Will Stronghold Assault make Assault Centurions viable?

[interrogator_chaplain]

Looked over the rules for the Assault Centurions with their double chainfists and their melta's and thought about the upcoming Stronghold Assault expansion, and is it me, or would they not become a fantastically viable option? These guys are perfect bunker crackers, and if you toss them in a Stormpigeon they become a hell of an option for storming a whole group of immobile defenders. It'd be nice to see them finally show up on a battlefield instead of relegated to the 6th edition dust-bin along with the Vespid and the Pyrovore.

Your thought's?

[Badtucker]

not just that but the new ipmerial fist supplement favors building busting too, thats gonna see more action.

[knas ser]

They ought to have added something along these lines for the Eldar V-Cannons. I suppose there wont be anything about those in this supplement, but in the original Space Marine game, V-Cannons were the ultimate in levelling buildings (as you might expect).

[interrogator_chaplain]

Just picked up this month's White Dwarf, and I can say yes, anything that can bust a bunker will definitely see more play on the field. The scenario shown in the White Dwarf, Bunker Assault (In teeny-tiny font) details a scenario which the defender gets between 1 and 3 fortifications for every primary detachment the army has. (Primary detachments are listed in the SA rulebook.) Likewise, the Attacker gets one additional Heavy Support for each primary detachment he has. Victory points are accumulated for every fortification destroyed.

So I'd say bust out the Chainfists, it's time to reduce the population of those Bastions to 0.

[Orange]

Pyrovores are awesome if used correctly. I don't see the reason for hating these things.

[Maelstorm]

At just 15 points each with 5 attacks on assault, 3 bases of simple Necron Scarabs (45 points for 15 attacks) will reduce an AV 14 building to rubble in 1 turn - most likely killing everyone cowering inside.

[chicop76]

I use vespids. They are 3 plus cover in ruins and make great deep striking in ruins shooting up stuff. Move through cover helps them not take dangerous terrain test. Heck they can gtg and have two plus cover saves. The beautiful part is if assaulted they can easily break combat and shoot again, combat negates gtg. Which means it is an awesome cycle of hate.

Ap 4 or better weapons that deny cover and in melee is a pain. Also flame weapons burn them down. Other than that they have been doing rather well. Not to mention they can assault if need too, like it's better to assault hounds than get assaulted by them, or you can shoot, assault, hit and run, over watch, get assaulted, and than hit and run and repeat. They are much better than before. Not to mention they can possibly score.

Pyrovores are good if the are in a drop pod.

I debated on the assault centurians, but the shooty ones are so much better.

[sfshilo]

They ought to have added something along these lines for the Eldar V-Cannons. I suppose there wont be anything about those in this supplement, but in the original Space Marine game, V-Cannons were the ultimate in levelling buildings (as you might expect).

Yes, because what eldar really need is one more thing they are good at......

[knas ser]

Yes, because what eldar really need is one more thing they are good at......

Hey - I'm an Eldar player. We're elitist snobs. Just throw on extra points to the cost and we'll be happy. What we care about is the feeling of superiority from having the best units. We don't care if the army is viable or not.

[Katharon]

Assault Centurions do not suddenly become better just because of a Fortress supplement. They still have to march/be hauled across the board to face any of these fortifications. Centurions haven't changed. The array of possible buildings has. Even the availability of these new fortifications does not mean that every local meta will immediately (or even future) change to suit the rather single-minded purpose of Assault Centurions.