New AM/IG Codex rumoured for release in February

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.

**aka_mythos**

So with this I can use multiple Baneblades... as part of my armored company... hmmmm

**Kanluwen**

Findslo wrote:
I really do like these formations, at least from a fluff perspective. At first look, I don't think they are hyper competitive, but I do think we finally have some better options to bring.

Taking the web bundle out of it, I think RAW and RAI, from what i have seen, really does lean towards taking 5 infantry squads per emperors shield platoon. That is the guard infantry way, over running with bodies. If you look at the new order they are given, it gives heavy weapons essential relentless. I would see that as meaning take 5 infantry squads, add a heavy weapons team to each one, blob them together, and have the PCS give it that order.

The big problem I see with these whole detachment is how expensive it will cost under the current codex. I can't see more then maybe 2 that could be purchased under 400 points, and some are above that without any upgrades.

You really do have to keep the web bundle in the discussion though.

Why? Because this would quite literally be the first time that one which has said "This bundle lets you field this formation" has been mistaken.

**quickfuze**

Dakkafang Dreggrim wrote:
ultimentra wrote:
hotsauceman1 wrote:
Why? The Stompa became Orks LOW.
The Khorne Mower became KDK LOW
Plastic super heavies become the LOW for them

Yes but we're the Guard son. We don't get nice things. I once showed up to a big game day at my FLGS and people gave me weird looks when I said "yeah the Deathstrike isn't Strength D it's strength 10." The general response was, "how is that seriously not strength D when everyone else gets D in their codex somehow?" My reply was always "IG don't get nice things. Ever."

If you have low expectations to begin with, you wont be BTFO when the truth turns out to be terrible. My realistic hopes for this codex are a decurion with some kind of recycling mechanic for Platoons or conscripts, and some kind of mechanic that buffs orders or leadership. That's about it. I don't see point costs reductions, unit buffs, or anything of the sort being a realistic expectation for our faction.

Remember those little quotes from Dawn of War? "Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment." Keep that in mind Guardsman, especially when it comes to releases for us.

Orks are still waiting on their real 7th ed codex. Orks don't get nice things either.

Chaos SM would like to have a word with you....

**Findslo**

Kanluwen wrote:
Findslo wrote:
I really do like these formations, at least from a fluff perspective. At first look, I don't think they are hyper competitive, but I do think we finally have some better options to bring.

Taking the web bundle out of it, I think RAW and RAI, from what i have seen, really does lean towards taking 5 infantry squads per emperors shield platoon. That is the guard infantry way, over running with bodies. If you look at the new order they are given, it gives heavy weapons essential relentless. I would see that as meaning take 5 infantry squads, add a heavy weapons team to each one, blob them together, and have the PCS give it that order.

The big problem I see with these whole detachment is how expensive it will cost under the current codex. I can't see more then maybe 2 that could be purchased under 400 points, and some are above that without any upgrades.

You really do have to keep the web bundle in the discussion though.

Why? Because this would quite literally be the first time that one which has said "This bundle lets you field this formation" has been mistaken.

True. Maybe I'm just hoping to get that rumored point decrease. It would be fun to field 3 50 man blobs with heavy weapons and not have it cost 3/4 of your army.

**krazynadechukr**

Is there any hint to plastic Valhallans?

**Miguelsan**

You (and me too) wish!. I have two metal ones that wouldn't mind a few companions.

M.

**Kid_Kyoto**

krazynadechukr wrote:
Is there any hint to plastic Valhallans?

Yeah, in a vault next to plastic Krieg,Tallarn, Mordians/Praetorian dual kit and plastic Battle Sisters.

They say only the most worthy fans are even allowed to glimpse inside.

The few who have say they are glorious.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alternate answer:

I have the Wargames Factory Russians they're not bad, the realistic proportions make it hard to use GW weapons though.

**Findslo**

This would have been the perfect release to bring in plastic Kasrkin.

**greyknight12**

aka_mythos wrote:
So with this I can use multiple Baneblades... as part of my armored company... hmmmm

Depending on how future points costs work out, a line of BS4 AV14 tanks that reduce the effects of pens with enginseers backed up by 3 superheavies with bonus repair that also reduce your charge range is probably the best combo at first glance. You can field a full army of battle tanks now, no bodies/forge world rules quibbling required.

**casvalremdeikun**

Kanluwen wrote:
Yup, same also as what came in WD when Execution Force released.

Wait, so there is actually a print version of the Assassin rules? Which issue of White Dwarf is it in?

**Peregrine**

Has anyone posted the new rules for the Baneblade (and variants) yet?

**generalchaos34**

Kid_Kyoto wrote:
krazynadechukr wrote:
Is there any hint to plastic Valhallans?

Yeah, in a vault next to plastic Krieg,Tallarn, Mordians/Praetorian dual kit and plastic Battle Sisters.

They say only the most worthy fans are even allowed to glimpse inside.

The few who have say they are glorious.

Spoiler:

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Alternate answer:

I have the Wargames Factory Russians they're not bad, the realistic proportions make it hard to use GW weapons though.

Don't forget victoria miniatures, shes not cheap but her sculpts are amazing and the variety is very nice!

**Vaktathi**

I'm not terribly impressed by the new formations, They're a whole lot more conditional and situational than the Necron/SM/Eldar ones, and a lot of them are reliant on getting Orders off (usually on Ld8) for anything to work, something other formations from earlier 2015 armies don't have to deal with for equivalent bonuses.

I'm still far more interested in points costs and rules changes than the formations however, as I just fundamentally have problems with the inherent concept as GW has done them.

**alasta**

Peregrine wrote:
Has anyone posted the new rules for the Baneblade (and variants) yet?

Not yet, they're just teasing us with the formations!

**BlaxicanX**

Vaktathi wrote:
I'm not terribly impressed by the new formations, They're a whole lot more conditional and situational than the Necron/SM/Eldar ones, and a lot of them are reliant on getting Orders off (usually on Ld8) for anything to work, something other formations from earlier 2015 armies don't have to deal with for equivalent bonuses.

I'm still far more interested in points costs and rules changes than the formations however, as I just fundamentally have problems with the inherent concept as GW has done them.

If Tau is any indication they won't be getting any. GW's new MO seems to be to just offer up new formations while leaving the points costs and individual units' rules as-is.

**Vaktathi**

BlaxicanX wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
I'm not terribly impressed by the new formations, They're a whole lot more conditional and situational than the Necron/SM/Eldar ones, and a lot of them are reliant on getting Orders off (usually on Ld8) for anything to work, something other formations from earlier 2015 armies don't have to deal with for equivalent bonuses.

I'm still far more interested in points costs and rules changes than the formations however, as I just fundamentally have problems with the inherent concept as GW has done them.
If Tau is any indication they won't be getting any. GW's new MO seems to be to just offer up new formations while leaving the points costs and individual units' rules as-is.

That's what I'm worried about, because formations are not going to fix IG

**aka_mythos**

All things considered I think they improve the Imperial Guard, but it remains to be seen if it's enough. I think it certainly plays to the most prevalent IG army lists... Yet it does seem to give some of the fluffier things an opportunity to shine; gasp artillery that functions like artillery.

I will have to rethink the guard army I litterally got the last models for earlier today.

**Eldarain**

BlaxicanX wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
I'm not terribly impressed by the new formations, They're a whole lot more conditional and situational than the Necron/SM/Eldar ones, and a lot of them are reliant on getting Orders off (usually on Ld8) for anything to work, something other formations from earlier 2015 armies don't have to deal with for equivalent bonuses.

I'm still far more interested in points costs and rules changes than the formations however, as I just fundamentally have problems with the inherent concept as GW has done them.
If Tau is any indication they won't be getting any. GW's new MO seems to be to just offer up new formations while leaving the points costs and individual units' rules as-is.

Just in time for Chaos, Nids and Guard. Yay! Then back to a new paradigm which benefits the usual suspects again...

**JohnHwangDD**

Vaktathi wrote:
formations are not going to fix IG

Not *those* formations, at least. The IG infantry formation is, by far, the weakest when you look at the core Eldar & SM formations. Eldar get free guns. SMs get free transports. IG get orders. WTF?

Had IG simply gotten their Apoc freebies (free barricades and free barrages), that might have been OK.

And even worse, they potentially need *5* useless infantry squads per platoon, where Apoc used to allow minimum platoons? Completely not worth the points compared to the tank company.

**casvalremdeikun**

Yeah, the only way these formations are worth a damn is if they are future-proofed to work with a HEAVILY buffed codex coming in the future. Not counting on it.

**diepotato47**

These formations are awesome! I just hope that it's not 50 guardsmen minimum per Emperor's Shield and that the actual codex included some formation that allows me to add Chimeras and Priests without having to explain to my opponent the difference between "unbound fun" and unbound cheese"

**alleus**

casvalremdeikun wrote:
Yeah, the only way these formations are worth a damn is if they are future-proofed to work with a HEAVILY buffed codex coming in the future. Not counting on it.

Can you or someone else please explain to me what you think is wrong with our current codex? I can't really find any major flaws, except the lack of strong formations and a decurion style detachment (which is the norm for newer codices now) and now we have those.

I have no problem competing with my IG army. Sure, against Eldar and Necrons there are problems, but I think our current codex is one of the more balanced ones at the moment, and it's dang fun to play. With this new detachment, the new formations and what not I think it might just become a really strong codex.

What exactly is wrong with our current codex, and what "HEAVY buffs" you speak of do we really need?

**Skinnereal**

Kanluwen wrote:
Why? Because this would quite literally be the first time that one which has said "This bundle lets you field this formation" has been mistaken.

The Eldar Windrider detachment box was missing a Farseer/Warlock, and came up short.

**diepotato47**

Has anyone else noticed too that the rules say 1+ command... so you can legally run an entire army of company command squads, tank commanders and Lord Commissars, with no core... Food for thought

**MeanGreenStompa**

I don't think it will be the AM codex in the spring. I think I might know what it is, but I'd prefer to keep it in the family for now, lest my brothers turn to brooding.

**Kanluwen**

Skinnereal wrote:
Kanluwen wrote:
Why? Because this would quite literally be the first time that one which has said "This bundle lets you field this formation" has been mistaken.
The Eldar Windrider detachment box was missing a Farseer/Warlock, and came up short.

The Eldar Windrider Battlehost boxed set was not advertised as meeting the criteria for the formation of the same name.

It's still available via GW Direct, and it only says the following:

This Battlehost is an amazing collection of miniatures, giving you a Farseer Skyrunner, an Eldar Vyper Jetbike and nine(!) Eldar Windrider Jetbikes. None shall escape the power and anger of the Craftworlds, should you choose to send this lot into battle.

Compare that to the Emperor's Shield Infantry Platoon:

This bundle gives you everything needed to field the Emperor’s Shield Infantry Platoon, a formation found in War Zone Damocles: Mont’ka. You’ll receive a Cadian Command Squad, two sets of Cadian Shock Troops, two Cadian Heavy Weapons Squads and three Sentinels - thirty-four models in total, for an awesome Astra Militarum strike force!

**vipoid**

Vaktathi wrote:
BlaxicanX wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
I'm not terribly impressed by the new formations, They're a whole lot more conditional and situational than the Necron/SM/Eldar ones, and a lot of them are reliant on getting Orders off (usually on Ld8) for anything to work, something other formations from earlier 2015 armies don't have to deal with for equivalent bonuses.

I'm still far more interested in points costs and rules changes than the formations however, as I just fundamentally have problems with the inherent concept as GW has done them.
If Tau is any indication they won't be getting any. GW's new MO seems to be to just offer up new formations while leaving the points costs and individual units' rules as-is.
That's what I'm worried about, because formations are not going to fix IG

If these formations are all they can offer, then I'm done with IG.

**Zewrath**

vipoid wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
BlaxicanX wrote:
Vaktathi wrote:
I'm not terribly impressed by the new formations, They're a whole lot more conditional and situational than the Necron/SM/Eldar ones, and a lot of them are reliant on getting Orders off (usually on Ld8) for anything to work, something other formations from earlier 2015 armies don't have to deal with for equivalent bonuses.

I'm still far more interested in points costs and rules changes than the formations however, as I just fundamentally have problems with the inherent concept as GW has done them.
If Tau is any indication they won't be getting any. GW's new MO seems to be to just offer up new formations while leaving the points costs and individual units' rules as-is.
That's what I'm worried about, because formations are not going to fix IG

If these formations are all they can offer, then I'm done with IG.

Yeah, I've reached the same conclusion.

**nekooni**

I don't think the tau release is the new norm. Why would it? It was already powerful and therefore they didn't up their individual power levels, but "had to" add power via formations and were too scared of nerfing the individual units. With IG they can add power to both (units and formations) without making balance even worse or people crying due to nerfs.

**Dramagod2**

MeanGreenStompa wrote:
I don't think it will be the AM codex in the spring. I think I might know what it is, but I'd prefer to keep it in the family for now, lest my brothers turn to brooding.

As much as I really want the new codex in the spring, I agree that the inclusion of these detachments and formation don't seem to make it likely. The only way I could see them doing it was if they planned to release a ton of new infantry models of a different type than cadian. The interesting thing about this release is that it doesnt have any new models. Usually codex releases come with a good size model release as well.