Marshal Loss wrote: Pre-orders up on NZ. Surprised to see a World Eaters transfer sheet in the kits, which is nice:
The product description for Jakhals mentions more customisation than I'd anticipated though we'll see how that actually turns out.
And the Eightbound can be built with bare torsos...
Bit unfortunate they've stripped away the colour from the World Eaters symbols - I prefer the green and blue Earth-like planet between the jaws, it's a good contrast to the rest of the armour.
Marshal Loss wrote: Pre-orders up on NZ. Surprised to see a World Eaters transfer sheet in the kits, which is nice:
Spoiler:
The product description for Jakhals mentions more customisation than I'd anticipated though we'll see how that actually turns out.
And the Eightbound can be built with bare torsos...
Topless Eightbound with an AoS khorne helmet would probably look a lot less derpy than the stock models, and the left over plate looks roughly terminator scale. Had a good nosey at the Jakhal sprue pics, they have lots of chain weapons poseable at the wrist, but as most of the unit is dual wielding doesn't look like there would be a lot of spare parts.
WE are pretty solid for keeping in theme with regards to appearances and haven't deviated too far from the original aesthetic. We can only hope that DG were a fluke and maybe the EC will keep the similar aesthetics...
What aesthetic do the EC really have to keep? It's actually quite stunning how few "Slaaneshi marine" models GW have ever made. Outside HH, there are:
About ten(?) from Rogue Trader, without much of a coherent aesthetic
The one from the set now called "Traitors of Chaos" which firmly established the look for the other three gods, but not Slaanesh
The original Noise Marine
Those weird 3rd(?) Ed Noise Marines that got very memory-holed very quickly
The upgrade set for plastic CSM, still on sale
The EC Chaos Lord
Lucius
The rereleased Noise Marine
Any more? It's possible I have missed something. But if not, that is six plus an upgrade kit since the 2nd Ed codex?
There are some recurrent elements there (notably speaker grilles in strange places) but as a group they don't even fit with each other that well. The EC are much more of a design blank slate when it comes to a full range compared to the other three. Granted, what they've now done for HH will probably lead the way.
The product description for Jakhals mentions more customisation than I'd anticipated though we'll see how that actually turns out.
Eh. The fact that the stimm backpacks connect to every arm at the wrist kills a lot of the customization and even available poses. They feel unnecessarily constrained by that design element.
From a gear standpoints, you've got 7 with two blades, 1 with a big blade and 1 with a banner and 1 big guy, and that's it.
One thing of note is the gear selection for Berserkers is real simple now.
Chainaxes and chainswords are the same thing - Berzerker chainblades.
2 can have two handed eviscerators
2 can have plasma pistols.
Sergeant can have a plasma pistol. The end.
Hope not too many people had axe and sword models, because that seems right out. As are power fist sergeants, of course.
The eightbound having options for bare chests is wild. Like why didn't they build the exalted version like that, or the weaker version? You really can't tell the difference the way they are now and it would have been a good way to differentiate them easily
WE are pretty solid for keeping in theme with regards to appearances and haven't deviated too far from the original aesthetic. We can only hope that DG were a fluke and maybe the EC will keep the similar aesthetics...
What aesthetic do the EC really have to keep? It's actually quite stunning how few "Slaaneshi marine" models GW have ever made. Outside HH, there are:
About ten(?) from Rogue Trader, without much of a coherent aesthetic
The one from the set now called "Traitors of Chaos" which firmly established the look for the other three gods, but not Slaanesh
The original Noise Marine
Those weird 3rd(?) Ed Noise Marines that got very memory-holed very quickly
The upgrade set for plastic CSM, still on sale
The EC Chaos Lord
Lucius
The rereleased Noise Marine
Any more? It's possible I have missed something. But if not, that is six plus an upgrade kit since the 2nd Ed codex?
There are some recurrent elements there (notably speaker grilles in strange places) but as a group they don't even fit with each other that well. The EC are much more of a design blank slate when it comes to a full range compared to the other three. Granted, what they've now done for HH will probably lead the way.
Supposedly the EC all became Noise Marines. I would hope that they don't go down the road of flanerization like with the World Eaters and quietly walk that bit back with the EC rediscovering the pleasures they used to enjoy, to the detriment of their victims.
They could have the EC differ in specializing in Slaanesh's 6 "Circles of Seduction" vices.
Even the World Eater models are an example of how Flanderisation/brain bugs can ruin a range.
1. There was a Khorne Lord on Juggernaut model. 2. We will make a new Khorne Lord on Juggernaut model! 3. The old model had a plasma pistol. 4. The new model will have a plasma pistol. 5. The model can only have a plasma pistol, because no model/no rule.
1. The Berzerker kit is old! 2. We will make a new Berzerker kit! 3. The old Berzerker kit included Chain Axes, Chainswords and Plasma Pistols. 4. The new Berzerker kit will include Chain Axes, Chainswords and Plasma Pistols. 5. Berzerkers can now only have these (plus Malibu Stacey's obligatory new hat/eviscerator), because no model/no rule.
In their attempt to modernise, update and recreate old kits they have created limitations that weren't there before.
I mean look at the sprues:
Spoiler:
How can plastic be so tightly packed, and yet so empty?
And let off the sirens! Trigger the fireworks! Australia has hit triple digits for basic infantry squads!
That's right, what was bordering AUD$100 at $98 for a long time now has finally crossed the Rubicon Stultus, and now Berzerkers are AUD$105! I expect all basic squads of that type to be that price (or higher) from now on.
blood reaper wrote: Bit unfortunate they've stripped away the colour from the World Eaters symbols...
One could say that it's emblematic of this release.
blood reaper wrote: Bit unfortunate they've stripped away the colour from the World Eaters symbols...
One could say that it's emblematic of this release.
Mind you, the original Realms of Chaos did say Khorne's worshippers were a serious dour lot as they viewed bloodletting as a serious activity to be done with the utmost solemnity. Similar to the Ork Goffs' and their views on decoration, it seems the only permitted colors were Khorne's favored of red, brass, and black.
Of course then this softened a bit later with World Eater symbols that had a splash of blue and green in the world being eaten, however it seems GW has gone backwards. One could make an argument that maybe this is to show the monomaniacal focus of the World Eaters as they have fallen even deeper into Khorne worship, washing out all color from their lives and increasingly any conscious rational thought as they devolve into frothing madmen....Or it is flanderization
Iracundus wrote: One could make an argument that maybe this is to show the monomaniacal focus of the World Eaters as they have fallen even deeper into Khorne worship, washing out all color from their lives and increasingly any conscious rational thought as they devolve into frothing madmen....
And let off the sirens! Trigger the fireworks! Australia has hit triple digits for basic infantry squads!
That's right, what was bordering AUD$100 at $98 for a long time now has finally crossed the Rubicon Stultus, and now Berzerkers are AUD$105! I expect all basic squads of that type to be that price (or higher) from now on.
Yep I'm not real impressed either. That unit of Berserkers (10) equates to $10.50 per Berserker.
Those Eightbound guys are $98 for 3! So like $32.66 ea. They must be powerful in game or really huge or something. Hmm I see they're on 40mm bases. Well I do like them, just not price.
Seems expensive to start a new army now whether it's an infantry heavy army like Astra Militarum or even more elite like Khorne.
What worries me about moving forward from here is that GW normally makes a statement about incoming price rises. So will GW announce a price hike this year? What month do they usually do that? And what will that bring for existing kits as well as new ones?
That isn't true, though. Even in relatively recent stuff (like the Fabius trilogy), Noise marines are a very specific sub-cult that's almost separate from the rest of the legion, who run the gamut from shades of the old perfectionist duelists to the complete degenerates who've thrown almost every shred of the old ways away.
To be honest, I think that's partly why the EC are stuck at the end of the update cycle. With no simple flanderization to focus on, GW's at a loss of what to do with them. And since they never quite know what to do with the mark of slaanesh (other than defaulting to immune to psychology and/or an initiative bonus) they're effectively chaos marines+ (with both melee and ranged experts), and they don't want or don't have room for that as a concept.
With world eaters, they managed to surpass my worst fears of blandification and just hacking out huge sections of the model range (while keeping it all in the lore section, which is just insult on injury). With EC, they're kind of just kicking the can down the road, because they're at another mental block (the recurring bane of many an elf and eldar faction, so I guess its at least fitting that the old enemy suffers the same fate)
I don't see what's wrong with the sprues of the new kits, it's a solid upgrade to what we had before. Also, those bleeding symbols in the transfer sheet look awesome.
On the bright side, and not strictly WE-related, the Arks Of Omen: Balefleet Battleforce was AUD$40 cheaper than I was expecting. After 25% discount it makes it over 50% off buying the individual items separately,. That's like old Maelstrom Game UK levels of discount.
The Daemon Prince is an eye-watering AUD$135 (I think it's release was delayed in Oz for some reason). Glad I paid $60 for mine.
ArcaneHorror wrote: I don't see what's wrong with the sprues of the new kits...
The loss of Champion options. The loss of any options for HQs.
I'll echo the criticism about not showing off Eightbound without the apparently optional armor pieces. There's something really weird going on at GW. They didn't show off Squat exosuit helmets either although they could have easily built a squad member like that, and the alternate (and better) Primaris banner bearer pose wasn't advertised until it showed up on the online store.
You'd think that with ever increasing prices and the decreasing options GW kits have, GW would have an incentive to show off options when they're there.
lost_lilliputian wrote: What worries me about moving forward from here is that GW normally makes a statement about incoming price rises. So will GW announce a price hike this year? What month do they usually do that? And what will that bring for existing kits as well as new ones?
In the last years the annual price hike kicked in early in March, or maybe very late in February. I think GW gave two or three weeks of advance notice. Since it's GW we're talking about and Guard and World Eaters are a good preview, I expect GW won't skip the general price hike and we'll see an announcement soon.
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
i am sorry, but this isn't a codex.
This is a joke at most:
no special havocs, no red butchers, 9-in-1-souls-possessed battle royal elites in the wrong numbers half the armored options the list should have non existent.
Ya, honestly WE players are better off if they run the bloody CSM dex and that one already stinks to high heavens for some things.
I wish Angron (and chaos space marines in general) had the option to include older marks of armor as trophies. I feel like these seasoned warriors would have relics and trophies from the Horus Heresy, but its always "primaris helmet, Cadian helmet, or even just firstborn helmet." Where are the MK 3s on spikes? If you want to use daemon prince angron in HH, he's got a primaris helmet buried in a pile of skulls on his base...
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
The Tabletop Tactics codex review started with nostalgia for the Khorne Daemonkin book from 7th. I took that as a bad sign.
They're more excited for the format changes (all the army rules together, for example) than anything else.
They're excited for the lack of subfactions, and less relics/traits/strats, but the discontent at the loss of models is bleeding through early.
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
The Tabletop Tactics codex review started with nostalgia for the Khorne Daemonkin book from 7th. I took that as a bad sign.
They're more excited for the format changes (all the army rules together, for example) than anything else.
The format change is really good - but if you're going for super streamlined you kinda have to make sure that the remaining content is top notch. 8 stratagems and 1 of them is smoke launchers while none of them are extra traits/relics is silly, likewise with WL traits - only 6, 3 locked to named guys, but in reality there are only 2 traits as you either have Angron (because he's probably the best unit in the codex) or Lord Invocatus (because he has the best warlord trait), the other 4 traits may as well not exist. Would have been so easy to copy/paste/update old traits and relics so you end up with a short streamlined list of things worth considering.
I'm wondering if this is just a transition period, and once Emperor's Children come out they will switch to God Books plus Undivided. Then let a God specific army take just less than half of undivided, or an Undivided army take non God Legion god units.
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
The Tabletop Tactics codex review started with nostalgia for the Khorne Daemonkin book from 7th. I took that as a bad sign.
They're more excited for the format changes (all the army rules together, for example) than anything else.
They're excited for the lack of subfactions, and less relics/traits/strats, but the discontent at the loss of models is bleeding through early.
Wonder how much GW paid them to be excited about less army rules LMAO
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
The Tabletop Tactics codex review started with nostalgia for the Khorne Daemonkin book from 7th. I took that as a bad sign.
They're more excited for the format changes (all the army rules together, for example) than anything else.
They're excited for the lack of subfactions, and less relics/traits/strats, but the discontent at the loss of models is bleeding through early.
Wonder how much GW paid them to be excited about less army rules LMAO
I don't think its that- it has a lot to do with how they play the game. And really, how bad GW has been about dumping in pages and pages of trash rules, particularly in the realm of warlord traits, relics and strats. So paring it down does get rid of some of the bloat.
The unfortunate part (which they also point out) is too much of what's left is still bad. Or pointless in the case of warlord traits, because there is very little reason not to take Angron or the Lord Invocatus. Ever. Especially the LI.
Oh and WE do lose Vindicators. Not any other vehicle, just vindicators. Because reasons.
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
The Tabletop Tactics codex review started with nostalgia for the Khorne Daemonkin book from 7th. I took that as a bad sign.
They're more excited for the format changes (all the army rules together, for example) than anything else.
They're excited for the lack of subfactions, and less relics/traits/strats, but the discontent at the loss of models is bleeding through early.
Wonder how much GW paid them to be excited about less army rules LMAO
I don't think its that- it has a lot to do with how they play the game. And really, how bad GW has been about dumping in pages and pages of trash rules, particularly in the realm of warlord traits, relics and strats. So paring it down does get rid of some of the bloat.
The unfortunate part (which they also point out) is too much of what's left is still bad. Or pointless in the case of warlord traits, because there is very little reason not to take Angron or the Lord Invocatus. Ever. Especially the LI.
Oh and WE do lose Vindicators. Not any other vehicle, just vindicators. Because reasons.
Well yeah, when Marines have over 50+ Warlord Traits to choose from there's gonna be garbage ones due to either being redundant (Salamanders have Iron Resolve, except you regen 1 wound a turn. It's not necessary) or useless because of Core rules themselves (Fear Made Manifest LOL). You have to trim it down obviously. Loyalist Scum should just have around 20-25 max shared between all 9 Chapters.
That's NOT what was done with World Eaters. There's not an effort on the "slimmed down" rules or the unit selection.
Wonder how much GW paid them to be excited about less army rules LMAO
Given rules bloat, mental burden, duplication of rules, unwanted niche strats, obviously qorse traits and relics etc. this place, including you, often complain about. I'd say they were just expressing pleasure at not having to learn 47 strats, 17 army rules and picking from 20ish relics to play a game of 40k for a change.
I think a lot of people would welcome a pruning down of the sheer volume of stuff.
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
The Tabletop Tactics codex review started with nostalgia for the Khorne Daemonkin book from 7th. I took that as a bad sign.
They're more excited for the format changes (all the army rules together, for example) than anything else.
They're excited for the lack of subfactions, and less relics/traits/strats, but the discontent at the loss of models is bleeding through early.
Wonder how much GW paid them to be excited about less army rules LMAO
I don't think its that- it has a lot to do with how they play the game. And really, how bad GW has been about dumping in pages and pages of trash rules, particularly in the realm of warlord traits, relics and strats. So paring it down does get rid of some of the bloat.
The unfortunate part (which they also point out) is too much of what's left is still bad. Or pointless in the case of warlord traits, because there is very little reason not to take Angron or the Lord Invocatus. Ever. Especially the LI.
Oh and WE do lose Vindicators. Not any other vehicle, just vindicators. Because reasons.
Well yeah, when Marines have over 50+ Warlord Traits to choose from there's gonna be garbage ones due to either being redundant (Salamanders have Iron Resolve, except you regen 1 wound a turn. It's not necessary) or useless because of Core rules themselves (Fear Made Manifest LOL). You have to trim it down obviously. Loyalist Scum should just have around 20-25 max shared between all 9 Chapters.
That's NOT what was done with World Eaters. There's not an effort on the "slimmed down" rules or the unit selection.
The unit selection is a different issue - one that they were clearly unhappy with (and they should be).
'Slimmed down rules,' on the other hand... Nah. The codex seems fine for that specific issue- they have plenty of goodies in that regard (to the point that I suspect a nerfbat is in their future, because the army lists basically write themselves, and as long as you can touch something with the good stuff, they'll explode). The codex lends itself to point/click, win or lose, and a lot of interesting choices went out the window with the units.
Its just the churn of traits/strats/relics. The stuff codex writers can crap out on a napkin in 15 minutes over lunch, and it usually shows. I completely understand wanting less of that, especially any sign that they're going to get rid of the auto-take stuff.
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
The Tabletop Tactics codex review started with nostalgia for the Khorne Daemonkin book from 7th. I took that as a bad sign.
They're more excited for the format changes (all the army rules together, for example) than anything else.
They're excited for the lack of subfactions, and less relics/traits/strats, but the discontent at the loss of models is bleeding through early.
Wonder how much GW paid them to be excited about less army rules LMAO
Isn't Rules bloat one of the things people don't like about 9th Ed?
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
The Tabletop Tactics codex review started with nostalgia for the Khorne Daemonkin book from 7th. I took that as a bad sign.
They're more excited for the format changes (all the army rules together, for example) than anything else.
They're excited for the lack of subfactions, and less relics/traits/strats, but the discontent at the loss of models is bleeding through early.
Wonder how much GW paid them to be excited about less army rules LMAO
Isn't Rules bloat one of the things people don't like about 9th Ed?
Having more than one choice per FOC slot is not rules bloat. Less relics, traits, stratagems etc. is a good thing, cutting out half of the unit choices is not.
Dreadful codex release. Please for the love of God do not waste your money on this garbage, and maybe consider no longer spending money on GW in a general sense.
Void__Dragon wrote: Dreadful codex release. Please for the love of God do not waste your money on this garbage, and maybe consider no longer spending money on GW in a general sense.
Void__Dragon wrote: Dreadful codex release. Please for the love of God do not waste your money on this garbage, and maybe consider no longer spending money on GW in a general sense.
What happened?
Prepare for a dozen whiny posts about how small the range is, how limited the weapons are, "flanderization", "this should've been a supplement or in the CSM book", etc etc.
Void__Dragon wrote: Dreadful codex release. Please for the love of God do not waste your money on this garbage, and maybe consider no longer spending money on GW in a general sense.
What happened?
Prepare for a dozen whiny posts about how small the range is, how limited the weapons are, "flanderization", "this should've been a supplement or in the CSM book", etc etc.
Insularum wrote: Preview vids are up on YT, doesn't look like there is much not already leaked.
There's basically nothing to discuss at this point - it's a pretty empty codex. All those people spurning that old leak of the unit selection as fake because the page number was 88 must feel pretty silly now.
The Tabletop Tactics codex review started with nostalgia for the Khorne Daemonkin book from 7th. I took that as a bad sign.
They're more excited for the format changes (all the army rules together, for example) than anything else.
They're excited for the lack of subfactions, and less relics/traits/strats, but the discontent at the loss of models is bleeding through early.
Wonder how much GW paid them to be excited about less army rules LMAO
Isn't Rules bloat one of the things people don't like about 9th Ed?
No, constant updates because GW won't do it right the first time is what people complain about. The "bloat" via 8th went away.
EviscerationPlague wrote: No, constant updates because GW won't do it right the first time is what people complain about. The "bloat" via 8th went away.
Seeing people pretty excited about the release. Small codex? Yeah, but so is Votann, Harlequins. Admech and Genestealer Cults were pretty slim when they released.
But, seeing people complain about any possible thing is what makes the internet... the internet.
World Eaters have been waiting for this for a long time. It's far from a perfect release, far from an ideal codex.
But, as an Emperor's Children fan, I'd honestly be pretty thrilled if I got Fulgrim, noise marines, a lord on steed, and a beefy specialist troop. Would I start playing the army right away? No, probably not. But, I'd happily buy into those new Noise Marines and other models because I've been waiting 15 years for those models to be updated in modern plastic.
And, I'm sure, other things are planned in the pipeline. May be another 3 years. Maybe longer. But that's just part of the hobby. I can ally with Chaos Daemons or with the core Chaos Space Marines books, or even throw in a Chaos Knight.
Prepare for a dozen whiny posts about how small the range is, how limited the weapons are, "flanderization", "this should've been a supplement or in the CSM book", etc etc.
Being willing to eat any garbage shoveled in front of you without any complaint like a good consumerist drone is not the virtue you seem to think it is.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
drbored wrote: Seeing people pretty excited about the release. Small codex? Yeah, but so is Votann, Harlequins. Admech and Genestealer Cults were pretty slim when they released.
Stop right there. I play Harlequins. I also play Custodes, another "small" book.
This book which doesn't even offer you the ability to take a generic foot World Eaters Chaos Lord is not comparable to those books just because they are also small and I'm not going to allow you to pretend it is.
But, seeing people complain about any possible thing is what makes the internet... the internet.
Have you considered having higher standards for what you put your money toward?
World Eaters have been waiting for this for a long time. It's far from a perfect release, far from an ideal codex.
It's the worst codex released in ninth so far (not necessarily in power level) yeah, I guess that would make it "not perfect", the same way that getting an F means your grades aren't perfect.
But, as an Emperor's Children fan, I'd honestly be pretty thrilled if I got Fulgrim, noise marines, a lord on steed, and a beefy specialist troop. Would I start playing the army right away? No, probably not. But, I'd happily buy into those new Noise Marines and other models because I've been waiting 15 years for those models to be updated in modern plastic.
And that's the reason the reason why GW can put out half-assed crummy releases like this and getting away with it.
And, I'm sure, other things are planned in the pipeline. May be another 3 years. Maybe longer. But that's just part of the hobby. I can ally with Chaos Daemons or with the core Chaos Space Marines books, or even throw in a Chaos Knight.
Per AoO you can not in fact ally this book with the core CSM book actually.
Here's the bottom line: Games Workshop is a billion dollar corporation who fully had the time and resources to give World Eaters a complete release without omitting weird gak liken standard World Eater foot Lords or Vindicators for some inexplicable reason and every fast attack option that isn't a fething Chaos Spawn. Despite fully having the resources to do this they didn't. And why not? Because they know that people with too much money and not enough sense will gladly shovel them money for overpriced garbage.
And that's just talking about this joke of a range. Not even talking about how paper thin the book is from a gameplay perspective and how mono-build they're going to be. As the Goonhammer review states the lists really do build themselves. There is so little room for variety and personal choice in how you build your army which isn't helped at all by the fact that there are more named characters than generic ones and the Lord Invocatus is so incredibly powerful that for the more tournament-minded player there is no reason to not take him other than personal preference. And the design space is similarly paper thin because the army lives and dies on running out, touching things, and then killing them with literally nothing else going for them but their ability to kill things in melee. Like Tau but in reverse, only worse because the various chassis and offensive profiles of the World Eaters are far more homogenous than the various shooting units and weapons of the Tau. The codex is a failure on almost every level.
But who cares right? Look at how cool the three or four new models are. Gotta consoom that new thing right?
I'm reminded of Captain America's line from the first Avengers film:
"When I went under, the world was at war. I wake up, they say we won. They didn't say what we lost."
WE lost far more than they gained.
Anyway, on the subject of the new minis, Naomi from Sword & Steel has a video about putting them together and some of the odd quirks of the kits (including hot leaked naked Eightbound pics! ).
Most interesting is that the Juggerlord appears to be a Carnifex situation, meaning if you can get an extra body (and just the body - you get extra Juggerlegs and a second head in the kit), you can build two Juggerlords from the same kit.
Hmm Naomi of Sword and Steel looks good in red, must be a Khorne fan/follower. I'm serious as red is not everyone's colour you know.
So, if I could do a poll I would, on the general feeling of this codex and specifically where people think the writers were, when they wrote this codex:
A) in the shower
B) on the toilet
C) stuck in traffic
D) a board meeting (bored meeting?)
Most interesting is that the Juggerlord appears to be a Carnifex situation, meaning if you can get an extra body (and just the body - you get extra Juggerlegs and a second head in the kit), you can build two Juggerlords from the same kit.
Goonhammer has an example where they used a Bloodcrusher Juggernaut to build both of them:
Here's the bottom line: Games Workshop is a billion dollar corporation ... Look at how cool the three or four new models are. Gotta consoom that new thing right?
A few points, I'm not impressed with the range offered, clearing that up straight away. They did a bad job on the units included, I don't think it would have hurt to have a few more relics and traits, maybe 8 subfactions for lolz.
That aside, they are not multi billion, they're not even a one billion dollar company. They are a producer of miniatures first and foremost by company statement. So everything you ranted about is literally what they tell you they are on day one.
As for the rest of this "consoomer" gak, stop taking notes off certain other whine-bots and go calm down. Not worth being angry about it all to the point you generalise and insult others.
There are some high res sprue pics for those that want to check out all the heads in the new Berzerkers kit, and I also go through all the assembly options.
Honestly the only things I'd really addon to what we got mini wise is a set of Short Range oriented Berzerker Havocs, a Butcher Surgeon (CSM take on an Apothecary) and some sort of possessed tank.
Give the Berzerker Havocs some sort of belt fed Grenade launcher, a Reaper Chain cannon, a plasma cannon and either Heavy Flamers or a bespoke counterpart.
Butcher Surgeon would be a healer and decent melee combatant. Perhaps have his kills heal nearby allies.
But other all the big issue with this release is that it does not feel satisfying. Nobody likes going from having a bunch of variation even if you are just a subfaction from a larger book, to a tiny fragment splintered off and now have 1/4th your prior options. It feels lazy. It feels low effort. I love some of these minis mind you. Angron looks awesome, the new Berzerkers are also pretty awesome, so is the Juggernaut Lord. But the Eightbound and Exalted Eightbound model wise feel very samey, if they had rolled those Exalted 8 bound into a Sergeant type model for the others and then threw in some Red Butchers it would feel better since it would be more in theme with the other God Books.
Here's the bottom line: Games Workshop is a billion dollar corporation ... Look at how cool the three or four new models are. Gotta consoom that new thing right?
A few points, I'm not impressed with the range offered, clearing that up straight away. They did a bad job on the units included, I don't think it would have hurt to have a few more relics and traits, maybe 8 subfactions for lolz.
That aside, they are not multi billion, they're not even a one billion dollar company. They are a producer of miniatures first and foremost by company statement. So everything you ranted about is literally what they tell you they are on day one.
As for the rest of this "consoomer" gak, stop taking notes off certain other whine-bots and go calm down. Not worth being angry about it all to the point you generalise and insult others.
They're not a miniatures first company.
Such a company would sell you all the different marks, civilians, cars, taverns, weapon packs, the various non faction xenos., etc etc.
And they wouldn't be charging an arm and a leg for it.
I've stopped playing the game and I'm only converting models now. And even so the kits are bad.
Whoever decided that melee weapons are 100% on the left side of the models and bolt pistols/bolters are 100% on the right side should be fired.
And why do they continue to make upgrade options....but only for heresy?
Why are CSM all made as Black Legion?
They either suck as miniature first company....or they just want you to believe that they are.
Here's the bottom line: Games Workshop is a billion dollar corporation ... Look at how cool the three or four new models are. Gotta consoom that new thing right?
A few points, I'm not impressed with the range offered, clearing that up straight away. They did a bad job on the units included, I don't think it would have hurt to have a few more relics and traits, maybe 8 subfactions for lolz.
That aside, they are not multi billion, they're not even a one billion dollar company. They are a producer of miniatures first and foremost by company statement. So everything you ranted about is literally what they tell you they are on day one.
As for the rest of this "consoomer" gak, stop taking notes off certain other whine-bots and go calm down. Not worth being angry about it all to the point you generalise and insult others.
They're not a miniatures first company.
Such a company would sell you all the different marks, civilians, cars, taverns, weapon packs, the various non faction xenos., etc etc.
And they wouldn't be charging an arm and a leg for it.
I've stopped playing the game and I'm only converting models now. And even so the kits are bad.
Whoever decided that melee weapons are 100% on the left side of the models and bolt pistols/bolters are 100% on the right side should be fired.
And why do they continue to make upgrade options....but only for heresy?
Why are CSM all made as Black Legion?
They either suck as miniature first company....or they just want you to believe that they are.
Not all CSM are black legion and have no iconography to that extent on each marine? As for the legion upgrade kits nobody can answer that. But looking at their rules and how they're designed purely to the model kits, you're going to have a hard time convincing anyone they're a rules first organisation.
A few points, I'm not impressed with the range offered, clearing that up straight away. They did a bad job on the units included, I don't think it would have hurt to have a few more relics and traits, maybe 8 subfactions for lolz.
But will you pay for these models anytime soon? Are you going to buy the codex?
That aside, they are not multi billion, they're not even a one billion dollar company.
Try to do at least basic research before posting next time.
They are a producer of miniatures first and foremost by company statement. So everything you ranted about is literally what they tell you they are on day one.
Let's say that I charitably ignore Roknar blowing you out in the posts following yours: so what? Per GW's own mission statement the game itself is a "key part" of their hobby and business model and integral to the success of their business. And even if that's not true, so what? Are you asserting that you can't criticize the company or the people who enable their gakky business practices because they are allegedly a "miniatures first" company? No my friend, I'm afraid I can. I will.
As for the rest of this "consoomer" gak, stop taking notes off certain other whine-bots and go calm down. Not worth being angry about it all to the point you generalise and insult others.
I lose absolutely nothing to take a few minutes out of my day of being sick at home with COVID to gak on Games Workshop or the whales who enable them my friend. Your bad faith concern is noted.
That doesn't make much sense Roknar, I can name companies that sell only miniatures (presumably making them miniatures companies) but don't sell taverns, cars, etc etc. If you're trying to say miniatures companies should sell miniatures in general, here are examples, that's what GW do, but not those specific examples. If you're saying miniatures companies need to sell every single miniature I think that's an illogical stipulation. If you're saying something different then I haven't understood your argument.
Watching the reviews by Tabletop Tactics and Auspex I am struck by something rather stark:
This is a Codex supplement ripped out of the CSM book and fattened up into its own (largely hollow) book. It's like the Red Corsairs and Creations of bile. 3 relics, 3 Warlord traits, 1 page of strats. No sub-factions of their own. No points-based upgrades. They're not an army book like CSM, 1KSons or Death Guard. They're a sub-faction put into its own book.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Watching the reviews by Tabletop Tactics and Auspex I am struck by something rather stark:
This is a Codex supplement ripped out of the CSM book and fattened up into its own (largely hollow) book. It's like the Red Corsairs and Creations of bile. 3 relics, 3 Warlord traits, 1 page of strats. No sub-factions of their own. No points-based upgrades. They're not an army book like CSM, 1KSons or Death Guard. They're a sub-faction put into its own book.
It's truly bizarre.
Don't forget the "super doctrines" that were leaked alongside the rest of the rules that will certainly come out in the next few month !
Soon available at the Games WorkshopTMCR nearest to you
Here's the bottom line: Games Workshop is a billion dollar corporation ... Look at how cool the three or four new models are. Gotta consoom that new thing right?
A few points, I'm not impressed with the range offered, clearing that up straight away. They did a bad job on the units included, I don't think it would have hurt to have a few more relics and traits, maybe 8 subfactions for lolz.
That aside, they are not multi billion, they're not even a one billion dollar company. They are a producer of miniatures first and foremost by company statement. So everything you ranted about is literally what they tell you they are on day one.
As for the rest of this "consoomer" gak, stop taking notes off certain other whine-bots and go calm down. Not worth being angry about it all to the point you generalise and insult others.
They're not a miniatures first company.
Such a company would sell you all the different marks, civilians, cars, taverns, weapon packs, the various non faction xenos., etc etc.
And they wouldn't be charging an arm and a leg for it.
I've stopped playing the game and I'm only converting models now. And even so the kits are bad.
Whoever decided that melee weapons are 100% on the left side of the models and bolt pistols/bolters are 100% on the right side should be fired.
And why do they continue to make upgrade options....but only for heresy?
Why are CSM all made as Black Legion?
They either suck as miniature first company....or they just want you to believe that they are.
I pointed out the melee weapons all being left handed the first time
Most interesting is that the Juggerlord appears to be a Carnifex situation, meaning if you can get an extra body (and just the body - you get extra Juggerlegs and a second head in the kit), you can build two Juggerlords from the same kit.
Goonhammer has an example where they used a Bloodcrusher Juggernaut to build both of them:
Spoiler:
SInce it looks like there are options for the rider to be holding onto the hook with either the left hand or the right hand, I really hope someone decides to make one where the World eater is desperately hanging on with both hands
There are some high res sprue pics for those that want to check out all the heads in the new Berzerkers kit, and I also go through all the assembly options.
I might be crazy, but it looks to me like you used the same sprue picture twice for the Juggernaught riders.
In any case, I'm am quite surprised that you can't give 100% of the models some form of chainaxe, be it one handed or two handed.
Bob Lorgar wrote: In any case, I'm am quite surprised that you can't give 100% of the models some form of chainaxe, be it one handed or two handed.
Given that two of these kits are near recreations of previous kits, it seems that their thought process somehow morphed from "These units had these options!" to "These units can only ever have these options!". It's why the Juggerlord has to have a Plasma Pistol, and it's why the weapon options (or lack thereof) are set up on the 'Zerker sprues.
There are some high res sprue pics for those that want to check out all the heads in the new Berzerkers kit, and I also go through all the assembly options.
I might be crazy, but it looks to me like you used the same sprue picture twice for the Juggernaught riders.
In any case, I'm am quite surprised that you can't give 100% of the models some form of chainaxe, be it one handed or two handed.
Shame that we can't do the dude/dudette from the Codex Cover with an axe literally for their head. Not on their head, the axe is their head.
World Eaters Crusade The World Eaters Crusade rules are all about gathering heaps of Worthy Skulls and offering them to Khorne – top marks for theme. Unfortunately, it falls foul of the Crusade system’s main weakness. There’s too much admin.
A World Eaters crusade force gains skulls at the end of the battle based on the number of enemy units you’ve killed. These get allocated to one eligible unit, so alongside XP, Rank, upgrades, and number of units killed, you’ll also be tracking the size of each unit’s skull stash.
Whenever you feel ready you can offer up those skulls to Khorne, rolling some dice – higher ranked units rolling more dice – and subtracting the result from the unit’s skull total as the God judges some skulls unworthy. The more Worthy Skulls there are left over, the better the table of random rewards you get to roll on.
This is a parallel progression system alongside XP, and another randomised progress system to go with Chaos Boons (also present). Some of the ‘Lesser Rewards’ are actually economic buffs – Favoured Killers lets you reroll Khorne’s judgement of a skull offering as if you were haggling with a pawnbroker, while Lessons of Slaughter increases the XP the unit gains from killing enemy units.
Administration is not Khornate, counting is more of a Nurgle thing. I don’t really hold this against the book – it’s a problem with the Crusade system as a whole. Narrative play has a reputation for being less intense than matched play, but it’s no less procedurally complex, it just happens on pieces of paper rather than the tabletop.
I enjoy Crusade despite my gripes with it, and if you do too then these are another fine set of Crusade rules, but it won’t change anyone’s mind about the system as a whole.
Excellent miniatures to use in older or different rules sets, then, I guess!
The single largest issue with GW at the moment is "no model no rules", leading to absolute nonsense like Catachan infantry squads being allowed to take... a flamer. Or Bezerker Champions not getting power fists or power weapons or anything else.
The single largest issue with GW at the moment is "no model no rules", leading to absolute nonsense like Catachan infantry squads being allowed to take... a flamer.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Watching the reviews by Tabletop Tactics and Auspex I am struck by something rather stark:
This is a Codex supplement ripped out of the CSM book and fattened up into its own (largely hollow) book. It's like the Red Corsairs and Creations of bile. 3 relics, 3 Warlord traits, 1 page of strats. No sub-factions of their own. No points-based upgrades. They're not an army book like CSM, 1KSons or Death Guard. They're a sub-faction put into its own book.
It's truly bizarre.
Reading the Goonhammer review gave me the same vibe. Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules. Worst case its a half-codex meant to tide you over until the second half of the faction is released next year with a new codex.
The cynic in me also couldn't help but notice that the "winners" from the codex are the new stuff like the Lord Invocatus and Eightbound. Your existing lords, bezerkers and terminators are strictly second tier or, even worse, suffer the fate of bikers etc and are no longer part of the army!
Yeah. I really don't know what I'm going to do with this one. As it stands, my current World Eaters army is essentially unplayable. I don't love the sound of the new codex, but equally I'm not sure how well it would work with the CSM codex and WD stop-gap rules for WE. And then there's apparently 10th on the horizon. I might just mothball my WE and focus on my Drukhari for now.
Fergie0044 wrote: Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules.
Wait, best case is 10th edition codices lose subfaction rules? You realize that means no more legion rules for CSM and they are back to warbanz again right?
Fergie0044 wrote: Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules.
Wait, best case is 10th edition codices lose subfaction rules? You realize that means no more legion rules for CSM and they are back to warbanz again right?
Would be fantastic. I'd be incredibly happy to see the back of gaming breaking and free bonuses to <unit type> based on <subfaction color>, and if you aren't playing <subfaction> you shouldn't use <unit>.
Bloat for the bloat god doesn't need to be the vehicle to sell rulebooks.
Fergie0044 wrote: Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules.
Wait, best case is 10th edition codices lose subfaction rules? You realize that means no more legion rules for CSM and they are back to warbanz again right?
Would be fantastic. I'd be incredibly happy to see the back of gaming breaking and free bonuses to <unit type> based on <subfaction color>, and if you aren't playing <subfaction> you shouldn't use <unit>.
Bloat for the bloat god doesn't need to be the vehicle to sell rulebooks.
Hard pass. Chapter Tactics was literally one of the only good things the GW "rules writers" came up with.
Fergie0044 wrote: Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules.
Wait, best case is 10th edition codices lose subfaction rules? You realize that means no more legion rules for CSM and they are back to warbanz again right?
Would be fantastic. I'd be incredibly happy to see the back of gaming breaking and free bonuses to <unit type> based on <subfaction color>, and if you aren't playing <subfaction> you shouldn't use <unit>.
Bloat for the bloat god doesn't need to be the vehicle to sell rulebooks.
Hard pass. Chapter Tactics was literally one of the only good things the GW "rules writers" came up with.
Other than creating imbalances, what's it good for?
Fergie0044 wrote: Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules.
Wait, best case is 10th edition codices lose subfaction rules? You realize that means no more legion rules for CSM and they are back to warbanz again right?
Would be fantastic. I'd be incredibly happy to see the back of gaming breaking and free bonuses to <unit type> based on <subfaction color>, and if you aren't playing <subfaction> you shouldn't use <unit>.
Bloat for the bloat god doesn't need to be the vehicle to sell rulebooks.
Hard pass. Chapter Tactics was literally one of the only good things the GW "rules writers" came up with.
Other than creating imbalances, what's it good for?
It's a good flavour tool, but as per usual the second competitive play and tight balance enters the room they're impossible to get right and need to be taken out IMO. Nothing more disparaging than someone taking their ultra-iron-fists to game 1 as ultras because that's rule of the month then meta chasing the rule changes between the multitude of chapters. Worse yet, punishes people for trying to play to their choice of story and colour scheme.
Fergie0044 wrote: Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules.
Wait, best case is 10th edition codices lose subfaction rules? You realize that means no more legion rules for CSM and they are back to warbanz again right?
Would be fantastic. I'd be incredibly happy to see the back of gaming breaking and free bonuses to <unit type> based on <subfaction color>, and if you aren't playing <subfaction> you shouldn't use <unit>.
Bloat for the bloat god doesn't need to be the vehicle to sell rulebooks.
Hard pass. Chapter Tactics was literally one of the only good things the GW "rules writers" came up with.
Other than creating imbalances, what's it good for?
It really hasn't created imbalances that much except with extreme circumstances. For example, Terminators even under Dark Angels aren't good. They just happen to get even more rules for Deathwing because reasons, and GW threw a lot at them. Then there was the occasion that GW threw TONS of rules for a singular Chapter Tactic equivalent. Most would agree Iron Hands didn't need three parts to their Chapter Tactic during 8.2, but that wasn't the primary reason they were broken.
No need to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Fergie0044 wrote: Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules.
Wait, best case is 10th edition codices lose subfaction rules? You realize that means no more legion rules for CSM and they are back to warbanz again right?
Would be fantastic. I'd be incredibly happy to see the back of gaming breaking and free bonuses to <unit type> based on <subfaction color>, and if you aren't playing <subfaction> you shouldn't use <unit>.
Bloat for the bloat god doesn't need to be the vehicle to sell rulebooks.
Hard pass. Chapter Tactics was literally one of the only good things the GW "rules writers" came up with.
Other than creating imbalances, what's it good for?
It's a good flavour tool, but as per usual the second competitive play and tight balance enters the room they're impossible to get right and need to be taken out IMO. Nothing more disparaging than someone taking their ultra-iron-fists to game 1 as ultras because that's rule of the month then meta chasing the rule changes between the multitude of chapters. Worse yet, punishes people for trying to play to their choice of story and colour scheme.
You don't need to the exact color scheme. Why would you care if someone uses green Iron Hands?
You don't need to the exact color scheme. Why would you care if someone uses green Iron Hands?
It's frustrating for people to ignore the setting and fluff purely to rules hop for power. I'd wager that Salamanders (given green example) player also doesn't really enjoy running as ironhands just to not be at a disadvantage.
Voss wrote: Bloat for the bloat god doesn't need to be the vehicle to sell rulebooks.
Each book having 3-4 pages of strats is bloat. 40 different types of Bolters is bloat. There being 10 versions of Scything Talons is bloat. Turning basic equipment into strats is bloat. Taking unit-specific special rules and turning them into strats is bloat.
Chaos getting Legions, Eldar getting Craftworlds, Tyranids getting Hive Fleets and Orks getting Klanz is not bloat.
Dudeface wrote: It's frustrating for people to ignore the setting and fluff purely to rules hop for power. I'd wager that Salamanders (given green example) player also doesn't really enjoy running as ironhands just to not be at a disadvantage.
I'd wager that there aren't enough people who do that for it to actually matter.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Watching the reviews by Tabletop Tactics and Auspex I am struck by something rather stark:
This is a Codex supplement ripped out of the CSM book and fattened up into its own (largely hollow) book. It's like the Red Corsairs and Creations of bile. 3 relics, 3 Warlord traits, 1 page of strats. No sub-factions of their own. No points-based upgrades. They're not an army book like CSM, 1KSons or Death Guard. They're a sub-faction put into its own book.
It's truly bizarre.
Reading the Goonhammer review gave me the same vibe. Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules. Worst case its a half-codex meant to tide you over until the second half of the faction is released next year with a new codex.
The cynic in me also couldn't help but notice that the "winners" from the codex are the new stuff like the Lord Invocatus and Eightbound. Your existing lords, bezerkers and terminators are strictly second tier or, even worse, suffer the fate of bikers etc and are no longer part of the army!
The cynic in me suspects that when World Eaters get a dedicated Kill Team, it'll just be Berzerkers with an added sprue. Then those bits will get added to their datasheet.
Fergie0044 wrote: Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules.
Wait, best case is 10th edition codices lose subfaction rules? You realize that means no more legion rules for CSM and they are back to warbanz again right?
I meant best case for WE players, who are otherwise getting screwed over. I'm certainly all for cutting out the bloat, but sub factions is the one thing I'd keep. On its own outside of additional sub faction strats/warlord traits etc etc they're fine.
I meant best case for WE players, who are otherwise getting screwed over. I'm certainly all for cutting out the bloat, but sub factions is the one thing I'd keep. On its own outside of additional sub faction strats/warlord traits etc etc they're fine.
Since the WE leaks started to emerge I've been expecting that sub-factions for most armies will end up being replaced by AoR style rules that give you alternative (but not additional) rules. So for example an Ork Speed Freeks list might give you 8 strats but they will be different from the ones in the main Orks codex, and different again from a Walkerz or Beastsnaggas themed AoR.
Fergie0044 wrote: Best case this is what all the 10th edition codexs will be like with a more streamlined approach to rules.
Wait, best case is 10th edition codices lose subfaction rules? You realize that means no more legion rules for CSM and they are back to warbanz again right?
You don't neeed free unbalanced rules to play legions...
People clamouring for free rules just want another rule to break by finding optimal one.
Dawnbringer wrote: Is there another reason to have 'free' rules? (By this I'm taking it to mean additional extra special rules without drawbacks)
If done well they can be used to promote faction identity and/or list design without any real blowback on balance.
This is not that circumstance and the whole reason the internal "faction purity" bonus came to pass. Because oddly giving your shooting using the shooting subfaction and the melee units the melee subfaction made the whole situation pointless.
You don't need to the exact color scheme. Why would you care if someone uses green Iron Hands?
It's frustrating for people to ignore the setting and fluff purely to rules hop for power. I'd wager that Salamanders (given green example) player also doesn't really enjoy running as ironhands just to not be at a disadvantage.
They're still Salamanders though, just with Iron Hands rules. Nobody should care. People did it all the time when Kelley wrote the broke ass 5th edition Space Wolves codex.
You don't need to the exact color scheme. Why would you care if someone uses green Iron Hands?
It's frustrating for people to ignore the setting and fluff purely to rules hop for power. I'd wager that Salamanders (given green example) player also doesn't really enjoy running as ironhands just to not be at a disadvantage.
They're still Salamanders though, just with Iron Hands rules. Nobody should care. People did it all the time when Kelley wrote the broke ass 5th edition Space Wolves codex.
"My faction plays like this"
Becomes:
"My faction gets bonuses to this"
Becomes:
"My faction has objectively better variants of these units"
Becomes:
"These units have multiple variants, eachof varying effectiveness, that are not reflected with varying costs"
And finally terminates with:
"Players are obviously going to play with the ruleset that most favours their list, regardless of aesthetics, ultimately making the theming pointless"
I don't know what the solution is. You could impose negative traits along with the positive but that doesn't actually solve the issue. Alternatively more rigid army construction rules like mandatory or limited units to reduce possible skew.
You don't need to the exact color scheme. Why would you care if someone uses green Iron Hands?
It's frustrating for people to ignore the setting and fluff purely to rules hop for power. I'd wager that Salamanders (given green example) player also doesn't really enjoy running as ironhands just to not be at a disadvantage.
They're still Salamanders though, just with Iron Hands rules. Nobody should care. People did it all the time when Kelley wrote the broke ass 5th edition Space Wolves codex.
Or get rid of that layer of rules and make a paint scheme purely aesthetic again maybe?
You don't need to the exact color scheme. Why would you care if someone uses green Iron Hands?
It's frustrating for people to ignore the setting and fluff purely to rules hop for power. I'd wager that Salamanders (given green example) player also doesn't really enjoy running as ironhands just to not be at a disadvantage.
They're still Salamanders though, just with Iron Hands rules. Nobody should care. People did it all the time when Kelley wrote the broke ass 5th edition Space Wolves codex.
Or get rid of that layer of rules and make a paint scheme purely aesthetic again maybe?
Not going to happen unless you consolidate Codices, which I know you're against doing.
In 2nd edition AoS sub factions were like they are in 40k now, if not MORE potent force modifiers. Choosing a sub-faction was choosing an army within the army, it was built around so significantly that only a handful could simply be swapped for another and still have a valid list, let alone actually function.
In 3rd edition AoS they realized that was too much, and dialed things way back. Now sub-factions are just one rule that grants a nice little perk. Some can be potent and worth building a list around, some armies have clear 'best' sub factions, but overall the game is in a much better place with the new philosophy.
You don't need to the exact color scheme. Why would you care if someone uses green Iron Hands?
It's frustrating for people to ignore the setting and fluff purely to rules hop for power. I'd wager that Salamanders (given green example) player also doesn't really enjoy running as ironhands just to not be at a disadvantage.
They're still Salamanders though, just with Iron Hands rules. Nobody should care. People did it all the time when Kelley wrote the broke ass 5th edition Space Wolves codex.
Or get rid of that layer of rules and make a paint scheme purely aesthetic again maybe?
Not going to happen unless you consolidate Codices, which I know you're against doing.
Why? I'm not against marines being rolled back together and given less stuff. Outside of that it's actually against your interests to condense books. WE in this guise actually show what it would look like, you just paint how you like for that army and play with the rules in the book.
Dawnbringer wrote: Is there another reason to have 'free' rules? (By this I'm taking it to mean additional extra special rules without drawbacks)
If done well they can be used to promote faction identity and/or list design without any real blowback on balance.
This is not that circumstance and the whole reason the internal "faction purity" bonus came to pass. Because oddly giving your shooting using the shooting subfaction and the melee units the melee subfaction made the whole situation pointless.
The point is free extra bonuses without a drawback (or with a notional drawback) are just that; free extra bonuses.
There is obviously a good point where you get small extra bonuses as recompense for not untoward restrictions that promote thematic armies. I think a good example of this was the Bretonnian Erranty war list. You lost Grail knights as a unit, restricted 0-1 in Pegasus knights, and had to fill core (troop) requirements with Erranty knights (Back when such things meant anything, and for a 2k battle would have been min three units). Also had to take a Duke as your Lord, but don't remember when that came in, as to if losing the lvl 3-4 wizard option mattered more than in 6th.
Dawnbringer wrote: I think a good example of this was the Bretonnian Erranty war list. You lost Grail knights as a unit, restricted 0-1 in Pegasus knights, and had to fill core (troop) requirements with Erranty knights (Back when such things meant anything, and for a 2k battle would have been min three units). Also had to take a Duke as your Lord, but don't remember when that came in, as to if losing the lvl 3-4 wizard option mattered more than in 6th.
And what if you weren't planning on taking Grail Knights or Pegasus Knights? Is it a restriction if you never intended on taking it in the first place?
I'd rather that armies have little boosts based on their fluff rather than structural changes of a core army list. I mean, I loved the 3.5 Guard Codex, but the Doctrine system wasn't actually good. Fun, yes, but poorly written.
I see that there may be a fair few disappointed World eaters players tomorrow that were expecting their orders in the UK, per the Firestorm Games facebook page:
"Hey everyone! Apparently the servitors at Games Workshop’s new automated warehouse have suffered a catastrophic data cascade and shoved their heads into the palette grinders (or something).
As a result, we won’t be receiving this week’s new releases as promptly as usual, which will have a knock-on effect on the dispatch date for some orders. All independent retailers appear to be affected, not just us. Based on current information we’re hoping to have received our stock from GW by early next week, but we’ll let you know if that changes. And of course, we’ll get your orders dispatched as soon as we’re physically able."
On a similar note my local official Warhammer store did not have their delivery yesterday ready for Saturdays release, so I will be interested to see if GW/Warhammer stores have been similarly affected.
My order with 1 box of eightbound has apparently shipped, but someone else on the WE discord who ordered 6(!) boxes of them from the same retailer has been told there's a delay.
Seems like they don't have enough stock to meet demand for some kits.
Maybe I'm missing something here but why would it be free rules and bloat?
The various subfactions, especially marines and the imperial guard canoncially fight differently....and look differently.
Why should we expect anything less of their tabletop representation?
It's not "free" rules, it's a fleshing out of rules.
They mostly share a core amount of units and rules, sure...but that is only what they have in common.
After that you fill out what makes each faction different, COMPLETING the rules, not ADDING new rules.
There is no consideration of power gaming there, the various subfactions are not just paint jobs. That's absurd?
Roknar wrote: Maybe I'm missing something here but why would it be free rules and bloat?
The various subfactions, especially marines and the imperial guard canoncially fight differently....and look differently.
Why should we expect anything less of their tabletop representation?
It's not "free" rules, it's a fleshing out of rules.
They mostly share a core amount of units and rules, sure...but that is only what they have in common.
After that you fill out what makes each faction different, COMPLETING the rules, not ADDING new rules.
There is no consideration of power gaming there, the various subfactions are not just paint jobs. That's absurd?
Because 20 mins after a book is out the "best" rules are decided on, then everyone's blue/green/pink/rainbow marines are all suddenly "best rules".
That to me is more of a problem than them existing in the first place. They're not representing made up nobodies within the setting, if you're using Salamanders, they're a specific thing. Iron Hands are a specific thing. They shouldn't be run as the other just for a rules advantage imo. So safer to remove.
Roknar wrote: Maybe I'm missing something here but why would it be free rules and bloat?
The various subfactions, especially marines and the imperial guard canoncially fight differently....and look differently.
Why should we expect anything less of their tabletop representation?
It's not "free" rules, it's a fleshing out of rules.
They mostly share a core amount of units and rules, sure...but that is only what they have in common.
After that you fill out what makes each faction different, COMPLETING the rules, not ADDING new rules.
There is no consideration of power gaming there, the various subfactions are not just paint jobs. That's absurd?
Because 20 mins after a book is out the "best" rules are decided on, then everyone's blue/green/pink/rainbow marines are all suddenly "best rules".
Okay, but why do you CARE so much? If someone thinks a certain Power Armor codex has rules that fit their army better, more power to them for using the better codex.
Roknar wrote: Maybe I'm missing something here but why would it be free rules and bloat?
The various subfactions, especially marines and the imperial guard canoncially fight differently....and look differently.
Why should we expect anything less of their tabletop representation?
It's not "free" rules, it's a fleshing out of rules.
They mostly share a core amount of units and rules, sure...but that is only what they have in common.
After that you fill out what makes each faction different, COMPLETING the rules, not ADDING new rules.
There is no consideration of power gaming there, the various subfactions are not just paint jobs. That's absurd?
Because 20 mins after a book is out the "best" rules are decided on, then everyone's blue/green/pink/rainbow marines are all suddenly "best rules".
Okay, but why do you CARE so much? If someone thinks a certain Power Armor codex has rules that fit their army better, more power to them for using the better codex.
The same reason you constantly slate the inadequacy of GW rules writing. To clarify I'm not talking about using a better codex, I'm talking about the supplement or subfactions in a book. The second something that's supposed to represent a subfactions fluff and personality is purely used out of character for a power play, it's not serving its purpose.
NinthMusketeer wrote: In 2nd edition AoS sub factions were like they are in 40k now, if not MORE potent force modifiers. Choosing a sub-faction was choosing an army within the army, it was built around so significantly that only a handful could simply be swapped for another and still have a valid list, let alone actually function.
In 3rd edition AoS they realized that was too much, and dialed things way back. Now sub-factions are just one rule that grants a nice little perk. Some can be potent and worth building a list around, some armies have clear 'best' sub factions, but overall the game is in a much better place with the new philosophy.
And then there's the last StD battletome which opens whole new ways to build your army while staying in spirit of the army. Of course there are "best" choices but if you don't have to instantly gravitate to those.
Roknar wrote: Maybe I'm missing something here but why would it be free rules and bloat?
The various subfactions, especially marines and the imperial guard canoncially fight differently....and look differently.
Why should we expect anything less of their tabletop representation?
It's not "free" rules, it's a fleshing out of rules.
They mostly share a core amount of units and rules, sure...but that is only what they have in common.
After that you fill out what makes each faction different, COMPLETING the rules, not ADDING new rules.
There is no consideration of power gaming there, the various subfactions are not just paint jobs. That's absurd?
Subfaction rules very much are free rules. They also flesh out the narrative side, which is a positive to be sure. But you can't get around the fact that the rules implementation is so bad that it actually is free stuff.
Let's imagine four traits to keep the argument simple. One gives your Tactical Marines a bonus attack on a charge. One grants your Tactical Marines' bolter hit rolls of 6 an additional hit. One gives your Tactical Marines a bonus to leadership. One grants damage reduction to Dreadnoughts.
Three of those four chapters have better Tactical Marines than the fourth one, but they all pay the same price for those Marines. Which means either the basic Tactical Marine underperforms compared to the buffed ones or the buffed ones get buffs for free. That doesn't even account for the value of the various buffs compared to each other.
Now put that in the context of the entire army and for argument's sake say an amount of points spent on Tactical Marines isn't worth as much as the same amount spent on Dreadnoughts. Now the fourth chapter that loses out on Tactical Marines gains a buff on Dreadnoughts that are a more useful and powerful than Tactical Squads, but pays the exact same points for the buffed Dreadnought as the other chapters pay for their unbuffed Dreadnoughts.
Now put that in the context of lax army construction rules which do not force you to invest in underperforming Tactical Squads and let you freely load up on overperforming Dreadnoughts. If you pick the chapter that buffs Dreadnoughts, you get greater performance out of your chapter's trait than the other chapters. Which compared to them is free and thus compared to the baseline, with which the first three chapters have to work with, is also free.
It's one of the bigger issues with a number of rules currently in use in 40k. They are all valued the same whether that's free or measured in CP, but increase performance over the baseline and do so to varying degrees compared to other thins that are valued the same. There's no easy fix to that as GW is reluctant to rewrite the rules to work better. You would want to allocate points to abilities like chapter traits, warlord traits, relics and so on to reflect their different impact on performance, reintroduce more restrictive force organization and limit unit number in a more sophisticated way than the rule of three, and refrain from breaking out of that framework for some abilities that may be fluffy but totally wreck balance. When you have that, you'll have a reasonable framework to hand out rules that alter capabilities to better reflect fighting style and other fluffy things. Just thrown on top like GW does now, it's just free boosts that don't even increase performance equally.
It's also not likely to change for the better. You can see with the free wargear choices GW implements at the moment that they are actively moving away from a better rules framework. In that context the absence of subfaction rules in the World Eaters book could be seen as kind of an improvement if you squint really hard, because it removes rules that are only going to work worse the more GW gives up balancing mechanics. It's completely bogus of course because it removes fluffy rules even further (or keeps them out to begin with, as in this case) and you just know that other subfactions won't lose their rules down the line, so it's just GW screwing over World Eaters specifically.
Roknar wrote: Maybe I'm missing something here but why would it be free rules and bloat?
The various subfactions, especially marines and the imperial guard canoncially fight differently....and look differently.
Why should we expect anything less of their tabletop representation?
It's not "free" rules, it's a fleshing out of rules.
They mostly share a core amount of units and rules, sure...but that is only what they have in common.
After that you fill out what makes each faction different, COMPLETING the rules, not ADDING new rules.
There is no consideration of power gaming there, the various subfactions are not just paint jobs. That's absurd?
So. How much your models pay for them? How much less you pay lf you don't get them? Why does ba devastator cost same as ih devasator when one is clearly better?
It's broken, leads to unfluffy lists just to power gaming and totally impossible to balance.
If you care about balance they must die.
If you care about fluffy armies they must die.
But then tournament try hards can't break the game.
Roknar wrote: Maybe I'm missing something here but why would it be free rules and bloat?
The various subfactions, especially marines and the imperial guard canoncially fight differently....and look differently.
Why should we expect anything less of their tabletop representation?
It's not "free" rules, it's a fleshing out of rules.
They mostly share a core amount of units and rules, sure...but that is only what they have in common.
After that you fill out what makes each faction different, COMPLETING the rules, not ADDING new rules.
There is no consideration of power gaming there, the various subfactions are not just paint jobs. That's absurd?
So. How much your models pay for them? How much less you pay lf you don't get them? Why does ba devastator cost same as ih devasator when one is clearly better?
It's broken, leads to unfluffy lists just to power gaming and totally impossible to balance.
If you care about balance they must die.
If you care about fluffy armies they must die.
But then tournament try hards can't break the game.
Players were breaking the game long before subfactions LMAO, give it a rest
Roknar wrote: Maybe I'm missing something here but why would it be free rules and bloat?
The various subfactions, especially marines and the imperial guard canoncially fight differently....and look differently.
Why should we expect anything less of their tabletop representation?
It's not "free" rules, it's a fleshing out of rules.
They mostly share a core amount of units and rules, sure...but that is only what they have in common.
After that you fill out what makes each faction different, COMPLETING the rules, not ADDING new rules.
There is no consideration of power gaming there, the various subfactions are not just paint jobs. That's absurd?
Subfaction rules very much are free rules. They also flesh out the narrative side, which is a positive to be sure. But you can't get around the fact that the rules implementation is so bad that it actually is free stuff.
Let's imagine four traits to keep the argument simple. One gives your Tactical Marines a bonus attack on a charge. One grants your Tactical Marines' bolter hit rolls of 6 an additional hit. One gives your Tactical Marines a bonus to leadership. One grants damage reduction to Dreadnoughts.
Three of those four chapters have better Tactical Marines than the fourth one, but they all pay the same price for those Marines. Which means either the basic Tactical Marine underperforms compared to the buffed ones or the buffed ones get buffs for free. That doesn't even account for the value of the various buffs compared to each other.
Now put that in the context of the entire army and for argument's sake say an amount of points spent on Tactical Marines isn't worth as much as the same amount spent on Dreadnoughts. Now the fourth chapter that loses out on Tactical Marines gains a buff on Dreadnoughts that are a more useful and powerful than Tactical Squads, but pays the exact same points for the buffed Dreadnought as the other chapters pay for their unbuffed Dreadnoughts.
Now put that in the context of lax army construction rules which do not force you to invest in underperforming Tactical Squads and let you freely load up on overperforming Dreadnoughts. If you pick the chapter that buffs Dreadnoughts, you get greater performance out of your chapter's trait than the other chapters. Which compared to them is free and thus compared to the baseline, with which the first three chapters have to work with, is also free.
It's one of the bigger issues with a number of rules currently in use in 40k. They are all valued the same whether that's free or measured in CP, but increase performance over the baseline and do so to varying degrees compared to other thins that are valued the same. There's no easy fix to that as GW is reluctant to rewrite the rules to work better. You would want to allocate points to abilities like chapter traits, warlord traits, relics and so on to reflect their different impact on performance, reintroduce more restrictive force organization and limit unit number in a more sophisticated way than the rule of three, and refrain from breaking out of that framework for some abilities that may be fluffy but totally wreck balance. When you have that, you'll have a reasonable framework to hand out rules that alter capabilities to better reflect fighting style and other fluffy things. Just thrown on top like GW does now, it's just free boosts that don't even increase performance equally.
It's also not likely to change for the better. You can see with the free wargear choices GW implements at the moment that they are actively moving away from a better rules framework. In that context the absence of subfaction rules in the World Eaters book could be seen as kind of an improvement if you squint really hard, because it removes rules that are only going to work worse the more GW gives up balancing mechanics. It's completely bogus of course because it removes fluffy rules even further (or keeps them out to begin with, as in this case) and you just know that other subfactions won't lose their rules down the line, so it's just GW screwing over World Eaters specifically.
the rules implementation is so bad.......GW is reluctant to rewrite the rules to work better
This. GW is bad and always has been bad at this to varying degrees.
It doesn't make it a conceptually bad idea to differentiate the various subfactions.
And even then, things are never going to be fully balanced even without such differences in rules, they just need to be close enough.
Spoiler:
So. How much your models pay for them? How much less you pay lf you don't get them? Why does ba devastator cost same as ih devasator when one is clearly better?
It's broken, leads to unfluffy lists just to power gaming and totally impossible to balance.
If you care about balance they must die.
If you care about fluffy armies they must die.
But then tournament try hards can't break the game.
Well then let's say you remove all those rules. We keep only the base rules for everybody
There will STILL be broken unfluffy lists. NOT having them on the other hand only punishes people wanting to play fluffy.
Unit profiles will be better than others, lists will be better than others. Some things will cost too little, others too much.
Decisions will be better than others, by which I don't mean player skill, I mean doing things that would be more accurate in the lore for you subfaction.
EviscerationPlague says it.... Power gamers will and always have been power gamers.
No amount of rules can fully protect against that. And GW are notoriously bad at writing rules.
Providing a way to improve the identity of a faction over an another does not change this.
Power gamers won't care either way, but those that care about the fluff can identify much stronger with their faction than without such rules.
And it doesn't have to be rules limited to one faction either. It could be a pool of specialisations everybody gets to dip in, with rules & restrictions governing how to do that.
Players were breaking the game long before subfactions LMAO, give it a rest
Never the less can you refute that subfaction rules end up just being a "I take the best one" situation for most?
That's how it is for literally any codex. I just used Space Wolves as an example. And the question is, who cares? Y'all blame the players and not the monkeys with typewriters.
Players were breaking the game long before subfactions LMAO, give it a rest
Never the less can you refute that subfaction rules end up just being a "I take the best one" situation for most?
That's how it is for literally any codex. I just used Space Wolves as an example. And the question is, who cares? Y'all blame the players and not the monkeys with typewriters.
I mean its the players lacking the integrity to use what their force is instead of rules hop and the writers inability to balance them. Solve both and remove them.
Roknar wrote:EviscerationPlague says it.... Power gamers will and always have been power gamers.
No amount of rules can fully protect against that. And GW are notoriously bad at writing rules.
'Power gamers exist, so they might as well be catered to because nothing can be done' isn't a compelling argument.
Roknar wrote:EviscerationPlague says it.... Power gamers will and always have been power gamers.
No amount of rules can fully protect against that. And GW are notoriously bad at writing rules.
'Power gamers exist, so they might as well be catered to because nothing can be done' isn't a compelling argument.
Actually a lot can be done about it. The first step is simply admitting it's not the player's fault.
Players were breaking the game long before subfactions LMAO, give it a rest
Never the less can you refute that subfaction rules end up just being a "I take the best one" situation for most?
I'm sure it was a total coincidence that all of a sudden every Raven Guard army had a load of Centurions in it when their Chapter trait made them OP totally fluffy...
So, other half of the Guard next, then the WECP week following?
A week apart is unlikely as they typically don't like back to back releases for the same game. I think we'll either see both CPs dropping together at the end of Feb, or only Guard's set will and WE will be end of March.
Players were breaking the game long before subfactions LMAO, give it a rest
Never the less can you refute that subfaction rules end up just being a "I take the best one" situation for most?
I'm sure it was a total coincidence that all of a sudden every Raven Guard army had a load of Centurions in it when their Chapter trait made them OP totally fluffy...
Do Raven Guard never need to conduct siege operations or use durable units to hold a position? Ever? Guess they should get rid of those Terminators and Aggressors too!
Players were breaking the game long before subfactions LMAO, give it a rest
Never the less can you refute that subfaction rules end up just being a "I take the best one" situation for most?
I'm sure it was a total coincidence that all of a sudden every Raven Guard army had a load of Centurions in it when their Chapter trait made them OP totally fluffy...
Do Raven Guard never need to conduct siege operations or use durable units to hold a position? Ever? Guess they should get rid of those Terminators and Aggressors too!
Feels like the point flew right over your head, but keep flexing that hyperbole muscle.
Anyway, book is out, units are out, just waiting on combat patrol iirc, what else is there to discuss?
Dudeface wrote: Never the less can you refute that subfaction rules end up just being a "I take the best one" situation for most?
He doesn't have to refute it. You have to prove it.
That's easy though, they placed the mono faction purity bonus in to restrict subfactions due to armies like sisters flip floping between units and detachments, such as the valorous heart exorcist taken with bloody rose repentia, because the subfactions could easily boost intended best fit units.
Recent AoO changes saw a slew of people waging bets on which marine chapter would come out best and suddenly there's an uptick in iron hands lists and results.
EviscerationPlague themselves provided an example historically of people flocking to use all flavours of marines as space wolves as they were the best subfaction alongside claiming everyone should be free to use the best subfaction.
Every book release review boils down to "which subfaction is most competitively viable", because that's what most people expect from them.
Can't do that with world eaters, their strength and units viability is based off the unit and the army wide rules, which is refreshing.
Just totally random indeed best subfactions are used. Just random after being barely seem iron hands(which dont even have black armour) are the ones you see most bar some dark angels.
That would require an entirely new Codex, which means we're a ways away from that. I expect to see the second half of the NotSquats first, and EC.
I am expecting second wave Votann and World Eaters to be accompanied with shiny new codexes that will invalidate the first codex within 12 months of release Lumineth style.
tneva82 wrote: Just totally random indeed best subfactions are used. Just random after being barely seem iron hands(which dont even have black armour) are the ones you see most bar some dark angels.
Nobody can be stupid enough to believe that.
You're shouting at the sky on this one. Frequent tournament players and tryhards (a substantial minority) are the only ones who relentlessly chase the meta to try and achieve maximum theoretical list power. For everyone else subfaction is just a choice, no different to choosing plasma guns over grenade launchers or imperial marines over chaos marines.
Back to WE news and rumours - if there is indeed a 2nd wave, how far out do you think it is and what are likely candidates? So far it's most odd that there isn't an inhuman troops choice (beastmen?) a unique daemon engine, or a unique terminator unit like the other cult legions received. Beyond that, berzerker surgeons have been mentioned in just about every fluff article.
I think there won't be beastmen, as Jakhals are in that slot.
My expectations are new unique blood versions of:
Terminators, Terminator Lord, Bikers, Biker Lord (low chance), Jump Packs, Jump Pack Lord (low chance), Daemon Engine, Slaughterbrute from AoS.
Not all from the list and like you said maybe some unexpected new one off character models.
It feels at some point they must produce a new dreadnought kit for Chaos. Maybe the play is a single dread that can be built one way for CSM then upgraded to a DG/TS/WE/EC specific version and this is waiting for EC. Perhaps the CAD file is sitting in whatever purgatory the new Aspect Warrior CAD files are in though.
Hey folks, warnings and suspensions have been issued, can we please resume discussion, be polite and not fling insults at one another? That would be great.
).
