull this off if not excel at it) look even worse than they did before.

At least the DA book can/will get updated with these things in mind (hopefully). I look forward to a binder full of printed off formations that I hunted in internet for to play my BA as competitively as this.

Or I could just play more guitar. Might just do that.


----------



## Angel of Blood (Aug 18, 2010)

I take it this can't be used by BA, DA or SW?


----------



## Nordicus (May 3, 2013)

Angel of Blood said:


> I take it this can't be used by BA, DA or SW?


Correct - It's Codex: Space Marines only.


----------



## danyboy (Jun 24, 2009)

Nordicus said:


> Correct - It's Codex: Space Marines only.


Have you seen it? I can't find this statement anywhere on "leaked" screenshot page


----------



## Nordicus (May 3, 2013)

danyboy said:


> Have you seen it? I can't find this statement anywhere on "leaked" screenshot page


I asked the local GW store and he confirmed it for me. I always trust the info, when it comes straight from the horses mouth 

But as to your question, then no, I have not had visual confirmation myself.


----------



## DeathKlokk (Jun 9, 2008)

Local GW stores are the other end of the horse. It's where all of their shit comes out after all.

I'm continually amazed at how ludicrous GW can make the game. Upping the ante with each new release. Yawn.

Ntaw, ever think about playing Infinity? Their rules are free and their releases are monthly for each faction instead of boosting one faction at a time to sell models.


----------



## elmir (Apr 14, 2011)

Nordicus said:


> Correct - It's Codex: Space Marines only.


Technically, you can just slap any paint of marines on there. It's a seperate detachment you take anyway and can thus be used as an "allied" detachment in any imperial force. 

So technically, you could just use your BA/SW/DA jump pack troops for this, along with devastator marines of your choice. Just slap any chapter tactic you want on it, and it'll all be good.


----------



## mayegelt (Mar 18, 2014)

elmir said:


> Technically, you can just slap any paint of marines on there. It's a seperate detachment you take anyway and can thus be used as an "allied" detachment in any imperial force.
> 
> So technically, you could just use your BA/SW/DA jump pack troops for this, along with devastator marines of your choice. Just slap any chapter tactic you want on it, and it'll all be good.


Blood and dark angels work for using them as in both armies yhey are still devs and assault marines. For wolves however it doesn't as they are bloodclaws and longfangs.
However you could use a chapter tact from another legion.


----------



## alt-f4 (May 18, 2015)

ntaw said:


> I think this is my beef with it. GW gives fuck all about balance I know, but this makes other army builds (that, for all intents and purposes, should at least be able to pull this off if not excel at it) look even worse than they did before.
> 
> At least the DA book can/will get updated with these things in mind (hopefully). I look forward to a binder full of printed off formations that I hunted in internet for to play my BA as competitively as this.
> 
> Or I could just play more guitar. Might just do that.


 Hopefully, no one is forced to play with (or against) such formations 

This one is a "crappy" one, IMHO, especially for people whose armies are historically melee oriented (Orks, CSM, Tyranids, ...) and who strive to adapt their tactics to current game mechanics like deep strike (and no charge possible in the same turn), overwatch or charging in difficult ground (with the initiative loss).

All of these rules are just passed by this formation, for an army which, historically speaking, is more a shooting than assaults oriented one : the player may choose the moment when his/her units are dropped, heavy weapons may directly be used at full potential (no snapshot, even if the dropped unit is considered as having moved), melee units may directly charge (it's not a new thing, as it is already allowed with usual drop pods, I guess, but it's useful to remind for the combo) and may use their jump pack twice in the same turn, and enemy units targeted (just "targeted", meaning that it works even if the shot is completely missed ?) are whether gone to ground (no overwatch, no initiative loss ... most of the time, actually, because 3D6 dice average result is above 10) or can't fire on overwatch .

No more strategy (list building) and no more tactics needed : where is the game ? :biggrin:


----------



## elmir (Apr 14, 2011)

You know... I don't mind it this much in this particular formation. 

They are friggin assault marines. When is the last time you ever saw those in a list that wanted to be competitive. Had this formation been for some uber-insane OTT close combat monster unit, I'd have more of a beef with it. 

But it's not... It's for assault marines. A unit that can now actually play along with some of the other "big boys" because of this. And so, I don't mind that much. Getting good formations for crappy units is good in my book, as long as they avoid great formations for already great units.


----------

