Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I'm getting these things later in the month.  Local store tells me it's a change in the printer, which is obvious from the paper material.  I preferred the older paper, but it';s not big deal.  Getting it a week later is...I subscribed to get it early (not a day or two early...a week or two early).  Remove that incentive, and I see no need to resubscribe...I can check it out in store to determine whether it's worth the $$$.

But I did get #332 yesterday, with the snazzy 2nd edition Codex-inspired artwork on the cover.

I never liked the Grombrindal editorial.  I'm not 13.  I know there isn't a Santa Claus, either. 

Starts with the new releases (which I like)...which is pretty much the entire 40K Chaos release set, soup to nuts.

There is a two page HE preview, showing the plastic mage kit (foot and mounted), and the plastic dragon.  They mention the plastic chariot can be built as a Lion or Standard chariot.

Obviously, Chaos is the flavor this month.  The designer notes will be lamented by folks such as myself.  The term they highlighted was making an army list without a "hassle".  Which sounds great, except I don't think any player ever complained about making an army list.  That's PART OF THE FUN.  Another note is Gav points out (like a stake through my heart) is that a Codex should be ONE army list.  Forever and ever.  Any idea good enough for a army should merit it's own Codex.  I wildly disagree with that theory, but with a long term view, I know that idea will die soon enough   As a 13th Company adherent, it is a kick to the balls, though.

They of course discuss the rules, the generic daemons, the renegade focus, show some of the color schemes (some are good, some are derivative, some blow), have Mark Harrison give his take, etc.  I alsways enjoy the modeler take, because if you read what they say, it provides some insight into the creative process at GW.  He mentioned he had to fight for the large Chaos Lord base, and discussed design briefs he had to follow.  I find stuff like that (even as throwaway lines while trying to be excited about the new models) pretty interesting.

As always, new plastic sprues means full page layouts of all of the bits (painted).  I like this addition to the WD.  It sets me up for success with BWB/TWS.  Lots of them this issue:

1) Chaos Marine, 2) Chaos Termies, 3) Chaos Termie Lord, and 4) Chaos Spawn

There is an IG/Chaos battle report...I skipped it, but there it is.

There are between 10-50 pages on LOTR.  Closer to 10.  I recall it took me longer than two seconds to flip through them (cool Mordor map), but less than seven.  I'm not knocking the LOTR line, I'm sure it's fascinazzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

JJ's Standard Bearer was on Apocalypse, and it was interesting to say the least.  Mostly fluff, as all of his SB's are, but he talked about it's conceptual genesis in the design studio.  And he kept talking about special characters (again).  With pics.  But it's not a bad read.  He does discuss they plan to support Apoc through WD and the website, adding rules and scenarios, like they used to do in 1st and 2nd edition.

Warhammer had an article on Mighty Empires, and how it can be used for old campaign battles (I think - did anyone buy Mighty Empires???).

Warhammer Tactica was on Magic, by Alessio.  Didn't read it.

The EM article is for Huron, and I like these articles as well.  The thing is 8 pages, so it's pretty comprehensive.  For completists, I wish GW would compile all of these online somewhere.  But it's nice to get them.

Onto Apocalypse.  I do like their abbreviated "Tale of Three Gamers", where they assigned the task of making Apocalypse armies to three of their slaves, Christian Byrne (who is adding 2500 points to his already huge Chaos army - new Vindies and new plastics); Matt Hutson who is staying with power armor, and got a Battle Company he is making into Blood Angels (brand new, from that box), and another gent is got 2 Baneblades to add to his IG army.  I like these types of articles, and they said it'll lead to two Apoc battle reports, one next month, and one at Christmas.

They've redone the last few pages, which still list stores and whatnot.  For some reason, they showed a lot of the metal Chaos 3.5 releases over a few pages, and Direct Order stuff, and they have two pages at the end showing Coming Soon stuff: the Baneblade box, the SM Battle Company, the two Marine metal releases, and all of the prices.  They also took almost a full page to pimp their Ard Boyz tourney, which I think is a neat idea, even if I have no interest (or skill) in it.

If you like Chaos, it's a decent issue, and I like some of the layout stuff.  I do like the army prep articles.  I find stuff like that neat.  Some Apoc thoughts in a different thread.

Salut,

Chuck

Posted By dienekes96 on 08/22/2007 10:15 AM

Warhammer had an article on Mighty Empires, and how it can be used for old campaign battles (I think - did anyone buy Mighty Empires???).

Actually, ME is something that my WHFB group is really excited about, because we play campaigns almost exclusively.

As a CSM player, I'm reserving judgment until I get a good look at the codex.

The battle report was typically bad. I miss the old reports from way back when. they used to break them down turn by turn for both players and talk about what they were thinking at the time, why they made their moves and the results of each action. I feel like the stuff they do now is just too brief, i want more details.

Bat reps are the main reason i buy WD.

The IG take a sort of lame army in this one, as does Chaos.

The ig had like four sqauds with no heavy weapons that try to walk onto an objective accross open ground.....as if that EVER works.

Two lords with deamon weapons (one of whom gets killed in HtH with gaurd!), no lash anywhere in sight, spawn, and two squads of possessed.

Suffice it to say, two crap armies

the article about the three armies for Apoc was really cool though, the chaos army is amazing, as was the IG army. I look forward to seeing those completed.

I dunno, I'd like to see some sort of innovation in white dwarf. Tale of four gamers was original way back when, but now it's been done to death. Battle reports are stale and old.
Something like an ongoing campaign article with fluff to go with would make me a little bit interested.

Posted By Reecius on 08/22/2007 1:21 PM

Two lords with deamon weapons (one of whom gets killed in HtH with gaurd!), no lash anywhere in sight, spawn, and two squads of possessed.

Now THAT is funny!

No Lash! It is almost like they're either feeling guilty about it or, more likely, they are that dumb.

And I agree, I like the "older" (turn by turn) style of Battle Reports too.

I wouldn't mind freeing up some space by shrinking down the "back patting' designer notes and/or the Standard Bearer too.

I enjoyed WD when they would give updates to the current campaign in WD. I don't play fantasy, but I am interested in what was happening with the campaigns. Really, I am a sucker for the fluff - but I have been getting less and less of it from WD (did I say less - I ment none).

I have had a WD subscription for as long as I can remember and I just let it expire, because there is no longer a compelling reason to keep buying it.

That's for the breakdown dienekes -

I flip through copies occasionally, just to see if GW has pulled their head out just far enough to see.

Nope, they are still playing ostrich in their butts.

Yay! Jervis!

I'm glad I'm not alone in thinking that the new paper sucks.

Good review, Chuck. And you were able to stop yourself from making cracks about the Orks. Kudos.

Now if I can get my copy from the mailman, I'll enjoy it too. Really looking forward to the Huron article. He has always been my fav 40k villian.

There was a gorgeous color art piece for Kharn, that I did not see in the Chaos Codex, which I finally saw today. I believe it was a Dave Gallagher, normally not my fave, but it was pretty stonking.

Jester, you know I LOVE the Orks. I'd never play them, but I do like to remind their fans they are the Cubs fans of the mini-gaming world. Besides, they can just kitbash everything

Posted By Hellfury on 08/22/2007 2:19 PM

Nope, they are still playing ostrich in their cloaca.

Yay! Jervis!

Fixed.

 

I like being reminded of why I have not purchased the caucasian midget in 2 years.

The cloaca is convenient.

Posted By dienekes96 on 08/22/2007 10:15 AM
Another note is Gav points out (like a stake through my heart) is that a Codex should be ONE army list.  Forever and ever.  Any idea good enough for a army should merit it's own Codex.

Is this guy serious(ly slowed)?  Or is he just pretending that "good ideas" are the determining factor when deciding who gets a codex?

Posted By dienekes96 on 08/22/2007 10:15 AM

There is an IG/Chaos battle report...I skipped it, but there it is.

Let me guess... Chaos wins.

well yeah, they are the flavour of the month.

Posted By stormboy on 08/22/2007 1:44 PM
I enjoyed WD when they would give updates to the current campaign in WD. I don't play fantasy, but I am interested in what was happening with the campaigns. Really, I am a sucker for the fluff - but I have been getting less and less of it from WD (did I say less - I ment none).

You mean the Nemesis Crown (affair)?  Lessee.  People found a way to cheat the system and log 10 Total Massacres a day; there were in-store events that did not affect the campaign in any way; Grimgor made his appearance in the end fluff by hocking a loogie at Karl Franz and then ran away (again); the Dwarfs ended up with the crown and locked it away.

So a whole 'nother campaign and bupkis happened.

Oh, is it all over, then?

Does he clarify this anywhere to indicate that the alleged upcoming Codex-Demons will be mix and matchable with Codex-CSM. If not how lame. I guess my idea of having non-bland demons with my chaos force just isn't "good enough".

I too am a 13th Company lover, and I dread the release of a new Codex:Space Wolf. Because I am fairly certain it will be the death of that list. Looks like my 45 wolf models will be going back to the Eye (or the back of the closet).

Oh, I can't wait (and wait) for the new SW Codex. I agree they will drop the 13th, but I want all of the new models. I'll use a different list for 13th if I have to, or I'll just play them in fun games. But I do want the new models. A LOT. Until they say the EoT lists are bupkiss, the 13th are fieldable.

He did not clarify anything about the Daemon Codex except to say that it is in "development".

Abs, I disagree with Gav rather vehemently as well, and I have a feeling the new (minimal lists) concept isn't going to last as a design approach past 4th edition. Just a hunch. Variant lists sell models and provide flavor. I know they don't get the full monty of "playtesting" and support, but few of them were "broken". What's the harm? As it is, at least make them for Apocalypse

Posted By dienekes96 on 08/23/2007 5:44 AM
Oh, I can't wait (and wait) for the new SW Codex. I agree they will drop the 13th, but I want all of the new models. I'll use a different list for 13th if I have to, or I'll just play them in fun games. But I do want the new models. A LOT. Until they say the EoT lists are bupkiss, the 13th are fieldable.

He did not clarify anything about the Daemon Codex except to say that it is in "development".

Abs, I disagree with Gav rather vehemently as well, and I have a feeling the new (minimal lists) concept isn't going to last as a design approach past 4th edition. Just a hunch. Variant lists sell models and provide flavor. I know they don't get the full monty of "playtesting" and support, but few of them were "broken". What's the harm? As it is, at least make them for Apocalypse

Indeed. After my Elysian drop troops army became invalidated after the newest IG codex came out (a mere month after I finally finished my army) I was pretty perturbed.

Now that "Funlists" are all the rage for apocalypse, I shouldnt have any problem fieiding my elysians again under the old rules.

Not only should the older lists not be invalidated, but they should continue to make more.

Creature feature, VDR, enslavers, etc... Many people miss those days and its crap that they are gone. It makes GW seem even lazier than they are already percieved by the lack of such content in their monthly ad rag.

"Uneasy feeling, Burning out my eyes
I hope the end is less painful than my life
I stand on trial before the gods
On Judgement day
A blink of an eye between
The cradle and the grave"

The quickest way to alienate existing customers is to totally invalidate varient list.  Especially one's like Elysian where the standard gear differs (shotguns vs. lasguns).  GW doesn't seem to care.  They get grief about squats (rightly so), but they've done the same thing to a whole lot more armies between 3 and 3.5.

Personally I'm just waiting for someone to knock Tom Kirby off a roof or something

I predict SW are going to get "vanillafied".  Grey Hunters will be indistinguishable from DA tac squads except... *drumroll* ...they won't have combat squads!  The variable squad sizes reflect their non-adherence to the Codex Astartes and their nonconformist rebellious nature!  Blood Claws will be Elites and will be identical to scouts (but with a different name!).

If you look at the data sheet for the "Masters of the Chapter" it seems to imply Space Wolves have the same organization as everybody else but with different names.

I just read my copy, and the battle report cracked me up.

Quoted from the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of Turn 1: 'his lascannon-armed anti-tank squad, which blew up the Khorne rhino' and 'the Chaos Lord and surviving berzerkers disembarked from the wreckage of the destroyed Rhino and headed north'. Now, is it just me, or aren't units entangled when vehicles are destroyed, or amazingly, they used the correct term of wrecked(wreckage). So this made me wonder....is it

A. We here at HQ don't know our own rules, and so can't competently demonstrate them to you, the end user of our products....

B. We chose two players from outside the 40K spectrum, blatantly obvious from their atrocious army selections...

C. We employ staff writers who watch the game and can't point out the rules either, as well as editors who neither catch the editing mistakes nor know 40K rules....

D. All of the above, because the new paradigm here is 'By Idiots, For Idiots'!

I thought the army selections were terrible, and didn't showcase anything, as they didn't seem to be fluffy or dynamic. And of course, Chaos ended up with 1/6th of its points in useless troops, being 2 squads of possessed, and 2 spawn. Yay!

Don't fearless units ignore pinning? Or does entanglement get them anyways?

Ozymandias, King of Kings

Entangled works on everything. That's why they invented the term, as opposed to just making it Pinning.

Salacious, the army selection is always based off of what the studio has painted up. Usually showcasing new models and always including a variety of units with pretty much no thought to how good or bad they actually are.

Will Space Wolves be a White Dwarf codex? Because if so, that means you won't get any
new models

But do we need any other SW models? Other than Scouts, Plastic Wolf Guard, Wulfen, Plastic Wolf Lord, Plastic Long Fangs, and Fenrir pattern Rhino (also in plastic), that is?

I just want two SW sprues like the DA got Maybe some heads with hair and beards. We'll see...but I do not expect a WD release for them in the interim.

malf, per Warseer's experts in the know, there are new wolf plastics floating around GW HQ. Many months away from release, but GW will release real Codicies and models for the BA and SW. Probably one next year, and one the year after.

But I will also take new scouts, plastic WG/WL, and all the rest of the stuff Jester listed. GW has always had a soft spot for the Wolves...the SW 2nd edition Codex was the very first one they ever released. But no matter what...it's a long time away

Posted By Reecius on 08/22/2007 1:21 PM
The ig had like four sqauds with no heavy weapons that try to walk onto an objective accross open ground.....as if that EVER works.

After umpteen years of battle reports, the only conclusion one can draw is that's how they actually play in the studio.