"The points for the Adeptus Custodes and Orks now have updated points as their Codexes hit store shelves on Saturday. These might be different from what is printed in the books, so you can be sure they’re fully up to date with this latest balance update. "
Awesome, so that book you bought is now out of date before you even get it in your hands! Why even put points in the codex if this is going to be the case?
points in the codex are mostly a relic, but it's a way of ensuring that people who buy the codex can play even if they know nothing else about the game (and thus don't know to check the digital points) as well as people with spotty internet access, such as people in rural areas
there's a use case for it, and it's only like an extra page in the book, so i doubt it's much effort for GW to consider taking it out
The Power Cosmic wrote: "The points for the Adeptus Custodes and Orks now have updated points as their Codexes hit store shelves on Saturday. These might be different from what is printed in the books, so you can be sure they’re fully up to date with this latest balance update. "
Awesome, so that book you bought is now out of date before you even get it in your hands! Why even put points in the codex if this is going to be the case?
It's GW being victim of their own relentless constant updates. Begs the question is it worth it? I mean the perception of value of these very expensive products is eroded to a level you stop caring for them.
The Power Cosmic wrote: "The points for the Adeptus Custodes and Orks now have updated points as their Codexes hit store shelves on Saturday. These might be different from what is printed in the books, so you can be sure they’re fully up to date with this latest balance update. "
Awesome, so that book you bought is now out of date before you even get it in your hands! Why even put points in the codex if this is going to be the case?
It's GW being victim of their own relentless constant updates. Begs the question is it worth it? I mean the perception of value of these very expensive products is eroded to a level you stop caring for them.
Yep, I feel the same.
I stopped buying any GW rulebooks when I realised that the points would be outdated pretty quickly, never mind how quickly new editions come round these days.
I understand that GW is trying to cater for the tournament crowd with these frequent points updates and balance patches, but it turns me off completely
Nah, balance and points updates are okay and would help the game even more if
a) GW didn't set everything to zero faster than you can build an army
b) wouldn't put Digital rules behind two paywalls.
I don't think GW are even catering to the tournament crowd with the fast updates - I think its more they found a way to sell more books in less timeframe whilst each book generates revenue for them.
As Cortez says these kind of updates would be fine if GW wasn't rebuilding the game every 3 years which means the system is only just getting to settle before its all change. That's a huge reason there's burnout.
Add into that the fact that during those 3 years GW will introduce new rules, expansions and more and suddenly you've got a game that's in a constant state of flux. that's annoying in itself but when every change to that flux comes with a cost
The lag on printing physical books makes Codex points completely impractical. They're good to have as an option but they were almost certainly locked in and sent to the printer before the September errata. There's just no way the game can hold itself to that kind of lag.
The good news is GW has started getting fairly reliable to where the MFM can serve as a real source of truth. There's not much question as to what points to play as the answer is just always the MFM. The only real lingering issue is the box set codex pre-releases not getting their points until the official release.
The Power Cosmic wrote: "The points for the Adeptus Custodes and Orks now have updated points as their Codexes hit store shelves on Saturday. These might be different from what is printed in the books, so you can be sure they’re fully up to date with this latest balance update. "
Awesome, so that book you bought is now out of date before you even get it in your hands! Why even put points in the codex if this is going to be the case?
It's GW being victim of their own relentless constant updates. Begs the question is it worth it? I mean the perception of value of these very expensive products is eroded to a level you stop caring for them.
go back in time and play 3 - 7 when they did not update anything and units were broken forever or crap forever. So yes WORTH IT
The Power Cosmic wrote: "The points for the Adeptus Custodes and Orks now have updated points as their Codexes hit store shelves on Saturday. These might be different from what is printed in the books, so you can be sure they’re fully up to date with this latest balance update. "
Awesome, so that book you bought is now out of date before you even get it in your hands! Why even put points in the codex if this is going to be the case?
It's GW being victim of their own relentless constant updates. Begs the question is it worth it? I mean the perception of value of these very expensive products is eroded to a level you stop caring for them.
go back in time and play 3 - 7 when they did not update anything and units were broken forever or crap forever. So yes WORTH IT
Good for you. At the end of the day depends what you are looking for. A beer and pretzels game that knows its just exactly that or a beer and pretzels game that pretends its something else just to charge more for the same in smaller time gaps.
The Power Cosmic wrote: "The points for the Adeptus Custodes and Orks now have updated points as their Codexes hit store shelves on Saturday. These might be different from what is printed in the books, so you can be sure they’re fully up to date with this latest balance update. "
Awesome, so that book you bought is now out of date before you even get it in your hands! Why even put points in the codex if this is going to be the case?
It's GW being victim of their own relentless constant updates. Begs the question is it worth it? I mean the perception of value of these very expensive products is eroded to a level you stop caring for them.
go back in time and play 3 - 7 when they did not update anything and units were broken forever or crap forever. So yes WORTH IT
I'd take my 3.5 Chaos codex and my 4th ed Dark Eldar codex ahead of anything produced in today's 40k, thank you very much
The Power Cosmic wrote: "The points for the Adeptus Custodes and Orks now have updated points as their Codexes hit store shelves on Saturday. These might be different from what is printed in the books, so you can be sure they’re fully up to date with this latest balance update. "
Awesome, so that book you bought is now out of date before you even get it in your hands! Why even put points in the codex if this is going to be the case?
It's GW being victim of their own relentless constant updates. Begs the question is it worth it? I mean the perception of value of these very expensive products is eroded to a level you stop caring for them.
go back in time and play 3 - 7 when they did not update anything and units were broken forever or crap forever. So yes WORTH IT
I'd take my 3.5 Chaos codex and my 4th ed Dark Eldar codex ahead of anything produced in today's 40k, thank you very much
Yea because both of those were good. How about you take the 4th edition CSM, in 5th edition and play it for years and let me know how you feel about updates then
The Power Cosmic wrote: "The points for the Adeptus Custodes and Orks now have updated points as their Codexes hit store shelves on Saturday. These might be different from what is printed in the books, so you can be sure they’re fully up to date with this latest balance update. "
Awesome, so that book you bought is now out of date before you even get it in your hands! Why even put points in the codex if this is going to be the case?
It's GW being victim of their own relentless constant updates. Begs the question is it worth it? I mean the perception of value of these very expensive products is eroded to a level you stop caring for them.
go back in time and play 3 - 7 when they did not update anything and units were broken forever or crap forever. So yes WORTH IT
I'd take my 3.5 Chaos codex and my 4th ed Dark Eldar codex ahead of anything produced in today's 40k, thank you very much
Yea because both of those were good. How about you take the 4th edition CSM, in 5th edition and play it for years and let me know how you feel about updates then
No, the 3.5 codex wasn't well balanced, so by your own standards how can you agree that it was good?
*********
I think there will always be a hobby divide between people who are more into modelling and painting versus people who see winning a game as being the most important aspect of the hobby.
The Power Cosmic wrote: "The points for the Adeptus Custodes and Orks now have updated points as their Codexes hit store shelves on Saturday. These might be different from what is printed in the books, so you can be sure they’re fully up to date with this latest balance update. "
Awesome, so that book you bought is now out of date before you even get it in your hands! Why even put points in the codex if this is going to be the case?
It's GW being victim of their own relentless constant updates. Begs the question is it worth it? I mean the perception of value of these very expensive products is eroded to a level you stop caring for them.
go back in time and play 3 - 7 when they did not update anything and units were broken forever or crap forever. So yes WORTH IT
In them days you could even got a whole edition and not get new rules. Sisters of Battle and Dark Eldar both went through phases of missing out whole editions.
I also recall at least once when Tyranids got their edition FAQ on the week or month where GW released a new edition.
So yeah you got your FAQ then the whole game changed
I agree with the others - there's a middle ground but GW has yet to learn that. They've swung from almost no updates to an insane speed of updates and books. At SOME point I hope they swing back a little.
I agree with the others - there's a middle ground but GW has yet to learn that. They've swung from almost no updates to an insane speed of updates and books. At SOME point I hope they swing back a little.
Eh, the early edition was nuts because it was essentially an alpha/beta test for new unproven rules, and GW had to immediately break their own update schedule. I think they're settling on the middle ground now.
They're going back to more tolerable tempo of rules changes every six months. We'll see individual codex releases at a steady pace until all factions are updated towards the middle of next year. Codexes generally haven't been as much of a massive leap over the index rules compared to previous editions, definitely evolution over revolution. This edition also hasn't seen too much in the way of codex FAQs shortly after release, and certainly not to the same degree as 9th when those could appear unannounced and completely change how an army functions via pages of semi-random errata.
Honestly, the only way to square this circle from a user-friendly perspective is to have a living ruleset of free-to-access rules that update regularly.
GW doesn't do this because the book mill is currently profitable (and will remain so unless they burn out their customer base). They look to have settled on a 3-year cycle for this.
I agree with the others - there's a middle ground but GW has yet to learn that. They've swung from almost no updates to an insane speed of updates and books. At SOME point I hope they swing back a little.
Eh, the early edition was nuts because it was essentially an alpha/beta test for new unproven rules, and GW had to immediately break their own update schedule.
But that's bad. They're having to do so many updates because the put out a shoddy product to begin with because they're releasing a new version of the rules every 3 years. Yes, not every release is as major as 10th was, but GW shouldn't put out a product that's so poorly realized and we shouldn't let them get away with it just because they have the ability to "fix" it with these updates.
If they spent more time testing the game before releasing it or before releasing supplements (which is what codecies basically are), they wouldn't need to put out so much errata.
spending more time on testing does not work if the product is obsolete within a short time, it is wasted money
spending more time in testing if it does not affect sales is wasted money
add in that minor changes to the core rules cause major imbalance in points and balance on the units, something that is impossible to be foreseen without extensive testing which cannot be done as by the first 2 points
that the point costs from the printed book are obsolete on release is a different thing as this just means the books were written for a different game and are made backwards compatible on release to fit the outdated lists still out there instead adapting the older lists to the new points of the books
Marshal Loss wrote: Still can't stand the way points are handled in 10th. I hope they reintroduce more granularity in 11th...
Gear, model count/size or both?
If they follow through on making weapons or loadouts have a form of parity then I've no issues on the gear front, but I do miss being able to shove a guy in to use up the last few points.
I feel like GW grew on multi-part models with units having lots of weapon types because GW could only make a few models per faction.
Eg Tyranids had Warriors and Carnifex who basically covered every role for middle and heavy units on one model. You give them close combat weapons and upgrades and they are your close combat; you give them ranged artillery or anti tank/infantry and they take up gunnery roles.
Over time GW has expanded the armies more and more and I think a thought that's coming through for htem is they want to keep expanding armies. They know that if they add a new faction (eg squats) they will get new fans and new breathing space with the new army; but existing fans of X army still want models for that army.
So if GW takes away lots of multi-weapon options that creates gaps. Gaps GW can fill with a new model type. The benefit here is GW gets to make and release a model and that model won't step on the toes of other models in the army.
The downside is we lose modular multi-weapon option models and we see choices being cut down steadily.
Of course in typical GW fashion I think they got an idea for 10th and hten went overboard. Plus its veyr clear that someone at GW wanted power-levels to be the way the game was built and just forced it through this edition (because we basically have powerlevels just with points)
So if GW takes away lots of multi-weapon options that creates gaps. Gaps GW can fill with a new model type. The benefit here is GW gets to make and release a model and that model won't step on the toes of other models in the army.
The downside is we lose modular multi-weapon option models and we see choices being cut down steadily.
Also if a single kit builds for multiple roles people can just magnetize it and switch to whatever they need right now which means GW only sells one kit.
If you need two or more kits for the different roles GW also sells two or more kits so more money.
Of course not everybody will buy more kits. You can still use the old versions if its a refresh or proxy something else for it but in the end even if not everybody buys every version GWwill sell more if every kit is limited in what it can do instead of being able to magnetize it to whatever you want it to do
So if GW takes away lots of multi-weapon options that creates gaps. Gaps GW can fill with a new model type. The benefit here is GW gets to make and release a model and that model won't step on the toes of other models in the army.
The downside is we lose modular multi-weapon option models and we see choices being cut down steadily.
Also if a single kit builds for multiple roles people can just magnetize it and switch to whatever they need right now which means GW only sells one kit.
If you need two or more kits for the different roles GW also sells two or more kits so more money.
Of course not everybody will buy more kits. You can still use the old versions if its a refresh or proxy something else for it but in the end even if not everybody buys every version GWwill sell more if every kit is limited in what it can do instead of being able to magnetize it to whatever you want it to do
Well, there is Horus Heresy and/or Necromunda that have its own MO in having rules for many different options, points to account for the options and even sell generous upgrade boxes with weapons enought to equip 2 or 3 full units. So there is different ways for GW to do this, and obviously like to try different methods for different games.
So if GW takes away lots of multi-weapon options that creates gaps. Gaps GW can fill with a new model type. The benefit here is GW gets to make and release a model and that model won't step on the toes of other models in the army.
The downside is we lose modular multi-weapon option models and we see choices being cut down steadily.
Also if a single kit builds for multiple roles people can just magnetize it and switch to whatever they need right now which means GW only sells one kit.
If you need two or more kits for the different roles GW also sells two or more kits so more money.
Of course not everybody will buy more kits. You can still use the old versions if its a refresh or proxy something else for it but in the end even if not everybody buys every version GWwill sell more if every kit is limited in what it can do instead of being able to magnetize it to whatever you want it to do
Well, there is Horus Heresy and/or Necromunda that have its own MO in having rules for many different options, points to account for the options and even sell generous upgrade boxes with weapons enought to equip 2 or 3 full units. So there is different ways for GW to do this, and obviously like to try different methods for different games.
and in that sense, if we're looking at GW's other games, 10th40k is more akin to AOS than it is HH or munda (which is why it's not something i take issue with, even if the execution has been mixed so far)
I'll say the same I did over on B&C, it looks kinda strange:
On one hand, GW sending out the new kit to someone who ordered the old one (probably because of automated warehouse errors) wouldn't be the first time. Thats how Dante leaked for example. Also Warp Spiders have been up on the rumour list for a while now and after the other Aeldari aspect refreshes it also wouldn't be surprising.
On the other hand, why this blurry of a picture? That looks like its taken through a window with little light but then the box itself looks perfectly lit? Also with the other aspects GW has been pretty faithful in their armour colour. Meanwhile these look wuite a bit brighter than the older Warpspiders. Looks more like the Guardians red instead of the darker Warp Spider red.
Also, looking at other aeldari boxes, the unit name on the box looks thicker than normal.
The black sections on the 'Spiders' appear far to black, with no reflections at all, almost certainly a dodgy photoshop job of that Avengers box picture for sure.
I just hate the false context of these things. If it really was someone random had been shipped it in error, there would be no reason for the potato cam photo. It's either mocked up and blurry to hide the fact, or someone breaking an NDA and worried something on the box would give away it was them.
Those look like they are missing their arms - which means whoever did it went nuts with blurring and masking or its a blurry bit of AI art to start with
even the story of "GW accidently shipped this out early" doesn't make a lot of sense because GW doesn't work that far in advance. for Dante, it was a standalone release, but warp spiders would be coming out with the codex and that hasn't been announced yet, and based on leaks we have, won't be coming until september at the earliest, so they wouldn't be making stuff for that yet, especially not in box and ready to be shipped
Yeah, comparing to the 55€, 12-model modern Kommandos box (10 orks+squig+grot) feels particularly spicy. The metal nobz and deffdread prices don't seem as bad by comparison, I think I'd be OK paying 60€ for a metal dread if I really wanted one and ebay had come up zilch.
ImAGeek wrote: I’ve just seen that the Kroot Hounds are 25 quid, for 5 little dogs on a single sprue. Mad.
Well, it seems like the launch box is still everywhere at third party discounts. So seems like little reason to buy expensive single kits at the moment if you want the kroot stuff.
Have there been any rumours at all about World Eaters?
I'm kinda worried that maybe they didn't sell very well and will never get another wave of models.
ImAGeek wrote: I’ve just seen that the Kroot Hounds are 25 quid, for 5 little dogs on a single sprue. Mad.
Well, it seems like the launch box is still everywhere at third party discounts. So seems like little reason to buy expensive single kits at the moment if you want the kroot stuff.
The Hounds, long spear, and trail shaper aren't in the bug box. The rest of the new kroot are. I'm debating a second one myself to bulk out kroot
dan2026 wrote: Have there been any rumours at all about World Eaters?
I'm kinda worried that maybe they didn't sell very well and will never get another wave of models.
Nothing concrete for them, but the main expectation is a Berserker-Surgeon character model as those was mentioned heavily in 9E fluff.
There's also an outside chance of seeing regular Berserkers on Juggernauts to join the mounted character model, given there is official artwork of Invocatus leading his own squad
The metal Ork Nobs and the metal dreadnought are proper nostalgia for me, right in the feels for some of my first and most coveted models. Part of me wants to get some MTO just because I can - but actually I still have plenty of each built and painted, built and unpainted, and unbuilt
Surprised they didn't MTO the old metal Killa Kanz from the same era.
That Waaagh banner Nob and a couple of those other guys are amongst my favourite 40k models of all time tbh.
New Chaos Space Marine Codex, Combat Patrol, 2 Battleforces, and - to my genuine shock and delight! - A standalone release of the Cultist Firebrand! I am floored by that.
There's also MTO Ork special characters and several MTO Tau sets.
GW seem to be cutting a few of those game set kits - the one from Cursed City for Soulblight also got cut.
It might be that GW is going to adjust some of them to be individual sets - heck I'd love to see some individual ones of the soulblight or even whole new designs of the units in those sets.
Zagstruk and Badrukk as MTO is a bit of a dick move considering they've been thrown out of the Codex when, last week? At least they could have made them in metal.
Kinda disappointed the MTO isn't all metal. The Old World gave me hope that finecast was official dead and that resin models would be metal. Guess it was too much a hassle for a one week order schedule
GaroRobe wrote: Kinda disappointed the MTO isn't all metal. The Old World gave me hope that finecast was official dead and that resin models would be metal. Guess it was too much a hassle for a one week order schedule
From what I remember the molds had to be changed to work properly with finecast, so they may be still trying to get some mileage from those instead of preparing new ones specifically for metal.
Dysartes wrote: I'm confused by the concept of "classic" Tau kits.
I'm glad I'm not the only one!
It's funny though even though Necrons are not that much older and Squats are much newer, the Tau always still feel like the "new guys" in the game.
I think it's the anime aesthetic. While Admech are much newer in terms of actual models, they fit into the 'grimdark' and almost steampunk tech that pervades the setting.
Dysartes wrote: I'm confused by the concept of "classic" Tau kits.
I'm glad I'm not the only one!
It's funny though even though Necrons are not that much older and Squats are much newer, the Tau always still feel like the "new guys" in the game.
I think it's the anime aesthetic. While Admech are much newer in terms of actual models, they fit into the 'grimdark' and almost steampunk tech that pervades the setting.
i still don't really get what people mean when they call T'au "anime". i know there's the robots but the actual aesthetics of the T'au feel much more Buddhist/Indian in nature than Japanese
Dysartes wrote: I'm confused by the concept of "classic" Tau kits.
I'm glad I'm not the only one!
It's funny though even though Necrons are not that much older and Squats are much newer, the Tau always still feel like the "new guys" in the game.
I think it's the anime aesthetic. While Admech are much newer in terms of actual models, they fit into the 'grimdark' and almost steampunk tech that pervades the setting.
i still don't really get what people mean when they call T'au "anime". i know there's the robots but the actual aesthetics of the T'au feel much more Buddhist/Indian in nature than Japanese
Lets face it, over the last few decades the west really hasn't done "Mecha" at all really. We've a few tries, but mostly its Mech Warrior and in TV/film world the only real mecha has been PowerRangers. Otherwise mecha series have nearly all originated from anime to the point where, to some, its "anime" as a concept. Western mech use tends to be more as a machine, but very much not the focus of a film or series - with the odd exception like Pacific Rim.
So its not necessarily the designs, but the fact that mecha has been from anime land for so long.
That said they also have a lot of asian influences here and there in the style and asthetics of the faction.
I do agree that its a good point that many of their designs are more fresh/clean than the Grim Dark gothic that we are more used too with many other factions. They have that "shiny new" feel to everything about them. It's also likely that the lore for them is pretty new too. They don't have ancient lore like the Necrons do that wriggles its way into the background of the setting. Tau haven't shaped the Galaxy at one time; or been part of ancient power bodies or such. Everything about them is "new and shiny".
Dysartes wrote: I'm confused by the concept of "classic" Tau kits.
I'm glad I'm not the only one!
It's funny though even though Necrons are not that much older and Squats are much newer, the Tau always still feel like the "new guys" in the game.
I think it's the anime aesthetic. While Admech are much newer in terms of actual models, they fit into the 'grimdark' and almost steampunk tech that pervades the setting.
i still don't really get what people mean when they call T'au "anime". i know there's the robots but the actual aesthetics of the T'au feel much more Buddhist/Indian in nature than Japanese
Lets face it, over the last few decades the west really hasn't done "Mecha" at all really. We've a few tries, but mostly its Mech Warrior and in TV/film world the only real mecha has been PowerRangers. Otherwise mecha series have nearly all originated from anime to the point where, to some, its "anime" as a concept. Western mech use tends to be more as a machine, but very much not the focus of a film or series - with the odd exception like Pacific Rim.
So its not necessarily the designs, but the fact that mecha has been from anime land for so long.
That said they also have a lot of asian influences here and there in the style and asthetics of the faction.
I do agree that its a good point that many of their designs are more fresh/clean than the Grim Dark gothic that we are more used too with many other factions. They have that "shiny new" feel to everything about them. It's also likely that the lore for them is pretty new too. They don't have ancient lore like the Necrons do that wriggles its way into the background of the setting. Tau haven't shaped the Galaxy at one time; or been part of ancient power bodies or such. Everything about them is "new and shiny".
that's fair; as i said, i don't really think of t'au as being "the robots faction"; the unifying aspect and caste system, which feels more significant for the character and background of the faction (granted, the models tell a different story, but hey at least we got new kroot)
That one CSM box with the Raptors and Havocs is really unique in that among SC boxes as that it has three HQ's. Also, while I do like the new Combat Patrol, I kind of wish that they would just go back to the last Start Collecting box with the Shadowspear models, with the Great Possessed models replaced with one GP new model that serves as a new HQ. The old GP models can either be packaged with the Master of Possession, maybe as some kind of specialist bodyguard, or packaged with the regular Possessed kit.
I am disappointed that there were no old metal Chaos models. I didn't buy the metal DP model when it was released as a limited time offer, a decision that I now regret. Also, I want the old Terminator Lord with horns pointing down.
Ooo, the gunrig coming back as MTO, tempting. I was always a little miffed that they stopped making that, though certain things from the same 'set' like the droneport are still available.
Though, when I got mine it was nearly forty quid, I dread what it might cost this time around.
ArcaneHorror wrote: I am disappointed that there were no old metal Chaos models. I didn't buy the metal DP model when it was released as a limited time offer, a decision that I now regret. Also, I want the old Terminator Lord with horns pointing down.
Id bet that CSM will get a MTO later, maybe alongside the next 40k codex release. They want people buying the new models, and then expanding with the older MTO stuff.
Matrindur wrote: Bit late this time but heres the summary for Valraks newest video about EC:
Fulgrim
Lucius
Noise marines
New Cataphractii-based Terminators (poor WE, only ones without specific Terminators)
New Slaanesh cultist-like unit
No new Eidolon
Other new HQs
Everything could change as always but should be out by the end of 2025
Sooo... the only relevant rumour is, that Terminators are Cataphractii (and it could change till the end of 2025). The rest is just 'of course'. And what 'no new Eidolon', there isn't an old one for 40k.
Why would they go for cataphractii terminators rather than tartaros? Feels like the tartaros phoenix guardians quickly became iconic for the 30k EC.
But then again, perhaps that is exactly why they dont want to do a kit that would easily substitute the resin models.
Fayric wrote: Why would they go for cataphractii terminators rather than tartaros? Feels like the tartaros phoenix guardians quickly became iconic for the 30k EC.
But then again, perhaps that is exactly why they dont want to do a kit that would easily substitute the resin models.
Because no team knows the lore of the other stage of the universe and of course what you pointed out with the strict split of the models available.
Makes me wonder if Horus Heresy gets embiggened Cataphractii soon and the Emprah's Kiddies design is based on it because the Cataphractii design was locked in at the time of sculpting while embiggened Tartaros was not.
Fayric wrote: Why would they go for cataphractii terminators rather than tartaros? Feels like the tartaros phoenix guardians quickly became iconic for the 30k EC.
But then again, perhaps that is exactly why they dont want to do a kit that would easily substitute the resin models.
They did it to the Thousand Sons, too. Their Heresy-era Terminators wear Cataphracti, but the modern Scarab Occults wear Tartaros.
i have a feeling that CSM having eight detachments is going to ensure that the army is continuously good throughout the edition. with so many options for rules and so many options for models, i'm sure there's always going to be some configuration of the army that's playable
I've noticed the GS Cults Combat Patrol is listed as 'No longer available online' on GW's UK site, and seemingly out of stock in third party retailers in the UK. Still available off the GW US site, but noting they been replacing combat patrol boxes as factions come out, I'd question if that one will get a restock before it is formally replaced, so if you want one I'd grab it while / if you can find it.
Dawnbringer wrote: I've noticed the GS Cults Combat Patrol is listed as 'No longer available online' on GW's UK site, and seemingly out of stock in third party retailers in the UK. Still available off the GW US site, but noting they been replacing combat patrol boxes as factions come out, I'd question if that one will get a restock before it is formally replaced, so if you want one I'd grab it while / if you can find it.
Very likely not getting another restock on the GW webstore at this point but if you are primarly interested in it because of the Goliath like me, the boxset that should be coming with their codex is rumoured to have two of them inside in addition to Neophytes and Aberrants. So unless you want the Acolyte Hybrids/Magus its probably better to wait.
Of course that assumes that you will be able to get the boxset in the first place
I got lucky with a perpetually out of stock Chaos Marine combat patrol getting a restock two weeks ago. No guarantees that the same might happen if you're looking for Genestealer Cults, but you never know what's still in the system waiting to get delivered to independent stores. May be worth keeping an eye on until the new codex is actually coming.
Geifer wrote: I got lucky with a perpetually out of stock Chaos Marine combat patrol getting a restock two weeks ago. No guarantees that the same might happen if you're looking for Genestealer Cults, but you never know what's still in the system waiting to get delivered to independent stores. May be worth keeping an eye on until the new codex is actually coming.
Shameless self promotion, but the Loot Group covers OOP Combat Patrols and equivalent. You’d be surprised how often they turn up gathering dust on a FGLS’ shelf.
You get your toys, FLGS gets their money, Looter gets their warm and fuzzies from being a good person
I'm hoping that Marks of Chaos can do more in the codex than they do right now. Nurgle Marines, for example, should have some kind of resilience ability. Also, what's the reason for Tzeentch units not being able to use Let The Galaxy Burn? It's random and unfluffy.
ArcaneHorror wrote: I'm hoping that Marks of Chaos can do more in the codex than they do right now. Nurgle Marines, for example, should have some kind of resilience ability. Also, what's the reason for Tzeentch units not being able to use Let The Galaxy Burn? It's random and unfluffy.
It’s probably because squads of rubrik matines can take 9 Warp Flamers, in a squad.
ArcaneHorror wrote: I'm hoping that Marks of Chaos can do more in the codex than they do right now. Nurgle Marines, for example, should have some kind of resilience ability. Also, what's the reason for Tzeentch units not being able to use Let The Galaxy Burn? It's random and unfluffy.
I would prepare to be disappointed I think. Those sorts of marks need a point cost per unit because of how wildly they very in effectiveness per body.
ArcaneHorror wrote: I'm hoping that Marks of Chaos can do more in the codex than they do right now. Nurgle Marines, for example, should have some kind of resilience ability. Also, what's the reason for Tzeentch units not being able to use Let The Galaxy Burn? It's random and unfluffy.
The only Tzeentch unit that *would* be able to is Rubric Marines, which can take 10 AP-2 flamers. Do *you* want to put that evil out in the world?
(Chaos Marks are for a different detachment, so it's not like you have to worry about a Legionary squad marked Tzeentch being denied this boon)
ArcaneHorror wrote: Also, what's the reason for Tzeentch units not being able to use Let The Galaxy Burn? It's random and unfluffy.
The fluff is kind of stupid anyway. Traitors are so angry and bitter they pull the flamer trigger real hard. Huh?
And with that fluff, rubrics are dust, they cant psych up themself to rage-flame their opponents.
Fayric wrote: Why would they go for cataphractii terminators rather than tartaros? Feels like the tartaros phoenix guardians quickly became iconic for the 30k EC.
But then again, perhaps that is exactly why they dont want to do a kit that would easily substitute the resin models.
They did it to the Thousand Sons, too. Their Heresy-era Terminators wear Cataphracti, but the modern Scarab Occults wear Tartaros.
And Death Guard. 30k Deathshroud Tartaros, 40k Deathshroud Cataphractii
ArcaneHorror wrote: I'm hoping that Marks of Chaos can do more in the codex than they do right now. Nurgle Marines, for example, should have some kind of resilience ability. Also, what's the reason for Tzeentch units not being able to use Let The Galaxy Burn? It's random and unfluffy.
I would prepare to be disappointed I think. Those sorts of marks need a point cost per unit because of how wildly they very in effectiveness per body.
One way it could be done is to make it another pacts ability, in addition to the weapon buff. Khorne units, for example, could get plus one to charge rolls, Nurgle could get plus one to save throws, Tzeentch could give a five plus invulnerable save and increase by one any units that already have invulnerable saves, and Slaanesh could give plus one movement.
Fayric wrote:
ArcaneHorror wrote: Also, what's the reason for Tzeentch units not being able to use Let The Galaxy Burn? It's random and unfluffy.
The fluff is kind of stupid anyway. Traitors are so angry and bitter they pull the flamer trigger real hard. Huh?
And with that fluff, rubrics are dust, they cant psych up themself to rage-flame their opponents.
I can totally see a Chaos Space Marine holding his finger on the trigger of a flamer, laughing maniacally as he torches his enemies. Also, not all Tzeentch units are Rubrics. There are many CSM who embrace Tzeentch who are not Rubrics, as well whole warbands like the Scourged.
I think it must be Forgeworld Resin - I can't see GW wanting to use finecast ever again. Honestly I'm surprised they didn't just strip it from the range a decade ago.
Forgeworld Resin kits should usually be marked expert Kit 15+ (see the giant that went form metal to FW resin).
Which is ironic, considering failcast GW resin kits are the actual expert kits that can only be salvaged with extensive hobby experience while FW stuff (at least the infantry sized) is usually fine.
They did away with the "Finecast" branding years ago for reasons we all know .
Finecast was a substitute for metal. They utilized a material that could be used with the existing metal moulds as a way to save money. It quickly became known as Failcast due to subpar results we quickly discovered.
I don't think (not an expert) resin can be used in the metal moulds.. These models in question were metal models originally so I would only expect them to be made from 'Failcast' material.
Sarigar wrote: Finecast was a substitute for metal. They utilized a material that could be used with the existing metal moulds as a way to save money. It quickly became known as Failcast due to subpar results we quickly discovered.
I don't think (not an expert) resin can be used in the metal moulds.. These models in question were metal models originally so I would only expect them to be made from 'Failcast' material.
This is not correct – the moulds used to produce finecast were new, hence the existing metal models having to be reconfigured onto small finecast 'sprues'.
The point was that the new finecast moulds could be used in the same casting machines as were used for metal, but the moulds were new, not the same ones used for metal. Metal models can be reproduced in either finecast-type resin or Forge World resin, since both require new moulds, so something having originally been metal doesn't tell us what new material will be used.
Sarigar wrote: Finecast was a substitute for metal. They utilized a material that could be used with the existing metal moulds as a way to save money. It quickly became known as Failcast due to subpar results we quickly discovered.
I don't think (not an expert) resin can be used in the metal moulds.. These models in question were metal models originally so I would only expect them to be made from 'Failcast' material.
This is not correct – the moulds used to produce finecast were new, hence the existing metal models having to be reconfigured onto small finecast 'sprues'.
The point was that the new finecast moulds could be used in the same casting machines as were used for metal, but the moulds were new, not the same ones used for metal. Metal models can be reproduced in either finecast-type resin or Forge World resin, since both require new moulds, so something having originally been metal doesn't tell us what new material will be used.
Sorry. Not an expert as to the manufacturing of miniatures. Not metal moulds, but the casting machines. All the metal models got switched to Finecast.
There're still some models with Finecast in their product description like Anrakyr the Traveller, the Branchwraith/Drycha or Sammael.
All of these details are glorious to behold in our premium Citadel Finecast resin.
They may have forgot to rewrite it, though.
Looking at my latest Finecast purchase (Wracks) und my latest non Forgeworld resin purchase (Sslyth, years later): the latter looks clean and I haven't spotted any fault yet (while the Wracks sprue looks really rough, with incomplete parts and a whole missing arm). The resin is bendable still, but so is the recent Forge World resin. It's a bit easier to prepare than new FW models and more so if you look at old ones.
While I'm content with the Sslyth this is of course not a general recommendation. But keep in mind they had subpar metal miniatures (incomplete parts, porous surface), too.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: Forgeworld Resin kits should usually be marked expert Kit 15+ (see the giant that went form metal to FW resin).
Which is ironic, considering failcast GW resin kits are the actual expert kits that can only be salvaged with extensive hobby experience while FW stuff (at least the infantry sized) is usually fine.
They did away with the "Finecast" branding years ago for reasons we all know .
Finecast should just be marked Expert Kit 99+ for consistency.
Sgt. Cortez wrote: Forgeworld Resin kits should usually be marked expert Kit 15+ (see the giant that went form metal to FW resin).
Which is ironic, considering failcast GW resin kits are the actual expert kits that can only be salvaged with extensive hobby experience while FW stuff (at least the infantry sized) is usually fine.
They did away with the "Finecast" branding years ago for reasons we all know .
Finecast should just be marked Expert Kit 99+ for consistency.
"single most sales driving material for Greenstuff and other hobiest filler material in the galaxy."tm
Lord Damocles wrote: I puke a little in my mouth every time the term 'seasons' is used.
This ^^
In a hobby that can take months, years and even decades to collect, build and paint an army. It's sickening to use 'seasons' to churn and burn even quicker than the existing 3 year cycle.
So use the last season's scenarios. It's not like they suddenly stop working, and outside of tournaments you're still going to find plenty of people willing to play them. And it's not like they invalidate your army either.
Lord Damocles wrote: I puke a little in my mouth every time the term 'seasons' is used.
This ^^
In a hobby that can take months, years and even decades to collect, build and paint an army. It's sickening to use 'seasons' to churn and burn even quicker than the existing 3 year cycle.
Agreed, 100%
I guess that Stormcast line of models that GW Squatted were just so last season!
Lord Damocles wrote: I puke a little in my mouth every time the term 'seasons' is used.
This ^^
In a hobby that can take months, years and even decades to collect, build and paint an army. It's sickening to use 'seasons' to churn and burn even quicker than the existing 3 year cycle.
Agreed, 100%
I guess that Stormcast line of models that GW Squatted were just so last season!
I appreciate the snarky humour, but they're revealing new sculpts for some of the squatted units already.
But unironically, 2 editions old is now kinda last season though, right or wrong.
Laughing Man wrote: So use the last season's scenarios. It's not like they suddenly stop working, and outside of tournaments you're still going to find plenty of people willing to play them. And it's not like they invalidate your army either.
I suspect you've missed the point - people are objecting more to the use of "seasons" as terminology than to the updated mission deck, though some may also be objecting to that.
They're winning pretty well, they've conditioned the fan base to buy a new non-fix to their intentionally non-functional rules in 6 or 3 month intervals or whatever it is now.
They're winning pretty well, they've conditioned the fan base to buy a new non-fix to their intentionally non-functional rules in 6 or 3 month intervals or whatever it is now.
About a year this time tbf, this is only the 2nd mission pack of 10th so the previous ‘season’ lasted longer than they were in 9th which iirc was quarterly and rather ridiculous.
Of course the whole edition is probably going to roll over in another year which is more frustrating…
Is it just the official terminology of 'seasons' that offends people, codifying it in an easily communicable way? Were the Chapter Approved days better, when a yearly book had some random scenarios and stuff, army updates etc., the 'three ways to play' mentality? At least those books were fun to flick through and get some ideas from.
there is a difference between the old days of no balance updates, no Errata and updates only happening with a new book (and not all faction getting ones)
and the rules being valid for 6 months, if you are a casual player that only plays twice a year, better stick to outdated rules (so back to the old days of no updates)
GW cannot win because they swing from one extrem to the other, doing a 180° turn when people ask for small changes
kodos wrote: there is a difference between the old days of no balance updates, no Errata and updates only happening with a new book (and not all faction getting ones)
and the rules being valid for 6 months, if you are a casual player that only plays twice a year, better stick to outdated rules (so back to the old days of no updates)
GW cannot win because they swing from one extrem to the other, doing a 180° turn when people ask for small changes
You're covering everything from faqs, points, codex lifespan and missions sets into a generalist statement when thos whole topic is about just the mission packs.
People are complaining about turn around of the mission pack, which seems to be a year. That is perfectly reasonable and the same time span that I believe the ITC etc. Used to update theirs, which was commonly praised.
I agree that the edition churn can go die in a fire (editions should last at least 5 years IMHO, to allow you to get some value out of all the books you have to buy), but this seems like a reasonable idea; a few new mechanics and a different set of missions to freshen up the game for those that play regularly for the price of a deck of cards. The GW price for a deck of cards, admittedly, but no new books or codices required, no fundamental rule changes, just pick from this deck instead of the old one.
To be honest, it would be great if GW could go further down this road; settle on some core rules that stay stable and maintain compatibility with basic model rules and then have regular campaigns / events that add the variety. Much like how each set of Magic has its own unique mechanics and style, but the core rules remain constant.
I didn't see it discussed I don't think but latest valrak dump:
Reiterates new KT rules with aerial combat, first box will be swooping hawks and vespid with completely new terrain.
Mechanicum for 30k is mentioned, knights and automota are up first, so has some 40k relevance.
BA is looking to be August.
GK are getting a character and an "upgrade to the dreadknight".
Reiterates imperial agents with coteaz and ordo based boxes. No concrete news on deathwatch or GK being in it.
Imperial Knights getting a new knight with a lightning/tesla weapon and a void generator like a titan - which sounds to me like the mechanicum Knight tbh.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kodos wrote: sorry but I fail to see were this is only about mission packs:
I remember when the editions/codex lasted years, and the public was clamoring for GW to engage the tournament scene....
Fair, the context is muddied as they're all separate products with different impacts and influences. I'd argue the tourney engagement resulted in seasons but nothing to do with the edition churn.
I'd definitely prefer 5 year edition changes over 3, but I don't really have an issue with yearly scenario updates as long as they don't overcomplicate things.
I remember when the editions/codex lasted years, and the public was clamoring for GW to engage the tournament scene...
They are winning very much with this and have been for a while.
You're mostly confusing the Dakka-crowd whose hobby is mostly whining online about a game they haven't played in a decade or two with genuine 40K player.
A one-year life cycle for the Missions pack is good. I got plenty of use out of my Leviathan pack and I look forward to a new one. Keeps things fresh without too much churn - I think they learned from the AOS 3rd Ed community pushback on the (initial) six-month seasons.
The changes look interesting - not sure if the effort to force Battle Line into relevance will work out. The return of Actions as rules could be good. They still kind of existed, and we all still called it that when we did things like Cleanse and Deploy Teleport Homers.
I remember when the editions/codex lasted years, and the public was clamoring for GW to engage the tournament scene...
They are winning very much with this and have been for a while.
You're mostly confusing the Dakka-crowd whose hobby is mostly whining online about a game they haven't played in a decade or two with genuine 40K player.
it would make conversations a lot easier if everyone had to include in their flair whether or not they've actually played a game of the current edition
I remember when the editions/codex lasted years, and the public was clamoring for GW to engage the tournament scene...
Actually GW can win. Engaging the tournament scene and providing more regular and speedy balance updates does NOT mean re-writing the rules every 3 years.
In fact re-writing the rules every 3 years doesn't help the tournament scene either.
What people want is rules they can use that get updated and balanced and corrected along with FAQ answers to common issues that arise. Not an FAQ that arrives for your codex on the last month of the current edition before a new set of rules are released; not your whole army sitting there for 2 whole rule editions without getting a new codex with updated rules (and that was in the days without compendiums at the start of some editions).
GW basically undoes themselves because their faster FAQ/Errata and updating system and Codex release that they've developed is exactly what people wanted to keep armies from falling behind. However its undone by the fact that now almost as soon as an edition is starting to settle down they shake it all up with a whole new edition. 5 years would be far more practical for this; you'd have 2-3 years of fast codex release and updates followed by at least 3-2 years of steadier changes. Where the army just works to a set tone of rules.
Heck GW could keep the fast edition change every 3 years if the change was more of a polishing. So instead of taking whole phases out of the game and moving around how things work; they just collate the last 3 years of errata,FAQ and updates into an updated book. Perhaps rewording a few phases to better show the flow of the game; maybe introduce minor new elements and such. Basically update things. Becuase let's face it long term fans are not buying the rule book on launch - they are buying the models in the starter set and the market is then flooded with cheap rulebooks.
Meanwhile codex updates aren't just for new stats on existing models but for the new ones that come out.
GW can very much have their cake and eat it, they just have to get off this idea of rebuilding the game from the ground up every 3 years.
Overread wrote: Actually GW can win. Engaging the tournament scene and providing more regular and speedy balance updates does NOT mean re-writing the rules every 3 years.
In fact re-writing the rules every 3 years doesn't help the tournament scene either.
As noted above, they're not really doing this every 3 years:
LunarSol wrote: To a degree they've been on a 6 year cycle. They just treat their .5 versions as a whole new thing.
The real test is going to be when 11th edition rolls around, as I certainly expect it to be more like the 8th>9th transition and an evolution rather than revolution.
A big difference this time around is that GW have since acknowledged the powercreep problem with layered rules that caused them to lose control of 8th & 9th and require another reset. It'll be interesting to see how the transition is handled next time, and how much codex content carries over intact.
With so many codexes and units and rule interactions, no amount of play testing is gonna catch them all, because there’s just too many permutations to cover.
And so stuff does get released which is proper wonky (like the Grudge Token/Rail Cannon interaction) and gets immediately or quickly errata’d or FAQ’d.
Rinse and repeat over a couple of years, and you soon have a paper trail of tweaks and amendments, where redoing the core book to include and expand on them does make sense.
Yes it would be nice to have a Perfect Rules System, but that’s just not gonna happen. No that doesn’t mean GW couldn’t do a much better job of getting at least in the same postcode if not ballpark of said perfection.
How often should that cycle be? Three years feels overly churny, especially when as noted above we seem to get a whole new base reset every six years. For someone such as myself who hasn’t played in yonks and is hopelessly out of date, it can feel like they don’t want me to catch up.
well, GW decided they need to have that many factions, units and rules and this is too much to handle for them, the solution would be to reduce the amount to something that is manageable and not adding more
than again, GW has all the time they need, no one forces them to replace the core rules or remove the factions books. Just always replacing too many things at the same time instead of one by one means they are never fixing any problem but just creating new ones
xttz wrote: A big difference this time around is that GW have since acknowledged the powercreep problem with layered rules that caused them to lose control of 8th & 9th and require another reset. It'll be interesting to see how the transition is handled next time, and how much codex content carries over intact.
?
yeah they have, in 4th, 6th, 7th and 9th Edition, why do you think GW acknowledging that they are losing control because the why they have chosen to work on rules and the chosen release models is going to change the outcome without changing the way they write and release rules?
I’d actually be happy with a new edition of the rule book every three years if that’s what it was; the same rules, re released with the FAQ/errata incorporated. Changing core mechanics for the sake of it is dumb.
Mr_Rose wrote: I’d actually be happy with a new edition of the rule book every three years if that’s what it was; the same rules, re released with the FAQ/errata incorporated. Changing core mechanics for the sake of it is dumb.
Same here - plus a more stable system would approach a more balanced system than what GW currently achieves.
However, as noted many times, GW doesn't set themselves up for this and it would take likely key staff changes to bring such a change through the firm. I suspect both at the management level in terms of how they treat editions and allocate resources; through to the people writing the rules.
Automatically Appended Next Post: In terms of discounts the Sisters CP has about the same 30% discount as is standard with the new CPs while the Genestealer Cults one is at 36% currently. Do mind that this can be slightly different for you due to currency conversions.
Also its pretty much the same after the price rise.
For the Battleforces, after the price increases if they are at the same price as the CSM ones, the Sisters one is at 31% and the Genestealers are at 36% discount
KidCthulhu wrote: Funny how in the age of monobuild, SoB have two Canoness models with multiple options.
Meanwhile there's one Archon that can be assembled one way. But at least he has more wargear options than a Genestealer Cult Primus
The Archon was designed to be cross-compatible with the rest of the Dark Eldar line (that 'faceless mask' conversion still pops up in the Codexes), so he has that going for him. Primus can't even get non-inegrated arms, but it was a delight to discover that his armour is the same design as the rider of the Jackal quad-bike, so one can give him a massive visor they really want to!
The Sisters stuff looks nice, but that face on the red painted Canoness has got to go. I really can't afford the boxes right now, but I'll probably pick one of the Canoness models up whenever it releases by itself. Disappointed to hear there's only 4 detachments in the Sisters book, but hopefully there's at least some good tech there and it's not gonna be like Custodes...
ZergSmasher wrote: The Sisters stuff looks nice, but that face on the red painted Canoness has got to go. I really can't afford the boxes right now, but I'll probably pick one of the Canoness models up whenever it releases by itself. Disappointed to hear there's only 4 detachments in the Sisters book, but hopefully there's at least some good tech there and it's not gonna be like Custodes...
Yeah I dislike both the red body head and the red hood head. But I do like the rebreather head so not a problem there. I'll probably take rebreather head and two handed axe if I go by looks
ZergSmasher wrote: Disappointed to hear there's only 4 detachments in the Sisters book
Yeah- I've got some issues with this too. I'm trying to figure out which Orders get left out. I think all we'll get is OoOML, Bloody Rose, Argent Shroud and probably Ebon Chalice. I had plans for the Order of the Sacred Rose- I wanted them to assume control of Progenium facilities in a campaign.
I'm happy about the Jump Canoness, and that battleforce is perfect for me, but I doubt I'll be able to afford it. The book could still be good; for me there's a lot riding on the Crusade content. So far, GW has done a decent job with Crusade- improving what was weak while maintaining what was strong. They're preserving the Sainthood piece; provided they maintain the Penitent Oath/ redemption arc, it could still work. I'd like to see something new, but not at the expense of either of those.
ZergSmasher wrote: Disappointed to hear there's only 4 detachments in the Sisters book
Yeah- I've got some issues with this too. I'm trying to figure out which Orders get left out. I think all we'll get is OoOML, Bloody Rose, Argent Shroud and probably Ebon Chalice. I had plans for the Order of the Sacred Rose- I wanted them to assume control of Progenium facilities in a campaign.
I'm happy about the Jump Canoness, and that battleforce is perfect for me, but I doubt I'll be able to afford it. The book could still be good; for me there's a lot riding on the Crusade content. So far, GW has done a decent job with Crusade- improving what was weak while maintaining what was strong. They're preserving the Sainthood piece; provided they maintain the Penitent Oath/ redemption arc, it could still work. I'd like to see something new, but not at the expense of either of those.
From what I've seen online from people at the event, the detachments were talked about a bit more.
One is what we have now
One is "Angelic Host" themed, with Zephyrim and Seraphim as the centre of the force (with aura to buff other units?)
One is a Penance themed force
The final one is about the Holy Trinity of bolter, flamer and melta.
I loved this announcement. Models all look top notch. I especially love the new Mechanicum 'bots. If they make their way over to 40k, I might just be starting a mechanicum army. Ugh, my wallet.
Also really excited for when AM inevitably makes their debut in LI.
Only thing I'm not really excited about is Sisters combat patrol, since I have multiples of pretty much everything in there. Was hoping maybe for an immolator or even a castigator.
But I'm almost certainly going to go for a Sisters and GSC battleforce and a GSCCP since those would fill out my roster nicely.
Also, GW did something I would've thought impossible for them--had a rather hefty release announcement and not a space marine in sight (unless you count the LI vehicles).
Matrindur wrote: Yeah I dislike both the red body head and the red hood head. But I do like the rebreather head so not a problem there. I'll probably take rebreather head and two handed axe if I go by looks
I agree with you on the heads - did this two-handed axe/halberd weapon get shown on the stream, as I don't seem to have seen it in the released pictures.
Matrindur wrote: Yeah I dislike both the red body head and the red hood head. But I do like the rebreather head so not a problem there. I'll probably take rebreather head and two handed axe if I go by looks
I agree with you on the heads - did this two-handed axe/halberd weapon get shown on the stream, as I don't seem to have seen it in the released pictures.
Yeah only on stream, you can see it in the video at 2:40
Im happy to have a cannones with jumppack but it doesnt look like a leader and it wont stand out in a unit of sisters with jumppacks, there is notting special that shows she is a cannones.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: because battlefields are famous for their beautiful faces and well-kept beauty regimes
Consistency please, If you cheer for more diversity and battlefields inclusive to women you should equally cheer for bad looking AND good looking females ... Just saying.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: because battlefields are famous for their beautiful faces and well-kept beauty regimes
Consistency please, If you cheer for more diversity and battlefields inclusive to women you should equally cheer for bad looking AND good looking females ... Just saying.
Yeah, this! If we have an unrealistic number, for a real world, of fighting women then they or at least some could be pretty.
Her face reminds me of Brienne of Tarth from GOT. She looks suitably bad ass and I don't want everyone to look like a 'model'. There are other heads available if you're not a fan
StudentOfEtherium wrote: because battlefields are famous for their beautiful faces and well-kept beauty regimes
Consistency please, If you cheer for more diversity and battlefields inclusive to women you should equally cheer for bad looking AND good looking females ... Just saying.
i have no issue with female models looking unattractive. i just think it's a lazy criticism of models (especially when time and time again it's been proven to be dependent on how it's painted, like the guard model people were complaining about a while back)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Kallus wrote: Her face reminds me of Brienne of Tarth from GOT. She looks suitably bad ass and I don't want everyone to look like a 'model'. There are other heads available if you're not a fan
also yeah this is what i'm thinking. it's a battle. who cares about looking hot
StudentOfEtherium wrote: because battlefields are famous for their beautiful faces and well-kept beauty regimes
Consistency please, If you cheer for more diversity and battlefields inclusive to women you should equally cheer for bad looking AND good looking females ... Just saying.
i have no issue with female models looking unattractive. i just think it's a lazy criticism of models (especially when time and time again it's been proven to be dependent on how it's painted, like the guard model people were complaining about a while back)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Inquisitor Kallus wrote: Her face reminds me of Brienne of Tarth from GOT. She looks suitably bad ass and I don't want everyone to look like a 'model'. There are other heads available if you're not a fan
also yeah this is what i'm thinking. it's a battle. who cares about looking hot
Its the other way around you seem to have an issue with the faces having more feminine traces, as if thats not errr realistic XD... Not about being hot or whatever... they did it pretty well before though, just not here.
Both bare faces look female. They're just not very fresh. I don't know if it's the sculpt alone or if the paintjob helps it along, but I suspect that GW wants senior officers to look old.
I can see the angle of Little Red Flying Hood in the full model picture throwing people off. That face looks far more recognizably feminine in profile that you can see in the detail collage.
The bare face is similar in that the halberd picture some posts up has a better angle, but by and large both it and the article picture should register as female.
skeleton wrote: Im happy to have a cannones with jumppack but it doesnt look like a leader and it wont stand out in a unit of sisters with jumppacks, there is notting special that shows she is a cannones.
Her wings have a pair of extra-spike halos, and they have an extra 'feather' on each side, and her armour has a crotch flap. But considering I've given every one of my Sisters a helmet where possible, I'm disappointed that there's no extra-flashy Canoness helm in the kit.
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: I could be persuaded to have a brace of Void Shield Generstors y’know.
Looks like I can finally add a third VSG without having to pay eBay prices for one. And this gets my hopes up for a Sector Imperialis MTO at some point later.
All depends on the price. It is my birthday at the end of the month though, which means Dosh From Dad. Yes even at the age of 44 ??
But…with a nascent Necromunda campaign rattling around my brain, and loads of terrain to get painted for that? They can find a place in my narrative.
Consider a newly discovered Dome, and the associated land grab. The Gangs being the first representatives of their respective Houses. And, in the second or third Campaign Season, something like a Fallout Vault is discovered….which happens to have a pair of VSG’s situated outside.
Which may or not be variants to create an Orky style impenetrable energy barrier to keep stuff in….
Danny76 wrote: So the WarCom article says the GSC Battleforce has one Goliath, but the picture has two?
Presuming it’s two as normally the pictures are right.
How much is a Battleforce giong for, always same price like how a Combat Patrol is always £95?
With the price increase upcoming, Battleforce prices are up in the air for the moment.
Danny76 wrote: So the WarCom article says the GSC Battleforce has one Goliath, but the picture has two?
Presuming it’s two as normally the pictures are right.
How much is a Battleforce giong for, always same price like how a Combat Patrol is always £95?
With the price increase upcoming, Battleforce prices are up in the air for the moment.
The two CSM ones already went up a bit compared to the ones before so that might be the new price. It would also fit the increased price of the contents for the GSC and SoB boxes to reach to usual discount %
Danny76 wrote: £140-150 then perhaps.
Not too bad.
Though is the GSC one just one vehicle, or two.. that would make a difference on the cost..
For sure two Goliath, its easy to make a mistake in the text but way harder to mess up the boxart. Also the discount wouldn't make sense otherwise.
For € we are at 260,25€ for the SoB contents and 282€ for the GSC contents both after price increases. With the 180€ price from the CSM boxes that would be 31% and 36% respectively which is perfectly in line with the usual discount
It amuses me to see that you can give them boltguns for the same cost as the sonic blasters and the sonic blasters are equal or better in all aspects to the boltgun.
And visually thematically if you were taking noise marines you'd also take the sonic weapons anyway.
I guess its because boltguns are in the core marine kit so technically they have to be there even if you've no reason to take them on noise marines at all.
I... don't get it. I understand its a temporary get-you-by add-on. But why demand Lucius?
Just keep the 'must be Slaanesh' bit and call it a day. Aside from adding back the Heretic Astartes keyword, and gating the gods, there's almost nothing here.
It feels like it was done backwards- these temporary datasheets should just have the HA keyword, and you use the codex as normal except you always have to pick Slaanesh. 'Emperor's Children' as a keyword doesn't make a blind bit of difference.
Because at some point GW are going to do them as a full army like they have the other chaos aspect legions. Doing this now means that people stop wondering if it will happen or arguing that it might not.
Sure its unlikely to convert many new players, but those who have a few might well be bolstered enough to stay in the game and wait it out until they get their codex and slew of new models.
I'm guessing the hero demand is part of trying to theme the army around something other than just noise marines and give it some focus. Since you've only 2 models anyway - hero and noise marines - so its not a huge imposition to have one hero mandated.
They didn't want to include them in the codex but didn't want to remove them from the game either since we will almost certainly see them get a line relatively soon. It's just entirely about separating them from CSM's army roster right now.
LunarSol wrote: They didn't want to include them in the codex but didn't want to remove them from the game either since we will almost certainly see them get a line relatively soon. It's just entirely about separating them from CSM's army roster right now.
But CSM armies can still take Noise Marines/Berzerkers/Plagues/Rubrics, correct?
Is it basically a way to ensure that (say) Black Legion players who want to take Noise Marines have to buy the EC codex when it comes out? That's essentially what it's amounted to for the other cult legions, right?
LunarSol wrote: They didn't want to include them in the codex but didn't want to remove them from the game either since we will almost certainly see them get a line relatively soon. It's just entirely about separating them from CSM's army roster right now.
But CSM armies can still take Noise Marines/Berzerkers/Plagues/Rubrics, correct?
Is it basically a way to ensure that (say) Black Legion players who want to take Noise Marines have to buy the EC codex when it comes out? That's essentially what it's amounted to for the other cult legions, right?
Basically. It's similar to the Forgeworld Indexes. These things are playable, but they're not in the main book, so they're not really being sold to people as part of the army's identity right now. People can legally take them, but its now pretty clear that they're not a future proof choice.
These rules are the exact rules from the index, and the only reason they are not in the codex is when (we all know its when) their new codex comes out GW now does not have to make any errata to the CSM codex, just eliminate the EC index. This is perfectly fine.
I can't wait until their codex, might be the first new army I am starting in many years.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: technically playable, but i can't imagine anyone who doesn't already own at least 60 noise marines caring much about this
I don't have any Noise Marines. But I do have an idea for an EC army that's been floating around in my head for a bit now (since around late 9e)....
All I need is to see the actual Codex - because I'm not moving forward without knowing all the unit options.
Overread wrote: Also don't forget an actual EC codex is likely going to come with several totally new models/units to use alongside heroes/leaders
If you're lucky you'll retain one ugly model with the official entry as a headswap and then inexplicably lose chaos lords. Then get a mounted character with no mounted units to join.
See, THIS counts as low-effort. They couldn't bother to make some kind of army rule or detachment to go with it? Just, "Here's your two whole datasheets so you can pretend to be CSM for now"?
Manfred von Drakken wrote: See, THIS counts as low-effort. They couldn't bother to make some kind of army rule or detachment to go with it? Just, "Here's your two whole datasheets so you can pretend to be CSM for now"?
Conceivably it's not about effort or bothering but going with the least damaging option.
The viable alternative to the index is legending Emperor's Children units (all two of them). That's as low as low effort goes, but isn't going to be popular. The index at least lets people who have issues with legends pretend that they're a fully supported army.
But I suspect GW deliberately wants to keep any incentive to start or expand an Emperor's Children army out of the index because they know that there will be precious little overlap between Codex Chaos Space Marines units and Codex Emperor's Children units. I don't remember the response to Thousand Sons much at all, but both when Death Guard and World Eaters dropped people were upset that they could no longer use their respective legion units based on the Chaos Marine codex. GW may just want to keep such disappointment down by making Emperor's Children technically playable until their own codex comes out, but not grow the number of potentially dissatisfied customers in the meantime by making anything about the index good perhaps even just by accident.
I am likely in the minority but I'm ok with the EC. I am fairly confident that an EC codex will be released late 10th or early 11th.
This allows me to keep using my EC models as they were built during 9th edition and carried over into 10th edition index. 4 Squads of Noise Marines are still WYSIWYG and completely usable. At least, until the EC codex gets released with new models.
It's definitely created as a way to support existing players while not encouraging new ones to minimize issues that come with being changed into a full army.
LunarSol wrote: It's definitely created as a way to support existing players while not encouraging new ones to minimize issues that come with being changed into a full army.
Support existing players to all buy Lucius before his new model is released...
LunarSol wrote: It's definitely created as a way to support existing players while not encouraging new ones to minimize issues that come with being changed into a full army.
Support existing players to all buy Lucius before his new model is released...
Not really. GW doesn't sell him anymore so the datasheet is really only for people that have him and I guess.... the odd LGS that can finally sell the one that fell behind a shelf a couple decades ago
LunarSol wrote: It's definitely created as a way to support existing players while not encouraging new ones to minimize issues that come with being changed into a full army.
Support existing players to all buy Lucius before his new model is released...
Two datasheets is so bad its hilarious, but keeping positive its a very strong nod to not only a glorious launch box but also a combat patrol bundle as well.
To be fair they don't have any other unique models to their name right now for 40K. There just isn't much else to really give them.
I'm sure once the release comes it will be awesome - dedicated noise marine models; new leaders; possibly terminators; a unique couple of models for infantry etc....
It'll be interesting to see what they do. It's seemed a bit strange the one facet Slannesh Cult marines latched onto was making noise. Ha. I suppose it speaks more to the time they were last updated that GW was still doing those sorts of gags.
Seeing changes to 10th edition so far, I'm wondering if we might see a new Troupe Master model. I'm guessing that the existing model - included in the Troupe kit - will instead become the Lead Player, and Troupes will become units of 6-12. An example of this would be the Tyranid Prime, which has been demoted to unit leader with the introduction of a Winged Prime.
And its also high time that Harlequins recieved a combat patrol in White Dwarf...
I'm guessing that Eldar Support weapons and Vypers will be revamped soon. Even without discount they're pretty good value compared to other kits, and I certainly don't see GW standing for that for much longer! I think I might order some more just to be on the safe side, just in case they decide to release "improved" kits with a hefty new price tag to go with them...
SamusDrake wrote: Seeing changes to 10th edition so far, I'm wondering if we might see a new Troupe Master model. I'm guessing that the existing model - included in the Troupe kit - will instead become the Lead Player, and Troupes will become units of 6-12. An example of this would be the Tyranid Prime, which has been demoted to unit leader with the introduction of a Winged Prime.
And its also high time that Harlequins recieved a combat patrol in White Dwarf...
I'm guessing that Eldar Support weapons and Vypers will be revamped soon. Even without discount they're pretty good value compared to other kits, and I certainly don't see GW standing for that for much longer! I think I might order some more just to be on the safe side, just in case they decide to release "improved" kits with a hefty new price tag to go with them...
I think harlequins are a regret of the studio and will be left to slowly be legended, but support weapons aren't *that* old for Eldar, they were 5th ed I think?
I'm guessing that Eldar Support weapons and Vypers will be revamped soon. Even without discount they're pretty good value compared to other kits, and I certainly don't see GW standing for that for much longer! I think I might order some more just to be on the safe side, just in case they decide to release "improved" kits with a hefty new price tag to go with them...
Shut your mouth! If the suits realize that they actually made a kit designed to allow you to swap weapons we're doomed.
Dawnbringer wrote: It'll be interesting to see what they do. It's seemed a bit strange the one facet Slannesh Cult marines latched onto was making noise. Ha. I suppose it speaks more to the time they were last updated that GW was still doing those sorts of gags.
I saw some video on YouTube a few weeks ago speculating about what else GW could do to distinguish the EC, and they hit on the idea of having squads dedicated to each sensation, so in addition to Noise you'd have Sight, Scent, etc. Of course, once you get to Touch it gets a bit weird, but it is Slaanesh...
Sound = Sonic Guns
Touch = Close combat weapons
Taste = Feral close combat unit (no weapons just claws and jaws)
Sight = Laser based guns
Smell = elite leader alluring unit (debuff unit)
I'd like it if the Emperors Children didn't get unique terminators, but instead got some form of elite chosen instead. Something almost like honour guard. Quick and agile, artificer armour as opposed to the unwieldy battering rams that terminators are.
And instead of new daemon engines, maybe unique versions of the existing vehicles with proper sonic weaponry on them. Although I would be more than happy with new daemon engines with sonic weaponry.
Overread wrote: To be fair they don't have any other unique models to their name right now for 40K. There just isn't much else to really give them.
I'm sure once the release comes it will be awesome - dedicated noise marine models; new leaders; possibly terminators; a unique couple of models for infantry etc....
Uh huh. Us Worldeaters say good luck with that. Let us know how it turns out.
Angron Primarch of Khorne
Kharn the Betrayer
Lord on Juggernaught
Eightbound
Jakhals
Lord Invocatus
Exalted Eightbound
Khorne Berzerkers
Now granted some of those are still core models but they all fit the Khorne theming and styling.
I will agree Nurgle seems to have it best, with one of the wider varieties of infantry and machines
Break that down properly by kits I think:
Angron
Mounted character
Eightbound
Zerkers
Jakhals
Note that kharn came earlier and was not in the WE wave.
WE got some stuff that charge in for the wanton slaughter like they dont give a darn, and that pretty much cover their full personality and style.
EC could well do with many niche specialists that is somewhat harder to play with, kind of like Aspect warriors (would be a fun thing for slaaneshians to mock the silly elfdar elite)
WE also pretty clearly still have a second wave coming soon. like the art of the berzerkers on juggers from the codex that doesn't tie into a model. like with votann, that seems to be how they're handling new armies these days
StudentOfEtherium wrote: WE also pretty clearly still have a second wave coming soon. like the art of the berzerkers on juggers from the codex that doesn't tie into a model. like with votann, that seems to be how they're handling new armies these days
I think thousand sons are still waiting for theirs.
Inflation calculator says £60 from 2016 would be £80 today. So a £5 mark up. But I always thought £60 was a bit steep to start with compared to contemporary terrain in 2016. So it comes off very poorly now.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: WE also pretty clearly still have a second wave coming soon. like the art of the berzerkers on juggers from the codex that doesn't tie into a model. like with votann, that seems to be how they're handling new armies these days
I think thousand sons are still waiting for theirs.
I'm not convinced they're getting one. Options are a little limited when 98% of the legion is Made of Dust. I certainly wouldn't mind some exclusive daemon engines, though, or some form of psychic dreadnought (why aren't these a thing yet?!).
I'm sure that once EC arrive GW will start to flesh out* other legion ranges some more. But a second wave for any of the legions would have been much harder to justify before we have all four of them established.
Didn't Nurgle get two waves or just one utterly massive one as they seem to have way more options? I know Tzzentch got boosted a bit as well cause the birdy people cross over with their AoS release
Overread wrote: Didn't Nurgle get two waves or just one utterly massive one as they seem to have way more options? I know Tzzentch got boosted a bit as well cause the birdy people cross over with their AoS release
Death Guard had the big advantage of being the starter army for 8th so they naturally got more releases.
Overread wrote: Didn't Nurgle get two waves or just one utterly massive one as they seem to have way more options? I know Tzzentch got boosted a bit as well cause the birdy people cross over with their AoS release
Death Guard had the big advantage of being the starter army for 8th so they naturally got more releases.
Ahh that makes sense - heck perhaps EC will be the starter for 11th.
That would give them a leg up considering they've 1 leader and 1 conversion kit right now, so basically nothing.
i imagine part of the issue with ksons is that their range was made right before the new SM scale was implemented, so GW might not want to do new infantry since it would look out of place next to the first wave
StudentOfEtherium wrote: i imagine part of the issue with ksons is that their range was made right before the new SM scale was implemented, so GW might not want to do new infantry since it would look out of place next to the first wave
A new GK vs TS battle box with new models would solve the problem for both sides. One infantry box and one terminator box for both sides would solve most the units, then it is just character models needing updated.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: i imagine part of the issue with ksons is that their range was made right before the new SM scale was implemented, so GW might not want to do new infantry since it would look out of place next to the first wave
Sound = Sonic Guns
Touch = Close combat weapons
Taste = Feral close combat unit (no weapons just claws and jaws)
Sight = Laser based guns
Smell = elite leader alluring unit (debuff unit)
This would be a really interesting way to approach the design of Slaneeshi units. Although, surely sight would need to involve disco glitter balls?!
Sound = Sonic Guns
Touch = Close combat weapons
Taste = Feral close combat unit (no weapons just claws and jaws)
Sight = Laser based guns
Smell = elite leader alluring unit (debuff unit)
This would be a really interesting way to approach the design of Slaneeshi units. Although, surely sight would need to involve disco glitter balls?!
Who says they have to be infantry - sight could be a vehicle with a huge disco-ball in the middle. All reflective lenses for the superlaser that fire from the bottom of the vehicle upward and then get redirected onto the enemy!
Or wait even better, a huge mobile hell portal facing upwards with the disco ball hovering above. The ball spins, blasts of hell-energy rise up and get reflected off!
Sound = Sonic Guns
Touch = Close combat weapons
Taste = Feral close combat unit (no weapons just claws and jaws)
Sight = Laser based guns
Smell = elite leader alluring unit (debuff unit)
This would be a really interesting way to approach the design of Slaneeshi units. Although, surely sight would need to involve disco glitter balls?!
Who says they have to be infantry - sight could be a vehicle with a huge disco-ball in the middle. All reflective lenses for the superlaser that fire from the bottom of the vehicle upward and then get redirected onto the enemy!
Or wait even better, a huge mobile hell portal facing upwards with the disco ball hovering above. The ball spins, blasts of hell-energy rise up and get reflected off!
A 40k version of the prism/spectrum tank from Red Alert would be cool. And a corrupted Slaanesi take on the Fire Prism would be ironically appropriate.
Dysartes wrote: What's the footprint on the VSG? Having missed out on it previously, I'm tempted to get one, but there's nothing on the page to give a sense of scale.
After checking eBay, I decided it was worth it to grab the VSG. It was expensive when it first came out (both versions) and is expensive now, but is a fun piece of terrain.
Somewhat interesting rules on the Votann. Hopefully they are around 9 points each. I am wondering what the point of a Theyn is though, as he has the same stats and weapons as the rest of his squad.
I'm hoping that once these guys and the squad of jumppack guys come out that I can build a 2000 point horde army with 130 infantry and 3 Sagitaurs.
the Theyn is there like every other sergeant-type model is there— they held purpose in older editions, but now mean nothing, so it's an artifact, but a harmless one (and it might matter again in future editions)
cuda1179 wrote: Somewhat interesting rules on the Votann. Hopefully they are around 9 points each. I am wondering what the point of a Theyn is though, as he has the same stats and weapons as the rest of his squad.
I'm hoping that once these guys and the squad of jumppack guys come out that I can build a 2000 point horde army with 130 infantry and 3 Sagitaurs.
Like Student said, you pay for the squad as a whole.
StudentOfEtherium wrote: the Theyn is there like every other sergeant-type model is there— they held purpose in older editions, but now mean nothing, so it's an artifact, but a harmless one (and it might matter again in future editions)
In most armies thr Sergeant isn't just a decorative title. They at least get access to a couple close combat weapons.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: Am I the only one who's rather pleased with how little errata/FAQ has come down?
I imagine it depends on your outlook on 10th ed. If you were inclined to read that question as "am I the only one who's rather pleased with how many variables GW removed from the game to finally get it mostly right on first try", the absence of questions to fill the FAQ might not look so great.
If this is received well, GW's designers might feel reinforced that their choices for 10th ed were the right ones. That does not bode well for people who liked the wider options and deeper rules of earlier editions as GW isn't incentivized to go back to that if the current rules are successful. GW already learned with AoS just how little they actually have to do to please people. Getting yet more confirmation isn't a great development all around, even if it technically seems like an improvement.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: Am I the only one who's rather pleased with how little errata/FAQ has come down?
I imagine it depends on your outlook on 10th ed. If you were inclined to read that question as "am I the only one who's rather pleased with how many variables GW removed from the game to finally get it mostly right on first try", the absence of questions to fill the FAQ might not look so great.
If this is received well, GW's designers might feel reinforced that their choices for 10th ed were the right ones. That does not bode well for people who liked the wider options and deeper rules of earlier editions as GW isn't incentivized to go back to that if the current rules are successful. GW already learned with AoS just how little they actually have to do to please people. Getting yet more confirmation isn't a great development all around, even if it technically seems like an improvement.
Just a thought.
Only relevant if the displeased are in the majority - if the changes are well received by the majority or grew their market then they're 100% doing the right thing and learning the right lessons.
These might be part of the coin stock stolen last year.
The past few years, in general, have just been really, really, really weird when it comes to tie-in stuff. Look at the "Cadia Stands" box, for example, featuring a LE book with Leontus on it while the general release LE had the box art from the set on it.
Guard, the recently revealed Slaves to Darkness coin, three winds of magic (or Mortal Realms, if you prefer), the Golden Daemon, and a couple of Marines honors.
My phone is five years old now. Still takes photos I can read text in.
Not sure if I need to point this out, but the image in thread is a low-quality preview. If you click on it it links through to the full quality version with legible text in the gallery.
Not sure if I need to point this out, but the image in thread is a low-quality preview. If you click on it it links through to the full quality version with legible text in the gallery.
PoorGravitasHandling wrote: Do the coins always correspond to a release? It will be weird to have guard running a full codex for more than half a year.
Marksman's Honor and Iron Halo may be Imperial Agent or Deathwatch related?
Latest rumours are guard being late 2024/early 2025 with an end of year pre-release box with a full release the following Jan.
Deathwatch are possibly being shoved into imperial agents is the speculation.
Manfred von Drakken wrote: Am I the only one who's rather pleased with how little errata/FAQ has come down?
I imagine it depends on your outlook on 10th ed. If you were inclined to read that question as "am I the only one who's rather pleased with how many variables GW removed from the game to finally get it mostly right on first try", the absence of questions to fill the FAQ might not look so great.
If this is received well, GW's designers might feel reinforced that their choices for 10th ed were the right ones. That does not bode well for people who liked the wider options and deeper rules of earlier editions as GW isn't incentivized to go back to that if the current rules are successful. GW already learned with AoS just how little they actually have to do to please people. Getting yet more confirmation isn't a great development all around, even if it technically seems like an improvement.
Just a thought.
Only relevant if the displeased are in the majority - if the changes are well received by the majority or grew their market then they're 100% doing the right thing and learning the right lessons.
Yep. They are company. Profits tell are they doing right or not. Don't like direction, vote with wallet.
As long as profit's go up gw knows they do it right.
.
