Naftka wrote:This came as as surprise this morning, and it was very concise with the information. June 13th will see a new Adeptus Astartes codex release with two vehicle boxes! That is big news... but it gets better; New Land Raider Variant alongside a new Rhino variant.
Check out the latest on 40k Rumors,
Please remember that this is a rumor at this point.
via 'RR' on Faeit 212
'June 13th sees new Adeptus Astartes Codex release with two vehicle boxes. New land raider command variant included and new rhino command variant. Ornate design on additional armour plates etc. More marine kits to follow.
The codex sees predators/whirlwinds/indicators as 1-3 options. No surprise.
The codex sees land raider squadrons and huge bonus to ignoring damage when part of them.
More info to come...'
I am taking this with salt, due to it conflicting with the supposed 9th Edition release for Fantasy
I even scratchbuilt myself few droppods before last "update" since I was sure we ll get them this time I am sucker for all chaos stuff
On topic if this is true I am really curious what role could this new vehicles fill. They start shooting themself in the legs with full auto with these rewrites. There is almost no new thing they can add and one must be wondering is it even profitable to do new moulds and casting of stuff which is forgotten few months after the release.
Sounds legit after what was rumored by Lords of War Gaming recently. It then might be followed by a Space Marine (Raven Guard actually) vs Tau campaign starter set, then a new Tau codex book.
If this is true, then I'm glad I'm holding off from starting a big army project like I was intending with Space Wolves. I'm willing to wait till 6/13... and so is my wallet...
If, and it's a big if, this new LR can make something as awesome as Calgar's Land Raider from the 5th ed codex, that could be pretty cool!
New codex, though? No way in hell am I buying that after just 2 years, especially when the current one is not only functional but about as closed to balanced internally and externally as it gets.
With the new "detachment-of-formations" style of army-building (or, in GW's mind, army-selling), I can see why they would want to apply this to their single biggest selling army as soon as possible. I suspect that, not only will we still have chapter tactics, we will also now get some chapter specific formations, too. But, the real question is, what will be the model(s) they want to sell with this? With Necrons, it was Tomb Blades for the core formation. With Eldar, it was Jetbikes and/or Guardians for the core formation. What models will they add into the core formation that most people probably don't have much of so GW can sell lots of them?
Anyway, vehicle squadrons sound like they might help with the less-used vehicles. Whirlwind squadrons could be fun. Predators will still largely be mediocre unless they drop the points on them or give them some real punch or something; at least the 30K preds have 4-shot autocannons to make them useful.
Seriously though? I think the current codex is fine, and now it feels like my money was wasted. Anyone want an LE White Scars codex that's only been used for like 6 games?
Land Raider formation sounds cool. New Land Raider variant has a 50/50 chance of being daft/awesome, so mixed feelings there. New codex seems ridiculous but, this is the new, GW age of rapid-fire rules replacement. I wonder how many knuckleheads will spring for the extra-limited-ultimate-awesome-chaptermaster edition with alternate hologram embossed foil covers this time when they now know they be milked again in a year or two?
Kanluwen wrote: Scouts or Tactical Marines will be my bet as to what the "tax" will be.
Personally I have always been in favor of mandating a 2:1 ratio of Scout Squads to MEQs.
Considering the number of scouts in a chapter to the number of marines, that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.
I’d guess the “tax” will be dreads or speeders, but that tac squads will play prominently. Depends a lot on if some get new rules to help move kits.
(my guesses)
SM demi-company:
Captain
3 tac squads
1 assault squad
1 dev squad
dreadnought
Rapid Strike force:
Captain (on bike)
3x5+ man bike squads
attack bike squad
land speeder squadron
If we do get a new codex, I’ll be a little irritated. The one we have now is fine, and not that old. Of course, I’m still smarting about the new Eldar codex, which is also replacing a newish codex, and makes me feel dirty for owning it.
Is anybody else flipping over this? GW is just pushing and pushing and I've only been back into the 40k world for about 3 months. Already I'm sick of release after release that cause all my books to become scrap. Seriously GW would have lost s customer if I had different games at my flgs. Sadly it's only 40k so I guess I gotta suck it up and deal with it
Drogga wrote: Is anybody else flipping over this? GW is just pushing and pushing and I've only been back into the 40k world for about 3 months. Already I'm sick of release after release that cause all my books to become scrap. Seriously GW would have lost s customer if I had different games at my flgs. Sadly it's only 40k so I guess I gotta suck it up and deal with it
I’m not at the straw that broke the camel’s back yet, but I can see it from where I am.
Literally all I care about is that they follow BA and SW in moving Rhinos to Fast Attack, with Flesh Tearers-esque FA-heavy detachment - having to pay two HQ/Troop taxes to get Rhinos & Grav-Cents for my Mechanicus army is a pain in the arse.
Anpu42 wrote:I remember when just a few years ago people complaining about the slow Codex release schedule.
I'm fairly sure that there's some kind of happy medium between "maybe you're army will get an update this decade, if you're lucky" and "you've been able to use your codex at least three times, time for an upgrade!" Particularly when there's so much other stuff they could explore (Kroot mercenaries, Tallarn, proper Chaos legions, etc. etc.)
Garrlor wrote:There were rumors of a new DA codex.... bringing them more in-line with 7th Ed.
Anpu42 wrote:I remember when just a few years ago people complaining about the slow Codex release schedule.
I'm fairly sure that there's some kind of happy medium between "maybe you're army will get an update this decade, if you're lucky" and "you've been able to use your codex at least three times, time for an upgrade!" Particularly when there's so much other stuff they could explore (Kroot mercenaries, Tallarn, proper Chaos legions, etc. etc.)
Garrlor wrote:There were rumors of a new DA codex.... bringing them more in-line with 7th Ed.
By making them part of the main codex
Supplements for every other chapter, and then dataslates for sub groups within chapters a la Sentinels of Terra
If Marines are going to be deployed to the field, Scouts are already deployed to mark the engagement zone and start disrupting everything.
So the ideal force to be seen on the average tabletop engagement SHOULD be more Scouts than MEQ.
Except that's not what we see in the fluff (10th company rarely has ten actual scout squads). It would detract from the unique established flavour of the faction, both mechanically and in terms of visuals. It would also force GW to re-market the whole faction, because people buy SM for SM, not Scouts.
I'm still going with "makes no sense".
Don't get me wrong, you make sense in some alternate universe where the background is a bit more in touch with reality and the resulting products match it better than what we have now. It's just not this universe
I'm fairly sure that there's some kind of happy medium between "maybe you're army will get an update this decade, if you're lucky" and "you've been able to use your codex at least three times, time for an upgrade!" Particularly when there's so much other stuff they could explore (Kroot mercenaries, Tallarn, proper Chaos legions, etc. etc.)
By making them part of the main codex
We may not have Kroot Mercs yet, but GW has been doing a lot of side codices in between big ones. Harlequins, Admech, Assassins model box, rumored Genestealer cult vs Deathwatch.
DA as part of the main book, eh. Would have worked an edition ago, but they added more new units so that would be a lot of bloat.
I'd be OK wiith a formation style FOC for Marines built around a battle company- Captain, 0-1 command squad, 0-1 chaplain, 0-1 librarian. 2-6 tac squads, 1-2 assault squads (to push that new assault squad box), 1-2 devastator squads. Predators, Vindicators, Whirlwinds, Hunters/Stalkers available as squadrons. Dreadnought Talons.
I take your point on the potential for codex bloat given the new units (unless they relegated them to a supplement, but that seems less likely than a full blown codex.)
I'm actually really impressed with all the new stuff they've been releasing, but it's almost impossible to keep up. I'd much rather they took a little more time over these new forces and left the updates to relatively new codices until later. I paid quite a lot for my iBook SM codex and really haven't got the value out of it yet.
I don't know why they don't offer a codex subscription at this point. I bet they'd make more money from a £100 per year and get every codex delivered deal AND turn 'my codex went invalid!' into 'yay my codex is great value!' in one fell swoop.
Almost seems too easy.
Wasn't there a rumour of a new assault marine kit? A new LR variant would be awesome, though.
Drogga wrote: Is anybody else flipping over this? GW is just pushing and pushing and I've only been back into the 40k world for about 3 months. Already I'm sick of release after release that cause all my books to become scrap. Seriously GW would have lost s customer if I had different games at my flgs. Sadly it's only 40k so I guess I gotta suck it up and deal with it
If you want change then YOU have to make it. Buy a starter, paint both armies, and teach people to play.
Mavnas wrote: So, with the amount of D-weapons Eldar got, buying multiple Land Raiders seems daft unless they also see a major points decrease.
I think that 250 points is a great burden for a model that doesn't do a ton of damage. Assuming that the LR continues not to be a hard hitter, it would only work if it dropped down to the 200 point range AND were tanky enough to survive a hit by a full, hard-hitting squad. Otherwise, the cheaper transport options are just better.
There are, however, mechanisms in 40k that make a unit really hard to kill. For instance, Void Shield Generators (they could have multiple, 1 for each LR of the squad!), low invulnerable saves, and IWND. At the end of the day, though, it has to have a chance to survive a full round against an enemy like Wraithguard, in range.
They could always put some kind of damage reflection array too, like they have on the new Cult Mechanicus.
the thing is, D weaponry should wipe landraiders off the table. I just think they screwed up with the wraithguard. By all means make the hvy wraithcannon S D, but the regular cannon should have had -1 on the D table and the scythe -2. Not sure if it would have made that much difference but would have been a start.
all these space marine players saying they wont buy the book. maybe not on day 1, but i bet minds change fast if the update brings them up close to eldar power...
and now i will continue to wait for what has to be the oldest relevant codex to be updated..... and left gak.
ausYenLoWang wrote: all these space marine players saying they wont buy the book.
By "all these space marine players" you mean all 2 of them that posted in this thread?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Nvs wrote:How long until GW just goes with a membership fee model like Microsoft and Adobe did?
For just $10/mo you can get access to all our rules!
Davylove21 wrote:I don't know why they don't offer a codex subscription at this point. I bet they'd make more money from a £100 per year and get every codex delivered deal AND turn 'my codex went invalid!' into 'yay my codex is great value!' in one fell swoop.
Almost seems too easy.
Wasn't there a rumour of a new assault marine kit? A new LR variant would be awesome, though.
$10 a month or £100 per year?
In another recent thread someone added up well over £800 to buy the various codices and supplements. So I'm guessing GW would charge £400+ per year if you wanted all codices.
I think what's more realistic is they just change over to a full on DLC system for codices and it costs something like $50 a year *per army*.
ausYenLoWang wrote: all these space marine players saying they wont buy the book.
By "all these space marine players" you mean all 2 of them that posted in this thread?
I don't intend on buying the codex for my Minotaurs, not a chance regardless of power level. However, I've also decided for some time to no longer reward GW for being a gakky company, and will only play with the collection I have and without spending any more money on the whole broken system. FW is a different beast, but even it's starting to behave more GW-like, which saddens me deeply.
Vote with your wallets - impulse buying the new shiny will only encourage GW.
ausYenLoWang wrote: all these space marine players saying they wont buy the book.
By "all these space marine players" you mean all 2 of them that posted in this thread?
I don't intend on buying the codex for my Minotaurs, not a chance regardless of power level. However, I've also decided for some time to no longer reward GW for being a gakky company, and will only play with the collection I have and without spending any more money on the whole broken system. FW is a different beast, but even it's starting to behave more GW-like, which saddens me deeply.
Vote with your wallets - impulse buying the new shiny will only encourage GW.
Yeah I don't think you really count if you already weren't buying things
I'm a SW player and I didn't buy the last SW codex... but given I haven't been playing recently it's not really all that significant that I didn't buy it, lol.
ausYenLoWang wrote: all these space marine players saying they wont buy the book.
By "all these space marine players" you mean all 2 of them that posted in this thread?
I don't intend on buying the codex for my Minotaurs, not a chance regardless of power level. However, I've also decided for some time to no longer reward GW for being a gakky company, and will only play with the collection I have and without spending any more money on the whole broken system. FW is a different beast, but even it's starting to behave more GW-like, which saddens me deeply.
Vote with your wallets - impulse buying the new shiny will only encourage GW.
Yeah I don't think you really count if you already weren't buying things
I'm a SW player and I didn't buy the last SW codex... but given I haven't been playing recently it's not really all that significant that I didn't buy it, lol.
Do I not? I only really stopped buying things in December, mostly due to lack of enthusiasm anymore than anything else. GW's actions since then have only infuriated me more, though I still try to enjoy the game.
I'm one of those customers who could be encouraged to give money to GW again, but instead their actions further reinforce my decision. Invalidating the Marine book which I have mostly liked - don't use the Centstar and avoid tactical marines like the plague and you've got a good book, for another $60 hardcover with, I imagine, the exact same fluff, a decurion setup, a few tweaks and probably no more chapter tactics.
Hell, I could keep using my existant codex and simply write down the relevant changes on a single page and insert it based off of the reviews.
AllSeeingSkink wrote: I think what's more realistic is they just change over to a full on DLC system for codices and it costs something like $50 a year *per army*.
You know what, I'd actually go for that, because there's a lot of supplements, dataslates, etc. that I don't buy, because who knows if they'll be worth it, or how long they are valid for. $50/£35 a year sounds reasonable if it means I'm guaranteed everything at latest issue, works out at what, $5/£3 a month?
Unfortunately if GW ever took this route they'd almost certainly get greedy and just go for the $800/£500 "Get everything!" approach, with no other option. Because why have many people buying at a low to medium price when you can have a handful paying through the nose
Really interesting that a company that says they are a miniature company, not a rules company, is nearly spitting out more rules than new miniatures...
So, they make landraiders and rhino command kits, and has "command upgrade" mandaory for a vehicle squadron?
Clever. I wonder if they introduce a new landraider weapon as well, to make you need to buy the new kit (landraider mounted grav cannon, anyone?).
Lets see if they spam vortex grenades too, just to toss things around a bit.
(Sorry, this soon after the eldar dex, GW deserv some snide remarks and doomsyings).
Between the usual SM favoritism and the recent Codex: Eldar release, I fully expect a Land Raider at 285 points, equipped with 3 Strength D weapons (Large Template).
I wonder how people will react when they will see that their IF(Sentinel of terra) and IH( Clan Rauhkaan) books will be invalidated just like Eldar and Iyanden did...
It is gone. It disappeared when the "old" codex was removed. Typical GW move. They did the same thing with the Knight Codex as well. At this rate, you're better off downloading the pirated copies rather than having to replace them every year or so.
Vanilla Marines were the best balanced army. They were strong yet not stupid powerful like Tau, Eldar and Necrons. They had multiple builds that were viable. I wish GW would have tried to bring the rest of the books in line with them. Oh well...
It is gone. It disappeared when the "old" codex was removed. Typical GW move. They did the same thing with the Knight Codex as well. At this rate, you're better off downloading the pirated copies rather than having to replace them every year or so.
Did they explicitly address that or is this something that everyone just assumed?
And yes, I encourage anyone to pirate the books to decide when/if you want to buy them.
It is gone. It disappeared when the "old" codex was removed. Typical GW move. They did the same thing with the Knight Codex as well. At this rate, you're better off downloading the pirated copies rather than having to replace them every year or so.
Did they explicitly address that or is this something that everyone just assumed?
And yes, I encourage anyone to pirate the books to decide when/if you want to buy them.
GW NEVER addresses anything. Especially the invalidating of a players army. If you don't see it on the website, it never existed seems to be their stance on things.
As someone who has only ever played BTs, a new SM codex is making me really happy right now.
I really disliked the homogenization that GW performed on my chapter and while I will likely never get back all of the flavor that I lost with the old 4th Ed Codex, It'll be interesting to see what they do to address the lack of direction (and effectiveness) for BTs.
If they do a good job I'll buy the dex, if not I'll keep playing Crons.
It is gone. It disappeared when the "old" codex was removed. Typical GW move. They did the same thing with the Knight Codex as well. At this rate, you're better off downloading the pirated copies rather than having to replace them every year or so.
Did they explicitly address that or is this something that everyone just assumed?
And yes, I encourage anyone to pirate the books to decide when/if you want to buy them.
There's an email floating around, I don't remember to/from who, where GW says that the book was intended for the old codex and does not work with the new one. It also says that if you can house rule it to make it work, that is encouraged. Not everyone will take 'an email from Joe Schmoe' as scripture though, but it answers the question well enough for me.
I expect the new tank will be where the D-weapons end up. Seeing as most SM weaponry pops up in other Imperial books makes me doubt we'd see something like D-lascannons...but never say never.
Assuming this bit of information is true, the release rate of rules is getting almost frantic. Maybe they want to get everyone up to date before they bring out 40K End Times and suck the galaxy down a giant cosmic plughole.
I suppose I just assume that after Eldar D-weapons will be a regular thing in Codices now. That said, I am trying to think of which existing units could possibly be changed to use D weapons a la Wraithguard, if such a thing were to happen. Centurion drills maybe?
Eldarain wrote: I don't think you'll be seeing new releases to match up with Eldar. They had a chance for ranged D on the new knights and passed on it.
Like many I expected a D-str arms race as well, but not one in the new IK book... arguably the easiest place to expect them, confirms that Eldar are a real aberration and sure to ruin our meta for years to come.
Should have seen it coming though. Sweet, now I get to put ANOTHER army on hold while I wait to see how the rules change.
I've got a whole box of Skaven and Helfs needing attention but that got put off for you-know-what. Now I figure is a good time to revamp my Spa.... What?
New codex time already? Yeah, I should have smelled the gak when GW sent me an email saying the new Eldar Dex was getting replaced. Then Knights?
I thought I would be excited about a new codex for my army next year. Next year!
Dammit GW, you make it really fething hard to justify this gak to the wife!
Fezman wrote: I suppose I just assume that after Eldar D-weapons will be a regular thing in Codices now. That said, I am trying to think of which existing units could possibly be changed to use D weapons a la Wraithguard, if such a thing were to happen. Centurion drills maybe?
I wouldn't rule out the long-range profile for the Conversion Beamer, Seismic Hammer, Orbital Bombardment and possibly even Grav Weapons in some form (even if they have a penalty like D-Scythes).
There's not shortage of potentials elsewhere too; Tau Railguns, Tyranid Warp Lance, Daemon gifts and powers, crazy Necron gadgets, and other new units. I have no doubt GW are watching the sales figures for Wraith units rising now and thinking "let's keep doing that!".
You know I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that no other faction will get D weapons, at least not in the abundance that Eldar have. It's just a feeling I have in my bones.
Colpicklejar wrote: You know I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that no other faction will get D weapons, at least not in the abundance that Eldar have. It's just a feeling I have in my bones.
If you're tired of your armies' codexes being updated too frequently, there is, realistically, an option.
Play Sisters of Battle. You'll have all the time in the world to lavish over your army composition, and paint your miniatures one at a time to an exacting standard.
Colpicklejar wrote: You know I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that no other faction will get D weapons, at least not in the abundance that Eldar have. It's just a feeling I have in my bones.
This. Eldar seem to get special treatment rules-wise because they are Eldar.
I could see Dark Angels or Space Marines getting access to a 50 point one shot Vortex grenade though.
Kitwise, there are a few logical releases for Marines. 3-4 of the following-
Assault Squad needs an update to match the new Tac marines and Vanguard.
Honor Guard don't have models (well, in Marines terms. Marines are easy to convert from other marine kits)
Thunderfire Cannon is a large resin kit.
Techmarines of all sorts need plastic clampack
Plastic Terminator Chaplain clampack
Dreadnought and Razorback could use new sprues with all their weapon options.
Predator could use a new sprue to have better sponsons like the Baal predator (also to drop it from 3 separate sprues for the guns and hatches down to 1)
Black Templar Crusader Squad.
Characters on Bikes clampack/box.
I'm just looking forward to seeing DAs get an update and some formations. Unlike others, I love the concept behind formations, reminds me of the old epic Space Marine datacards.
But this isn't a Dark Angels release, this is a new Space Marine codex, right? Remember, Dark Angels are not Space Marines, they are a completely unique and separate army from Space Marines, with their own models, rules, and organization. That's the entire reason why they got their own book and why DA players scream bloody murder every time someone even suggests that all the Marine chapters could be represented in a single book.
Sidstyler wrote: But this isn't a Dark Angels release, this is a new Space Marine codex, right? Remember, Dark Angels are not Space Marines, they are a completely unique and separate army from Space Marines, with their own models, rules, and organization. That's the entire reason why they got their own book and why DA players scream bloody murder every time someone even suggests that all the Marine chapters could be represented in a single book.
I know some people who play their DA (or BA) models as regular space marines, and just call them something else. Obviously, without the faction-specific stuff like ravenwing command or sanguinary guard, or the faction-specific loadouts (like trimelta ASM). Some peeps just like the models and bits you can get
Colpicklejar wrote: You know I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that no other faction will get D weapons, at least not in the abundance that Eldar have. It's just a feeling I have in my bones.
This. Eldar seem to get special treatment rules-wise because they are Eldar.
Well, this is a pretty safe bet, since the WD says the Eldar have more D weapons than any other race
But that's ok, just give Land Raiders a new sprue with a twelve lascannon array, and we'll call it even!
Sidstyler wrote: But this isn't a Dark Angels release, this is a new Space Marine codex, right? Remember, Dark Angels are not Space Marines, they are a completely unique and separate army from Space Marines, with their own models, rules, and organization. That's the entire reason why they got their own book and why DA players scream bloody murder every time someone even suggests that all the Marine chapters could be represented in a single book.
I know some people who play their DA (or BA) models as regular space marines, and just call them something else. Obviously, without the faction-specific stuff like ravenwing command or sanguinary guard, or the faction-specific loadouts (like trimelta ASM). Some peeps just like the models and bits you can get
I'm one of them. I love the winged icon of Emperor's Children and Ravenwing. Use them as Astral Claws and only just now decided to de-Dark Angel some other models for it. I'm actually really worried what's going to become of my Astral Claws when the new codex drops. There is the chance that Forge World units will be invalidated like the Iyanden Supplement was with new Eldar. So Minotaur Characters, Severin Loth, my own Lugft Huron, they might all be at risk...
Sidstyler wrote: But this isn't a Dark Angels release, this is a new Space Marine codex, right? Remember, Dark Angels are not Space Marines, they are a completely unique and separate army from Space Marines, with their own models, rules, and organization. That's the entire reason why they got their own book and why DA players scream bloody murder every time someone even suggests that all the Marine chapters could be represented in a single book.
I know some people who play their DA (or BA) models as regular space marines, and just call them something else. Obviously, without the faction-specific stuff like ravenwing command or sanguinary guard, or the faction-specific loadouts (like trimelta ASM). Some peeps just like the models and bits you can get
I'm one of them. I love the winged icon of Emperor's Children and Ravenwing. Use them as Astral Claws and only just now decided to de-Dark Angel some other models for it. I'm actually really worried what's going to become of my Astral Claws when the new codex drops. There is the chance that Forge World units will be invalidated like the Iyanden Supplement was with new Eldar. So Minotaur Characters, Severin Loth, my own Lugft Huron, they might all be at risk...
Forge World is not the same as the Iyanden supplement.
You might have to wait awhile for a PDF and then an updated book, but they don't generally just drop things.
Davylove21 wrote: I don't know why they don't offer a codex subscription at this point. I bet they'd make more money from a £100 per year and get every codex delivered deal AND turn 'my codex went invalid!' into 'yay my codex is great value!' in one fell swoop.
Almost seems too easy.
Wasn't there a rumour of a new assault marine kit? A new LR variant would be awesome, though.
You do realize that if GW starts to sell a year Codex subscription and people start to fork out +$100 a year for it then GW will stop making new codexs. They wont need a reason to make new or improve them since they are getting the money already. GW is out to make money no matter how they do it. They don't care if people get upset, new kids will join their cult. I've had a love'/hate relationship with GW for 30 years now. I own 4-5 copies of Fantasy rules (I stopped after the 6th) and own 4+ copies of 40k. I love the 40k background and lore but hate the rules and the way GW runs their company. The Horus books brought me back into the 40k games and I hate them for it.
Davylove21 wrote: I don't know why they don't offer a codex subscription at this point. I bet they'd make more money from a £100 per year and get every codex delivered deal AND turn 'my codex went invalid!' into 'yay my codex is great value!' in one fell swoop.
Almost seems too easy.
Wasn't there a rumour of a new assault marine kit? A new LR variant would be awesome, though.
You do realize that if GW starts to sell a year Codex subscription and people start to fork out +$100 a year for it then GW will stop making new codexs. They wont need a reason to make new or improve them since they are getting the money already. GW is out to make money no matter how they do it. They don't care if people get upset, new kids will join their cult. I've had a love'/hate relationship with GW for 30 years now. I own 4-5 copies of Fantasy rules (I stopped after the 6th) and own 4+ copies of 40k. I love the 40k background and lore but hate the rules and the way GW runs their company. The Horus books brought me back into the 40k games and I hate them for it.
Davylove21 wrote: I don't know why they don't offer a codex subscription at this point. I bet they'd make more money from a £100 per year and get every codex delivered deal AND turn 'my codex went invalid!' into 'yay my codex is great value!' in one fell swoop.
Almost seems too easy.
Wasn't there a rumour of a new assault marine kit? A new LR variant would be awesome, though.
You do realize that if GW starts to sell a year Codex subscription and people start to fork out +$100 a year for it then GW will stop making new codexs. They wont need a reason to make new or improve them since they are getting the money already. GW is out to make money no matter how they do it. They don't care if people get upset, new kids will join their cult. I've had a love'/hate relationship with GW for 30 years now. I own 4-5 copies of Fantasy rules (I stopped after the 6th) and own 4+ copies of 40k. I love the 40k background and lore but hate the rules and the way GW runs their company. The Horus books brought me back into the 40k games and I hate them for it.
I don't realise it, no.
Not to mention, new kids aren't really joining there cult currently. There kinda losing a boatload of money apparently. hell, reddit has a betting pool going on about how long GW will last.
Is Forge World and Black Library different companies than GW? Can GW fail if FW and BL are making money? I would like to see GW fail but I would hate not to see the end of the Horus novels. Even though I already know the final ending, the Big E dies.
Boredflak1066 wrote: Is Forge World and Black Library different companies than GW? Can GW fail if FW and BL are making money? I would like to see GW fail but I would hate not to see the end of the Horus novels. Even though I already know the final ending, the Big E dies.
Sorry for the lack of a spoiler alert.
Forgeworld and Black Library are just different branches of GW. They're all one company even if they don't talk to each other quite as much as they should.
Don't think Lascannons is going to become strenght D. But if I am going too put my money on something in the Space Marine arsenal getting buffed to Strength D it would be the Demolisher cannon on the Vindicator.
After all, it's S 10 AP 2 range 24" already and only on one has it. Lascannons can be taken by over 10 different units.
Don't think Lascannons is going to become strenght D. But if I am going too put my money on something in the Space Marine arsenal getting buffed to Strength D it would be the Demolisher cannon on the Vindicator.
After all, it's S 10 AP 2 range 24" already and only on one has it. Lascannons can be taken by over 10 different units.
If the Demolisher Cannon gets buffed to Strength D in Marines, they damn well better FAQ it quickly for the Guard.
Squadrons of Demolishers running around with Strength D. Mwhahahahaha.
No, they wouldn't necessarily need to, much like the bolters the imperial guard have are not necessarily astartes bolters. This of course is from non-cannonical FFG games, but still.
Mathieu Raymond wrote: No, they wouldn't necessarily need to, much like the bolters the imperial guard have are not necessarily astartes bolters. This of course is from non-cannonical FFG games, but still.
Actually yeah, they would. The bolters carried by Guard officers/sergeants are scaled down but effectively still the same weapon. The major differences that they would have are the handling, overall ROF, ammunition capacities, etc etc--which aren't really something easily represented on the tabletop.
A Demolisher Cannon is the same thing, no matter what. The Baneblade and Hellhammer have one in their hull mounts, the Demolisher features it as its turret mount, the Vindicator has one, and the Thunderer has one as well.
So if they give Vindicators Strength D on account of their Demolisher Cannons? That affects a whole lot of vehicles across the board.
Or they just call them Omega pattern Demolisher cannons, or give them Wicked Radical Awesome Tempest Hammer Ammo that other Demolisher cannons don't have access to (for now).
Two new vehicle variants on the Rhino and Land Raider hulls doesn't really make me that excited. At this point I'm a bit perplexed what they'd actually do with it, especially considering that it'll be hard to shoehorn in something with all the gaps that FW has filled (especially for Land Raiders).
Also not really impressed- or even interested, in fact- in Predator/Vindicator squadrons. Whirlwinds? Totally down with it. Preds/Vindis? Not so much; the Predator and Vindicator chassis suffer more from not having proper battle-tank equivalent armor than anything else... well, barring the lackluster primary weapon options of the Predator.
I'd much rather see Preds/Vindis become AV12 sides, with a buff to the Predator's turret weapons (maybe Tank Hunter rule for just the turret gun or access to PotMS?), and Razorbacks be made AV12 front with slightly cheaper weapon options.
Then they wouldn't be so horrifically bad that FW is near-required to patch in for the horrible SM armor options. Whirlwinds are the only thing that's "decent", and for moderate investment you can get a near-straight upgrade in the Thunderfire Cannon.
The issue is that GW generally prefers to make up new things that do a similar job to the FW variants that are already extant... or just make up something else entirely.
As an example, FW produced the SM Whirlwind Hyperios and Land Raider Helios models, which were not incorporated into the codex proper and instead were supplemented with the Hunter (an oldie-but-goldie from the Epic 40K/Epic Armageddon eras, as I understand) and the Stalker.
Ironically, both the Hunter and Stalker are far and away better than the Hyperios.
Personally, I'm having a bit of a hard time trying to figure out what kind of "command" bonuses they'd try to stick onto a Rhino/Land Raider that doesn't make it seem like "FW only GeeDubs", a la the Stalker, for example (Hunters predated the Hyperios, while AFAIK the Stalker is basically a SM Hydra).
The last time that GW incorporated straight FW units into an GW-labeled publication was the 5th-edition Guard, with the Valkyrie, Hydra, and several LR variants. Since then they've done nothing of the sort, and have in several books actually removed options /raging about DE special character losses.
Whiskey144 wrote: The issue is that GW generally prefers to make up new things that do a similar job to the FW variants that are already extant... or just make up something else entirely.
As an example, FW produced the SM Whirlwind Hyperios and Land Raider Helios models, which were not incorporated into the codex proper and instead were supplemented with the Hunter (an oldie-but-goldie from the Epic 40K/Epic Armageddon eras, as I understand) and the Stalker.
Ironically, both the Hunter and Stalker are far and away better than the Hyperios.
Personally, I'm having a bit of a hard time trying to figure out what kind of "command" bonuses they'd try to stick onto a Rhino/Land Raider that doesn't make it seem like "FW only GeeDubs", a la the Stalker, for example (Hunters predated the Hyperios, while AFAIK the Stalker is basically a SM Hydra).
The last time that GW incorporated straight FW units into an GW-labeled publication was the 5th-edition Guard, with the Valkyrie, Hydra, and several LR variants. Since then they've done nothing of the sort, and have in several books actually removed options /raging about DE special character losses.
Well the Stompa got included in the Orks book, and if I recall, the only profile it had prior were some Forgeworld ones.
What I really look forward too see how they go about formations i SM. It would be really nice to be able to make specialized army builds. As it is the Combined arms detachment is almost formed around a SM battle company (6 tactical, 2 assault, 2 devestator, 2-3 dreadnoughts. Would be really nice to get a 1-st company formation option close to the apocalypse one, some 10-th company as well, armoury, chapter HQ, armoury etc.
I like fluff, fluff is fun.
I wonder if they'll have a different base formation for each chapter. Could see them going away with chapter tactics maybe and incorporating them into bonuses for the base formation/decursion
jSewell wrote: As an Iron Hands lover, I'm stoked for squadron predators
And why's that?, you will loose your IH supplement just like Iyanden went into the sewers once the new Eldar dex came out.
Still have chapter tactics without the supplement and being able to take more than one armor piece per heavy support slot will benefit them a lot (assuming the chapter tactics for IH don't get destroyed or something)
jSewell wrote: I wonder if they'll have a different base formation for each chapter. Could see them going away with chapter tactics maybe and incorporating them into bonuses for the base formation/decursion
Man, I hope you're not right about that one! The strength of SM to me has always been the large number of viable builds - not often OP but always fun and mostly competative. This would be nothing but a sweet memory if they made chapter specific formations instead of chapter tactics.
Who else besides Calgar do you think will become a LoW? Lysander? Will we get a big beastie?
Base on finance and profit reasons, GW will most likely boost models that are currently weak and undersold.
1. Landraiders: Not sure how are they gonna make them competitive again... mech is not very strong in 7ed, especially now with all these S-D and -1D weapons that can wipe out expensive vehicles in one turn.
2. Rhinos: Same crap as LRs... no one wants to buy them unless GW can boost Mech survivability in 7ed.
3. Terminators: Maybe give them 2 wounds, FNP and/or new range weapon upgrades that has flesh bane or whatever. Whatever GW do they need to be a viable deathstar again and maybe that'll also indirectly promote players to purchase Landraiders and storm ravens.
4. Techmarines: Give them some kind of ability to make SM mech more viable for competitive play again...
jSewell wrote: As an Iron Hands lover, I'm stoked for squadron predators
And why's that?, you will loose your IH supplement just like Iyanden went into the sewers once the new Eldar dex came out.
Still have chapter tactics without the supplement and being able to take more than one armor piece per heavy support slot will benefit them a lot (assuming the chapter tactics for IH don't get destroyed or something)
Why assume you will have chapter tactics? You'll lose chapter tactics and probably gain some "decurion" nonsense.
SonsofVulkan wrote: Base on finance and profit reasons, GW will most likely boost models that are currently weak and undersold.
1. Landraiders: Not sure how are they gonna make them competitive again... mech is not very strong in 7ed, especially now with all these S-D and -1D weapons that can wipe out expensive vehicles in one turn.
2. Rhinos: Same crap as LRs... no one wants to buy them unless GW can boost Mech survivability in 7ed.
Mech is much better in 7e than it was in 6e. "All these S-D weapons", which ones exactly? The ones present in a single codex? How many factions are even in 40k now?
jSewell wrote: I wonder if they'll have a different base formation for each chapter. Could see them going away with chapter tactics maybe and incorporating them into bonuses for the base formation/decursion
Man, I hope you're not right about that one! The strength of SM to me has always been the large number of viable builds - not often OP but always fun and mostly competative. This would be nothing but a sweet memory if they made chapter specific formations instead of chapter tactics.
Who else besides Calgar do you think will become a LoW? Lysander? Will we get a big beastie?
Helbrecht, Pedro Kantor, and (possibly) generic Chapter Masters. the LoW slots in SW and BA were chapter masters. Gabriel Seth is a 165 pt Lord of War. Lysander, beatstick though he may be, is just a lowly 1st captain.
Personally I think nothing new is going to come out. They'll change a bunch of stuff, add a Decurion, and otherwise find ways to get you to buy more of the toys you thought you already had enough of.
I just hope they keep something resembling chapter tactics.
SonsofVulkan wrote: Base on finance and profit reasons, GW will most likely boost models that are currently weak and undersold.
1. Landraiders: Not sure how are they gonna make them competitive again... mech is not very strong in 7ed, especially now with all these S-D and -1D weapons that can wipe out expensive vehicles in one turn.
2. Rhinos: Same crap as LRs... no one wants to buy them unless GW can boost Mech survivability in 7ed.
Mech is much better in 7e than it was in 6e. "All these S-D weapons", which ones exactly? The ones present in a single codex? How many factions are even in 40k now?
I took a hiatus skipped 6e. With that said, does it even matter if 7e mech is better than 6e? It is still pretty bad in the "current" top meta and thats all it matters. The only true or semi-true mech list that was highly competitive was the 6e Wave serpent spam. Even the top Tau lists contain min Vehicles(Skyray for marker lights)... When was the last time anyone seen spams of Rhino/razorback, chimeras, Leman Russ, devilfishes, Land raiders, any type of walkers and etc in the top tournament lists?
Maybe I phrased it badly about the S-D weapons... more like the additions of these new S-D weapons on top of the many already existing anti-mech capabilities in 7ed. Yes there are many factions in 40k, but "competitive" players takes the best ones that will give them the best chance to win.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Ok maybe also Ad Lance is still pretty good/scary if you want to consider that "mech"
Isn't there a new campaign box set due around then? DA V Tzeentch, I heard.
If the timing puts it a week or two apart, I expect a single "Space Marines of all chapters" book, like they have (re)done with Eldar.
I don't know if it means anything, but part of my web order today contained a pin that had the roman numeral one on top of a double headed side ways arrow.
I know the Codex Astartes has that as a valid tactical marine symbol, but I've only ever really seen it painted/sculpted on Dark Angel marines.
I really hope they make some changes to Pedro Kantor. For one, he should have Artificer Armor. It doesn't make sense that he can get a squad of Honour Guard that have better armor than him. Also, he should have Eternal Warrior. Dude has been Chapter Master for several centuries, he should have EW.
Eh, I personally think every unique named character of every army deserves to have EW. It might not be terribly realistic ("...and then Lord Solar Macharius took a lascannon blast to the face and said, "it ruined my hairdo!"), but it makes sense since all unique named characters are storied warlords. It could represent the character's outright toughness or his luck or his survival skills.
Olgerth Istaarn wrote: Eh, I personally think every unique named character of every army deserves to have EW. It might not be terribly realistic ("...and then Lord Solar Macharius took a lascannon blast to the face and said, "it ruined my hairdo!"), but it makes sense since all unique named characters are storied warlords. It could represent the character's outright toughness or his luck or his survival skills.
I'd go for an alternative: Named characters are presumed injured (not dead) when removed from the board , so award no 'kill' points unless killed by another named character
But, I atleast can breathe easier. Looks like Chapter Tactics are still staying. I'd be interested in what those rumored 'chapter detachments' restrictions will be. If I can run alternate tactics with 'White Scar Hunting Party' or if it's just what it sounds. White Scar only. But, a lack of Iron Hands detachment rumors might mean Raukaan will still work fine.
Probably just a recut of the rhino and land raider molds to equip the spruces to carry a grav weapon. Then the space wolves will be updated to have a frost rhino (ice cream truck) that no other chapter will have. Of course the dark Angels will have come out prior to this book so they won't have access to it even though they supposedly have all sorts of technology that they have tucked away in the closet.
Theophony wrote: Probably just a recut of the rhino and land raider molds to equip the spruces to carry a grav weapon. Then the space wolves will be updated to have a frost rhino (ice cream truck) that no other chapter will have. Of course the dark Angels will have come out prior to this book so they won't have access to it even though they supposedly have all sorts of technology that they have tucked away in the closet.
I can't see them allowing speeders to be attached to Biker squads again. That was a rules quagmire and they intentionally removed it from the DA book. Pretty telling that the related stories at the bottom of that article pointed to Brettonians coming out in June 2014
Ughh.. so they brought the templars back into the vanilla codex only to split them off two years later? Ughh... so much fail in such little time. It feels like GW is just throwing wet toilet paper balls onto the wall (the player base) to see what sticks. Unfortunately for us, they don't seem to have limited themselves to unused toliet paper only.
Jambles wrote: I really don't think they're going to get rid of Black Templars entirely. After all, they've pretty much got their own model line.
How about this for a positive spin - maybe this means they're getting their own codex again!
For sure, that would be an amazing turn of events, but as of late I have come to expect GW to not do the thing that makes their customers happy.
They could make us a Supplement which would make the whole thing cost $80+ and may not give us everything we really want for a book. They could make a Skitarii/Harlequin style book which actually could give us everything we want. Or they could pop a full Codex like in 4th and give us a lot of our identity back.
Options 2 or 3 would be my pick (Option 2 I think might actually be the best for all parties) but, quite literally, anything could happen.
I won't hold out hope, but I'll admit I'm wrong if they do end up doing the right thing
The Space Marine codex is due according to rumors in early June, and some information is being talked about that gives us some insight to the what might be in that codex. Here is the latest Space Marine Information.
Please remember that these are rumors.
via Steve the Warboss on Faeit 212
My sources tell me the following content for the coming SM Codex:
Rules
-Chapter Tactics remains
-Chapter Tactics unlock Characters and exclusive Relics
-Black Templar are gone
-Legion of the Damned are gone
Space Marine Captain
-5 points cheaper
-Chapter Master is now a upgrade for the captain
Maneus Calgar
-Is now a Lord of War
Iron Hands Character
-New Character
-Special Thunder Hammer with Area Damage
-Melta and Flamer combined Weapon
Space Marine Librarian
-Lexicanium is the base profile
-5 points cheaper
-Can be upgraded to a Codicier or a Episolary
Space Marine Command Squad
-Bike or Jump Pack option remains
-Honour Guard is gone
Terminator Command Squad
-Only when a Terminator Captain is in the Dettachment
-3 to 9 Terminators
Tactical Squad
-1 point cheaper per Marine
Land Speeder
-Can join Units with Bikes when the LS Squadron includes only one Model
Tanks
-Predators, Vindicators and Whirlwinds can form Squadrons of 1-3 Tanks
-No Land Raider Squadrons in the Codex
-Land Raider Redeemer and Crusade are Fast Attack
Dettachments
-Three in one Codex
-Codex Astartes Battle Company
-Raven Guard Strike Squadron
-White Scars Hunting Party
Is it just me, or is any excitement over getting more LR's into a list moot, until they justify their cost as it is?
I never see people field LR in a competitive setting. Between new Eldar, Skitarii having Haywire all over the place, Melta Dominions, etc... I feel like LRs are super expensive chassis for a few Lascannons.
Their whole value was durability... before half of the armies in the game could just laugh at said durability.
So you can now have 6 LR in an army, assuming the guy don't take 3x3 termies just to had 3 more LR...
And CSMLR are still limited to 10 models...
If it makes you feel better, the base Loyalist Land Raider is also limited to 10 models, with the Crusader holding 16 and the 'Deemer holding 12.
If it was up to me Chaos would totally have a bigass transport of some kind that could hold the big Marine blobs you can take in the list, because they'd get way more use out of it than the Loyalists who have all of what, 2-3?, units that can actually fill a LRC without using large amounts of ICs.
Heliodore wrote: Wow, an Iron Hands special character, never thought I'd see the day, hehe, hope it's true!
Except, you know, the Badab War one and the HH ones...
In all technicalities, Cal is from an Iron Hands successor. He just uses the same rules. It's nice but simply isn't the SAME, ya know?
Horus Heresy definitely has quite a few, but that's a different game system.
SickSix wrote: I am hoping Legion of the Damned will at least be moved to a data slate... I haven't even painted mine yet.
I kitbashed a counts-as squad. Sitting primed, waiting. If we loose LotD in the codex, not sure what I’m going to do with them. No way am I shelling out for a one unit “codex”.
So you can now have 6 LR in an army, assuming the guy don't take 3x3 termies just to had 3 more LR...
And CSMLR are still limited to 10 models...
If it makes you feel better, the base Loyalist Land Raider is also limited to 10 models, with the Crusader holding 16 and the 'Deemer holding 12.
If it was up to me Chaos would totally have a bigass transport of some kind that could hold the big Marine blobs you can take in the list, because they'd get way more use out of it than the Loyalists who have all of what, 2-3?, units that can actually fill a LRC without using large amounts of ICs.
I was thinking of something that's on the side of "not going to cost the soul of your firstborn", point-wise. Spartans are expensive models, and will pretty easily hit 300+ points. With the widespread availability of big Chaos Marine squads, I'd say it'd be better to have a long-wheelbase Rhino that's either open topped or an assault ramp.
Heliodore wrote: Wow, an Iron Hands special character, never thought I'd see the day, hehe, hope it's true!
Except, you know, the Badab War one and the HH ones...
In all technicalities, Cal is from an Iron Hands successor. He just uses the same rules. It's nice but simply isn't the SAME, ya know?
Horus Heresy definitely has quite a few, but that's a different game system.
Yup, thanks Slayerfan, I figured since this was a rumor thread for a new Adeptus Astartes Codex for Games Workshop's 40k system that it was clear enough that I was specifically speaking within the confines of the 7th edition 40k system with regards to Iron Hands, not Sons of Medusa, not FW's HH system. I was just thinking back on the release of the 5th edition codex, and then the 6th edition codex, and finally the Clan Raukaan supplement and how each time an Iron Hands character was anticipated, but no dice, hehe.
No Honor Guard kinda screws me considering I bought an Honor Guard unit prebuilt, painted, complete with Banner and Axes... REALLY hope that's wrong or there is a replacement. Seems kinda messed if there is no more use for those fancy Ultramarines models too all Aquilla-d out.
God, I hope that's not true. Was just about to kitbash an Honour Guard squad.
I was just about to start painting my kitbashed squad. I would be okay if they just combined the Honour Guard and Command Squad though. Being able to give a chapter master FNP by virtue of the Apothecary would be quite good. It is dumb you can't take an Apothecary with a Chapter Master in the first place. If the HG is, in fact, gone, I will just have to UN-kitbash them.
Honestly, I can see them cutting Honour Guard quite easily; the only "official" models are with Calgar, so instead make Calgar a "unit" with "Ultramarine Honour Guard" only available to him.
Of course, cutting Honour Guard will nerf heavily melee Marines; they're by far the best close combat unit in the codex alongside TH+SS AssTermies, I rely on them extensively with my minotaurs, and should they be cut I honestly don't know what I'd do with my 10 converted models which represent a key element of my "triple threat" assault force.
Probably use Legion rules and run the whole force as Imperial Fists; Templar Bretheren and Moloc a Praetor with a Paragon Blade, Storm Shield and so on.
SickSix wrote: I am hoping Legion of the Damned will at least be moved to a data slate... I haven't even painted mine yet.
I kitbashed a counts-as squad. Sitting primed, waiting. If we loose LotD in the codex, not sure what I’m going to do with them. No way am I shelling out for a one unit “codex”.
For what it's worth, aside from the relic they can take, the profiles age exactly the same as those in the SM book, and their Detachment is simply 1-3 squads. Just keep your current book for reference and I doubt you'll run into any problems.
As for Honour Guard, I can't see them going. Seeing as BA Command Squads and their functional equivalent of HG (SangGuard) are now both in Elites, I can see them possibly moving there.
Calgar moving to LoW is understandable(in relation) with Gaz, Draigo, and others being moved. I do not like GW's decision to have them moved in the first place. Unfortunately Many game groups simply do not allow LoW''s of any type. So for many smurf players, Calgar is pseudo cut from the codex.
I feel like any game group of people you're friends with won't give a damn that Calgar or Ghaz got put in a LoW slot, especially if they were HQs you ran regularly when they were still in that slot.
Brother SRM wrote: I feel like any game group of people you're friends with won't give a damn that Calgar or Ghaz got put in a LoW slot, especially if they were HQs you ran regularly when they were still in that slot.
I'm a vocal opponent of GW shoving apoc in every orifice of "normal" 40k and I don't see any problem with using *THOSE* LOW. Frankly, character LOW are theoretically annoying (wtf can't marneus calgar, chapter master of the ultramarines, lead the army without having a minion HQ under him?) but not unbalanced overall. It was stupid to move them into that category along with superheavies and gargantuans and they have as much in common with them as heavy support grots would with battlewagons. If someone is not allowing those then they're really throwing out the baby with the bathwater and not even bothering to hold true to what 40k used to be.
I wholly agre. I can understand a "no superheavies/gargantuan creatures" rule on a group, but "no HQs that are slightly tougher than regular HQs" is silly.
My main concern about this Iron Hands character is that he sounds like yet another beatstick HQ that is on foot. Like Sicarius, Vulkan, Helbrecht and the Imperial Fists guy he will move slow as hell and just get shot up. I don't see the use in including him if he'll never get used like the three I mentioned. What I want is more options for creating my own custom CM or Captain- being able to buy special rules or abilities. But I know that will never happen.
I know it will never happen, but I'd like to see the new Adeptus Astartes codex ONLY represent chapters that are 'custom' and not part of one of the 9 original chapters featured. Not only would it put a greater emphasis on creating your own narrative, but it would allow each of the other chapters to have their own codices.
Again, I know it won't happen... it's not exactly "fluffly" since the chapters are all ostensibly following the Codex Astartes. I just feal like the ultramarines have really had their day in the sun. They are super tired at this point and as a Dark Angels player who currently enjoys the most recent DA codex, I think that other players should have the chance to enjoy the same thing...
Wouldn't it be amazing if each of the 9 original chapters had their own book - detailing not only them but their successors? Imperial Fists, Crisom Fists, and Black Templars would all fit nicely into a single book. I think the White Scars could do with a book of their own, and so could the raven guard (actually the Raven Guard could really use one... SM special rules really don't lend themselves to a chapter that is supposed to relly so heavily on stealth).
Salamanders would be an amazing one as well
I think that if each army got the attention it deserved, it could easily accommodate a book's worth of special rules to fit their playstyles. And if you wanted to go the Ultramarines... you get them in a book + the rules for other 'generic' marines. Anything that would adhere strictly to the codex astartes.
Some more rumors went up from that Blogspot site. Same Source.
If accurate, Templars are being removed from the dex to be added later and will still be able to use the 6th SM dex (I believe that is what is being stated) until the new dex hits.
So that's something.
Don't know if this was noted earlier but:
via Steve the Warboss on Faeit 212
The new Codex Space Marines comes with some Chapter-specific Boxed Sets.
Azreal13 wrote: A flawed idea, as all the loyalist chapters are descended from the 9 loyalist legions.
Not strictly true; there's some hints that certain Loyalist chapters are actually descended from loyal members of the Traitor legions, or were founded using leftover gene-seed from the Traitor Legions that was kept on Mars/Terra. Some particular examples include:
-Blood Ravens: unknown, but a few hints that they may be Thousand Sons descendants
-Silver Skulls: possibly descended from loyal Iron Warriors, particularly given the chapter culture's "deviation" from that of their supposed primogenitors, the Ultramarines
-Carcharadons: possibly Night Lords descendants, though this one is very shaky; definitely "unknown" primogenitor status, though
-Minotaurs: might be World Eaters descendants, but again, all records are either nonexistent, expunged, or otherwise sealed
-Red Scorpions: might be Emperor's Children descendants. They claim that their geneseed is the purest, and it just so happens that the Emperor's Children had the purest geneseed...
So, yeah. Definitely some odd happenings, and quite a few chapters that have unknown founders that may in fact be Traitor derived. Personally I think that's pretty cool, that there are a few loyalist chapters that have a heritage with the Traitor Legions, because it does bring up the fact that not everybody wanted to go along with the Heresy in the Traitor Legions (though most were killed in the virus bombings of Istvaan III).
Azreal13 wrote: A flawed idea, as all the loyalist chapters are descended from the 9 loyalist legions.
Not strictly true; there's some hints that certain Loyalist chapters are actually descended from loyal members of the Traitor legions, or were founded using leftover gene-seed from the Traitor Legions that was kept on Mars/Terra. Some particular examples include:
-Blood Ravens: unknown, but a few hints that they may be Thousand Sons descendants
-Silver Skulls: possibly descended from loyal Iron Warriors, particularly given the chapter culture's "deviation" from that of their supposed primogenitors, the Ultramarines
-Carcharadons: possibly Night Lords descendants, though this one is very shaky; definitely "unknown" primogenitor status, though
-Minotaurs: might be World Eaters descendants, but again, all records are either nonexistent, expunged, or otherwise sealed
-Red Scorpions: might be Emperor's Children descendants. They claim that their geneseed is the purest, and it just so happens that the Emperor's Children had the purest geneseed...
So, yeah. Definitely some odd happenings, and quite a few chapters that have unknown founders that may in fact be Traitor derived. Personally I think that's pretty cool, that there are a few loyalist chapters that have a heritage with the Traitor Legions, because it does bring up the fact that not everybody wanted to go along with the Heresy in the Traitor Legions (though most were killed in the virus bombings of Istvaan III).
But, regardless of what might be, I'm seeing lots of maybes and mights, the fact remains that all chapters that have an established primogenitor are derived from loyalist chapters. GW aren't going to somehow break that vagueness just to justify a Codex as suggested by the post I posted that in response to.
And again, that's not strictly true; the Silver Skulls are established as having the Ultramarines as their primogenitors, but there's enough hints dropped to say "they're not actually UM descendants".
Ok, fine, I'll look out for Codex: Silver Skulls And Other Chapters That Possibly Are Descended From Traitor Remnants in lieu of the regular Codex: Space Marines sometime in the future.
These rumours sound like the failed rumours from the last book. Increased command squad size, terminator command squads back(and without a vanilla kit, if the rumours are true?) three levels of librarians? Sounds like someone opened a 3rd/4th edition codex and started pointing at things.
EDIT: and an iron hands character, rumored just like last time...
-Carcharadons: possibly Night Lords descendants, though this one is very shaky; definitely "unknown" primogenitor status, though
Carcharadon Astra is descended from Pre-Corax elements of the Raven Guard banished to the borders of the Imperium space by the Primach before the Heresy per FW Horus Heresy book 3 - Extermination. There was never any indication of them being Night Lords. Even the original retro-con in Imperial Armor - Badab War, only ever mentions Raven Guard. It's a done deal. Pre-heresy RG even had the same color scheme and bore the same tribal iconography.
Where in the hell did anyone ever get the idea that Silver Skulls could be Iron Warrior descendants?Just because of the icon?
They are UM successors. But over the eons some of their history was lost so now in M40 they aren't 100% sure. That's all it is. Seriously, Sarah Cawkwell chatted with us on B&C. They are first(second) founding successors of the UM. One of the most storied and successful chapters there is. ( that isn'ta legion)
Azreal13 wrote: A flawed idea, as all the loyalist chapters are descended from the 9 loyalist legions.
Not strictly true; there's some hints that certain Loyalist chapters are actually descended from loyal members of the Traitor legions, or were founded using leftover gene-seed from the Traitor Legions that was kept on Mars/Terra. Some particular examples include:
-Blood Ravens: unknown, but a few hints that they may be Thousand Sons descendants
-Silver Skulls: possibly descended from loyal Iron Warriors, particularly given the chapter culture's "deviation" from that of their supposed primogenitors, the Ultramarines
-Carcharadons: possibly Night Lords descendants, though this one is very shaky; definitely "unknown" primogenitor status, though
-Minotaurs: might be World Eaters descendants, but again, all records are either nonexistent, expunged, or otherwise sealed
-Red Scorpions: might be Emperor's Children descendants. They claim that their geneseed is the purest, and it just so happens that the Emperor's Children had the purest geneseed...
So, yeah. Definitely some odd happenings, and quite a few chapters that have unknown founders that may in fact be Traitor derived. Personally I think that's pretty cool, that there are a few loyalist chapters that have a heritage with the Traitor Legions, because it does bring up the fact that not everybody wanted to go along with the Heresy in the Traitor Legions (though most were killed in the virus bombings of Istvaan III).
Erh.. I'm pretty sure it's stated that the Carcharadons are descended from Raven Guard, especially since their skin is pale and their eyes are black.
Red Scorpions never had any records ever stating that they were descended from any traitor legion and IIRC there's historical records that indicates Red Scorpions as a loyalist founded chapter as early as 33 MK.
Also, why would Minotuars be World Eaters descendants? Because they favor melee combat? I'm not strong on the fluff on Minotaurs but if that's the reason then the Blood Angels would honestly make for much better candidates, especially if you removed the part with Sanguinius and replaced everything blood related and replaced it with 'Khorne'.
Azreal13 wrote: A flawed idea, as all the loyalist chapters are descended from the 9 loyalist legions.
Not strictly true; there's some hints that certain Loyalist chapters are actually descended from loyal members of the Traitor legions, or were founded using leftover gene-seed from the Traitor Legions that was kept on Mars/Terra. Some particular examples include:
-Blood Ravens: unknown, but a few hints that they may be Thousand Sons descendants
-Silver Skulls: possibly descended from loyal Iron Warriors, particularly given the chapter culture's "deviation" from that of their supposed primogenitors, the Ultramarines
-Carcharadons: possibly Night Lords descendants, though this one is very shaky; definitely "unknown" primogenitor status, though
-Minotaurs: might be World Eaters descendants, but again, all records are either nonexistent, expunged, or otherwise sealed
-Red Scorpions: might be Emperor's Children descendants. They claim that their geneseed is the purest, and it just so happens that the Emperor's Children had the purest geneseed...
So, yeah. Definitely some odd happenings, and quite a few chapters that have unknown founders that may in fact be Traitor derived. Personally I think that's pretty cool, that there are a few loyalist chapters that have a heritage with the Traitor Legions, because it does bring up the fact that not everybody wanted to go along with the Heresy in the Traitor Legions (though most were killed in the virus bombings of Istvaan III).
Except that...you know all of the Geneseeds of the traitoris is either locked up in a bunker somewhere on Mars or was destroyed...
Even nowa days 80% of new Chapters are made by using Guilliman geneseed because its the purest and most viable of the lot of the Loyalist, since all the others have some flaws in some kind or have mutations and are kept secret in others (BA, SW etc).
So using even more flawed and corrupted geneseed is simply dumb, and all of this is just feul for the Thinfoil hat people crazy theories.
Well actually DA seem to have the most stable seed... Political reasons prevent the seed from being used, though.
For no reason at all.
Since we're loyal.
And hide nothing.
Not like anyone here tripped and fell...
Totally.
Azreal13 wrote: A flawed idea, as all the loyalist chapters are descended from the 9 loyalist legions.
What does that even matter in terms of codex releases?
Apart from the Grey Knights (who already have their own codex), all SM chapters are successors of one of the original 9. That changes nothing in my idea.
Each book should cover one of the original 9 AND their successors.
Codex DA for example would cover the DA and all the chapters that descended from them.
Codex: Imperial Fists would cover the IF as well as Black Templars, Crimson Fists, and so on...
As a customer, I would love to see it. If they can make a game edition that lasts long enough to cover all the releases I would happily purchase a book for all the armies I play. Good business move for GW - Good set of options for players. Everybody wins.
Azreal13 wrote: A flawed idea, as all the loyalist chapters are descended from the 9 loyalist legions.
What does that even matter in terms of codex releases?
Apart from the Grey Knights (who already have their own codex), all SM chapters are successors of one of the original 9. That changes nothing in my idea.
Each book should cover one of the original 9 AND their successors.
Codex DA for example would cover the DA and all the chapters that descended from them.
Codex: Imperial Fists would cover the IF as well as Black Templars, Crimson Fists, and so on...
As a customer, I would love to see it. If they can make a game edition that lasts long enough to cover all the releases I would happily purchase a book for all the armies I play. Good business move for GW - Good set of options for players. Everybody wins.
I would love to see this but not as full codices, I really miss the days of 3rd ed where we had thin soft covered books that made codices so much better. Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, Craftworld Eldar, all of these made the original books much better with a much lower corporate investment and player cost. Yeah I would like to see codex imperial fists, but I also wanna see codex biel tan and codex behemoth and codex blood axe. GW needs to bring back the age of the softcover add on.
En Excelsis wrote: I know it will never happen, but I'd like to see the new Adeptus Astartes codex ONLY represent chapters that are 'custom' and not part of one of the 9 original chapters featured. Not only would it put a greater emphasis on creating your own narrative, but it would allow each of the other chapters to have their own codices.
Is saying that you'd like to see a book that features Chapters that aren't part of one of the loyalist Legions, and my point was that would be a short book because, small dose of subsequent internet pedantry aside, all chapters are successors to one of those Legions, custom or not.
I think your idea of having a book for each Legion/Chapter is exactly how the supplement system should have worked, with a core Astartes book and an add on for each, but clearly GW can't be arsed and would much rather fanny about doing a half baked version of a handful of them.
Azreal13 wrote: A flawed idea, as all the loyalist chapters are descended from the 9 loyalist legions.
What does that even matter in terms of codex releases?
Apart from the Grey Knights (who already have their own codex), all SM chapters are successors of one of the original 9. That changes nothing in my idea.
Each book should cover one of the original 9 AND their successors.
Codex DA for example would cover the DA and all the chapters that descended from them.
Codex: Imperial Fists would cover the IF as well as Black Templars, Crimson Fists, and so on...
As a customer, I would love to see it. If they can make a game edition that lasts long enough to cover all the releases I would happily purchase a book for all the armies I play. Good business move for GW - Good set of options for players. Everybody wins.
I would love to see this but not as full codices, I really miss the days of 3rd ed where we had thin soft covered books that made codices so much better. Dark Angels, Blood Angels, Space Wolves, Craftworld Eldar, all of these made the original books much better with a much lower corporate investment and player cost. Yeah I would like to see codex imperial fists, but I also wanna see codex biel tan and codex behemoth and codex blood axe. GW needs to bring back the age of the softcover add on.
Mmm... I really enjoy most of the factions in the game. I primarily play Eldar, but I've invested significantly in SM of various chapter, CSM, and even a little bit of orks/tyranids. I've really run that gamut of armies. All of them are fun in their own way and offer interesting an unique approaches to the tabletop experience. I can honestly say that each army I play has a distinctly unique approach to playing that justifies the investment - both in my personal time and the monetary value of the materials. After all, if playing Dark Angels - for example - was not worth the money, I would not buy the book. But it is worth it: Dark Angels are different enough from other chapters that they genuinely need their own book to explain all the differences in their available play style.
This really isn't true of most other factions. I'm not hating - just pointing out a fact. Each SM chapter has enough background lore and history detailing such different tactics that they could easily fill a book with special rules. The fact that some factions do get books (like BA, DA, etc) and some don't (IF, BT, IH, WS, etc) is just a disservice to the later chapters. All of them are varied enough to deserve it. (assuming of course that there are enough people playing that faction to merit selling books to them). Other factions like the various tribes of orks, or hive fleets of 'nids are just not different enough in background and lore to merit different rule sets. Does Kraken have noticeably different battlefield tactics than Leviethan? Do they have different critters? Different abilities? If so, its not readily visible to me as a player... If that were to change I could see each factions getting supplement, but until it does, there isn't a reason.
The same is true of the other factions... even the Eldar. While most of the craftworlds have wildly different motivations, the overall "way of war" that applies to the Eldar is centralized by their worship of Khaine and his individual shrines. All the little differences are differences of character, not of anything else. Biel-Tan isn't using anything in war that Ulthwe is not. There are not enough units or special rules from craftworld to craftworld to justify individual books.
IMO, the only factions that need more than one codex are the SM and the CSM - each of their respective factions should have its own units and rules, and should presented in their own books. After all, they really are the stars of the 40k show.
IMO, the only factions that need more than one codex are the SM and the CSM - each of their respective factions should have its own units and rules, and should presented in their own books. After all, they really are the stars of the 40k show.
The Imperial Guard would like to have a word with you on that front.
They actually have, at present, the most diversity of any army in the game in terms of "codexes"
Death Korps: Assault Brigade + Siege Regiment
Elysians: Drop Troops + D-99
Basic IG Codex
And Catachans used to have their own book, and the 4th edition Regiment Builder is the origin for the FW lists (in fact, many of their special rules are exact replicas of those now-gone options).
What we need, and this is for most codexes is not multiple books but proper customization options as existed in 3.5/4 CSM, SM, IG, Orks, Eldar, they all used to have wonderful, if not especially well designed options in the core book. They weren't very internally balanced, but the idea was sound, and wonderful for fluffy builds.
En Excelsis wrote: Other factions like the various tribes of orks, or hive fleets of 'nids are just not different enough in background and lore to merit different rule sets.
Ork speed freaks would like to have a word with you...
Also the Imperial Guard regiments are certainly worthy of that level of differentiation, never mind traitor guard, who currently aren't even really represented, other than by sticking spikes on your Cadians.
I think most of the factions deserve some analog of "chapter tactics". Even Orks Speedfreeks, Blood Axes and Deathskulls can do war very different. Even in my DA codex there are Disciples of Caliban that can diffirient from main chapter.
IG has Cadian, Valhallian, Catachan, Vostroya and Krieg regiments that can be realy different. Eldar craftworlds, Dark Eldars cabals, adMech forgeworlds, Tyranids hivefleets, Tau anclaves, CSM legions. Daemons somehow have distinct differensec between gods allready, but can have some bonuses for monogod armies I think.
P.S. And I'm really frustrated that my DA codex got bypassed in udates que again...
Reinokarite wrote: I think most of the factions deserve some analog of "chapter tactics". Even Orks Speedfreeks, Blood Axes and Deathskulls can do war very different. Even in my DA codex there are Disciples of Caliban that can diffirient from main chapter.
IG has Cadian, Valhallian, Catachan, Vostroya and Krieg regiments that can be realy different. Eldar craftworlds, Dark Eldars cabals, adMech forgeworlds, Tyranids hivefleets, Tau anclaves, CSM legions. Daemons somehow have distinct differensec between gods allready, but can have some bonuses for monogod armies I think.
P.S. And I'm really frustrated that my DA codex got bypassed in udates que again...
Well, coming after the main Astartes book this time DA can be Vanilla Marines stuff +1 like Blood Angels, instead of Vanilla Marines 0.5 beta version. Therefore no whining (brooding) allowed.
Reinokarite wrote: I think most of the factions deserve some analog of "chapter tactics". Even Orks Speedfreeks, Blood Axes and Deathskulls can do war very different. Even in my DA codex there are Disciples of Caliban that can diffirient from main chapter.
IG has Cadian, Valhallian, Catachan, Vostroya and Krieg regiments that can be realy different. Eldar craftworlds, Dark Eldars cabals, adMech forgeworlds, Tyranids hivefleets, Tau anclaves, CSM legions. Daemons somehow have distinct differensec between gods allready, but can have some bonuses for monogod armies I think.
P.S. And I'm really frustrated that my DA codex got bypassed in udates que again...
Well, coming after the main Astartes book this time DA can be Vanilla Marines stuff +1 like Blood Angels, instead of Vanilla Marines 0.5 beta version. Therefore no whining (brooding) allowed.
Wouldn't count on it. After all DA's are "slow to adapt new tech" and with the slew of special models we have (Black Knights, DW Knights, LS Vengeance (lol) and the Flyers (doublelol)) that puts us with 6 units that SM don't have - so I expect to have 6 units "cut" from the SM arsenal to balance the scales. Because reasons.
En Excelsis wrote: Each book should cover one of the original 9 AND their successors.
Codex DA for example would cover the DA and all the chapters that descended from them.
Codex: Imperial Fists would cover the IF as well as Black Templars, Crimson Fists, and so on...
Unless GW was going to commit to doing a codex for every loyalist and traitor legion just for the hell of it (and some of those codexes would be huge and others would be redundant) I have to say this doesn't make a lick of sense, for the loyalists especially.
Most of the loyalist chapters, even the first founding chapters, have very little deviation from the codex astartes - but some of their descendants do deviate a great deal. Imperial Fists are the poster children for why you wouldn't want to publish codexes this way. The Imperial Fists and Crimson Fists adhere very strictly to the codex astartes, while the Black Templars deviate more than probably any other chapter. Imperial/Crimson Fists are Ultramarines with slightly different special rules. Black Templars really need their own book.
I'll keep going: Raven Guard are codex compliant with an emphasis on stealth and infiltration; meanwhile the Carcharodons equip their tactical squads with chainswords and excel at brutal close combat.
White Scars are codex compliant with an emphasis on mounted warfare; meanwhile the Mantis Warriors specialize in guerrilla warfare.
Salamanders are codex compliant with an emphasis on artisan armor and weaponry; meanwhile the Storm Giants (rumored Salamanders descendants) are about as bog-standard as they come.
Not to mention all the chapters whose original founding is unknown.
It's a nonsensical way of organizing things - the vast majority of the chapters out there can be handled by a single core codex plus a few unique rules, and that includes most of the first founding chapters. Meanwhile their descendants, when they have them, many times have nothing in common with their parent chapter (or have no known parent chapter at all - where would you lump them?) and may need totally unrelated unique rules. And then the Black Templars, one of the few chapters out there so unique that surely they need their own book, have to share a book with the Imperial Fists, who differ only slightly from your average codex-compliant chapter.
To everyone saying that such and such army would like to have a word with you on that....
Cute but I never said that all the armies aren't special snowflakes. Every army is a little different or it wouldn't have some mention in any of the books. But that doesn't mean it's different enough to merit its own unique rule set.
While Tyranid Hive Fleets, Ork Waaaghs, Tau Enclaves, and Necron Tombwrolds all have variations in personality and flare, they hardly differ at all in terms of gameplay.(Red goz fasta! - A single special rule does not a codex make). They share a common group of units and rules that can be used differently from player to player, and that amount of variety is sufficient to represent the diversity of that faction in the game.
SM and CSM are quite different. The varying factions do have unique units, characters, tactics, and rules that are not just footnotes. In many cases they are enough to merit entire books! Not always... but many times.
While the IG do have lots of very awesome style choices, most of them don't do battle very differently from the "core" of the IG. (the Elysians are a slight departure in that they favor drop troops, which are themselves only a footnote in the existing books).
Again - that's not the way it has to be. Just the way it currently is.
I personally think that the SM codex line-up should look something like this:
Codex: Ultramarines (includes rules for playing the Ultramarines and their successor chapters, as well as any "DIY chapter that strictly adheres to the Codex Astartes)
Codex: Imperial Fists (Includes rules for playing the IF - focus on siege units, siege tactics, and their successor chapters suc has BT and CF)
Codex: DA (already covered)
Codex: BA (already covered)
Codex: Ravenguard (includes rules for playing the RG and their successors. Special rules and units emphasizing scouts, infiltration, and speed)
Codex: White Scars (includes rules for playing the WS and their successors, Special rules for mounted units, special mounted units, blitz tactics and speed)
Codex: Space Wolves (already covered)
Codex: Iron Hands (Includes rules for playing the IH and their successors. Special rules for augmented infantry, heavy tanks, etc)
Codex: Salamanders (Includes special rules for playing the Salamanders and their successors. Special rules for unique techmarines, emphasis on special wargear, and use of flamers, relics and heavy infantry).
The Same could be done for the 5 CSM armies
Codex: CSM (Khorne)
Codex: CSM (Nurgle)
Codex: CSM (Slaanesh)
Codex: CSM (Tzeentch)
And perhaps a very small suupliment for playing undivided
I would rather see more diversity in the books than is needed, than suffer through not enough diversity to adequately represent the factions
I hate when these threads devolve into this type of discussion.
Before their 4th and 5th edition books, none of them needed to be separated because the special rules that each got could have been handled with a few special entries on a HQ and some limitations the player could accept on his own. Fortunately (or unfortunately depending on which side of the debate you’re on) GW has expanded these few chapters enough over the years to warrant their additional books for more than just the background they offer which is really the only reason they were split off to begin with.
But I agree with CalgarsPimpHand more or less. If we’re seriously going to keep the books separate, there’s no reason to introduce more loyalist books as all of the divergent chapters are listed. A special rule for an HQ or detachment would be enough to give most of the others a reasonable enough identity that players would be content. Chaos is in a similar boat. Why have a book for things like Alpha Legion, Iron Warriors, or Word Bearers? These legions are covered fairly well with the standard book and if GW introduced some special rules on HQ choices or through detachments, you’d get a reasonable list for these (could be better, CSM is starved for choices). It’s the 4 main cult legions that really stand apart, but seeing as how they don’t have the amount of background material that the loyalists have I don’t even know if we need a separate book for each of them. Just a generic CSM Cult Legion book.
If we could turn back the clock back to 3rd edition when none of the books had enough rules to warrant splitting them, I’d be fine with doing away with all of them. Especially now that Black Library is handling the background material so well. But that’s not going to happen. The last thing we need is for it to be made worse though. SM don’t need more division. CSM certainly deserve it though.
Roll all of the Space Marines into one codex and make supplements for the special snow flakes. That includes Black Templars, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Dark Angels.
And for God's sake, make Dreadnoughts into Monstrous Creatures so that we can use the damn things!
kronk wrote: Roll all of the Space Marines into one codex and make supplements for the special snow flakes. That includes Black Templars, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Dark Angels.
And for God's sake, make Dreadnoughts into Monstrous Creatures so that we can use the damn things!
Please yes
Though what are the chances the whole set is just going to be rehashed again next year.
darkcloak wrote: Dreadnoughts as MCs? Holy hell. I throw my hands up. That is the solution? My god.
Right now there is a huge disconnect between the relative durability, utility, and power of monstrous creatures and vehicles. If you can one shot one, why can't you head shot the other? Making them two completely different systems was stupid in the first place. Alternately, if they came up with a damage table for multiwound creatures that decreased their effectiveness as well as gave the a chance to be one shotted as well that would be fair as well in a separate but equal way. That's better than coming up with convoluted special rules for EACH case like dreads with IWND, invuls, and ignores half the damage result, and rerolls damage results. YMMV.
kronk wrote: Roll all of the Space Marines into one codex and make supplements for the special snow flakes. That includes Black Templars, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Dark Angels.
And for God's sake, make Dreadnoughts into Monstrous Creatures so that we can use the damn things!
Please yes
Though what are the chances the whole set is just going to be rehashed again next year.
Grey Knights are missing from that list
While I wouldn't mind a supercodex, I don't think it will ever happen. I certainly don't want to see Ultramarines, imperial fists, ravenguard, white scars, iron hands, and salamanders getting their own codex -- at least not unless each of those has at least a half dozen distinct models.
I think Blood Angels and Dark Angels would be the best candidates for being rolled into the main codex, because they are the least distinct from basic SM. Space Wolves just look so different, and their units are very distinct. And Grey Knights have their own thing going.
I know lots of people who buy BA/DA and play them with vanilla space marine rules (just because they like the models), but I don't know anyone who plays GK/SW who does this.
darkcloak wrote: Dreadnoughts as MCs? Holy hell. I throw my hands up. That is the solution? My god.
Right now there is a huge disconnect between the relative durability, utility, and power of monstrous creatures and vehicles. If you can one shot one, why can't you head shot the other? Making them two completely different systems was stupid in the first place. Alternately, if they came up with a damage table for multiwound creatures that decreased their effectiveness as well as gave the a chance to be one shotted as well that would be fair as well in a separate but equal way. That's better than coming up with convoluted special rules for EACH case like dreads with IWND, invuls, and ignores half the damage result, and rerolls damage results. YMMV.
Yes, putting vehicles and MCs on equal footing would make me so happy. As you say, it makes no sense that you can head shot one and not the other.
The Vehicle system does make sense from the perspective that many vehicles are more heavily armored in the front than the sides or back. However, I would prefer to see the MCs moved into the Vehicle side, than vice versa. It would be a way of toning them down a bit, and I'm all for that. Perhaps, just make MCs Vehicles with Fear and call it a day; then, in books, add armor facings.
SM and CSM are quite different. The varying factions do have unique units, characters, tactics, and rules that are not just footnotes. In many cases they are enough to merit entire books! Not always... but many times.
While the IG do have lots of very awesome style choices, most of them don't do battle very differently from the "core" of the IG. (the Elysians are a slight departure in that they favor drop troops, which are themselves only a footnote in the existing books).
Again - that's not the way it has to be. Just the way it currently is.
Not really - the Imperial Guard have always been the most diverse figting force in the Imperium- they have primatives with sword and axe and technoligical advanced Regiments in sleek armour and with cybernetics, plus steampunk power armour and everything in between.
The Astartes are massively varied Culturally BUT not in tems of the actual fighitng forces and until recently not on the battlefield.
Recently GW deiced not bother making different IG models but has spent all its time an effort on crowbaring in new units and vehicles into the Marines in an atempt to mkae them a little different from each other - hence horrifici mistakes (IMO) like Centuirons, the dire looking flyers and Baby carriers.
IG is the easiest army to make supplements for - which they can't bothered - not when they can make ever so slightly different Marines - and continue the self perpuating cycle of they sell most - cos we make the most of them - odd that.
kronk wrote: Roll all of the Space Marines into one codex and make supplements for the special snow flakes. That includes Black Templars, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Dark Angels.
And for God's sake, make Dreadnoughts into Monstrous Creatures so that we can use the damn things!
Best suggestion so far...
And let's not forget that in game terms most "deviant" astartes are made by giving them a special unit or two or weapon upgrades.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
darkcloak wrote: Dreadnoughts as MCs? Holy hell. I throw my hands up. That is the solution? My god.
Yes, putting vehicles and MCs on equal footing would make me so happy. As you say, it makes no sense that you can head shot one and not the other.
The Vehicle system does make sense from the perspective that many vehicles are more heavily armored in the front than the sides or back. However, I would prefer to see the MCs moved into the Vehicle side, than vice versa. It would be a way of toning them down a bit, and I'm all for that. Perhaps, just make MCs Vehicles with Fear and call it a day; then, in books, add armor facings.
You could still have that though for "vehicles" with toughness by just saying they're -1 T on the side and -2 T on the back. I'd prefer switching everything to one system with a slight preference for the T one but I'd be fine with both. I just don't think it's fair to have such major differences in power between them with things like the wraithknight being 100% fine at 1 wound and then suddenly dropping dead when a land raider at the same cost can be gimped either permanently or at a minimum for 1 turn with each shot and that's assuming it's not just destroyed right away.
Vehicles are just too easy to damage. I watch a lot of movies. Only the heroes AP1 revolver has the destructive potential to blow up the enemies camaro. The normal AK47s can fire 100rounds into them and nothing happens! The same should be true here!
I know lots of people who buy BA/DA and play them with vanilla space marine rules (just because they like the models), but I don't know anyone who plays GK/SW who does this.
They play DA/BA that way because vanilla codex is clearly stronger them DA/BA codecies not because there to small diferences. DA for one have 2 flyers, 2 LSs, 1 uniqe Terminaor flawor, 1 bike flawor, 1 uniqe HQ type, 5 named HQsm uniq force organisations, thta's no small differences. Would they do that if DA had strong competitve codex? I doubt it.
I know lots of people who buy BA/DA and play them with vanilla space marine rules (just because they like the models), but I don't know anyone who plays GK/SW who does this.
They play DA/BA that way because vanilla codex is clearly stronger them DA/BA codecies not because there to small diferences. DA for one have 2 flyers, 2 LSs, 1 uniqe Terminaor flawor, 1 bike flawor, 1 uniqe HQ type, 5 named HQsm uniq force organisations, thta's no small differences. Would they do that if DA had strong competitve codex? I doubt it.
It's kinda a symptom of the fact we have to many codexs in the game that play similar to each other.
Unless you spamming the special units for BA or DA, then your just playing a inferior version of the vanilla SM book.
The same way if your not spamming deamon engines in a CSM army, your just playing a inferior version of the Space Wolf Codex.
I'm not saying that these armies should exist in the fluff or game. But I think rolling Dark Angels into the SM book, and making the CSM and space wolf play styles more divergent from each other would improve the game over all. Blood Angels could swing either way IMHO when it comes to rolling into a super sized SM book.
To me the biggest problem is when you have to many armies that have to similar play styles. Because it's impossible to not compare thows two books together and just use the best one.
@Reinokarite, Lockark -- I don't really see it that way.
I actually play my BA as BA about 3/4 of the time, because it lets me play the "flavored" BA units like Death Company, Sanguinary Guard, and that kind of thing. But sometimes it gets a bit boring, and I want to use Centurions and Stormtalons, or even something silly like a ven dred (because I have a nicely painted model) and use some different Chapter Tactic to mix things up. It's just kind of nice having an army that you can apply more than one set of rules to. None of my SM lists are really killer lists by today's standards (though they're not hopeless, either). Plus, when you put BA Tacticals beside standard Tacticals, DC to standard Assault Marines, BA Terminators to standard Terminators... there is just no comparison in models. The Blood Angels models are just a billion times better. It's also nice that BA are a faction that you can get sculpted icons for (as a part of kits) without having to spend a fortune with Forge World.
From a practical perspective, the very first faction of Space Marines I modelled were Blood Angels (during Rogue Trader) followed by Grey Knights when the Chaos book that was shared with Fantasy came out. I've kind of stuck with BA as my space marine chapter, partly because I paint my Eldar blue/yellow (Alaitoc colors), so I didn't want blue/white Ultramarines I didn't do Salamanders because my Orks have claimed green/black, and Dark Eldar have claimed the dark green colors.
I guess I have some Dark Angels that are also dark green, but really just because the Ravenwing Command and Deathwing Knights were cool, and the 6th ed DV box had them I've never had enough DA to actually play 'em as DA. I haven't gotten very far with Necron, but for sure they'll be painted to codex.
I guess that leaves me purple for some Chaos army one day, and yellow for something IMPERIAL FISTS HERE WE COME!!!
Nvs wrote: Vehicles are just too easy to damage. I watch a lot of movies. Only the heroes AP1 revolver has the destructive potential to blow up the enemies camaro. The normal AK47s can fire 100rounds into them and nothing happens! The same should be true here!
Sigh...
Vehicles are absolutely not too easy to damage.
Try playing the DE where the toughness vehicle in your list has a 10 AV on all sides. Your 'too easy to damage' dreadnaughts are the same front AV as an Eldar heavy tank. Do you hear Eldar players griping about how weak their tanks are?
What would turning the dreadnaught in a MC really accomplish? You'd lose the AV and get a T value instead. At first that sounds cool but after a few games you'd realize that it comes with a mess of its own drawbacks. Ever heard of poison? Having 4+ or 2+ poison weapons just obliterate MC. And now that Fleshbane is being handed out like party favors in the codices my wraithlords are lucky to get passed turn 2. I've all but retired the damn things...
On top of that, having all the walker-type units in the game be MC ultimately just strips away what little variety is left in the game. Wouldn't it be more desirable to have the dreadnaught remain a vehicle and just alter some of the rules for vehicles when in CC?
Not that I see anything changing anyway - when the New Astartes codex hits I don't think that the dreads will be altered in any significant way. The only thing I could see happening is a point cost reduction. A small one...
I'd honestly rather they make some much needed changes to other units. With the current 7E rules the Assault marines are virtually useless. I feel especially bad for Black Templar players who rely heavily of CC. If there is any major change I want to see in the new book that would be it....
These codex books and supplements are getting out of hand. DA, BA, and SW are unique enough with rules, deviations, and models that they deserve their own book.
White scars, salamanders, iron hands, adventures, don't deviate from the codex astartes and are known only for being specialized in one area that all other armies have access to as well. I hope they keep the codex as is where a character gives you more heavies (imperial fists), fast attack units or abilities (raven guard, white scars, etc). Why make more codex books when some armies are basically copy in others in the firat place (Ravenwing was here long before white scars had anything besides a different painted job).
I can understand Templars getting their own book as thwy deviate a bit. If anything they ahould make a codex forgeworld which has official updated differentiated rules for carcharodons, minotaurs, and red scorpions... now that would be cool!!
GW keep it simple. I don't want a frikin library of books that are outdated in a years time.
455_PWR wrote: These codex books and supplements are getting out of hand. DA, BA, and SW are unique enough with rules, deviations, and models that they deserve their own book.
White scars, salamanders, iron hands, adventures, don't deviate from the codex astartes and are known only for being specialized in one area that all other armies have access to as well. I hope they keep the codex as is where a character gives you more heavies (imperial fists), fast attack units or abilities (raven guard, white scars, etc). Why make more codex books when some armies are basically copy in others in the firat place (Ravenwing was here long before white scars had anything besides a different painted job).
I can understand Templars getting their own book as thwy deviate a bit. If anything they ahould make a codex forgeworld which has official updated differentiated rules for carcharodons, minotaurs, and red scorpions... now that would be cool!!
GW keep it simple. I don't want a frikin library of books that are outdated in a years time.
The actual equipment of Chapters such as the Blood and Dark Angels only really changed from standard in 5th edition onwards when GW expanded hugely (and poorly IMO) those Chapters bredth of equipment in order to justify having their own Codex and sell slightly different Marine stuff besides different coloured armour and heraldry.
The other First Founding Chapters listed in particular have many and varied nuances and differecnes in cultural terms which if they had had Sepcial Snowflake status would have resulted in them having dire looking flyes, various weapons in the same manner as Blood fists and blood Talons
A proper large scale codex with a variety of specalised and unusual "generic" Marine units such as say those that use riding beasts would mean that many and varied Chapters could easily be well represented by one book.
455_PWR wrote: GW keep it simple. I don't want a frikin library of books that are outdated in a years time.
Looks at the "new" Imperial Knights codex after one year I have some bad news for you...
Preceeded by the eldar that lasted less than two years which followed 6th edition whose life cycle was 2 years and released with the assassin's game which came out less than a year ago (but is admittedly the same). The era of 0-2 year product usefulness is already in full swing.
With the current 7E rules the Assault marines are virtually useless.
ASM are a fantastic Blood Angels tool. They are cheap, you get a free drop pod, and you can take 3 special weapons out of a squad of 5.
The blood Angel assault Marines are prety great also since they get Red Thirst witch can give them abit of a edge in CC when push comes to shove. But the reasons you state is why they are still amazing. Most people I see who play blood angels uses the 6 fast attack slot flesh terror formation, so they can take more assault mariens and less of the "meh" tactical squads. That and the fact anyone who owns a bunch of assault mariens from previous editions of the army, can still field them on the table top doing so.
Their cheap price point wise also allows you to get more of thows amazing BA Fast Las-Plas Razor Backs into your army.
You don't get Red Thirst in a Flesh Tearers Detachment. They get some crappy 'roll more than 10 on the charge' thing that may as well be forgotten about.
SharkoutofWata wrote: You don't get Red Thirst in a Flesh Tearers Detachment. They get some crappy 'roll more than 10 on the charge' thing that may as well be forgotten about.
Ah. Didn't know that. Will let some people know in my area they have been playing it wrong.
Ironically, everyone in my local area stopped wanting to play against my deathwing army as soon as 6th edition hit and changed powerswords to ap3. I haven't been able to get anything other than polite "no thanks" when offering games against them.
warboss wrote: Ironically, everyone in my local area stopped wanting to play against my deathwing army as soon as 6th edition hit and changed powerswords to ap3. I haven't been able to get anything other than polite "no thanks" when offering games against them.
I've been playing 40k since the RT days and for 25 years we've been complaining bitterly about GW not supporting the fluff with rules and the codecii with models. Now that they're finally doing that... we're complaining about that too. Now I fully understand the frustration about the too-soon-replaced codecii. I have a still in plastic wrap Inyaden codex sitting on my shelf that is now worthless... but at some point, I've got to give them credit for doing what people have been griping about for decades. Yes, it's a money grab... but they are a for-profit business. Technically everything they do should generate capitol or it's not worth doing in the first place.
And no... I'm not a GW apologist... I've complained about them as strongly as anyone. This I think... I can handle though. It's better than the abject neglect that has so often typified GW's approach to 40k.
455_PWR wrote: These codex books and supplements are getting out of hand. DA, BA, and SW are unique enough with rules, deviations, and models that they deserve their own book.
White scars, salamanders, iron hands, adventures, don't deviate from the codex astartes and are known only for being specialized in one area that all other armies have access to as well. I hope they keep the codex as is where a character gives you more heavies (imperial fists), fast attack units or abilities (raven guard, white scars, etc). Why make more codex books when some armies are basically copy in others in the firat place (Ravenwing was here long before white scars had anything besides a different painted job).
I can understand Templars getting their own book as thwy deviate a bit. If anything they ahould make a codex forgeworld which has official updated differentiated rules for carcharodons, minotaurs, and red scorpions... now that would be cool!!
GW keep it simple. I don't want a frikin library of books that are outdated in a years time.
Actually, White Scars, Salamanders, and Iron Hands deviated further for the Codex Astartes than the Blood Angels during 3.5 and 4th ed. Those chapters being adherent came with the 5th ed book, same time the BA and DA got further from it.
insaniak wrote: You only need to match armour 10 on most vehicles in order to glance them to death.
In close combat then. Because most vehicles have more than AV10 on front and side.
I might be biased though, because I rely mostly if not entirely on melta for my anti-tank needs. So I guess armor save for vehicles would actually favor me quite a bit.
More on topic, I think the release data is wrong. Isn't WHFB 9th ed already scheduled for June 13th? Two big releases on the very same day? Not convinced. July or August maybe but not June.
How many weapon without AP2 or at least AP3 are a threat to your vehicles? Maybe grenades in close combat?
Anything strength 4 or higher?
You only need to match armour 10 on most vehicles in order to glance them to death.
If we are still talking about dreads, its a 100p unit. If you want more durable machines you better be ready to pay closer to 300points for them.
A Blood thirster can be shot down by anything with S3, dont have the fire power or S10 of the dread, cant take drop pods -but yay! have a precious 3+ armour totaly worth the point difference to dreads.
Anyway, we shall see how the new mechanicum robots do; they ought to aproximate what people who like MC Dreads expect right?
How many weapon without AP2 or at least AP3 are a threat to your vehicles? Maybe grenades in close combat?
Anything strength 4 or higher?
You only need to match armour 10 on most vehicles in order to glance them to death.
If we are still talking about dreads, its a 100p unit. If you want more durable machines you better be ready to pay closer to 300points for them.
A Blood thirster can be shot down by anything with S3, dont have the fire power or S10 of the dread, cant take drop pods -but yay! have a precious 3+ armour totaly worth the point difference to dreads.
Anyway, we shall see how the new mechanicum robots do; they ought to aproximate what people who like MC Dreads expect right?
Wraith Knight with very high T, 3+ armour save, Feel no pain, poison nerfed against it is how much now?
Rip Tide with 2+ Armour save, 5++ / 3++, is how much now?
The main issue with Walkers vs M Creatures is that for some bizarre reason whilst you can blow limbs/ weapons off both - it only actually matters for walkers / vehicles that have to suffer by rolling on the table and possibly killed by one shots.
kronk wrote: Roll all of the Space Marines into one codex and make supplements for the special snow flakes. That includes Black Templars, Space Wolves, Blood Angels, and Dark Angels.
And for God's sake, make Dreadnoughts into Monstrous Creatures so that we can use the damn things!
Please yes
Though what are the chances the whole set is just going to be rehashed again next year.
Grey Knights are missing from that list
I think of the Grey Knights as part of the Inquisition, and their codex should have freaking Inquisition in it! Along with Ordo Xenos, etc, assassins, etc, and so on.
I think of the Grey Knights as part of the Inquisition, and their codex should have freaking Inquisition in it! Along with Ordo Xenos, etc, assassins, etc, and so on.
You can just take that 3rd edition style thinking back with you to the early millenium! Go back to your fanciful world of =I= militant arm codex books with actual =I= in them along with Lord of the Rings minis that weren't priced at their weight in ambergris. If you want to play 40k now, you'll just have to get used to the wonderful world of piecemeal pricing ala the discount airlines and bad video games. Off with you and take your wretched interest in non-core games like Necromunda and Epic with you!
Gitsplitta wrote: I've been playing 40k since the RT days and for 25 years we've been complaining bitterly about GW not supporting the fluff with rules and the codecii with models. Now that they're finally doing that... we're complaining about that too. Now I fully understand the frustration about the too-soon-replaced codecii. I have a still in plastic wrap Inyaden codex sitting on my shelf that is now worthless... but at some point, I've got to give them credit for doing what people have been griping about for decades. Yes, it's a money grab... but they are a for-profit business. Technically everything they do should generate capitol or it's not worth doing in the first place.
And no... I'm not a GW apologist... I've complained about them as strongly as anyone. This I think... I can handle though. It's better than the abject neglect that has so often typified GW's approach to 40k.
Hey bro, if its really still in the plastic wrap you can actually return it...
I would love to see dreadnoughts as MCs. It's hard to say what values they should have though, since there doesn't seem to be a costing formula any more.
As someone who started in 2nd ed, it was weird seeing wraithlords and carnifexes become gradually more durable than the dreadnoughts that they were rules wise nearly identical to at first.
Colpicklejar wrote: You know I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that no other faction will get D weapons, at least not in the abundance that Eldar have. It's just a feeling I have in my bones.
I agree. It seems like the D weapons were less power creep than fluffing the army. Necrons got near invincibility (poorly balanced). Khorn got Blood Tithe. Skitarii got strange weaponry. Eldar got high tech weaponry (also poorly balanced). I'm hoping the new SM Codex will be similarly fluffy but also balanced.
Henshini wrote: I would love to see dreadnoughts as MCs. It's hard to say what values they should have though, since there doesn't seem to be a costing formula any more.
As someone who started in 2nd ed, it was weird seeing wraithlords and carnifexes become gradually more durable than the dreadnoughts that they were rules wise nearly identical to at first.
T7 W3 3+, and about 100 points + guns. Alternatively T6 W3 2+. The latter makes more sense background wise, since infantry with 'Tactical Dreadnought armor' have a 2+ save too. The Wraithlord and the Carnifex are the best cost comparisons.
It's worth noting that people generally don't consider Wraithlords or Carnifexes very good.
I've been working on the algorithms for monstrous creatures and vehicles for a while now, armor 12/12/10 would be roughly equivalent points wise to a toughness 5 2+ save or toughness 6 3+ save monstrous creature.
The toughness + 6.5 equals the armor range equivalent, then the higher the save, the more facings (points wise) have the higher value. So with the dreadnaught, you have 12 as the highest armor value, meaning toughness 6. Then three sides share that defense, so 3+ save. The rear armor being 10 means the monstrous creature version would save 5 points versus the walker version,making it slightly more cost effective.
I would probably have the monster design rules done (like the vehicle design rules linked in my SIG) but there are so few monstrous creatures without a pile of special rules to use as a baseline...
This is basically the proper response to every post wishing for some special snowflake character, piece of wargear, new vehicle variant, chapter tactic, elite unit, chapter specific codex, etc.
Azreal13 wrote: A flawed idea, as all the loyalist chapters are descended from the 9 loyalist legions.
Not strictly true; there's some hints that certain Loyalist chapters are actually descended from loyal members of the Traitor legions, or were founded using leftover gene-seed from the Traitor Legions that was kept on Mars/Terra. Some particular examples include:
-Blood Ravens: unknown, but a few hints that they may be Thousand Sons descendants
-Silver Skulls: possibly descended from loyal Iron Warriors, particularly given the chapter culture's "deviation" from that of their supposed primogenitors, the Ultramarines
-Carcharadons: possibly Night Lords descendants, though this one is very shaky; definitely "unknown" primogenitor status, though
-Minotaurs: might be World Eaters descendants, but again, all records are either nonexistent, expunged, or otherwise sealed
-Red Scorpions: might be Emperor's Children descendants. They claim that their geneseed is the purest, and it just so happens that the Emperor's Children had the purest geneseed...
So, yeah. Definitely some odd happenings, and quite a few chapters that have unknown founders that may in fact be Traitor derived. Personally I think that's pretty cool, that there are a few loyalist chapters that have a heritage with the Traitor Legions, because it does bring up the fact that not everybody wanted to go along with the Heresy in the Traitor Legions (though most were killed in the virus bombings of Istvaan III).
Erh.. I'm pretty sure it's stated that the Carcharadons are descended from Raven Guard, especially since their skin is pale and their eyes are black.
Red Scorpions never had any records ever stating that they were descended from any traitor legion and IIRC there's historical records that indicates Red Scorpions as a loyalist founded chapter as early as 33 MK.
Also, why would Minotuars be World Eaters descendants? Because they favor melee combat? I'm not strong on the fluff on Minotaurs but if that's the reason then the Blood Angels would honestly make for much better candidates, especially if you removed the part with Sanguinius and replaced everything blood related and replaced it with 'Khorne'.
Forge World says the Minotaur's are descended from the Iron Hands. and the loyalist from the fallen Legions ether repainted their armor back to pre-founding colors joined the soon to be Grey Knights (ones with a Psy ability) or where folded in to loyalist chapters.
Henshini wrote: I would love to see dreadnoughts as MCs. It's hard to say what values they should have though, since there doesn't seem to be a costing formula any more.
As someone who started in 2nd ed, it was weird seeing wraithlords and carnifexes become gradually more durable than the dreadnoughts that they were rules wise nearly identical to at first.
T7 W3 3+, and about 100 points + guns. Alternatively T6 W3 2+. The latter makes more sense background wise, since infantry with 'Tactical Dreadnought armor' have a 2+ save too. The Wraithlord and the Carnifex are the best cost comparisons.
It's worth noting that people generally don't consider Wraithlords or Carnifexes very good.
Talos have T7 W3 3+. It'd be the closest thing to a organic Dreadnought
Lythrandire Biehrellian wrote: I've been working on the algorithms for monstrous creatures and vehicles for a while now, armor 12/12/10 would be roughly equivalent points wise to a toughness 5 2+ save or toughness 6 3+ save monstrous creature.
Not to totally derail this thread, but.. you're kidding, right? Armor 12 is almost identical to Toughness 8. A S8 weapon glances/pens AV12 on a 4+ and wounds T8 on a 4+. The straight conversion of AV to T is to subtract 4 from AV. I could see it going one point of toughness lower to make up for the armor save that gets added and the loss of the vehicle damage table, but not three points of toughness lower.
Your proposed dreadnought is losing a hull point to a plasma gun on a 2+, whereas before it took a 5+ to glance. It's a centurion with one more wound. You're so far off the mark it isn't even funny.
Henshini wrote: I would love to see dreadnoughts as MCs. It's hard to say what values they should have though, since there doesn't seem to be a costing formula any more.
As someone who started in 2nd ed, it was weird seeing wraithlords and carnifexes become gradually more durable than the dreadnoughts that they were rules wise nearly identical to at first.
T7 W3 3+, and about 100 points + guns. Alternatively T6 W3 2+. The latter makes more sense background wise, since infantry with 'Tactical Dreadnought armor' have a 2+ save too. The Wraithlord and the Carnifex are the best cost comparisons.
It's worth noting that people generally don't consider Wraithlords or Carnifexes very good.
Talos have T7 W3 3+. It'd be the closest thing to a organic Dreadnought
T6 and 7 is still very weak for a walker. In equivalent armor values, T6 is AV 9/10 and T7 is 10/11. Ironclads would have to be T9 to equal their current armor of 13. It's why I don't get why so many complain about wraithlords when its actually weaker than AV12. The main issue is the lack of armor saves for vehicles and "instant death" from a single pen.
sonofruss wrote: Forge World says the Minotaur's are descended from the Iron Hands. and the loyalist from the fallen Legions ether repainted their armor back to pre-founding colors joined the soon to be Grey Knights (ones with a Psy ability) or where folded in to loyalist chapters.
Some old fluff had some of the creations from the Cursed Founding (M35) made from Genestock of Traitor Legions.
Sons of Antaeus were from Death Guard. Minotaurs were from World Eater stock. etc.. Fluff got retconned quickly. It probably was a one-off idea to play loyalists with the old Legion rules.
When Forgeworld re-did Minotaurs, they added that the loony Minotaurs known for being unstable and blood thirsty to the extreme went missing/were "disappeared" in M38. Than in the 41st Millenium they suddenly reappear, but show none (or few) of the crazy Berserker-traits they used to have.
So plenty of grey areas that even if you subscribe to the (since retconned) Minotaurs-from-World-Eaters-cursed-founding theory, it would seem most likely, that the Berserker-Minotaurs were removed by the Inquisition and replaced by a "new" Minotaurs Chapter from different gene-stock (unless, of course, you want your Minotaurs to be loyalst World Eaters).
Either way, what the Cursed Founding allegeldy did was not simply to create successor chapters of the Traitor Legions, but to "fix" what was wrong with their genestock (as they did trying to "fix" the flaw in Blood Angels) and/or splice geneseed from different Legions. So even if they come (partly) from World Eaters, there'd still a lot of Inquisitorial tampering that sets them apart from "straight" World Eaters.
Kirasu wrote: It's why I don't get why so many complain about wraithlords when its actually weaker than AV12. The main issue is the lack of armor saves for vehicles and "instant death" from a single pen.
Answered your own question right there. High strength weapons with good AP are expensive; yes your wraithlord is slightly more likely to be dealt a wound by it, but all you ever lose is one wound, and those weapons usually aren't present in large numbers. Meanwhile one penetrating hit will shake/stun/immobilize/damage/outright destroy a vehicle.
On the other end of the scale, medium strength weapons with poor/no AP are cheaper and usually have a higher rate of fire, so T6-8 MCs survive by their armor save, while AV10-12 vehicles simply get glanced to death.
Also, let's back up. The wraithlord is T8, right? That's identical to AV12 except in the case of S5 weapons, where T8 can be wounded on a 6+ and AV12 can't be touched. However, the wraithlord has an armor save that the majority of S5 weapons won't ignore, making wounds from S5 weapons rare. The wraithlord's 3+ save will block 2/3 of those S5 shots, and 2/3 of shots from any medium/high strength weapons with poor AP that would otherwise glance or pen AV12 (autocannons, manticores, etc). So in general, a T8 3+ save wraithlord is definitely tougher than an AV12 vehicle, not weaker. The tiny amount of wounds you can expect from heavy bolters and their ilk is more than outweighed by the wraithlord's armor save against other weapons.
(That being said, I'm in total agreement that T7 3+ save is probably too weak as a replacement for AV12 - in the dreadnought example, I'd rather see T8 3/3/4+ and a slight points increase if necessary)
Why would GW limit new space marine vehicles to an event? Yeah, sure, they might get in another 100-200 guys who otherwise wouldn't have come. So, the select few who 1. didn't want to come in the first place 2. play space marines (and ultras in particular as some of the bling seems to be modelled on) 3. like the new models and 4. have enough spare dough to actually buy the tickets and the models they want. That's what? another 1000 GBP for the event revenue.
Now compare that to making that stuff available through the webshop. I assume they'd make that money in a day for months to come.
My bet: after the event they'll post something along the lines of "due to the *surprising* demand for the command tanks at our great event we have decided to share the love with all of you and will make them available permanently/for another 27 months through the webshop"
nudibranch wrote: They are... very blue. Like, even bluer than most 'Eavy Metal UM stuff...
Go to the actual source, they're not even remotely as blue - dunno what happened to the picture in here, but it's an entirely different blue. Actual image
The newsletter the image is from does seem to indicate it is only available at WW.
Spoiler:
We’re extremely excited here at Warhammer World, and preparations are coming to an end ready for our Grand Opening this weekend. Not only do we have fantastic new displays for you to gaze upon in our brand new exhibition rooms (5 exhibition rooms!) this weekend will be the first opportunity for you to grab hold of our new exclusives. Let’s take a look at what could be yours…
Warhammer World Tank
Wow! Space Marine command tanks…what other Warhammer World exclusives will there be?
Warhammer World merchandise
Satchel Bags, metal pin badges, mugs, T-shirts and hoodies…How will you choose? These exclusives and the Space Marine command tanks will only be available to purchase here at the Warhammer World Store. For the lucky ticket holders, the Grand opening this weekend will be your first opportunity to take these exclusives home. If you are not a ticket holder, have no fear, Monday 18th May will be your first opportunity to grab these exclusives, as we will be selling them all year round.
If you’ve not yet planned your trip to Warhammer World, grab your calendar, call your friends and start setting a date for what can only be described as the trip of a lifetime. See you there!
Wonderwolf wrote: I doubt they're plastic. Probably Forge World add-ons for the opening.
Both the way it's designed, the aesthetic and the fact it's painted by 'Eavy Metal suggests it's plastic. This wouldn't be the first time GW's released a limited edition plastic kit, like that void shield generator.
*Edit* Also if you look closely you can see some of the joins like on the grav-cannon barrel.
"Let's make some new products, but make it effectively impossible for almost all of our customers to purchase it even if they wanted to! It's genius! Our revenues will skyrocket!"
Wonderwolf wrote: I doubt they're plastic. Probably Forge World add-ons for the opening.
Both the way it's designed, the aesthetic and the fact it's painted by 'Eavy Metal suggests it's plastic. This wouldn't be the first time GW's released a limited edition plastic kit, like that void shield generator.
*Edit* Also if you look closely you can see some of the joins like on the grav-cannon barrel.
The Void Shield Generator was polystone, not plastic.
In any case, I have to agree that I can't see this as a permanent exclusive. By showing it off first as a Warhammer World Exclusive, they can (in their minds) prevent fears of a "new Space Marine codex incoming!1!" from their fanbase.
This sounds to be an exclusive product - as in 'exclusively sold AT the Warhammer World in Nottingham'.
But let's imagine what GW could do:
- Also sell worldwide available, regular kit(s) with different iconography for all the major Chapters and also include a 'neutral' variant for homebrew-chapters. This would allow selling lots of 'Command Rhino' and 'Command Land Raider' kits at a price increase (like they did with the Razorback). Makes them lots of profit
Wasn't Josef Bugman essentially a WHW exclusive miniature? TBH, it's not really that big of a deal. Except for the blingy bits, all of that stuff is pretty easily converted from existing kits. Once the rules hit the Internet, we can all be special snowflakes. And if you're that much of a rabid SM completionist, make a friend on Dakka who lives in the UK who plans on going to WHW in the near future, and then have them post you a box or two.
Thanks. 
